Transcript Antimony

Critical versus deficit mineral
commodities?
International Conference on EU 2020 Strategy
in mineral commodities management
19-20 September 2011 – Polish Geological Insitute, Warsaw
Dr. Tadeusz Smakowski, PGI and Dr. Patrice Christmann, BRGM
European work on minerals criticality
assessment
• The EU assessment of criticalities related to
minerals and metals is part of the work
supporting the European Commission’s Raw
Materials Initiative [COM(2008)699 and
COM(2011)025]
• It resulted in the publication, in June 2010 of
the « Minerals Critical for the EU » report
European work on minerals criticality
assessment
• 41 raw materials (metals, industrial minerals,
construction materials) were assessed, 14
were selected as critical.
• The assessment will be revised, possibly every
3 years
POLITICAL ECONOMIC STABILITY OF PRODUCING
COUNTRIES
Data source: World Governance Indicator
LEVEL OF CONCENTRATION OF THE PRODUCTION
Data source: HHI
SUPPLY RISK
SUBSTITUTION POTENTIAL
Data source: Expert opinion
by Fraunhofer ISI (based on cost, not on
functionality)
RECYCLING RATE
ratio of recycling from old scrap to European
APPARENT consumption - Data source: UNEP
International Resource Panel report « Recycling of
metals: a status report »
ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE
25%
25%
25%
25%
Copper
European work on minerals criticality
assessment
Several important factors are not yet integrated in
the EU criticality assessment, such as:
– Analysis of criticalities at different time horizons
– New projects pipeline analysis (what, where, and
when?)
– Supply risks analysis along the supply chains
– Disappearance of know-how all along the supply chain
– Integration of environme ntal and social externalities
– Raw materials price volatility
Limits to any criticality assessment
• Data availability and quality: several countries
publish little and/or unreliable data on their
minerals projects pipeline, production and
trade. Even the best commercial databases
document only a limlted part of the global
mineral industry, and a decreasing one!
• Customs statistics are of limited use to
measure real consumption. Only apparent
consumptions can – and not for every metal be evaluated!
Limits to any criticality assessment
• The trade of minor (= rare) metals and
projects financed out of private equity are
very poorly documented
• There is a strong incidence of undocumented,
but growing, stockpiles on criticality issues.
The development of Exchange Traded
Commodities/ Exchange Traded Funds is
adding to the problem.
Critical when?
• It is absolutely necessary when assessing criticality
issues to work at different, complementary time
horizons: now, 5 years, 15 years, 30 years supply and
demand analysis are needed.
• The exemple of copper is quite typical
• Due to the nature of the minerals industry and the 10
to 20 years lead-time from exploration to production,
informed foresight is a basis for any strategy.
• This still is in its infancy at EU and national levels, after
decades of benign neglect and short-term policies.
Copper criticality analysis: any
supply risk?
The need for supply-chain
analysis
Supply chain analysis
• Modern industry relies on sometimes very
complex and potentially fragile supply chains
linking all end-users goods to geology.
• Western industries are heavily relying on
concepts such as « just in time », « zero stock »,
lean organisations.
• End-of-supply chain industries have mostly no or
very limited knowledge on the risks they are
exposed to and have no mitigation strategies
The need for Supply chain analysis
• Few companies at the end of supply-chains know
what raw materials are in the goods they
produce, and what risks they face (rapid cost
escalation, disruptions)
• The situation is particularly worrying in the case
of SMEs who have little resources to spare to
involve themselves in the intricacies of mineral
raw materials and their related issues.
• Criticality can occur at various stage of a supply
chain. This should be publicly documented up to
the purification stage (where applicable)
Antimony (Sb)
Geological
endowment
System
(e.g: car)
Exploration
Development
Mining
Processing
Component
Semi-product
Purification
Metallurgy
Key risk factors are the dominance of China over mining, processing and
metallugy of antimony. The possibility to substitute antimony in its main use
reduces the risk.
Information on exploration activities for antimony were not available at the
time of peparing this presentation.
Beryllium (Be)
<Geological
endowment
System
(e.g: car)
Exploration
Development
Mining
Processing
Component
Semi-product
Purification
Metallurgy
Key risk factors are possible regulatory changes in the occupational exposure limits
applicable to beryllium metallurgical plants or workplaces where harmful beryllium dust
may occur. In Europe, some high-tech SMEs and their know-how are critical
to beryllium / beryllium alloy metallurgy and manufacturing of derived products.
Cobalt (Co)
<Geological
endowment
System
(e.g: car)
Exploration
Development
Mining
Processing
Component
Semi-product
Purification
Metallurgy
There is limited data available on cobalt related exploration activities. While mining is
geographically relatively well distributed (HHI : 0,25), this is not the case for cobalt
refining, with China controlling a growing share of global cobalt refining (42% in 2010,
estimate, Darton Commodities (2011)
Conclusions
• Minerals and metals are essential to the EU
• While this is now politically recognised, the actions
identifiable at EU level appear very strongly tilted towards
innovation and technology. This is only one side of the coin.
• Data, information and knowledge development is as vital.
When and how will this develop? There is a danger of
further loss of know-how and capacities.
• Due to rapid shifts in technologies, recycling, substitutions,
regulations and geopolitics continuous publicly funded
minerals intelligence is required, not an 3-yearly update of
criticality assessments. This should be made available to
enterprises
Conclusions
• EU Research is needeed to improve the current EU
criticality indicators
• Pooling of efforts in indicators developement, data
collection at EU level needs to be organised soon.
Capacities are subcritical and dwindling.
• Polling with other countries should be considered
(USA: USGS and Yale Criticality Project 2009-2012,
involving over 10 researchers and international
stakeholders!, Japan: JOGMEC; S. Korea …)
• Development of information supportive of enterprises,
particularly SMEs , as well as of public authorities, is of
essence.
Conclusions
• Many minerals and metals could not be critical to the EU
economy, as they are geologically available, in the EU but
there is:
– A DEFICIT IN PRODUCTION DUE TO A DEFICIT IN
PUBLIC POLICIES. THESE WERE IGNORING FOR TOO
LONG TIME THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF
MINERALS AND METALS AS THE BASIS OF MOST
ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES
– A CONFUSION BETWEEN (non existent)
DEMATERIALISATION AND VALUE-ADDING DEVELOPED
AT EU LEVEL
Conclusions
• 3 R (recycle, reduce, re-use) based economic
development is needed at EU level, but it will be
insufficient to meet our needs.
• Decoupling growth from resources use is not the key
issue, it is decopling from negative environmental
and social impacts that is the probleme
• Beware of EU policies that would result in further
burden shifting to developing countries, losses of
jobs and skills in the EU!
Conclusions
Critical versus deficit mineral commodities?
The deficit is in knowledge, vital to design and
implement the industrial and public strategies
required to address Europe’s loss of
competitiveness.
This deficit leads to the current criticalities, and
to worser ones possibly to come.
A final word, from 2500 years ago
« It is not winning 100 victories in 100 battles
that is clever, it is being victorious without
having fought a single battle that is clever. »
Sun Tzu, Chinese military
strategist
Prises de participations chinoises dans l’industrie minérale mondiale
(D’après Bateman Beijing Axis)
Situation en 2004
Situation en début 2010
Situation en début 2009
Situation en début 2011