3 ms·

First: The "Limits to Growth" language here is hyperbolic, and this report was commissioned by (and this PDF is hosted on the site of) a green materials/mining

First: The "Limits to Growth" language here is hyperbolic, and this report was commissioned by (and this PDF is hosted on the site of) a green materials/mining agency* GTK that has a "Circular Economy" project about material reuse. So this is clearly coming from a perspective of advocacy and economic interest. Second: If you actually read the paper, they freely admit that this isn't about minerals "running out", but more that they're becoming harder to extract - especially regarding more money / energy / water. The classic issue with this is that these models are highly sensitive to technological change, which is in turn driven by the economic realities involved. We've all seen what chips, PV panels, etc. when these all align. To wit, note that while there is a long analysis of how current mining practice is getting harder, there is no discussion of the pace of innovation in mining tech and the trends by which it would be adopted. An example of one tech that addresses their copper ore grade issue is biomining [1], which is using microorganisms to process the ore. This isn't widespread yet, but is in development because the industry already knows this is a problem. The mining industry and commodities more broadly actually suffer from boom and bust cycles with respect to their CapEx invested and payback period - ie everyone frantically fracks for gas until the price goes through the floor and they all go bankrupt. So resource extraction is more about economic viability than technical constraints like the author suggests. TL;DR: We're not in danger of long-term shortages of minerals, just shocks like we're having with oil, but these pose no danger to encountering any "limits to growth" anytime soon. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomining https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biomining * Corrected from "company" from comment below.

ulrashida 4y ago
All credit to my colleagues in academia, but the pace of technological change in mining is often wildly overstated by mining companies as an attempt to attract investors, greenwash, or genuine misunderstanding of the underlying technology. Most notably, many of the newer techs encounter meaningful difficulties as they attempt to scale. Nearly all of the advances in current mining have been either driving economies of scale (larger trucks, larger plants, block caving undergrounds) or sweating efficiencies (electronic detonators, computer-assisted monitoring and design, reprocessing tailings). One of the great things about mining is the ability to simultaneously accept there is often lots of free cash flow around to invest in the next great thing while acknowledging the brutal realities that all the tech in the world won't help if you don't have a matching orebody. While the author does a messy job of their pitch, it's indisputable that the overall quality and size of deposits is going down over time. For many of us in the industry, we know that the problem is not going to be running out but rather is society able to handle increasingly frequent supply/demand shocks without losing the collective plot. We already see a bit of this tension now: for every bio-mining initiative we have another set of lunatics who are proposing to "mine" sea beds. There are interesting times ahead.
- nickpinkston 4y ago
  Yea, I'm not denying the quality of deposits are down, costs of processing are up, or that it's hard to make the tech work. I'm just saying that we haven't seen the dire need that would cause big changes because the industry's unique R&D and CapEx requirements to change. Dire = severally decreased production of vital end products because of mineral costs/shortages (ie the 1970's oil crisis). Generally, there are known technologies already past the prototype stages just waiting for the prices and other factors to make them viable, and once they are they then ride the experience curve to better productivity. Re: supply/demand shocks - Interestingly, this is where the state can have a good roll in helping smooth these out. For instance, Biden's recent bill included guaranteed oil/gas purchases that the oil industry needed so they can justify running their refineries on with uncertain future demand, with the USG taking the risk on via filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with the excess. [1] I'm reacting to an effect that this chart [2] highlights where academia / industry is being overly conservative in their predictions. In this case, every year they predicted PV was about to run out of steam, when it was actually growing exponentially. I think this paper is doing the same thing by ignoring tech development increases in its analysis. Are you aware of any systematic study of new mining tech development, economics, etc. that has a thorough analysis of this? This isn't my field. I'm in manufacturing, but follow the space because it's adjacent and has some things in common, so I'd be interested to get your take / sources. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-gas-prices-energy-oil-2022-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-gas-prices-energy-oil-... [2] https://zenmo.com/en/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-projections-of-the-international-energy-agency-with-2018-update-2/ https://zenmo.com/en/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-proj...
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Maybe we could tap the breaks on extraction from virgin deposits while we work out how to more sustainably use what's already been extracted? Or we could just keep plunging headlong into a future where it takes 2 barrels of oil to produce 1.
    - nickpinkston 4y ago
Lasokki 4y ago
A small correction: GTK, or Geological Survey of Finland, is a public research agency operating under the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment. https://www.gtk.fi/en/this-is-gtk/ https://www.gtk.fi/en/this-is-gtk/
- nickpinkston 4y ago
  Thank you!

ulrashida 4y ago

All credit to my colleagues in academia, but the pace of technological change in mining is often wildly overstated by mining companies as an attempt to attract investors, greenwash, or genuine misunderstanding of the underlying technology. Most notably, many of the newer techs encounter meaningful difficulties as they attempt to scale. Nearly all of the advances in current mining have been either driving economies of scale (larger trucks, larger plants, block caving undergrounds) or sweating efficiencies (electronic detonators, computer-assisted monitoring and design, reprocessing tailings). One of the great things about mining is the ability to simultaneously accept there is often lots of free cash flow around to invest in the next great thing while acknowledging the brutal realities that all the tech in the world won't help if you don't have a matching orebody. While the author does a messy job of their pitch, it's indisputable that the overall quality and size of deposits is going down over time. For many of us in the industry, we know that the problem is not going to be running out but rather is society able to handle increasingly frequent supply/demand shocks without losing the collective plot. We already see a bit of this tension now: for every bio-mining initiative we have another set of lunatics who are proposing to "mine" sea beds. There are interesting times ahead.

nickpinkston 4y ago
Yea, I'm not denying the quality of deposits are down, costs of processing are up, or that it's hard to make the tech work. I'm just saying that we haven't seen the dire need that would cause big changes because the industry's unique R&D and CapEx requirements to change. Dire = severally decreased production of vital end products because of mineral costs/shortages (ie the 1970's oil crisis). Generally, there are known technologies already past the prototype stages just waiting for the prices and other factors to make them viable, and once they are they then ride the experience curve to better productivity. Re: supply/demand shocks - Interestingly, this is where the state can have a good roll in helping smooth these out. For instance, Biden's recent bill included guaranteed oil/gas purchases that the oil industry needed so they can justify running their refineries on with uncertain future demand, with the USG taking the risk on via filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve with the excess. [1] I'm reacting to an effect that this chart [2] highlights where academia / industry is being overly conservative in their predictions. In this case, every year they predicted PV was about to run out of steam, when it was actually growing exponentially. I think this paper is doing the same thing by ignoring tech development increases in its analysis. Are you aware of any systematic study of new mining tech development, economics, etc. that has a thorough analysis of this? This isn't my field. I'm in manufacturing, but follow the space because it's adjacent and has some things in common, so I'd be interested to get your take / sources. [1] https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-gas-prices-energy-oil-2022-7 https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-gas-prices-energy-oil-... [2] https://zenmo.com/en/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-projections-of-the-international-energy-agency-with-2018-update-2/ https://zenmo.com/en/photovoltaic-growth-reality-versus-proj...
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Maybe we could tap the breaks on extraction from virgin deposits while we work out how to more sustainably use what's already been extracted? Or we could just keep plunging headlong into a future where it takes 2 barrels of oil to produce 1.
  - nickpinkston 4y ago

Lasokki 4y ago

A small correction: GTK, or Geological Survey of Finland, is a public research agency operating under the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment. https://www.gtk.fi/en/this-is-gtk/ https://www.gtk.fi/en/this-is-gtk/

nickpinkston 4y ago
Thank you!