Auping WL - SPM5910 - Thesis Report - The Uncertain Future of Copper

The uncertain future of copper
An Exploratory System Dynamics Model and Analysis of the global

copper system in the next 40 years
Delft University of Technology

Faculty Technology, Policy and Management
Master Systems Engineering, Policy Analysis and Management
SPM 5910 – SEPAM Thesis Project
Chairman graduation committee: Prof.dr.ir. W.A.H. Thissen

1st Supervisor TU Delft: Dr. E. Pruyt
2nd Supervisor TU Delft: Dr.ir. G.P.J. Dijkema
External supervisor TNO: Dr. A.G.T.M. Bastein
November 2011
W.L. Auping, 1014153

ii
Preface
The rough scope of my graduation project was clear from an early moment before the real start of the project.
Together with my supervisor Erik Pruyt, I decided that after my bachelor project about Lithium scarcity (Auping,
2009), the issues about mineral scarcity still existed and were very suitable to research with his newly developed
method Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis (ESDMA. Pruyt, 2010b), which allows exploring the
future of a system, instead of trying to predict it.
The second step was meeting with my second supervisor, Ton Bastein of TNO, also in the period before
my thesis project started. With him I talked about possibilities for a more precise scope of the project in
preparation. After discussing practically all rare earths, the platinum group and “The metal wheel” (Verhoef,
Dijkema & Reuter, 2004), he came with the thesis work of Rembrandt Koppelaar (2011) about mineral cost
developments and told me that despite all the attention mineral scarcity receives the last years, copper seems to
be neglected in this issue.
We decided to start a modelling project of the global copper system. The goal of this research should be
to draw attention to the fact that also bulk metals like copper need consideration in the discussion of mineral
scarcity. An extra advantage would be the fact that the copper market is well documented and relatively
transparent when compared to for example, the relative dearth of information about the rare earth or lithium
markets. Despite this, the omnipresent uncertainties give an excellent opportunity to explore their effects on the
possible behaviour of the copper system.
Erik agreed with this subject because it combined three important subjects: energy transition,
geopolitical issues and modelling uncertainty. In this way the project would fit very well in my master
specialisations: Modelling, Simulation & Gaming combined with Energy & Industry. My other two supervisors were
quickly found: Gerard Dijkema, the industry expert of my faculty and Professor Thissen of the department of
Policy Analysis under which this research will be done.
This research study is thus written as a thesis report for the master degree course “Systems Engineering, Policy
Analysis and Management” of the Faculty of Technology, Policy and Management at the Delft University of
Technology. The thesis research was performed in cooperation with the division “Built Environment and
Geosciences” of the Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (TNO).
The target readership of this report embraces anyone who is interested in mineral (metal) scarcity
issues. But, in addition, it is intended to be of specific interest for policy makers and researchers in the fields of
sustainability, industry and recycling, both on a national and a European level. Finally, it aims at giving a clear
example of the use and application of this new technique in the field of System Dynamics (SD).
This thesis has four parts. First is the introduction, in which the problem is introduced, the relevance and
precise scope is discussed, the research question is explained together with the sub questions and the use of and
choice for the ESDMA research methodology is explained. The second part is about the world copper system, it
discusses the copper demand and energy needs for producing it, the current and potential structure of the copper
market and uncertainties and risks in this market. The third part is an exploratory model analysis where possible
scenarios and behaviour of the modelled copper market are given and the influence they might have on the
future availability of copper is examined. In the last part, the evaluation, policy options are discussed which might
counter unwanted effects of the system noticed in the study, conclusions are drawn on the subject and a
reflection is made on the way the research was performed. To keep the report readable for non System Dynamics
experts, all specifications of the used models are given in the appendices.
iii
Some valuable information about the functioning of copper mining and the development of copper
mining capacity was further provided by Piet Hein van der Klein, who owns my gratitude for his contribution to
this research
In conducting the Exploratory Modelling and Anlaysis (EMA) part of this research, I received much
support from two postdoctoral researchers of the Policy Analysis group. The first is Jan Kwakkel, who helped me
using the ESDMA interface, encouraged me to try to write Python scripts for transferring model variables to
documents, helped me to write a script which enables using debugging data to develop debugging models and
who helped me developing a 3D visualisation for the distribution of runs in the uncertainty space of a Key
Performance Indicator. The second is Gönenç Yücel, who made it possible to classify runs by behaviour.
Final thanks are for my supervisors, professor Thissen, Erik Pruyt, Gerard Dijkema and Ton Bastein for
their intensive supervision (especially Erik and Ton) and their valuable feedback. Last but not least, I thank
Dieneke for her support and patience during my thesis work.
Delft, 28 October 2011, Willem Auping
iv
Abstract
High copper prices have not led to a place for this metal in the debate about mineral scarcity, while copper is a
base metal which has many uses and is vital for developments in the energy transition. In this research the global
copper system is examined from the perspective of the development of supply and demand and the effects
structural and parametric uncertainties in the system have on the development of behaviour in this system. The
question immediately arises:
What are the effects of parametric and structural uncertainties on the possible future behaviour of the
copper system?
The research approach is Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis (ESDMA) and the period the
copper system is examined is 2000 till 2050. For the analysis three different System Dynamics (SD) models were
built, with regard to existing literature about the structure and functioning of the different elements in the copper
system. These models were connected to a python shell to perform the Exploratory Model Analysis (EMA).
The effects of a specific ESDMA structure, a randomised economic feed, were first tested in this
research. The conclusions were that, mainly due to the fact that this feed mainly influenced stocks in the system,
the system behaviour was not significantly different due to this feed. Henceforth the other experiments were
performed without the economic feed.
During the interpretation of these experiments it became clear that a mistake were made in the
experimental setup. The lower bounds for the four coefficients relevant for the Recycling Input Rate (RIR) were
taken too low, causing the RIR in effect to have an overly low modus, as well as a lower average value for the
copper consumption. While this potentially could have changed the behaviour of the system, a new experiment
with the corrected bounds has let to similar outcomes.
The behavioural conclusions of these experiments are that the copper consumption is likely to decline
slowly in the coming 40 years. This reduction in consumption also leads to very high Reserve over Production
(R/P) ratios. The system has further a high risk for volatile price movements, caused by a disbalance between
copper supply and demand. This and the importance of copper for our economy make it a vulnerable resource,
which needs to be monitored more closely.
Six different policy designs were tested in this research to try to counter potential unwanted effects in
the copper system. These policies were designed from the perspective of European stakeholders. Performing
experiments with these policies has lead to the conclusion that policies aiming at improving the collection rate of
copper products at their end of life in combination with improving the Recycling Efficiency Rate (RER) leads on
average to lower copper prices. The copper price volatility was lowered by a policy regarding the implementation
of a strategic reserve.
Keywords: Copper, Mineral scarcity, Energy transition, System Dynamics, Exploratory Modelling and
Analysis, Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis
v
Contents
Preface ...................................................................................................................................................... iii
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................... v
Table of abbreviations ............................................................................................................................... viii
Table of boxes ............................................................................................................................................ ix
Table of figures ........................................................................................................................................... x
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................2
1.1. The energy transition .........................................................................................................................2
1.2. Emerging economies ..........................................................................................................................2
1.3. Uncertainties in the copper system ......................................................................................................3
1.4. Research introduction .........................................................................................................................3
2. Problem exploration .................................................................................................................................4
2.1. Problem exploration ...........................................................................................................................4
2.2. Problem statement .............................................................................................................................5
2.3. Research objectives............................................................................................................................5
2.4. Choice for research method and modelling software ..............................................................................5
2.5. Scope of research ..............................................................................................................................6
2.6. Research questions ............................................................................................................................6
3. Research methodology .............................................................................................................................8
3.1. Exploratory Modelling and Analysis (EMA) ............................................................................................8
3.2. Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis (ESDMA) ..............................................................9
3.3. Research design .................................................................................................................................9
4. Copper demand and substitution ............................................................................................................. 12
4.1. Main drivers for copper demand and model varieties ........................................................................... 12
4.2. Copper substitution .......................................................................................................................... 16
5. Current and potential structure copper supply system ............................................................................... 18
5.1. Resources and reserves .................................................................................................................... 18
5.2. Mining, smelting/SX-EW and refining ................................................................................................. 20
5.3. Deep sea mining .............................................................................................................................. 22
5.4. Copper recycling or secondary copper ................................................................................................ 24
6. Uncertainties and risks in the copper system ............................................................................................ 25
6.1. Parametric uncertainties ................................................................................................................... 25
6.2. Structural uncertainties ..................................................................................................................... 25
6.3. System risks .................................................................................................................................... 26
7. Behaviour and scenarios of the copper models .......................................................................................... 30
7.1. The effect of the ESDMA economic growth structure ........................................................................... 30
7.2. Behaviour observed in all model varieties ........................................................................................... 32
7.3. Behavioural differences between the models ...................................................................................... 37
7.4. Scenarios and risks displayed by the copper models ............................................................................ 39
7.5. Less valid outcomes ......................................................................................................................... 39
7.6. Observations from new data ............................................................................................................. 41
8. Policy design for the copper system ......................................................................................................... 42
vi
8.1. Development and testing of policy options.......................................................................................... 42
8.2. Basic setup for the policy options ...................................................................................................... 42
8.3. The different policy options ............................................................................................................... 43
8.4. Differences in policy design between model varieties ........................................................................... 44
9. Policy evaluation for the copper system .................................................................................................... 48
9.1. Overall effects of policies .................................................................................................................. 48
9.2. Effect of policies on copper price and consumption ............................................................................. 52
9.3. Policy design conclusions .................................................................................................................. 55
10. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................... 56
10.1. Possible future behaviour of the copper system ................................................................................. 56
10.2. Policy designs for the copper system ................................................................................................ 57
11. Reflections ........................................................................................................................................... 58
11.1. Pitfalls in using a “traditional” SD model for ESDMA ........................................................................... 58
11.2. Limitations of the chosen research methodology ............................................................................... 58
11.3. Possibilities for further research ....................................................................................................... 59
11.4. Validity of the research ................................................................................................................... 59
11.5. Final remarks regarding the research methodology............................................................................ 59
References ................................................................................................................................................ 60
Appendix A. Causal loop diagrams ............................................................................................................... 64
A.1. Top down........................................................................................................................................ 64
A.2. Bottom up ....................................................................................................................................... 65
A.3. Regional.......................................................................................................................................... 66
Appendix B. Model structures ...................................................................................................................... 68
B.1. Top down model .............................................................................................................................. 68
B.2. Bottom up model ............................................................................................................................. 72
B.3. Regional model ................................................................................................................................ 77
Appendix C. Model equations and uncertainties ............................................................................................ 82
Appendix D. Setup of ESDMA ...................................................................................................................... 83
D.1. Typical script for running ESDMA models ........................................................................................... 83
D.2. Script for generating graphs ............................................................................................................. 91
D.3. Script for sorting Vensim variables to a csv file ................................................................................... 92
D.4. Script for creating a debugging model ............................................................................................... 93
Appendix E. Results of ESDMA experiments .................................................................................................. 96
E.1. Experimental setup .......................................................................................................................... 96
E.2. The effect of the ESDMA economic growth structure ........................................................................... 96
E.3. Top down model .............................................................................................................................. 97
E.4. Bottom up model ........................................................................................................................... 104
E.5. Regional model .............................................................................................................................. 108
Appendix F. Minutes of personal communication with P.H. van der Kleijn ...................................................... 112
F.1. Initial e-mail to Hans de Ruiter ........................................................................................................ 112
F.2. Minutes meeting 5 July 2011 ........................................................................................................... 113
F.3. Further e-mail communication ......................................................................................................... 113
vii
Table of abbreviations
Asean-10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand,
Brunai, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam
BEV Battery (powered) Electric Vehicle
BGR Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe
CIS Commonwealth of Independent States, regional organisation of former Soviet Union republics
CLD Causal Loop Diagram
CSP Concentrated Solar Plant
Cu Cuprum, the chemical element of Copper
Dmnl Dimensionless
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone
EMA Exploratory Modelling and Analysis
EOL End of Life
ESD Exploratory System Dynamics
ESDMA Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis
EU European Union
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HEV Hybrid Electric Vehicle
ICSG International Copper Study Group
ISA International Seabed Authority
ISI Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research
JORC Australasian Joint Ore Reserves Committee
KDE Kernel Density Estimation
(K)PI (Key) Performance Indicator
LME London Metal Exchange
PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle
PRIM Patient Rule Induction Method
R/P Reserve/Production ratio (time left of production when no new reserves are discovered and the
production remains constant)
RER Recycling Efficiency Rate
RIR Recycling Input Rate - The percentage of recycled copper in the total amount of refined copper at a
given time
SD System Dynamics
SDS System Dynamics Society
SX-EW Solvant Extraction - Electro Winning
t Tonne or metric ton. Equal to 1000 kg or 1 Mg
TNO The Netherlands Organisation of Applied Scientific Research (Nederlandse Organisatie voor
toegepast-natuurwetenschappelijk onderzoek)
UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNPD United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division, Population
Estimates and Projections Section
USGS United States Geological Survey
viii
Table of boxes
Box I: System Dynamics ...............................................................................................................................8
Box II: Modelling uncertainty: Economic growth ........................................................................................... 13
Box III: Modelling uncertainty: Relations for demand .................................................................................... 15
Box IV: Modelling uncertainty: Substitution .................................................................................................. 17
Box V: Modelling uncertainty: Mining and refinery capacity ............................................................................ 21
Box VI: Modelling uncertainty: Deep sea mining capacity .............................................................................. 23
Box VII: Visualising ESDMA results .............................................................................................................. 31
Box VIII: Modelling policies: Connection of policies to the model .................................................................... 43
ix
Table of figures
Figure 2.1: Copper System diagram ...............................................................................................................6
Figure 3.1: Simple SD model .........................................................................................................................9
Figure 3.2: Traditional and two ESDMA research approaches compared .......................................................... 10
Figure 4.1: Top down intrinsic demand ........................................................................................................ 12
Figure 4.2: The economic growth structure .................................................................................................. 13
Figure 4.3: The effect of this uncertainty structure ........................................................................................ 13
Figure 4.4: Bottom up intrinsic demand ....................................................................................................... 13
Figure 4.5: The dominance scenario (Angerer et al., 2010: 18) ...................................................................... 14
Figure 4.6: The pluralism scenario (Angerer et al., 2010: 19) ......................................................................... 14
Figure 4.7: Regional approach. All variables with a green background are regional .......................................... 14
Figure 4.8: SD structure for short and long term effects on demand ............................................................... 15
Figure 4.9: Copper and aluminium price over the last 30 years (Index Mundi, 2011a, 2011b) ........................... 16
Figure 4.10: Relating copper price and the aluminium price ........................................................................... 17
Figure 4.11: SD structure for substitution in relation to demand ..................................................................... 17
Figure 5.1: Extended stock-flow diagram of the copper supply system with some connections to the demand .... 18
Figure 5.2: Relation between reserves and resources. Based on the McKelvey Box (McKelvey, 1973) ................ 18
Figure 5.3: Ore grade in relation to energy costs needed for processing copper (Skinner, 1976) ...................... 19
Figure 5.4: Typical distribution of reserve base and reserve of a mine. The split between them is the cut-off ore
grade (Kleijn, P. H. v. d., 2011). .................................................................................................................. 20
Figure 5.5: SD structure for mining capacity ................................................................................................. 22
Figure 5.6: Deep sea copper resource and reserve development .................................................................... 23
Figure 5.7: SD structure for new mining capacity .......................................................................................... 24
Figure 7.1: Global consumption of copper with economic feed, top down model .............................................. 30
Figure 7.2: Global consumption of copper without economic feed, top down model ......................................... 30
Figure 7.3: Envelope. No distinction between policies .................................................................................... 31
Figure 7.4: Envelope. There are two panes (colours are in the legend) super positioned over each other ........... 31
Figure 7.5: Lines graph .............................................................................................................................. 31
Figure 7.6: Envelopes graph with KDE ......................................................................................................... 31
Figure 7.7: Lines graph with KDE ................................................................................................................ 31
Figure 7.8: 3D envelope with KDE values on the z-axis and the standard perspective ....................................... 32
Figure 7.9: 3D envelope without the KDE values and a turned perspective ...................................................... 32
Figure 7.10: Multiplot with Part of original demand substituted and RIR .......................................................... 32
Figure 7.11: Multiplot with Part of original demand substituted and RIR and different colour for the policies ...... 32
Figure 7.12: Lines graph for the Real price of copper, top down model ........................................................... 33
Figure 7.13: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], top down model. The graph is
truncated at 30 million tonne per Year ......................................................................................................... 34
Figure 7.14: Lines graph for Part of original demand substituted, top down model ........................................... 34
Figure 7.15: 3D envelopes of the Part of original demand substituted [Dmnl], top down model. The graph is not
truncated, so the values for the substitution lie between 0 and 1 ................................................................... 34
Figure 7.16: Lines graph for the Year left of copper mining, top down model .................................................. 35
x
Figure 7.17: 3D envelopes of the Year left of copper mining [Year], top down model. The graph is truncated at
500 year ................................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 7.18: Multiplot of Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year] and Year left of copper mining [Year], top
down model .............................................................................................................................................. 36
Figure 7.19: 3D envelopes of the Relative part of deep sea mining [Dmnl], top down model. The graph is not
truncated, so the values for the substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100%......................................... 36
Figure 7.20: Lines graph for the Real price of copper, bottom up model .......................................................... 37
Figure 7.21: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper [Dollar/t], bottom up model. The graph is truncated at
100000 Dollar/t ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 7.22: Lines graph for the Real price of copper, regional model ............................................................. 37
Figure 7.23: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper [Dollar/t], regional model. The graph is truncated at
100000 Dollar/t ......................................................................................................................................... 37
Figure 7.24: Lines graph for Global consumption of refined copper, bottom up model ...................................... 38
Figure 7.25: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], bottom up model. The graph is
truncated at 30 million t/Year ...................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 7.26: Lines graph for the Part of original demand substituted, bottom up model .................................... 39
Figure 7.27: Low values for the Recycling Input Rate [Dmnl], top down model ................................................ 40
Figure 7.28: The RIR [Dmnl] in the new runs, top down model ...................................................................... 41
Figure 7.29: The global consumption of copper [t/Year] in the new model ...................................................... 41
Figure 8.1: The recycling score (RER) policy connection ................................................................................ 43
Figure 9.1: All policies for the real price of copper, global consumption of refined copper, the part of original
demand substituted and the RIR in the top down model ................................................................................ 48
Figure 9.2: All policies for the marginal costs of copper and deep sea copper, relative part of deep sea mining and
the year left of copper mining in the top down model.................................................................................... 49
Figure 9.3: Part of original demand substituted [Dmnl] with substitution policies ............................................. 49
Figure 9.4: RIR [Dmnl] with recycling policies ............................................................................................... 49
demand substituted and the RIR in the bottom up model .............................................................................. 50
Figure 9.6: All policies for the marginal costs of copper and deep sea copper, relative part of deep sea mining and
the year left of copper mining in the top down model.................................................................................... 50
demand substituted and the RIR in the regional model .................................................................................. 51
Figure 9.9: All policies for the marginal costs of copper and deep sea copper and the year left of copper mining in
the regional model ..................................................................................................................................... 51
Figure 9.8: Lines graph for year left of copper mining with all regional policies ................................................ 51
Figure 9.10: All policies for the regional relative parts of deep sea mining ....................................................... 52
Figure 9.11: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], recycling policies ........................................................................ 52
Figure 9.12: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], all policies .................................................................................. 52
Figure 9.13: Real price of copper, recycling policies ...................................................................................... 53
Figure 9.14: Real price of copper, strategic reserve policy.............................................................................. 53
Figure 9.15: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year] with recycling policies ........................................... 53
Figure 9.16: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year] with all policies .................................................... 53
Figure 9.17: Real price of copper[Dollar/t], recycling policies ......................................................................... 53
xi
Figure 9.19: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], recycling policies ................................................. 54
Figure 9.20: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], all policies .......................................................... 54
Figure 9.21: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], recycling policies ........................................................................ 54
Figure F.9.23: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], recycling policies .............................................. 55
Figure F.9.24: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], all policies ........................................................ 55
Figure E.1: Envelopes with KDEs and line graphs of the different (K)PIs ......................................................... 97
Figure E.2: Lines graph for the Real price of copper ...................................................................................... 97
Figure E.3: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper [Dollar/t]. The red, green and blue arrows show the
respective direction of x, y and z axis. The price is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t .............................................. 98
Figure E.4: Lines graph for the Global consumption of copper ........................................................................ 98
Figure E.5: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year]. The graph is truncated at 30
million tonne per Year ................................................................................................................................ 99
Figure E.6: Lines graph for Part of original demand substituted .................................................................... 100
Figure E.7: 3D envelopes of the Part of original demand substituted [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated, so the
values for the substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100% ................................................................ 100
Figure E.8: Lines graph for the Recycling Input Rate ................................................................................... 100
Figure E.9: 3D envelopes of the Recycling Input Rate [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated, so the values for the
substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100% ..................................................................................... 101
Figure E.10: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of copper ............................................................................ 102
Figure E.11: Lines graph for the Marginal costs deep sea copper .................................................................. 102
Figure E.12: 3D envelopes of the Marginal costs of copper [Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t
.............................................................................................................................................................. 102
Figure E.13: 3D envelopes of the Marginal costs deep sea copper [Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000
Dollar/t ................................................................................................................................................... 102
Figure E.14: Multiplot of Marginal costs of copper [Dollar/t] and Marginal costs deep sea copper [Dollar/t] ...... 102
Figure E.15: Lines graph for the Relative part of deep sea mining ................................................................ 103
Figure E.16: 3D envelopes of the Relative part of deep sea mining [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated, so the
values for the substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100% ................................................................ 103
Figure E.17: Lines graph for the Year left of copper mining .......................................................................... 103
Figure E.18: 3D envelopes of the Year left of copper mining [Year]. The graph is truncated at 500 year .......... 104
Figure E.19: Multiplot of Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year] and year left of copper mining [Year] . 104
Figure E.20: Lines graph for the Real price of copper .................................................................................. 105
Figure E.21: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper [Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t..... 105
Figure E.22: Lines graph for Global consumption of refined copper ............................................................... 105
million t/Year ........................................................................................................................................... 105
Figure E.24: Lines graph for the Part of original demand substituted ............................................................ 106
Figure E.25: Lines graph for the RIR .......................................................................................................... 106
Figure E.26: 3D envelopes of the RIR [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated ..................................................... 106
Figure E.28: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of deep sea copper .............................................................. 107
xii
Figure E.29: Lines graph for the Relative part of deep sea mining ................................................................ 107
Figure E.30: 3D envelopes of the Relative part of deep sea mining [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated ........... 107
Figure E.32: Multiplot of Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year] and Year left of copper mining [Year] . 107
Figure E.33: Lines graph for the Real price of copper .................................................................................. 108
Figure E.34: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper [Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t..... 108
Figure E.35: Lines graph for the Global consumption of refined copper ......................................................... 109
million t/Year ........................................................................................................................................... 109
Figure E.37: Lines graph for the Part of original demand substituted ............................................................ 109
Figure E.38: Lines graph for the RIR .......................................................................................................... 110
Figure E.40: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of deep sea copper .............................................................. 110
Figure E.41: Lines graphs for the regional relative parts of deep sea mining .................................................. 111
Figure E.43: 3D envelopes of the Year left of copper mining [Year]. The graph is truncated at 500 year .......... 111
xiii
xiv
Part One: Introduction
1
1. Introduction
Frequently the Dutch media report the theft of copper wire used by the Dutch railways (Klis, 2011; Volkskrant,
2011): The word “koperdief” (copper thief) was even added to the online version of the “Grote Van Dale” due to
the enormous rise in the use of the word in newspapers (Sanders, 2011). It is also considered a growing
problem, since the copper theft increased with 173% percent over the last year. The obvious reason for the rise
in thefts is the high copper price of the last years (LME, 2011).
There seem to be two causes for the high copper price: the energy transition towards a more
sustainable mix of energy sources (Kleijn, R. & van der Voet, 2010) and the growing demand for minerals in fast
developing economies like China and India (European Commission, 2011).
Next to this is the ongoing debate about mineral scarcity, which focuses on several “risky” metals, like
lithium (Angerer, Marscheider-Weidemann, Wendl & Wietschel, 2009; Auping, 2009). There are signs that
regulations to help industry obtain their scarce metals are being developed (Hekking, 2011). Despite the copper
thefts not much attention is yet paid to copper, despite the fact that this bulk metal can be considered a scarce
metal, in contrast with for example iron or aluminium (Gordon, Koopmans, Nordhaus & Skinner, 1987: 2).
1.1. The energy transition

The energy transition is the change from fossil fuels to renewable energy. It stems from the debate on climate
change in combination with geopolitical issues related to the security of supply. These have brought the European
Union (EU) to the idea that the dependence on fossil fuels should be reduced and the share of renewable energy,
like hydro and wind power, solar energy, hydrogen production and bio fuels will have to increase (European
Parliament & European Council, 2009). For this purpose, the often mentioned 20-20-20 goal was established
(Council of the European Union, 2007), which means that countries in the EU will feel committed to decrease
their greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20% in 2020 compared to 1990 and having a share of at least 20%
renewable. For 2050 the goals are even more ambitious and the countries strive to collectively reduce the
greenhouse gas emissions by 60 – 80 %. A similar policy exists in the United States, were the White House
recently posted the goal to have 80% of the electricity production by clean sources (National Economic Council,
Council of Economic Advisers & Office of Science and Technology Policy, 2011).
For the development of solar power for the European main land, several plans have been developed, like
the Mediterranean Solar Plan. This plan aims at installing Concentrated Solar Plants (CSP) in the Southern
Mediterranean Area and the Middle East (Presidencia Española de la Unión Europea, 2011; Viebahn, Lechon &
Trieb, 2010). These solar plants will be connected to the European electricity network to provide solar power, as
can be seen on the plans of the Desertec Foundation (Desertec Foundation, 2011).
For the electricity infrastructure large amounts of copper may be needed, but not much research has
been done to create more insight in possible problems related to the availability of this metal on the long term,
especially in relation with the energy transition (Kleijn, R. & van der Voet, 2010). The interest of this problem
becomes clearer when falling ore grades are taken into consideration, which cause the energy demand of mining
copper to increase. As a result of this, the price of the commodity will also have to rise (Koppelaar, 2011).
1.2. Emerging economies

