Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on June 6, 2014
Raw Material Demand Seen at 140 Billion Tons by 2050
Global use of minerals, ores, fossil fuels and biomass will reach 140 billion metric tons a year by 2050, three times what it was in 2000, according to the United Nations’ Environment Program’s International Resouce Panel.
Available water supplies will likely only satisfy 60 percent of global demand in 20 years, the panel said in a report today. Many industries may be affected by shortages of some “key” metals in 50 years, it said.
Raw-material costs have climbed as surging consumption led by growth in China boosted demand for copper to oil. Metal prices rose 176 percent since 2000, rubber surged 350 percent and energy is 260 percent higher, according to the report.
The 140 billion tons of consumption seen by 2050 most likely exceeds all existing available resources and the limits of the planet to absorb the impacts of their use, it said. There could be as much as $3.7 trillion saved each year through increased productivity of resources, the panel said.
“Business as usual is not an option,” the European Union Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik said in a statement accompanying the report. “Rising commodity prices mark the end of an era of cheap and abundant resources. Improving resource efficiency is a way out of the crisis.”
Energy and water efficiency could be improved by as much as 80 percent in industries from construction to agriculture, according to the report. Energy use in smelting zinc, tin, copper and lead could be reduced by 40 percent with advanced furnace technology, it said.
20 Comments on "Raw Material Demand Seen at 140 Billion Tons by 2050"
Northwest Resident on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 3:16 pm
“Improving resource efficiency is a way out of the crisis”
I doubt that. All of the “efficiency” improvement is going to take a lot of investment, a lot of energy, a lot of time AND a lot of the raw material resources that are becoming increasingly scarce and hard to extract anyway.
This is a sterling example of the “between a rock and hard spot” predicament that our industrial civilization finds itself in — or to be more exact — that the industrial, financial and political elites find themselves in.
Juan Pueblo on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 3:58 pm
I recommend everyone not familiar with the concept to Google Jevons’ Paradox.
The basic idea being that the more efficient the use of a resource or product becomes, the cheaper and more available it will be becoming accessible to a larger number of people and the total amount we consume increases in spite of the efficiency gains.
We will not solve this by increasing efficiency, yet, I believe we should try to be as efficient as possible in our personal lives for many reasons.
GregT on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 5:32 pm
“Business as usual is not an option,”
Well golly gee whiz, who would’ve thunk it?
One more time:
Infinite exponential growth, in a finite environment, is a physical and mathematical impossibility.
J-Gav on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 5:43 pm
“… by 2050.” Holy Moly! So many things will have changed by then. “Raw material demand”, for example will likely have morphed into scavenging on a scale few people can imagine. Already a big uptick there today and that can only increase, leading to new and harsher laws, crack-downs, shoot-outs, etc.
Harquebus on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 6:26 pm
You are correct GregT. That is the bottom line.
Hubert on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 9:14 pm
I seriously doubt America will be around by 2050.
pat on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 9:45 pm
apocalypse before 2050?
GregT on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 10:01 pm
“I seriously doubt America will be around by 2050.”
I seriously doubt that a very good portion of what we all take for granted each and every day, will ‘be around’ by 2030.
America, however, will still be here. If it isn’t, there won’t be much of anything left anywhere.
Northwest Resident on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 10:26 pm
“America, however, will still be here.”
I hope so, Greg. Probably better that than a break-up into regions and areas, each with their own government — and own set of priorities that may just conflict with one or more of their neighbor’s priorities. In other words, a return to us versus them. I would hate to see things devolve into that. There was an ideal once that launched America on a spectacular path. In practice, America failed to live up to its ideals. Maybe it will do better the second time around.
GregT on Fri, 6th Jun 2014 11:46 pm
NWR,
The best constitution ever written. Well worth fighting for, IMHO.
