Geology topics

Nedal T. Nassar

Publications and source records attributed to Nedal T. Nassar.

36 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

USGS2022

Global tellurium supply potential from electrolytic copper refining

The transition towards renewable energy requires increasing quantities of nonfuel mineral commodities, including tellurium used in certain photovoltaics. While demand for tellurium may increase markedly, the potential to increase tellurium supply is not well-understood. In this analysis, we estimate the quantity of tellurium contained in anode slimes generated by electrolytic copper refining by country between 1986 and 2018, including uncertainties. For 2018, the results indicate that 1930 (1500-2700, 95% confidence interval) metric tons of tellurium were contained in anode slimes globally. This is nearly quadruple the reported tellurium production for that year. China has the greatest potential to increase tellurium supplies. However, most of the tellurium potentially recoverable by Chinese refineries appears to come from copper mined elsewhere. Further research into the business decisions associated with tellurium recovery may help translate the physical availability of tellurium into economic availability. The methodology presented here can be applied to other byproduct elements.

Resources, Conservation & Recycling↗

USGS2022

Dynamic material flow analysis of tantalum in the United States from 2002 to 2020

Tantalum has received considerable attention due to risks associated with its supply chain. In 2020 ∼70% of global tantalum supply originated in Africa, with 40% produced in the Democratic Republic of Congo alone. The United States has relied entirely on imports since the 1950s. However, quantifying total domestic consumption is problematic because refined tantalum compounds do not have unique tariff codes resulting in significant trade volumes not properly documented. Furthermore, tantalum incorporated into finished goods is not tracked as tantalum. Thus, estimates only capture a fraction of total consumption. We performed a material flow analysis to quantify total domestic tantalum consumption from 2002 to 2020. Our results indicate that consumption may be up to 250% more than previously estimated. Our detailed results allow quantification of tantalum stocks in-use as well as coming out of use any year, providing valuable insight to industry and policymakers for addressing potential supply security issues.

Resources, Conservation & Recycling↗

USGS2022

A model to assess industry vulnerability to disruptions in mineral commodity supplies

Mineral commodity supply disruptions have the potential to ripple through and impact the economy in many ways. Industrial vulnerability is a crucial component of mineral commodity criticality tools as it provides guidance on the economic importance of these commodities to regional criticality indices. Using an economic model that links mineral commodity end-use data to input-output tables and a linear optimization routine, reductions in economic output of individual industries and of the overall economy may be calculated. Such a model can also help to identify industries, be they direct or indirect consumers of the mineral commodities in question, that are most vulnerable to specific mineral commodity supply disruptions at different disruption magnitudes. In this assessment, 56 commodities’ end-use data for the year 2012 were paired with the United States’ detail-level Benchmark Input-Output accounts to build an industrial vulnerability model. The model does not evaluate the likelihood of specific supply disruptions but can be used to assess potential industry impacts for a range of scenarios. The model findings indicate that when the supplies of mineral commodities such as mica, lithium, and fluorspar were disrupted, large overall economic decline was paired with a large decline in many industries. On the other hand, gold, lead, and rhenium disruptions resulted in low declines and few disrupted industries.

Resources Policy↗

USGS2022

Examining industry vulnerability: A focus on mineral commodities used in the automotive and electronics industries

Automotive manufacturing is material-intensive and dependent on a broad range of mineral commodities. Moreover, the automotive manufacturing industries are reliant on complex and sometimes opaque multi-tiered global supply chains. Among the many industries on which automotive supply chains depend are the electronics and semiconductor industries , which are themselves material-intensive and reliant on opaque global supply chains. A linear programming model built on mineral end-use data and input-output tables provides a tool for investigating inter-industry relationships between the two sets of industry sectors and industrial vulnerability to mineral commodity supply disruptions. Supply disruptions in aluminum, magnesium metal, and zinc—metals used in the body-in-white, wheels and other parts—have significant potential to disrupt the automotive industries. On the other hand, supply disruptions in gallium, tellurium, and indium for example—semiconductor elements used in power electronics, screen coatings and other parts—have significant potential to impact the electronics and computer industries. More interestingly, case studies of the automotive and electronics industries show how supply disruptions in mineral commodities that are generally considered semiconductor materials, such as gallium, can significantly impact the automotive sector.

Resources Policy↗

USGS2022

USGS Critical Minerals Review: 2021

In 2021, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) continued to play a central role in understanding and anticipating potential supply chain disruptions by defining and quantitatively evaluating mineral criticality. In addition, the USGS continued to evaluate new sources of domestic critical minerals by conducting mineral resource assessments, mapping and surveying regions prospective for critical minerals, re-assessing mine waste, and pursuing fundamental research in support of responsible, sustainable mining.

Mining Engineering↗

USGS2021

Methodology and technical input for the 2021 review and revision of the U.S. Critical Minerals List

Pursuant to Section 7002 (“Mineral Security”) of Title VII (“Critical Minerals”) of the Energy Act of 2020 (Public Law 116–260, December 27, 2020, 116th Cong.), the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, is tasked with reviewing and revising the methodology used to evaluate mineral criticality and the U.S. Critical Minerals List no less than every 3 years. The initial Critical Minerals List was published in the Federal Register on May 18, 2018, in response to Executive Order No. 13817, A Federal Strategy to Ensure Secure and Reliable Supplies of Critical Minerals (3 CFR, 2017 Comp, p. 397–399). This report documents the updated evaluation methodology and the resultant updated draft list of minerals recommended for inclusion in the Critical Minerals List.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2021

USGS 2020 critical minerals review

Concerns about the lack of domestic production and availability of essential mineral raw materials were a recurring theme throughout the 20th century, particularly in the periods around armed conflicts (Congressional Research Service, 2019). These concerns resulted in the designation of particular minerals as “strategic” or “critical,” terms that commonly depend on the perspective of the user, but which are generally understood to relate to mineral commodities with uses in essential applications, and which are exposed to risk of supply disruptions, with attendant implications for economic and national security interests.

Mining Engineering↗

USGS2020

Investigation of U.S. Foreign Reliance on Critical Minerals—U.S. Geological Survey technical input document in response to Executive Order No. 13953 Signed September 30, 2020

Over the past few decades (1990–2019), the United States has become reliant on foreign sources to meet domestic demand for a large and growing number of mineral commodities. In combination with recent trends towards progressively concentrated supply of mineral commodities from a limited number of countries, this heightened import reliance may increase the risk to the United States economy and national security. Several factors obscure the true net import reliance of mineral commodities essential to the United States, including indirect trade reliance, embedded trade reliance, and foreign ownership. This report provides a detailed overview of contributions to and trends of these mineral commodity supply risks and provides an outline of the salient factors pertaining to each mineral commodity’s supply chain. It also describes some additional considerations and provides a general framework for evaluating different strategies aimed at reducing net import reliance and supply risk.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2020

Evaluating the mineral commodity supply risk of the U.S. manufacturing sector

Trade tensions, resource nationalism, and various other factors are increasing concerns regarding the supply reliability of nonfuel mineral commodities. This is especially the case for commodities required for new and emerging technologies ranging from electric vehicles to wind turbines. In this analysis, we utilize a conventional risk-modeling framework to develop and apply a new methodology for assessing the supply risk to the U.S. manufacturing sector. Specifically, supply risk is defined as the confluence of three factors: the likelihood of a foreign supply disruption, the dependency of U.S. manufacturers on foreign supplies, and the ability of U.S. manufacturers to withstand a supply disruption. The methodology is applied to 52 commodities for the decade spanning 2007-2016. The results indicate that a subset of 23 commodities, including cobalt, niobium, rare earth elements, and tungsten, pose the greatest supply risk. Importantly, this supply risk is dynamic, shifting with changes in global market conditions.

Science Advances↗

USGS2019

Natural hazards and mineral commodity supply: Quantifying risk of earthquake disruption to South American copper supply

Mineral resources, and their mining and enrichment operations, are not equally distributed across Earth. The concentration of mineral supply in certain regions, owing to the geology or geography of the mineral resource, raises the level of risk related to supply disruption. Where mineral production coincides with areas prone to natural hazards, supply may be especially at risk. However, the level of risk that natural hazards pose to mineral supply has yet to be quantified on a global or regional scale. Using copper in South America as a case study, this paper offers methods for quantifying (i) the coincidence of mineral production and seismic hazards, and (ii) the Expected Annual Disruption (EAD) of the mineral supply from earthquakes. The first of these methods indicates that, of the 101 copper producing facilities in South America considered, 76 are located within an area of high seismic hazard, taken here as the area with>85% chance of exceeding Modified Mercalli Intensity VI earthquake shaking in 50 years. Collectively, the 76 facilities comprise 82%, 87%, and 91% of the 2015 South American mine production, smelter capacity, and refinery capacity, respectively. For each of the 101 facilities, the second method calculates the EAD using a full earthquake shaking hazard forecast at the location, the annualized copper production of the facility, and models of the vulnerability of that production to shaking. The EADs are summed by country, here within South America, as a demonstration of how supply risk could eventually be quantified globally. Consideration of two illustrative vulnerability models shows that future work is needed to determine percentages of disruption to mineral production for different levels of earthquake shaking. Ultimately, the methods presented herein could be applied to other mineral commodities and/or adapted for other natural hazards, and the resulting EADs could be summed. Results from these methods could be used to focus more detailed risk assessments where the risk is highest.