The emerging economies have a great influence on the strong rising copper demand of the last years (ICSG,
2010b: 36, 50). One of the characteristics of these countries is the large population: larger than all the old
developed countries combined (UNPD, 2011a). These people experienced a strong economic growth last years,
2
which in combination with the fact that people with a higher income on average have a higher need for resources
(Gordon, Betram & Graedel, 2006: 1210), have resulted in the spectacular rise in copper demand from these
areas.
1.3. Uncertainties in the copper system

Many things about the copper system are uncertain, while they may have a great influence on the development
of the system. A first example is the development of the ore grade of copper in the future, which is one of the
main drivers of the costs of copper mining (ICSG, 2010b: 12; Koppelaar, 2011). It is uncertain in what pace ore
grades will decline. One theory which concerns this, the Skinner thesis (Skinner, 1976), has been neither
adequately proven nor falsified.
The copper price is very sensitive to the grade of ore because of the large amount of energy that is
needed to extract copper from the ore. This introduces considerable uncertainty into future scenario
development. The future of energy prices is a second big uncertainty. Another big uncertainty is whether and
how much substitutes of the metal can be used. This depends on the variety of substitutes available, the amount
needed for substitution and the price of the substitutes (Gordon et al., 1987: 66-76). The future movement of the
prices of these substitutes is unknown.
A final uncertainty is connected to the earlier mentioned relation between copper use, welfare and
population size. Several scenarios exist for these developments (UNPD, 2011a), but the real development will
remain unknown.
1.4. Research introduction

Despite the fact that the copper system is transparent and much information is available, it is interesting to relate
the above mentioned trends to uncertainties in the copper system and to the future availability of this metal. A
second matter is the development of potential policies to counter undesirable risks that might occur due to the
energy transition. The question immediately arises:
copper system?
In the research performed here, an Exploratory System Dynamics Model and Analysis (ESDMA, see Pruyt, 2010b)
is made for the period 2000 till 2050. For this purpose, three different models have been developed, representing
different views regarding the demand and supply of copper. With these models it is attempted to find different
types of behaviour for different system parameters and possible policy options to counter undesirable behaviour.
The research is performed from the perspective of stakeholders in the European Union.
3
2. Problem exploration
The research problem is separated into two distinguished parts: the social and the scientific. The social relevance
concerns the impact on society in general, while the scientific relevance emphasizes on the contribution of this
research to the body of knowledge of System Dynamics (SD) modellers and researches. After this, the problem
statement is given and the formulation of the research objectives. This is followed by a motivation for the choice
of the research method. After this, the scope of the research is clarified. Finally, the research questions central in
this research are presented.
2.1. Problem exploration
2.1.1. Societal relevance

The proposed energy transition discussed in the introduction can have as a consequence that due to the
construction of transmission lines between Concentrated Solar Plants in the Southern Mediterranean area, copper
will become scarcer and hence more expensive for the European Union. Interest is growing in the geopolitical
aspects of the availability of many scarce metals and crucial metals, but copper is not mentioned in these lists
(Hekking, 2011), since it is considered a base commodity and widely available.
Copper is however not only used in transmission lines, but also for construction, electronic products,
industrial machinery and consumer products (Raw Materials Group, 17 March 2010). The present copper use is
often given in kilogram per capita and compared to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita (Gordon et al.,
2006; ICSG, 2010b: 37; Raw Materials Group, 17 March 2010: 11). An increasing GDP per capita in developing
countries such as India and China has combined with a growing world population to put additional pressure on
copper availability.
Due to ore grades falling, extracting copper from the ore will most likely become more expensive, since
the energy costs are higher at a lower ore grade (ICSG, 2010b: 12). This makes it more interesting to investigate
the effect of this increase in energy needed for copper ore mining and refining (Sun, Nie, Liu, Wang & Gong,
2010) and its effect on the marginal costs of copper. The copper price is related to these marginal costs. This
price seems to have been more or less constant for the last 140 years (Svedberg & Tilton, 2006), with a great
exception in the last 5 years, when prices surged upwards.
Geopolitically certain facts stand out about the concentration of power in this market: mining is
concentrated in Chile (1/3rd of world production), while smelting is more and more concentrated in China (1/4th of
world production) (ICSG, 2010b: 10,16) and the three largest mining companies produced 27.9% of all copper
worldwide in 2005 (Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, or BGR, 2007).
Finally, any modelling of future possibilities needs to embrace the uncertainties within the copper system
relating to new product development, energy transition and geopolitical policies to counter uncertain scenarios in
the next 40 years. At least the copper system has a considerable amount of reliable basic data, which is lacking in
many other metal markets.
2.1.2. Scientific relevance

The scientific relevance lies in the fact that using ESDMA is a relatively new way of approaching uncertainty in
systems. There is little experience in this type of modelling for metal scarcity, especially for a main metal like
copper.
Despite the relatively well documented nature of the copper system, much uncertainty still exists, both
structural and parametric. An example of a structural uncertainty is the debate whether metal scarcity should be
4
modelled with an open or closed stock for the reserve base, i.e. if the reserve base can grow from the resource
base (Tilton & Lagos, 2007) or will remain constant in the next period (Gordon, Bertram & Graedel, 2007; Gordon
et al., 2006). Also structurally uncertain is the growth of mine or smelting production capacity. It is unclear with
what kind of delay this should be modelled. Since every type of structure can give a difference in system
behaviour, it is important to explore this uncertainty. Parametric uncertainty is evident to the fact that this study
tried to explore the future, at which time all kinds of parameters will become more uncertain.
Scarcity is in this research defined as the moment when copper availability cannot satisfy the demand,
with as a result price (considerably) higher than the maximum marginal costs of copper.
2.2. Problem statement

In this project, an attempt was made to explore uncertainties in the copper system in the past 10 years and the
next 40 years. For this purpose, three SD model varieties were made which were used in an exploratory way
regarding structural and parametric uncertainty. The knowledge gap lies in a lack of insight in the dynamics of
the copper system in the future and the uncertainties and risks associated with the present and future structure
of this system, especially in relation to the rise in demand due to the energy transition from fossil to renewable
energy. The perspective of the research is the European Union. The policy measures suggested and tested will
thus be relevant for this problem owner and other actors active in the European part of the copper system.
2.3. Research objectives

This research is intended for everyone who is interested in the issue of mineral (metal) scarcity, but especially for
policy makers and the SD community. The first group is relevant for this research, since they may have the
opportunity to change the copper system in such a way that unwanted behaviour, like scarcity and price volatility,
will occur in fewer instances. The other group is important, because this research makes use of a new
development in the SD body of knowledge, being the use of System Dynamics models for Exploratory Modelling
and Analysis.
The behaviour of the system is assessed by looking at Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) of the system.
These are visible on the right side of Figure 2.1. These are the Real Copper price – which is the copper price
corrected for inflation (Svedberg & Tilton, 2006), the Reserve over Production (R/P) ratio, the Global copper
consumption, the Recycling Input Rate and the Part of original substituted. Further Performance Indicators (PIs)
are the Marginal costs of copper, the Marginal costs of deep sea copper and the Relative part of deep sea mining.
2.4. Choice for research method and modelling software

The method Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis is chosen, because exploration of the future of
the copper system is very interesting from the perspective of different possible modes of behaviour of the above
mentioned KPIs and PIs. The uncertainties which are present in the system (already partly discussed in section
1.3) span the uncertainty space of the systems future behaviour. Allowing these uncertainties to show their
influence, gives also a better perspective on the effectiveness of possible policy options regarding the types of
behaviour that are possible in this system.
The copper system is a well documented, complex system. It is characterised by the strong feedback
loops present in the system (see for instance Appendix A). Another feature is the long time horizon of this
research and the possible importance of stocks and flows in the system (see for example Figure 5.1) for the long
term behaviour of the system. A very suitable research method for these characteristics is System Dynamics
5
modelling, which emphasizes on the dynamic behaviour of the system in relation to stocks and flows in the
system (Meadows, 1985).
Due to the open structure of the copper system, data is available in many different sources. The main
sources used are the International Copper Study Group (ICSG), the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the
World bank, UN Population division (UNPD), the German Fraunhofer institute, the “Nederlandse Organisatie voor
toegepast-natuurwetenschappelijk onderzoek” (TNO) and many scientific articles about this or similar subjects.
2.5. Scope of research

This research offers a global view on the copper system (Figure 2.1). This contains the subsystems for supply,
demand and price mechanisms. A selection of policy options is visible on the left, while the (K)PIs are visible on
the right.
External factors
· Supply elasticity copper
· Demand elasticity copper
· Substitution elasticity copper
· Copper use per capita
· Lifetime copper products
· Recycling rates copper products
· Losses during copper production
· Price of energy
· Price of substitutes
· Growth world population
Policy options (political) · Economic growth Key Performance indicators
· Improve collection rate for recycling Real copper price
· Build strategic reserves
· Encourage substution
R/P (“Years left of copper mining”)
- + Global copper consumption

Policy options (technical) Supply Price Demand
· Improving the recycling efficiency + -
· Improving copper substitutes
Recycling Input Rate
· Improving deep sea mining
Part of original subsituted
Extra Performance Indicators:

Copper System · Marginal costs of copper
· Marginal costs of deep sea copper
· Relative part deep sea mining
Figure 2.1: Copper System diagram
The period examined in this research is the period 2000-2050. The reason for also trying to model behaviour
already passed is that this gives an opportunity to validate the bounds of the behaviour generated by modelled
system.
2.6. Research questions

The following main question is central in this research:
copper system?
Before answering the main question is possible, it is first of importance to look at the following sub questions:
· What are drivers for the copper demand?
· What is the current and potential future structure of the global copper supply system?
· What uncertainties and potential risks exist in the copper system?
· What is the behaviour of the modelled (K)PIs in the copper system and can this be related to the real
world system?
6
· How can policies be designed for the copper system?
· What are the effects of the designed policies on the (K)PIs in the copper system?
Before these questions can be answered, the setup of this research and the research method are presented in
chapter 3. These questions are discussed in respectively chapters 4 till 9.
7
3. Research methodology
The method used to explore the copper system is the aforementioned Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling
and Analysis (Pruyt, 2010b: 3-7). This is the combination of System Dynamics (SD) modelling (Box I) with
Exploratory Modelling and Analysis (EMA). It is a very new approach of using models for analysis. In this chapter,
first the major concepts of Exploratory Modelling and Analysis are explained. In the next section, SD and EMA are
combined to explain ESDMA. In the final section of this chapter, the new research design used in this study is
clarified.
3.1. Exploratory Modelling and Analysis (EMA)

For most real world systems different opinions exist about how the system can be modelled. In traditional
modelling, the analyst tries to converge these different perspectives into one single model definition, which is
often supposed to give most valid results regarding the prediction of future behaviour. A totally different
approach is not to try to unite all different opinions in one structure, but allow these structural uncertainties to
exist and explore the different system futures possible by combining these possible structures with the
uncertainties also existent in the parametric values relevant for the system. This is the essence of Exploratory
Modelling and Analysis (EMA) (Bankes, 1993; Lempert, Popper & Bankes, 2003).
In this study, EMA is performed by changing all uncertainties in the SD copper models from a python
shell (Python Software Foundation, 2011). This enables the modeller to perform a high number of runs: the only
limitation is the amount of time available for the research combined with the clock speed of the computer and the
amount of memory available for data storage.
The number of runs performed also depends on the type of analysis done. For exploring the uncertainty
space, a Latin hypercube sampling (Iman, Campbell & Helton, 1981) is used. This allows a broad perspective on
the modes of behaviour the model can develop. When testing policies, a Full factorial analysis (Fischer, 1952) can
used. The number of runs performed in this analysis is dependent on the level in which the space needs to be
explored and the number of uncertainties. The number of runs is then:
( 3.1 )
To be able to explore the corners of the uncertainty space, the value for in ( 3.1 ) is most often two. It is
clear that with any run time not infinitely small, the number of uncertainties greatly limits the number of runs
which can be performed. For example, with a model which can generate ten runs per second and twenty
uncertainties, the experiment will already take more than a day to complete, while if this model has 62
uncertainties, it will require 14.6 billion years to complete. Therefore, in cases with many uncertainties, a
selection needs to be made regarding the sensitivity of the model to the parameters.
Box I: System Dynamics
SD contains several elements, which combined form the models used for this study. These elements are levels,
rates, auxiliaries and constants. The rates form flows to or from a level, like in Figure 3.1.
. This is depicted by a double, straight arrow. The mathematical representation of a level is the first-order
integral equation:
( 3.2 )
Where is the initial time and is the time of the model. Auxiliaries (and rates, which are special auxiliaries)
8
can contain any mathematical equation containing other elements of the model. This is shown by the (curved)
single arrows from for example Rate 1, the Level and Constant 1 to the Auxiliary in Figure 3.1.
Constant 2
Initial level
Level
Rate 1 Rate 2
Auxiliary
Constant 1
Figure 3.1: Simple SD model
A constant remains the same during the run of the model. An initial value of a level is also considered to be a
constant. A level can also be seen as a first order delay. It is also possible to use higher order delays. These are
shown in the model by a double dash through a curved arrow, like between Auxiliary and Rate 2 (Figure 3.1).
The model can contain loops between variables, which need to contain at least one delay order. These loops
are called feedback loops. In the simple SD model there are three present, with different lengths: Auxiliary –
Rate 2 – Level – Auxiliary with length two, Auxiliary – Rate 2 – Level – Rate 1 - Auxiliary with length three and
Auxiliary – Rate 2 – Level – Rate 1 – Auxiliary of length 4. They can be either positive (reinforcing) or negative
(balancing), depending on the relations between the elements. Positive loops in isolation cause exponential
growth or decay, while negative loops in isolation have balancing or goal seeking behaviour (Pruyt, 2010b: 3, 4).
To give results of the SD model and solve the integral equations like ( 3.2 ), a numerical integration method is
used to solve the equation. In the modelling package used for the models underlying this research, Vensim, this
can be either the Euler method, difference equations or second and fourth order Runge-Kutta methods (Ventana
Systems, 2010: 213). More insight in these methods can be found in Borelli & Coleman (2004: 122-129).
3.2. Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis (ESDMA)

With ESDMA a SD model is used for performing EMA. This has certain consequences for the way the model is
built, since it needs to fit the purpose of exploratory modelling, i.e. the mapping of the consequences of a very
extensive uncertainty exploration. This means that the model is not developed with the purpose of being able to
reproduce historic data in the base run or just similar modes, but should be able to produce many different types
of behaviour, dependent on the set of uncertainties chosen for each run. Verification of the model happens in the
traditional fashion, but validation takes place by examining the possibility and the plausibility of the outcomes the
model generates.
To be able to explore the structural uncertainties mentioned above, an Exploratory SD model needs to
contain separate structures for areas where structural uncertainties occur. An example of these structures used
for the copper system, are structures which can generate different economic growth scenarios (Box II) and
different scenarios for the development of the energy price and the prices of substitutes.
3.3. Research design

While System Dynamics modelling is a well documented and standardised research approach and fits very well
the standard “model cycle” (SDS, 2011; Waveren, Groot, Scholten, Geer, Wösten et al., 1999: 0-1), the
combination of System Dynamics with Exploratory Modelling and Analysis is very new and does not have a well
documented set of steps for performing the study. Therefore, both to give a framework for this research and to
9
give insight in how such a research could be performed, the research design is presented here (Figure 3.2). In
this research design, two possible ESDMA approaches are compared with the traditional SD approach. The two
new approaches were developed before and after performing the experiments. The difference can thus be
explained by the change in perception of a good ESDMA approach that evolved during this research. The ex post
ESDMA approach is the way the study was actually performed.
Traditional SD approach Ex ante ESDMA approach Ex post ESDMA approach

Problem identification Problem identification Problem identification
1. Discussion with client 1. Discussion with client 1. Discussion with client
Conceptualisation Building experimental setup

Conceptualisation
2a. Literature research 2a. SD Model conceptualisations
2a. Literature research
2b. Discussion with experts 2b. SD Model specifications
2b. Discussion with experts
2c. Defining “unwanted” system 2c. Testing SD models
2c. Formulation of dynamic hypothesis
behaviour
Calibrating experimental setup

Specification 3a. Modification SD models for control-
Specification 3a. Building SD model lable connection by EMA workbench
3. Building SD model 3b. Defining parametric & structural 3b. Construction of connections control in
uncertainties EMA workbench
3c. Performing test runs
3d. Debugging SD models
Model testing 3e. Validation of results
Model testing
4a. Verification
4a. Verification
4b. Assessing possible modes of Experimental execution
4b. Validation
behaviour for plausibility
4a. Performing model runs
4b. Performing analyses
4c. Preliminary interpretation base runs
Model interpretation 4c. Implementing policy design in SD
5a. Building EMA experimental setup model and EMA workbench
Model interpretation
5b. Sensitivity analysis to define most 4d. Performing policy runs
5a. Interpreting results
influential (sets of) factors
5b. Sensitivity analysis
5c. Interpreting modes of behaviour
5d. Detecting unwanted behaviour ESDMA interpretation
5a. Interpretation of extreme values,
behavioural modes and trends visible in
results
Implementing of solutions Implementing of solutions
5b. Relate new insights to reality
6. Testing of policy options 6. Testing of policy options
Figure 3.2: Traditional and two ESDMA research approaches compared
The differences between the traditional SD and the ex ante ESDMA approach are not very extensive, since the
first ESDMA research design was largely based on the traditional SD model cycle. When, in an ESDMA effort, the
researcher uses the ex ante framework, planning of the research will be practically impossible. After step 4 in this
research cycle the researcher will have the feeling to be just past half way, while in the ex post framework he will
turn out to have just begun.
A change which is present in both the ex ante and the ex post ESDMA approach, is the absence of an
explicit dynamics hypothesis, since the inherently uncertain outcomes of EMA make it very difficult, or impossible,
to define this. It is important however, to think in advance about potential undesirable behaviour the system can
exhibit, both in discussion with the client and with experts. When specifying the model in the ESDMA approach, it
is immediately important to think about elements in the model which values or build up are unknown or
uncertain: the parametric and structural uncertainties.
Another big difference is the correct moment for verification and validation of the model. In the
traditional SD model cycle, this is a separate step. In the ex post ESDMA cycle essentially validation is part of step
two up to and including four. The ESDMA methodology is thus also used as a tool for validation of the research
results.
10
Part Two: The World Copper System
11
4. Copper demand and substitution
There are different perspectives possible of looking at copper demand. Two major alternatives are a top down or
a bottom up approach. Another way of looking at copper demand is from a regional point of view. These
differences have let to different varieties of models which might demonstrate different behaviour of the copper
system and the KPIs defined in section 2.3. In relation to this, substitutes for copper and their relation with the
copper demand are discussed.
4.1. Main drivers for copper demand and model varieties

In this research, three model varieties have been made for the different perspectives for copper demand
discussed above. These are discussed now, together with the main differences between the models.
4.1.1. Top down

When copper demand is determined top down, this means in this study that the Gross Domestic Product (GDP)
per capita, with no inflation, is compared with the use of copper per capita and the size of the global population
(Tilton, 2003: 70). In this respect, this is the least complex way of approaching the demand. A Causal Loop
Diagram (CLD, see Lane, 2008; Sterman, 2000: 137-190) of this system view can be seen in Figure 4.1. This CLS
is an expansion of the little CLD visible in the systems diagram (Figure 2.1).
World population
+ Effect of GDP on
+ copper demand
Intrinsic copper
demand
- + +
+
Copper supply Copper price Copper demand
+ - GDP per capita
Supply loop Demand loop -
Copper
substitution -
-
Substitution loop
Price of substitutes
Figure 4.1: Top down intrinsic demand
From a modelling perspective, this means that for the time period of the model values need to be found for the
world population size, the GDP per capita and for the relation between the copper demand and the GDP per
capita (Wouters & Bol, 2009: 18). For the world population, the low, middle, high and constant fertility scenarios
are used which have been developed by the United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
Population Division, Population Estimates and Projections Section (UNPD, 2011a). The GDP per capita can be
modelled by looking at the growth of the global GDP and dividing this by the world population. The main
uncertainty here is the economic growth rate. How this is modelled here can be seen in Box II.
The economic paradigm behind this model is a perfect market, since all suppliers of copper are
generalised in a global perspective and copper is being sold to the highest bidder. This leaves out the regional,
geopolitical interference of regions. It is interesting to see whether this approach gives similar or different types
of behaviour compared to the model with the regional approach (section 4.1.3).
12
Box II: Modelling uncertainty: Economic growth
In modelling economic growth, it is assumed that it consists of several cycles which are super positioned on each
other. When there is a short, medium and long cycle, with each cycle being more or less dominant on different
moments, this can be modelled as 3 x 2 sinuses with 3 amplitudes, together with a base economic growth (Figure
4.2). This results in the following equation:
Yearly economic growth ESDMA =
Amplitude long sinus * Economic sinus long period amplitudes * Economic sinus long period
+ Amplitude medium sinus * Economic sinus medium period amplitudes * Economic sinus medium period
+ Amplitude short sinus * Economic sinus short period amplitudes * Economic short period
+ Base economic growth
Yearly economic
growth historic data
Period long sinus
Economic sinus
Period long sinus long period
amplitudes
Economic sinus long Base economic
period amplitudes growth
Relative growth
Period medium GDP
Economic sinus
sinus
medium period
Period medium sinus Economic sinus medium Yearly economic

amplitudes period amplitudes growth ESDMA
Amplitude long
sinus
Period short sinus Economic short
period Amplitude
Amplitude short
medium sinus
sinus
Economic sinus short
Period short sinus
period amplitudes
amplitudes
Long term effect
intrinsic demand period
Figure 4.2: The economic growth structure Figure 4.3: The effect of this uncertainty structure
All purple variables with a purple background are uncertainties which can be varied by the python shell. The
effect is a behaviour which is chaotic, but which still has strong periodic aspects to it, as can be seen in Figure
4.3. Turning this behaviour on and off before runs, allows analysis of the influence of the economic growth on the
copper system.
4.1.2. Bottom up
From the bottom up point of view, the copper demand is composed of a set of uses which all have a quasi
independent growth. This allows testing of the effects of scenarios regarding energy transition developed by
different authors. A selection of major uses of copper has been made by the Fraunhofer ISI (Angerer, Mohring,
Marscheider-Weidemann & Wietschel, 2010: 16-20). Two of these uses, the automotive sector and infrastructure,
are strongly linked to the development of a more sustainable way of using energy. Some different authors have
thus hypothesised possible scenarios for these applications scenarios, which can form input for the bottom up
model.
Copper use in
electricity infrastructure
Copper use in cars
Copper use in water
treatment
+ Copper use in stationary

+ + electromotors
Intrinsic copper +
demand +
- + + Copper use in
+
Copper supply Copper price Copper demand architecture
+ -
Supply loop Demand loop -
Copper in other
use
Copper
substitution -
-
+
Substitution loop Price of substitutes
Substitution
possibilities
Figure 4.4: Bottom up intrinsic demand
13
In the model, the “dominance” and “pluralism” scenarios of electric vehicles for the automotive industry,
developed by the Fraunhofer ISI, have been used (Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6). These scenarios regard the relative
part of new cars built which have (semi) electric propulsion. These types are, besides the conventional
automobiles, the Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV), the Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV), the Battery Electric
Vehicle (BEV) and the city BEV. These are relevant, since the amount of copper per vehicle depends heavily on
the grade in which the vehicle has electric propulsion. For the development of the electricity infrastructure, which
is related to the development of decentralised sustainable energy sources, another scenario is presented in an
article of Kleijn & van der Voet (2010).
Fractions of new cars - Dominance Fractions of new cars - Pluralism

