critical minerals assessment approaches and examples ... · 5/16/2017 · u.s. national research...

© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Natural Resources, 2017

Critical Minerals Assessment Approachesand Examples: Clean Energy and Aerospace

Leonard Surges, Natural Resources Canada

International Summer School on the Geopolitics of Energy & Natural ResourcesCalgary, AlbertaMay 16, 2017


Flashback to 1842, when Coal was King

• Funding for a Geological Survey of the Province of Canada was granted in 1841– A competitive industrial economy required a viable mining industry– A director was appointed in April 1842, who prepared a compilation, established a

headquarters and planned future fieldwork– Industrial advances in England showed coal was essential for economic growth

• The director reported in 1844 that no coal deposits had been found– All rocks in the province were older than the earliest known coal-bearing formations


Materials Matter• Energy and materials are used to supply food, shelter, communications, health

care, infrastructure, machinery and equipment, transportation, utilities, defence and security

– Materials intensity rises as countries develop, grow, industrialize and per capita income rises– An increasingly diverse mix of minerals and metals enables advanced technologies

• Most elements are metals or metalloids– Metals are used mainly as alloys, in which a metal is combined with other elements, while

metalloids are used in many electronic materials– Alloy properties depend on composition, structure and thermomechanical history– Small additions can have big effects– Many metals and metalloids rarely occur in an economic quantity and concentration


U.S. National Research Council4

• This study provides a framework to identify and assess critical minerals that are essential for industry and emerging technologies

• The framework has been used by U.S. Government departments and agencies, Canada, the European Commission, Germany, Japan and the U.K.

• The methodology has been adapted and applied by major corporations to assess and manage risks


U.S. National Science and Technology Council5

• A study by the Subcommittee on Critical and Strategic Mineral Supply Chains of the National Science and Technology Council aims to provide early warning

• Screening criteria to identify minerals that could become critical were selected by statistical analysis

• Application would require detailed use data


How do we assess criticality?• Peer-reviewed methodology, used by the U.S., Germany,

United Kingdom, European Commission and Japan

• Vertical axis: consequence of a supply restriction– Factors include availability, performance and cost of potential

substitutes for different applications

• Horizontal axis: risk of a supply restriction– Concentration of production, reliability of supply

• A discrete rating of 1 to 4 is assigned for each dimension and application group

– Risk of a supply restriction may not be identical for each group or form (e.g. concentrate, refined metal, certified metal)

– A composite result may be calculated based on use patterns

– Results for application groups provide insight into adjustment mechanisms and policy options


How do we interpret results?The vertical axis reflects consequences of a supply restriction

– A rating of 4 is indicated if there is no substitute in an application group, or potential substitutes significantly degrade performance

– Application groups with substitutes are rated lower

– A composite rating based on weighting factors

Market factors drive ratings for the risk of supply restrictions– Concentration and location of global production and processing

– Contributions of co-products and recycling

– Country risk and geopolitical factors

Criticality increases from bottom left to top right– Critical applications receive maximum ratings on both axes

– Critical and near-critical applications merit more frequent review

CriticalNear-CriticalNon-Critical


Clean Electricity

Solar Photovoltaic (PV): A basket of byproducts


Prices and policies drive generation

• Air quality concerns make it difficult to permit coal-fired plants

• Gas-fired plants displace coal if prices are lower

• Nuclear is declining• Growth in renewables

and gas slows without the Clean Power Plan

• Any coal comeback is likely to be muted


Generating capacity changesReference Case

• Lower capital costs and tax credits boost near-term wind additions and sustain solar additions

• Natural gas prices and the Clean Power Plan drive coal-fired unit retirements


End-use generators drive Solar PV

Sectors Type 2016 Net Additions 2050 Growth %/y Net Additions 2050 Growth %/yElectric Power Sector Solar PV 19.4 128.6 148.0 6.2 86.3 105.6 5.1

Wind 81.3 105.0 186.3 2.5 73.9 155.2 1.9End-Use Generators Solar PV 14.4 211.3 225.7 8.4 207.3 221.8 8.4

Wind 3.1 3.0 6.2 2.0 2.3 5.4 1.6All Sectors Solar PV 35.6 340.1 375.7 7.2 293.8 329.4 6.8

Wind 84.4 108.1 192.5 2.5 76.2 160.6 1.9Source: EIA, Annual Energy Outlook 2017

Reference Case without Clean Power PlanReference Case


Global Solar PV Growth

Source: Jessika Trancik et al, “Technology improvement and emissions reductions as mutually reinforcing efforts: Observations from the global expansion of solar and wind energy”, MIT Institute for Data, Systems and Society, November 2015.

• Capacity additions were modeled based on INDCs, resource availability and costs

• Expansions increase the share of solar PV and wind in large GHG-emitting economies

• Solar PV and wind contribute 3.8% and 8.9% of estimated global electricity demand of 30,000 TWh in 2030, if solar PV and wind reach 4.9 and 2.7 times 2014 levels


Solar PV Enablers• Materials are needed to manufacture solar cells, to assemble and install panels

and to connect to the grid• Crystalline silicon (c-Si), cadmium telluride (CdTe), copper indium gallium

(di)selenide (CIGS), and amorphous silicon germanium (α-SiGe) technologies rely on:

– silver (Ag) in conductive pastes and silicon (Si)– cadmium (Cd) and tellurium (Te)– copper (Cu), indium (In), gallium (Ga) and selenium (Se)– silicon (Si) and germanium (Ge)

• All except silicon and copper are produced mainly as byproducts


Potential Constraints for Solar PVByproduct Constraints for Energy Conversion in Solar Photovoltaic Technologies

Material Silicon Silver Cadmium Tellurium Copper Indium Gallium Selenium GermaniumSymbol Si Ag Cd Te Cu In Ga Se Ge

Byproduct No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes YesMain Products N/A Lead, Zinc, Copper Zinc Copper N/A Zinc Bauxite, Zinc Copper Zinc

Intensity 2,000 t/GW 25 t/GW 60 t/GW 60 t/GW 8 t/GW 15 t/GW 5 t/GW 40 t/GW ?Annual Output (t) 26,800 23,000 400 655 375 4,000 155

Source USGS USGS USGS USGS USGS 5N Plus USGSConstraint 1070 GW 380 GW 7 GW 44 GW 75 GW 100 GW ?

NOTE: Material intensities are current averages, without taking material losses into account (Trancik et al). Constraints neglect recycling and do not consider other uses.

• Solar PV depends on materials for energy conversion and other functions• Crystalline silica (c-Si) is the dominant technology, with about 90% market share• Silicon is abundant, but a silver substitute may be needed for c-Si PV to realize its full potential• Thin-film PV technologies (CdTe and CIGS) drove cost decreases and c-Si suppliers responded, but thin

films rely on materials produced in small quantities• High levels of deployment require byproduct growth rates that have not been observed for any metal

Source: Trancik et al (Paraphrased)


Clean TransportationAdvanced Batteries for Electric Vehicles


Global EV Outlook• Stock of Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) surpassed Plug-In

Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs) in 2013• Number of Electric Vehicles (EVs) nearly doubled in 2014

and in 2015, to reach 1.26 million (0.1%)– North America accounted for 34%, Asia for 36%, and Europe

for close to one-third of global EV stock in 2015– Sales in China exceeded those in the U.S. in 2015, with

market shares of 1% and 0.7%, respectively• Electric Vehicles Initiative (EVI) targets 20 million EVs by

2020 (1.7%)• Paris Declaration on Electro-Mobility and Climate Change

and Call to Action target 100 million EVs and 400 million electric 2- and 3-wheelers in 2030

Source: Global EV Outlook 2016: Beyond one million electric cars, Electric Vehicles Initiative, IEA


Forecast EV Battery Types

10% 8% 7% 6% 6%23% 18% 14% 20% 16% 12% 10%

25%25% 26% 26% 27%

25%23%

22%20%

19% 18%

16%

62% 63% 65% 67% 68%52% 59% 64% 60% 65% 70%

74%

3% 3% 2% 1%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2016 2017F 2018F 2019F 2020F 2021F 2022F 2023F 2024F 2025F 2026F 2027F

NCA LFP NMC LMO

Source: Tahuti GlobalNCA: Lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxideLFP: Lithium iron phosphateNMC: Lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxideLMO: Lithium manganese oxide


Lithium Ion Battery Supply Chain for EVs

Raw materials for connections

Raw materials for battery control unit

Raw materials for electronic ci rcuits

Raw materials for mechanical systems

Raw materials for thermal systems

Steel or Aluminum

Other raw materials for electrolyte

Raw materials fororganic solvent

Raw materials forLi thium salt

Raw materials for the Separator

Raw materials for Cathode Binder

Aluminum

Lithium and other raw material for Cathode

Mining Materials Extraction

Materials ProcessingRefining & Metal Making

Components / Parts Manufacture

BatteryManufacture

CarManufacture

Internal / ExternalConnections

Battery Control

Electronic Ci rcui ts

Mechanical Systems

ThermalSubsystems

Metal recovery

Battery recycling

Landfil l

Battery Electric Vehicle

(BEV)

Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle(PHEV)

Hybrid Electric Vehicle

(HEV)

Li thium-ion battery cell

andmodules

Li thium-ion battery pack(Complete)

Anode Electrode(-)

Cathode Electrode(+)

Separator

Cas ing

Electrolyte

Raw materials for Anode Binder

Copper

Carbon and other raw material for cathode

Binder

Col lector

Graphite and /orother Material

LiNiMnCoO2 (NMC)LiNiCoAlO2 (NCA)LiFePO4 (LFP)Conductive additivesOther mixed metal oxides

Col lector

Binder

Other electrolyte components

Organic solvent

Li thium salt

Materials Use in CathodesCode Description Assumed Composition

NCA Lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide LiNi0.8Co0.15Al0.05O2

LFP Lithium iron phosphate LiFePO4

NMC Lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide LiNi0.33Mn0.33Co0.33O2Source: Tahuti Global


Potential Constraints for EVsBased on EV sales growth of 28%/y to 12 million EVs in 2027 (12%)

Materials Use in Batteries for Electric VehiclesMaterial Lithium Graphite Cobalt Manganese NickelSymbol Li Cg Co Mn Ni

Byproduct No No Yes No NoMain Products N/A N/A Copper, Nickel N/A N/A2016 Output (t)

Mine Production 35,000 1,200,000 123,000 16,000,000 2,250,000Source USGS USGS USGS USGS USGS

Refined 94,000Source CDI

2016 UseTotal 37,800 85,000

Source USGS CDIAll Batteries 14,700 200,000 42,500 <300,000

Source USGS Tahuti Global Tahuti Global Tahuti GlobalElectric Vehicles

2016 3,000 28,000 4,000 10,000 5,0002027 45,000 325,000 75,000 188,000 93,500

Source Tahuti Global Tahuti Global Tahuti Global Tahuti Global NRCanNotes 1 2 3 4 5

1 Three countries accounted for 91% of 2016 mine production: Australia, Chile and Argentina. Sources include spodumene and brines.

2 New mines are needed to supply graphite with desired properties.

3 Five countries accounted for 76% of 2015 refined cobalt production: China, Finland, Belgium, Canada and Australia.

4 Most production is ferromanganese, while manganese dioxide is used in alkaline batteries; new refining capacity is needed.

5 Five countries accounted for 67% of 2015 refined nickel production: China, Russia, Japan, Canada and Australia. New sulphide mines are needed.


Clean Transportation & Energy

Superalloys for aerospace and other gas turbines


Materials Solutions Drive PerformanceNominal Specifications for Selected Nickel-Based Superalloys

Alloy Carbon, C Chromium, Cr Cobalt, Co Molybdenum, Mo Titanium, Ti Aluminum, AlIN-100 0.18 10.00 15.00 3.00 4.70 5.50IN-738 0.17 16.00 8.50 1.75 3.40 3.40713C 0.12 12.50 4.20 0.80 6.10Alloy Vanadium, V Zirconium, Zr Boron, B Iron, Fe Manganese, Mn Silicon, Si

IN-100 0.90 0.06 0.014 LAP LAP LAPIN-738 0.10 0.010 LAP LAP LAP713C 0.10 0.012 LAP LAP LAPAlloy Sulphur, S Nickel, Ni Tungsten, W Tantalum, Ta Niobium, Nb Copper, Cu

IN-100 LAP 60.00IN-738 LAP 61.00 2.60 1.75 0.90713C 76.00 Ta+Nb 2.20 LAP

LAP Low as possible; maximum levels are also set. Nickel represents the balance, so content would differ from indicated levels.

• Higher operating temperatures improve fuel efficiency and reduce emissions and noise• Requirements include high resistance to oxidation, high strength over a wide temperature range,

high creep resistance and low coefficient of thermal expansion


Focus on Nickel, Chromium and Cobalt• Stainless steel is the dominant use for nickel and chromium

– Stainless steel use is driven by industrial production and durable goods– Ferroalloys and nickel pig iron supply new chromium and nickel units– Scrap reduces ferroalloy use in developed countries and regions

• Aerospace demand for nickel-based superalloys is growing– Pratt & Witney projects a net increase of 40% in nickel use over five years, despite

weight reductions and recycling– Superalloys also require cobalt and chromium– Chromium inputs include scrap and new metal units with low iron

• Batteries drive cobalt use and are a growing source of demand for nickel, as well as for graphite and lithium


Sources of Risk23

Past PresentRaw materials Ore or concentrate Concentrate, residues, scrap,

recyclable materials

Metals Major metals Minor metals

Minerals Commodities Specialty products

Products Commodities Engineered materials

Trade Direct Direct and indirect

Value chains National or regional Global

Geopolitics War, labour disruptions, trade sanctions

War, trade sanctions, export restrictions, technical measures


Chromium and Cobalt, 201424

Stainless steel

Refractories

Superalloys

Chemicals, other

Metallurgical

Composite

Medicine

Chemicals

Magnets

Composite

Chromium Cobalt


Composite Results, 201425

CobaltRare Earths

Lithium

TantalumGraphite

Indium Chromium

Antimony

Tungsten

PGMs

Titanium

Cadmium

Gallium

Selenium

• A higher criticality rating does not imply greater socioeconomic risk

• Potential adjustment mechanisms:– Price response, materials competition

and demand destruction– Invest in new supply– Increase collection and recycling– Develop improved substitutes– Restrict trade and allocate materials

• Mechanisms operate on different timescales and require coordination

• Case studies and historical reviews are instructive


Conclusion• Canada is a significant mineral and metal producer and net exporter that is

closely integrated in key global value chains– Businesses are primarily responsible to assess and manage risks and require access to markets,

imported materials and other goods and services

• The criticality matrix provides a framework for analysis and decisions by businesses and governments

– Effective application requires an understanding of global and continental value chains, processing, supply risks and priorities

– Materials security concerns present opportunities and threats, for Canada and investors

• Global mining and manufacturing capital is mobile– Uncertain timelines, infrastructure gaps, transportation costs and other considerations can

challenge project economics and influence investment decisions

critical minerals assessment approaches and examples ... · 5/16/2017 · u.s. national research...

Documents