Nonfuel minerals projections - Why they were wrong

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

Abstract

This article revisits global projections made in 1981 of eight metallic and fertilizer minerals for the year 2000. The objectives here are to quantify the diferences between the projected and observed levels of consumption for the year 2000 for eight of the 26 nonfuel minerals covered in the earlier study. An attempt is then made to attribute these large differences to the major determinants of minerals demand - income, technological, regulatory and other policy changes, and changes in the recycling rates of the metallic minerals. The eight minerals covered are aluminum, copper, iron, mercury nickel, phosphate rock, potash and tin.

Original languageEnglish
Pages22-28
Number of pages7
Volume57
No9
Specialist publicationMining Engineering
StatePublished - 1 Sep 2005

Fingerprint

Minerals
mineral
phosphate rock
potash
Potash
tin
Mercury (metal)
nickel
Fertilizers
recycling
aluminum
Tin
fertilizer
income
Recycling
copper
Phosphates
iron
Rocks
Nickel

Cite this

@misc{fdfcc5c9ff624d6bb710cfe5931aacd4,
title = "Nonfuel minerals projections - Why they were wrong",
abstract = "This article revisits global projections made in 1981 of eight metallic and fertilizer minerals for the year 2000. The objectives here are to quantify the diferences between the projected and observed levels of consumption for the year 2000 for eight of the 26 nonfuel minerals covered in the earlier study. An attempt is then made to attribute these large differences to the major determinants of minerals demand - income, technological, regulatory and other policy changes, and changes in the recycling rates of the metallic minerals. The eight minerals covered are aluminum, copper, iron, mercury nickel, phosphate rock, potash and tin.",
author = "Ira Sohn",
year = "2005",
month = "9",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "57",
pages = "22--28",
journal = "Mining Engineering",
issn = "0026-5187",
publisher = "Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration",

}

Nonfuel minerals projections - Why they were wrong. / Sohn, Ira.

In: Mining Engineering, Vol. 57, No. 9, 01.09.2005, p. 22-28.

Research output: Contribution to specialist publicationArticle

TY - GEN

T1 - Nonfuel minerals projections - Why they were wrong

AU - Sohn, Ira

PY - 2005/9/1

Y1 - 2005/9/1

N2 - This article revisits global projections made in 1981 of eight metallic and fertilizer minerals for the year 2000. The objectives here are to quantify the diferences between the projected and observed levels of consumption for the year 2000 for eight of the 26 nonfuel minerals covered in the earlier study. An attempt is then made to attribute these large differences to the major determinants of minerals demand - income, technological, regulatory and other policy changes, and changes in the recycling rates of the metallic minerals. The eight minerals covered are aluminum, copper, iron, mercury nickel, phosphate rock, potash and tin.

AB - This article revisits global projections made in 1981 of eight metallic and fertilizer minerals for the year 2000. The objectives here are to quantify the diferences between the projected and observed levels of consumption for the year 2000 for eight of the 26 nonfuel minerals covered in the earlier study. An attempt is then made to attribute these large differences to the major determinants of minerals demand - income, technological, regulatory and other policy changes, and changes in the recycling rates of the metallic minerals. The eight minerals covered are aluminum, copper, iron, mercury nickel, phosphate rock, potash and tin.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=27144471313&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:27144471313

VL - 57

SP - 22

EP - 28

JO - Mining Engineering

JF - Mining Engineering

SN - 0026-5187

ER -