12threefall t1_j6ob4p6 wrote
Reply to comment by Kleanish in Study: Enough minerals to fuel green energy shift -"The analysis is robust and this study debunks those (running out of minerals) concerns" by Surur
I would have to reread it closely, sorry. If you're asking about Manberg and Stenqvist, I think they forecast demand. Not sure about innovation - given they cite the USGS and their definition of reserves (mentioned some comments up) I would guess not, or that if they do they then had to explain their assumptions on it somewhat.
I don't know much/anything about forecasting. With napkin logic I see reserves defined by USGS as conservative, as market demand drives technological development making uneconomical deposits economical. Reminds me of rare-earth elements. They are not rare, it's just the economical deposits of them which are currently. Think there is a study on the boom in studies of rare-earth-elements lol.
Tangentially, I didn't even check to see if the reserves are global (I assumed it). Geopolitics is a concern for projections that I don't think was factored in. In the west there's an emergence of the term 'critical minerals'; a sort of linguistic reaction you might have when you see an economic powerhouse controlling supply of something you want.
Sorry I can't be more help. If you have an undying passion on the matter and can't get access to the study/studies let me know.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments