The woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) was the best-known of about ten mammoth species.

It stood about the same size as modern African elephants and roamed the Northern Hemisphere for roughly half a million years.

The species became extinct by around 2000 BC.

Contemporary summaries describe the causes of their demise as multifaceted, including climate warming at the end of the last Ice Age that reduced grassland habitat while forests expanded across the northern hemisphere.

Some accounts also note hunting pressures from humans as an additional factor in population decline.

Recent large-scale genetic and palaeoecological research reported in Nature concludes that rapid climate-driven vegetation change, rather than human hunting, was the primary driver of woolly mammoth extinction in the Arctic region.

Researchers reconstructed tundra-steppe ecosystems by sequencing ancient DNA from plants, animals and fossil dung (coprolites) collected across hundreds of Arctic sites over about twenty years.

Those analyses showed that after the end of the Pleistocene melting ice created wetter conditions with rivers, lakes and bogs, and that trees and wetland plants replaced the mammoths' typical pastures.

As a result, typical mammoth food became scarce and populations declined, became fragmented and lost genetic diversity.

The research team emphasized that the speed of environmental change was critical and that mammoths could not adapt quickly enough to the rapidly transformed landscapes.

The same studies report model results that did not detect a significant effect of humans on mammoth decline in their reconstructions.

Historical summaries and archaeological evidence nevertheless document human use of mammoths for meat, shelter and tools and note that hunting pressures are commonly cited in discussions of their decline.

Because of the species' prominence, de-extinction efforts have received attention and current genetic projects focus on identifying cold-adaptive mammoth alleles and altering Asian elephant genomes to produce mammoth-like traits.

Those de-extinction proposals face major technical and ethical challenges, and some experts argue conservation resources should prioritize preventing habitat loss and modern species declines instead.

In summary, recent multidisciplinary studies indicate rapid climate-driven vegetation change was the primary cause of woolly mammoth extinction, while human hunting may have contributed locally but was not identified as the main driver in those models.

The woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) was the best-known of about ten mammoth species.

Title:

Content: Woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius)

The most famous of the 10 mammoth species known to have existed is undoubtedly the woolly mammoth. Standing at around the same size as today’s African elephants, this magnificent animal roamed the northern hemisphere for roughly half a million years, becoming extinct by around 2000 BC.

Advertisement

The reasons for the woolly mammoth’s demise are multifaceted. As the climate warmed at the end of the last Ice Age, and forests spread across the northern hemisphere, the grassland habitats in which the animal thrived were drastically reduced. This, combined with hunting pressures from humans, meant the woolly mammoth population ended up being restricted to just a couple of islands in the Arctic Ocean near Siberia and Alaska.

Some scientists hope to bring the woolly mammoth back from extinction, but with African and Asian elephant populations still facing a huge range of threats, many believe that our focus should be on preserving those animals instead.

Dodo (Raphus cucullatus)

For a large bird species that only became extinct relatively recently, we know surprisingly little about the dodo and its behaviours. In fact, there is just one near- complete dodo skeleton with bones from one bird, and there is only one specimen that contains soft tissue.

What we do know is that the dodo was restricted to Mauritius, an island in the Indian Ocean off the eastern coast of Madagascar and part of the Mascarene Archipelago, and was a relative to doves and pigeons. It’s thought that natural selection caused the animal to evolve into a flightless bird, with the species no longer needing to fly on an island with no predators.

However, when humans – and the animals they brought with them – first came to Mauritius in the 16th century, the dodo became extremely vulnerable. As well as being hunted for meat, it suffered from habitat loss and the predation of its eggs, resulting in its extinction by c1680.

Thylacine (Thylacinus cynocephalus)

Also known as the Tasmanian tiger or Tasmanian wolf, the thylacine was a carnivorous mammal originally found in Australia and New Guinea. Despite being similar in appearance to the domestic dog, it was actually a marsupial – a group of mammals that also includes kangaroos, koalas, wombats and opossums – and had a pouch.

Once widespread, the thylacine became extinct on the Australian mainland no less than 2,000 years ago, although the reasons for this are unknown. The species then became restricted to the island of Tasmania, off the south coast of Victoria, with between 2,000–4,000 individuals remaining when the British arrived in the early 19th century.

Eventually, the thylacine was persecuted as it was deemed a threat to livestock. The last known captive individual died from exposure at a zoo in Hobart in 1936 after being accidentally left out overnight. It’s thought that the last wild thylacines died in the 1960s, but that hasn’t stopped persistent rumours over the species’ continued survival.

Great auk (Pinguinus impennis)

Despite being similar in colouration and shape and bearing the genus name Pinguinus, the great auk wasn’t a relative of penguins, but was instead a member of the same family as puffins and guillemots.

Once a relatively common species in the North Atlantic, it bred on remote rocky islands such as Funk Island off the coast of Newfoundland, which was described by one 18th- century sailor as being “entirely covered with those fowls, so close that a man could not put his foot between them.”

However, exploration of the North Atlantic seas by European sailors spelled danger for the flightless seabird, with overharvesting of its eggs and adults for meat, feathers and body parts dramatically reducing the population. Attempts were made to protect the great auk, but that only increased its worth to collectors.

Sadly, the last breeding pair were killed and their single egg accidentally crushed by fishermen on Eldey Island, Iceland, on 3 July 1844.

Xerces butterfly (Glaucopsyche xerces)

Named after the Persian kings Xerxes I and Xerxes II (whose names are sometimes spelled ‘Xerces’ in France), this diminutive blue butterfly species lived among the coastal sand dunes of the San Francisco Peninsula, where its caterpillar preferred to feed on a single plant species.

However, urban development resulted in the loss of the plant, which could not survive in disturbed soil, and thus the loss of the Xerces blue in the 1940s – the first example of a butterfly becoming extinct due to human activity in North America.

Later, the Xerces Society, a non-profit conservation organisation established in 1971, was named in memory of the lost invertebrate.

For a while, there was uncertainty as to whether the Xerces blue was a distinct species or a subspecies of another blue butterfly. However, a scientific paper published in 2021 examined the DNA of a museum specimen collected in 1928 and proved that it was indeed a distinct species.

Passenger pigeon (Ectopistes migratorius)

The passenger pigeon was one of the most abundant pigeon species on the planet. Native to North America, it was called jahgowa by the Seneca Tribe, which translates to “big bread”, as it was a source of food by the Seneca and the rest of the Haudenosaunee people. Despite this, the hunting of the species was carefully regulated by rules set by each tribe.

However, after colonisation by the Europeans, hunting of the passenger pigeon increased and gradually became more industrial and commercialised. As the population declined, the species then became vulnerable to further pressures such as habitat loss and predation by other animals.

The last living passenger pigeon was a female named Martha, who was kept at Cincinnati Zoo in Ohio. She died on 1 September 1914 – one of the few times we have known the absolute date of a species’ extinction. Her death contributed to the creation of the US Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which requires permits to hunt some migratory bird species.

