The document discusses material risk and access to technology minerals that are critical to European industry. It identifies 14 such minerals and analyzes the supply risks and the ability of the European mining sector to respond. Over 60% of reserves for most technology minerals are concentrated in just 3 countries, many in higher risk environments. Few EU companies are involved in exploration or extraction, and they face challenges in funding given the early stage and risk profile of many projects. Joint ventures are increasingly used to share risk and secure supply.

1. Material risk
Access to technology minerals
September 2010

2. In June 2010, the European Commission (EC) published a report1
which identified 14 raw mineral materials as critical to European
industry. In this paper we explore the supply risks facing producers
and consumers of these technology minerals, and assess the
European mining and metals sector’s ability to respond to the
supply chain challenge.
Michel Nestour
Director Mining & Metals
London
T: +44 (0)20 7951 4936
E: mnestour@uk.ey.com
5
Rare Earths
4.5
4
PGM
3.5
3
Supply risk
Germanium Niobium
Antimony
Magnesium
2.5 Gallium
2 Indium
Tungsten
Barytes
Fluorspar
1.5
Beryllium Graphite
Cobalt
Tantalum
1
Lithium Magnesite Chromium
Rhenium
Limestone Vanadium
Borates Tellurium Molybdenum
0.5 Diatomite Bentonite Zinc
Perlite Gypsum Manganese
Clays Silver Iron
Talc Silica Aluminium Bauxite Nickel
Feldspar Copper
0
Titanium
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Economic importance
Source: Critical raw materials for the EU: report of the Ad-Hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materials, European Commission, June 2010.
1
Critical raw materials for the EU: report of the Ad-Hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materials, European Commission, June 2010.
Material risk Access to technology minerals

3. Material risk
Access to technology minerals
Critical raw materials for the European Union (EU)
The world’s population growth and rapid industrialization have EC experts have identified a selection of 14 raw materials as
led to a swift increase in demand for metal intensive technology critical, out of 41 minerals and metals analyzed. These materials
such as LCD screens, hybrid cars and wind turbine magnets. The are referred to in this paper as “technology minerals”.
emergence of China as a metal superpower and its insatiable thirst
The EC study, Critical raw materials for the EU, used a methodology
for minerals to support its economic development, coupled with
based on criticality, designed to account for the supply risk and the
worldwide increased dependence on these technologies, prompted
economic importance of each mineral and metal considered.
the EC to design an integrated strategy for raw materials in
November 2008. The goal is to ensure that future EU technology The minerals considered as critical are circled in yellow in the
industries can adequately prepare themselves to face increasing diagram opposite.
global competition for key mineral inputs.
The response from the rest of the world
Globally, other law makers, federal agencies and companies are heavily backed by the government, has taken it to Vietnam and
beginning to see increasing supply risks dependence and are Kazakhstan. US policy makers are pursuing a rare earths plan with
now looking at what needs to be done to secure resources. In the Rare Earths Supply Technology and Resources Transformation
the case of rare earths, Korean companies aim to obtain rare- (RESTART) Act, which aims to establish a working group to assess
earth resources from China by equity participation in Chinese and monitor strategic need for rare earths, create a national
companies, while Japan has begun an unprecedented number of stockpile, facilitate financing for domestic production and support
exploration projects and acquisitions outside China in an effort innovation and workforce development to support the industry.
to secure supply. Japan’s search for rare earth investments,
Material risk Access to technology minerals 1

