Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Global Resource Assessments of Primary Metals: An Optimistic Reality Check

  • Review Paper
  • Published:
Natural Resources Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The mining of primary metals is critical for a range of modern infrastructure and goods and the continuing growth in global population and consumption means that these primary metals are expected to remain in high demand. However, metallic deposits are, in essence, finite and non-renewable—leading to some concern that we may run out of a given metal in the future. Here, we address this concern by presenting a brief review of the reporting of mineral resource estimates, compiling detailed datasets for national and global trends in mineral resources for numerous metals, and present detailed case studies of major mining projects or fields. The evidence clearly shows strong growth in known mineral resources and cumulative production over time rather than any evidence of gradual resource depletion. In addition, the key factors that already govern existing mining projects and mineral resources are certainly social, environmental and economic in nature rather than geological or related to physical resource depletion. Overall, there is great room for optimism in terms of humankind’s ability to supply future generations with the metals they will require.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure  2
Figure  3
Figure  4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AusIMM, MCA, & AIG (2012). Australasian code for reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and ore reserves: The JORC Code. Joint Ore Reserves Committee (JORC) of The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM), Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) and Australian Institute of Geoscientists (AIG), Parkville, VIC, December 2012, 44 p.

  • Cargill, S. M., Root, D. H., & Bailey, E. H. (1981). Estimating usable resources from historical industry data. Economic Geology, 76, 1081–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CIM. (2014). CIM definition standards for mineral resources and mineral reserves (p. 9). Toronto: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy & Petroleum (CIM).

    Google Scholar 

  • CMSA (2014). Facts and figures 2013–2014. Chamber of Mines of South Africa (CMSA), Johannesburg, South Africa, 44 p, www.bullion.org.za.

  • Cohen, D. (2007). Earth audit. New Scientist, 26 May 2007 (pp 34–41).

  • DeYoung, J. H. J. (1981). The Lasky cumulative tonnage-grade relationship—a re-examination. Economic Geology, 76, 1067–1080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drake, A. (2012). Canadian reserves of selected major metals and recent production decisions. Natural Resources Canada (NRC), Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/mining-materials/exploration/8294.

  • Falk, J., Green, J., & Mudd, G. M. (2006). Australia, uranium and nuclear power. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 63, 845–857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GA (2016). Australia’s identified mineral resources 2015—preliminary. Geoscience Australia (GA), Canberra, ACT, Accessed 27 January 2017, www.ga.gov.au/scientific-topics/minerals/table1, www.ga.gov.au.

  • Gerst, M. D. (2008). Revisiting the cumulative grade-tonnage relationship for major copper ore types. Economic Geology, 103, 615–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R. B., Bertram, M., & Graedel, T. E. (2006) Metal stocks and sustainability. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 31 January, 103(5) (pp. 1209–1214).

  • Graedel, T. E., Harper, E. M., Nassar, N. T., & Reck, B. K. (2015). On the materials basis of modern society. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 112(20) (pp. 6295–6300).

  • Hewett, D. F. (1929). Cycles in metal production. American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers Transactions, 85, 65–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jowitt, S. M., & Mudd, G. M. (2014). Global gold: Current resources, dominant deposit types and implications. In Proc. “Gold14 @ Kalgoorlie”, Kalgoorlie, Western Australia, (pp. 56–58).

  • Jowitt, S. M., Mudd, G. M., & Weng, Z. (2013). Hidden mineral deposits in Cu-dominated porphyry-skarn systems: how resource reporting can occlude important mineralization types within mining camps. Economic Geology, 108, 1185–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasky, S. G. (1950). How tonnage and grade relations help predict ore reserves. Engineering and Mining Journal, 151, 81–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, S. H., Mudd, G. M., & Giurco, D. (2012). Lithium resources, production: Critical assessment and global projections. Minerals, 2, 65–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moyer, M. (2010). How much is left? Scientific American, 303, 74–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M. (2007). Global trends in gold mining: Towards quantifying environmental and resource sustainability? Resources Policy, 32, 42–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G.M. (2009) The sustainability of mining in Australia: Key production trends and their environmental implications for the future. Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University and Mineral Policy Institute, Melbourne, VIC, October 2007; Revised April 2009, 277 p, users.monash.edu.au/~ gmudd/sustymining.html.