1 1
0.75 0.75
Dmnl
Dmnl
0.5 0.5
0.25 0.25
0 0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050
Time (Year) Time (Year)
"Fractions of new cars - Dominance"[HEV] : CurrentBottomUp "Fractions of new cars - Pluralism"[HEV] : CurrentBottomUp
"Fractions of new cars - Dominance"[PHEV] : CurrentBottomUp "Fractions of new cars - Pluralism"[PHEV] : CurrentBottomUp
"Fractions of new cars - Dominance"[BEV] : CurrentBottomUp "Fractions of new cars - Pluralism"[BEV] : CurrentBottomUp
"Fractions of new cars - Dominance"[cityBEV] : CurrentBottomUp "Fractions of new cars - Pluralism"[cityBEV] : CurrentBottomUp
"Fractions of new cars - Dominance"[Conventional] : CurrentBottomUp "Fractions of new cars - Pluralism"[Conventional] : CurrentBottomUp
Figure 4.5: The dominance scenario (Angerer et al., 2010: 18) Figure 4.6: The pluralism scenario (Angerer et al., 2010: 19)
4.1.3. Regional
In the regional approach, visible in Figure 4.7, the global demand for and production of copper is divided in
regions which are divided by the resources they have most. The supply side is extensively discussed in chapter 5.
The copper price however remains global in this model. The big difference in economic perspective is the fact
that this model variant does not assume a totally free market: a regional mine will first supply a smelter in its
own region, and only when this demand is satisfied, other regions will be supplied. Since the highest bidder is
most probable to receive the materials needed, the copper export over the regions is assumed to be divided
regarding the GDPs per capita of the regions with a copper deficit.
Regional world
population
+ Effect of GDP on
+ copper demand
Regional intrinsic
Regional resources + + copper demand
- + +
Regional copper Regional copper
supply Copper price demand
+ Regional GDP per
+ Demand loop -
Regional physical copper Supply loop - capita
production system
Regional copper
+
substitution
Production loop - -
Substitution loop Price of substitutes
Figure 4.7: Regional approach. All variables with a green background are regional
The regional model makes use of three distinct regions: the developed world (Europe, N-America, Oceania and
Japan), the upcoming economies (Asia without the CIS and Asean-10) and the (resource abundant) developing
countries (Africa, S-America, and Asean-10). These areas correspond with respectively the more developed
countries, the Asian part of the less developed countries and the rest of the world (UNPD, 2011b). The idea is a
14
distinction between money (region 1), people (region 2) and the resources (region 3). The selection is thus not
meant to be topographical. Together they might generate interesting geopolitical issues.
Deep sea mining is in this situation of course more difficult to regionalise, especially when deep sea
mining takes place in international waters. The assumption made in the regional model to solve this issue is that
a mining concession means that the copper mining is regionalised. Since the reserve base is part of a mining
concession (see section 5.1.2), this is the moment to bring in the regional division. The regional “preference” to
develop deep sea mining, is linked to the average GDP per capita in the region, since this can be considered an
indicator for development as well. More details about deep sea mining are discussed in section 5.3.
Box III: Modelling uncertainty: Relations for demand
In the CLDs showing the different model varieties in this research, it is visible that the copper demand is
influenced by three different elements: the intrinsic demand, substitution and the copper price. This is also
visible in the model structure visible in Figure 4.8.
In this research it is assumed that each of these elements has both a short and a long term effect. To calculate
these effects, each element is compared with its relevant counterpart to calculate their relation. For the three
elements these are intrinsic demand (A) and availability (B) for the copper price, price of copper (A) with the
price of aluminium (B, for more details about this, see Box V) for the substitution and finally the intrinsic demand
with the demand (A) and substituted demand (B) for the effect of the intrinsic demand. This formula is of the
form:
Relation = ( A / B ) ^ Amplifier
Since the values for A and B are always positive, this relation will have a value between 0 and infinity as well,
while the relation is equal to 1 when A and B balance. It is uncertain however how big the influence of the
relation between A and B will be. Therefore, the relation can be amplified with a value around 1 (for example,
between 0.25 and 4). This amplifying factor is an extra uncertainty in the relation.
<Administration
time> Initial postponed Automatic decay of
demand unfulfilled demand
Postponed
demand of
copper Change in demand due
Copper not produced Finally fulfilled
to economic situation
with demand demand of copper
Long term copper
price elasticity
Short term copper
<Difference copper
price elasticity
consumption and demand> Total demand
Loss in demand due to for copper
price elasticity
Loss in demand due

Amplified effect of to substitution
relative price on demand
Amplification
Initial value long term factor of relative
effect price price effect
Average long
term effect on
demand Growth of effect of Positive effect
Negative effect
relative price on demand of relative price of relative price
on demand on demand <Postponed demand
of copper>
Decay of effect of
relative price on demand Long term effect on Effect of relative
demand period price on demand
Real price of
Relative price of
copper
copper
<Global inventories of
refined copper>
Figure 4.8: SD structure for short and long term effects on demand
When calculating the effect of this relation, it is assumed that a balanced relation should have no effect. Further,
the extreme values (i.e. 0 and infinity) should have the same effect. The following equation simulates this effect
(with thanks to Bonthuis, 2011):
Effect = 1 – 2 ^ ( 1 – Relation )
The values for effect are between -1 for Relation = 0, 0 for Relation = 1 and 1 for Relation = ∞. This effect can
also be amplified similar to the Relation amplification. It is assumed that this effect can change the demand
directly (short term) or by the accumulation of the effect of a longer period of time (long term). The sum of the
short and long term effects define the maximum de- or increase in demand, since the relation is as follows:
15
Loss in demand due to price elasticity =
( Short term copper price elasticity * Amplified effect of relative price on demand + Long term copper price
elasticity * Average long term effect on demand ) * Total demand for copper
The total demand is subsequently calculated by solving the integral equation with the input regarding the
intrinsic demand and the outputs regarding the price and the substitution.
4.2. Copper substitution

A significant change in the demand for copper can come from the substitution of this metal for another resource.
This is a process that is of all times: a very early example may be the transition of the Bronze Age towards the
Iron Age (Gordon et al., 1987: 60). In our times substitution and also resubstitution (a substitute is discarded for
a renewed use of copper) of copper is also common practice, as the use of aluminium core steel reinforced cables
for electricity transport, plastic pipes for water transport and glass fibre infrastructure for data traffic illustrate
(Gordon et al., 1987: 74, 75; U.S. Geological Survey, 2011: 49). Substitution of electric wiring in homes has
however caused serious fire hazards in the past (Gordon et al., 1987: 71).
12000 $/t
10000 $/t
8000 $/t
6000 $/t
Aluminium price
4000 $/t Copper price
2000 $/t
0 $/t
Figure 4.9: Copper and aluminium price over the last 30 years (Index Mundi, 2011a, 2011b)
The substitution of copper can be triggered by a crisis in availability, or sustained differences in price (Figure 4.9).
It can however also in itself generate a crisis by a sudden collapse in demand and as such form a threat for
copper production (Rademaker & Kooroshy, 2010: 3). It could therefore also pose a system risk.
The moment at which point substitution of a mineral becomes relevant, can be calculated by comparing
the amount of substitute material needed to replace the original demand and the relation in price between both
resources (Gordon et al., 1987: 66-69). The way in which this was implemented in the model, can be seen in Box
IV. A major assumption here is the view that the substitution is compared with the excess demand which existed
at the moment the model is initiated. The initial value for substitution is for this reason zero.
16
Box IV: Modelling uncertainty: Substitution
Substitution of copper demand takes place when the price of copper is at such an amount that it is cheaper to
use the substitute than the original resource. This is modelled by using a threshold value, which models the fact
that the weight of aluminium needed to replace copper is not equal to the weight of copper originally needed.
This relation is then amplified, to increase (or decrease the effect) of the substitution relation Figure 4.10.
Relation between copper and aluminium price =
( Real price of copper / ( Substitution threshold * Price of aluminium ) ) ^ Substitution amplifying factor
The method for modelling different uses in the bottom up model is by use of different threshold values for every
use. This assumes a similar price development of the different substitutes, which is not necessarily true.
However, it poses a significant simplification of the model, which adds to the intelligibility of the structure and
reduces the amount of data needed as input for the model and the EMA.
Growth effect of Short term increase
intrinsic demand demand due to intrinsic
Total change due to demand
Relation between copper intrinsic demand
Long term increase
and aluminium price demand due to intrinsic
demand
Change in demand due Present

Real price of to economic situation de-substitution
Substitution Substitution Initial value for of copper
copper amplifying factor threshold
Long term copper substituted
price elasticity copper
Part of original Total
Total demand demand substituted substitution of
Loss in demand due to for copper copper
<Marginal price of price elasticity
copper> Price of
Loss in demand due
aluminium Amplified effect of Present substitution
Change in relative price on demand
to substitution
of copper
aluminium price Initial price of Complete positive and
negative substitution
aluminium Amplification
factor of relative
price effect
Figure 4.10: Relating copper price and the aluminium

price Figure 4.11: SD structure for substitution in relation to
demand
The two-stock structure in Figure 4.11, which is based on the one-stock-structure from (Pruyt, 2010a: 5), allows
the model to “store” the amount of demand which was substituted. This information is used for generating the
new demand, since it is assumed that the part of demand substituted will again be substituted, ceteris paribus, in
the new demand. The part of original demand substituted is calculated with the following equation:
Part of original demand substituted =
Total substitution of copper / ( Total demand for copper + Total substitution of copper )
In reality this would mean for instance that if half the electricity transportation companies have decided to build
new high voltage infrastructure with aluminium wires, they will make this choice again when they have to replace
new bits of their network. Another effect which can be generated by this structure is oscillation between the
substituted and the copper parts of demand. This could happen if the price oscillates around the threshold value
for substitution already discussed above.
17
5. Current and potential structure copper supply system
In this chapter the structure of the physical copper supply system will be discussed. This consists of the resources
and reserves, mining, smelting and refining and recycling. A schematic stock-flow diagram (Sterman, 2000: 191-
229) of this system can be seen in Figure 5.1.
Average permit
term mines Substitution
possibilities
Price of
substitutes
+ -
Mining - Mining capacity +
capacity in development Copper
Decommissioning of + Growth mining Preparation of new + substitution Part of demand
mining capacity capacity mining capacity +
substituted
-
- World population
Average lifetime Investments in

-
of mines copper technology + - GDP per capita
Copper price Demand for +
+ +
Marginal costs of - + copper +
copper
+ Copper demand
Ore grade + related to GDP
- Energy price
+
Resource + Reserve + Stock of Stock of + Copper in Average lifetime of
Resources copper refined copper products
base Resource base matte copper use
Discovery of Copper mining + Copper smelting Copper
development reserves and refining consumption + Total use of -
+ copper +
+ + Secondary
<Copper price> - copper to scrap
Primary copper
Recycling Input to scrap
+
Rate
Copper in Collection rate of
+
+ scrap copper products
Smelting and Smelting Copper
refining capacity in and refining + recycling
development capacity
Preparation of new Growth smelting and Decommissioning of
refining capacity + smelting and refining + + Legend:
smelting and refining
capacity + capacity External variables
-
-
Copper variables
Key performance
Average lifetime of Recycling indicators
Average permit smelters and refiners recovery rate
term of mines <Shadow variables>
Figure 5.1: Extended stock-flow diagram of the copper supply system with some connections to the demand
5.1. Resources and reserves

The natural sources of copper which are theoretically minable are called mineral resources and ore reserves.
Their classification is however bound to strict rules (JORC, 2004), in order to create an unambiguous image of the
potentially copper availability underground. An easy way of depicting the relations between resources and
reserves is the McKelvey box (Figure 5.2), which provides ordering on economic feasibility and geological
assurance. In the copper EDSMA models some simplifications have been made in this perspective, which will be
discussed in the next sections.
Identified resources Undiscovered resources

Demonstrated Probability range
Inferred
Measured Indicated Hypothetical Speculative
Economic
Inferred
Marginally Reserve
Reserve Resources
economic Base
Sub- Base
Economic
Other
Resource base
occurrences
Figure 5.2: Relation between reserves and resources. Based on the McKelvey Box (McKelvey, 1973)
18
5.1.1. Resource base and resources
The total amount of copper in the lithosphere can be calculated by taking the average elemental abundance of
copper and multiplying it with the estimated weight of the earth’s crust. This is called the Resource base (Tilton,
2003: 22, 23). There is among scientists discussion on whether this is relevant for the – undiscovered – ever
recoverable amount of copper (Gordon et al., 2007; Gordon et al., 2006; Tilton & Lagos, 2007). The resources
are then the undiscovered, but potentially economic amount of copper available.
The exact distribution of the ore grade of undiscovered copper deposits is unknown, but it is often
assumed that it is the high-end of a lognormal curve (Gordon et al., 1987: 38). Another option is the “Skinner
thesis” (Skinner, 1976), which proposes a bimodal lognormal distribution. This consists of a lognormal distribution
for copper ores and a similar, but at lower grades positioned distribution for deposits in common rock. Despite
the fact that Skinner posed this theory in 1976 and it was considered probable, no proof can be found in the
literature (Gordon et al., 1987: 39, 40). The most important consequence of accepting the Skinner thesis is the
“mineralogical barrier” between the two lognormal modes of ore and rock deposits. This barrier means that the
amount of energy needed to process copper ore dramatically increases around 0.1% Cu grade (Skinner, 1976).
Figure 5.3: Ore grade in relation to energy costs needed for processing copper (Skinner, 1976)
In the model some simplification is made for the resource and resource base. First, originally the lowest part of
the sub-economic discovered copper is also considered to be part of the resources, and not of the reserve base.
The distinction between reserve base and resources is thus strictly whether the deposits have been discovered or
not. The distinction between resources and resource base is now just an economic factor. When mining capacity
is able to extend (due to profits), the resources extend due to the available resource base.
5.1.2. Reserve base and reserves

For resources to be turned into the reserve base, a proper assessment of the availability of the reserves and the
economic feasibility to mine them needs to be made (JORC, 2004: 10-12). The difference between the actual
reserve and the reserve base lies again in the economic value of the deposits: the reserves are economic, the
reserve base is marginally economic (Gordon et al., 2007: 25). On mine level, the distinction is even easier to
define. The reserves are the part of the deposits owned by the mine, which are above the cut-off ore grade. The
reserve base is thus the rest, or the part which is below this ore grade (Kleijn, P. H. v. d., 2011, see also
Appendix G). This can be seen in Figure 5.4. When the copper price rises or technology improves, the cut-off ore
grade can become lower, which increase the reserves of the mine.
19
Log (Tonnage)
Reserve base
Reserve
Log(Grade)
Figure 5.4: Typical distribution of reserve base and reserve of a mine. The split between them is the cut-off ore grade (Kleijn, P.
H. v. d., 2011).
In the model the distinction is slightly aggregated: there is no distinction between reserves and reserve base,
since both are physically minable. This is possible, since the average ore grade of the mining operations
determine the marginal costs. When the price becomes too high compared to other options, the copper demand
gets (partially) substituted, as was described above. The disadvantage of this approach is the fact that the KPI
“Years left of mining” (R/P ratio), which can be calculated by dividing the reserves by the mining production,
becomes several times higher when compared with the reserve base instead of the reserves.
5.2. Mining, smelting/SX-EW and refining

The transfer from copper reserves to copper in use happens through mining, smelting and refining. These
processes will now be discussed, together with the way they are modelled.
5.2.1. Mining
After the classification of ore bodies at a certain spot, the mining operations can start. Dependent on the location
of the deposits in the rock, this happens largely with two techniques: open-cast and underground mining. On
average, the first technique is cheaper than the second. Other methods are in situ leaching and deep sea or
ocean mining (Lossin, 2005: 9, 10). The latter will be discussed in section 5.3, due to its potential influence on
the future of copper availability.
The biggest challenge of mining copper at this moment is the falling ore grade in developed copper
mining areas, like Chile and the United States of America (ICSG, 2010b: 12). This, together with the increasing
overhaul or overburden of rock due to deeper open-pit mines, increases the marginal costs of mining
considerately (Gordon et al., 1987: 40-42; Kleijn, P. H. v. d., 2011).
A dynamic which is difficult to explain is happening in mine capacity utilisation over the last years (Table
5.1). The mine capacity is mostly defined by the size and capacity of the breaker (Kleijn, P. H. v. d., 2011), but
can also be defined by looking at the relation between the size of the reserves and presumed lifetime (Wellmer,
Dalheimer & Wagner, 2006). Mostly mining capacity utilisation rises in times of high prices and declines when
prices are low. The last decade however, the copper price has risen to heights unknown before. Reasons why the
mines did not fully use their capacity in this period are therefore important to obtain, but were not available at
the time of this research.
20
Table 5.1: World Refined Copper Usage and Supply Trends, 2000-2010 (ICSG, 2010a, 2011). Production values are in thousand
metric tons.
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
W orld Mine Production 13203 13633 13577 13757 14594 14924 14991 15474 15528 15950 16097
W orld Mine Capacity 14277 14532 15193 15338 16072 16826 17141 18098 18739 19523 19898
Mine Capacity Utilisation (%) 92,5% 93,8% 89,4% 89,7% 90,8% 88,7% 87,5% 85,5% 82,9% 81,7% 80,9%
Primary Refined Production 12696 13746 13457 13485 13848 14411 14678 15191 15399 15414 15660
Secondary Refined Production 2100 1892 1898 1786 2069 2161 2613 2743 2823 2839 3401
W orld Refined Production
(Secondary+ Primary) 14796 15638 15355 15271 15917 16572 17291 17934 18222 18253 19061
W orld Refinery Capacity 17145 17760 18320 18804 19179 20250 20604 21559 22462 23625 23908
Refinery Capacity Utilisation (%) 86,3% 88,1% 83,8% 81,2% 83,0% 81,8% 83,9% 83,2% 81,1% 77,3% 79,7%
W orld Refined Usage 15185 15014 15210 15717 16833 16683 17058 18239 18056 18090 19314
Refined Stocks
End of Period 1291 1992 2048 1780 923 867 1131 1027 1159 1433 1289
Period Stock Change -344 702 55 -267 -857 -56 264 -105 132 274 -144
Refined Balance -389 624 144 -446 -915 -112 233 -305 162 163 -252
LME Copper Price (Dollar/t) 1814 1578 1558 1780 2868 3684 6727 7126 6952 5164 7539
Modelling of mining capacity has been done by looking at the profits that are and were made and comparing
these with the – uncertain – capital investment costs. The model further assumes three different states the
mining capacity can have, the mining capacity in preparation, mining capacity and the parked mining capacity. In
the models, mines close when they have reached the average mine lifetime or when continued losses occur and
largely ignores the difficult processes that happen at mine closures (Cochilco, 2002). A more detailed description
can be found in Box V. Artisanal or illegal mining is not separately incorporated in the model.
Box V: Modelling uncertainty: Mining and refinery capacity
As mentioned above, the mining capacity is modelled in three states (Figure 5.5). This structure resembles the
two-state structure used by Pruyt (2010a: 6), but differs in the way that here a bad economic situation will lead
to first parking of the mining capacity and then, after continued losses, decommissioning. A second difference is
the lack of a learning effect due to the cumulatively mined metal. The assumption here is that in a mature market
these effects are comparatively small in relation to the increasing costs due to the declining ore grade. The
growth of the mining capacity, from the state Mining capacity in preparation to the World copper mining capacity,
uses the following delay structure (Pruyt, 2010a):
Growth mining capacity =
DELAY N ( Preparation of capacity increase , Average mine permit term , Initial mining capacity in preparation /
Average mine permit term , Delay order mining capacity )
This is a way of modelling the structural uncertainty in the distribution of permit terms. The delay order (green
background) can now be changed using the EMA method.
21
Initial used mining
capacity
Parked copper
mining capacity Decommissioning of
mines due to losses
Delay order mining
capacity Recommissioning of Parking of copper
mining capacity mining capacity
Initial mining capacity
in preparation Initial mining
Mining capacity World copper
capacity in mining
Preparation of preparation Growth mine capacity Decomissioning of
capacity increase capacity mines due to age
Average mine
permit term Average mine
lifetime
Figure 5.5: SD structure for mining capacity
The preparation of capacity increase is relative to the already existing (used) and prepared mining capacity. First
a comparison is made however between the marginal costs of conventional mining and deep sea mining. The
cheapest method will receive most of the new capacity. A similar structure also exists for the development of
deep sea mining capacity and the capacity of smelters and refiners.
5.2.2. Smelting and refining

After mining, the copper ore needs to be processed before it can be incorporated in products. How this happens,
depends on the type of ore. Sulphide ores are processed by traditional smelting, while oxide ores and some
sulphide ores use solvent extraction-electro winning (SX-EW) (Lossin, 2005: 43). The latter is a relatively new
technique, developed in the sixties, which was in 2009 responsible for 18% of the copper production (ICSG,
2010b: 7). The products of copper smelters are blister and anode copper. In the refineries the copper is further
concentrated till it can be melted and cast (Lossin, 2005: 12, 13). The final product before “consumption” of the
copper is cathode copper and ingots.
In the model, smelting and refining processes are taken together, since the smelting and refinery
concentrations are comparable per country (ICSG, 2010b: 15-22). A second reason is the relatively low export
and import of blister and anode copper, compared to the export and import of other copper product categories.
This also indicates that smelting and refining are often in proximity of each other (ICSG, 2010b: 27).
Another simplification is the fact that copper semis and alloys are not separately considered in the
model. The reason for this is the fact that this will further complicate the model, but since the mass balances over
the stocks of copper do not change with these products, will not generate new insights with regard to the
sustainable use of copper.
5.3. Deep sea mining

The discovery of manganese nodules in the Pacific brought forward the interest about deep sea mining. These
nodules contain apart from manganese also cobalt, nickel and copper (Glasby, 2000). Until now, mining this
enormous resource has proved to be too expensive, but due to the high copper prices of the last years (Figure
4.9), there is at present at least one tangible project near Papua New Guinea for mining gold and copper in deep
sea (Hobson, 2011).
There are several concerns regarding deep sea mining operations. The first is the environmental concern
that mining in the ocean poses a serious threat to marine ecosystems (Halfar & Fujita, 2007). Especially the
sediment plumes and toxic effects in the ocean water could have a devastating effect. Other concerns are about
the legal aspects of deep sea mining outside Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of countries. For this purpose, the
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS, McKelvey, 1980; United Nations, 1982) was
22
undertaken and the International Seabed Authority (ISA) was set up (Glasby, 2000). These last developments
and the lower price of metals in the 1980’s and 1990’s stopped many initiatives on this subject.
Considering the legal status of the oceanic area outside the EEZ, especially articles 137 and 138 of
UNCLOS are important. They state that the area is common heritage of mankind and that no state or person can
claim any area or the resources in this area exclusively. Also articles 150 and 164 are particularly relevant, since
they discuss the development of deep sea mining in relation to the world economy and a balanced growth of
international trade. Annex III further describes conditions for prospecting, exploration and exploitation of mineral
resources outside the EEZ (United Nations, 1982).
Despite these limitations, it is considered very feasible that significant deep sea mining will be happening
in the future to come (Hobson, 2011). For this reason, it has been made an endogenous development of the
copper system modelled. Initially, it is assumed to be of negligible size. The marginal costs of deep sea mining
and conventional mining are compared to divide new mining capacity over both deep sea and conventional
mining. These two forms are in this way assumed to be competitive. In this way, it limits the growth of the
marginal costs of copper and potentially increases the supply and consumption of copper. In the regional model,
the development of deep sea copper happens only in those regions which have an average GDP per capita above
a certain threshold value. This resembles the need for sophisticated technology for deep sea mining, but this
approach is conflicting with the idea of the UNCLOS agreement. It is still considered to be realistic, since even
when profits of deep sea mining are shared via the ISA, the actual resources will most probably find their way to
the region where the technology existed.
Box VI: Modelling uncertainty: Deep sea mining capacity
While the structure and development of conventional (onshore) copper mining operations are well documented,
the development of deep sea mining is not, apart from UNCLOS (United Nations, 1982) and the few
developments that are currently taking place (Hobson, 2011). This makes it more difficult to model this potential
new source copper, while it has the potential to make a difference in the long term availability of this metal.
The first uncertain issue is the development of the deep sea resources and reserve base (Figure 5.6). This is
considered to be comparable with the development of conventional resources and reserves. There is however
one big difference: presently no deep sea copper reserves are classified (U.S. Geological Survey, 2011: 49). The
model therefore uses a “normal resource reserve relation” to kick start the deep sea reserve development.
<Administration
Administration time>
Part of resource time
base seabased
Initial seabased Initial seabeased Percentage lost
Minimum
resources reserve base reserve during refining
Seabased Seabased base size
Seabased
copper copper
resource base resources reserve base Deep sea mining
Seabased Copper from
seabased production
copper to resources
resources Last years mined
<Deep sea mining
copper production
capacity>
<Relative recommissioning <One year>
Deep sea reserve
of deep sea mine capacity> <Relative increase in Delay order mining
base development
deep sea mining
Threshold for junior companies
capacity>
to start deep sea reserve base
development
New autonomous Relation between deep sea <Normal resource

reserve development copper resources and reserve relation>
reserve base
Figure 5.6: Deep sea copper resource and reserve development
The development of deep sea mining capacity has a similar problem: even though some deep sea mining
capacity is already under development (Hobson, 2011), it is perceivable that the growth of deep sea mining will
exceed normal growth percentages for the conventional mining capacity by far. The assumption in the copper
models is consequently that all new mining capacity is related to all existing mining capacity and mining capacity
in preparation. This can be seen in Figure 5.7. This is divided over the conventional and deep sea preparation of
new mining capacity by comparing the marginal costs of both distinct types of mining. Roughly put is the
preparation of new deep sea capacity equal to the new conventional capacity, when the marginal costs of both
23
copper sources are equal.
<Marginal costs deep <Marginal costs
sea mining> mining>
Relation deep sea and <Mining

conventional mining costs capacity <Relative recommissioning of
utilisation rate> copper mine and smelter
Mining usage capacity>
investment cap
Preparation of deep sea New capacity for New capacity for Delay order mining
mining capacity increase deep sea mines conventional mines capacity
Effect of use of
mining capacity
in preparation
<Forcast Recycling Mining
Input Rate> capacity in
Preparation of preparation
Deep sea mining capacity increase
capacity in
preparation Average mine
Proposed
Initial deep sea new mining permit term
capacity in
capacity
preparation
Figure 5.7: SD structure for new mining capacity
A consequence of this type of modelling, where the deep sea reserve base and mining capacity are not coupled,
is that a situation is perceivable where the mining capacity exceeds the remaining copper reserve base, resulting
in a sudden drop in production. This seems possible however, since the production capacity of deep sea copper
mining will probably be mobile and not linked to production locations.
For the regional model, an assumption was made that the possibility for deep sea mining is dependent on the
regional GDP per capita. This resembles the thought that the higher technological demands necessary for this
kind of mining is probably not available in lower income countries. A threshold was thus built in, only enabling
the possibility for deep sea mining development when the GDP per capita in a certain region is higher than this
value.
5.4. Copper recycling or secondary copper