4. Why worry now about technology minerals?
Exploitation of the identified technology minerals is dependent
The availability of technological minerals appears to be on the sector’s ability to: identify and commercially extract the
increasingly under pressure. minerals from either an accessible and large enough mineral
This is due to: deposit, or from smaller mineral deposits of high grade minerals;
► New demand from emerging markets or to commercially recycle the mineral harvested from existing
metal fabrication. In the case of rare earths, an additional
► The impact of the recent economic crisis on the
complexity arises from the fact that the mineral composition
availability of funding, and, in turn, on exploration and
of rare earths deposits usually includes all of the 17 rare earth
production spend
elements1 in varying proportions. The demand pattern is different
► Continued advances in technology application for each of the 17 elements according to their various applications.
► Investors’ limited knowledge and understanding of the
A number of challenges arise for EU (listed or headquartered)
technology minerals
companies in making the decision to explore or extract such
However, the main perceived threat is a change in geopolitical- technology minerals. These include:
economic frameworks, which could disrupt supply and demand
► The availability of an accessible mineral deposit capable of
patterns and ultimately lead to protectionism.
economic extraction
We believe that, assuming demand continues to rise, this
► Legislative regimes, mining regulations, political systems and
scenario is unlikely to occur over the long term as market
social and environmental risks
solutions will prevail — for example, price increases will
lead to new exploration, long term supply agreements and ► Availability of funding to develop the mines
joint ventures.
► Level of customer demand for the ores
Nevertheless, if the EU mining and metals industry is to remain
In the following pages we address the above mentioned challenges
competitive in the future supply of these critical technological
in the context of technology minerals by looking specifically at:
minerals, and if customers are to limit their supply chain risks,
now is the time to take notice. A strategy needs to be developed ► How many EU companies are involved in the exploration/
for technology minerals supply, potentially with the support of a extraction of technology minerals?
broader incentivized investment framework.
► How geographically concentrated are the global reserves of
technology minerals?
► Where these technology minerals are located
► The stability of the mining environment in which these
technology mineral reserves are located
► The sources of funding available to develop
technology minerals
► The potential market size and demand for these technology
minerals and the influence of mineral substitutions or price
1
Rare earth elements include: yttrium, scandium,
lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium,
promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium,
terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium,
ytterbium and lutetium.
2 Material risk Access to technology minerals

5. Exploration or extraction of technology minerals
by EU companies
We have identified 36 companies listed or headquartered in the EU About half of those identified EU companies are UK listed or
involved in the exploration or extraction of technology minerals, headquartered. However, the majority of their ore deposits are
based on information in the public domain. The primary focus of located outside the EU. Certain companies are in fact subsidiaries
these companies is on platinum group metals (PGMs), magnesium, of larger groups such as CAMEC (now part of ENRC) or Glebe
fluorspar and tungsten. Often the same company will have several Mining Limited (part of Ineos Group).
projects covering several technology minerals. Conversely, there
are currently no EU listed or headquartered companies which are
involved in extraction or exploration of beryllium.
10
9
8
Number of European companies
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Fluorspar Magnesium Graphite Antimony Rare Earths Cobalt Niobium Tungsten Tantalum Indium1 PGMs Beryllium Germanium1 Gallium1
compounds 2
Source: Global OneSource, London Stock Exchange, Raw Materials Group and EY research. It excludes diversified miners such as BHP Billiton,
Rio Tinto, Anglo American and Xstrata.
1
Includes refiners as by-product.
2
Based on magnesite.
Material risk Access to technology minerals 3

6. How geographically concentrated are the global
reserves of technology minerals?
Our findings suggest that, for the majority of the technology view, a high level of geographical reserve concentration poses an
minerals, the three largest reserves account for over 60% of total additional risk to the supply chain for such technology minerals. It
global reserves1, by volume. This means that, with the exception increases the economic influence of a sector in a local economy. It
of gallium, indium and fluorspar, over 60% of each mineral’s total also increases the risk that such economies may decide to process
reserves are concentrated in three or fewer geographic regions. the minerals locally to create higher value-add products instead of
This concentration level is higher than we see for bauxite and simply exporting the minerals overseas for further processing.
iron ore, indicated in the chart for comparative purposes. In our
Mineral global reserve concentration %
100%
80%
Concentration %
60%
40%
20%
0%
Germanium PGMs Niobium Tantalum Graphite Cobalt Tungsten Antimony Rare Magnesium Beryllium Bauxite Gallium Indium Iron ore Fluorspar
Earths compounds
Source: Mineral commodity summaries, USGS, January 2010; Mikolajczak, Clair , “Availability of indium and gallium”, September 2009,
via www.indium.com.
1
The level of global reserve concentration ratio is estimated as the proportion of the
top three largest identified estimated mineral reserves by volume divided by total
estimated reserves (as compiled by the US Geological Survey (USGS) as at 2009
from a variety of sources such as mineral commodity national reserves information,
and in their absence, other sources such as academic articles, company reports,
trade journals and articles), except for niobium, germanium, tantalum and indium,
where only the top one or two countries publicly report data. For beryllium, we
have used the world resources approximation from the USGS as reserves are not
sufficiently well delineated to report consistent figures by geography. For gallium,
we have used as a concentration proxy, the bauxite concentration, as gallium is
primarily a by-product of bauxite and there is no gallium reserve publicly disclosed.
4 Material risk Access to technology minerals

7. Where are these concentrated mineral
reserves located?
Sixty percent of the technology mineral reserves are concentrated the two largest reserves in volume, the concentration percentage
in three geographic areas: Russia, North Korea (predominantly increases to 68% and China accounts for more than 50% of the
magnesium) and China. Discounting magnesium and fluorspar, global reserves.
Geographic concentration of Geographic concentration of 12 critical global resources
14 critical global resources (excluding magnesium and fluorspar)
Russia
24%
Others Others
40% 32%
China
51%
China
19%
US
7%
North Korea CIS
17% 10%
Source: Mineral commodity summaries, USGS, January 2010; Mikolajczak, Clair, “Availability of indium and gallium”, September 2009, via www.indium.com.
Material risk Access to technology minerals 5

8. How stable is the mining environment in which
these technology mineral reserves are located?
We have cross-referenced the top three technology mineral
reserves’ geographic location (where available) with widely
available qualitative studies. The map opposite shows in visual
form our analysis of these countries in terms of perceived risks.
Our observations suggest that a significant proportion of these
minerals are located in countries considered by these studies to
represent a higher risk of instability.
Source: 2010 Ranking of countries for mining investment, Behre Dolbear
Group inc., via http://www.dolbear.com; IHS Global Insight Country Risk
Ratings Analysis (as at 22/9/2010) via http://www.ihsglobalinsight.com and USA
Transparency International Corruption Perception Index 2009, via http://www.
Rare earths
transparency.org; Reserves location sourced from Mineral commodity survey,
USGS, January 2010; Mikolajczak, Clair (Director of Metals and Chemicals) Tungsten
“Availability of Indium and Gallium”, September 2009 via www.indium.com. PGMs
1
Gallium reserve location was not available publicly so bauxite location was used Beryllium
Cuba
as a proxy. Germanium
Cobalt
Mexico
Fluorspar
Graphite
Key:
Negligible risk
Brazil
Niobium
Low risk Tantalum
Medium risk
High risk
Very high risk
6 Material risk Access to technology minerals

9. Russia
Magnesium
Antimony
Tungsten
Indium
PGMs
Rare earths (CIS)
North Korea
Magnesium
China
Fluorspar
Magnesium
Graphite
Antimony
Rare earths
Tungsten
India Indium
Guinea
Gallium1 Graphite
DRC Thailand
Cobalt Antimony
Vietnam
Gallium1
South Africa
Fluorspar
PGMs
Australia
Cobalt
Tantalum
Gallium1
Material risk Access to technology minerals 7

10. What sources of funding are available to develop
technology minerals?
Our research on our universe of EU listed or headquartered
companies suggests that, since 2005, they have raised US$2.2b Equity issues by EU technology minerals companies
through the stock market. In 2009 and 2010 YTD, more than 50% 1,038
14
1100
of the capital raised was by a single company, Lonmin plc. The
1000 12
companies that have raised these funds are primarily focused on 900
the PGMs and cobalt. 800 10
Proceeds US$m
The majority of our sample has limited access to the debt market 700
8
due to the early stage or perceived high risk profile of technology 600
Number
500
mineral operations. This is compounded by the fact that the 6
400 367
demand for such minerals is a relatively new phenomenon, arising 299
300 274
from increasing technology applications and the desire to bring 200
223 4
these to global mass markets. A case in point is the ubiquitous 100
2
iPhone, which did not exist until June 2007.
Other alternative sources of funding may include joint ventures. 0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
The rationale for entering a joint venture varies from transaction
to transaction and may include: Proceeds Number of issuers
► Spreading the risk Source: Thomson Reuters, Ernst & Young research
► Matching of capital to assets
► State-backed Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corp
► Securing supply in the face of a possible minerals (JOGMEC) has agreed to explore and develop mineral
supply-demand imbalance resources, with a particular focus on rare earths and rare
metals, in Namibia (July 2010). JOGMEC’s role will be to
► Securing price in exchange for off-take agreement and
provide advanced technology for the analysis of geological
provision of funding from customers
data and to help Japanese companies join exploration projects.
Recently announced joint ventures in technology minerals include: JOGMEC aims to stockpile two months’ worth of the special
► Graphit Kropfmuhl, a subsidiary of Dutch group AMG metals required in electronics, steel, and car manufacturing to
Advanced Metallurgical Group N.V., entered into a joint venture guard against price and supply volatility.
with Extrativa Grafite do Brasil and REP Minerals to secure ► In August 2010 JOGMEC also announced a partnership with
graphite (announced in February 2010). Midland Exploration Inc., (a Canadian exploration company) on
► Planet Resource Recovery Inc., a developer, manufacturer the Ytterby rare earths project.
and marketer of “green” technologies for the remediation and ► Advanced Metallurgical Group (AMG) signed an agreement
recovery of the planet’s resources, entered a joint venture with to buy antimony mining rights in Turkey to secure future raw
Franklin Mining inc., to develop and operate the San Antonia de material supply in September 2010.
Turiri Antimony mine in Bolivia (announced in April 2010).
Outside of the technology minerals, Bolloré, a developer of lithium-
► Toshiba Corp has signed a definitive agreement with metal-polymer batteries, and Eramet, a mining group, signed an
Kazakhstan’s state-operated nuclear firm Kazatomprom to exploration contract in February 2010 with a call option for lithium
form a joint venture in September 2010 to focus on the global deposits with Argentinean company Minera Santa Rita. Similarly,
distribution of niobium-based products to the superconductor in June 2010, JOGMEC agreed to invest US$4m in the Borate
industry, tantalum and rare earths such as dysprosium. Hills Project to be a joint venture partner with American Lithium
Minerals, Inc. (a US based mineral exploration company).
Most of these examples represent early indications of mining
companies and industrial groups jointly collaborating to find
solutions to the supply chain challenge.
8 Material risk Access to technology minerals

