Page 1
“Abiotic Resource Depletion & LCA: Where
From Here?”
Presented at the
“EXPERT WORKSHOP
SECURITY OF SUPPLY AND SCARCITY OF RAW MATERIALS:
A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR SUPPLY CHAIN SUSTAINABILITY
ASSESSMENT”
13th -14th November 2012
Ranco, Italy
Dr Mohan Yellishetty
Department of Civil Engineering
Monash University
eMail: [email protected]
Page 2
Outline of the Presentation
• Introduction
• A Brief Outlook on the current State-of-the Art about ARD in
LCA
• Need for the Resource Debate to continue
• Methodological Frameworks – a Review
• What Framework is Needed
• Conclusions
Page 3
A Sustainability Nightmare
Page 4
Introduction - LCA
• is a technique used in environmental analysis of potential
environmental impacts of any product or process over its entire
life cycle, from raw material acquisition to ultimate disposal
• addresses the potential environmental impacts, human health and
resource concerns for a product system, including raw material
acquisition through manufacture, use, end-of-life treatment,
recycling and final disposal.
• was developed directly from a desire to limit the energy used in
manufacturing processes
• is a major sustainability assessment tool for industrial sectors
Page 5
Introduction – LCA – Abiotic Resources
• entities that are valued for the functionality that they deliver to
human society.
• “raw materials or means for production or consumption activities”
Ore Reserves: assessments demonstrate at the time of reporting that
economic extraction could reasonably be justified. Ore Reserves are sub-
divided in order of increasing confidence into Probable Ore Reserves and
Proved Ore Reserves. (JORC)
Mineral Resources: the location, quantity, grade, geological characteristics
and continuity of a Mineral Resource are known, such that there are
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction; not all modifying
factors have been assessed and hence some uncertainty remains. (JORC)
Page 6
LCA : an Evolving Sustainability Assessment Tool
Page 7
Resources – A Loose Definition
JORC Code 2004 – Australia
National Instrument 43-101 – Canada
SAMREC – South Africa
The USGS
.
.
.
Page 8
Iron Ore Reserves (USGS)
Page 9
Resources – A Loose Definition
Page 10
• resource scarcity is becoming increasingly imminent - BRICS
• the quantification of abiotic resource depletion in LCA – ie.
how to account for resource depletion in the life cycle impact
assessment (LCIA) stage is unclear
• no definitive approach for quantifying the effects of ARD and
the current LCA models fail to recognise the ARD as a
potential problem and therefore do not address the issue
What Are the Current Issues?
Page 11
Characteristics of Main Material Families
– a useful backhand information to underpin the depletion concerns
Page 12
Impact Assessment Methods in LCA
(Yellishetty et al . 2010 )
Methodologies
either focus on
current
consumption,
Or on the future
consequences.
Page 13
The Seminal Study - Limits to Growth: the Concern
• Using the systems model, ‘World3’, the MIT team qualitatively
assessed future growth scenarios and possible societal futures
Page 14
Mineral Futures Collaboration Cluster
For
CSIRO Minerals Down Under National Research Flagship
We have produced a research report
Highlights from Case Studies
Page 15
Annual Production Mineral Trends
Growing
Exponentially
Growing
Exponentially
Page 16
Annual Production Mineral Trends
Growing
Exponentially
Page 17
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
1840 1855 1870 1885 1900 1915 1930 1945 1960 1975 1990 2005
Ore
Gra
des (
Cu
, P
b, Z
n, A
u, N
i, U
, D
iam
on
ds)
0
325
650
975
1,300
1,625
1,950
2,275
2,600
Ore
Gra
de (
Ag
)
Copper (%Cu)
Gold (g/t)
Lead (%Pb)
Zinc (%Zn)
Uranium (kg/t U3O8)
Nickel (%Ni)
Diamonds (carats/t)
Silver (g/t)
(kg/t U3O8)
(Ag, 1884 - 3,506 g/t)
Declining Ore Grades
general trend
Page 18
Declining Ore Grades – Implications!