A considerable proportion of all used copper is recycled, resulting in a Recycling Input Rate (RIR) of
approximately 35% in 2008 (ICSG, 2010b: 47). Copper does not lose its chemical or physical properties when
recycling, even when it is recycled over and over again (Lossin, 2005: 38). Reasons this percentage is not higher
are the long average lifetime of copper products (Angerer et al., 2010: 26) and the still growing consumption of
the metal. This is also illustrated by the higher input rate of 37% for secondary copper in 1997 (Lossin, 2005:
38).
In copper recycling two important input streams are distinguished. Primary or new scrap is copper which
is lost during production of copper products, while secondary or old scrap comes from products at the end of
their lifetime. (Lossin, 2005: 38). Dependent on the grade of the scrap, it needs smelting or refining before reuse
is possible.
Especially for the secondary copper, several factors limit the amount which is produced. These are first
the collection rate, the percentage of products recycled. This is an important factor which can be increased with
policies from local government. Other factors are the coefficients which influence the RER copper score during
treatment, the copper score during dismembering and the percentage of copper recovered from scrap (Angerer
et al., 2010: 26), which combined give the total recycling score or recycling efficiency rate .
The modelling of the recycling happens in a similar way. The different factors mentioned above are
uncertain parameters in the model. The smelting and refinery capacity is used for the recycling process, which
uses in this way a part of the capacity otherwise used for primary copper production.
24
6. Uncertainties and risks in the copper system
Despite the fact that the copper system is well documented and the copper price is formed in an open way, much
information about the systems parameters and structure remains uncertain. In combination with these unknowns,
also risks exist for the system. In the next sections, which are the last chapter concerning the conceptual phase
of this research, these uncertainties and risks are discussed.
6.1. Parametric uncertainties

Simply put, the parametric uncertainties are all external variables, which can be “caught” using a single value,
initialised during the setup of the model. These can be divided into parameter values, initial values, delay orders,
delay times and switches. The first category is the simplest. Good examples are the “Average lifetime of copper in
use” (see the model structure in B.1.1, this variable in on the right of the figure) and the “Substitution threshold”,
which is used by comparing the aluminium price with the copper price. Despite the fact that these values are
constant throughout the run, this is of course a simplification of reality. All sorts of variables, both endogenous
and exogenous of the copper system, can change these values during the period. For experimental purposes
however, it is important to be able to alter these variables and keep considering them as constants. When an
uncertainty can impossibly be considered constant throughout the run time, it may be built as a lookup function
(Sterman, 2000: 552-563) dependent on time.
The second type is the initial value. An initial value sets a stock at the beginning of a run. The only
moment they influence the system is thus at the moment of initialisation. Therefore, they do not give us the
same problem as the constants described above. Good examples are the initial values for the Reserve base and
the Mining capacity.
Delays have two different kinds of parametric uncertainties: the delay order and the delay time. The
latter is largely comparable with the earlier mentioned constants and requires the same assumption for them to
be constant during the entire run, but they may also be modelled dynamically and change over time. The delay
order can be any integer value of at least 1. A good example of the delay was the mining capacity discussed in
Box IV. The delay order in this case can be seen as the number of procedures the mine developer needs to work
through before the mine is constructed. The sum of the average delay times per procedure is the total delay
time.
The last type is the switch. This is used for alternating between different model structures and structural
uncertainties. It can also be used for changing between certain scenarios, like the world population scenarios
which form input for the model (UNPD, 2011a). The switch can be considered a true ESDMA uncertainty, since it
is not used in normal System Dynamics practice, but is essential for being able to explore the structural
uncertainty space of the system.
All parametric uncertainties belonging to the different copper models can be found in the Excel
document attached to this report. To be able to generate these Excel worksheets a Python script was used which
was developed especially for this research in cooperation with Jan Kwakkel (appendix D.3).
6.2. Structural uncertainties

The structural uncertainties cannot be caught using parameters. They pose a true difficulty for the modeller. In
the copper system, despite the fact that it is well documented, these uncertainties also exist. The first of them
was already discussed in section 5.1.1. It is the fixed stock verses the opportunity cost paradigm (Tilton & Lagos,
25
2007: 20). The models used in this study choose side in this discussion, by using a Resource base and letting the
Resources develop on behalf of it.
Another structural uncertainty is the Copper use per dollar, or per GDP/capita. Despite some research
and information on the type of relation to be expected, the exact form of the relation between GDP/capita and
the copper use remains unclear and is probably subject to changes over time (Wouters & Bol, 2009). This is
modelled by using different types of relations, which are normalised on a dimensionless scale. By comparing the
calculated GDP/capita with a normalisation value (which is a parametric uncertainty) and switching between the
different relations per run, it is possible to place this structural uncertainty in the uncertainty space of the model.
Further examples are the ore grade, economic growth (Box II) and the formation of energy and
aluminium prices. For more information about how these are modelled, please look at the model structure in
Appendix A and the model equations in the linked Excel file.
6.3. System risks

The copper system could be subject to system risks which can cause unwanted behaviour for system
stakeholders, but no risks were defined at the beginning of this study. The research primarily aims at generating
insight in the systems behaviour and not at assessing the value of the behaviour characteristics. Further, the
commissioning actors were and are not active in the copper system. The great advantage of this point of origin is
that it leaves space for the researcher and the reader to think independently about possible system risks.
For possible policy design in the copper system, further discussed in chapter 8, and when thinking about
ways of influencing the system by actors participating in it, it is important to think about types of behaviour which
need to or can be countered. The risks stated here are therefore assumptions and suggestions by the researcher,
and no universal truths. They are intended to illustrate potential unwanted behaviour, from perceived different
perspectives (actors or stakeholders) in the system. This process was however supported by literature and
experts suggesting certain characteristics of unwanted behaviour, for example Rademaker & Kooroshy (2010),
Van der Kleijn (2011) and Gordon et al. (1987). This behaviour will now be discussed with regard for the actors
for which the risk exists. All risks are summarised in Table 6.1.
The first risk discussed here are extremely high prices, where especially consumers are at risk. The
relevant question now is: what is high, or what is the threshold above which the copper price can be considered
high? In this research this is assumed to be at 100000 Dollar/t of copper, a price level approximately 10 times as
high as presently. Copper will at that moment not yet be as expensive as precious metals like gold, but price level
will make many present-day applications significantly more difficult.
Another risk could be high price volatility. Here both consumers and producers can be at risk, since the
price alternates between high and low values. In this research the price is considered excessively volatile if the
change in price is more than a factor two positive or negative in a period of a 1/8th (0.125 yr) of a year. This will
be called a copper crisis in this report.
High substitution can also be a risk for the copper system, since high substitution can cause a rapid
decline in demand. This is mainly disadvantageous for producers and investors on the copper supply side.
Substitution is considered high when more than 80% of the intrinsic copper demand is substituted at any given
time.
One of the risks that is often mentioned in discussions about mineral scarcity, is the low number of years
left of production, which is calculated by dividing the reserves by the production (the R/P ratio). This would be
disadvantageous for the copper consumers, since it would indicate that the copper reserves will soon be finished.
The extreme low value is defined here as a value under 10 years. This would mean that the copper reserves are
26
not being further developed, or that the reserve development cannot keep pace with the mine production. Please
note: the R in the ratio is in this case the reserve base, as was already mentioned before. The value is thus
higher than the R/P ratios normally found in literature.
The final risk assumed to exist in the copper system is the opposite of the former. The year left of
copper mining can also become very high. This is would be a risk for producers, more specifically the mining
companies, and the investors in those companies. The value taken here is an R/P ratio larger than 500 years. It
could be an indicator that the copper production has collapsed, since the reserves are linked to mining operations
and developing reserves is also an investment.
After the review of the results generated by the different copper models in sections 7.2 and 7.3 it was
considered whether these risks occur. For those risks that form a potential threat to the system, policy options
have been designed.
Table 6.1: Potential risks
Nr. Name Criterion Stakeholder

1 High price Real copper price > 100000 Dollar/t Consumers
2 Copper crisis Change in price > factor 2 in 1/8th of a Consumers, producers
year
3 High Part of original demand substituted > 0.8 Producers, investors
substitution
4 Low R/P ratio Year left of copper mining < 10 Year Consumers
5 High R/P ratio Year left of copper mining > 500 Year Producers, investors
27
28
Part Three: Exploratory Model Analysis
29
7. Behaviour and scenarios of the copper models
In this chapter, the behaviour and scenarios displayed by the three copper models is explained and related to the
reality of the copper system. Firstly, it will be explained why the economic feed structure had little effect on the
behaviour of the models. Secondly, the most distinct types of behaviour of the (K)PIs, the price volatility,
gradually declining demand, potentially strong substitution and high values for the years left of copper mining,
will be explained that were observed in all model varieties. This is followed by differences in behaviour visible in
the different model varieties, like the higher consumption of copper displayed in the bottom up model and in the
same model, the lower speed of substitution. Thirdly, some remarks will be made regarding the validity of the
outcomes. Especially the recycling input rate and the global consumption of copper showed too low values due to
wrong assumptions. It is demonstrated however that changing these assumptions does not change the overall
behaviour of the system. Finally, the scenarios visible in the copper system will be explained. This chapter draws
much information from 0, which is the experimental report for the main ESDMA experiments.
7.1. The effect of the ESDMA economic growth structure

The economic growth does not seem to make a large difference in behaviour. This can be seen by comparing the
runs lines of the different (K)PIs or the Kernel density estimations (KDE, see Parzen, 1962; Rosenblatt, 1956) of
the distribution of the run lines at the end state. An example of the behavioural patterns for the case with and
without can be seen in Figure 7.1 and Figure 7.2, where the global consumption of refined copper can be
compared. The only (K)PI that did show a difference was the real price of copper. The outcomes of all
performance indicators are visible in E.2.
Figure 7.1: Global consumption of copper with economic Figure 7.2: Global consumption of copper without economic
feed, top down model feed, top down model
Whether indeed the economic feed has little effect, can be proven with a regret analysis, but this has not been
performed due to the scope of the research. There is however some logic behind the little difference: the
economic growth drives stocks: the GDP, the aluminium price and the energy price. These stocks smooth the
capricious behaviour of the economic growth. Some difference could have been expected due to the substitution
threshold, where a small difference can already cause substitution or resubstitution. Long term effects are
however, as well with substitution, more important than the fluctuations generated by the economic growth.
When thinking about the real world copper system, it also seems plausible that fluctuations in the
economic growth will not have a considerable effect on the development of capacity for mining and refining of
copper, but only long term economic trends. The current high level copper price is therefore probably caused by
a disbalance between supply and demand, which will be discussed in next section, and not by the current
economic growth, as was postulated recently in Dutch media (Depuydt, 2011).
30
Taking all these issues regarding the little effect of the economic feed structure in consideration, the
further experiments in this research have been performed without the economic feed active. This allows a clearer
view on the different types of behaviour displayed by the copper models and will make it consequently easier to
interpret the outcomes, without changing the underlying dynamics of the system, as this test demonstrated.
Box VII: Visualising ESDMA results
There are different methods for showing data generated by the runs performed for ESDMA (EMA Group, 2011).
This research method generates a considerably larger amount of data than traditional SD modelling does. The
trick is therefore to leave certain information out, in order to create a clearer image. In this box the different
visualisation techniques used will be discussed. For clarity, the same input is used for every figure in this box, the
RIR.
The first visualisation is the envelopes graph (Figure 7.3). The envelope is created by using the highest and
lowest explored value of a (K)PI on any saved time step. The behaviour of specific runs is thus not visible. The
advantage of this visualisation is the quick overview it gives of the perceived bounds. Differences in policies or
other characteristics can be shown by using different coloured envelopes for each policy (Figure 7.4). In the
envelopes used here, the horizontal or x-axis shows the time (unit Year), the vertical or y-axis the (K)PI, while
the unit is displayed next to it.
Figure 7.3: Envelope. No distinction between policies Figure 7.4: Envelope. There are two panes (colours are in
the legend) super positioned over each other
The lines graph (Figure 7.5) shows the behavioural patterns of the (K)PI, in this case of a set of 100 runs. Every
line represents a different run of the model. A set of colours makes it possible to distinguish them.
Figure 7.5: Lines graph
It is also possible to give a kernel density estimation or KDE (Parzen, 1962; Rosenblatt, 1956) next to envelopes
and lines graph (Figure 7.6 and Figure 7.7). These estimate the distribution of runs at the final run time, i.e. 2050
in this research and are displayed to the right of the envelopes or lines graphs. A histogram (Pearson, 1895) can
be used for the same purpose.
Figure 7.6: Envelopes graph with KDE Figure 7.7: Lines graph with KDE
A disadvantage of the two dimensional envelopes graph with the KDE for the end state is the fact that may be
interested in the distribution of the behaviour patterns on other moments in the run time as well. A solution for
this problem is offered by 3D envelopes graph (Figure 7.8). The KDE is now calculated for every time step saved
and projected on the y-z-plane for the given time. Over the different KDE values the surface is drawn which is
visible in the graph. The easiest way of imagining it is printing an Envelope (Figure 7.6) with a KDE and folding
the paper between the envelopes and the KDE in such a way that the KDE stands upright. The distribution of
runs is then depicted on the Z-axis, but this axis is often left away, since the exact value for the KDE often does
not add any information. Red indicates a very high concentration of runs, red a high concentration, and via green
and cyan to dark blue, which indicates zero likelihood. The time and the (K)PI are given on the x and y axis and
lie in the horizontal plane. For interpretation purposes, the envelope can be turned in all three dimensions, to
31
reveal the side which gives the best view on the data.
Figure 7.8: 3D envelope with KDE values on the z-axis and Figure 7.9: 3D envelope without the KDE values and a
the standard perspective turned perspective
In this research, mostly the lines and the 3D envelopes graphs will be used for interpretation. This is, because in
addition to these, the normal envelopes graph does not add any more information. Since the normal envelopes
are easier to overview than the 3D envelopes, they can be found in the annexes for comparison.
A totally different way of visualising the information generated by the models, is the multiplot (EMA Group, 2011).
In this graph different (K)PIs are plotted against each other on the end state of the time period. The names of
the outcomes are plotted on the diagonal axis, from top left to bottom right. On the intersecting panes, the
correlation between the horizontal and vertical outcome is visible (Figure 7.10). In this case, there is clearly no
correlation visible. The same plot can also be made with distinction in colours for the different policies (Figure
7.11).
Figure 7.10: Multiplot with Part of original demand Figure 7.11: Multiplot with Part of original demand
substituted and RIR substituted and RIR and different colour for the policies
7.2. Behaviour observed in all model varieties

The different copper models showed similar behavioural patterns regarding five (K)PIs in the system. These types
of regularly occurring behaviour in the runs were periodic price volatility and very high copper prices, a declining
copper demand, a potentially strong substitution and oscillation in the substitution, high values for years left of
copper mining and low values for the relative part deep sea mining. Four of these issues were also identified as
potential system risks in section 6.3. In the next sub sections, the causes for this behaviour in the modelled
system will be discussed and linked to the real world copper system.
7.2.1. Price volatility and high copper prices

In lines graph (Figure 7.12) it is visible that the copper price shows diverse and extreme behaviour. The highest
prices found in this case are well over 1 million Dollars per tonne, but most typical is the volatile behaviour the
32
price shows. In many runs, sharp in- and decreases are visible, or copper crises as defined in section 6.3. These
crises seem to occur multiple times in a run, alternating between a strong drop and strong rise in price. These
indicate a strong disbalance between the availability and the demand of copper over a prolonged period of time.
In the line graph it is unclear whether these crises tend to increase in severity during the run time, stay rather
stable or are dampened and what the chances are for either of these options. The lines graph cannot help in this
case, but clustering of the behaviour could. This analysis has however not been performed here.
Figure 7.12: Lines graph for the Real price of copper, top down model
This cyclical behaviour with alternating prices below and above the marginal costs of copper seemed to be
present in the real world copper system as well, as the copper price developments of the last thirty years in
Figure 4.9 demonstrate. When observing copper price data before 1981 however, price oscillations occur, but not
in the same manner. This can be due to system changes, which also caused the since 1914 traded electrolytic
wire bars to be changed to cathode copper in 1981 (Svedberg & Tilton, 2006: 510, 517).
Another reason for a change in the copper price behaviour may be changes in the delay times, like the
permit term for developing new mining capacity, causing the periodic behaviour. While they have been kept
constant during each run in the models, it is very likely that in reality these may change over time due to
changing institutions and investor demands.
7.2.2. Declining demand

Another important finding from the ESDMA study is the general behaviour of the global consumption of refined
copper (Figure 7.13). The copper consumption seems to be slowly decreasing after 2010. This is probably due to
the increasing marginal costs of copper compared to the costs of substitutes. The rising costs are caused by the
falling ore grade, making the demand for energy to process the ore higher. It is likely that substitutes are not
subject to these increasing energy needs.
In the case of aluminium, already mentioned before as one of the main substitutes of copper, this is
probably true (Gordon et al., 1987), since this metal is significantly more abundant than copper (U.S. Geological
Survey, 2011: 17, 27, 49). It is therefore well perceivable that even with fluctuating copper prices the overall
trend of copper use in the coming 40 years will be declining.
The overall the global copper consumption explored by the ESDMA effort seems rather low however,
since the present consumption (see Table 5.1) was considerably higher than the values displayed in Figure 7.13.
This validity issue will be further discussed in section 7.5.
33
Figure 7.13: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], top down model. The graph is truncated at 30
million tonne per Year
7.2.3. Strong substitution and oscillation

The substitution of the copper demand tends to be increasing during the run time for many cases, but it is also
visible that this happens with oscillatory behaviour. This behaviour can be explained with the modelling
assumptions for substitution (Box IV). For example, when at a certain moment in time 20% of the demand is
substituted and new demand arises due to the economic situation, this percentage will remain the same only
when the copper price is equal to the substitution threshold on short term and when the average copper price
over a longer period is also comparable to this value. Especially the long term effect is important here, since a
copper consumer will first take his loss when first confronted with a high price. A prolonged period of time with a
higher price for copper than the substitution threshold will however cause a rapid increase in the part of the
demand that is substituted, since this longer period allows more opportunity for the choice for a substitute. The
subsequent strong decrease in demand for copper will result in a sharp decrease of the copper price, which can
in term become lower than the substitution threshold for a longer period of time, which reverses the process.
Figure 7.14: Lines graph for Part of original demand

substituted, top down model
Figure 7.15: 3D envelopes of the Part of original demand

substituted [Dmnl], top down model. The graph is not
truncated, so the values for the substitution lie between 0
and 1
34
The trends of substitution show some bifurcation, as can be seen both in Figure 7.15 and the KDE of Figure 7.14.
This means that two trends seem plausible, one with relatively little substitution (up to 30%) and one with
relatively much substitution (over 30%, with a peek around 90%). The high copper substitution is the primary
cause for the above discussed declining consumption of refined copper, while the situation with little substitution
is more comparable to the present use of copper. In many cases the oscillatory behaviour for the substitution
moves between these two states of low and high substitution and vice versa.
This situation is well perceivable in the coming years, even when it was not observed in the period
before. Till 2005 copper was indeed more expensive than aluminium for most of the time (see Figure 4.9), but
given the better electrical conductivity of copper (Lossin, 2005: 4, 5) the price difference could not be considered
a prime reason for substitution. The current high copper price will, if it continues to remain on this level, probably
instigate a considerable demand substitution. When this occurs, this will immediately result in a lower copper
price which might even become lower than the values of before 2005. With rising marginal costs for copper
mining this forms a motivation for the classification of a system risk for copper producers and investors in mining
and refining capacity, as was given in section 6.3.
7.2.4. Many years left of copper mining

The lines graph for year left of copper mining shows a remarkable empty view. This has to do with the
extraordinary high values for this KPI that some runs show. Its variable is calculated by dividing the reserve base
(contrary what was done for example by Koppelaar (2011), who looked at the reserves) by the global mine
production. The reserve base can only decrease by mining, while it grows semi-autonomous by findings of the
junior companies, the semi independent exploration companies. The drastic growth of the year left of mining can
thus only be explained by cases in which the production declines heavily compared to the reserve base present.
This is probably caused by the strong substitution, of which cases were visible in Figure 7.14 and which was
discussed above.
Figure 7.16: Lines graph for the Year left of copper mining, top down model
Figure 7.17 shows a similar view as the copper price development in Figure 7.16. After some time the year left of
copper mining has diverged so much, that not many trends can be seen, other than the divergence itself. This
view corresponds with the idea that the copper production is likely to decrease in the coming period of forty
years. This is also clearly visible when the year left of copper mining is plotted against the copper consumption
(Figure 7.18). A high value for the year left of copper mining only exists with a low value for the global
consumption of refined copper.
Whether the values for this KPI will actually rise so dramatically in the coming years, is unclear. These
results do demonstrate what the true value of this outcome is. By some authors a small value for the R/P ratio
indicates a possible risk for depletion (see for example Diederen, 2009). In the dynamic perspective of this
research a short period “left of mining” indicates that most reserves discovered and classified are minable to a
large extent, indicating a good price for the mineral and little risks for producers and investors. Another reason
for a low lifetime of copper mining may be the size of the different mines and the time needed to pay back the
35
loans taken for development of the production facility (Wellmer et al., 2006). In both cases, low values for year
left of copper mining do not pose to be a system risk, while high values indicate either a decline in the mine
production or high investment costs for development of the facilities.
Figure 7.18: Multiplot of Global consumption of refined

Figure 7.17: 3D envelopes of the Year left of copper mining copper [t/Year] and Year left of copper mining [Year], top
[Year], top down model. The graph is truncated at 500 year down model
7.2.5. Low relative part deep sea mining

A final important outcome is the perspective on the future of deep sea mining in the coming years (Figure 7.19).
In some cases the deep sea mining seems to form a substantial part of the total amount of mined copper, but
given these outcomes it seems most likely that deep sea mining is not going to form more than a few percent of
total mining. Please note however that, considering the size of the yearly copper production, that this will be very
large operations.
This result is comprehendible when indeed the current size of all copper mining operations is considered.
Even when a considerable part of new mining capacity is deep sea mining capacity, the share of the active deep
sea mining capacity will remain rather low. Only when practically no new conventional mining capacity is being
development, high proportions of ocean mining can be expected, which seems highly unlikely. Deep sea mining
will therefore probably not form an important solution for potential future copper scarcity issues.
Figure 7.19: 3D envelopes of the Relative part of deep sea mining [Dmnl], top down model. The graph is not truncated, so the
values for the substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100%
36
7.3. Behavioural differences between the models
Despite the fact that the above mentioned behavioural patterns were observed in all three copper models, some
differences were also found in the results of the experiments. The first difference found was the strong cyclical
behaviour for the copper price in the bottom up model, while the regional model showed higher prices for copper
than the other models. Another difference was the global consumption of refined copper, for which the bottom up
model showed a wider spread in values. Finally, the bottom up model showed slightly slower maximum rates of
substitution. Now these types behaviour will be discussed and explained.
7.3.1. Different types of price volatility
Figure 7.21: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper

Figure 7.20: Lines graph for the Real price of copper, bottom [Dollar/t], bottom up model. The graph is truncated at
up model 100000 Dollar/t
The Real price of copper in the bottom up model seemed to have a strong tendency for cyclical, oscillatory
behaviour, which seemed to have a far more constant period than the behaviour of the top down model. This is
visible in both Figure 7.20 and Figure 7.21. It is unclear what causes this very distinct behaviour, since all
parameters of the model were varied in the ESDMA experimental setup. Further analysis by means of the Patient
Rule Induction Method (PRIM) (Friedman & Fisher, 1999), Random Forests (Breiman, 2001), clustering the
behaviour or other machine learning methods might help in this case. It is interesting to see however that the
prices are on average less high than the prices in the top down model. This is also indicated by the highest value
of the KDE, which is almost 1.8 10-5, which is significantly higher than the value just under 1.0 10-5 in Figure
7.12.
Figure 7.22: Lines graph for the Real price of copper, regional
model
Figure 7.23: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper
[Dollar/t], regional model. The graph is truncated at 100000
Dollar/t
37
The real price of copper for the regional model shows the most extreme view for possible price developments in
the coming forty years. While clustering could shed more light on the exact behavioural modes of the runs, the
behaviour of the copper price seems to be characterised by strong surges followed by a gradual decreases
(Figure 7.22). The strong increases can be caused by the same disbalance noticed in section 7.2.1. Figure 7.23
shows no distribution of data after approximately 2020. This is due to the fact that the differences between the
runs are so great, that no concentration of values can be seen. Between 2010 and 2020 this already happens, but
to a lesser extent. It is also unclear why specifically in this model variety the prices show this wide distribution of
possible values. Further analysis could help in this case by distinguishing which uncertainties play a major role in
causing the price volatility and distribution.
Since it is unclear what causes these types of behaviour, it is difficult to relate it to reality and explain
whether this is indeed likely to happen.
7.3.2. Different calculations for global consumption of copper
Figure 7.24: Lines graph for Global consumption of refined

copper, bottom up model Figure 7.25: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of
refined copper [t/Year], bottom up model. The graph is
truncated at 30 million t/Year
The first big difference of the global consumption of refined copper generated by the Bottom up model is higher
than the consumption displayed in Figure 7.13, but in the period 2000 – 2010 on average still lower than the
historical data found in Table 5.1. A second feature of the top down consumption behaviour, the serration in the
different run lines, seems to be less distinguished, although it is still visible.
The overall higher consumption copper, which was just noticed, is probably caused by a higher average
value for the RIR, which will be discussed in 7.5.1. The same assumption was made however for the relation
between primary scrap and copper consumption, causing the values to be too low again and perhaps also the
initial value error visible in Figure 7.25 at time is 2000.
7.3.3. Differences in substitution

