China’s gallium and germanium controls: what they mean and what could happen next.

From August, China is to restrict exports of gallium and germanium, two critical elements for making semiconductor chips. With China dominating the supply of both elements, exporters will now need special licences to get them out of the country.

The move has the potential to harm a range of Western tech manufacturers that use these elements to make their products.


Written by Gavin D. J. Harper, University of Birmingham. This article is the opinion of the author and not necessarily that of the UK Defence Journal. If you would like to submit your own article on this topic or any other, please see our submission guidelines.


The move is reportedly in response to western restrictions of equipment vital for making semiconductor devices (and was forewarned in an previous article in The Conversation).

Above all, the US CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 curtailed exports of high-end microchips and technology to China, potentially affecting Beijing’s capacity for high-performance computing in areas such as defence. Other nations such as Japan and the Netherlands have also imposed restrictions.

So how important are the new Chinese restrictions and what are the implications likely to be?

The importance of gallium and germanium

Silicon is the most widely used material in semiconductors, and is very abundant. But germanium and gallium have specific properties that are hard to replicate and lend themselves to certain niche applications. These get incorporated into countless devices such as smartphones, laptops, solar panels and medical equipment, as well as defence applications.

Both elements are also crucial to technological advancement over the next few years. Germanium is particularly useful in space technologies such as solar cells because it is more resistant to cosmic radiation than silicon. With the physical limits of silicon being approached in some technologies, increased use of germanium is mooted as a way of overcoming these limits. It is already used in small quantities in some semiconductors to improve things like electron flow and thermal conductivity.

As for gallium, 95% of it is used in a material called gallium arsenide, which is used in semiconductors with higher performance and lower power-consumption applications than silicon. These are used in things like blue and violet LEDs and microwave devices.

Meanwhile, gallium nitride is used in semiconductors in components for things like electric vehicles, sensors, high-end radio communications, LEDs and Blu-Ray players. Its use is expected to grow significantly.

Both gallium and germanium are on the European Union and US lists of critical elements. The UK considers gallium to be critical to its manufacturing interests, though sees germanium as less important.

Where they come from

China controls about 60% of all germanium supplies. The element is derived in two main ways, as a by-product of zinc production and from coal. These respectively account for about 75% and 25% of the total supply. China dominates germanium that comes from zinc production. The US is one of the alternative suppliers, with deposits in Alaska and Tennessee and additional refining capacity in Canada. But as it stands, the US is still over 50% reliant on imported germanium.

Germanium from coal has several drawbacks. Two of the main producers are Russia and Ukraine, and the war has affected supplies to the west from both countries. In the years 2017-20, Russia was supplying 9% of the US germanium requirement, for instance, but this is now likely to have stopped. In response to the Chinese restrictions, Russia plans to increase germanium production for its domestic market. This may at least alleviate global demand, even if it won’t help the west directly.

Germanium from coal is also at the mercy of the power industry, since certain coals rich in the element are burned as an energy source. In addition, germanium from coal will become more difficult as much of the world seeks to phase out coal power, which again could tighten supplies.

With gallium, China accounts for around 80% of the world supply, deriving it mainly from aluminium production. There’s actually no shortage of gallium, but even before the new controls, the supply was restricted by a lack of production capacity.

Gallium is also obtained by recycling semiconductor wafers, which are thin slices of semiconductor used in electronic circuits. But once the circuits are integrated into products, the quantities of gallium in each one are so small that it becomes challenging to recycle. A Nature Communications paper in 2022 noted that gallium is “almost never functionally recycled” once it reaches final products.

The implications

The full impact of China’s new export regime depend on a number of factors, including the severity of the controls in practice, and the response of western governments and companies. As it stands, the controls look likely to lead to higher prices for gallium and germanium, as well as longer delivery times.

This could make it more expensive and difficult for western companies to produce electronic devices, which could in turn lead to higher prices for consumers. It could also make it more difficult for western companies to compete with Chinese companies. In an echo of how the global microchip shortage during the COVID pandemic considerably affected tech manufacturing, this points to a significant impact on the global economy.

The long-term effects of the controls are difficult to predict because so many factors are involved. Stockpiles of the elements should help to some extent: the US has said it holds inventory of germanium, though not gallium.

Western manufacturers may be forced to diversify their supply chains by obtaining components containing the elements from countries to which China is willing to export. This could lead to increased costs and complexity.

Another avenue is to increase production from alternative sources. In the past, germanium has been derived from minerals mined in Germany, Latin America and Africa, so these options may come back on the table. There is also the potential to invest in researching devices that are less reliant on these critical materials, but that would take time to bear fruit.

Clearly, the move is a significant escalation in the tech war between China and the west. The concern is that it could go further: China dominates the supply of a whole range of vital materials known as rare earth metals, as well as other materials which are required for the clean energy transition. Even before the escalation in hostilities over the past couple of years, China had used its dominance over certain materials as leverage in trade disputes.

So this latest development is concerning to say the least. At a time when the international challenges faced by humanity are greater than ever, the emergence of a new resource nationalism is the last thing anyone needed.The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

27 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

John Hartley
John Hartley (@guest_737472)
9 months ago

Some years ago, a British university came up with extracting rare earths from Titanium Dioxide (white paint pigment). What happened to that? It would have made us less vulnerable to China.

John Hartley
John Hartley (@guest_738080)
9 months ago
Reply to  John Hartley

Leeds, 2009

farouk
farouk (@guest_737476)
9 months ago

It has never failed to amaze me how poor the UK is regards promoting British industry. Take for example the renewable market which is part and parcel of a modern society and a source of materials be it: Plastics (There is a runway in North Killingholme Lincs which as of 2019 had 50000 tonnes of plastic waste dumped on it) if the government paid for a plastic recycling factory and then allowed it to pay its way by selling recovered plastic it would be a source of raw material and go some way to reduce the waste mountain the government… Read more »

Last edited 9 months ago by farouk
Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_737537)
9 months ago
Reply to  farouk

Agree with most apart from the last bit. The loan is a max £500 one time loan for people who have made it through the refugee process, been approved to stay.
These type of loan/grants are available to people if they don’t have any money for some situations or have a crisis etc. Normally dependant on income etc.
It’s a loan that will be taken back off this people through through benefits, wages etc.
These loans should be available to everyone in society if they are in need.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking (@guest_737773)
9 months ago
Reply to  farouk

The ‘national interest’ as a principle to guide our decisions on vital capability was dropped last century in favour of instant financial betterment in the here and now.

Re-cycling should be a much bigger industry. ‘Where there is muck there is money’.

Last edited 9 months ago by Barry Larking
George
George (@guest_740634)
9 months ago
Reply to  farouk

I recall visiting a warehouse on Tyneside several years ago, to purchase several used PC IT items advertised on eBay. Mostly CPUs and HDDs. The company was a so-called recycling concern. However, there were pallets and pallets of plastic wrapped PC, printers and monitors being prepared to load onto ships. The obvious enquiry revealed there destination. Communist China. The worlds largest recipient and recycler of used electrical or electronic equipment. Further investigation revealed the reason we did not recycle our own waste and recover the highly valuable rare earth metals and others. To do it in a way that complied… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_737549)
9 months ago

Is worrying but the last time China did this their market share of these materials declined from over 90% to 70% or less reasonably quickly so expect other supplies to materialise over time. Also should be noted that the only supply of a constituent material in the make up of silicon chips is presently the US so this somewhat limits Chinese actions in such matters.

grizzler
grizzler (@guest_737554)
9 months ago

This statement appears to me to be somewhat ambiguous and/or contradictory: “Germanium from coal is also at the mercy of the power industry, since certain coals rich in the element are burned as an energy source. In addition, germanium from coal will become more difficult as much of the world seeks to phase out coal power, which again could tighten supplies”. Are they saying you need to burn the coal in order to extract the Germanium as implied in the first half or that when coal is burned does that destroy Germanium , if it does then surely if we… Read more »

Last edited 9 months ago by grizzler
Ian
Ian (@guest_737609)
9 months ago
Reply to  grizzler

You won’t destroy Germanium by burning it because it’s a metal. It’s probably recoverable from the ash. I think the author’s point is that mining coal just to get Germanium out of it isn’t economical, whereas extracting it as a byproduct of the energy industry is. So this is a largely self-inflicted problem and we probably should fire up the coal stations again. As things stand- without them we could be in real trouble next winter if it’s a cold one.

Stc
Stc (@guest_737706)
9 months ago
Reply to  Ian

Hear, hear Sir.

Expat
Expat (@guest_737757)
9 months ago
Reply to  Ian

With China building 1200 coal stations I doubt us firing 1 or 2 up is a big problem globally.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_738077)
9 months ago
Reply to  Ian

Agree. Drax and the other coal powered station were allowed to close. Primarily because the owners would have needed to retain key workers and the sites ready to fire them up. The UK paid £400 million towards both facilities last winter and they were barely used. Drax was warmed up/ fired up ready to use then not used in the December cold snap. Instead we imported electricity to cover the shortfall from France, Norway and Belgium. Hmmm🤔🤔🤔 Not sure scrapping national key infrastructure to purchase supplies from Europe/ Norway was/is a good idea, especially if European markets are under strain… Read more »

Simon
Simon (@guest_738333)
9 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

I think Drax refused to extend the life of it last coal fired unit any further.

