Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mineral grades: an important indicator for environmental impact of mineral exploitation

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Mineral Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We have collected and analysed grade information for nine metals: copper, gold, iron, lead, manganese, nickel, PGM, tin, and zinc. Based on this analysis, we have developed a proposal of “grade classes”, i.e., what could be considered low-grade, average-grade, and high-grade deposits for all these metals. We discuss the implications of possible developments into the future of the grades of ores, from which these metals are extracted. A focus on high-grade deposits will naturally reduce the environmental impact of mining. For six metals (copper, gold, iron, nickel, PGM, and zinc), we have further analysed the volumes available for the 10% cohort of projects and operating mines with the highest grades. Three metals (iron, PGM, and zinc) show considerable volumes, between 15 and 20% of total metal content in resources in this high-grade percentile. Copper and gold have between 5 and 10% while nickel has only 1.7% in the highest 10% grade percentile.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. As the data on deposits is not presented on a deposit by deposit basis, but as statistical results it is not possible to identify each deposit. Hence there might be some few cases where one deposit included in the deposit cohort is also present among the mines and projects cohorts. We do not think this issue materially alters the results of the analysis and/or our conclusions.

  2. Goldschmidt (1888–1947) classified the elements in 4 groups, lithophile (rock-loving), siderophile (iron-loving), chalcophile (ore-loving or chalcogen-loving), and atmophile (gas-loving), which determine the paragenetic associations in deposits. Siderophile means that the element is often associated with sulfide minerals. Cited in White (2013)

References

  • Angerer G, Hagelüken C, Thaurer RK, Buchholz P, Herzig P, Wellmer F-W, Gutzmer J, Littke R (2016) Rohstoffe für die Energieversorgung der Zukunft: Geologie – Märkte – Umwelteinflüsse (Schriftenreihe Energiesysteme der Zukunft), München 2016. http://www.acatech.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Baumstruktur_nach_Website/Acatech/root/de/Publikationen/Kooperationspublikationen/ESYS_Analyse_Rohstoffe_fuer_die_Energieversorgung.pdf. Accessed Dec 2018

  • Berger VI, Singer DA, Bliss JD, Moring BC (2011) Ni-Co laterite deposits of the world - database and tonnage models. U.S. Geological Survey, Reston

  • Birshan M, Decaix G, Ferreira N, Robinson H (2015) Is there hidden treasure in the mining industry? McKinsey. http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/metals-and-mining/our-insights/is-there-hidden-treasure-in-the-mining-industry. Accessed Dec 2018

  • Calvo G, Mudd G, Valero A, Valero A (2016) Decreasing ore grades in global metallic mining: a theoretical issue or a global reality? Resources 5:36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coulomb R, Dietz S, Godunova M, Nielsen TB (2015) Critical minerals today and in 2030: an analysis for OECD countries, OECD Working Papers, No 91

  • Crowson P (2012) Some observations on copper yields and ore grades. Res Policy 37:59–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dehoust, G., Manhart, A., Möck, A., Kießling, L., Vogt, R., Kämper, C., Giegrich, J., Auberger, A., Priester, M., Rechlin, A., Dolega, P (2017) Erörterung ökologischer Grenzen der Primärrohstoffgewinnung und Entwicklung einer Methode zur Bewertung der ökologischen Rohstoffverfügbarkeit zur Weiterentwicklung des Kritikalitätskonzeptes (ÖkoRess I) – Teilbericht Bewertung ökologischer Gefährdungspotenziale bei der Primärgewinnung abiotischer Rohstoffe - Methode für einen standortbezogenen Ansatz, Umweltbundesamt, Dessau-Roßlau

  • Drielsma JA, Russell-Vaccari A, Drnek T, Brady T, Weihed P, Mistry M, Simbor LP (2016) Mineral resources in life cycle impact assessment-defining the path forward. Int J Life Cycle Assess 21:85–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EU Commission (2014) Report on critical raw materials for the EU. Report of the Ad hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materials

