Ok so I idd some digging and bloomberg is light on analysis on this one.
The graph that got me wondering as to why the price has spiked was the mined/produced tonnes of tungsten from what I can see.
I naturally assumed, like the article is hinting, that demand has risen significantly.
It appears that china has limited exports and the USA has demanded that military applications needs to be sourced for people they like, rather than china russia and north korea. Demand has apparently increased by about 4%, but that doesn't explain the 10x price jump.
All I know is my carbide tooling is going to cost a shitload more now.
I know that, but given that tungsten demand is ~80-90% civilian, ie depends on how well the economy is doing, a 4% demand increase is pretty within spec.
The bigger thing here is china has restricted export to something like 14 companies. so a supply shock makes much more sense.
The natural question is what is china doing with that spare capacity? is it being used domestically? diverted to some other country? are they just stock piling it? after all they need a load of it for machine tooling.
At one event I was at I spoke with someone who was tied into the company and they said that when wars happen their business picks up because copper mining starts back up. War apparently needs a lot of copper too.
I never looked into it to verify but it seemed like an interesting bit of data.
> ...attracting the attention of many players, including the president of the United States. Donald Trump’s sons are collaborating with the family of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on a tungsten project in Kazakhstan, according to the New York Times. The US government is considering supporting the mining venture with federal loans.
Fascinating to see how completely normalised this sort of thing has become in the US.
At least in the good ol' days politicians had to set up fake charities and foundations to rake in the dough. Now we've got Biden bragging on air that he was withholding already approved funds for Ukraine back when he was VP unless they stopped investigating Hunter's company, and Trump's kids might be getting loans!
This is the entirety of their thesis on its war prediction powers, BTW:
>First opened in 1917 to support munitions production in World War I, it shut down three years later when peace crashed the tungsten market. Starting up again in 1938 on the eve of World War II, it was saved twice more as conflict broke out first in Korea and then Vietnam. In 1990, exactly 12 months after the fall of the Berlin Wall, it closed, seemingly for good.
Tungsten is mostly used in artillery, tank shells, it will take some time to ramp up which makes me think the timing is peculiar along with the happenings in Europe.
I see some people are saying it's a win for Australia but I'd say its a bit of a mixed bag given their dependence on China's liquidity. The major question here is are Australians willing to accept a return to the Hawke days for moral solidarity with a continent far away that barely acknowledges or trades at the level it does with Asian giants like China?
Ukraine is a lost cause at this point and EU doesn't want the war to continue as it is and Russia wants an exit as well. Neither side has anything to gain by prolonging the war.
I'm happy to hear your case for why Kiev currently have no effective air defence and facing dwindling man power. If EU truly cared about Ukraine they wouldn't be in this current position. Doesn't make sense why they would withhold resources that Ukraine desperately needs at the moment if they are just beginning to ramp up production now.
By the time the current build up is done which will take years, Ukraine will not be a sovereign nation at its current rate. For Russia's perspective, a regime change is their ultimate goal, not territory. Once the corridor is secure they are likely to turn to Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.
The bigger conflict seems to point to baltic states that would draw in NATO and thats the one that EU seems to be preparing for, not Ukraine.
Assuming your thesis is correct: the war in ukraine is a dead end and the EU should let russia finish what it started (parahpraasing, I apologise if I miss the nuance)
Surely that would mean _another_ russian friendly Satellite state that can be used as an invasion point by a resurgent russia?
Surely its in the best interest of the EU (and US, because trading partner and sphere of influence) to make sure ukraine wins? keeping russia in its box and stop it expanding westwards?
I don't follow. Ukraine war isn't a one sided affair, a perma-militarized frontier state dependent on EU doesn't meet their interests at all.
I guess a lot of people mistake Ukraine as being part of Europe because they are Europeans but this shows poor understanding of West/East Europe and their history.
EU itself struggles put up a solid unified front and its members regularly disagree on how to approach Ukraine.
I'm curious, are you American? What media do you consume because as an Eastern European myself, I find the cognitive dissonance fascinating.
> a perma-militarized frontier state dependent on EU doesn't meet their interests at all.
Also agreed.
I think the point I want to make is that a lot of the EU realise that its far better to have the frontier in eastern ukraine than to have it in eastern Poland , Slovakia, Hungary and romania. Russia isn't going away, its doing what its been doing for the last 150 years, which is waving its dick about in the Steppe and as far south as afganistan/india(delete according to which imperialist bastards you want to aim your ire at) With out ukraine russia wasn't going to stop. Like they blew up a fucking passenger plane, poisoned civilians in the UK and a whole host of other stupid shit. All the things that we as "the west" kinda half arsed in reply.