Dave Wolfy
Dave Wolfy (@guest_737660)
9 months ago

The first transistors were Germanium, superceded by the better Silicon.

Strange how things come and go.

Expat
Expat (@guest_737756)
9 months ago

Of course these moves don’t always pay off as industry starts to research and produce alternatives. Example, at the start of WW2 4% of all rubber used in the US was synthetic, around 4000 tons a year. When access to natural rubber was cut off the US ended up producing 756,000 tons as year of synthetic rubber ramping up in just three years.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_737775)
9 months ago
Reply to  Expat

Wow that’s a lot of rubber

Last edited 9 months ago by Monkey spanker
Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon (@guest_738016)
9 months ago
Reply to  Expat

At one level it’s nice that China & Russia are now so actively demonstrating in just what direction their authoritarian minds have been focused for so long. Not that there was any real doubt, of course. I did pass comment decades back that we’d been lucky regarding the former’s long slumber, for when the dragon awoke other challenges would pale in significance. I will not personally get over far into the 21st century, but it will obviously turn out transformative. Still, I’ll stake on Democracy again rising to the challenge, since it requires a more imaginative mind set than your… Read more »

Frost002
Frost002 (@guest_737914)
9 months ago

The wealth of the West is based on Chinese commodities. Russia, due to it’s vast resources will also harm the west now it is cut off. The result for the UK: the working class, no change. the middle class, diminished. The upper/ruling class, more wealth. For example property, the elite are slowly eroding the ability for the lower classes to own it. The truth is western capitalist society is based on the enemies commodities, that is the root cause of the issue.

Last edited 9 months ago by Frost002
Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_738079)
9 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

Well… Not wanting to agree with a PutinBot Ruskfascist but you aren’t wrong. The West gladly used cheap Chinese labour to drive profits and Russian energy to fuel cheap electricity and gas. Now that has gone the West will adapt. Diversification of the energy sector, ongoing with much more low carbon and renewables energy coming online. Purchasing of LPG from other sources eg Nigeria, Middle East, as transition to electric heat pumps and solar continues. The UK has much more work to do and needs to move faster in this area. Crucially I think it’s telling noone in HMG has… Read more »

Airborne
Airborne (@guest_738090)
9 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

Absolute chuff!

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_738098)
9 months ago
Reply to  Airborne

Sorry Airborne I gave the guy too much considered thought. You are right of course. It is absolute chuff!

Airborne
Airborne (@guest_738127)
9 months ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Mate not all chuff you were correct to a certain degree but his interpretation of working, middle/upper ruling class etc absolutely bollocks! No way can you define people as this any more, as what definition or platform do you use to define? Income, status, heritage, where they grew up, where they are now etc. no mate it’s impossible to do that nowadays, but for those with an axe to grind it does feed into their politics of envy! Anyway mate it’s a subject for another thread maybe, cheers 👍

Jonno
Jonno (@guest_738224)
9 months ago
Reply to  Frost002

In UK it was the property owning democracy ideal that stemmed from conservatism. The Marxists on the other hand wanted everyone to live in tower blocks. Look where that got us.
Getting back to the point. I think the UK needs to be more proactive recycling and even mining those rubbish tips.
The problem stems from so many MP’s and others being scientifically illiterate.

Tom
Tom (@guest_740440)
9 months ago
Reply to  Jonno

“Marxist wanted everyone to live in tower blocks”… to be honest I’ve no idea what that’s all about, and it’s certainly a load of old pony. You are right however, when you say that the UK needs to do much more regarding recycling. I have no desire to turn this into a political conversation however, the Tories expound money money money.. capitalism, capitalism etc. Capitalism and social justice are two ideologies that cannot exist together, especially in the 21st century. The Labour party… well who knows, and the Lib Dems, well they remind me of scavengers… the hide behind the… Read more »

Robert Billington
Robert Billington (@guest_738115)
9 months ago

Ooof China is learning fast!! As Russia was commanding oil and gas, the Chinese are commanding supplies of Gallium and Germanium.
With Yellen and Blinken over there, they will give them Taiwan surely and the US and the West will appear as two-faced liars??

steve page
steve page (@guest_739893)
9 months ago

The trouble is, it’s not as if any right – minded person couldn’t see resource wars coming our way, which makes me wonder what sort of people have we got running our country. don’t get me wrong, Labour are just as bad if not worse…. i’m talking about general levels of competence.

PurpleRonnie
PurpleRonnie (@guest_741998)
9 months ago

40k tons of Germanium is mined each year in the UK. Its wouldn’t take a lot to increase this. Gallium on the other hand is difficult to come by as it is a by-product of non-ferrous metal production which the UK has very little of. This is what happens when you throw all your manufacturing to China.