Chinese Export Restrictions Lead to Exploding Rare Metal Prices

Gallium
(Image credit: Shutterstock)

Prices for gallium are reported to have increased by 50% in just the past seventeen days, following the August 1st enforcement of China's export restrictions on the rare metal. A vital yet relatively underrepresented material used in chipmaking (especially when reacted towards gallium arsenide [GaA] and gallium nitride [GaN]), gallium production (like that of many other rare earth metals) lays primarily in China's hands. The country commands as much as 80% of the world's output, making it a prime candidate for leverage in the global economic tug-of-war between the U.S. and the Middle Kingdom.

As reported by Bloomberg, the price increase means that gallium now sits at a 10-month-high of $400 per kilogram, putting a deeper squeeze on chipmakers and companies that depend on the material (luckily, in trace amounts) for high-performance semiconductor designs. For perspective, high-purity silicon metal (Si) is currently quoted at an average of $2,000 per metric ton - meaning a kilogram runs chipmakers just $2. 

Worldwide, gallium refinement facilities are primarily present throughout China and Japan. A lone facility also exists in Europe, but as expected, that's not nearly enough for the continent's needs, let alone as an alternative source for the globalized (yet restricted) market. Therefore, non-producing countries must import either the base metal or already-processed gallium arsenide wafers.

Yet due to China's imposed restrictions, U.S.-based entities looking to import the metal must submit for registration with China's Ministry of Commerce. While that is a relatively common requirement, the fact that companies could only apply for a license starting August 1st (the same day the export restrictions went into effect) creates a measure of attrition. Add to that the fact that obtaining the license can take up to 45 days and that China announced the restrictions with barely a month to go for companies to adjust (in early July), and the stage was set for the country's intended disruption.

Due to its relatively exotic usage in electronics and semiconductors, a squeeze on the supply side of gallium disproportionally impacts the U.S.'s chipmaking capabilities. While China may be its home at extraction, the country's 5-generation gap compared to the U.S. in leading-edge microelectronics means there aren't many occasions for its chipmaking players to take advantage of its properties. At the same time, the export restrictions mean that China can start stockpiling the rare metal for deployment whenever its chip manufacturing processes are up to the task.

Francisco Pires
Freelance News Writer

Francisco Pires is a freelance news writer for Tom's Hardware with a soft side for quantum computing.

  • bit_user
    But we're not talking about CPUs and GPUs being made with Gallium, right? Isn't it more things like analog chips and solar panels that stand to be affected?

    Wikipedia says:
    Gallium arsenide is used in the manufacture of devices such as microwave frequency integrated circuits, monolithic microwave integrated circuits, infrared light-emitting diodes, laser diodes, solar cells and optical windows.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    DavidMV said:
    Unpopular opinion... this is good.
    Perhaps in the long-term, but it takes quite a while to ramp up mining and processing. Meanwhile, a lot of economic damage can potentially occur.

    At that point, China can just turn around and flood world markets with all the pent-up supply its been withholding and make those new mining and processing operations insolvent, again. Then, switch to another commodity and repeat.

    It seems the only way around this is to have an alternative supply chain for everything we get from China, and that will probably come at some non-trivial expense to taxpayers. Let's see if they have the stomachs.
    Reply
  • LolaGT
    These aren't rare.

    They just weren't being produced in other nations because it was cheaper to get them from china.
    It will only be incentive for other nations to build the infrastructure to mine the materials.
    Whatever works out to be cheaper. No one is going to run out.
    Reply
  • DSzymborski
    You guys do know that you can't just shuffle on down to the ye olde gallium mine and just crank up production, right? You would need to suddenly bump up zinc and bauxite mining by a couple orders of magnitude before you're even talking about smelting for gallium, and the whole permitting processes for a new mine is upwards of a decade. Now, there's certainly merit in increasing production given how crucial many of these rare earth elements are, but that's a solution to get more gallium in 2040, not 2024.
    Reply
  • rluker5
    There is some gallium down in Texas: https://www.usgs.gov/news/technical-announcement/usgs-updates-mineral-database-gallium-deposits-united-states
    Enough to outlast fossil fuels at least. Texas gov is pretty friendly to extracting resources, but they aren't the only ones you have to get the OK from.

    A big potential iron mine in Wisconsin was shut down by EPA regulations and activists. Those two would show up down in Texas as well.

    Edit: And I agree with bit_user. If it looked like gallium would start to be produced there, the competition would use noncompetitive practices to make it unprofitable.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    rluker5 said:
    There is some gallium down in Texas: https://www.usgs.gov/news/technical-announcement/usgs-updates-mineral-database-gallium-deposits-united-states
    I seem to recall reading that China has more of a lock on processing of Gallium than raw supply.

    rluker5 said:
    Edit: And I agree with bit_user. If it looked like gallium would start to be produced there, the competition would use noncompetitive practices to make it unprofitable.
    I agree that @DavidMV that tariffs could be used to support domestic supply. Especially if you used the tariffs on imports to fund direct subsidies for domestic production.

    This is a politically treacherous path to go down, because we can certainly get addicted to such practices. In the end, it would just lead to higher prices (inflation) and hurt international competitive of US-based manufacturers. Therefore, there ought to be a goal of some % domestic production, and then adjust tariffs/subsidies accordingly. Either that, or limit the margins of these producers - if they're going to receive subsidies and protection, then the tradeoff is that they can't make a windfall off it.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act
    Fun fact: this is what the teacher was lecturing about, during the famous "Bueller, Bueller... anyone?" scene of Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
    Reply
  • rluker5
    bit_user said:
    I seem to recall reading that China has more of a lock on processing of Gallium than raw supply.
    It would definitely take time to build the extraction facilities. On the plus side a lot of other rare earths would be produced.
    bit_user said:


    I agree that @DavidMV that tariffs could be used to support domestic supply. Especially if you used the tariffs on imports to fund direct subsidies for domestic production.

    This is a politically treacherous path to go down, because we can certainly get addicted to such practices. In the end, it would just lead to higher prices (inflation) and hurt international competitive of US-based manufacturers. Therefore, there ought to be a goal of some % domestic production, and then adjust tariffs/subsidies accordingly. Either that, or limit the margins of these producers - if they're going to receive subsidies and protection, then the tradeoff is that they can't make a windfall off it.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoot%E2%80%93Hawley_Tariff_Act
    Fun fact: this is what the teacher was lecturing about, during the famous "Bueller, Bueller... anyone?" scene of Ferris Bueller's Day Off.
    While tariffs could be applied, I doubt they would. I did not see much of them when I worked in the metal casting industry and I'm not seeing much in the chemical industry. They are the exception not the rule and I expect another dirty business like mining will just be neglected.
    It is not the primary job of those who make tariffs to protect unpopular industries.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    rluker5 said:
    While tariffs could be applied, I doubt they would. I did not see much of them when I worked in the metal casting industry and I'm not seeing much in the chemical industry. They are the exception not the rule and I expect another dirty business like mining will just be neglected.
    It is not the primary job of those who make tariffs to protect unpopular industries.
    Well, we famously got aluminum and steel tariffs, about 5 years ago. Those are largely still intact, I think.
    Reply
  • Co BIY
    The high prices will solve much of the problem on their own by causing all the users to decide if they can do more with less or use substitutes. Those who can most easily substitute will do so leaving fewer to compete for the remaining production.

    I have to think that refusing to export is a somewhat unusual tactic in a trade war. Refusing to import or raising tariffs is more common. In fact, it is a little like placing a trade sanction on yourself.
    Reply