Golden toad (Incilius periglenes)

So-named for the brilliant yellow-orange colouration of the male (the female was black with yellow and red patterning), the golden toad has become a poster child for extinctions connected to the climate crisis.

Found in the Monteverde Cloud Forest of Costa Rica, the amphibian spent most of the year underground. It only emerged for a few days each April, with males fighting with each other around pools of rainwater in order to mate with females.

In 1987, roughly 1,500 golden toads were observed. However, the following year, only 10 toads were found, and in 1989, just one male. That one male was the last golden
toad ever seen, and the species was officially declared extinct in 2004.

While the exact cause of extinction is unknown, the climate crisis – combined with habitat loss and an infectious disease called chytridiomycosis – are all thought to have played a part.

Baiji (Lipotes vexillifer)

The baiji was a freshwater dolphin that lived in the Yangtze River in China, the third-longest river in the world. Although still listed as ‘Critically Endangered’ on the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s Red List, having last been assessed in 2017, the species is considered extinct by conservationists. In fact, both the last confirmed sighting of a wild individual and the death of the last captive individual occurred in 2002.

The Yangtze River is also home to the Yangtze finless porpoise, the only freshwater porpoise in the world. Like the baiji, its existence is currently threatened by overfishing, shipping traffic and noise pollution.

However, the 2017 suspension of sand mining in Dongting Lake – a flood basin of the Yangtze in China’s Hunan province – has seen the finless porpoise return to areas that it had previously been avoiding.

Pinta Island giant tortoise (Chelonoidis nigra abingdonii or Chelonoidis abingdonii)

While there is debate about whether the giant tortoises of the Galápagos Islands are subspecies of the same species or a completely different species altogether, one thing is certain: Lonesome George was the last of his kind.

George was a Pinta Island tortoise, a species (or subspecies) that was already thought to have been extinct until he was discovered alone on the island that gave George and his former companions their collective name.

There were attempts to find other Pinta Island tortoises, and to mate him with closely related females, but to no avail. He died in 2012 of natural causes when he was around 100 years old.

Curiously, scientists believe it might be possible to bring back the Pinta Island tortoise, or at least a closely related version. Researchers have discovered hybrid tortoises with Pinta Island tortoise genes on nearby Isabela Island, with their Pinta Island ancestors having been moved there by whalers and pirates.

Megan Shersby is a naturalist, science writer and communicator. She was previously editorial and digital coordinator at BBC Wildlife Magazine

Advertisement

This content first appeared in the November 2023 issue of BBC History Revealed

Authors

Megan ShersbyNaturalist, writer and content creator
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

It stood about the same size as modern African elephants and roamed the Northern Hemisphere for roughly half a million years.

The species became extinct by around 2000 BC.

When did the last population of wooly mammoth become extinct?

Contemporary summaries describe the causes of their demise as multifaceted, including climate warming at the end of the last Ice Age that reduced grassland habitat while forests expanded across the northern hemisphere.

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

How did climate change affect mammoth' habitat?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

What aspects of climate change contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

What environmental factors contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

Some accounts also note hunting pressures from humans as an additional factor in population decline.

How did humans contribute to the wooly mammoth extinction?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

Recent large-scale genetic and palaeoecological research reported in Nature concludes that rapid climate-driven vegetation change, rather than human hunting, was the primary driver of woolly mammoth extinction in the Arctic region.

Title:

Content: In one of the most common versions of the extinction of giant mamutes, it is claimed that this was caused by the hunting of ancient people.
Our ancestors literally ate most of the animals.
But recent studies say that this is not the case and people have become far from the main reason for the disappearance of mammoths.
Hunger caused by climate change is the real killer.
Searching for gold, but found mammoths: an incredible story with the Yukon
Drawing of a mammoth on the wall of the cave of Arcy-sur-Cure, France / Photo Wikipedia
The Hungry Death of Great Animals
It would seem that mammoths existed for millions of years and survived several ice ages.
That is, climate change did not affect them critically.
But as soon as they encountered humans, they began to die out.
Finally, we were able to prove that the problem was not only climate change, but also the speed of these changes.
This was the last nail in the coffin – the mammoths could not adapt quickly enough when the landscape changed dramatically and food became scarce.
- says the author of the study Eske Willerslev, a professor at the University of Cambridge and director of the Center for Geogenetics of the Lundbeck Foundation at the University of Copenhagen.
The team, led by Prof. Willerslev, sequenced the DNA of plant, animal, and their fossilized excrement, coprolites.
The selection of these samples lasted about 20 years and allowed us to fully understand why the majestic animals died out.
After the end of the last cooling, the glaciers began to melt.
The environment quickly became quite humid, leading to a chain change in flora.
Typical mamut habitats and pastures became increasingly swampy and vegetation changed accordingly.
As a result, there is simply no food left typical for animals.
From birth to death: scientists have fully investigated the life path of the mammoth
Giants did not have time to adapt to rapid changes, so the total number of mammoths was constantly declining.
Because of this, isolated and partially isolated animal populations arose, which already caused little genetic diversity.
It is clear that all this did not positively affect the chances of survival.
Scientists say climate change is critical.
When such changes destroyed mammoths and probably another megafauna.
Today, we live in a time when the average temperature on the planet is rising again, so we need to take this “harsh lesson ” seriously.

Title:

Content: Partners news
The cause of the extinction of mammoths
Scientists have found that mammoths died out due to climate change
Photo: Stanislav Krasilnikov / TASS
An international team of researchers found that the cause of the extinction of mammoths in Siberia was primarily a sharp climate change, not human activity.
The article is published in the journal Nature.
Woolly mammoths became extinct only about four thousand years ago.
They were not only the main source of meat of ancient people – the latter made from their bones the basis for dwellings, from their tusks made harpoons and even musical instruments.
Therefore, there is a widespread theory that the main cause of extinction was humans.
Researchers from the Institute of Earth Sciences of St. Petersburg State University together with colleagues from the UK, Denmark, China, Norway and the United States decided to restore the appearance of the tundrosteppe, which was inhabited by mammoths.
To do this, they using the shotgun method — obtaining from a random massive sample of cloned fragments of the original sequence — analyzed the DNA of ancient plants and animals collected from 535 different places in the Arctic, where the mammoth lived, over 20 years.
They also analyzed the DNA of more than 1,500 modern plants and animals.
Researchers were able to map the distribution of populations of mammoths and other representatives of the megafauna of the tundrosteppe.
They saw that over time their populations and genetic diversity became smaller and smaller — making survival increasingly difficult.
With the end of the Pleistocene about 12 thousand years ago and the accompanying retreat of glaciers and the formation of rivers, lakes and marshes, vegetation has decreased in volume, and it has become insufficient to maintain the previous level of populations.
As the climate warms, trees and swamp plants have taken the place of former mammoth pastures.
“We have shown that climate change, in particular rainfall, has directly led to changes in vegetation.
According to our models, people did not have any influence on them [mammoths], ” said the first author of the work, a researcher at the University of Cambridge Yuchen Wang.
However, the extinction of mammoths was influenced not only by the warming of the climate itself.
“His speed was the last nail in the lid of the coffin – they (megafauna tundrosteppe – approx.
“Tape.ru ”) could not adapt quickly enough, when the landscape radically changed and food was not enough, ” said the head of the scientific group, Professor of Copenhagen and Cambridge universities Eske Willerslev.
Only what is important to you is in the “Tape of the Day ” in Telegram.
Subscribe now

According to most recent research, what cause of wooly mammoth extinction is not as important as previously believed?

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

How did climate change affect mammoth' habitat?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

What aspects of climate change contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

What environmental factors contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

According to most recent research, what cause of wooly mammoth extinction is not as important as previously believed?

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

How did climate change affect mammoth' habitat?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

What aspects of climate change contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

What environmental factors contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

Researchers reconstructed tundra-steppe ecosystems by sequencing ancient DNA from plants, animals and fossil dung (coprolites) collected across hundreds of Arctic sites over about twenty years.

Those analyses showed that after the end of the Pleistocene melting ice created wetter conditions with rivers, lakes and bogs, and that trees and wetland plants replaced the mammoths' typical pastures.

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

How did climate change affect mammoth' habitat?

food sources disappearing
pastures becoming swampy
restricted habitat
shrank grassland

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

What environmental factors contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

As a result, typical mammoth food became scarce and populations declined, became fragmented and lost genetic diversity.

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

How did climate change affect mammoth' habitat?

food sources disappearing
restricted habitat
shrank grassland

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

How did climate change affect mammoth' habitat?

food sources disappearing
restricted habitat
shrank grassland

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

The research team emphasized that the speed of environmental change was critical and that mammoths could not adapt quickly enough to the rapidly transformed landscapes.

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

What environmental factors contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

According to most recent research, what is the primary cause of wooly mammoth extinction?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

What environmental factors contributed to the wooly mammoth extinction?

The same studies report model results that did not detect a significant effect of humans on mammoth decline in their reconstructions.

According to most recent research, what cause of wooly mammoth extinction is not as important as previously believed?

According to most recent research, what cause of wooly mammoth extinction is not as important as previously believed?

Historical summaries and archaeological evidence nevertheless document human use of mammoths for meat, shelter and tools and note that hunting pressures are commonly cited in discussions of their decline.

How did humans contribute to the wooly mammoth extinction?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

How did humans contribute to the wooly mammoth extinction?

What are the causes of the wooly mammoth extinction?

Because of the species' prominence, de-extinction efforts have received attention and current genetic projects focus on identifying cold-adaptive mammoth alleles and altering Asian elephant genomes to produce mammoth-like traits.

Title:

Content: Skip to content
The Future

A zoologist explains why the project to resurrect the wooly mammoth should go extinct

De-extinction, if it is ever possible, will not be simple.
Key Takeaways
  • Over the past couple of decades, a handful of de-extinction projects have explored the potential of "resurrecting" the wooly mammoth.
  • The term is a bit misleading: Rather than resurrecting an extinct species, the process would essentially modify the genome of an existing species in order to give it traits an extinct species once possessed.
  • The British zoologist Matthew Cobb argues that the primary focus of conservation efforts needs to be on the prevention of species loss, not on de-extinction.

Excerpted from As Gods: A Moral History of the Genetic Age by Matthew Cobb. Copyright © 2022. Available from Basic Books, an imprint of Hachette Book Group, Inc.

The most truly god-like ability provided by genetic engineering is the apparent possibility of resurrecting extinct species – ‘de-extinction’. The most attention-grabbing proposal, which has been around for over a decade, is the idea of recreating the woolly mammoth, using our knowledge of the mammoth genome, obtained from tissue frozen in the tundra. It is claimed that de-extincting mammoths and other large tundra-dwelling mammals would not only enable us to encounter fantastic beasts but would also help mitigate some of the effects of climate change – as these creatures trampled and disturbed the ground, they would supposedly allow the winter frost to penetrate deeper, keeping carbon trapped for longer.

Leaving aside the obvious lessons of Jurassic Park, the technical issues involved in recreating a mammoth appear insurmountable. It would require taking the genome of the mammoth’s closest living relative – an Asian elephant – and introducing all the relevant changes (synthesising a whole chromosome is an incredibly arduous process and has not yet been performed in an animal; a woolly mammoth had twenty-nine pairs of chromosomes). These two species split between 2.5 and 5 million years ago; there are millions of base pairs that differ between them. Not all of those differences are significant, and we do not know which are the ones that count, but it is technically possible that all the relevant differences could be identified and then introduced into the elephant genome (the Asian elephant has one fewer pair of chromosomes than a mammoth, so the whole process might prove problematic).

Assuming these difficulties can be overcome, the modified chromosomes would then have to be introduced into an elephant cell and safely interact there with all of the cell’s organelles and molecules. But this cellular environment would be different in so many unknown ways to the cells that the mammoth genome co-evolved with that there is no guarantee that this would work. As an indication of the challenge involved, it took Venter’s group twenty years to master this procedure in a bacterial cell, which has only one chromosome and does not have a nucleus or any of the complex structures found in eukaryotes such as elephants and mammoths and does not develop into a large, hairy, intelligent animal.

Even if all this went smoothly, the resultant embryo would have to be implanted into a surrogate – again, an Asian elephant would be best – and the myriad interactions between embryo and mother would have to function appropriately for months and not kill either or both. This is much trickier than you might think – a few years ago a Spanish-led team of researchers tried to clone an extinct subspecies of Pyrenean ibex; hundreds of embryos were created and implanted in a series of surrogate mothers of the same species, but only one animal was born and she died a few minutes after birth. Things could so easily go awry using a surrogate from a different species.

Perhaps for this reason, one version of the project involves artificial wombs (these are currently hypothetical), like those in Brave New World, but which would presumably have to be the size of a small car. Finally, mammoths were not simply bags of cells and DNA, but complex social animals that lived in an environment that has now disappeared along with the cultural aspects of their social organisation. Even if every one of those unbelievably complex steps could be overcome, there would be profound ethical questions about the well-being of these extraordinary animals in the alien world in which they would find themselves.

As a result of these very real problems, the woolly mammoth de-extinction scheme, initially the brainchild of George Church, has recently become less mammoth in scope. The current version of the project, partly funded by Revive & Restore (R&R), a US foundation co-founded by Stewart Brand, focuses on identifying those alleles that adapted the mammoth to cold temperatures, with the dream of maybe some day creating an elephant with enough mammothy characteristics to enable it to live in northern climes. By 2022, a biotech start-up co-founded by Church called Colossal Biosciences had raised $75 million* to try to create a ‘cold-resistant elephant’, which it was claimed would be ‘functionally equivalent’ to a mammoth. So not a mammoth.