The sometimes oscillating behaviour of the demand substitution in the bottom up model is largely the same as
the substitution displayed in Figure 7.14, but the slopes of the runs seem to be less steep. This is well
understandable with some knowledge of the structural differences between both models. The top down model
used only one substitution threshold, while the bottom up model used six, one for each major use of copper (the
different uses were visible in Figure 4.4). When the copper reaches the threshold of one of the uses, this
particular use will be more substituted, while other uses, with higher thresholds, may even experience
resubstitution. Since the speed of substitution seems to have a great influence on price volatility in the copper
38
system due to sudden drops and increases of the demand, this would explain fewer occurrences of copper crises,
as defined in section 6.3, in the bottom up model.
Also in reality the slower substitution due to the availability of different kinds of substitutes for copper,
each with an own price and price development, seems plausible. This reduces the effects of the system risk of
high substitution. This was also noticeable by the shorter time needed to run the experiments for the bottom up
model, compared to the top down model, since crises in the price caused Vensim to take a very long time needed
to perform a run containing these heavy crises. The less severe nature of copper crises occurring in reality does
not mean however that they will not occur. Even with substitution rates comparable to the rates observed in the
bottom up model, the copper price fluctuations due to substitution may be very strong.
Figure 7.26: Lines graph for the Part of original demand substituted, bottom up model
7.4. Scenarios and risks displayed by the copper models

As a short summary of the behaviour discussed above, in this section some scenarios displayed by the copper
models will be identified. First, the models show a declining copper consumption. Probably this causes a decline
in copper mine production, which can be related to increasing years left of copper mining. Regarding the copper
price it became clear that the price may rise, but that high price volatility with alternating periods of low and high
prices are more probable. The high copper prices cause the substitution of demand to increase, sometimes
dramatically, causing more price volatility. Finally, deep sea mining will probably become part of the copper
“mixture”, but will probably not be the solution for copper shortages in the coming forty years.
Regarding the five risks stated in section 6.3, it seems that high prices over 100000 Dollar/t are visible in
a considerable amount of runs. Heavy price volatility, or copper crises, seems to have an even higher prevalence.
Exact numbers regarding these issues cannot be given however, but respectively PRIM and clustering analyses
could elucidate the matter. High substitution, with values for the part of original demand substituted of over 0.8,
is also seen in many runs, for all models. This could be the cause of the high values for the years left of copper
mining. Many runs show values over 500 years, some even substantially larger numbers. The potential risk of
having only a few years left of copper mining did not seem to be a problem.
One final remark needs to be made about the substitution of copper. The real problem concerning the
substitution of copper did not seem to be a high substitution, but a rapid change in the substituted part of the
intrinsic demand, probably causing many copper crises. This risk was not considered in section 6.3, but seems to
be, in addition to disbalance in the supply structure, a major source of heavy price fluctuations.
7.5. Less valid outcomes

Despite the well perceivable nature of different types of behaviour observed from most (K)PIs, some outcomes
are less plausible. First of all, the values shown by the RIR and the consumption of copper were too low. Another
issue is the initial value error displayed by the global consumption of refined copper. Finally, it is explained why
these less valid outcomes do not have a considerable effect on the other outcomes of this research
39
7.5.1. Low RIR and consumption
In a stable system, the amount of End of Life (EOL) copper is equal to the copper consumption. The output of
secondary copper is than equal to the collection rate times the Recycling Efficiency Rate (RER), while when we
assume that all recycled copper is reused, this is exactly the RIR. Since in this research both the collection rate
and the RER are modelled statically, changes in the RIR during runs are only dependent on changes in the copper
consumption. A growing copper consumption will thus result in a lower RIR and vice versa. The increasing values
for the RIR (Figure 7.27) are consequently caused by the gradually declining copper consumption visible in Figure
7.13.
Figure 7.27: Low values for the Recycling Input Rate [Dmnl], top down model
It is however typical to notice that the RIR generated by the ESDMA research is lower than the RIR of around 1/3
mentioned by the ICSG (2010b). The easiest way of explaining this is by an exaggeration of the uncertainties
regarding the collection rate and the RER. The four uncertainties relevant in this case (collection rate, copper
score during treatment, copper score during dismembering, and the percentage of copper recovered from scrap)
(Angerer et al., 2010) need however to have an average value of almost 76% to create an RIR of 33.3%, while
an average value of 50% gives an RIR of no greater than 6.25%, both in a system in equilibrium. This indicates
the importance of both high collection rates and RER, despite the fact that the values presented in Figure 7.27
might be an underestimation of reality. When thinking about the possible RIR however, these values indicate
clear the fact that with growing marginal costs for copper mining it is of utmost importance to increase both
collection rate of EOL copper and the RER. In chapter 8 and 9 will be more focus on the RIR and the effect of a
higher RER.
7.5.2. Low consumption of copper

Overall the global copper consumption explored by the ESDMA effort seems too low, since the present
consumption (see Table 5.1) was considerably higher than the values displayed in Figure 7.13. The bottom up
consumption (Figure 7.25) showed also higher values, but is on average still too low. There are two possible
explanations for these low values. First, the RIR is probably an underestimation of the true RIR, as was discussed
in the previous section.
Second, the bounds of the value of the yearly copper use related to GDP are probably taken too narrow.
Another reason could have been a wrong assumption about which flow the global consumption of copper and the
copper demand actually represent. Further investigation of the values of the ICSG however proved that the initial
assumption was right, but that the definitions of the relevant variables in the model could be improved. This did
not have an effect however in increasing the copper consumption.
40
7.5.3. Initial value error consumption of copper
The initial value problem visible in Figure 7.13 and Figure 7.24 is caused by the way the availability of copper,
crucial for the amount of copper which can be consumed, is calculated. This happens by dividing the global
inventories of copper by the production time. The first variable is a stock, while the second is modelled as a
constant. Both values are in essence uncertain, but the range of the first is considerably smaller due to the latter
given its well documented nature. Since the consumption is defined as the smallest value of either the availability
of refined copper, or the copper demand combined with the postponed demand, a relatively high availability in
the initial state may cause a very short termed higher consumption of copper.
7.5.4. Effects on the validity of the other outcomes

The question now remains how valid the outcomes of the research are, without the above mentioned correct
assumptions and values. First, this research was not only performed to explore the bounds of (K)PIs in the
copper system, but also to explore the behavioural modes and, by doing so, discover what structures and
mechanisms in the system causes them. It is not likely that with higher average values for the RIR and the
different assumption for the consumption of refined copper, the modes of conduct of the (K)PIs will change
considerable, since these changes are mostly parametric in nature and do not contain extensive structural
alterations in the model. Therefore, despite the problems noticed, the types of behavioural modes probably will
not change much with higher values for the RIR, as does the evaluation of the policy options will show in chapter
9.
To test this thought, a new set of runs has been performed in which the wrong bounds for the recycling
coefficients have been corrected and the definition for the global consumption of refined copper has been
remodelled. The results of this experiment are discussed in next section.
7.6. Observations from new data

The new runs indeed displayed higher values for the RIR and the global consumption of copper, as can be seen
in Figure 7.28 and Figure 7.29. The global consumption is however still relatively low compared to the data
provided by the ICSG (ICSG, 2010a, 2011). This is probably due to the already mentioned small bound for the
constant yearly copper use related to GDP. The advantage of the small bound is however that the outcomes are
easier interpretable, since the directions of behaviour are clearer visible in the figures. The overall behaviour of
the outcomes remained however the same in new runs. This was expected and validates the outcomes discussed
above.
Figure 7.28: The RIR [Dmnl] in the new runs, top down
model Figure 7.29: The global consumption of copper [t/Year] in the
new model
41
8. Policy design for the copper system
This chapter regards the designing of policies able to limit the potential unwanted behaviour that was discussed
before in section 6.3. First the different approaches for policy design and testing are discussed. This is followed
by the basic setup which all policy options share. In the third section, the different characteristics of all designed
policies are discussed, while the differences in design regarding the model varieties are discussed in the final
section. An overview of all policies and their characteristics is given in Table 8.1.
8.1. Development and testing of policy options

For the design of policy options in an ESDMA context, roughly two approaches can be chosen:
· Closing the circle: select problematic behaviour patterns, try to find which selection of input parameters
cause these behaviour (for example with the random forest method), select those that can be influenced
by policy makers, companies or investors and try to develop policies that (combined) have the biggest
impact.
· Understanding of the system: the modeller needs to know which stakeholders can have an influence on
the system and at which points this influence “connects” (Box VIII). This influence needs to be
developed into possible policy options.
In this research, the second option is chosen, since the development of policy options is not in the primary scope
of this research. These options have been developed in different forms to acknowledge the different paradigms
the model varieties stand for. These differences will be discussed in section 8.4.
Testing of the effects of the policies happened by running each model variety with the different options
with one set of input parameters. This allowed assessing the effects of each policy by comparing its behaviour
with the base run of the model. Another test, which was not performed, could be a full factorial analysis on a
selected set of runs, which behaviour for certain (K)PIs is representative for the different behavioural modes the
model generates. The results of this approach can make clear which selection of combined policy options has
most effect in reducing the systems unwanted behaviour, which was defined in section 6.3. These selected runs
can be selected by picking them with from clusters of behaviour.
8.2. Basic setup for the policy options

With the approach mentioned in last section, six different policy options have been developed. These policies are
rather classical: they do not react to system behaviour and cannot be considered proper adaptive policies
(Walker, Rahman & Cave, 2001). To improve the realism regarding the implementation, they are not considered
to be instant improvements: they follow a continuous implementation path between the start date and the end
date. The start date of the policies is 2015. At this time, nothing has changed yet. The end date is 2025. At this
moment, the policy is completely functional and the effects remain till the end of the run time (2050).
The stakeholders relevant for these policy designs are all actors with interests in the copper system and
localised in the European or more specifically, the Dutch perspective. First of all, these are governments on
national or supranational scale which have power to enforce rules and regulations regarding copper, or who can
issue incentive measures. The second group is formed by developers of technologies relevant for the copper
system. Since technology development can be a cost intensive process, investors in technology or the copper
system form the final category.
42
Box VIII: Modelling policies: Connection of policies to the model
All policies are connected to a specific point in the model. This can be seen in Figure 8.1. All policy variables have
a green background colour.
Copper recovered
Forcast Recycling from scrap Switch recycling
Input Rate policies
Recycling score
Average time scrap Not recovered
to recycling copper in scrap
Copper score
during treatment Goal for copper
Copper score during
Original recycling recycling scores
treatment due to policy
Copper score during score
dismembering
Percentage copper
recovered from scrap End year recycling
policy
<Time>
Start year
recycling policy
Figure 8.1: The recycling score (RER) policy connection
The new copper score is calculated by interpolating between the original value (fed by the purple uncertainties)
and the policy goal. This new value is always calculated, but a switch is used for turning the effects of the policy
on and off.
8.3. The different policy options

In this section all different policy options will be discussed regarding their connection to the model, the goal of
each policy and which type of actor is able to implement it. An overview of all policies and their most important
characteristics is given in Table 8.1.
Table 8.1: Policy options for the copper models. All policies start in 2015, policies 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 have full effect in 2025: 1, 2,
4 and 5 with linear interpolation, 6 with an S-curve
Nr Name Connection Goal Type

1 Recycling 1 Recycling score 0.95 Technical
2 Recycling 2 Collection rate copper 0.95 Political

products
3 Strategic reserve Global inventories of 0.5 * Global consumption Political
refined copper of refined copper;
Selling at over 1.3 *
MAX(Marginal costs)
4 Substitution 1 Substitution threshold 0.7 * original Substitution Technical
threshold
5 Substitution 2 Growth of effect of Minimum 0.7 Political
substitution
6 Deep sea Marginal costs deep 0.5 * original Production Technical
sea mining costs deep sea copper
The first two policy options regard recycling. The first recycling policy influences the RER, which is modelled as
the recycling score. Again, regardless of the initial value of the coefficients relevant for the recycling percentage
of copper, this rate is improved till 95%. This policy is more technological in nature, since it influences the
recycling technologies, which in their turn seem to define the efficiencies reached in the recycling process. It is
however interesting for investors as well, since they may want to invest in copper recycling, which has, as was
discussed in section 7.5.1, the potential of forming the major supplier of refined copper.
The second recycling policy connects to the collection rate of copper products in the model. This policy
has the effect that, regardless of the initial collection rate, the collection rate in 2025 will be 95%, which means
43
that only five percent of all used copper will be discarded at the end of the lifetime. This is mainly a political
policy option, since a law obliging, or an incentive measure encouraging, citizens to recycle their disbanded
products could have this effect.
The third policy option in this research is the construction of a strategic reserve for refined copper. It
thus connects to the global inventories of copper. The goal for this strategic reserve is defined with respect to a
certain amount of time of copper consumption, in this case, this line is put at a half year consumption. The
copper for the reserve is only bought when the copper price is below the highest marginal costs for copper
production (either for conventional or deep sea copper). It thus uses only the market surplus: the positive
difference between the total production of refined copper and the total copper demand. This copper is sold (the
reserve is used) when the copper price is above a certain threshold for the copper price relative to the marginal
costs. This threshold is taken at 1.3 times the marginal costs. The rate at which the strategic reserves can be
emptied is defined as two years, which means that the volume of strategic reserve divided by the outflow of
copper in times of need is equal to two years. This means that the outflow will gradually decrease as the strategic
reserve empties. This, again, is a political policy option, but it can also be performed by investors with a long
term perspectives, since buying refined copper when the price is low and selling it when the price is high, is
potentially profitable.
The fourth policy, or the first substitution policy, comes down to lowering the substitution threshold for
copper. Practically this means that either the price of the substitutes becomes lower, or that less of the substitute
is needed. This is thus mainly a technological policy, but it can also be seen as an investment strategy.
The second substitution policy, or the fifth in Table 8.1, regards the growth of the effect of substitution.
This can be seen as an incentive measure and thus a political policy. The copper system thus, regardless the
then-present costs of copper and substitutes, looses part of the copper demand.
The final or sixth policy regards the reduction of the production costs of deep sea copper. Example of
such a development would be investing in improving the efficiency of deep sea mining equipment. This is also a
technological policy, but again with an investment side.
Four combinations of policies will also be tested. These are the combination of both recycling policies,
the combination of both substitution policies, the combination of both recycling policies with the strategic
reserves policy and finally all policies combined. The goal of this additional analysis is to start with the exploration
of the effects of combined policy measures.
8.4. Differences in policy design between model varieties

Since the policy designs also consider variables that are subject to different uses or regionalised, there are
differences in the policy options between the different model varieties. In this chapter these changes will be
related to the policy approach taken in the top down model.
The policies in the bottom up model differ in the following ways. First, the collection rate of copper is
dependent on the copper use category. The policy brings all collection rates, regardless of the initial value, up to
95%. The same counts for the second recycling policy. Some coefficients of the RER were split up for the
different uses of copper. The second recycling policy too ignores this and pulls the overall recycling score or RER
to 95%. A next variable divided by copper use is the substitution threshold. The first substitution policy changes
these different values by lowering them with 30%. The use dependence therefore remains present in this policy.
The second substitution policy connects to the growth of effect of substitution, which is the only influence for
long term substitution. It minimizes, again without regard for initial values, this growth to 0.7 (on a scale
44
between -1 and 1, as was explained in Box III). The remaining two policies, the strategic reserves policy and the
deep sea policy, are identical in implementation to the top down model.
For the regional model, the policy design differences can be explained more easily. Simply put are all
political policies only regional, while the technological policies are globalised. This means that the first recycling
policy, the strategic reserves policy and the second substitution policy are only implemented in region 1. The
second recycling policy, the first substitution policy and the deep sea policy have an identical effect in all three
regions, since they all have a major technological component.
45
46
Part Four: Evaluation
47
9. Policy evaluation for the copper system
The policy evaluation will be done per model, in which the different policies were implemented. The first model
discussed is again the top down model, after which the differences between the outcomes from this model and
respectively the bottom up and regional model will be assessed. This is done by first looking at the behavioural
bounds of all (K)PIs, followed by a more detailed view on the effects of the policies for the behaviour of the
copper price and consumption of refined copper. Finally, some conclusions are drawn about the successful
recycling policies and the strategic reserve policy, as well as the combination of all policies.
9.1. Overall effects of policies

The six policies and the three combinations of policies will be first assessed by looking at their effects on the
(K)PIs, especially the envelopes of these values. Behavioural analysis is very difficult without clustering or PRIM
analyses, and will thus only be done in very clear cases.
9.1.1. Top down model

A first look to the envelopes of the first four (K)PIs in Figure 9.1 immediately shows differences in effect of the
different policies and policy combinations. A good reference is the base model, which is visible on the left side of
the figure with the dark blue line. The real price of copper seems to be limited in its extreme values by the
recycling policy 1 and even more by the combination of recycling policies, while the single effect of recycling
policy 2 is not impressive. The combination of all policies has the lowest maximum value for the price. The
different substitution policies and their combination also seem to have lowered the price slightly. The strategic
reserves policy gives the smallest effect. The consumption seems likewise to have increased due to the recycling
policies, especially the first one and the combination. All other policies had virtually no (visual) effect, except the
combination of all policies. It is further visible that the recycling policies lower the average part of original
demand substituted, while the substitution policies had, as could be expected, an effect which increased the
substitution. The effect of all policies was that very high substitution was limited (probably due to the effects
which lower the price), while the medium substitution was more dominant. The RIR reacted heavily on the first
recycling policy and even more on the combined recycling policies, while all other policies did not seem to have
much effect. The combination of all policies produced a similar shift in behaviour as the recycling policies. This is
logical, since the recycling policies also form part of all policies.
Figure 9.1: All policies for the real price of copper, global consumption of refined copper, the part of original demand
substituted and the RIR in the top down model
48
The next four (K)PIs are visible in Figure 9.2. Both marginal costs did not seem heavily affected by the policies.
The relative part of deep sea mining is very little expanded by its almost direct policy, the deep sea policy. The
second recycling policy did have an effect as well, but only in limiting the deep sea mining. Finally, the year left of
copper mining was in the end state limited by the first recycling policy and the combination of the two recycling
policies. The second recycling policy however seems to have increased the year left of copper mining, probably
by reducing the mining due to a higher inflow of secondary copper.
Figure 9.2: All policies for the marginal costs of copper and deep sea copper, relative part of deep sea mining and the year left
of copper mining in the top down model
Finally, it is interesting to see what the effect was of the substitution policies on the part of original demand
substituted and the recycling policies on the RIR. These are visible in respectively Figure 9.3 and Figure 9.4. The
substitution effect is clearly visible by a “wave” of extra substitution which departs from the lower substituted
state to the higher substituted state between 2015 and 2025.
The RIR showed an even clearer image of the effects of more collection of copper scrap and a higher
RER. This is also clearly visible between the start and end date of the policies. The rise in RIR after 2025 is
probably due to a declining consumption of refined copper.
Figure 9.3: Part of original demand substituted [Dmnl] with Figure 9.4: RIR [Dmnl] with recycling policies
substitution policies
9.1.2. Bottom up model

The oscillating behaviour which was so visible in the real price of copper, tended to decrease due to the recycling
policies and the strategic reserve policy, but most dramatic by the combination of all policies. For the global
consumption the same effects as observed for the top down model were visible, just like the part of original
49
demand substituted and the recycling input rate. Further, the effect on the RIR seems to be even bigger with the
bottom up recycling policies, compared to the top down model. This is typical, since the bottom up model
originally had an already bigger average for the RIR.
substituted and the RIR in the bottom up model
The two marginal costs and the relative part of deep sea mining show the same picture as with the top down
model, although the combination of the two recycling policies seems to have increased the relative part of deep
sea mining around to 2030. This was due to one single run. In the year left of copper mining virtually no visible
change can be detected due to the policy measures.
Figure 9.6: All policies for the marginal costs of copper and deep sea copper, relative part of deep sea mining and the year left
of copper mining in the top down model
9.1.3. Regional model

In the regional model, the real price of copper was substantially limited by recycling policy one and the recycling
policies. An even stronger effect was reached by the strategic reserve policy. The combination of all policies had
the biggest effect. This is clearly visible in Figure 9.7. The global consumption had an envelope with higher
possible values due to the first recycling policy and the recycling policies combination. This was just one run, but
still it would be interesting to analyse which input parameters caused this gradual rising high value for the copper
consumption. There was no significant difference in demand substitution due to the policies. This was probably
due to the regional effect of the second substitution policy. The RIR showed the same behaviour due to the
policies as was already noticed with the other models.
50
substituted and the RIR in the regional model
Now it is interesting to look at Figure 9.9. This shows that

the policies had little effect on the envelope of behaviour of
the marginal costs for conventional and deep sea copper.
The change in the year left of copper mining is
however very dramatic, which were due to the recycling
policies again (Figure 9.8). Originally the values for this
outcome after 2040 were extraordinarily high, as can be
Figure 9.8: Lines graph for year left of copper mining seen in Figure E.42. The relevant policies lower these values
with all regional policies
with approximately a factor 100 in 2050. While this does not
indicate anything about the validity of these high values for this outcome, it is clear that in reducing this extreme
behaviour, these policies perform very well.
Figure 9.9: All policies for the marginal costs of copper and deep sea copper and the year left of copper mining in the regional
model
Apart from the differences which were visible for the relative part of deep sea mining in region 3, it seems that
the policies did not have a significant effect on these outcomes, which can be seen in Figure 9.10. This
corresponds with the findings of the other models, where the effects on deep sea mining were not impressive as
well.
51
Figure 9.10: All policies for the regional relative parts of deep sea mining
9.2. Effect of policies on copper price and consumption

The effects of the policies can be assessed in more detail with emphasis on two KPIs, the copper price and the
9.2.1. Top down model

When comparing Figure E.3 with Figure 9.11 and Figure 9.12 the reduction of extreme behaviour due to the
combination of recycling policies and all policies is very clear, although the policies do not eliminate the spread in
the real price of copper altogether.
Figure 9.11: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], recycling policies Figure 9.12: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], all policies
Now it is interesting to look at the behaviour of the different runs in the model regarding this outcome. Figure
9.13 shows that the higher RIR does not change the volatile behaviour of the price. It is therefore interesting to
look at the effect of the strategic reserve policy (Figure 9.14). The lines which were still quite serrated with the
recycling policies seem to have smoothed due to strategic reserves. This is understandable behaviour, since the
strategic reserves are intended to relieve the copper market in case of an extreme high difference between
supply and demand. This same smoothed behaviour is also visible when all policies are combined. Apparently, the
combination of a higher RIR and a strategic reserve has an effect on the copper system which reduces extreme
high prices and also slightly reduces some volatility in the system.
52
Figure 9.13: Real price of copper, recycling policies Figure 9.14: Real price of copper, strategic reserve policy
The global consumption of copper also displays a more positive view, as some more consumption seems possible
due to the recycling policies and the combination of all policies. However, after the policy has reached its full
effect, the average global consumption seems to decrease again, so this tendency is quite strong. It is therefore
not likely that recycling will stop the decrease of the copper mining production.
Figure 9.15: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year] Figure 9.16: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year]
with recycling policies with all policies
9.2.2. Bottom up model
Figure 9.17: Real price of copper[Dollar/t], recycling policies Figure 9.18: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], all policies
In Figure 7.21 it was visible that the behaviour of the real price of copper was subject to periodic oscillatory
behaviour. The recycling policies seemed to limit this behaviour slight (Figure 9.17), as did the combination of all
policies (Figure 9.18). The extreme values were reduced as well by these policy combinations, but this was
already demonstrated in section 9.1.2. It is also visible that, just like in the top down model, the price trend is
confined a little more to the lower regions. The type of behaviour does not seem to be changed however, or at
53
least not as clear as in the top down model. More specific analyses regarding the model behaviour could clarify
this issue further.
For the global consumption (Figure 9.19 and Figure 9.20) it could be noticed that again the values
slightly increase due to the implementation of the combination of the recycling policies and the combination of all
policies. This KPI in showed in the base case ESDMA results already a broader spread in behaviour than the top
down equivalent, making it harder to observe these differences. The strategic reserves policy finally does have an
positive effect in limiting the amplitudes of oscillations in the bottom up model, but does not change more
gradual behaviour with high prices. The overall conclusion for the bottom up model is that strategic reserve policy
and the combinations of recycling policies and all policies show an overall improvement of the behaviour,
especially with regard to the risks defined in section 6.3.
Figure 9.19: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], Figure 9.20: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year],
recycling policies all policies
9.2.3. Regional model

The real price of copper in the base run showed such a wide distribution of possible values, that effectively
nothing could be seen after 2020. It is interesting to see which policies were able to improve this behaviour. In
Figure 9.21 it is visible that the recycling policies already sorted some effect in reducing the average price. The
combination of all policies did an even better job (Figure 9.22). This is probably due to the combination of
strategic reserves policy and the recycling policies, which could reinforce each other in limiting extreme price
behaviour.
Figure 9.21: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], recycling policies Figure 9.22: Real price of copper [Dollar/t], all policies
The policy effects on the global consumption of copper in the regional model seem less clear than the results in
the other two model varieties. This was to be expected, since the most effective single policy in increasing the
RIR and via the recycling also the consumption of copper, is the collection rate of discarded copper products. This
54
policy, being political in nature, was regionalised in the regional model and was only implemented in region 1.
The effect of this policy would thus only work on the discarded copper in this region, which was a considerable
amount, but not as much as the amounts in the top down and bottom up models.
The conclusion of the policy analysis in the regional model is that the same policies as mentioned before
seem effective, i.e. the strategic reserves policy, the combination of the recycling policies and also the
combination of all policies.
Figure F.9.23: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year], Figure F.9.24: Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year],
recycling policies all policies
9.3. Policy design conclusions