Resources Policy↗

USGS2018

China, the United States, and competition for resources that enable emerging technologies

Historically, resource conflicts have often centered on fuel minerals (particularly oil). Future resource conflicts may, however, focus more on competition for nonfuel minerals that enable emerging technologies. Whether it is rhenium in jet engines, indium in flat panel displays, or gallium in smart phones, obscure elements empower smarter, smaller, and faster technologies, and nations seek stable supplies of these and other nonfuel minerals for their industries. No nation has all of the resources it needs domestically. International trade may lead to international competition for these resources if supplies are deemed at risk or insufficient to satisfy growing demand, especially for minerals used in technologies important to economic development and national security. Here, we compare the net import reliance of China and the United States to inform mineral resource competition and foreign supply risk. Our analysis indicates that China relies on imports for over half of its consumption for 19 of 42 nonfuel minerals, compared with 24 for the United States—11 of which are common to both. It is for these 11 nonfuel minerals that competition between the United States and China may become the most contentious, especially for those with highly concentrated production that prove irreplaceable in pivotal emerging technologies.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of↗

USGS2018

Draft critical mineral list—Summary of methodology and background information—U.S. Geological Survey technical input document in response to Secretarial Order No. 3359

Pursuant to the Presidential Executive Order (EO) No. 13817, “A Federal Strategy to Ensure Secure and Reliable Supplies of Critical Minerals,” the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, and in consultation with the heads of other relevant executive departments and agencies, was tasked with developing and submitting a draft list of minerals defined as “critical minerals” to the Federal Register within 60 days of the issue of the EO (December 20, 2017). Based on an analysis by the U.S. Geological Survey and other U.S. Government agencies, using multiple criteria, 35 minerals or mineral material groups have been identified that are currently (February 2018) considered critical. These include the following: aluminum (bauxite), antimony, arsenic, barite, beryllium, bismuth, cesium, chromium, cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, germanium, graphite (natural), hafnium, helium, indium, lithium, magnesium, manganese, niobium, platinum group metals, potash, rare earth elements group, rhenium, rubidium, scandium, strontium, tantalum, tellurium, tin, titanium, tungsten, uranium, vanadium, and zirconium. The categorization of minerals as critical may change during the course of the review process and is thus provisional.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Globally sourced mineral commodities used in U.S. Navy SEAL gear—An illustration of U.S. net import reliance

A U.S. Navy SEAL (an acronym for sea, air, land) carries gear containing at least 23 nonfuel mineral commodities for which the United States is greater than 50 percent net import reliant. The graphics display the leading world producers of selected nonfuel mineral commodities used to manufacture U.S. Navy SEAL gear. SEALs are members of the U.S. Navy's special operations forces.

General Information Product↗

USGS2017

Assessment of critical minerals: Updated application of an early-warning screening methodology

Increasing reliance on non-renewable mineral resources reinforces the need for identifying potential supply constraints before they occur. The US National Science and Technology Council recently released a report that outlines a methodology for screening potentially critical minerals based on three indicators: supply risk ( R ), production growth ( G ), and market dynamics ( M ). This early-warning screening was initially applied to 78 minerals across the years 1996 to 2013 and identified a subset of minerals as “potentially critical” based on the geometric average of these indicators—designated as criticality potential ( C ). In this study, the screening methodology has been updated to include data for 2014, as well as to incorporate revisions and modifications to the data, where applicable. Overall, C declined in 2014 for the majority of minerals examined largely due to decreases in production concentration and price volatility. However, the results vary considerably across minerals, with some minerals, such as gallium, recording increases for all three indicators. In addition to assessing magnitudinal changes, this analysis also examines the significance of the change relative to historical variation for each mineral. For example, although mined nickel’s R declined modestly in 2014 in comparison to that of other minerals, it was by far the largest annual change recorded for mined nickel across all years examined and is attributable to Indonesia’s ban on the export of unprocessed minerals. Based on the 2014 results, 20 minerals with the highest C values have been identified for further study including the rare earths, gallium, germanium, rhodium, tantalum, and tungsten.

Mineral Economics↗

USGS2017

Minor metals and renewable energy—Diversifying America’s energy sources

Solar photovoltaic (PV) and wind turbine technologies are projected to make up an increasing proportion of electricity generation capacity in the United States in the coming decades. By 2050, they will account for 36 percent (or 566 gigawatts) of capacity compared with about 11 percent (or 118 gigawatts) in 2016 (fig. 1; EIA, 2017). There are several different types of commercial solar PV and wind turbine technologies, and each type makes use of different minor metals. “Minor metal” is the term used for metals for which world production is small compared with the more widely produced base metals, and they are often produced as byproducts of the mining or processing of base metals. Minor metals used in renewable energy technologies often have complex supply chains, are often produced primarily outside of the United States, and are also used in many other applications. A larger amount of minor metals will be needed in the future to support the projected increases in solar PV and wind energy production capacity (Nassar and others, 2016).

Fact Sheet↗

USGS2017

Grand challenges for integrated USGS science — A workshop report

Executive Summary The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a long history of advancing the traditional Earth science disciplines and identifying opportunities to integrate USGS science across disciplines to address complex societal problems. The USGS science strategy for 2007–2017 laid out key challenges in disciplinary and interdisciplinary arenas, culminating in a call for increased focus on a number of crosscutting science directions. Ten years on, to further the goal of integrated science and at the request of the Executive Leadership Team (ELT), a workshop with three dozen invited scientists spanning different disciplines and career stages in the Bureau convened on February 7–10, 2017, at the USGS John Wesley Powell Center for Analysis and Synthesis in Fort Collins, Colorado. The workshop focused on identifying “grand challenges” for integrated USGS science. Individual participants identified nearly 70 potential grand challenges before the workshop and through workshop discussions. After discussion, four overarching grand challenges emerged: Natural resource security, Societal risk from existing and emerging threats, Smart infrastructure development, and Anticipatory science for changing landscapes. Participants also identified a “comprehensive science challenge” that highlights the development of integrative science, data, models, and tools—all interacting in a modular framework—that can be used to address these and other future grand challenges: Earth Monitoring, Analyses, and Projections (EarthMAP) EarthMAP is our long-term vision for an integrated scientific framework that spans traditional scientific boundaries and disciplines, and integrates the full portfolio of USGS science: research, monitoring, assessment, analysis, and information delivery. The Department of Interior, and the Nation in general, have a vast array of information needs. The USGS meets these needs by having a broadly trained and agile scientific workforce. Encouraging and supporting cross-discipline engagement would position the USGS to tackle complex and multifaceted scientific and societal challenges in the 21st Century.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2016

Mineral resources: Reserves, peak production and the future

The adequacy of mineral resources in light of population growth and rising standards of living has been a concern since the time of Malthus (1798), but many studies erroneously forecast impending peak production or exhaustion because they confuse reserves with “all there is”. Reserves are formally defined as a subset of resources, and even current and potential resources are only a small subset of “all there is”. Peak production or exhaustion cannot be modeled accurately from reserves. Using copper as an example, identified resources are twice as large as the amount projected to be needed through 2050. Estimates of yet-to-be discovered copper resources are up to 40-times more than currently-identified resources, amounts that could last for many centuries. Thus, forecasts of imminent peak production due to resource exhaustion in the next 20–30 years are not valid. Short-term supply problems may arise, however, and supply-chain disruptions are possible at any time due to natural disasters (earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes) or political complications. Needed to resolve these problems are education and exploration technology development, access to prospective terrain, better recycling and better accounting of externalities associated with production (pollution, loss of ecosystem services and water and energy use).

Resources↗

USGS2016

Byproduct metal requirements for U.S. wind and solar photovoltaic electricity generation up to the year 2040 under various Clean Power Plan scenarios

The United States has and will likely continue to obtain an increasing share of its electricity from solar photovoltaics (PV) and wind power, especially under the Clean Power Plan (CPP). The need for additional solar PV modules and wind turbines will, among other things, result in greater demand for a number of minor metals that are produced mainly or only as byproducts. In this analysis, the quantities of 11 byproduct metals (Ag, Cd, Te, In, Ga, Se, Ge, Nd, Pr, Dy, and Tb) required for wind turbines with rare-earth permanent magnets and four solar PV technologies are assessed through the year 2040. Three key uncertainties (electricity generation capacities, technology market shares, and material intensities) are varied to develop 42 scenarios for each byproduct metal. The results indicate that byproduct metal requirements vary significantly across technologies, scenarios, and over time. In certain scenarios, the requirements are projected to become a significant portion of current primary production. This is especially the case for Te, Ge, Dy, In, and Tb under the more aggressive scenarios of increasing market share and conservative material intensities. Te and Dy are, perhaps, of most concern given their substitution limitations. In certain years, the differences in byproduct metal requirements between the technology market share and material intensity scenarios are greater than those between the various CPP and No CPP scenarios. Cumulatively across years 2016–2040, the various CPP scenarios are estimated to require 15–43% more byproduct metals than the No CPP scenario depending on the specific byproduct metal and scenario. Increasing primary production via enhanced recovery rates of the byproduct metals during the beneficiation and enrichment operations, improving end-of-life recycling rates, and developing substitutes are important strategies that may help meet the increased demand for these byproduct metals.

Applied Energy↗