All these nuances were lost in the inevitable media excitement at the Colossal announcement, which yet again led to headlines about de-extincting mammoths (these have recurred every few years). Tori Herridge, a mammoth expert at the Natural History Museum in London, was invited to be involved but declined. She explained why in a thoughtful article in Nature:

Colossal has committed to ‘radical’ transparency, inclusion and community engagement, but has the chance to set the bar even higher, by empowering the public as part of its de-extinction journey. … The ethical road to de-extinction has to include informed citizen voices, alongside experts and activists. This might mean that the process takes longer than five years, but private enterprises working for the common good shouldn’t shy away from the views of those they seek to serve. Let the people decide the future world they want to build.

As evolutionary biologist and R&R board member Beth Shapiro explains in her best-selling if somewhat misleadingly titled How to Clone a Mammoth, it is extremely unlikely that we will ever truly recreate any extinct species, not only because it is technically extremely difficult, but also because the ecological relationships that made up their world have all been lost. In that respect, extinction is indeed forever.

Subscribe for counterintuitive, surprising, and impactful stories delivered to your inbox every Thursday

Even more disturbing and god-like are the semi-serious, profoundly problematic proposals involving the recreation of Neanderthals – extinct humans who lived in Europe, Asia and the Middle East before us. Leaving aside some absurd internet fantasists, no scientist is actually considering such an experiment – cloning a Neanderthal and implanting the embryo in a surrogate human mother would be nauseatingly unethical on every level. However, researchers have studied the function of Neanderthal genes in human brain organoids – lentil-size blobs of tissue that can be grown in the laboratory from stem cells. A Neanderthal allele in a gene that plays a role in neural development and function altered the organisation and activity of otherwise human tissue. Brain organoid research is slightly creepy (they spontaneously grow eye-like structures that respond to light) as well as being a potential ethical minefield (could such a structure become even dimly conscious? How would we know?), but the researchers involved claim that this kind of study might shed light on how the functions of some of our genes may have differed in our close relatives.

Despite all the substantial technical and ethical issues relating to de-extinction, in 2014 the International Union for the Conservation of Nature set up a De-extinction Task Force which produced a set of guiding principles outlining the kind of detailed ecological and financial risk assessments that would be necessary before genetic engineering was applied to endangered or extinct species. In 2019, a subgroup of the Task Force published a positive exploration of the potential impact of genetic technology on conservation. At around the same time, ecologists from the University of California Santa Barbara and Imperial College took a far more cautious view, arguing that any de-extinction program should focus on recently extinct species (their ecology would be more likely to be intact) that could be restored in sufficient numbers to enable the recreation of their lost ecological function. That would rule out the mammoth, or a mammothified elephant.

What looks like a spiffy technofix might provoke excitement and attract funding from the public or mega-rich celebrities but is unlikely to be a solution to extinction for any but a tiny handful of cases. If molecular biology really must be employed, then scientists should try cloning dead members of an endangered species to increase genetic diversity, as has been done in the case of the US black-footed ferret, with funding from the R&R foundation. In 2022, an attempt to recover the genome of the extinct Christmas Island rat, using different extant rat genomes as models, showed that it was impossible to recover around 5 per cent of the genome, with over twenty genes being completely absent. Key genes involved in the sense of smell and the immune system were particularly affected.

De-extinction, if it is ever possible, will not be simple. The primary focus of conservation efforts needs to be on the prevention of species loss, not on de-extinction. In the vast majority of cases, that will involve basic work to prevent habitat degradation and to keep humans away from the endangered organisms. That might be less sexy, but it is a lot more sensible.

Related

Up Next

Title:

Content: Title: Unlocking Nature’s Secrets: The Fascinating Journey of Animal Recreation

Kuyamba:
The realm of science has always been driven by curiosity and the pursuit of knowledge. In recent years, scientists have embarked on an extraordinary endeavor: recreating animals that have long vanished from our planet. This groundbreaking field of research, known as de-extinction, holds the potential to reshape our understanding of the natural world and the intricate web of life. In this article, we will delve into the captivating world of animal recreation, exploring the methods, challenges, and ethical considerations involved in this awe-inspiring scientific pursuit.

Understanding De-extinction:
De-extinction refers to the process of resurrecting extinct species by utilizing advanced genetic engineering techniques. It involves piecing together the genetic puzzle of an extinct animal using DNA fragments extracted from preserved remains, such as bones or feathers. Once the genetic blueprint is reconstructed, scientists can attempt to reintroduce the species into its native habitat or a suitable alternative environment.

The Process of Animal Recreation:
1. Genetic Reconstruction: The first step in recreating an extinct animal involves obtaining its genetic material. This can be achieved through various means, including extracting DNA from well-preserved specimens or utilizing advanced genomic sequencing techniques to reconstruct the animal’s genome.

2. Genome Editing: Once the genetic material is obtained, scientists employ cutting-edge techniques like CRISPR-Cas9 to edit the genome. This process involves removing or replacing specific genes to ensure the recreated animal possesses the necessary traits for survival.

3. Surrogate Mothers: In cases where the extinct species cannot be directly recreated, scientists rely on surrogate mothers from closely related species. By modifying the surrogate’s reproductive cells with the edited genome, it becomes possible to give birth to offspring that closely resemble the extinct species.

Zovuta ndi Kulingalira Kwamakhalidwe:
1. Genetic Gaps: The process of de-extinction heavily relies on the availability and quality of genetic material. In cases where DNA is fragmented or incomplete, scientists face significant challenges in accurately reconstructing the animal’s genome.

2. Ecological Impact: Reintroducing a long-extinct species into its former habitat can have unforeseen consequences. The ecological dynamics may have changed since the species’ extinction, potentially leading to disruptions in the existing ecosystem.

3. Resource Allocation: De-extinction research requires substantial resources, both in terms of funding and scientific expertise. Critics argue that these resources could be better utilized for conserving endangered species and protecting existing biodiversity.

Mafunso Ofunsidwa Kawirikawiri (FAQ):

Q1: Can any extinct animal be recreated?
A1: While the possibility of recreating extinct animals is theoretically feasible, it largely depends on the availability of well-preserved genetic material. Some species, like the woolly mammoth, have been the focus of intense research due to the relatively well-preserved remains found in frozen environments.

Q2: Is de-extinction just a scientific curiosity, or does it serve a purpose?
A2: De-extinction holds the potential to restore lost biodiversity and revive ecosystems that have been impacted by the extinction of key species. It also offers an opportunity to study and understand extinct species, shedding light on their ecological roles and evolutionary history.

Q3: Are there any ethical concerns associated with de-extinction?
A3: Ethical considerations surrounding de-extinction primarily revolve around resource allocation, potential ecological disruptions, and the prioritization of conserving existing endangered species. Striking a balance between de-extinction efforts and conservation efforts is crucial to ensure responsible scientific progress.

In conclusion, the field of animal recreation through de-extinction represents a remarkable scientific frontier. While it offers tantalizing possibilities for restoring lost biodiversity and understanding extinct species, it also poses significant challenges and ethical dilemmas. As scientists continue to push the boundaries of genetic engineering, the future of de-extinction remains both captivating and contentious, requiring careful consideration and responsible scientific stewardship.

By

Those de-extinction proposals face major technical and ethical challenges, and some experts argue conservation resources should prioritize preventing habitat loss and modern species declines instead.