Despite the problems already noticed in chapter 7 regarding the wrong input values for the collection rate and
RER coefficients and the wrong assumption for the consumption of copper, a policy analysis was performed to
see what differences in behaviour they could cause.
The results of these tests were that the two recycling policies were able to limit extreme behaviour of
several (K)PIs, especially the year left of copper mining and the real price of copper. It should be noted though
that this effect is exaggerated, since the original RIR was far too low. This indication of the importance of a good
recycling structure for the stability of the copper system is however unambiguous.
Slightly less influential, but still of some use, especially in limiting the amplitude of oscillatory or crisis
behaviour is the strategic reserves policy. This can be explained by the smoothing or balancing effect such a
policy can have when implemented and used correctly. The two substitution policies and the deep sea policy did
not show a clear use in reducing the risks considered in this research. It could even be argued that the
substitution policies could have potentially a negative effect on the price volatility, since the models earlier
showed that fast substitution could be linked to a rapid decline in demand, causing the copper price to fall.
Probably the recycling policies combined with the strategic reserves policy will have a balancing effect on
volatile behaviour of the model, and, by keeping more copper in the system, they may also allow for more copper
consumption. It is interesting to test this hypothesis in further research, for example the earlier proposed full
factorial analysis on a small but representative set of model input variables.
Further analysis of the system and the search for early warning indicators of undesirable behaviour may
lead to additional insights regarding a more adaptive policy design for the copper system. This will be more in line
with the first policy design option which was presented in section 8.1.
55
10. Conclusions
In this research an attempt was made to model the global copper system with its uncertainties and by doing so,
explore possible types of behaviour that the system can generate. In this chapter, first the possible future
behaviour of the copper system is discussed. This is followed by policies which could counter potential
undesirable effects.
10.1. Possible future behaviour of the copper system

The most important findings about the possible future behaviour of the copper system are that the economic feed
does not make a big difference in the behaviour, often high price volatility and copper price crises occur (these
were defined as fast and big changes in the price), the copper demand tends to decline as a result of substitution
of the metal and finally that the relative part of deep sea mining is not likely to be very high compared to
conventional mining. Further, the (K)PI year left of copper mining did not signify to be an important feature of
scarcity in the copper system. Finally, the wrong bounds for the recycling coefficients, which resulted in too low
values for the RIR, did not significantly change the behaviour of the (K)PIs observed in the experiments.
The reason the economic feed did not make a big difference can be explained both from a modelling
perspective and from reality. In the model, the economic growth only influenced stocks, which tend to smooth
the capricious behaviour displayed by the economic feed structure. In reality, the demand will probably also only
change a little due to economic growth, while the supply will not be able to react on yearly changes, but only to
long term trends.
The potential high price volatility is caused by a disbalance between supply and demand of copper. The
underlying dynamics causing this are long delays in the building of capacities and development of the demand.
This effect is started by the demand which is influenced by price mechanisms combined with influences from
substitution, the intrinsic demand and postponed demand in the case of scarcity. The price volatility mechanisms
observed in this study could explain the price fluctuations in the past thirty years. A slight unbalance between
supply and demand is well perceivable, especially since the exact growth of demand is difficult to predict, as the
differences between the top down and bottom up approach demonstrated.
The coming forty years may well experience a declining copper consumption. This is caused by the rising
energy costs related to the falling grades of copper ore. The available substitutes for copper, like aluminium for
electricity transmission, do not encounter this problem. It is therefore well perceivable that the price for copper
will rise compared to the alternatives. Strong substitution after a longer period of high copper prices may
however very well result in a drastic drop in the copper price. This may (temporarily) reverse the effects just
described, resulting in renewed use of copper. This oscillation is also a major reason for price volatility and
unbalance in the copper system.
Deep sea mining will probably not form a substantial part of the input of primary copper. This has to do
with the sheer size of the current copper mining operations. Only in very exceptional cases, for instance when the
marginal costs of conventional mining become considerably larger than the marginal costs of deep sea copper.
Limitations may also come from the international regulations regarding deep sea mining and the potentially high
environmental impact of deep sea mining. In this research however, these issues have not been taken into
explicit consideration.
The often mentioned R/P ratio, in this research represented by the (K)PI year left of copper mining, did
not signify to be an important indicator of scarcity. It was found out that high values for this indicator were most
likely caused by a declining mining production and not of an increased finding of new reserves. The lifetime of
56
copper mines is also principally determined by the size of the reserve present at a particular operation site. Many
small mining operations might therefore result in a short mining lifetime, but in a high overall production, while
the discovery of new deposits may not let it result in scarcity of the mineral mined.
Finally, for the RIR and the global consumption of refined copper, too low values were witnessed as
results of the ESDMA experiments. Changing the bounds of the uncertainties for the different recycling
coefficients could theoretically have changed part of the behaviour of outcomes displayed in the experiments.
Performing new runs with improved bounds and higher RIR and consumption of copper as a result has let
however to the conclusion that changing these bounds did not change the modes of behaviour.
10.2. Policy designs for the copper system

The results of the policy designs made to counter potentially undesirable effects in the system were that
improving recycling and developing a strategic reserve may counter high prices and copper crises, as well as
allowing more copper to be consumed.
The recycling policies comprehended improving of the collection rates of EOL copper products, as well as
improving all RER coefficients in order to create a higher recycling efficiency. These two policies are most
effective when combined. This can be easily understood, since the effectiveness of recycling depends on the
product of both policies. When the recycling efficiency is improved by investments in the technology and
equipment used for recycling, this will not have much effect, when the rate of EOL copper collection is low. The
same counts for the improvement of the collection rate. When both policies are in place however, the make it
possible to receive a very high RIR, making European countries less dependent on resources from other regions.
Since recycling is not subject to falling ore grades, it will not have a negative effect on copper mining either, since
more copper will remain used and less copper will be substituted.
Developing a strategic reserve of copper can happen in different ways, but in this research it was
proposed to by the reserve when the copper price is under the marginal costs of copper and to utilize the reserve
when the price is well above the marginal costs. In this way the strategic reserve, which serves intrinsically a
geopolitical security goal, can be used to counter volatility in the copper price. A requisite for the strategic reserve
will however be that the size is sufficient to have is effect. It is however unclear whether governments presently
developing strategic copper reserves follow the same strategy.
57
11. Reflections
After performing a research, it is wise to reflect on the way it has been performed, limitations of the chosen
method and recommendations for further research.
11.1. Pitfalls in using a “traditional” SD model for ESDMA

In this research, an extensive, traditional SD model was built. For the construction, extensive use of literature
was made. This “traditional” SD model was subsequently adjusted and transformed for ESDMA use. The results of
this study were interesting, but this approach had a few drawbacks.
The biggest problem was the wrong perception of the researcher of the actual research design
framework chosen in this study. The original perceived framework was closely related to the traditional SD
approach and model cycle, while the actually used framework closer resembled a scientific experiment, where the
SD model was only part of the experimental setup. The result of this difference was while in the traditional, ex
ante ESDMA framework the research should have been more than half completed after finishing the SD models
used in the research, the ex post ESDMA framework showed that the analyst was actually more around 25% of
his study. This caused a wrong distribution of time for the different research elements, which could have been
avoided with more knowledge beforehand of the scientific process characterising an ESDMA effort.
Another pitfall is the way in which the research is documented. The enormous amounts of data and the
often difficult to interpret visualisations of this data make it hard for a non insider in this research methodology to
understand and value the results presented in an ESDMA research. When a study is intended to be interesting
however for those actually interested in the case research with the methodology, a translation needs to be made
Finally, the approach used is a very innovative and interesting research method. It still needs however
much time and effort to make new features and visualisation techniques available. A great risk for the researcher
is thus to lose himself in trying to improve the method, and not his subject...
11.2. Limitations of the chosen research methodology

The chosen research method, i.e. SD modelling combined with EMA, has of course its limitations. A few of them
will now be unravelled. First of all, this approach allowed little or no focus on single actors in the copper system:
this can be interesting for dynamics of single copper mines, with different parameters (ore grade, political
situation, remoteness, etc.). Presently the five biggest producers of copper supply almost 40% of the mined
copper available (BGR, 2007: 12). This makes an Agent Based Modelling view especially relevant, since the risk of
actors exercising their market power is well thinkable.
A second limitation lies in the already mentioned calculation power, which is not enough for full factorial
analysis in large models. This problem can be solved by making more different models, since these will only result
in a linear growth of calculation time, compared to an exponential growth of run time necessary for less models
with more variables.
Another limitation of the approach chosen is the fact that not much contact with the copper industry
existed. It would be interesting to see what points of the copper system they regard as vulnerable and explore
these parts. This will increase the value of this research on two sides: the model development can be better
supported, while the interpretation of the outcomes improves as well.
58
11.3. Possibilities for further research
The ESDMA method is very powerful and has not been used to the full extend yet. This is especially the case for
this study, also due to the pitfalls already mentioned above. Many tools have now not yet been used, while they
may have a profound impact on the quality of the policy options developed.
One improvement might be the engineering of adaptive policy options. This kind of policy will react to
the systems behaviour, in contrast with the more traditional policies presented in this research, which are static
decisions. For these adaptive policies it is necessary to find “early warning indicators” for copper crises. This
happens by looking at parameters that cause this behaviour with the newly developed methods for mode
selection and interpretation. The uncertainties can then be further explored by making different models for the
new policy options and comparing the effects of the different models.
Overall, more different analyses may be used on the data generated by the experiments in this research.
In this report only visual analyses were made of the outcomes specified in the experimental setup. The large
amount of data makes it however difficult to solely rely on this method. Classification of behaviour with respect to
the categories of more and less desirable effects in the system by means of for example clustering or PRIM
algorithms may create more insight in these matters.
An issue not explored in this research is the possibility of major copper producers exercising market
power, as well as the development of copper mining capacity from a geopolitical perspective in which regional
safety can be compared to local ore grades and transport distances. These points of interest may be better
researched not using ESDMA, but agent based modelling, perhaps also from an EMA perspective.
11.4. Validity of the research

The most important outcomes of this research were explainable with the knowledge of the copper system, thus
adding to the possible validity of the research. This validity could be further extended by letting experts in the
copper system evaluate the results and compare it with their view on the issues at hand. The insights of these
experts on the uncertainties could also help in generating better experimental setups, thus improving the validity
from the input side.
In this research three different models were used in order to be able to model the uncertainties regarding
the supply and demand of copper. The question immediately arises whether this was necessary for performing
this research or whether one of these models could have generated the same results. As far as this issue
concerns modelling the intrinsic demand, one of the major uncertainties in this field, all three models could have
produced the same behaviour with the right input parameters. However, some conclusions about the internal
functioning of the system, like the speed of the substitution or the effects of a regionalised playing field for the
copper production and use, the insights the different models gave were undeniable. Therefore especially the
ensemble of these models generated new insights.
11.5. Final remarks regarding the research methodology

One of the principles of EMA is that by taking more uncertainties into account, more certainty about the effects of
designed policies can be derived. One of the premises necessary for policy design is however that certain value
judgements exist about the exhibited behaviour of the system under consideration. These judgements are
important for the stakeholders in the system. It is therefore of utmost importance that the commissioning actor,
which is often also a stakeholder, is able to give quantifiable characteristics of undesirable system effects.
Especially in ESDMA, where many analysis techniques depend on the knowledge of system risks (like PRIM and
clustering methods), the input of the commissioning actor creates thus the value of the outcomes.
59
References
Angerer, G., Marscheider-Weidemann, F., Wendl, M. & Wietschel, M. (2009). Lithium für Zukunftstechnologien
(Fraunhofer Systemforschung Elektromobilität, Trans.) (pp. 58). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.
Angerer, G., Mohring, A., Marscheider-Weidemann, F. & Wietschel, M. (2010). Kupfer für Zukunftstechnologien
(Fraunhofer Systemforschung Elektromobilität, Trans.) (pp. 46). Karlsruhe: Fraunhofer ISI.
Auping, W. L. (2009). Verslag Bachelorproject - Gevolgen voor de lithiumprijs, -winning en -recycling door
grootschalig gebruik van Lithiumbatterijen. Bachelor "Technische Bestuurskunde", Delft University of
Technology, Delft.
Bankes, S. C. (1993). Exploratory Modeling for Policy Analysis. Operations Research, 41(3): 435-449.
BGR. (2007). Kurzbericht zur Konzentration in der Weltbergbauproduktion – Fortschreibung Februar 2007.
Hannover, Germany.
Bonthuis, D. J. (2011, 1 July). [Vergelijking].
Borelli, R. L. & Coleman, C. S. (2004). Differential Equations. A Modeling Perspective. New York: John Wiley &
Sons, Inc.
Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. Machine Learning, 45: 5-32.
Cochilco. (2002). Research on Mine Closure Policy. In MMSD (Ed.), IIED (Vol. 44).
Council of the European Union. (2007). Presidency Conclusions (8/9 March 2007). Brussels.
Depuydt, P. (2011, 7 October). Prijs van koper zowel gevaar als koopkans, NRC Handelsblad, p. 30.
Desertec Foundation. (2011). The focus region EU-MENA Retrieved 16 March, 2011, from
http://www.desertec.org/en/global-mission/focus-region-eu-mena/
Diederen, A. M. (2009). Metal minerals scarcity: A call for managed austerity and the elements of hope. Rijswijk,
The Netherlands: TNO Defence, Security and Safety.
EMA Group. (2011). Exploratory Modelling & Analysis (EMA) Workbench Retrieved 22 September, 2011, from
http://wiki.tudelft.nl/bin/view/Research/EmaWorkbench
European Commission. (2011). Tackling the challenges in commodity markets and on raw materials. Brussels.
European Parliament & European Council. (2009). Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy
from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and
2003/30/EC. Official Journal of the European Union, L(140): 16-62.
Fischer, R. A. (1952). Statistical methods in genetics. Heredity, 6: 1-12.
Friedman, J. H. & Fisher, N. I. (1999). Bump hunting in high-dimensional data. Statistics and Computing, 9: 123-
143.
Glasby, G. P. (2000). Lessons Learned from Deep-Sea Mining. Science Magazine, 289(5479): 551-553.
Gordon, R. B., Bertram, M. & Graedel, T. E. (2007). On the sustainability of metal supplies: A response to Tilton
and Lagos. Resources Policy, 32(1-2): 24-28.
Gordon, R. B., Betram, M. & Graedel, T. E. (2006). From the Cover: Metal stocks and sustainability. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(5): 1209-1214.
Gordon, R. B., Koopmans, T. C., Nordhaus, W. D. & Skinner, B. J. (1987). Towards a New Iron Age? Quantitative
Modeling of Resource Exhaustion. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
60
Halfar, J. & Fujita, R. M. (2007). Deanger of Deep-Sea Mining. Science Magazine, 316(5827): 987.
Hekking, H. D. (2011, 2 Februari). Strengere regulering grondstoffenmarkt, Financieel Dagblad.
Hobson, B. (2011). Anthony O’Sullivan: Blue Ocean Thinking for Copper & Gold Retrieved 18 August, 2011, from
http://www.resourceinvestor.com/News/2011/1/Pages/OSullivan-Blue-Ocean-Thinking--for-Copper--
Gold-Production.aspx?k=nautilus
ICSG. (2010a). Release of ICSG 2010 Statistical Yearbook ICSG Press Release: ICSG.
ICSG. (2010b). The World Copper Factbook. Lisbon.
ICSG. (2011). Copper: Preliminary Data for January 2011 ICSG Press Release.
Iman, R. L., Campbell, J. E. & Helton, J. C. (1981). An approach to sensitivity analysis of computer models. I -
Introduction, input, variable selection and preliminary variable assessment. Journal of Quality
Technology, 13: 174-183.
Index Mundi. (2011a). Aluminum Monthly Price - US Dollars per Metric Ton. Commodities, Metals Retrieved 15
July, 2011, from http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=aluminum&months=360
Index Mundi. (2011b). Copper, grade A cathode Monthly Price - US Dollars per Metric Ton. Commodities, Metals
Retrieved 15 July, 2011, from
http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=copper&months=360
JORC. (2004). The JORC Code - Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and
Ore Reserves (2004 ed.): JORC.
Kleijn, P. H. v. d. (2011, 5 July 2011). [Mine production capacity, personal communication].
Kleijn, R. & van der Voet, E. (2010). Resource constraints in a hydrogen economy based on renewable energy
sources: An exploration. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(9): 2784-2795.
Klis, H. (2011, 5 March 2011). Prorail luidt noodklok over koperdiefstal, NRC Handelsblad. Retrieved from
http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2011/03/05/prorail-luidt-noodklok-over-koperdiefstal/
Koppelaar, R. H. E. M. (2011). Modeling mineral cost developments - The case of copper, iron ore, tungsten and
phosphorus. MSc, Wageningen University, Wageningen. (ENR – 80424)
Lane, D. C. (2008). The emergence and use of diagramming in system dynamics: a critical account. Systems
Research and Behavioral Science, 25(1): 3-23.
Lempert, R. J., Popper, S. W. & Bankes, S. C. (2003). Shaping the next one hundred years : new methods for
quantitative, long-term policy analysis (Vol. MR-1626). Santa Monica: RAND.
LME. (2011). Copper graphs Retrieved 14 August, 2011, from http://www.lme.com/copper_graphs.asp
Lossin, A. (2005). CopperUllman's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH &
Co. KGaA.
McKelvey, V. E. (1980). Seabed Mlinerals and the Law of the Sea. Science Magazine, 209(4455): 464-472.
Meadows, D. H. (1985). Models of modeling. In D. H. Meadows (Ed.), The Electronic Oracle (pp. 19-90).
Chippenham Wiltshire: Antony Rowe Ltd.
National Economic Council, Council of Economic Advisers & Office of Science and Technology Policy. (2011). A
Strategy for American Innovation. Securing Our Economic Growth and Prosperity. Washinton.
Parzen, E. (1962). On estimation of a probability density function and mode. Annals of Mathematical Statistics,
33: 1065-1076.
61
Pearson, K. (1895). Contributions to the Mathematical Theory of Evolution. II. Skew Variation in Homogeneous
Material. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering
Sciences, 186: 343-414.
Presidencia Española de la Unión Europea. (2011). Mediterranean Solar Plan Retrieved 16 March, 2011, from
http://www.mediterraneansolarplan-
conference.es/index.php/mod.pags/mem.detalle/idpag.11/idmenu.1009
Pruyt, E. (2010a, 25-29 July 2010). Scarcity of Minerals and Metals: A Generic Exploratory System Dynamics
Model. Paper presented at the 18th International Conference of the System Dynamics Society, Seoul,
Korea.
Pruyt, E. (2010b, 25-29 July 2010). Using Small Models for Big Issues: Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling
and Analysis for Insightful Crisis Management. Paper presented at the 18th International Conference of
the System Dynamics Society, Seoul, Korea.
Python Software Foundation. (2011). Python Programming Language – Official Website Retrieved 13 August,
2011, from www.python.org
Rademaker, M. & Kooroshy, J. (2010). The Global Challenge of Mineral Scarcity. Paper presented at the Enriching
the Planet, Empowering Europe - Optimising the use of natural resources for a more sustainable
economy, The Hague.
Raw Materials Group. (17 March 2010). Copper reserve resources presentation. Stockholm.
Rosenblatt, M. (1956). Remarks on some nonparametric estimates of a density function. Annals of Mathematical
Statistics, 27: 832-837.
Sanders, E. (2011, 20 June). Sommige koperdieven hadden hoge hoeden op, NRC Handelsblad, p. 24.
SDS. (2011). The Field of System Dynamics Retrieved 7 Augustus, 2011, from
http://www.systemdynamics.org/what_is_system_dynamics.html#approach
Skinner, B. J. (1976). A Second Iron Age Ahead? American Scientist, 64(3): 258-269.
Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modelling for a Complex World. Boston:
McGraw-Hill.
Sun, B. X., Nie, Z. R., Liu, Y., Wang, Z. H. & Gong, X. Z. (2010). Exergy-Based Model of the Depletion of Mineral
Resources. Materials Science Forum, 650: 1-8.
Svedberg, P. & Tilton, J. (2006). The real, real price of nonrenewable resources: copper 1870–2000. World
Development, 34(3): 501-519.
Tilton, J. E. (2003). On Borrowed Time? Assessing the Threat of Mineral Depletion. Washington, DC: RFF Press.
Tilton, J. E. & Lagos, G. (2007). Assessing the long-run availability of copper. Resources Policy, 32(1-2): 19-23.
U.S. Geological Survey. (2011). Mineral commodity summaries 2011. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982).
UNPD. (2011a). World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision Retrieved June 17, 2011, from
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/index.htm
UNPD. (2011b, April 2011). World Population Prospects: The 2010 Revision. Location list Retrieved 19 July, from
http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Excel-Data/WPP2010_F01_LOCATIONS.XLS
Ventana Systems. (2010). Vensim Reference Manual.
Verhoef, E. V., Dijkema, G. P. J. & Reuter, M. A. (2004). Process Knowledge, System Dynamics, and Metal
Ecology. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 8(1-2): 23-43.
62
Viebahn, P., Lechon, Y. & Trieb, F. (2010). The potential role of concentrated solar power (CSP) in Africa and
Europe—A dynamic assessment of technology development, cost development and life cycle inventories
until 2050. Energy Policy.
Volkskrant. (2011, 15 June 2011). Koperdieven worden aangepakt door Prorail, De Volkskrant. Retrieved from
http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2686/Binnenland/article/detail/2445537/2011/06/15/Koperdieven-
worden-aangepakt-door-Prorail.dhtml
Walker, W. E., Rahman, S. A. & Cave, J. (2001). Adaptive policies, policy analysis, and policy-making. European
Journal of Operational Research, 128(2): 282-289.
Waveren, R. H. v., Groot, S., Scholten, H., Geer, F. C. v., Wösten, J. H. M., et al. (1999). Good Modelling Practice
Handbook. Lelystad: Rijkswaterstaat-RIZA.
Wellmer, F. W., Dalheimer, M. & Wagner, M. (2006). Production lifetime Economic Evaluations in Exploration:
Springer Verlag.
Wouters, H. & Bol, D. (2009). Material Scarcity. An M2i study (pp. 72). Delft: Stichting Materials innovation
institute.
63
Appendix A. Causal loop diagrams
A.1. Top down
Legend
Part of demand Copper demand
External variables substituted World population related to GDP
Price of subsitutes
+ -
Copper variables
- GDP per capita
Copper
levels Copper
substitution
Key performance Substitution + +
possibilities
+ - +
indicators Copper substitution Demand +
- for
copper + Copper
consumption
Price - demand loop

Investments in
+
copper technology Copper production
Reserve development Price of +
copper -
+
Investments +
Stance of - Available Copper in
technology refined - -
Marginal costs of copper Copper recycling products
producing copper
+ +
- +
Technology +
Energy price Copper smelter
and refinery
capacity
+ Copper discarding
+ Ore grade Recycling capacity
Copper
resources - Mining capacity + Copper recycling
+ +
- Copper mine Refinery capacity +
capacity
Copper products to
+
recycling -
Rese
rve Copper refining Lifetime of copper
devel
opm
ent + + products
+ Copper mining +
Copper
Copper - +
- scrap heap
reserves Recycling Input
- Rate
+ Raw copper
available
A.2. Bottom up
Copper use in
electricity infrastructure Copper use in water
Copper use in cars treatment
Legend
Copper use in stationary
Part of demand
External variables electromotors
substituted
Price of subsitutes
+ -
Copper variables Copper use in
- architecture
Copper
levels Copper
substitution
Key performance Substitution + Copper in other
+ ++ +
indicators possibilities - + use
Copper substitution Demand +
- for +
copper Copper
+
consumption
Price - demand loop

Investments in
+
copper -
+
Investments +
producing copper
+ +
- +
Technology +
and refinery
capacity
+ Copper discarding
Copper
+ +
capacity
Copper products to
+
recycling -
Rese
devel
opm
ent + + products
+ Copper mining +
Copper
Copper - +
- scrap heap
- Rate
+ Raw copper
available
65
A.3. Regional
Legend
Part of demand Copper demand
External variables substituted World population related to GDP
Price of subsitutes
+ -
Copper variables
- GDP per capita
Copper
levels Copper
substitution
Key performance Substitution + +
possibilities
+ - +
indicators Copper substitution Demand +
- for
Regional variable copper + Copper
consumption
Price - demand loop

Investments in
+
copper -
+
Investments +
producing copper
+ +
- +
Technology +
and refinery
capacity
+ Copper discarding
Copper
+ +
capacity
Copper products to
+
recycling -
Rese
devel
opm
ent + + products
+ Copper mining +
Copper
Copper - +
- scrap heap
- Rate
+ Raw copper
available
66
67
Appendix B. Model structures
In this Annex, all model structures of the different model varieties are presented. Colour coding of the variables is the same for all models. For the equations, please consider the digitally
appended Excel file containing all model variables and uncertainties.
B.1. Top down model
B.1.1. Copper stocks

Difference in copper
consumption between 1 and
2 years ago
Global consumption of Legend
consumption delay copper -2 Year Copper variable
Minimum usage
mining capacity Delay variable
Forecast of copper <2 Year>
<Recycling Input
consumption Global demand of <One year> External factor
Normal resource Rate>
copper -1 Year
reserve relation Initial value
<World copper <Minimum usage smelting Compete demand Switch variable
mining capacity> and refining capacity> for copper
Relation between Structural
<New autonomous uncertainty
reserve development> resource and reserves Mining <Smelting <Postponed demand <Total demand for Key Performance
capacity Usage of mining Usage of smelting and refining
utilisation rate <Total availability of of copper> copper> Indicator
capacity capacity capacity>
<Relative recommissioning of copper>
Losses during
copper mine and smelter Difference copper
mining Switch forecast Losses during
capacity> Findings by junior capacity Smelting production consumption and demand
companies capacity
Initial copper utilisation rate
Initial copper Initial copper Percentage lost Initial stock of raw Initial copper in
resource base reserve base during mining use
resources copper
Copper Global Global
Copper Global
copper Global copper
resource base resources stock of inventories of Netto consumption of
Copper to Copper from reserve base Global mined Global in use Disbanded copper
raw copper refined copper refined copper
resources resources copper production of products not collected
production refined copper Initial
inventories Percentage of
of refined primary scrap Global consumption
Year left of copper
Collection rate
Relation deep sea Losses during of refined copper
Part of resource
Administration and conventional
copper mining refining copper products
base seabased <Administration Average time Global secondary
time reserve base copper to scrap
time> mining till Percentage of
Global primary
Percentage lost refining copper lost during
Initial seabased Initial seabased Minimum reserve production scrap
during refining <One year> Average lifetime of
resources reserve base base size copper in use
Seabased Seabased Seabased Last years
copper copper scrap
resource base resources reserve base Deep sea mining Delay order scrap
Seabased Copper from Real RIR
seabased production Initial value global
copper to resources Global copper
Last years mined copper in scrap
resources Copper recovered in scrap
copper production <Deep sea mining Recycling Input from scrap
capacity>
<Relative recommissioning <One year> Rate
Deep sea reserve Recycling score
of deep sea mine capacity> <Relative increase in Delay order mining
base development
deep sea mining Average time scrap Not recovered
Threshold for junior companies Copper score during
capacity> to recycling copper in scrap
to start deep sea reserve base Relative part of dismembering Percentage copper
development recovered from scrap
deep sea mining
Copper score
<Normal resource during treatment
Relation between deep sea
copper resources and reserve relation>
reserve base <Global mined <Deep sea mining
New autonomous production>
copper production>
reserve development
68
B.1.2. Mine, smelting and refinery capacity
<Marginal costs deep <Marginal costs
sea mining> mining>
Relation deep sea and <Mining

conventional mining costs capacity <Relative recommissioning of
utilisation rate> copper mine and smelter Initial used mining
Mining usage capacity> capacity
investment cap
Parked copper
mining capacity Decommissioning of
New capacity for mines due to losses
Preparation of deep sea New capacity for Delay order mining
mining capacity increase deep sea mines conventional mines capacity Recommissioning of Parking of copper
Effect of use of
mining capacity
capacity in mining
Deep sea mining capacity increase capacity mines due to age
capacity in
preparation Proposed Average mine
Initial deep sea new mining permit term Average mine
Delay order
capacity in capacity lifetime
deep sea preparation
<Relative
recommissioning Growth deep sea
of deep sea mine Average deep sea mining capacity <Relative decrease in
capacity> <Recycling Input <Relative increase in
permit term copper mine and smelter
Rate> copper mine and
capacity>
<Relative increase in smelter capacity>
deep sea mining
capacity>
Initial used deep
Recommissioning of
sea capacity Total present and future
deep sea capacity
Relation copper smelting and refining
Parked deep <Global production of capacity
Deep sea mining Initial deep sea mining and refining
sea mining refined copper>
capacity capacity mining capacity Average lifetime of
Average smelting Initial refining copper smelters and
Parking of <One year>
deep sea <Delay order capacity permit term capacity refineries
capacity mining>
Smelting and Smelting and
Last years deep sea refining capacity in refining
Preparation of smelting preparation Growth refining capacity
Decommissioning of Decommissioning of deep mining capacity <Deep sea mining Decommissioning of
and refining capacity capacity
deep sea capacity due sea mining capacity due to production> refinery capacity due
Initial preparation of
to losses age to age
refining capacity
<Relative decrease
<Global mined Effect of use of Recommissioning of
deep sea mine Difference in deep sea Parking of
copper production> smelting capacity Delay order of smelting and refining smelting and
capacity> Average lifetime mining between last year
smelting capacity capacity refining capacity
of deep sea
capacity
Percentual increase in Smelter and refiner

Parked smelting
deep sea mining capacity usage investment cap and refining
capacity Decommissioning of
<Relative recommissioning of smelters and refineries due
<Smelting Initial used
copper mine and smelter to losses
capacity utilisation refinery capacity
rate> capacity>
69
B.1.3. Copper demand
World population -
High scenario
World population - Switch World
Medium scenario population
<Time> World population -

Low scenario
World population -
Constant growth scenario World population
Yearly economic Lookup for copper use related

growth historic data Start GDP per to GDP - First high then
Average global GDP
<Time> capita slower rising
per capita
Period long sinus
Global GDP Lookup for copper use
PPP related to GDP - First high
Growth GDP then constant
Economic sinus Intrinsic global
Period long sinus Lookup for copper use
long period demand for copper
Normalisation related to GDP - First high
amplitudes
value GDP then declining
Economic sinus long Base economic
period amplitudes growth Relative growth Lookup for copper use Copper use related
GDP related to GDP - to GDP
Period medium Economic sinus Continuous rising
sinus medium period
Switch copper use
related to GDP Yearly copper use
Economic sinus medium Yearly economic
Period medium sinus related to GDP
period amplitudes growth ESDMA
amplitudes Relation between
intrinsic and total
Amplitude long
demand
sinus
Economic short
Period short sinus period Amplitude Positive effect of
Amplitude short
medium sinus intrinsic demand
sinus
Intrinsic demand
Long term effect Amplified effect of Amplification minus substitution
Economic sinus short intrinsic demand period factor of intrinsic Effect of relation
Period short sinus intrinsic demand
period amplitudes demand intrinisic and real
amplitudes
demand on change
Initial value long term
Negative effect of
effect intrinsic demand
intrinsic demand
Average long term <Part of original
effect of intrinsic
Decay of effect of demand Growth effect of Short term increase demand substituted>
intrinsic demand intrinsic demand demand due to intrinsic
Total change due to demand
<Administration intrinsic demand
time> Automatic decay of Long term increase
Initial postponed
demand unfulfilled demand demand due to intrinsic
demand
Postponed
demand of
Copper not produced copper Finally fulfilled Change in demand due Present
with demand demand of copper to economic situation de-substitution
Initial value for of copper
Long term copper substituted
price elasticity copper
Short term copper
<Difference copper
price elasticity
Part of original Total
consumption and demand> Total demand demand substituted substitution of Long term
Loss in demand due to for copper copper substitution strength
price elasticity
Loss in demand due Short term

Amplified effect of to substitution Present substitution substitution strength
relative price on demand of copper
Complete positive and
Amplification
Initial value long term factor of relative Initial value of long term
effect price price effect effect substitution
Average long Average long
term effect on Positive
demand term effect of
Growth of effect of Negative effect Positive effect substitution effect substitution
Amplification factor Growth of effect of
relative price on demand of relative price of relative price Effect of relation copper
for substitution Amplified effect of relation substitution
on demand on demand and aluminium price
Negative copper and aluminium price
Decay of effect of substitution effect
relative price on demand Long term effect on Effect of relative Relation between copper Decay of effect of
demand period price on demand and aluminium price Long term effect of substitution
substitution period
<Intrinsic demand
minus substitution> Real price of
<Global inventories of Relative price of Substitution Substitution
refined copper> copper
copper amplifying factor threshold
<Percentage of
primary scrap> <Marginal price of
copper> Price of
Total availability of
aluminium
copper Change in
aluminium price Initial price of
aluminium
Cap for relative Price amplifying
<Percentage of copper price factor Growth relative
lost during production> Production time GDP last year Delay order GDP
Minimum price
<One year>
aluminium
<Relative growth Difference GDP Amplified
GDP> growth with last year difference
Growth factor GDP growth

aluminium difference amplifier
70
B.1.4. Economics of copper
<Long term profit
period>
Initial long term

profit forecast
Price averaging One year Old difference in Long term
period price 1 year Increase long term profit forecast Decrease long term
Copper price one profit forecast profit forecast
year ago 2 Year Second derivative
Initial copper price Old difference in
price
price 2 year
Relative recommissioning of
Average periodic Difference in price 2
Changes due to copper mine and smelter
Increase in periodically price of copper and 1 years ago
Decrease in Elasticity of Supply capacity
price of copper periodically price of Copper price two
copper years ago
Copper price Normalised profit

forecast forecast
Relative decrease in
<Real price of copper mine and smelter
copper> Copper price capacity
forecast delay
Copper price Elasticity

Switch forecast and Maximum increase mine of Supply short term
historical data for capacity and smelter capacity
Copper price Elasticity of

Capital investment
Supply long term
fraction
Marginal price
Transport costs of forecast Relative increase in Maximum
copper Normalised profit with copper mine and smelter recommissioning per year
capital investment capacity
Marginal price one <One year>
year ago
Marginal price Long term
profitable
of copper Difference in marginal
Increase long term investment forecast Decrease long term
price 2 and 1 years ago profitable investment
Marginal price two Old difference in profitable investment Initial long term forecast
years ago marginal price 1 year forecast
Energy costs for profitable investment
Marginal costs copper mining forecast
mining Second derivative
<2 Year> marginal price
Long term profit
Old difference in
period
marginal price 2 year
Mined copper Initial deep sea long
Amplifier GDP growth before 2000 term profit
Ore grade of Long term deep
effect on energy price Initial price of Cumulative
landbased copper sea mining profit
energy mined
copper Addition to mined Increase long term deep forecast Decrease long term deep
Relative recommissioning
copper sea mining profit forecast sea mining profit forecast
Price of of deep sea mine capacity
Growth of price of energy Normalisation value Power for <Part of resource
<Relative growth energy ore grade oregrades base seabased>
GDP> <Global mined Influence of technology on Energy costs of copper
copper production> copper mining energy costs smelting and refining
Changes due to Elasticity of
Ore grade of
Deep sea mined Supply in deep sea mining
seabased copper
copper before 2000
Normalised deep sea
Cumulative profit forecast
Amplified difference seabased mined <Switch forecast and
<Difference GDP for energy copper Addition to seabased historical data for Relative decrease deep
growth with last year>
mined copper capacity> sea mine capacity <Copper price Elasticity
Marginal costs deep of Supply short term>
<Deep sea mining <Copper price Elasticity
Growth factor sea mining
GDP growth difference Energy costs for of Supply long term>
energy production>
amplifier energy deep sea copper <Copper price
Marginal price forecast forecast>
<One year> Maximum increase
deep sea copper
Deep sea capital deep sea mine capacity
Production costs Marginal price deep sea investment fraction
deep sea copper copper one year ago
Marginal price
deep sea copper Difference in marginal price
Normalised deep sea profit
deep sea copper 2 and 1 Relative increase in deep
forecast with capital
years ago sea mining capacity
Old difference in marginal investment
Marginal price deep sea price deep sea copper1
copper two years ago Second derivative
year
marginal price deep sea
copper
Long term deep sea
mining profitable
Old difference in marginal Increase long term deep sea investment forecast Decrease long term deep sea
<2 Year> mining profitable investment mining profitable investment
price deep sea copper 2
year forecast Initial deep sea forecast
profitable investments
<Long term profit
period>
71
B.2. Bottom up model

Difference in copper
Minimum usage consumption between 1 <Intrinsic copper
mining capacity and 2 years ago demand bottom
<Recycling Input up>
Rate> consumption Global consumption of Initial use grade for
delay copper -2 Year Architecture
Normal resource
<World copper Initial use grade for Initial use grade for
reserve relation Global demand of Total summed
mining capacity> Minimum usage smelting <One year> StationaryElectromotors WaterTreatment
Forecast of copper copper -1 Year <2 Year> demand
consumption and refining capacity
Initial use grade for
Use grades for Initial use grade for
<Autonomous reserve Mining EnergyInfrastructure
copper in use Automotive
development factor> Relation between capacity <Smelting
resource and reserves utilisation rate
and refining <Total demand for Initial use grade for
capacity>
<Relative recommissioning of copper> Difference copper OtherUse
Losses during Usage of mining
copper mine and smelter mining Usage of smelting consumption and demand Percentages of use
capacity <Total availability of
capacity> capacity grades copper in use
Findings by junior Losses during copper>
companies Switch forecast production Normalised Collection rate copper Collection rate copper
capacity Smelting products products
Percentage lost capacity copper use
Initial copper Initial copper Initial copper in Initial total copper EnergyInfrastructure StationaryElectromotors
Initial copper during mining Initial stock of raw utilisation rate
resources reserve base use in use
resource base copper Collection rate copper
Global Global
Copper Copper Global products Architecture
resource copper Global copper
base resources stock of inventories of Global consumption of
Copper to Copper from reserve base Global mined Global in use Collection rate copper
raw copper refined copper uses refined copper Disbanded copper
resources resources copper production of products WaterTreatment
production Initial products not collected
refined copper Percentage of
inventories Collection rate copper
of refined primary scrap
copper Global consumption Collection rate products Automotive Average lifetime of copper
Losses during
of refined copper copper products Collection rate copper in use EnergyInfrastructure
refining
Part of resource
Year left of Average time Global secondary products OtherUse
<Administration copper to scrap Average lifetime of copper in
base seabased copper mining Administration mining till
Global primary Average lifetime of use StationaryElectromotors
time> refining Percentage of
time Percentage lost <One year>
copper lost during scrap copper in use
during refining production Sum copper to
scrap Average lifetime of copper
Last years in use Architecture
Initial seabased Initial seabased Minimum reserve <Percentage lost Real RIR scrap
reserve base base size Delay order scrap Initial value global Average lifetime of copper
resources during mining>
Global copper copper in scrap Initial total copper in use WaterTreatment
Seabased Seabased Seabased
copper copper Copper recovered in scrap scrap Average lifetime of Average lifetime of
resource base resources reserve base Recycling Input Normalised scrap
Seabased Copper from Deep sea mining from scrap copper in use OtherUse copper in use Automotive
copper to Rate input
seabased resources production
resources Percentage of use
Normalised recycling Initial value global copper in
<Deep sea mining grades copper scrap
score per use scrap EnergyInfrastructure
Last years mined capacity>
Not recovered
<Relative recommissioning copper production Initial value global copper in
Recycling score copper in scrap
of deep sea mine capacity> Use grades for scrap
Deep sea reserve
Delay order mining Average time scrap copper scrap StationaryElectromotors
base development <One year>
to recycling Copper score during
Percentage copper
<Relative increase in deep dismembering Initial value global
Threshold for junior companies recovered from scrap
sea mining capacity> to start deep sea reserve base copper in scrap
Copper score during Copper score Architecture
development treatment during treatment Normalisation
Relation between deep sea Relative part of EnergyInfrastructure Initial value global
copper in scrap Initial value global copper
Autonomous reserve copper resources and copper in scrap
reserve base deep sea mining OtherUse in scrap WaterTreatment
development factor <Normal resource Copper score during
reserve relation> treatment Copper score during
Initial value global
StationaryElectromotors treatment OtherUse
copper in scrap
Automotive
<Global mined <Deep sea mining Copper score during Copper score during Copper score during
copper production> production> treatment Architecture treatment WaterTreatment treatment Automotive
72
<Marginal costs deep
Initial used mining
<Marginal costs sea mining> <Relative recommissioning of capacity
mining> copper mine and smelter
<Mining capacity> Parked copper
capacity mining capacity
utilisation rate> Decommissioning of
mines due to losses
Mining usage
investment cap
Relation deep sea and
Preparation of deep sea
conventional mining costs
mining capacity increase Recommissioning of Parking of copper
Delay order mining
capacity
New capacity for New capacity for

conventional mines Effect of use of
deep sea mines Initial mining capacity
mining capacity
capacity in mining
Deep sea mining Preparation of preparation Growth mine capacity Decommissioning
capacity in of mines due to
capacity increase capacity age
preparation
Average mine
Initial deep sea permit term
Delay order capacity in
preparation Average mine
deep sea lifetime
Average deep sea Proposed new

permit term mining capacity <Relative decrease in
Growth deep sea <Relative increase in
mining capacity copper mine and copper mine and smelter
smelter capacity> capacity>
<Relative increase in deep
sea mining capacity>
<Relative recommissioning <Global mined

of deep sea mine capacity> copper production>
Relation copper
Average lifetime of
mining and refining
Average smelting Initial refining copper mills
Initial used deep capacity permit term
Recommissioning of capacity
sea capacity
deep sea capacity <Recycling Input Smelting and Smelting and
Parked deep Deep sea mining Initial deep sea Rate> <Global production of refining capacity
sea mining refining Decommissioning of
capacity mining capacity refined copper> Preparation of smelting in preparation Growth refining capacity
capacity refinery capacity due to
Parking of and refining capacity capacity
<Deep sea mining age
Initial preparation of
deep sea production>
refining capacity
capacity
Effect of use of
smelting capacity Recommissioning of Parking of
Delay order of smelting and refining smelting and
Decommissioning of Decommissioning of
smelting capacity capacity refining capacity
deep sea capacity due deep sea mining
to losses <Relative decrease deep capacity due to age <Smelting
sea mine capacity> capacity utilisation
rate>
Smelter and refiner Parked smelting
Average lifetime of usage investment cap and refining
deep sea capacity <Relative recommissioning of capacity Decommissioning of
copper mine and smelter smelters and refineries due
capacity> Initial used refinery to losses
capacity
73
<Intrinsic copper
demand bottom <Percentage of
up> primary scrap>
Relation between
intrinsic and total
demand
Positive effect of
Long term effect
intrinsic demand
intrinsic demand period
Amplification Effect of relation
Amplified effect of factor of intrinsic intrinisic and real
Initial value long term intrinsic demand demand on change
effect intrinsic demand demand
Average long term Negative effect of

effect of intrinsic
Decay of effect of demand Growth effect of intrinsic demand
intrinsic demand intrinsic demand
Short term increase
<Administration demand due to intrinsic
Total change due to
demand
time> Automatic decay of intrinsic demand
unfulfilled demand
Postponed Long term increase
demand of demand due to intrinsic
Copper not produced copper
Finally fulfilled demand
with demand Initial postponed demand of copper
demand Change in demand due Present
to economic situation de-substitution of
copper
Long term copper
price elasticity Initial value for
<Difference copper Initial value of long term effect
substituted
consumption and demand> Short term copper substitution
Part of original uses copper StationaryElectromotors
price elasticity Total
demand for substituted Total
Loss in demand due to copper substitution Initial value of long term
Initial value of long term
price elasticity Part of original of copper
effect substitution effect substitution
demand substituted Long term EnergyInfrastructure Architecture
Loss in demand due substitution strength
Amplified effect of Initial value of long term
to substitution
relative price on demand Present substitution effect substitution
Initial value long Short term
term effect of copper substitution strength Automotive
Amplification
Average long factor of relative Initial value of long term Initial value of long term
term effect on
demand Growth of effect of price effect Complete positive and effect substitution effect substitution
relative price on demand negative substitution WaterTreatment
Average long
Negative effect of Positive term effect of
relative price on Positive effect of Growth of effect of substitution Initial value of long term
relative price on substitution effect
demand Effect of relation copper Amplified effect of relation substitution effect substitution OtherUse
Long term effect on demand Amplification factor
Decay of effect of demand period and aluminium price for substitution copper and aluminium price
relative price on demand Negative
Effect of relative substitution effect
price on demand Decay of effect of
<Percentage of Long term effect of substitution
<Percentage of copper primary scrap> Relation between copper substitution period
lost during production> Relative price of and aluminium price
copper Real price of
copper
Substitution
Total availability of Substitution Substitution threshold OtherUse
<Global inventories of copper amplifying factor threshold Substitution threshold
refined copper> <Marginal price of Automotive
copper> Substitution threshold
<One year>
Price amplifying WaterTreatment
Production time factor
Growth relative Substitution threshold Substitution threshold Substitution threshold
GDP last year StationaryElectromotors EnergyInfrastructure Architecture
Price of
Delay order GDP
Change in aluminium
<Relative growth Difference GDP Amplified
GDP> aluminium price Initial price of
growth with last year difference
aluminium
Growth factor GDP growth

aluminium difference amplifier
74
<Long term profit
period>
Price averaging
Initial long term
period
profit forecast
One year
Initial copper price Old difference in Long term
price 1 year Increase long term profit forecast
Copper price one Decrease long term
2 Year
year ago profit forecast profit forecast
Average periodic
price of copper Difference in price 2 Second derivative
Increase in periodically Decrease in
and 1 years ago price
price of copper periodically price of
Old difference in Relative recommissioning of
copper Copper price two price 2 year Changes due to copper mine and smelter
years ago Elasticity of Supply capacity
Relative decrease in
Copper price copper mine and smelter
<Real price of forecast delay Copper price capacity
copper> Normalised profit
forecast
forecast
Transport costs of Switch forecast and Maximum increase mine Copper price Elasticity
copper historical data for capacity Capital investment of Supply short term
and smelter capacity
fraction
Copper price Elasticity
of Supply long term
Marginal price
Marginal price one <One year> forecast Normalised profit with Relative increase in
Marginal price year ago capital investment copper mine and smelter
capacity Maximum
of copper recommissioning per year
Marginal price two Difference in marginal

years ago price 2 and 1 years ago Long term
profitable
Energy costs for Old difference in Increase long term investment forecast Decrease long term
Marginal costs copper mining marginal price 1 year profitable investment Initial long term profitable investment
mining forecast profitable investment forecast
Second derivative
<2 Year> marginal price forecast
Old difference in
marginal price 2 year
Mined copper Long term profit
before 2000 period
Ore grade of
landbased copper Initial deep sea long
Cumulative term profit
Amplifier GDP growth mined
effect on energy price copper Addition to mined Long term deep
Initial price of sea mining profit
energy copper Increase long term deep forecast Decrease long term deep
Price of sea mining profit forecast sea mining profit forecast
Normalisation Power for <Part of resource Relative recommissioning
energy value base seabased> <Global mined Influence of technology on
Growth of price of oregrades Energy costs of copper of deep sea mine capacity
energy copper production> copper mining energy costs smelting and refining
<Relative growth Changes due to Elasticity of
GDP> Deep sea mined Supply in deep sea mining
Normalised deep sea
copper before 2000
<Switch forecast and profit forecast
Ore grade of Relative decrease deep
Cumulative historical data for
seabased copper seabased mined sea mine capacity
capacity>
copper Addition to seabased
<Difference GDP Amplified difference
mined copper <Copper price Deep sea capital
growth with last year> for energy
forecast> <Copper price Elasticity
investment fraction
<Deep sea mining Maximum increase of Supply short term> <Copper price Elasticity
Marginal price forecast
Marginal costs deep production> deep sea mine capacity of Supply long term>
deep sea copper
sea mining
GDP growth difference Energy costs for
Growth factor
amplifier energy deep sea copper <One year> Normalised deep sea profit
energy Production costs Marginal price deep sea forecast with capital
deep sea copper copper one year ago investment Relative increase in deep
Difference in marginal price sea mining capacity
Marginal price deep sea copper 2 and 1
deep sea copper years ago
Marginal price deep sea Old difference in marginal Second derivative
price deep sea copper1 marginal price deep sea Long term deep sea
copper two years ago mining profitable
year copper
Increase long term deep sea investment forecast Decrease long term deep sea
mining profitable investment mining profitable investment
forecast forecast
Initial deep sea
Old difference in marginal profitable investments
<2 Year>
price deep sea copper 2
year
<Long term profit

period>
75
B.2.5. Bottom-up demand
<Time> <Time> <Relative growth
GDP>
Period long sinus World population -

Economic sinus Yearly economic High scenario
long period growth historic data
Period long sinus Start GDP per
Economic sinus long Medium scenario population
amplitudes capita
period amplitudes Base economic Global GDP World population - Average growth other uses
growth PPP Low scenario devided by econ growth
Growth GDP New Growth other Old growth other
Period medium Economic sinus World population - uses etc uses etc
sinus medium period Constant growth scenario
Relative growth World population
Yearly economic
GDP Averaging period
growth ESDMA
Period medium sinus Economic sinus medium Average global GDP
amplitudes period amplitudes per capita
Growth percentage for
Period short sinus Economic short infrastructure growth
Amplitude long
period
sinus
Amplitude <Time> Number of cars
Period short sinus Number of new
Economic sinus short medium sinus related to GDP Newly developed
amplitudes cars per dollar
period amplitudes Demand for copper infrastructure
Amplitude short automotive
sinus Fractions of new cars
- Dominance
<Infrastructure to Number of cars in Growth of copper in
scrap> 2000 watertreatment
Fractions of new Goal for copper in
cars - Pluralism Supposed copper
Number of infrastructure 2050
in energy
<Total copper in cars
Newly build Destruction of infrastructure
cars to scrap> cars New copper in
Fractions of new cars
watertreatment
cars
Switch new cars

Copper demand Infrastructure to
<Copper in Copper per car Copper in cars to
All things to scrap per car type
architecture to scrap> type scrap per car type scrap
<Initial copper in
<Watertreatment
use>
to scrap>
Copper in
Cu in vehicles watertreatment
Watertreatment to
scrap
Copper in
Copper demand due automotive Total copper in cars
<Other uses to to automotive to scrap
scrap> <Stationary
electromotors to scrap>
Cu in vehicles
HEV Cu in vehicles
Conventional
Cu in vehicles <Average lifetime of Growth of copper in
PHEV Cu in vehicles Cu in vehicles Intrinsic copper copper in use> architecture
BEV cityBEV demand bottom up
Copper in
architecture New copper for
architecture
Copper for
New copper for other uses
Copper in
other uses Copper in
stationary
New copper for electromotors architecture to scrap
stationary electromotors
Growth other uses Other uses to

scrap
Stationary
Growth in stationary electromotors to scrap
electromotors
76
B.3. Regional model