11. What is the potential market size and demand for
technology minerals and are these influenced by
mineral substitutions or price?
With the exception of fluorspar, magnesium compounds and In addition, one of the factors driving the potential demand for
graphite, the global production of technology minerals is well technology minerals will be the degree of possible substitution
below a million tons each per annum, and significantly below the and future technology applications. Possible substitutions
production levels of iron ore (2.3b tons) and bauxite (201m tons), concerning technology minerals can be summarized into three
illustrated for comparative purposes in Appendix 1. This highlights broad categories (see table below).
both the limited availability and rate of production or recycling of
The degrees of substitution appear to be limited. However, this
these minerals.
is a dynamic process which is subject to constant change due
One reason for such limited production rates to date is that these to evolving technology research and development, discovery
minerals currently represent relatively small markets (with the and application.
exception of magnesium compounds, PGMs, cobalt and niobium
Should there not be an appropriate substitute for a particular
which have an indicative annual global market size of over US$2b).
technology mineral, or where production of technology minerals
This has historically reduced the incentive of the mining sector to
could not be increased, then the price of that mineral will increase
invest in these markets.
accordingly, assuming demand increases. This could impact
In its report, the EC presented an analysis of future demand the end consumer by contributing to either the scarcity of the
based on technology change. From this analysis, it identified product itself or increasing its overall price. However, technology
gallium, indium and germanium as the three minerals that should minerals comprise only a small proportion of the end product and
experience the largest demand growth. The table in Appendix 2, as contribute only a modest amount to the total price paid by the
presented in the EC report, shows that demand for these products consumer (e.g., it is estimated that the cost of indium in a 42”
will more than double by 2030. TV is less than 1% of the TV price). It is important therefore that
the industry producing the end product ensures that it maintains
The supply and demand for gallium, indium and germanium
a fluid supply-chain through involvement in upstream mineral
minerals, which are by-products of bauxite, zinc, lead and copper
procurement (i.e., exploration or extraction) through joint venture
production, is not only dependent on emerging technology
or long term supply agreements.
demand, but also (and more significantly) on the supply and
demand for bauxite, zinc, lead and copper. Each of these in turn
responds to its own supply and demand cycle in line with expected
future economic growth and future metal price trends.
Technology minerals Main industrial use Substitution
Antimony Flame retardant No effective substitute for its major application
Beryllium, germanium, niobium, rare earths, Electronic, steel, construction, automotive, IT, Difficult to substitute or where there are
tantalum and tungsten telecommunication and mining possibilities there may be a loss of performance
or higher costs
Cobalt, fluorspar, gallium, graphite, indium, Alloys, battery, chemicals, construction, steel, Limited substitute or only for certain application
magnesium and PGMs semi-conductors, telecommunication, renewable
technology, electronic and automotive
Source: Ernst & Young research
Material risk Access to technology minerals 9