In summary, recent multidisciplinary studies indicate rapid climate-driven vegetation change was the primary cause of woolly mammoth extinction, while human hunting may have contributed locally but was not identified as the main driver in those models.


Multiple exploration companies and wealthy private investors have targeted Greenland for rare-earth and other critical-mineral exploration.

Kobold Metals and Bluejay Mining are reported to be working on searches around Disco Island and the Nuussuaq peninsula with reported financial backing from billionaires including Jeff Bezos, Michael Bloomberg, and Bill Gates.

Tanbreez Mining has been reported to hold a Greenland permit and its owner Greg Barnes claimed the Tanbreez deposit contains about 19 million tonnes of rare-earth oxides, with roughly 30% classed as heavy rare earths.

The Tanbreez owner said production could begin next year and a Greenland mining official confirmed a permit had been issued.

Reports and company statements describe Greenland as hosting rare earths alongside gold, iron ore, uranium, zinc and other critical minerals.

A major constraint is downstream processing and separation capacity, which the context says is currently concentrated in China and Russia while new plants are being planned in the United States and Europe.

Mining and refining rare earths are described as environmentally and technically challenging because ores can contain radioactive elements such as thorium and uranium and refining can generate toxic and radioactive waste.

Greenland’s licensing framework requires environmental review and specific permits for extraction and export, and larger-scale mining projects must undergo environmental and social impact assessments.

Companies already active in Greenland note supportive government positions, available infrastructure in parts of south Greenland, and potential access to hydropower for mining operations.

Economic and logistical hurdles such as high shipping costs, heavy bulk of some resources, and uncertain near-term market economics mean feasibility and timelines for large-scale exports remain uncertain.

Multiple exploration companies and wealthy private investors have targeted Greenland for rare-earth and other critical-mineral exploration.

Title:

Content: AEX Gold aims to invest in Greenland through its new gold mining project

Traditionally known for its fishing and hunting industries, Greenland is fast becoming the next significant area of exploration for mining businesses. The largest island in the world, Greenland remains one of the least populated areas worldwide with 56,000 citizens, and it has sought to attract local and foreign investment across a number of new projects.

The island’s current position remains complex. A sovereign government, it is positioned under the Danish kingdom who provide grants to support its local economy. To further its independence and bolster its economy to create increased tax revenue, Greenland has embraced the exploration of new mining projects as well as utilising all the renewable and local resources it has to offer.

Rich in rare-earth minerals, gold, iron-ore, uranium, in addition to hydro and wind power, Greenland’s favourable legal framework and robust infrastructure, particularly in South Greenland, have factored into AEX Gold’s vision to explore through its Greenlandic subsidiary, Nalunaq Gold Mine, situated in the Nanortalik Gold belt, Southern Greenland.

Acquiring an existing Exploitation Licence in 2015, the company is at the advanced exploration stage of its Nalunaq property, including the previously operating Nalunaq Gold Mine.   It also holds Exploration Licences at the early exploration stage Vagar and Tartoq properties.

Hosting a high-grade NI 43-101 compliant gold resource estimate of 263k oz (inferred) at 18.7 g/t and a number of regional exploration targets, AEX Gold has undertaken three years of exploration at Nalunaq, developing an updated geological model and an extension of the main vein strike length up to 1km.

“The government is very supportive, so it's about having a sound exploration strategy. We are very much focused on that, as we have an asset package that we think we can grow and create a lot of value,” explains Chief Executive Officer, Eldur Olafsson.

Originating from Iceland, Olafsson has gained extensive experience of the local geography. Focusing on mining projects in Greenland since 2012, he has analysed the country’s potential against the backdrop of environmental responsibilities and associated legalities with partner SRK Exploration Services. Through this process, the business has turned its attentions solely towards gold exploration.

“The known gold deposits in Greenland are in an area where the climate is mild and, given our experience, logistics are relatively easy. Gold opportunities are easier to finance than larger base metals projects and our perception was that we could fully fund projects like these through our support here in Iceland and in the UK market,” he explains.

“We started looking for opportunities in the South Greenland Gold Province and became aware of this historically producing mine. We were attracted by the extremely high-grade potential of the resource and the fact that the project had significant infrastructure in place.  We believed there were significant opportunities to materially improve the mining operation that had been run by previous operators.”

Extensive exploration

Throughout the exploration of high-grade resources, Olafsson is proud to remain hands on and is regularly seen on site. By undertaking various technical studies, AEX has gained the ability to comprehensively analyse similar types of assets with potential.  After acquiring the Nalunaq project in 2015 the company has continued to expand its portfolio. Whilst Nalunaq encompasses the required licence to explore and recommence production at the old gold mine, they own the larger Vagar exploration licence, situated a few kilometres to the west of the mine, where AEX believes the ground is prospective for the discovery of further Nalunaq-type deposits.  In addition, they also own the early stage Tartoq Project to the North West of Nalunaq. Each licence area is at a different stage of exploration which supports AEX’s aim of having a continuous pipeline of projects being brought into production.

“We have a total of 690sqkm of licences in south Greenland and we're the only active listed gold company in Greenland. Previous operators undertook very little forward-looking exploration once the mine was in production.  It's a very under-explored region so we intend to recommence production within the next two years at Nalunaq in order to support our exploration in the larger licences in the next 5-10 years,” he says.

“Iceland is a short distance from Greenland, so logistically it’s good for us. Additionally, in Iceland you need to be really self-sufficient, and the same can be said for those in Greenland. We don't have as many people or the multitude of services that you would have in other countries which encourages you to think creatively,” he adds.

Consequently, the company has sought to maximise efficiency whilst keeping costs down, yet all the time adding increased value across its operations.

By acquiring a high-grade deposit, less material is needed to be broken down, lowering AEX Gold’s carbon footprint. Everything taken out of the mine from underground will be processed and shipped out to a different processing facility, or processed on site adhering to the current environmental guidelines. Historically, electricity has been generated through the use of traditional fossil fuels, something which is steadily changing throughout Greenland.

“We're using oil to put in generators or to power mobile mining equipment which is high cost both in monetary and environmental terms.   Greenland currently has five hydroelectric power plants and they are looking at building more in south Greenland,” says Olafsson.

Seeing huge opportunities, he explains that the use of hydropower and wind power would complement AEX Gold’s operations, not only in its existing exploration activities, but with the implementation of an electric mining fleet with electricity being obtained from local renewable resources.

Providing local opportunities

In the future, it will be essential for Greenland to gain further revenue to unlock opportunities and services for its citizens. This is something Olafsson believes that AEX Gold can help with due to its knowledge of Iceland as it has many similarities to Greenland and has been through a period of comparable change.

“Greenland is in a similar position to Iceland not so long ago. Iceland didn't have a high education rate and wasn’t wealthy compared to other European countries, with economic and cultural activities that were very insular. We are now at the highest level of all parameters in terms of education, wealth per family, etc. and this has stemmed from improving the breadth of schooling and creating opportunities for people to grow and develop outside of the traditional areas of agriculture and fisheries.

“Our aim is that the majority of employees will be Greenlandic, but it will take time. Greenland has a large number of people competing for jobs in the fisheries and tourist centres. It is important that Greenlanders are able to access programmes that will allow them to consider other career options. In Iceland we are importing a lot of people to work in different industries in our country because we don't have enough people. This might be the case for Greenlanders as well if the anticipated growth of the Mining Sector materialises but we want to ensure that, where possible, we use local people first before looking elsewhere.

“The Greenlandic Government provides good support for those who seek education.  There are an increasing number of Greenlandic students attending Danish Universities so that now, for example, we are seeing well qualified Greenlandic geologists available for employment.  There has been a Mining School at Sisimiut for the last 10 years which provides local qualified labour who can take advantage of opportunities in the Mining sector.  You need skilled labour and as we own a mine that was in production for 10 years previously, there is a fair bit of local knowledge that we have been able to use during our exploration work and which we are keen to utilise going forward,” he says.

“We are creating revenue for local communities, creating highly skilled jobs, and are providing benefits where local communities can live better lives and grow as individuals. We need to create opportunities for young people.”

Additionally, by working with local businesses as well as those who have been operating in Greenland for some time, AEX has made a conscious effort to hire companies which can support its growth. AEX have therefore acquired a longstanding relationship with Cartwright Drilling, due to the company’s extensive experience in Greenland and subsequent knowledge of the island’s government systems, processes and practices.

Planning to mine high-grade resources using significant infrastructure already in place, AEX Gold holds extensive licences managed by an experienced team. Previous operations produced between 50,000 to 100,000 ounces a year at 15.4 grams/ton produced and this has provided a benchmark for the company, who will utilise this cash flow to explore the wider region in the long-term.

“We have a five-year plan where we want to get into production at Nalunaq and use the cash generated to fund exploration in the wider district.   We envisage investing a significant amount in exploration assets to provide a portfolio of different deposits that we can bring into production. We are creating a company that has a long-term mission in Greenland to build up local know how to support our aim of ramping up to very profitable production across a number of projects,” notes Olafsson.

“It will create a dramatic effect on the local community and hopefully be a springboard for unlocking much larger potential in Greenland. There are plenty of deposits that have been found, but you have to be able to develop them. You can only do that that with support and cooperation from the local people who believe in your vision.”

Share
Share
Author
Executives
Eldur Olafsson

Title:

Content: Advertisement
Economics.
A race between financiers around the world to search for this substance in Greenland.
Interesting details!
10-08-2022 | 00: 49
A-
A +
photos 0
A +
A-
CNN reports that some of the world ’ s wealthiest people are funding large treasure hunts using helicopters and signal transmitters on Greenland ’ s west coast.
The climate crisis is causing Greenland ’ s ice to melt at unprecedented rates, ironically creating an opportunity for investors and mining companies looking for a treasure trove of important minerals capable of powering clean energy transitions.
Advertisement
Search for minerals in Greenland
Many billionaires, including Jeff Bezos, Michael Bloomberg and Bill Gates, are betting that what lies beneath the surface of the hills and valleys of Disco Island and Greenland ’ s Noswak Peninsula are important enough minerals to power millions of electric vehicles.
Speaking to CNN, Kobold Metals CEO Kurt House said: “We are looking for a deposition that will be the largest or second largest nickel and cobalt deposition in the world. ”
The disappearance of Arctic ice – both on land and in the ocean – highlights a unique dichotomy: Greenland is the zero point for the effects of climate change, but it could also be the zero point for the search for the minerals needed to provide solutions to this crisis.
For their part, representatives of Kobold Metals, a California-based mineral exploration company, said the billionaires ’ club is supporting the company financially.
Bezos, Gates and Bloomberg did not respond to requests from CNN for comment on the news, and Kobold Metals is partnering with Bluejay Mining to find precious and rare metals in Greenland, which are essential for building the electric vehicles and huge batteries needed to store renewable energy.
The Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland said Greenland could be a hot spot for coal, copper, gold, rare earth elements and zinc.
The Greenland government has conducted several assessments on ice-free land and is aware of the country ’ s “ability to diversify the national economy through mineral extraction, ” the agency said.
(Arabic Post)
Go ahead.
Advertisement
Our news via your email
SIGN UP
Softimpact
All rights reserved © Lebanon24
All rights reserved © Lebanon24
Softimpact

Kobold Metals and Bluejay Mining are reported to be working on searches around Disco Island and the Nuussuaq peninsula with reported financial backing from billionaires including Jeff Bezos, Michael Bloomberg, and Bill Gates.

Tanbreez Mining has been reported to hold a Greenland permit and its owner Greg Barnes claimed the Tanbreez deposit contains about 19 million tonnes of rare-earth oxides, with roughly 30% classed as heavy rare earths.

Title:

Content: Greenland to mine rare earths in 2024 | Economic Horizontal | DW | 30.07.2023
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
Advertisement
Economic stratification
Greenland to mine rare earths in 2024
According to the German "Economic Weekly" reported that a mining company has obtained permission from the Greenland government to mine rare earths on the island.
The company said production could begin next year.
Tanbreez Mining, a mining company, plans to mine rare earths in Greenland next year, according to the Economic Weekly.
“We can start production next year, ” said Greg Barnes, a geologist and owner of the company. Greenland ’ s deputy minister for minerals confirmed to the journal that a mining licence had been issued.
Barnes said the Tanbreez mine "contains more than half of the world's rare earth resources" and has 19 million tons of rare earth oxides.
Of these, 30% are highly favored heavy rare earth elements.
Rare earth contains a total of 17 kinds of metal elements, the properties of each metal are different.
Each metal has a unique industrial value.
Some of them are irreplaceable.
They are used, for example, in the manufacture of electric vehicles or wind turbines.
Last year, about two-thirds of Germany ’ s rare earths came from China. Mining such as rare earths is difficult and often harmful to the environment, as rare earths are often associated with iron ore, and the chemical process of refining often requires the use of acidic substances.
What is Rare Earth?
Barnes, owner of Tanbreez Mining, told Economic Weekly that to start mining for rare earths in Greenland, a factory would be needed to separate rare earths from heterosexual rocks.
Currently there are only such factories in Russia and China.
But one such plant will be built in the United States in the coming months.
There are also plans to build a factory in Europe.
Thanks to technological advances, the equipment that separates rare earths currently costs only $40 million.
According to Barnes, China paid 1.7 billion U.S. dollars for the equipment 13 years ago.
In January, Swedish state-owned mining company LKAB announced the discovery of Europe ’ s largest rare earth deposit to date.
But the company said it would take 10-15 years for the rare earth mine, located in Kiruna in northern Sweden, to be available to the market.
EU Plans to Diversify Rare Earth Supply Chain
(Agence France-Presse, Economic Weekly)
© 2023 Deutsche Welle Copyright Notice: All content in this article is protected by copyright law and may not be used without special permission from Deutsche Welle.
Any misconduct will lead to recovery and criminal prosecution.
DW.COM

What company has obtained permission to extract Greenland's rare earths?

What does Greenland's Tanbreez mine contain?

30% of oxides are highly sought after heavy rare earth metals

The Tanbreez owner said production could begin next year and a Greenland mining official confirmed a permit had been issued.

What company has obtained permission to extract Greenland's rare earths?

Reports and company statements describe Greenland as hosting rare earths alongside gold, iron ore, uranium, zinc and other critical minerals.

What does Greenland's Tanbreez mine contain?

30% of oxides are highly sought after heavy rare earth metals

What does Greenland's Tanbreez mine contain?

30% of oxides are highly sought after heavy rare earth metals

A major constraint is downstream processing and separation capacity, which the context says is currently concentrated in China and Russia while new plants are being planned in the United States and Europe.

Title:

Content: Sweden's new rare-earth metal find likely big deal for Western consumers

Sweden has discovered what is billed as Europe's biggest deposit of rare earth minerals - a crucial component of electronics and clean energy technology - giving a significant boost to the continent's hunt for trade security.

LKAB, the Swedish state-owned mining company, announced Thursday that it found deposits of more than 1 million tonnes of rare earth metals in the country's far northern Lapland province.

Products ranging from smartphones to electric vehicles and even military jets require these rare earth elements, which are not currently mined in Europe, the company said. Much of the world's supply comes from China, which has used them as a geopolitical tool.

LKAB president Jan Mostrom said in a statement that the find could be a "significant building block" for Europe, which faces a "supply problem." But the company also said that it would take at least a decade before the rare earth minerals discovered hit the market.

READ MORE:
* GM reaches supply deals for electric vehicle motor magnets
* Why rare earths are a Five Eyes hot topic
* The race against China's 'rare earths weapon'
* Rare earth could be common in NZ

Here's what to know about this major discovery and what it means for Western consumers.

What are rare earth minerals and where are they found?

Rare earths are not actually that rare. They are a group of 17 chemical elements, composed of scandium, yttrium and lanthanides, according to the US Geological Survey.

But mining rare earth minerals is complex, as supply is not concentrated in one location. Mining them also affects the environment, since their ores can be laced with radioactive materials such as thorium and uranium. Refining the minerals can generate toxic and radioactive waste, which poses environmental and health risks if not properly disposed of.

China hosts the majority of the world's reserve of rare earth minerals and is the world's leading supplier. (The United States was the largest producer several decades ago.) While Brazil and Vietnam have significant reserves, they lag far behind in mining them.

Access to the minerals became an issue in the trade war with China during the administration of US President Donald Trump. Beijing threatened to cut off exports to the United States in 2019 to retaliate against Trump's measures, pushing prices up and prompting Trump to sign an executive order increasing domestic production. The Biden administration has also pushed for investments in that supply chain.

Other countries have also moved to reduce their reliance on China. Australia is spending millions to develop a rare earths mine and processing plant in its Northern Territory.

What are rare earth minerals used for?

Multiple household goods, including televisions, computers, smartphones and lighting use rare earth minerals. Yttrium and europium, for instance, light up iPhone displays and allow them to vibrate.

They are also key elements of US-made defence systems, including night-vision technology, jets and armoured-vehicle alloys.

Rare earth minerals are critical for the global clean energy transition, as they are components of the magnets used in electric vehicles and wind turbines - although recently some companies have developed motors for electric vehicles that do not require rare earths.

What does Sweden's discovery mean for the climate?

LKAB's find was welcomed in Europe, which has faced energy challenges amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The European Union also has a goal of becoming climate neutral by 2050.

In September, a senior EU official said Europe's climate ambitions were at risk without reliable supply chains. "Take China, with its quasi-monopoly on rare earths and permanent magnets and prices rising by 50-90% in the past year alone," wrote Thierry Breton, an EU commissioner. "Supply of raw materials has become a real geopolitical tool."

The European Raw Materials Alliance notes that while the European Union has a massive electric-motor manufacturing sector, "it is almost fully import dependent" when it comes to rare earth permanent magnets.

Swedish Deputy Prime Minister Ebba Busch said Thursday that Europe's independence from Russia and China would begin with this mine.

Political leadership in the continent, she said, "must give the industry the conditions to switch to green and fossil-free production."

The Washington Post

Mining and refining rare earths are described as environmentally and technically challenging because ores can contain radioactive elements such as thorium and uranium and refining can generate toxic and radioactive waste.

Title:

Content: Democracy Dies in Darkness

Sweden’s new rare-earth metal find likely big deal for Western consumers

Sweden has discovered what is billed as Europe’s biggest deposit of rare earth minerals — a crucial component for electronics and clean energy needs — giving a significant boost to the continent’s hunt for trade security.

LKAB, the Swedish state-owned mining company, announced Thursday that it found deposits of more than 1 million tons of rare earth metals in the country’s far northern Lapland province.

Products ranging from smartphones to electric vehicles and even military jets require these rare earth elements which are not currently mined in Europe, the company said. Much of the world’s supply comes from China, which has used them as a geopolitical tool.

LKAB President Jan Mostrom said in a statement that the find could be a “significant building block” for Europe, which faces a “supply problem.” But the company also said that it would take at least a decade before rare earth minerals from the find hit market.

Here’s what to know about this major discovery and what it means for Western consumers.

What are rare earth minerals and where are they found?

Rare earths are not actually that rare. They are a group of 17 chemical elements, composed of scandium, yttrium and lanthanides, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.

But mining rare earth minerals is complex, as supply is not concentrated in one location. Mining them also impacts the environment, since their ores can be laced with radioactive materials such as thorium and uranium. Refining the minerals can also generate toxic and radioactive waste, which poses environmental and health risks if not properly disposed of.

China hosts a majority of the world’s reserve of rare earth minerals and is the world’s leading supplier of the product. (The United States was the largest producer several decades ago.) While Brazil and Vietnam have significant reserves, they lag far behind in mining it.

China hints it will choke off U.S. ‘rare earths’ access. But it’s not that easy.

Access to the minerals became an issue during the Trump administration’s trade war with China. Beijing threatened to cut off exports to the United States in 2019 to retaliate against Trump’s measures, pushing prices up, prompting Trump to sign an executive order increasing domestic production. The Biden administration has also pushed for investments in that supply chain.

Other countries have also moved to reduce their reliance on China. Australia is spending millions to develop a rare earths mine and processing plant in its Northern Territory.

What are rare earth minerals used for?

Multiple household goods, including televisions, computers, smartphones, and lighting use rare earth minerals. Yttrium and europium, for instance, light up iPhone displays and allow them to vibrate.

They are also key elements of U.S.-made defense systems, including night vision technology, jets and armored vehicle alloys.

Rare earth minerals are critical for the global clean energy transition, as they are components of the magnets used in electric vehicles and wind turbines. Though recently, some companies have developed motors for electric vehicles that do not require rare earths.

What does Sweden’s discovery mean for the climate?

LKAB’s find was welcomed in Europe, which has faced energy challenges amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The European Union also has a goal of becoming climate neutral by 2050.

In September, a senior E.U. official said that Europe’s climate ambitions were at risk without reliable supply chains. “Take China, with its quasi-monopoly on rare earths and permanent magnets and prices rising by 50-90% in the past year alone,” wrote Thierry Breton, an E.U. commissioner. “Supply of raw materials has become a real geopolitical tool.”

The European Raw Material Alliance notes that while the European Union has a massive electric-motor manufacturing sector, “it is almost fully import dependent” when it came to rare earth permanent magnets.

Swedish Deputy Prime Minister Ebba Busch said Thursday that Europe’s independence from Russia and China will begin with this mine.

Political leadership in the continent, she said, “must give the industry the conditions to switch to green and fossil-free production.”

Greenland’s licensing framework requires environmental review and specific permits for extraction and export, and larger-scale mining projects must undergo environmental and social impact assessments.

Title:

Content: Greenland’s Melting Glaciers Spew a Complicated Treasure: Sand

Meltwater from the island’s ice sheet is loaded with the right kind of sand for concrete production—which further warms the planet.

Sand is both abundant and rare. Earth has vast deserts of the stuff, of course, but not the kind that’s in such high demand that sand mafias are killing for it. That special variety is a critical component of the concrete used in buildings and infrastructure, the production of which has skyrocketed exponentially over the last few decades. That has come at a significant climate cost: The industry now accounts for 8 percent of global carbon emissions.

Sand is also at the center of a strange climate story. Climate change is destroying Greenland’s ice sheet, producing an extraordinary amount of meltwater. (Even if we somehow totally stopped emissions today, Greenland’s melting could still contribute nearly a foot of sea-level rise.) And in a twist of fate, that meltwater is loaded with the right kind of sand for concrete production, which causes more warming and more melting. Great plumes of glacial sediment are swirling along the coast, actually adding land along the edges of the island. Even though Greenland is only three times the size of Texas, its ice sheet is the source of 8 percent of suspended river sediments flowing into the oceans.

The country now has to figure out whether exploiting that valuable, abundant resource on a wider scale would be environmentally, socially, and economically tenable. “It is quite controversial—we're saying Greenland can benefit from climate change,” says Mette Bendixen, a geographer at McGill University in Canada, who’s studying the idea. “Contrary to most of the other parts of the Arctic coast, Greenland is not eroding. It's in fact growing bigger, because the ice sheet is melting. So you can think of the ice sheet as a tap that pours out not only water, but also all the sediment.”

That sediment is special, indeed. Desert sand from, say, the Sahara is no good for making concrete because it’s too rounded and uniform. Over millennia, winds push those grains around, polishing them. If you make concrete out of such sand, “it's almost like building with marbles,” says Bendixen. “You want particles that are more angular in shape, not rounded. And that type of material is exactly what you get from rivers, for example, or material that has been deposited by glaciers.”

As Greenland’s ice sheet—which covers 700,000 square miles and is up to 10,000 feet thick—rubs against the land, it grinds up sediment, including sand, fine silt, and larger chunks of gravel. And as the ice melts, torrents of water carry all that debris to the sea, while the pounding of the rivers themselves further erodes the landscape. Compared to the thousands of years that sand spends rolling around the Sahara and becoming rounded, the particles coming off Greenland are fresher. They’re more angular and more diversely shaped. Instead of acting like marbles, they fit together like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, which is good for concrete.

Greenland already harvests its sand for local, small-scale concrete production, since importing sand would be prohibitively expensive. This is limited to domestic companies, who have to win non-exclusive permits after passing environmental review by the government’s scientific advisers. They can also apply to export the sand, but that requires additional licensing. “We are basically also open for sand extraction aiming at export, but then it will be treated like any other mining activity,” says Kim Zinck-Jørgensen, of the Greenland government’s Mineral Licence and Safety Authority. “And for that you'll have a much greater setup with regulations and also environmental impact assessments, social impact assessments.”

Currently, dredging boats suck up sediment along the coast and filter out the sand, which is then brought back onshore. But if Greenland decides to scale up sand extraction for export, that would mean big ships would have to haul the stuff away to international ports. “It's important to stress that if you extract whatever natural resource, there will be environmental consequences,” says Bendixen. “But really, here the environmental consequences can be super broad.”

For one, those big ships will also be bringing in ballast, or the water they’ve collected from elsewhere and stored in their hulls for balance. If that ballast is released off the coast of Greenland, it may introduce invasive species. And, of course, dredging coastal sediments would further endanger underwater native creatures—and on land, increased mining operations might scare away the game that Inuit hunters rely on. (Greenland’s population is about 90 percent indigenous Inuit. The Greenland branch of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, an NGO representing Inuit peoples, declined to comment for this story.)

Interestingly, though, last month Bendixen and her colleagues published a survey of Greenlanders about their opinions on sand extraction. They found that 84 percent of adult residents are in favor of it, and three-quarters want it to be a national project. “It turns out that the vast majority of Greenlanders think that it should be primarily a Greenlandic enterprise,” says Rasmus Leander Nielsen, a political scientist at the University of Greenland, who did the survey with Bendixen. “Maybe you could have some smaller-scale, Greenlandic-led companies that could start off. And then eventually, when the business case is more favorable, then we could go into a larger export.”

About that business case: While the global demand for sand has gone wild, the economics of exported Greenland sand aren’t yet clear. A company would have to pay to run the local operations and foot the shipping costs to get the resource off the island. Those will be considerable, since sand is heavy and takes up a lot of room in a ship.

The Greenland government recently worked with a consultancy that did an assessment, finding that exporting the sand to Europe isn’t economically feasible at the moment. “Whether it's feasible to export it further on to the Middle East, I don't know,” says Thomas Lauridsen, chief adviser to Greenland’s Ministry of Mineral Resources and Justice. “But we will then be in competition with European companies that will dredge sand in Europe or closer to the customer.”

Lauridsen adds that it’s up to the private sector to determine whether selling Greenland’s sand is cost-effective or not. And that export cost calculus may change in the future. “By 2100, the demand for sand is going to rise 300 percent, and the price 400 percent,” says Bendixen. “So we don't have to look that much farther into the future to start seeing a different calculation here in terms of whether it's worthwhile.”

Yes, a world with more sand harvesting for making more concrete would also mean more carbon emissions, more warming, and more melting of Greenland’s ice sheet. But, Bendixen says, all that glacial sand need not go exclusively toward concrete. Coastal communities are increasingly clamoring for sand to hold back rising seas, a fortification known as beach nourishment. “Just think of the irony in using the sand for beach nourishment to mitigate sea-level rise,” says Bendixen, “which is caused by—to a large extent—the melting of the Greenland ice sheet!”

Why AEX consider Greenland a favorable mining location?

Companies already active in Greenland note supportive government positions, available infrastructure in parts of south Greenland, and potential access to hydropower for mining operations.

Why AEX consider Greenland a favorable mining location?

Economic and logistical hurdles such as high shipping costs, heavy bulk of some resources, and uncertain near-term market economics mean feasibility and timelines for large-scale exports remain uncertain.