  • Gerst MD (2008) Revisiting the cumulative grade-tonnage relationship for major copper ore types economic. Geology 103(3):615–628

    Google Scholar 

  • Giurco D, Prior T, Mudd G, Mason L, Behrisch J (2010) Peak minerals in Australia. A review of changing impacts and benefits. prepared for CSIRO minerals down under flagship, by the Institute for Sustainable Futures (University of Technology, Sydney) and Department of Civil Engineering (Monash University)

  • Graedel TE, Harper EM, Nassar NT, Nuss P, Reck BK (2015) Criticality of metals and metalloids. Proc Natl Acad Sci 112(14):4257–4262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee B, Preston F, Kooroshy J, Bailey R, Lahn G (2012) Resource Futures. A Chatham House Report. The Royal Institute of International Affairs. http://resourcesfutures.org/downloads/CHJ204_Resources_Futures_WEB_28.01.13.pdf. Accessed Dec 2018

  • Manhart A, Vogt R, Priester M et al (2018) The environmental criticality of primary raw materials – a new methodology to assess global environmental hazard potentials of minerals and metals from mining. Miner Econ https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-018-0160-0

  • Martin HL, Jen L-S (1988) Are ore grades declining? The Canadian experience1939–89. In: Tilton J (ed) World mineral exploration – trends and economic issues. Roderick Eggert and Hans Landsberg

  • Montani C (2017) 28th Report Marble and stones in the world 2017, Aldus Carrrara

  • Mudd G (2007) Global trends in gold mining towards quantifying environmental and resource sustainability. Resour Policy 32:42–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd G (2009) The sustainability of mining in Australia: key production trends and their environmental implications for the future. Research Report No RR5, Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University and Mineral Policy Institute, Revised - April 2009

  • Mudd G (2010) The environmental sustainability of mining in Australia: key mega trends and constraints. Res Policy 35(2):98–115

  • Mudd G (2012) Key trends in the resource sustainability of platinum group elements. Ore Geol Rev 46:106–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudd GM (2014) The future of Yellowcake: a global assessment of uranium resources and mining. Sci Total Environ 472(2014):590–607

  • Mudd G, Ward JM (2008) Will sustainability constraints cause ‘Peak Minerals’? Institute for Sustainable Water Resources/Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne. School of Chemistry, Physics & Earth Science, Flinders University, Adelaide. Australia

  • Norgate TE, Jahanshahi S, Rankin WJ (2007) Assessing the environmental impact of metal production processes. J Clean Prod 15:838–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northey S, Haque N, Mudd G (2013) Using sustainability reporting to assess the environmental footprint of copper mining. J Clean Prod 40:118–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Northey S, Mohr S, Mudd G, Weng Z, Giurco D (2014) Modelling future copper ore grade decline based on a detailed assessment of copper resources and mining. Resour Conserv Recycl 83:190–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrow OW, Michailow BK, Kimelmann SA, Ledowskich AA, Bawlow NN, Nezhenskii IA, Warobew JJ, Schatow WW, Kapina JS, Nikolaeva LL, Bespalow EW, Boiko MS, Wolkow AW, Sergeew AS, Parschikowa NW, Mirchalewskaja NW (2008) Mineral Resources of Russia (in Russian). Ministry of the Natural Resources of the Russian Federation (VSEGEI), St. Petersburg, p 302

    Google Scholar 

  • Priester M, Dolega P (2015) Bergbauliche Rohstoffe – Teilprojektbericht ÖkoRess. Berlin

  • Prior T, Giurco D, Mudd G, Mason L, Behrisch J (2011) Resource depletion, peak minerals and the implications for sustainable resource management. Glob Environ Chang 22(3):577–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raw Materials Data Stockholm (2016) A computerised database

  • Rötzer N, Schmidt M (2018) Sind Erzgehalte ein geeigneter Indikator für die Rohstoffverfügbarkeit? INEC, Pforzheim 2018 (draft, yet unpublished)

  • Staal Y (2009) Prioritisation of metals regarding their environmental impact. Master thesis, Leiden University, Leiden, the Netherlands. Cited from UNEP (2010). Assessing the environmental impacts of consumption and production, priority products and materials, a report of the working group on the environmental impact of products and materials to the international panel for sustainable resource management. Hertwich, E., van der Voet, E., Suh, S., Tukker, A., Muriguchi, Y

  • STRADE (2016) Discussion during the STRADE project advisory board meeting, 1/2 September 2017, Brüssel, unpublished minutes from meeting. Project website www.stradeproject.eu

  • Sverdrup HU, Ragnarsdottir K, Koca D (2015) An assessment of metal supply sustainability as an input to policy: Security of supply extraction rates, stocks-in-use, recycling, and risk of scarcity. J Clean Prod 140:359–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Technical University Clausthal International mining copper, presentation by prof. H. Tudeshki without year.

  • Umweltrat (2012) Deutscher Umweltrat: Umweltgutachten 2012

  • U.S. DOE (2007) U.S. Department of Energy, Mining Industry Energy Bandwidth Study. BCS Incorporated, June 2007

  • Weber (2015) Leopold Weber, Interpretation von Reserven- und Ressourcenangaben aus wirtschaftsgeologischer Sicht. BHM 160(2):71–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00501-015-0347-4 © Springer-Verlag Wien 2015

    Google Scholar 

  • West (2011) West, J. Decreasing Metal Ore Grades. J Ind Ecol 15(2):165–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellmer F-W, Scholz RW (2017) Peak Minerals: What can we learn from the history of mineral economics and the cases of gold and phosphorus? Miner Econ 30(2):73–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Gold)

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Copper)

  • Cox DP, Singer DA (2008) Descriptive and grade-tonnage models and database for Iron Oxide Cu-Au deposits. Reston

  • Cox DP, Lindsey DA, Singer DA, Morig BC, Diggs MF (2007) Sediment-hosted copper deposits of the world: deposit models and database.

  • IFEU Datenbank (n.d.-a) Codelco, FCX, Teck, BHP, RioTinto, Boliden, Lundin Mining, Imperial, Xstrata Grupo Mexico, Metorex, First Quantum, Hudbay Mining, Southern Peru, Katanga, Vale

  • Mosier DL, Berger VI, Singer DA (2009) Volcanogenic massive sulfide deposits of the world—database and grade and tonnage models

  • Nornik (o.J.) (n.d.) http://www.nornik.ru/en/about-norilsk-nickel/operations/polar-division/mining-assets. Accessed 18 Sept 2015

  • Singer DA (1986a) Grade and tonnage model of Besshi massive sulfide In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 136ff. Washington

  • Singer DA (1986b) Grade and tonnage model of porphyry Cu, skarn-related deposits. In: Cox, DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 82ff. Washington

  • Singer DA, Mosier DL (1986a) Grade and tonnage model kuroko massive sulfide. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 190ff. Washington

  • Singer DA, Mosier DL (1986b) Grade and tonnage model of Cyprus massive. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 131ff. Washington.

  • Singer DA, Cox DP, Mosier DL (1986a) Grade and tonnage model of porphyry Cu-Mo. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 116ff. Washington

  • Singer DA, Berger V, Morig BC (2008) Porphyry copper deposits of the world: database and grade and tonnage models. Reston

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Zinc)

  • IFEU Datenbank (o.J.) (n.d.-b) Buenaventura, BHP, Teck, Volcan, Boliden, Lundin Mining, Xstrata, Inmet, Penoles, Hudbay Mining, Grupo Mexico, Kazzinc

  • Mosier DL (1986a) Grade and Tonnage Model of Zn-Pb Skarn Deposits. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 90ff. Washington

  • Singer DA, Berger VI, Morig BC (2009) Sediment-hosted zinc-lead deposits of the world - database and grade and tonnage models. Reston

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Lead)

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Nickel)

  • IFEU (n.d.) Vale, Xstrata, Lundin Mining, African Rainbow, Minara Resources

  • Singer DA, Page NJ (1986) Grade and tonnage model of dunitic Ni-Cu. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 24ff. Washington

  • Singer DA, Page NJ, Menzie WD (1986b) Grade and tonnage model of komatiitic Ni-Cu. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 18ff. Washington

  • Singer DA, Page NJ, Menzie WD (1986c) Grade and tonnage model of synorogenic-synvolcanic Ni-Cu. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693: 28ff. Washington

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Tin)

  • Menzie WD, Reed BL (1992a) Grade and tonnage model of Sn greisen deposits. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 71–72.