Dutch on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 3:19 am
The Constitution must indeed be the rallying point for the American insurgents of the future. And if Americans won’t fight, they will end up in the gulag, just like the Russians did. The commissars already own Washington. But I do think that just like in 1776 aid from Europe will tilt the balance in favour of the insurgents. The French right won the last European elections and Jeanne d’Arc 2.0 could very well win the next national election and go after the Plantagenets 2.0 of this world (sorry about that, Plant.lol). If that happens France will abandon NATO and the West and turn to Russia and Germany and the rest of Europe will join. Europe will first kill American imposed multiculturalism and next solve the American problem. In 1945 Anglos met their Soviet palls in Thorgau on the Elbe river. Maybe Russian, German and French troops will meet the Alex Jones types in Hermann on the Missouri in 202x.
J-Gav on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 3:34 am
Re: The Constitution.
The U.S. one I mean. It may be the best one out there (Ho Chi Minh was still considering using it for Vietnam in the 1940s) but it’s far from perfect.
One major shortcoming is how inexplicit it is about who has the right to create the money supply. If they’d had more foresight, the banks would never have been able to grab that role and money-creation/lending would be a public service instead of a racket.
I know, I know … “If ‘ifs’ and ‘buts’ were candy and nuts, we’d all have a Merry Christmas.”
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 6:22 am
Art said – Maybe Russian, German and French troops will meet the Alex Jones types in Hermann on the Missouri in 202x
Art, I am getting old. Maybe my kids will take you up on it.LOL
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 6:33 am
Juan said – I recommend everyone not familiar with the concept to Google Jevons’ Paradox.
Juan I have seen studies that have blunted Jevon’s Paradox. I think the real issue is control of the commons and vital resources. That will require centralized authority and command control economy. That is not in the cards for a few years if at all. I imagine we will be thrust back to pre-industrial man where Jevons Paradox is mute because his thesis was more a reflection of energy intensity. Though I guess the Wooly Mammoth were driven to extinction by human hunting efficiency. I do agree with you on efficiency gains have reached diminishing returns. How efficient do you make a house before the cost is never recovered and from an energy point of view when is the embedded energy in efficiency more than the energy ever saved? Efficiency will make the biggest impact in lifestyles and attitudes. Here is where we can make the biggest gains and pick low hanging fruit. Around where I live there are still horribly energy inefficient activities going on. Many resource inefficient activities are just lifestyle choices that are discretionary and not vital to survival. The US has much ground to gain here.
rollin on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 3:51 pm
Now if we were really smart we would know how to genetically engineer the human race to be able to tolerate natural environments and eliminate the need for houses, clothing, and artificial heat sources.
Next make them less vulnerable to rampant consumerism and most of the resource demand will fall flat on it’s face.
I think technology is going up a dead end. We need to change, not keep trying to change the world around us and collect a whole bunch of dead (and eventually useless) junk along the way.
Makati1 on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 9:17 pm
The US as a nation will not exist as a nation in 2050. The land will still be here, but it may be covered with radioactivity or be a desert. Not the country we know today. 36 years is half of the current life expectancy for an American. By 2050, it may be the life expectancy of only 1 percent or less of the surviving population and all others will be much lower.
Rob on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 9:35 pm
No it won’t. I wouldn’t make any statement about just about anything in that time frame.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Sat, 7th Jun 2014 9:38 pm
Sorry Mak, you mistook the US for the P’s in your desolation fantasy. The p’s will be lifeless and picked over like a bone. The oceans around her will be dead zones. This will not be 2050 but in just a few short years.
Kenz300 on Sun, 8th Jun 2014 7:56 am
Around the world we have a food crisis, a water crisis, a declining fish stocks crisis, a Climate Change crisis, a jobs crisis and an OVER POPULATION crisis.
Endless population growth is not sustainable and will only lead to more poverty, suffering and despair.
Overpopulation facts – the problem no one will discuss: Alexandra Paul at TEDxTopanga – YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNxctzyNxC0
Kenz300 on Sun, 8th Jun 2014 10:03 pm
Time to stop putting trash into landfills and take recycling seriously.
Too much of what is discarded should be recycled or used to produce energy, biofuels or recycled raw materials for new products.
Landfills should become a thing of the past. The materials being tossed away will continue to increase in value as raw materials become more expensive.