  • Mudd, G. M. (2010a). The environmental sustainability of mining in Australia: Key mega-trends and looming constraints. Resources Policy, 35, 98–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M. (2010b). Global trends and environmental issues in nickel mining: Sulfides versus laterites. Ore Geology Reviews, 38, 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M. (2012). Key trends in the resource sustainability of platinum group elements. Ore Geology Reviews, 46, 106–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M. (2014). The future of yellowcake: A global assessment of uranium resources and mining. Science of the Total Environment, 472, 590–607.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M., & Jowitt, S. M. (2014). A detailed assessment of global nickel resource trends and endowments. Economic Geology, 109, 1813–1841.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M., Jowitt, S. M., & Werner, T. T. (2017a). The world’s by-product and critical metal resources part I: Uncertainties, current reporting practices, implications and grounds for optimism. Ore Geology Reviews, 86, 924–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M., Jowitt, S. M., & Werner, T. T. (2017b). The world’s lead-zinc mineral resources: scarcity, data, issues and opportunities. Ore Geology Reviews, 80, 1160–1190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M., Weng, Z., & Jowitt, S. M. (2013a). A detailed assessment of global Cu resource trends and endowments. Economic Geology, 108, 1163–1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd, G. M., Weng, Z., Jowitt, S. M., Turnbull, I. D., & Graedel, T. E. (2013b). Quantifying the recoverable resources of by-product metals: The case of cobalt. Ore Geology Reviews, 55, 87–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nassar, N. T., Graedel, T. E., & Harper, E. M. (2015). By-product metals are technologically essential but have problematic supply. Science Advances, 1, e1400180, 10 p.

  • Norgate, T. E., & Jahanshahi, S. (2010). Low grade ores—smelt, leach or concentrate? Minerals Engineering, 23, 65–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norgate, T. E., & Jahanshahi, S. (2011). Assessing the energy and greenhouse gas footprints of nickel laterite processing. Minerals Engineering, 24, 698–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northey, S. A., Mohr, S. H., Mudd, G. M., Weng, Z., & Giurco, D. (2014). Modelling future copper ore grade decline based on a detailed assessment of copper resources and mining. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 83, 190–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD-NEA & IAEA (2016). Uranium 2016: Resources, production and demand. Nuclear Energy Agency, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD-NEA) and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Paris, France, 550 p, www.nea.fr.

  • OSC (2011). National instrument 43-101—standards of disclosure for mineral projects, Form 43-101F1 and Companion Policy 43-101CP. Ontario Securities Commission (OSC), Toronto, Canada, June 2011, 44 p.

  • PERC (2013). Pan-European standard for reporting of exploration results, mineral resources and reserves. Pan-European Reserves and Resources Reporting Committee (PERC), Brussels, Belgium, March 2013, 59 p.

  • Prior, T., Giurco, D., Mudd, G. M., & Mason, L. (2012). Resource depletion, peak minerals and the implications for sustainable resource management. Global Environmental Change, 22, 577–587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rustad, J. R. (2012). Peak nothing: recent trends in mineral resource production. Environmental Science and Technology, 46, 1903–1906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SAMREC (2009). South African code for reporting of mineral resources and mineral reserves. South African Mineral Resource Committee (SAMREC) Working Group, Johannesburg, South Africa, 2007, Amended July 2009, 65 p.

  • Tilton, J. E., & Lagos, G. (2012). Assessing the long-run availability of copper. Resources Policy, 32, 19–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USGS (2016). Mineral commodity summaries 2016. US Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia, USA, 205 p, minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/.

  • Weng, Z., Jowitt, S. M., Mudd, G. M., & Haque, N. (2015). A detailed assessment of global rare earth resources: Opportunities and challenges. Economic Geology, 110, 1925–1952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, J. (2011). Decreasing metal ore grades: are they really being driven by the depletion of high-grade deposits? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 15, 165–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WNA (2017). World uranium mining production. World Nuclear Association (WNA), London, UK, Last Updated—July 2016, www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/mining-of-uranium/world-uranium-mining-production.aspx (accessed 1 Feb 2017).

  • Yaksic, A., & Tilton, J. E. (2009). Using the cumulative availability curve to assess the threat of mineral depletion: the case of lithium. Resources Policy, 34, 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwartendyk, J. (1981). Economic issues in mineral resource adequacy and in the long-term supply of minerals. Economic Geology, 76, 999–1005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was supported by a small grant under the ‘Resourcing Future Generations’ (RFG) scheme of the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS). In addition, it has been supported in the past by CSIRO Mineral Resources, as well as the in-kind support of numerous colleagues, companies and government agencies. We also acknowledge the Editor of Natural Resources Research, Dr. John Carranza, and excellent, constructive comments from the review process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Engineering, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia

    Gavin M. Mudd

  2. Department of Geosciences, University of Nevada Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV, USA

    Simon M. Jowitt

Authors
  1. Gavin M. Mudd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Simon M. Jowitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gavin M. Mudd.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mudd, G.M., Jowitt, S.M. Global Resource Assessments of Primary Metals: An Optimistic Reality Check. Nat Resour Res 27, 229–240 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-017-9349-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11053-017-9349-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation