Duke and UCT Target Critical Minerals' Missing Middle - But Who Will Fund the Scale-Up?

Highlights

• Duke and UCT recommend five investment priorities including rare earth separation, DLE, and lower-energy lithium conversion at technology readiness levels 5–7.
• China controlled roughly 91% of magnet rare earth separation in 2024, making midstream processing the world's most critical industrial chokepoint.
• Direct lithium extraction can cut recovery time from months to hours, but performance varies by brine chemistry and hybrid systems may be more realistic.
• Recycled NdFeB magnet feedstock will remain limited until EV and wind-turbine magnets reach retirement volumes around 2030.
• REEx warns that capital alone won't close the commercialization gap—feedstock reliability, customer qualification, and repeatable output are equally essential.

---

Duke University and the University of Cape Town (UCT) recommended five critical-mineral investment priorities on August 13, 2026, centered on lithium conversion, rare earth separation, and pilot-scale commercialization. Rare Earth Exchanges® analysis finds the report correctly identifies midstream processing—not mineral ownership—as the principal source of industrial leverage. The Global South controls substantial mineral resources but captures too little of their value. Duke and UCT argue that processing technology can change that equation. The harder question is whether governments will fund repeatable industrial capacity rather than another cycle of promising pilot plants.

What Did Duke University and UCT Recommend?

According to Creamers Media’s Mining Weekly (opens in a new tab), the researchers identified five investment priorities: secure a position at processing chokepoints; fund pilot and demonstration plants; evaluate alternatives to lithium evaporation ponds; reduce the energy intensity of lithium conversion; and prioritize rare earth separation and magnet recycling. The report focuses on technologies at technology readiness levels 5–7, including direct lithium extraction, lower-temperature spodumene roasting, and continuous rare earth ion exchange. At this stage, developers must prove that a process can operate repeatedly with real feedstock—not merely succeed under laboratory conditions.

Financing must also change with the development stage. Pilot plants generally require grants and equity. Demonstration facilities need customer offtakes, debt guarantees, and co-development partners capable of absorbing scale-up risk.

Why Is Midstream Processing More Valuable Than Mining Alone?

Mining without conversion or separation leaves the strongest margins and strategic leverage elsewhere. The International Energy Agency’s 2024 net-zero scenario projected eightfold lithium-demand growth and a doubling of rare earth demand by 2040. Yet China controlled approximately 91% of magnet rare earth separation and refining in 2024, according to later IEA analysis. That concentration explains why simply opening more mines cannot create an independent supply chain. Concentrates must be converted into battery-grade lithium chemicals or separated rare earth oxides before manufacturers can use them.

Can Direct Lithium Extraction Replace Evaporation Ponds?

DLE can shorten lithium recovery from 12–24 months to hours while potentially recovering more than 90% of the lithium, compared with roughly 30%–50% for conventional evaporation ponds. But DLE is not a universal solution. Performance depends on brine chemistry, including magnesium content, temperature, and contaminant levels. Many projects still require downstream concentration and purification. Hybrid DLE-and-pond systems may therefore prove more credible than claims that DLE can eliminate ponds everywhere.

For hard-rock lithium, Duke and UCT highlight roasting as the major energy bottleneck. Conventional spodumene calcination operates around 1,000°C–1,100°C. Lower-temperature sulphate and chloride routes could reduce energy use while accepting lower-grade feeds, but commercial reliability remains to be proven.

Rare Earth Separation Is the Harder Strategic Test

The report identifies solvent-free separation and magnet recycling as practical diversification opportunities.

REEtec is developing a separation process that avoids the organic solvents used in conventional solvent extraction. HyProMag and Cyclic Materials are pursuing neodymium-iron-boron magnet recycling. However, recycling feedstock will remain constrained until larger volumes of electric-vehicle and wind-turbine magnets reach retirement around 2030. The report’s diagnosis is persuasive. Its investment prescription raises a more difficult question: are these technologies stranded because capital is scarce, or because too few have demonstrated qualified output, dependable feedstock, and competitive economics at industrial scale?

REEx Reality Check

Duke and UCT correctly identify the commercialization valley, but capital is not the only missing ingredient. Technology readiness levels can conceal unresolved feedstock variability, recovery losses, waste handling, customer qualification, and operating-cost risk. Governments should fund shared demonstration and qualification infrastructure, but payments must be tied to repeatable output and buyer acceptance—not equipment installation. The strongest opportunities will combine technology, committed feedstock, an operating partner, and a customer willing to qualify the product.

What to Watch

• By the end of 2026: Whether the Council establishes a public technology-readiness registry with comparable pilot results.
• During 2027: Whether Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) developers publish sustained recovery and reagent data using commercial brines.
• By 2028: Whether solvent-free rare earth separation produces qualified oxides at meaningful continuous scale.
• Around 2030: Whether retired magnets become a dependable industrial feedstock rather than a projected recycling opportunity.

Bottom Line: The Global South does not need more processing ambition; it needs qualified tonnes, committed buyers, and financing tied to performance.

FAQ

What did Duke University and UCT recommend for critical minerals?

They recommended investing at processing chokepoints, funding pilot-to-demonstration projects, testing DLE against site-specific brines, reducing the energy intensity of hard-rock lithium conversion, and advancing rare earth separation and recycling. Their central argument is that resource-rich countries must capture more midstream value rather than export unprocessed minerals.

Why is rare earth separation strategically important?

Rare earth ores contain multiple chemically similar elements that must be separated into high-purity products before they can enter metal, alloy, and magnet manufacturing. China’s approximately 91% share of global magnet rare earth separation and refining in 2024 makes this stage one of the world’s most consequential industrial chokepoints.

Sources:

• Duke University Nicholas Institute, “Report Identifies Investments to Break China’s Grip on Critical Minerals Processing,” August 13, 2026
• International Energy Agency, Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2024
• MP Materials, “Transformational Public-Private Partnership with the Department of Defense,” July 10, 2025
• Creamer Media’s Mining Weekly, “Duke University, UCT make tangible investment recommendations ahead of lithium, rare earths boom”