European mineral intelligence – collecting, harmonizing and sharing data on European raw materials

Abstract

The major share of raw materials needed to sustain our present lifestyle and even more importantly, required for the crucial green transition, are sourced outside Europe. The European Commission aims to enhance Europe's resilience and strengthen domestic sourcing. Although Europe has a long tradition of mining and extractive activities, it is acknowledged that there are several challenges to achieve European sourcing of certain raw materials such as the critical raw materials. A basic prerequisite to enable access to domestic raw materials is information on raw material occurrences, current and past mining activities, resources and reserves. The Geological Survey Organisations (GSOs) of Europe play a key role in generating, compiling, gathering, and storing the most up to date information as well as long-term data series on raw materials at national and regional levels. Over the last decade, the GSOs have joined forces and taken essential steps to harmonise and share data on raw materials. The results of this cooperation are illustrated as interactive maps on the European Geological Data Infrastructure (EGDI). This paper describes the data compiled in cooperation between the GSOs, and analyses the strengths and weaknesses of as well as opportunities for and threats towards the data.

Mass-Balance-Consistent Geological Stock Accounting: A New Approach toward Sustainable Management of Mineral Resources

“…Definitions, methods, and standards for government and industry data collection, sharing, and integration, however, have diverse historical backgrounds and have been developed by different organizations to serve distinct information needs: Government agencies, for instance, collect basic geoscientific and industry data to inform long-term resource management, promote sustainable development, and secure an affordable supply of raw materials at national, regional, and local levels. National- and regional-scale geospatial data sets and mineral resource estimates by government agencies often cover both known and undiscovered mineral deposits, and aim to inform a wide range of users including policy makers, exploration companies, and investors. ,− These data sets and resource estimates, however, have diverse underlying assumptions, varying uncertainty, and significant data gaps, ,,, which make them difficult to compare and integrate. Exploration and mining companies, on the other hand, collect detailed site-scale information for project-specific appraisal (valuation) and operations planning, with the goal of generating revenue though successful mining and refining ventures (Figure ).…”

“…Reported mine production data are commonly ingested by geological survey organizations (GSOs), mining directorates, and industry associations. Due to confidentiality concerns, these organizations usually only publish them as aggregated mineral production statistics. − , National mine production totals and global production estimates are used by a wide range of stakeholders, e.g., to evaluate markets for project development, assess raw material criticality, − investigate the long-run availability of metals, , and develop raw material policies and science-based resource efficiency targets . However, the published production statistics are often misinterpreted by data users that do not know their context.…”

“…However, the minerals and mining-related datasets are still mostly 2D, have coarse resolution, and mainly cover areas where publicly funded exploration campaigns have been conducted (“mapped areas” labeled ‘B’). National mineral inventories and mineral statistics combine such government data with mandatory company reporting, and occasionally also voluntary public disclosures and information from industry associations and commercial data providers. , Such data compilation and integration from sources that are poorly standardized, diverse, and can only be selectively sampled is time-consuming and costly . Moreover, nongeospatial “external” data cannot readily be integrated into existing geomodels, but rather only indirectly linked to administrative records (e.g., mapped concession areas ‘A’) or approximate locations of production sites (e.g., ‘ID1’).…”

“…The mineral depletion and sustainability debate continues unabated, and while neither the optimistic nor the pessimistic perspective is inherently contradictory or incorrect, neither has offered a unifying solution to reconcile the positions. ,− Notably, both resource optimists and resource pessimists base their claims on the same national and global mineral production statistics and estimates for mineral resources and reserves. − Whether these data are at all suitable for quantifying long-term mineral depletion is questioned by recent studies. ,− Various authors highlight significant uncertainties regarding conceptual methods for estimation, classification, and spatial aggregation of mineral resources and reserves across all data sources, particularly for critical raw materials. − Moreover, the general lack of systematic and standardized granular mine-site-level “bottom-up” information is a key concern for comparing, aggregating, and monitoring mineral resources and mineral reserves. ,, Poor data availability also hampers environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risk assessments, , sustainability analysis, , and raw materials scenario modeling. ,, Notwithstanding, there are few recommendations on how mineral-related data collection may be streamlined and industry-government integration facilitated to address data gaps and fragmentation. Here, we use material flow analysis (MFA) and mass-balance (MB) principles to review current mineral reserve accounting, mine production monitoring, and industry-government data integration.…”

“… 4 , 34 − 39 Notably, both resource optimists and resource pessimists base their claims on the same national and global mineral production statistics and estimates for mineral resources and reserves. 40 − 42 Whether these data are at all suitable for quantifying long-term mineral depletion is questioned by recent studies. 11 , 43 − 46 Various authors highlight significant uncertainties regarding conceptual methods for estimation, classification, and spatial aggregation of mineral resources and reserves across all data sources, particularly for critical raw materials.…”