IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v63y2019ic41.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Natural hazards and mineral commodity supply: Quantifying risk of earthquake disruption to South American copper supply

Author

Listed:
  • Schnebele, Emily
  • Jaiswal, Kishor
  • Luco, Nicolas
  • Nassar, Nedal T.

Abstract

Mineral resources, and their mining and enrichment operations, are not equally distributed across Earth. The concentration of mineral supply in certain regions, owing to the geology or geography of the mineral resource, raises the level of risk related to supply disruption. Where mineral production coincides with areas prone to natural hazards, supply may be especially at risk. However, the level of risk that natural hazards pose to mineral supply has yet to be quantified on a global or regional scale. Using copper in South America as a case study, this paper offers methods for quantifying (i) the coincidence of mineral production and seismic hazards, and (ii) the Expected Annual Disruption (EAD) of the mineral supply from earthquakes. The first of these methods indicates that, of the 101 copper producing facilities in South America considered, 76 are located within an area of high seismic hazard, taken here as the area with >85% chance of exceeding Modified Mercalli Intensity VI earthquake shaking in 50 years. Collectively, the 76 facilities comprise 82%, 87%, and 91% of the 2015 South American mine production, smelter capacity, and refinery capacity, respectively. For each of the 101 facilities, the second method calculates the EAD using a full earthquake shaking hazard forecast at the location, the annualized copper production of the facility, and models of the vulnerability of that production to shaking. The EADs are summed by country, here within South America, as a demonstration of how supply risk could eventually be quantified globally. Consideration of two illustrative vulnerability models shows that future work is needed to determine percentages of disruption to mineral production for different levels of earthquake shaking. Ultimately, the methods presented herein could be applied to other mineral commodities and/or adapted for other natural hazards, and the resulting EADs could be summed. Results from these methods could be used to focus more detailed risk assessments where the risk is highest.

Suggested Citation

  • Schnebele, Emily & Jaiswal, Kishor & Luco, Nicolas & Nassar, Nedal T., 2019. "Natural hazards and mineral commodity supply: Quantifying risk of earthquake disruption to South American copper supply," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1-1.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:63:y:2019:i:c:41
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101430
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420718306676
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.101430?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. T. E. Graedel & Barbara K. Reck, 2016. "Six Years of Criticality Assessments: What Have We Learned So Far?," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 20(4), pages 692-699, August.
    2. Helbig, Christoph & Wietschel, Lars & Thorenz, Andrea & Tuma, Axel, 2016. "How to evaluate raw material vulnerability - An overview," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 13-24.
    3. Erin McCullough & Nedal T. Nassar, 2017. "Assessment of critical minerals: updated application of an early-warning screening methodology," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 30(3), pages 257-272, October.
    4. Hatayama, Hiroki & Tahara, Kiyotaka, 2018. "Adopting an objective approach to criticality assessment: Learning from the past," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 96-102.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Li, Baihua & Li, Huajiao & Ren, Shuai & Liu, Haiping & Wang, Gang, 2023. "Commodity supply risk assessment of China's copper industrial chain: The perspective of trade network," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    2. Zeng, Lanyan & Liu, Shi Qiang & Kozan, Erhan & Corry, Paul & Masoud, Mahmoud, 2021. "A comprehensive interdisciplinary review of mine supply chain management," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    3. Jair Santillán‐Saldivar & Tobias Gaugler & Christoph Helbig & Andreas Rathgeber & Guido Sonnemann & Andrea Thorenz & Axel Tuma, 2021. "Design of an endpoint indicator for mineral resource supply risks in life cycle sustainability assessment: The case of Li‐ion batteries," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(4), pages 1051-1062, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Helbig & Martin Bruckler & Andrea Thorenz & Axel Tuma, 2021. "An Overview of Indicator Choice and Normalization in Raw Material Supply Risk Assessments," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-26, August.
    2. Kim, Juhan & Lee, Jungbae & Kim, BumChoong & Kim, Jinsoo, 2019. "Raw material criticality assessment with weighted indicators: An application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 225-233.
    3. Hache, Emmanuel & Seck, Gondia Sokhna & Simoen, Marine & Bonnet, Clément & Carcanague, Samuel, 2019. "Critical raw materials and transportation sector electrification: A detailed bottom-up analysis in world transport," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 240(C), pages 6-25.
    4. Kühnel, Konstantin & Schütte, Philip & Bach, Vanessa & Franken, Gudrun & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2023. "Correlation analysis of country governance indicators and the magnitude of environmental and social incidents in mining," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PA).
    5. Griffin, Gillian & Gaustad, Gabrielle & Badami, Kedar, 2019. "A framework for firm-level critical material supply management and mitigation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 262-276.
    6. Fikru, Mahelet G. & Awuah-Offei, Kwame, 2022. "An economic framework for producing critical minerals as joint products," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    7. Marie K. Schellens & Johanna Gisladottir, 2018. "Critical Natural Resources: Challenging the Current Discourse and Proposal for a Holistic Definition," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-28, December.
    8. Yu, Shiwei & Duan, Haoran & Cheng, Jinhua, 2021. "An evaluation of the supply risk for China's strategic metallic mineral resources," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Christine L. Thomas & Nedal T. Nassar & John H. DeYoung, 2022. "Assessing mineral supply concentration from different perspectives through a case study of zinc," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 35(3), pages 607-616, December.
    10. Galos, Krzysztof & Lewicka, Ewa & Burkowicz, Anna & Guzik, Katarzyna & Kot-Niewiadomska, Alicja & Kamyk, Jarosław & Szlugaj, Jarosław, 2021. "Approach to identification and classification of the key, strategic and critical minerals important for the mineral security of Poland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    11. Li, Baihua & Li, Huajiao & Ren, Shuai & Liu, Haiping & Wang, Gang, 2023. "Commodity supply risk assessment of China's copper industrial chain: The perspective of trade network," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C).
    12. Simon Glöser-Chahoud & Luis Tercero Espinoza & Rainer Walz & Martin Faulstich, 2016. "Taking the Step towards a More Dynamic View on Raw Material Criticality: An Indicator Based Analysis for Germany and Japan," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-16, December.
    13. Hayes, Sarah M. & McCullough, Erin A., 2018. "Critical minerals: A review of elemental trends in comprehensive criticality studies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 192-199.
    14. Luca Ciacci & Philip Nuss & Barbara K. Reck & T. T. Werner & T. E. Graedel, 2016. "Metal Criticality Determination for Australia, the US, and the Planet—Comparing 2008 and 2012 Results," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-8, September.
    15. Clement Bonnet & Samuel Carcanague & Emmanuel Hache & Gondia Seck & Marine Simoën, 2019. "Vers une Géopolitique de l'énergie plus complexe ? Une analyse prospective tridimensionnelle de la transition énergétique," Working Papers hal-02971706, HAL.
    16. Lèbre, Éléonore & Owen, John R. & Kemp, Deanna & Valenta, Rick K., 2022. "Complex orebodies and future global metal supply: An introduction," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    17. André Månberger, 2021. "Reduced Use of Fossil Fuels can Reduce Supply of Critical Resources," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 1-15, June.
    18. Masoudi, S.M. & Ezzati, E. & Rashidnejad-Omran, N. & Moradzadeh, Ali, 2017. "Geoeconomics of fluorspar as strategic and critical mineral in Iran," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 100-106.
    19. Dou Shiquan & Xu Deyi, 2023. "The security of critical mineral supply chains," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 36(3), pages 401-412, September.
    20. Fox, Sarah Jane, 2022. "‘Exploiting – land, sea and space: Mineral superpower’ In the name of peace: A critical race to protect the depths and heights," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:63:y:2019:i:c:41. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.