Declining importance of metals since WW2
For those of you who have been following the - “Why Global Warming(climate change) doesn’t matter anymore thread, I wanted to take the time to create a seperate post specifically addressing the rarity of Copper point that Rob brought up in the comments section where our exchange has been taking place
There are . so far in that discussion.
Spiralman writes:
By the way, I don’t think Rob read carefully through the article he cited for copper and metals through to their conclusions, including especially their caveats.
[highlights mine]
http://www.arch.mcgill.ca/prof/sijpkes/arch374/winter2002/materials/chapter1.html
Conclusions
The fraction of the stock of recoverable resources in the litho-sphere already placed in use or in wastes from which it will probably never be recovered is currently ~26% for copper and 19% for zinc. We lack data, but suggest that similar proportions apply for the other industrially important, geochemically scarce metals. Because the remaining stocks of ore are large compared with current needs, prices of these metals do not yet reflect scarcity value. Additionally, improved extraction techniques have kept the average real prices of these metals nearly steady for over 50 years (1). There is no immediate concern about the capacity of mineral resources to supply requirements for the geochemically scarce metals. Limitations would arise only from restrictions on international trade or legislative restrictions related to the environmental consequences of mining, milling, and smelting lower-grade ores (1–5). Nonetheless, over time the widespread adoption of certain new technologies can be expected to encounter natural limitations in cases for which a particular material provides a unique service. We identify platinum as the most likely metal to face this limitation because of its unique catalytic properties and its desirability for such applications as alloys for high-temperature service.
Data on the stock of copper used in the U.S. over the past century cast doubt on the idea that demand for metals eventually decreases as incomes rise. Although the nation’s GDP has increased much faster than the copper stock-in-use, the rate of increase of the per-capita copper stock remains undiminished. We find that the per-capita copper committed to some services has decreased in the 20th century but that this decrease is overbalanced by the provision of new services. The demand for new services is deeply embedded in a western popular and political culture that sees growth and development as absolutes, quickly converting services originating as luxuries or entertainments for the wealthy into necessities for everyone. Scenarios depicting future use of copper resources anticipate worldwide spread of the metal services enjoyed by the postindustrial nations. These scenarios need to explicitly address the cultural factors that continue to increase the per-capita use of copper in wealthy societies and the use of alternative materials to provide copper services.
Concern about the extent of mineral resources arises when the stock of metal needed to provide the services enjoyed by the highly developed nations is compared with that needed to provide comparable services with existing technology to a large part of the world’s population. Our stock data demonstrate that current technologies would require the entire copper and zinc ore resource in the lithosphere and perhaps that of platinum as well. Even a lower level of services could not be sustained worldwide because a continuing supply of new metal is needed to make up for inevitable losses in the recycling of the metal stock-in-use. [This is no doubt where Rob derives his main conclusions, but let’s read further…….] Substitution has the potential to ameliorate this situation, but one should not automatically assume that technology will produce a satisfactory substitute for every service at an affordable price and precisely when needed.
The topic of resource constraints inevitably recalls the classic bet between Julian Simon and Paul Ehrlich in 1980, in which Ehrlich bet that the prices of five metals would increase by 1990 (36). Instead, the grouped prices fell, and Ehrlich paid Simon $576.07 to settle the wager. Unlike Ehrlich, we do not imply that metal price is a satisfactory measure of the remaining amount of a resource. Rather, we merely point out the present state of affairs: that anthropogenic and lithospheric stocks of at least some metals are becoming equivalent in magnitude, that world-wide demand continues to increase, and that the virgin stocks of several metals appear inadequate to sustain the modern ‘‘developed world’’ quality of life for all Earth’s peoples under contemporary technology. These facts compel us to ask two key questions: Do we really envision a developed world quality of life for all of the people of the planet? and If so, are we willing to encourage the transformational technologies that will be required to make that vision a reality?
Notwithstanding the answers to the key questions posed above, it is clear that, as the proportion of the stock of ore remaining in the lithosphere diminishes relative to the stock-in-use and the stock dissipated, scarcity value will indeed eventually raise the real prices of the geochemically scarce metals and will stimulate intensive recycling well above today’s levels (37). We anticipate that price increases are unlikely to trigger a lower rate of increase in metal services or sudden economic disruption. More likely, we will see a new engineering emphasis on using these metals more efficiently and increased use of abundant alternative materials, principally iron and its alloys, aluminum, and magnesium. We anticipate a gradual transition to reliance on these alternative materials, with the use of the scarce metals increasingly restricted to those services most difficult to obtain by material substitution.
[so, let’s make that point more sharply than the article.
Even if every person on the planet expected to be alive in 2050, lived like an American we would not be anywhere near any natural limits for industrial services provided by Earth’s raw materials because any that are rare will be substituted by more abundant materials.
The article should have more fully addressed the major new technological developments that are likely to lead to widespread replacement of copper, so people could have a feel for how substitution takes place:
First, let’s recapitulate their nice list of copper’s main usages:
the following four principal categories of copper use can be defined:
1. Building and construction comprises the copper contained in structures and is subdivided into three subcategories: interior wiring; plumbing, heating, and architectural uses; and air conditioning and commercial refrigeration.
2. Infrastructure, which is not subdivided and comprises copper in power-generating utilities, telecommunications, lighting, and business electronics.
3. Domestic and industrial equipment comprises in-plant equipment, industrial valves and fittings, nonelectrical instruments, appliances, consumer electronics, military and commercial ordnance, coinage, and off-highway vehicles. It is subdivided into domestic and industrial categories.
4. Transport includes two subcategories, motor vehicles (auto-mobile, trucks and buses), and other transportation (railroad, marine, aircraft, and aerospace equipment).
Table 1. Components of copper stock-in-use in the U.S. in 1999
In-use stock,
Sector or subsector kg per capita
——————————————————————-
Infrastructure 95
Building and construction 76
Plumbing 32
Wiring 28
Air conditioning and refrigeration 16
Industrial and Domestic Equipment 39
Industrial 26
Domestic 13
Transportation 28
Motor vehicles 16
Railway, ships, aircraft 12
Total 238
As (many of you) are aware from my periodic sendings of articles, there is a major revolution underway in high temperature superconductivity (HTSC). It already has led to early adopter, experimental rollouts of HTSC power cabling in NY for power substation connectivity. Such cables carry over 150X the amount of current per pound and volume than standard copper cables.
This HTSC tech is still a copper-based technology (albeit using 150X less copper material) and which only raise operating temps to liquid nitrogen.
Developments in the last few years are pushing that up to the much warmer temperature of dry ice, ie CO2.
Advances in 2008 and 2009 have found completely new classes of superconducting materials:
Silicon-hydrogen
http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news3.19a.html
Iron and arsenic Feb. 24, 2009
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090216092835.htm
Almost every single usage mentioned above, from the article that Rob cited, aside from plumbing and valves, are ultimately related to the usage of copper for conducting of electricity. Even the motor usages (which covers air conditioning, refrigeration, and vehicles) are principally for the usage of copper as windings around motors and transformers.
The less directly related usages of lighting and telecommunications are already being rapidly superceded by LED lighting and fiber optics.
RSS
Archive
Mobile