  • Menzie WD, Reed BL (1992b) Grade and tonnage model of Sn skarn deposits. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 58–60

  • Singer DA, Mosier DL (1992) Grade and tonnage hodel of rhyolite-hosted Sn. In Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 169–171

  • Menzie WD, Reed BL (1992c) Grade and tonnage model of Sn veins. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (Hg.) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 67–69

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Iron)

  • Cox DP (1992) Descriptive model of Fe skarn deposits. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 94–97

  • Mosier DL (1992a) Grade and tonnage model of volcanic-hosted magnetite. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 172–174

  • Mosier DL, Singer DA (1992) Grade and tonnage model of superior Fe and Algoma Fe deposits. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 228–230

Literature for the statistics of ore grades (Manganese)

  • Mosier DL (1992b) Descriptive model of replacement Mn. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 105–107

  • Mosier DL (1992c) Grade and tonnage model of volcanogenic Mn. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 139–141

  • Mosier DL (1992d) Grade and tonnage model of epithermal Mn. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 166–167

  • Mosier DL (1992e) Grade and tonnage model of sedimentary Mn. In: Cox DP, Singer DA (eds) Mineral deposit models, vol 1693. U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin, pp 231–233.

  • BGS (2016): World mineral statistics data. Internet: https://www.bgs.ac.uk/mineralsuk/statistics/wms.cfc?method=searchWMS. Accessed 3 March 2017

  • USGS (2017): Mineral Commodity Summaries 2017. Internet: https://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/mcs/2017/mcs2017.pdf. Accessed 26 Sept 2017

  • White, W.M. (2013): Geochemistry. Chichester. Wiley-Blackwell

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors like to thank two anonymous reviewers and Prof. Mario Schmidt from the Institute for Industrial Ecology INEC of the Hochschule Pforzheim, for his review and comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Projekt-Consult GmbH, Eulenkrugstrasse 82, 22359, Hamburg, Germany

    Michael Priester

  2. Luleå University of Technology, ETS/Economics, SE-971 87, Luleå, Sweden

    Magnus Ericsson

  3. Öko-Institut e.V., Rheinstraße 95, 64295, Darmstadt, Germany

    Peter Dolega

  4. RMG Consulting, Drakskeppsvägen 42, SE-183 63, Täby, Sweden

    Olof Löf

Authors
  1. Michael Priester
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Magnus Ericsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter Dolega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Olof Löf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Priester.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

An analysis by Michael Priester, Magnus Ericsson, Peter Dolega, and Olof Löf.

Annex 1

Annex 1

Figures over ore grades of deposits, mines, and projects. Sources: own calculations based on references cited in the resource specific section of the reference list.

Fig. 22
figure 22

Relative ore grades of gold deposits, mines, and projects

Full size image
Fig. 23
figure 23

Relative ore grades of copper deposits, mines, and projects

Full size image
Fig. 24
figure 24

Relative ore grades of iron deposits, mines, and projects

Full size image
Fig. 25
figure 25

Relative ore grades of zinc deposits, mines, and projects

Full size image
Fig. 26
figure 26

Relative ore grades of nickel deposits, mines, and projects

Full size image
Fig. 27
figure 27

Relative ore grades of PGM deposits, mines, and projects

Full size image

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Priester, M., Ericsson, M., Dolega, P. et al. Mineral grades: an important indicator for environmental impact of mineral exploitation. Miner Econ 32, 49–73 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-018-00168-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13563-018-00168-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation