IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v5y2016i4p29-d78874.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Metal Criticality Determination for Australia, the US, and the Planet—Comparing 2008 and 2012 Results

Author

Listed:
  • Luca Ciacci

    (Center for Industrial Ecology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA
    Interdepartmental Centre for Industrial Research “Energy & Environment”, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Bologna 40136, Italy)

  • Philip Nuss

    (Center for Industrial Ecology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA)

  • Barbara K. Reck

    (Center for Industrial Ecology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA)

  • T. T. Werner

    (Environmental Engineering, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne 3800, VIC, Australia)

  • T. E. Graedel

    (Center for Industrial Ecology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511, USA)

Abstract

Episodic supply shortages of metals and unsettling predictions of potential supply constraints in the future have led to a series of recent criticality evaluations. This study applies a consistent criticality methodology to the United States, Australia, and to the global level for both 2008 and 2012. It is the first time that criticality assessments are presented for Australia, a country that contrasts with the United States in terms of its mineral deposits and metal use characteristics. We use the Yale criticality methodology, which measures Supply Risk (SR), Environmental Implications (EI), and Vulnerability to Supply Restriction (VSR) to derive criticality assessments for five major metals (Al, Fe, Ni, Cu, Zn) and for indium (In). We find only modest changes in SR between 2008 and 2012 at both country and global levels; these changes are due to revisions in resource estimates. At the country level, Australia’s VSR for Ni, Cu, and Zn is 23%–33% lower than that for the United States, largely because of Australia’s abundant domestic resources. At the global level, SR is much higher for In, Ni, Cu, and Zn than for Al and Fe as a consequence of SR’s longer time horizon and anticipated supply/demand constraints. The results emphasize the dynamic nature of criticality and its variance between countries and among metals.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:29-:d:78874
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/4/29/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/5/4/29/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roelich, Katy & Dawson, David A. & Purnell, Phil & Knoeri, Christof & Revell, Ruairi & Busch, Jonathan & Steinberger, Julia K., 2014. "Assessing the dynamic material criticality of infrastructure transitions: A case of low carbon electricity," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 378-386.
    2. N.T. Nassar & Xiaoyue Du & T.E. Graedel, 2015. "Criticality of the Rare Earth Elements," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(6), pages 1044-1054, December.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. E. M. Harper & Goksin Kavlak & Lara Burmeister & Matthew J. Eckelman & Serkan Erbis & Vicente Sebastian Espinoza & Philip Nuss & T. E. Graedel, 2015. "Criticality of the Geological Zinc, Tin, and Lead Family," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 19(4), pages 628-644, August.
    6. Achzet, Benjamin & Helbig, Christoph, 2013. "How to evaluate raw material supply risks—an overview," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 435-447.
    7. Glöser, Simon & Tercero Espinoza, Luis & Gandenberger, Carsten & Faulstich, Martin, 2015. "Raw material criticality in the context of classical risk assessment," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 35-46.
    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. T. E. Graedel & Barbara K. Reck & Luca Ciacci & Fabrizio Passarini, 2019. "On the Spatial Dimension of the Circular Economy," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-10, February.
    2. 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).
    3. Luca Ciacci & Ivano Vassura & Fabrizio Passarini, 2018. "Shedding Light on the Anthropogenic Europium Cycle in the EU–28. Marking Product Turnover and Energy Progress in the Lighting Sector," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-17, September.
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. Jenni Ylä-Mella & Eva Pongrácz, 2016. "Drivers and Constraints of Critical Materials Recycling: The Case of Indium," Resources, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-12, November.
    7. Luca Ciacci & Ivano Vassura & Fabrizio Passarini, 2017. "Urban Mines of Copper: Size and Potential for Recycling in the EU," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-14, January.

    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. 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.
    2. Dewulf, Jo & Blengini, Gian Andrea & Pennington, David & Nuss, Philip & Nassar, Nedal T., 2016. "Criticality on the international scene: Quo vadis?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 169-176.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Helbig, Christoph & Bradshaw, Alex M. & Kolotzek, Christoph & Thorenz, Andrea & Tuma, Axel, 2016. "Supply risks associated with CdTe and CIGS thin-film photovoltaics," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 422-433.
    6. Pell, Robert S. & Wall, Frances & Yan, Xiaoyu & Bailey, Gwendolyn, 2019. "Applying and advancing the economic resource scarcity potential (ESP) method for rare earth elements," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 472-481.
    7. 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).
    8. 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.
    9. Aiman Fadil & Paul Davis & John Geraghty, 2023. "A Mixed-Method Approach to Determine the Successful Factors Affecting the Criticality Level of Intermediate and Final Products on National Basis: A Case Study from Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-29, March.
    10. Blengini, Gian Andrea & Nuss, Philip & Dewulf, Jo & Nita, Viorel & Peirò, Laura Talens & Vidal-Legaz, Beatriz & Latunussa, Cynthia & Mancini, Lucia & Blagoeva, Darina & Pennington, David & Pellegrini,, 2017. "EU methodology for critical raw materials assessment: Policy needs and proposed solutions for incremental improvements," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 12-19.
    11. 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.
    12. Gondia Sokhna Seck & Emmanuel Hache & Clement Bonnet & Marine Simoën & Samuel Carcanague, 2020. "Copper at the crossroads : Assessment of the interactions between low-carbon energy transition and supply limitations," Post-Print hal-03118509, HAL.
    13. Keisuke Nansai & Kenichi Nakajima & Sangwon Suh & Shigemi Kagawa & Yasushi Kondo & Wataru Takayanagi & Yosuke Shigetomi, 2017. "The role of primary processing in the supply risks of critical metals," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 335-356, July.
    14. Bach, Vanessa & Finogenova, Natalia & Berger, Markus & Winter, Lisa & Finkbeiner, Matthias, 2017. "Enhancing the assessment of critical resource use at the country level with the SCARCE method – Case study of Germany," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 283-299.
    15. Shigetomi, Yosuke & Nansai, Keisuke & Kagawa, Shigemi & Kondo, Yasushi & Tohno, Susumu, 2017. "Economic and social determinants of global physical flows of critical metals," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 107-113.
    16. Jasiński, Dominik & Cinelli, Marco & Dias, Luis C. & Meredith, James & Kirwan, Kerry, 2018. "Assessing supply risks for non-fossil mineral resources via multi-criteria decision analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 150-158.
    17. Glöser, Simon & Tercero Espinoza, Luis & Gandenberger, Carsten & Faulstich, Martin, 2015. "Raw material criticality in the context of classical risk assessment," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 35-46.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. 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.

    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:gam:jresou:v:5:y:2016:i:4:p:29-:d:78874. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.