(adapted from Mudd, 2010: Resources
Policy)
(adapted from Norgate& Haque,
2010: Journal of Cleaner
Production)
Page 19
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
1895 1905 1915 1925 1935 1945 1955 1965 1975 1985 1995 2005
Wa
ste
Ro
ck
(C
u,
Dia
mo
nd
s,
U,
Bro
wn
Co
al)
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
Wa
ste
Ro
ck
(G
old
, B
lac
k C
oa
l)
Copper (Mt) Uranium (Mt)
Diamonds (Mt) Brown Coal (Mm3)
Gold (Mt) Black Coal (Mm3)
(Mm3)
(Mm3)
Waste Rock Generation
general
trend
Page 20
Material Flows in the World (2006)
Page 21
IPAT Equation – its relevance
• Another famous 1970’s book was Professor Paul R Erhlich’s
“Population Bomb” (1968)
• It describes the multiplicative contribution of population (P),
affluence (A) and technology (T) to environmental impact
(I). Environmental impact (I) may be expressed in terms of
resource depletion or waste accumulation
• In it, proposes the now famous equation:
I = P x A x T I = Impact,
P = population,
A = affluence (ie. consumption),
T = technology
Page 22
Substance Flow Analysis of Steel and Long Term
Sustainability
Page 23
0
100
200
300
400
500
0.0
1.6
3.2
4.8
6.4
8.0
9.6
11.2
12.8
14.4
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
De
ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(Gt)
Ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(M
t)
Australia
DA 1 (@ current rate)
DA 2 (@ 50% > current rate)
DA 3 (@100 > current rate)
DA 4 (@ 150% > current rate)
AS 1 (@ 405 kg/capita)
AS 2 (@ 500 kg/capita)
As 3 (@ 600 kg/capita)
Deaccumulation (DA)
Accumulation (A)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0.0
1.6
3.2
4.8
6.4
8.0
9.6
11.2
12.8
14.4
16.0
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(M
t)
De
ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(Gt)
Brazil
DA 1 (@ current rate)
DA 2 (@ 50% > current rate)
DA 3 (@ 100% > current rate)
DA 4 (@150% > current rate)
A 1 (@ current rate)
A 2 (@ 50% > current rate)
A 3 (@ 100% > current rate)
Accumulation (A)
Deaccumulation (DA)
350
5350
10350
15350
20350
25350
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(M
t)
De
ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(Gt)
DA 1 (@ current rate)
DA 2 (@ 50% > current arte)
DA 3 (@100% > current rate)
A 1 (plateau @ 405 kg/capita)
A 2 (@ current rate)
A 3 (@ 10% > current rate)
Accumulation (A)
Deaccumulation (DA)
China
350
5350
10350
15350
20350
25350
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
Ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(M
t)
De
ac
cu
mu
lati
on
(G
t)
DA 1 (@ current rate)
DA 2 (@ 50% > current arte)
DA 3 (@100% > current rate)
A 1 (plateau @ 405 kg/capita)
A 2 (@ current rate)
A 3 (@ 10% > current rate)
Accumulation (A)
Deaccumulation (DA)
China
Accumulation and De-accumulation of Steel
Page 24
Qmax = 33.72 Gt; with Qmax = 64.52 Gt (EDR +
Sub‐economic and Inferred Resources)
Peak Iron of Australia – Hubbert’s model
Page 25
Peak Minerals: What does that mean ?
Unlike ‘Peak Oil’ we may not encounter peak minerals, but the
future mineral production will be constrained by environmental
sustainability issues :
– Declining ore grades are indicative of a shift from ‘easier
and cheaper’ to more ‘complex and expensive’
processing – in social and environmental terms as well
as economic.
– greenhouse emissions, energy, water, chemicals, …
Page 26
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Pro
du
cti
on
(M
t)
Australia
Other Steel
EAF Steel
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Pro
du
cti
on
(M
t)
Brazil
Other Steel
EAF Steel
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Pro
du
cti
on
(M
t)
China
Other Steel
EAF Steel
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010P
rod
ucti
on
(M
t)
India
Other Steel
EAF Steel
Recycling: How Efficient We Are?
‘‘the cities of today are the mines of tomorrow’’ - Jacobs (1969)
Page 27
Summary & Thoughts for the Future
• Mining has continued to expand, and this looks set to continue for
some decades …
• Fundamentally, mineral resources could be considered ‘finite’ – but
not due to a “limited” quantity : future constraints will be
environmental
• Transition from cheap and easy extraction to complex and
expensive
• Many authors seem to have a fairly optimistic view on our ability to
cope with resource depletion and see substitution, recycling and
general development of economy and technology as efficient
means for resource housekeeping.
• A Consensus need to Evolve: Inclusive, Sensitive and Consistent
Page 28
Acknowledgements:
Dr Gavin M. Mudd
for sharing his invaluable wealth of data and profound
knowledge!
Thank you Very Much for Your
Attention!