12. Is the EU mining and metals sector ready to
answer the technology minerals supply chain
issue highlighted by the EC?
The number of EU companies involved in technology minerals
exploration or extraction is small and in our view currently
insufficient to respond to the technology minerals supply chain
issue. The main reasons for this timid response are:
► The mineral ore deposits tend to be small when compared
with iron ore or bauxite. The minerals are themselves often
extracted as by-products of other more plentiful minerals,
which affects their extraction rate. For example, the primary
extraction of gallium does not depend solely on the demand
for, and price of, gallium. The additional revenues from
gallium’s production are small compared with the overall
income generated by bauxite extraction and this can adversely
affect a miner’s readiness to expand its gallium extraction. In
addition, it often takes between seven to ten years before a
new discovery can start to produce minerals.
► The mineral deposits tend to be located in regions where
mining laws and political regimes are complex or challenging.
► The availability of debt to finance mine development was
significantly impacted by the global financial crisis and risk
aversion, and economic uncertainty will continue to impact
investors’ appetite for investment in exploration1. However,
mineral technology companies have been able to raise funding
through the equity market since 2005 with a particular focus
on cobalt and PGMs. Alternative sources of funding are still
available and many early stage projects in other mineral
groups have successfully attracted investment from strategic
partners acquiring minority equity stakes.
► Investors have limited experience and knowledge of the
technology minerals fundamentals to date as this is a complex
new area.
► The demand for technology minerals is increasing but these
markets still remain small in comparison to those of other
minerals such as bauxite or iron ore. As a result, they are yet to
attract the full attention of the mining community.
Failure to address the above challenges promptly could cause
the EU technology industry to dwindle over time. We are already
experiencing a marked decrease in the amount of these minerals
exported from emerging economies, as a result of increasing
internal demand from their technology industry, with the
announced decreasing export quota from China rare earths
industry on 7 July 20102.
Other regions of the world are beginning to take both public and 1
See previous Ernst & Young papers, The wall of debt (October 2009) and Life after
debt (May 2009). www.ey.com/miningandmetals
private sector action to address this risk – Europe cannot afford to 2
“China reduces rare earths export quota by 72%” from China Daily via
be left behind. www.english.mofcom.gov.cn
10 Material risk Access to technology minerals

13. How can the EU mining and metals sector
better position itself to fulfil the demand for
technology minerals?
Successfully fulfilling the demand for technology minerals must Ernst & Young’s experience with mining and metals companies
be dependent on whether the EU consumers of these technology around the world suggests that EU companies that wish to develop
minerals have the requisite appetite for active participation in in this sector will require support and innovative thinking, given
the technology mineral supply-chain. In the current environment, the challenges highlighted.
it is doubtful that the response could solely come from the EU
There are steps that can be taken to address these challenges:
exploration/extraction sector.
► Development of growth strategies (e.g., greenfield projects or
Early indications concerning other minerals (e.g., lithium) suggest
company acquisitions) to compete with foreign state owned
that joint responses between mining companies and industry
enterprises in geographies where local knowledge is key.
consumers to find creative and individualized solutions are possible,
such as the proposed lithium joint venture between Eramet, Bolloré ► Lobbying of government and tax authorities to ensure that the
and Minera Santa Rita. This will take industrial companies into the authorities understand the risks associated with inaction in the
unfamiliar territory of M&A or joint venture with junior miners. technology minerals sector.
Unfamiliarity should not prevent the necessary actions.
► Development of new relationships and cultural understanding
Interestingly, opportunities are emerging with one of the major between miners and technology companies to facilitate future
technology mineral rich countries, China, which has allowed joint supply strategies.
foreign companies to enter processing joint ventures with Chinese
rare earths businesses for example. China has also recently
For further information on how Ernst & Young can help
stepped up its efforts on research and development of high-end
with your material risk, please contact Michel Nestour
technology for the rare earths downstream industry by setting up
a special research fund of between 300m Yuan and 450m Yuan on +44 (0)20 7951 4936, mnestour@uk.ey.com or your
(US$44.1m and US$66.1m). Such cross-border joint ventures can local Ernst & Young contact.
be complex but strategically rewarding.
The EC needs to decide what the next steps will be to ensure that
the EU mining and metals industry takes a greater interest in
technology minerals and remains competitive in this area. This
could take various forms including:
► Tax policy changes including tax breaks (such as flow-through
financing) for EU based exploration and extraction activities in
the specified metals.
► Setting up a state-owned enterprise, to take responsibility for
exploration or provide centralized funding support for private
exploration or extraction companies.
► State-owned geological surveys for early exploration.
► Creation of national stockpiles.
► Promotion of technology minerials recycling in the EU.
► Creating more innovative supply chains for key metals that
incentivise the secure supply of key scarce materials. Such
supply chain features will often attach suitable premiums
on the necessary materials that will enable the creation of
capital or the acceptance of greater sourcing and production
risk. Such premiums may provide incentives for arbitrage
opportunities from otherwise apparently closed markets.
Material risk Access to technology minerals 11

14. Appendix 1: Illustrative technology minerals
market size, use, production and reserves
Indicative
Leader Reserves annual
Mine Prod. 08 Mine Prod. 09E share of 09E estimates Indicative market size
Minerals Source Industrial use (metric ton) (metric ton) production (metric ton) price ($/kg) ($m)c
Iron ore Mined Steel 2,220,000,000 2,300,000,000 39% China 77 billion tons 0.15 345,000
Bauxite Mined Aluminium 205,000,000 201,000,000 31% Australia 27 billion tons 0.028 (d) 5,628
Magnesium Mined Casting alloys, 5,430,000 4,990,000 56% China 2.3 billion tons 2.85 14,221
compounds packaging (excludes US) (excludes US)
PGMsa Mined Automotive and 393 373 58% 71,000 Pt – 48,900 11,746
electronics South Africa
Pd -15,600
Cobalt Nickel or copper Alloys and 75,900 62,000 40% DRC 6,600,000 41.9 2,597
by-product rechargeable
or mined batteries
Niobium Mined Steel or 62,900 62,000 91% Brazil 2,946,000 41d 2,542
construction
Antimony Mined Flame retardant 197,000 187,000 90% China 2,100,000 9.6 1,795
Tungsten Mined Mining and 55,900 58,000 81% China 2,800,000 30 1,740
construction
Graphite Mined Steel 1,120,000 1,130,000 70% China 71,000,000 1.2d 1,400
Rare earths Mined Automotive, 124,000 124,000 96% China 99,000,000 5.7b 710
renewables
technology
Fluorspar Mined Chemical and steel 6,040,000 5,100,000 58% China 230 million 0.11c 561
tons
Indium Zinc, lead, Electronic 570 600 50% China 49,000 575 345
copper and tin
by-product
Tantalum Mined IT and 1,170 1,160 48% USA 110,000 87.1 101
telecommunication
Germanium Copper, lead or Telecommunication 140 140 71% China 450f 638 89
zinc by-product and solar
Gallium Bauxite and zinc Semi-conductor 111 78 Not available Not available 600 47
by-product and renewables
technology
Beryllium Mined Electronic 200 140 85% USA Not available 264d 37
Source: Mineral commodity summaries, USGS, January 2010; MetalBulletin (23 August 2010); www.mineralprices.com (27 August 2010); and Mikolajczak, Clair (Director of
Metals and Chemicals) - “Availability of indium and gallium”, September 2009, via www.indium.com.
a
Based on platinum and palladium only, production in kilograms. b Based on rare earths oxides year end 2009. c Based on year end 2009 price for metallurgical grade.
d
Based on 2009 year end price. e estimated. f USA only; other countries not available.
12 Material risk Access to technology minerals

15. Appendix 2: Global demand for
technology minerals
Demand in 2006 Estimated demand in
Production in 2006 from emerging 2030 from emerging
Minerals Source (ton) technology (ton) technology (ton) Indicator 20061 Indicator 20301
Gallium Bauxite and zinc 152 28 603 0.18 3.97
by-product
Indium Zinc, lead, copper 581 234 1,911 0.4 3.29
and tin by–product
Germanium Copper, lead or zinc 100 28 220 0.28 2.20
by-product
Neodynium Mined 16,800 4,000 27,900 0.23 1.66
(rare earth)
PGM (Platinum) Mined 255 Very small 345 0 1.35
PGM (Palladium) Mined 267 23 77 0.09 0.29
Tantalum Mined 1,384 551 1,410 0.4 1.02
Cobalt Nickel or copper 62,279 12,820 26,860 0.21 0.43
by-product or mined
Ruthenium Mined 29 0 1 0 0.03
Niobium Mined 44,531 288 1,410 0.01 0.03
Antimony Mined 172,223 28 71 <0.01 <0.01
Source: Critical raw materials for the EU: report of the Ad-Hoc Working Group on defining critical raw materials”, European Commission, June 2010, and Annexe V to the
Report; Ernst & Young research
1
The indicator measures the share of the demand resulting from driving emerging technologies in total today’s demand of each raw material in 2006 and 2030
Material risk Access to technology minerals 13

16. Ernst & Young’s Global Mining & Metals Center
Ernst & Young’s Global Mining & Metals Center brings together a worldwide team of professionals Ernst & Young
to help you achieve your potential — a team with deep technical experience in providing assurance,
Assurance | Tax | Transactions | Advisory
tax, transaction and advisory services. The Center works to anticipate market trends, identify the
implications and develop points of view on relevant industry issues. Ultimately, it enables us to
help you meet your goals and compete more effectively. It’s how Ernst & Young makes a difference. About Ernst & Young
Ernst & Young is a global leader in
assurance, tax, transaction and advisory
Global Mining & Metals Leader, Europe, Middle East, Austria, Germany, Switzerland services. Worldwide, our 144,000 people
and Oceania India and Africa Reto Hofer
Mike Elliott Michael Lynch-Bell
are united by our shared values and an
+41 58 286 7503
+61 29 248 4588 +44 (0)20 7951 3064 unwavering commitment to quality. We
reto.hofer@ch.ey.com
michael.elliott@au.ey.com mlynchbell@uk.ey.com make a difference by helping our people, our
clients and our wider communities achieve
South America United Kingdom Belgium and the Netherlands their potential.
Carlos Assis Lee Downham Jeff Sluijter
Ernst & Young refers to the global
+55 21 2109 1606 +44 (0)20 7951 2178 +31 10 406 8331
carlos.assis@br.ey.com ldownham@uk.ey.com jeff.sluijter@nl.ey.com
organization of member firms of
Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which
China Africa CES* is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young
Peter Markey Adrian Macartney Jacek Hryniuk Global Limited, a UK company limited by
+86 21 2228 2616 +27 11 772 3052 +48 22 5577514 guarantee, does not provide services to
peter.markey@cn.ey.com adrian.macartney@za.ey.com jacek.hryniuk@pl.ey.com clients. For more information about our
organization, please visit www.ey.com
Canada France and Luxembourg Italy, Spain, Portugal
Tom Whelan Christian Mion Basilio Gomez Salinas © 2010 EYGM Limited.
+1 604 891 8381 +22 430 41 21 82 +34 915 727285 All Rights Reserved.
tom.s.whelan@ca.ey.com christian.mion@fr.ey.com basilio.gomezsalinas@es.ey.com
EYG no. ER0019
United States Commonwealth of
Andy Miller Independent States
+1 314 290 1205 Evgeni Khrustalev
andy.miller@ey.com +7 495 648 9624
evgeni.khrustalev@ru.ey.com
Alexei Ivanov
+7 495 228 3661
alexei.ivanov@ru.ey.com
India
Anjani Agrawal
+91 22 4035 6380
anjani.agrawal@in.ey.com
* Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova,
Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Turkey.
For further information on our global capabilities, visit www.ey.com/miningandmetals
Our views and opinions
We regularly produce papers that address some of the relevant and timely issues facing
the sector.
Our most recent publications include:
► Fraud and corruption in mining and metals. To meet rising demand, mining and In line with Ernst & Young’s commitment to
minimize its impact on the environment, this
metals companies are operating in territories that provide increased exposure document has been printed on paper with a high
to corruption. Today’s slimmed down control environments by virtue of cost recycled content.
reductions from the financial crisis only puts companies at greater risk. See which
This publication contains information in summary form
indicators will help you detect and prevent fraudulent and corrupt practices and is therefore intended for general guidance only. It
is not intended to be a substitute for detailed research
► 2010 business risks facing the mining and metals sector. The 2010 Ernst & Young or the exercise of professional judgment. Neither EYGM
Limited nor any other member of the global Ernst & Young
business risk report identifies the top 10 global strategic risks in the mining and organization can accept any responsibility for loss
metals sector. We also identify specific measures we believe company leadership occasioned to any person acting or refraining from
action as a result of any material in this publication. On
should adopt to manage these risks in today’s more challenging economic climate. any specific matter, reference should be made to the
appropriate advisor.
Publications can be viewed and downloaded at www.ey.com/miningandmetals 1017424.indd (UK) 09/10. Creative Services Group.