> a lot of people mistake Ukraine as being part of Europe
I don't see Ukraine as European, its that grey area. in the same way that greece is european, but bulgaria probably isnt (as in its bulgarian, and not seen as part of the Yugoslav tapestry of blood, even though it was ottoman for a loooong time)
I see ukraine in the same way that I see Georgia, a country that has been aggressively brutalised by putin. Its not right that russia can waft in and bomb the living shit out of a country and attempt to ethnically cleanse the place. (before you ask, iraq, Libya and afganistan are in roughly the same ball park) Its also too close to home to have russia fucking with.
I currently work, and have worked with ukrainians off and on for the last ten years(both east and west). So perhaps my view is warped.
> EU itself struggles put up a solid unified front and its members regularly disagree on how to approach Ukraine.
Again agreed. You and I know part of it is standard EU stupidity, and some of it is russian fuckery. then the rest is short sighted economic/political self interest.
I think letting ukraine in the EU would be a mistake, in its present form. Its still adjusting from the last lot to reach full member status.
I'm not american, I'm british and live in London. I think most people in the UK see it as not cricket, and that we should support ukraine, up until the point we have to put soldiers in. But then we don't have an army anymore and we are woefully underprepared.
> By the time the current build up is done which will take years, Ukraine will not be a sovereign nation at its current rate. For Russia's perspective, a regime change is their ultimate goal, not territory. Once the corridor is secure they are likely to turn to Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.
All the more reason for the EU to continue supplying Ukraine.
EU states are providing Ukraine with every resource they can spare without compromising their own defensive stance - which is, understandably, their n.1 priority. In addition, they are ramping up production - largely to satisfy demand on the Ukrainian front rather than their own.
Nobody is perfect, nobody has infinite money to burn, and nobody wants this war to continue - because nobody wanted this war to start with, except Putin; but rhis war only ends if/when Putin decides it's not worth continuing, or when the last Ukrainian soldier dies. EU states have no real say.
Not only is it opening up but several other large scale projects are already being considered in the USA, including one in Atolia, California that I have been privileged enough to personally visit.
Watch the markets for the metals most used in wartime. That tells you pretty quickly when conflict is near.
I wonder if there’s path dependence there. It _seems_ like just because you build up lots of “defence” tech that doesn’t necessarily mean you _have_ to use it? Or does it? I wonder what happened with those markets during the Cold War.
Why would you not believe them? Our defense manufacturing base has withered just like all the other manufacturing sectors. They’re being used faster than they’re being made and no one really planned for this war. Same reason the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is so low.
I think it's the same bubble that many in the West live in because they have been at peace mostly and cant fathom that much of it has been from de facto state of detente from states that are now threatened by its economic order.
Iran and Russia figured out a way to arbitrage expensive AD that were designed to take down jets and other ballistic missiles with predictability at scale and its still a source of disbelief particularly in the mainstream.
Drones have rewritten the rules of modern warfare and we will likely see maps change as a result.
If anything they seem to be having the opposite effect, entrenching defender's advantages to the point that maps might never change again. (Ok, it's hyperbole, but hopefully you get the point.)
They’ve been quite effective in Ukraine’s counteroffensive probes against Russia. That’s how all those oil refineries keep catching fire. The balance is just continuing to shift away from overwhelming manpower being the deciding factor
This isn't so much "conflict is near" as much as reaction to a defense-related policy. The entire US defense supply chain will be banned from >80% of tungsten supply at the end of the year, while also being demanded to up production to make up for depleted stockpiles from Iran and Ukraine.
Bloomberg's Odd Lots interivew on this with the author, "The Tungsten Market Is Warning of an Upcoming War":
* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xLxM-TzBPY
* https://omny.fm/shows/odd-lots/the-tungsten-market-is-warnin...
* https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-tungsten-market-is...
Ok so I idd some digging and bloomberg is light on analysis on this one.
The graph that got me wondering as to why the price has spiked was the mined/produced tonnes of tungsten from what I can see.
I naturally assumed, like the article is hinting, that demand has risen significantly.
It appears that china has limited exports and the USA has demanded that military applications needs to be sourced for people they like, rather than china russia and north korea. Demand has apparently increased by about 4%, but that doesn't explain the 10x price jump.
All I know is my carbide tooling is going to cost a shitload more now.
> Demand has apparently increased by about 4%, but that doesn't explain the 10x price jump.
The price is set at the margin. Mines in wealthy high regulation countries are incredibly inelastic.
I know that, but given that tungsten demand is ~80-90% civilian, ie depends on how well the economy is doing, a 4% demand increase is pretty within spec.
The bigger thing here is china has restricted export to something like 14 companies. so a supply shock makes much more sense.
The natural question is what is china doing with that spare capacity? is it being used domestically? diverted to some other country? are they just stock piling it? after all they need a load of it for machine tooling.
A company local makes mining trucks [1].
At one event I was at I spoke with someone who was tied into the company and they said that when wars happen their business picks up because copper mining starts back up. War apparently needs a lot of copper too. I never looked into it to verify but it seemed like an interesting bit of data.
[1] https://gfworldwide.com/
Nickel mining also
> ...attracting the attention of many players, including the president of the United States. Donald Trump’s sons are collaborating with the family of Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on a tungsten project in Kazakhstan, according to the New York Times. The US government is considering supporting the mining venture with federal loans.
Fascinating to see how completely normalised this sort of thing has become in the US.
At least in the good ol' days politicians had to set up fake charities and foundations to rake in the dough. Now we've got Biden bragging on air that he was withholding already approved funds for Ukraine back when he was VP unless they stopped investigating Hunter's company, and Trump's kids might be getting loans!
Biden wanted Shokin out because he failed to pursue the Burisma investigation, not because he was aggressive on it. https://www.rferl.org/a/why-was-ukraine-top-prosecutor-fired...
Dolphin tungsten mine in Australia.
This is the entirety of their thesis on its war prediction powers, BTW:
>First opened in 1917 to support munitions production in World War I, it shut down three years later when peace crashed the tungsten market. Starting up again in 1938 on the eve of World War II, it was saved twice more as conflict broke out first in Korea and then Vietnam. In 1990, exactly 12 months after the fall of the Berlin Wall, it closed, seemingly for good.
The title is clickbait.
If you look at antiwar.com, we seem to be in the throes of World War.
Major W for Australia.
Tungsten is mostly used in artillery, tank shells, it will take some time to ramp up which makes me think the timing is peculiar along with the happenings in Europe.
I see some people are saying it's a win for Australia but I'd say its a bit of a mixed bag given their dependence on China's liquidity. The major question here is are Australians willing to accept a return to the Hawke days for moral solidarity with a continent far away that barely acknowledges or trades at the level it does with Asian giants like China?
Why is it peculiar? Ukraine needs a lot of ammo and the EU is massively ramping up production
Ukraine is a lost cause at this point and EU doesn't want the war to continue as it is and Russia wants an exit as well. Neither side has anything to gain by prolonging the war.
I'm happy to hear your case for why Kiev currently have no effective air defence and facing dwindling man power. If EU truly cared about Ukraine they wouldn't be in this current position. Doesn't make sense why they would withhold resources that Ukraine desperately needs at the moment if they are just beginning to ramp up production now.
By the time the current build up is done which will take years, Ukraine will not be a sovereign nation at its current rate. For Russia's perspective, a regime change is their ultimate goal, not territory. Once the corridor is secure they are likely to turn to Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.
The bigger conflict seems to point to baltic states that would draw in NATO and thats the one that EU seems to be preparing for, not Ukraine.
Assuming your thesis is correct: the war in ukraine is a dead end and the EU should let russia finish what it started (parahpraasing, I apologise if I miss the nuance)
Surely that would mean _another_ russian friendly Satellite state that can be used as an invasion point by a resurgent russia?
Surely its in the best interest of the EU (and US, because trading partner and sphere of influence) to make sure ukraine wins? keeping russia in its box and stop it expanding westwards?
I don't follow. Ukraine war isn't a one sided affair, a perma-militarized frontier state dependent on EU doesn't meet their interests at all.
I guess a lot of people mistake Ukraine as being part of Europe because they are Europeans but this shows poor understanding of West/East Europe and their history.
EU itself struggles put up a solid unified front and its members regularly disagree on how to approach Ukraine.
I'm curious, are you American? What media do you consume because as an Eastern European myself, I find the cognitive dissonance fascinating.
> Ukraine war isn't a one sided affair
Agreed.
> a perma-militarized frontier state dependent on EU doesn't meet their interests at all.
Also agreed.
I think the point I want to make is that a lot of the EU realise that its far better to have the frontier in eastern ukraine than to have it in eastern Poland , Slovakia, Hungary and romania. Russia isn't going away, its doing what its been doing for the last 150 years, which is waving its dick about in the Steppe and as far south as afganistan/india(delete according to which imperialist bastards you want to aim your ire at) With out ukraine russia wasn't going to stop. Like they blew up a fucking passenger plane, poisoned civilians in the UK and a whole host of other stupid shit. All the things that we as "the west" kinda half arsed in reply.
> a lot of people mistake Ukraine as being part of Europe
I don't see Ukraine as European, its that grey area. in the same way that greece is european, but bulgaria probably isnt (as in its bulgarian, and not seen as part of the Yugoslav tapestry of blood, even though it was ottoman for a loooong time)
I see ukraine in the same way that I see Georgia, a country that has been aggressively brutalised by putin. Its not right that russia can waft in and bomb the living shit out of a country and attempt to ethnically cleanse the place. (before you ask, iraq, Libya and afganistan are in roughly the same ball park) Its also too close to home to have russia fucking with.
I currently work, and have worked with ukrainians off and on for the last ten years(both east and west). So perhaps my view is warped.
> EU itself struggles put up a solid unified front and its members regularly disagree on how to approach Ukraine.
Again agreed. You and I know part of it is standard EU stupidity, and some of it is russian fuckery. then the rest is short sighted economic/political self interest.
I think letting ukraine in the EU would be a mistake, in its present form. Its still adjusting from the last lot to reach full member status.
I'm not american, I'm british and live in London. I think most people in the UK see it as not cricket, and that we should support ukraine, up until the point we have to put soldiers in. But then we don't have an army anymore and we are woefully underprepared.
> By the time the current build up is done which will take years, Ukraine will not be a sovereign nation at its current rate. For Russia's perspective, a regime change is their ultimate goal, not territory. Once the corridor is secure they are likely to turn to Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania.
All the more reason for the EU to continue supplying Ukraine.
EU states are providing Ukraine with every resource they can spare without compromising their own defensive stance - which is, understandably, their n.1 priority. In addition, they are ramping up production - largely to satisfy demand on the Ukrainian front rather than their own.
Nobody is perfect, nobody has infinite money to burn, and nobody wants this war to continue - because nobody wanted this war to start with, except Putin; but rhis war only ends if/when Putin decides it's not worth continuing, or when the last Ukrainian soldier dies. EU states have no real say.
Not only is it opening up but several other large scale projects are already being considered in the USA, including one in Atolia, California that I have been privileged enough to personally visit.
Watch the markets for the metals most used in wartime. That tells you pretty quickly when conflict is near.
I wonder if there’s path dependence there. It _seems_ like just because you build up lots of “defence” tech that doesn’t necessarily mean you _have_ to use it? Or does it? I wonder what happened with those markets during the Cold War.
Maybe it's also for USA to rebuild supply? That is, if you believe the "US spent too many missiles in Iran" stories.
Why would you not believe them? Our defense manufacturing base has withered just like all the other manufacturing sectors. They’re being used faster than they’re being made and no one really planned for this war. Same reason the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is so low.
I think it's the same bubble that many in the West live in because they have been at peace mostly and cant fathom that much of it has been from de facto state of detente from states that are now threatened by its economic order.
Iran and Russia figured out a way to arbitrage expensive AD that were designed to take down jets and other ballistic missiles with predictability at scale and its still a source of disbelief particularly in the mainstream.
Drones have rewritten the rules of modern warfare and we will likely see maps change as a result.
If anything they seem to be having the opposite effect, entrenching defender's advantages to the point that maps might never change again. (Ok, it's hyperbole, but hopefully you get the point.)
They’ve been quite effective in Ukraine’s counteroffensive probes against Russia. That’s how all those oil refineries keep catching fire. The balance is just continuing to shift away from overwhelming manpower being the deciding factor
Hopefully it’s just Crimea returning to Ukraine, but you’re probably right.
Never happening willing to bet a million dollars
"αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐφέλκεται ἄνδρα σίδηρος." And the movie having just come out.
This isn't so much "conflict is near" as much as reaction to a defense-related policy. The entire US defense supply chain will be banned from >80% of tungsten supply at the end of the year, while also being demanded to up production to make up for depleted stockpiles from Iran and Ukraine.