Mining pwidth Initial stock of raw Initial stock of raw Initial stock of raw
Mining ptype copper r1 copper r2 copper r3
Mining pextra
<Ore grade of
Priority of using landbased copper> Initial stock of
mining capacity
raw copper
Forecast of total
copper consumption Forecast of copper Difference in copper
<Normalised copper consumption between 1
recovered from scrap> consumption
and 2 years ago
Preferable usage of
mining capacity Minimum usage Global consumption of
mining capacity consumption copper -2 Year
Normalised delay
Global complete
Regional difference with recycling input rate <World copper
One year demand for copper
calculated resources and mining capacity> Minimum usage smelting Global demand of 2 Year
reserves r1 and refining capacity copper -1 Year
<Recycling Input
Rate> Normal resource Complete demand
<Smelting
Regional difference with reserve relation Switch forecast for copper
and refining
calculated resources and capacity capacity>
Mining
reserves r2 Autonomous reserve capacity Usage of mining
development factor Relation between utilisation rate capacity Usage of smelting <Import of refined <Regional availability
resource and reserves capacity <Total demand for
copper> of refined copper> copper>
Regional difference with <Relative increase in Losses during
copper mine and smelter <Postponed demand Initial copper in
calculated resources and Initial fractions of mining
reserves capacity> of copper> use r1
regions reserve base <Export of raw <Import of raw <Export of Losses during Difference copper
copper> copper> refined production consumption and demand Initial copper in
Findings by junior Percentage use r2
Regional difference with Initial copper copper>
companies Initial copper lost during
calculated resources and resource base Initial copper Smelting Initial copper in Initial copper in
reserves r3 resources reserve base mining capacity use use r3
Copper Global utilisation rate Global Collection rate
Copper Global
resource copper inventories of Global copper
resources stock of Regional consumption copper products r1
base Copper to Copper from reserve base Global mined Global refined copper in use
raw copper of refined copper Disbanded copper Collection rate
resources resources copper production of
production products not collected copper products r2
<Relative recommissioning of refined copper Initial
inventories
copper mine and smelter of refined Percentage of
capacity> copper Global consumption Collection rate Collection rate
primary scrap
copper products copper products r3
Year left of Losses during Average time
of refined copper
Part of resource Global secondary
<Administration Administration refining mining till
base seabased copper mining copper to scrap
time> time refining Percentage of Global primary <One year> Average lifetime of
copper lost during scrap Average lifetime of copper in use r1
Initial seabased Initial seabased production Last years
Minimum reserve Percentage lost copper in use
resources reserve base scrap Average lifetime of
base size during refining
<Export of copper
Seabased Seabased Seabased Real RIR Delay order scrap copper in use r2
copper scrap>
copper reserve base
resource base resources Copper from Deep sea mining Global copper Average lifetime of
Seabased
copper to seabased resources production Copper recovered in scrap copper in use r3
resources from scrap <Import of copper
Last years mined <Deep sea mining scrap>
<Part of deep sea Recycling Input
copper production capacity> Initial value global
mining per region> Rate Recycling score Initial value global
<Relative increase in deep copper in scrap
Deep sea mining <One year> copper in scrap r3
sea mining capacity> Delay order
development Average time scrap Copper score during
mining Initial value global
<Relative recommissioning to recycling dismembering Percentage copper Not recovered
of deep sea mine capacity> recovered from scrap copper in scrap r2
Copper score copper in scrap
<Autonomous reserve Normalised copper
Threshold for junior companies Total production of recovered from scrap during treatment Initial value global
development factor> to start deep sea reserve base
Relation between deep sea refined copper copper in scrap r1
development
copper resources and
reserve base Relative part of deep
<Normal resource Relative part of
sea mining
reserve relation>
<Global mined deep sea mining r1
copper production>
Relative part of
<Deep sea mining
deep sea mining r2
production> Relative part of
deep sea mining r3
77
<Mining pwidth>
<Ore grade of
<Relative recommissioning of
landbased copper> <Mining ptype>
copper mine and smelter
capacity>
<Mining pextra>
Initial used mining
<Marginal costs deep <Marginal costs Initial used mining
Priority of building capacity r1
sea mining> mining> capacity r2
mining capacity Initial mining capacity
in preparation r2 Initial used mining
<Part of deep sea
Initial used mining capacity r3
mining per region> Initial mining capacity
Relation deep sea and Initial mining capacity capacity
conventional mining costs Regional delay in preparation r1 in preparation r3
order r2 Regional delay parked copper
order r3 mining capacity
Normalised priority of Decommissioning of
building mining capacity Regional delay mines due to losses
order r1
New capacity for New capacity for
Delay order mining
deep sea mines conventional mines Recommissioning of Parking of copper
Preparation of deep sea capacity
<Mining mining capacity mining capacity
mining capacity increase
capacity
utilisation rate>
Mining usage in preparation
investment cap Mining World copper
capacity in mining
<Regional delay
Effect of use of capacity increase capacity mines
order r1>
Deep sea mining mining capacity Average mine
<Regional delay capacity in Average permit Initial mining
capacity lifetime
order r2> preparation Proposed new term
conventional mining
<Regional delay Delay order Initial deep sea Initial deep sea capacity capacity Initial mining
Proposed
order r3> deep sea capacity in preparation in preparation r1 new mining capacity r3
Average permit Average permit
capacity term r1 term r3 Initial mining
Initial mining capacity r2
Initial deep sea capacity Initial deep sea capacity Average permit
capacity r1
in preparation r3 Proposed new deep term r2
in preparation r2
sea mining capacity
<Recycling Input
Rate>
Average deep sea Growth deep sea
permit term r1 Average deep sea mining capacity
Average deep sea permit term <Relative increase in <Relative increase in <Relative decrease in
permit term r2 deep sea mining copper mine and smelter copper mine and
capacity> capacity> smelter capacity>
Average deep sea
<Relative
permit term r3
recommissioning of
Initial used deep sea deep sea mine
<Smelting
capacity r1 Initial used deep Recommissioning capacity> capacity utilisation Initial refining
Initial deep sea Average smelting
Initial used deep sea sea capacity of deep sea mining capacity r1 rate> capacity permit term r2 capacity r1 Initial refining
capacity r2 capacity capacity r2
Parked deep Effect of use of Average smelting Average smelting
sea mining Deep sea mining Initial deep sea capacity permit term r1 capacity permit term r3
Initial used deep sea Initial deep sea smelting capacity Initial refining
capacity capacity mining capacity
capacity r3 mining capacity r2 capacity r3
Proposed new smelting Initial refining
Parking of
and refining capacity Average smelting capacity Average lifetime of
deep sea Initial deep sea
capacity mining capacity r3 Smelter and refiner capacity permit term copper mills
<Global production of Relation copper usage investment cap Smelting and Smelting and
refined copper> mining and refining refining capacity refining
Preparation of smelting in preparation Growth refining capacity Decommissioning of
Decommissioning of Decommissioning of and refining capacity capacity refinery capacity
<Deep sea mining <Global mined
deep sea capacity due to deep sea mining Initial preparation of
<Relative decrease production> copper production>
losses capacity due to age refining capacity
deep sea mine Parts of proposed new
Recommissioning of Parking of
capacity> smelting and refining capacity
<Mining pwidth> smelting and refining smelting and
per region Delay order of refining capacity
capacity
smelting capacity
Regional priority of building <Regional delay
Average lifetime order r1>
smelter and refiner capacity
of deep sea Parked smelting
capacity and refining
<Regional delay capacity Decommissioning of
Initial preparation of Initial preparation of
order r2> smelters and refiniries due
refining capacity r1 refining capacity r3 Initial used refinery
to losses
capacity
<Mining pextra> <Mining ptype> Initial preparation of
<Intrinsic global <Regional delay refining capacity r2 Initial used refinery
demand for copper> order r3> capacity r3
<Relative recommissioning of Initial used refinery

copper mine and smelter capacity r2
capacity>
Initial used refinery
capacity r1
78
Start GDP per Start GDP per Switch World Switch World
capita r2 capita r1 World population - population - region 1 population - region 2
High scenario Relative growth
Start GDP per Relative growth Relative growth
GDP Region 1
capita r3 Start GDP per GDP Region 2 GDP Region 3
Base economic capita Switch World
Medium scenario population - region 3
growth r1 population
<Time> World population -
Base economic <Relative growth
<Time> Low scenario
growth r2 GDP>
Base economic World population -
World population
growth r3 Constant growth scenario
Economic sinus Lookup for copper use related SUM intrinsic
Period long sinus Period long sinus
long period to GDP - First high then demand
amplitudes r1 Global GDP per
Regional GDP per slower rising
capita <Percentage of
Economic sinus long Yearly economic capita Lookup for copper use
Period long sinus Period long sinus
growth historic data <Percentage of copper primary scrap>
amplitudes r2 amplitudes period amplitudes related to GDP - First high
Base economic then constant lost during production>
Period long sinus growth
amplitudes r3 Period medium Economic sinus Global GDP Lookup for copper use Intrinsic global
sinus medium period PPP related to GDP - First high demand for copper
Growth GDP then declining
Period medium sinus Lookup for copper use Yearly copper use
amplitudes r1 Relative growth related to GDP - related to GDP
Economic sinus medium Normalisation
GDP Continuous rising Lookup for copper use
Period medium sinus period amplitudes Yearly economic Normalised regional value GDP
Period medium sinus
amplitudes r2 growth ESDMA yearly economic growth Switch copper use related to GDP <One year>
amplitudes
related to GDP Last years intrinsic
Period medium sinus Switch economic
regional demands
amplitudes r3 Economic short growth Average yearly Relation between intrinsic
period economic growth and total demand
Relative increase in
Period short sinus Period short sinus intrinsic demand per
amplitudes r1 region Delay order last years
Long term effect Effect of relation
Economic sinus short intrinisic and real intrinsic demand
Period short sinus intrinsic demand period Difference between
Period short sinus period amplitudes demand on change old and new intrinsic
amplitudes r2
amplitudes Initial value long term demand
Period short sinus effect intrinsic demand
Amplification factor of
amplitudes r3 intrinsic demand
Average long term
Amplitude long effect of intrinsic Negative effect of
Amplitude short Amplitude demand Growth effect of Positive effect of
Decay of interest of
sinus medium sinus sinus intrinsic demand intrinsic demand
intrinsic demand intrinsic demand
Regional intrinsic
Amplified effect of
Ampl short sin r1 Ampl med sin r1 Ampl long sin r1 Short term increase demand substituted
intrinsic demand
demand due to intrinsic
Ampl med sin r2 Ampl long sin r2 demand
Ampl short sin r2 Total change due to
Ampl long sin r3 Long term increase intrinsic demand Intrinsic demand
Ampl med sin r3
Ampl short sin r3 demand due to intrinsic minus substitution
<Administration demand
time> Change in demand due Present
Automatic decay of to economic situation de-substitution of
Initial postponed unfulfilled demand
Short term copper copper
demand
price elasticity
Postponed Regional part of original
demand of Long term copper
Copper not produced copper Finally fulfilled Total demand substituted Initial value for
price elasticity demand for
with demand demand of copper Total substituted
Loss in demand due to copper substitution
price elasticity Part of original of copper copper
demand substituted Long term
Initial value long term
effect price Loss in demand due substitution strength
to substitution
<Difference copper Average long Amplified effect of Present substitution
term effect on relative price on demand of copper
consumption and demand> demand Short term
Growth of effect of
relative price on demand Complete positive and substitution strength
Amplification factor of
relative price effect
Decay of effect of Long term effect on
Positive
relative price on demand demand period Negative effect
Positive effect substitution effect
of relative price of relative price Effect of relation copper Amplified effect of relation
Amplification factor Initial value of long term
on demand on demand and aluminium price copper and aluminium price
for substitution effect substitution
Negative
substitution effect Average long
Effect of relative term effect of
price on demand Growth of effect of substitution
Relation between copper
substitution
and aluminium price
Relative scarcity of Relative price of

<Intrinsic global copper Real price of Substitution Decay of effect of
copper Substitution
demand for copper> copper amplifying factor threshold substitution
Total availability of Long term effect of
<Percentage of copper substitution period
Cap for relative
primary scrap> <Regional marginal
Price amplifying price
price of copper>
factor
<Global inventories of <Intrinsic demand Initial price of
<One year>
refined copper> minus substitution> aluminium
Regional availability of
refined copper Price of
Growth relative Change in aluminium
GDP last year aluminium price
Production time
<Percentage of copper Delay order GDP
lost during production> <Average yearly Minimum price
economic growth> Difference GDP Amplified aluminium
growth with last year difference
Minimum value Growth factor GDP growth

economic growth aluminium difference amplifier
<Base economic <Amplitude short

growth> sinus>
<Amplitude long <Amplitude

sinus> medium sinus>
79
<Long term profit
period>
Initial long term

profit forecast
Long term
profit
forecast
<One year> Increase long term Decrease long term
Price averaging Old difference in profit forecast profit forecast
period price 1 year
Copper price one
year ago Relative recommissioning of
Initial copper price copper mine and smelter
Old difference in Second derivative Changes due to capacity
Difference in price 2
Average periodic price 2 year price Elasticity of Supply
and 1 years ago
price of copper
Increase in periodically Decrease in
price of copper periodically price of
copper
Copper price two <2 Year>
Copper price Relative decrease in
years ago
forecast delay Copper price copper mine and smelter
forecast Normalised profit capacity
forecast
Maximum increase mine Copper price Elasticity

<Real price of and smelter capacity
Switch forecast and of Supply short term
copper>
historical data for capacity Capital investment Copper price Elasticity
fraction of Supply long term
Maximum
Transport costs of recommissioning per year
copper Relative increase in copper
Normalised profit with mine and smelter capacity
Marginal price <One year> Marginal price capital investment
Marginal price one forecast
of copper year ago Long term
Regional marginal profitable
price of copper Increase long term investment forecast Decrease long term
profitable investment profitable investment
Initial long term
Difference in marginal forecast forecast
Marginal price two profitable investment
Energy costs for years ago price 2 and 1 years ago Old difference in forecast
Marginal costs copper mining marginal price 1 year
mining Long term profit
Mined copper period
before 2000 r1 Mined copper
<2 Year>
before 2000 r2 Second derivative Initial deep sea long
<Initial fractions of Old difference in
Mined copper marginal price term profit
regions reserve base> Mined copper marginal price 2 year
before 2000 before 2000 r3 Long term deep
sea mining profit
Amplifier GDP growth Ore grade of Cumulative Increase long term deep forecast Decrease long term deep
effect on energy price mined
landbased copper copper sea mining profit forecast sea mining profit forecast
Initial price of Addition to mined
energy copper Relative recommissioning
of deep sea mine capacity
Price of Normalisation value Power for <Part of resource
base seabased> Influence of technology on Energy costs of copper Changes due to Elasticity of
Growth of price of energy ore grade oregrades <Global mined
<Average yearly copper mining energy costs smelting and refining Supply in deep sea mining
economic growth> energy copper production> Normalised deep sea
profit forecast
Deep sea mined
Ore grade of copper before 2000
Relative decrease deep
seabased copper Cumulative sea mine capacity
Amplified difference seabased mined <Copper price Elasticity
copper <Copper price Elasticity
Addition to seabased <Copper price
for energy <Difference GDP of Supply short term> of Supply long term>
mined copper forecast>
growth with last year> <Switch forecast and Maximum increase deep
historical data for Deep sea capital sea mine capacity
<Deep sea mining capacity> investment fraction
Growth factor Threshold GDP for deep
Marginal costs deep production>
energy GDP growth difference sea mining development
sea mining
amplifier energy Energy costs
for deep sea Relative increase in deep
copper Normalised deep sea profit
Marginal price forecast sea mining capacity
deep sea copper forecast with capital
Production costs investment
<One year>
deep sea copper Marginal price deep sea Regional GDP surplus for
copper one year ago Part of deep sea development of deep sea
Marginal price mining per region mining
deep sea copper Difference in marginal price
deep sea copper 2 and 1 Second derivative Long term deep sea <Regional GDP
years ago marginal price deep sea mining profitable per capita>
Marginal price deep sea Increase long term deep sea
copper investment forecast Decrease long term deep sea
copper two years ago Old difference in marginal mining profitable investment
Initial deep sea mining profitable investment
price deep sea copper1 forecast forecast
year profitable investments
Old difference in marginal <Long term profit

price deep sea copper 2 period>
year
<2 Year>
80
B.3.5. Copper transport
Export of copper
scrap <Export priority
ptype>
Export priority <Export priority

<Usage of smelting CuScrap pwidth>
capacity> Total surplus of
<Recycling Input Copper scrap to
copper scrap <Export priority
Rate> transit
pextra>
<Global secondary
Regional surplus of
copper to scrap>
copper scrap
CuScrap transport
<Global stock of Copper delay order
<Deep sea mining raw copper> scrap in
<Global primary Regional surplus or <Null vector Total deficits of transport
production> <Average time
scrap> deficit of copper scrap copper> copper scrap between
mining till refining> regions
<Global mined
copper production> <Average time scrap Regional deficit of
to recycling> copper scrap Initial CuScrap in <Import priority
<Global copper in transit pextra>
<Usage of smelting Copper scrap
capacity> scrap>
Regional surplus or available to regions
deficit of raw copper Import priority <Import priority
<Recycling Input CuScrap ptype>
Rate> Null vector
copper Import of copper <Import priority
scrap pwidth>
Regional surplus of Regional deficit of
raw copper raw copper
<Dimensionless region <One over GDP as
Transportation GDP per Capita for ppriority>
time ppriority>
Total surplus raw Total deficits raw

copper copper
Export of raw Import of raw <Import priority
copper copper Import of refined pextra>
copper
Initial RawCu in
transit
Import priority <Import priority
Raw copper in
transit between RefCu ptype>
Raw copper to regions Raw copper <Postponed demand Refined copper
transit available to regions of copper> available to regions
<Total demand for
copper>
<Import priority
RawCu transport Initial RefCu in
Regional deficit of pwidth>
Export priority raw delay order <Global inventories of transit
Import priority raw refined copper
copper refined copper> Refined RefCu transport
copper
copper in delay order
Total deficits of
Regional surplus or <Null vector transport
<Production time> refined copper between
deficit of refined copper copper>
regions
Regional surplus of
<Global production of refined copper Refined copper to <Export priority
refined copper> transit pextra>
Export priority One over GDP as Dimensionless region
Export priority Export priority Import priority Import priority Import priority
pextra ppriority GDP per Capita for Total surplus of
ptype pwidth ptype pwidth pextra
ppriority raw copper
<Copper recovered Export priority <Export priority
from scrap> RefCu ptype>
Export priority Export priority Export priority
ptype r1 Export priority
Export priority ptype r3 pextra r1 <Regional GDP
ptype r2 pextra r3 <Export priority
per capita> Import priority Import priority Import priority pwidth>
Export priority pwidth r1 pextra r1 pextra r3 Export of refined
pextra r2 Import priority Import priority copper
Export priority Export priority ptype r1 ptype r3 Import priority
pwidth r1 pwidth r3 Import priority
pwidth r3
Export priority pextra r2
Import priority
pwidth r2 ptype r2 Import priority
pwidth r2
81
Appendix C. Model equations and uncertainties
The next sections could present all model uncertainties and model equations per model. However, due to the
enormous number of equation, this would make mean many extra pages, even with a font so small, that it would
be difficult to read the information stated. The information about equations and uncertainties is available in the
models and at the author.
Appendix D. Setup of ESDMA
D.1. Typical script for running ESDMA models

The following script was used for generating EMA runs with the Top down model. In order to be able to produce this script easier,
the “self.uncertainties” have been generated using the Excel worksheet digitally attached to this report. Since this worksheet is
generated digitally using the Vensim-to-csv script, the chance for making mistakes in the external factors names, is greatly
reduced.
from __future__ import division
'''
Created on 2 sep. 2011
For use with the EMA of the copper model varieties part of the graduation project
"The Future of Copper in a Sustainable World"
Delft
This script only allows running to generate a cPickle file. For making graphs, use CopperGraphs
@author: wauping
'''
import time
from expWorkbench.vensim import VensimModelStructureInterface

from expWorkbench.uncertaintySpace import ParameterUncertainty,\
CategoricalUncertainty
from expWorkbench.outcomes import Outcome
from expWorkbench.model import SimpleModelEnsemble
import expWorkbench.EMAlogging as EMAlogging
import expWorkbench
#=========================================================================================================
#The Copper2 model
#=========================================================================================================
class Copper2(VensimModelStructureInterface):
def __init__(self, workingDirectory, name):

super(Copper2, self).__init__(workingDirectory, name)
#model
self.modelFile = r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA Policies NoEconFeed.vpm'
#outcomes, or key performance indicators

self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Year left of copper mining', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Recycling Input Rate', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Global consumption of refined copper', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Part of original demand substituted', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Real price of copper', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Marginal costs of copper', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Marginal costs deep sea copper', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Relative part of deep sea mining', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Relative growth GDP', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('TIME', time=True))
#Uncertainties
# floats
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,2), "One year"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,2), "Administration time"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor for substitution"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor of intrinsic demand"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor of relative price effect"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Amplifier GDP growth effect on energy price"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,6), "Amplitude long sinus"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Amplitude medium sinus"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,2), "Amplitude short sinus"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.0004,0.04), "New autonomous reserve development")) # Waarom werkt deze niet?
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average deep sea permit term"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average lifetime of copper in use"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((20,60), "Average lifetime of copper smelters and refineries"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average lifetime of deep sea capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average mine lifetime"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average mine permit term"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average smelting capacity permit term"))

self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.005,0.25), "Average time mining till refining"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,2), "Average time scrap to recycling"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-1,10), "Base economic growth"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10000,1000000), "Cap for relative price"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "Capital investment fraction"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,1), "Collection rate copper products")) # this value should be over 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Copper price Elasticity of Supply long term"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Copper price Elasticity of Supply short term"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Copper score during dismembering")) # this value should be over 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Copper score during treatment")) # this value should be over 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,10), "Deep sea capital investment fraction"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((37.5,75), "Energy costs of copper smelting and refining"))

self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "GDP growth difference amplifier"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "GDP growth difference amplifier energy"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.05,0.06), "Growth factor aluminium"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.05,0.06), "Growth factor energy"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,25), "Influence of technology on copper mining energy costs"))

self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Long term copper price elasticity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect intrinsic demand period"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect of substitution period"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect on demand period"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Long term increase demand due to intrinsic demand"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term profit period"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.1), "Long term substitution strength"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,0.1), "Maximum increase deep sea mine capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,0.1), "Maximum increase mine and smelter capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.2), "Maximum recommissioning per year"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Minimum usage mining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Minimum usage smelting and refining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Mining usage investment cap"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((50000000,500000000), "Normalisation value ore grade"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3000,30000), "Normalisation value GDP"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,0.9), "Part of resource base seabased"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Percentage copper recovered from scrap")) # this value should be over 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Percentage lost during mining"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Percentage lost during refining"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Percentage of copper lost during production"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.5), "Percentage of primary scrap"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3,20), "Period long sinus"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3,20), "Period long sinus amplitudes"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus amplitudes"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus amplitudes"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,0.5), "Power for oregrades"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,1.5), "Price amplifying factor"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Price averaging period"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500,10000), "Production costs deep sea copper"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.03,0.08), "Production time"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.05), "Short term copper price elasticity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.05), "Short term increase demand due to intrinsic demand"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.03), "Short term substitution strength"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Smelter and refiner usage investment cap"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((5000,15000), "Start GDP per capita"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,4), "Substitution amplifying factor"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,5), "Substitution threshold"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.01), "Threshold for junior companies to start deep sea reserve base development"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500,2000), "Transport costs of copper"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.0023,0.0027), "Yearly copper use related to GDP"))
# Initial values
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1000), "Deep sea mined copper before 2000"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((100000000,1000000000), "Mined copper before 2000"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1681,1962), "Initial copper price"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500000000000000,3000000000000000), "Initial copper resource base"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((2000000000,7400000000), "Initial copper resources"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,100000), "Initial deep sea mining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1458,1680), "Initial price of aluminium"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((7.5,30), "Initial price of energy"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((350000000,7000000000), "Initial seabased resources"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1000,1000000), "Initial seabeased reserve base"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Initial used mining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Initial used refinery capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((30000000,120000000), "Initial copper in use"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((300000000,1000000000), "Initial copper reserve base"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,100000), "Initial deep sea capacity in preparation"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.2,0.2), "Initial deep sea long term profit"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.2,0.2), "Initial deep sea profitable investments"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((700000,2100000), "Initial inventories of refined copper"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.2,0.2), "Initial long term profit forecast"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.2,0.2), "Initial long term profitable investment forecast"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((13800000,14800000), "Initial mining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((4000000,8000000), "Initial mining capacity in preparation"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((5000000,9000000), "Initial preparation of refining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((16000000,18000000), "Initial refining capacity"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1000000,2000000), "Initial stock of raw copper"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Initial used deep sea capacity"))
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,10000000), "Initial value for substituted copper")) # Deze moet eigenlijk 0 zijn.
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1000000,20000000), "Initial value global copper in scrap"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value long term effect intrinsic demand"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value long term effect price"))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution"))
#integers (delays)
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "consumption delay", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Copper price forecast delay", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order deep sea", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order GDP", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order mining", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order mining capacity", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order of smelting capacity", default = 3))
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order scrap", default = 3))
#switches
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Switch copper use related to GDP", integer=True))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch forecast and historical data for capacity", integer=True))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch forecast capacity", integer=True))
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Switch World population", integer=True))
def model_init(self, policy, kwargs):

'''initializes the model'''
try:
self.modelFile = policy['file']
self.resultFile = r'\CurrentCopper2.vdf'
except:
EMAlogging.debug("no policies specified")
super(Copper2, self).model_init(policy, kwargs)
84
#=========================================================================================================
#The bottom up model
#=========================================================================================================
class CopperBottomUp(VensimModelStructureInterface):

super(CopperBottomUp, self).__init__(workingDirectory, name)
#model
self.modelFile = r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA policies No EconFeed.vpm'

self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Relative part of deep sea mining', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Relative growth GDP', time=True))
#Uncertainties
# floats
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,2), "Administration time")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor for substitution")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor of intrinsic demand")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor of relative price effect")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Amplifier GDP growth effect on energy price")) # Original value: 0.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,6), "Amplitude long sinus")) # Original value: 3
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Amplitude medium sinus")) # Original value: 2
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,2), "Amplitude short sinus")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Automatic decay of unfulfilled demand")) # Original value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.0004,0.04), "Autonomous reserve development factor")) # Original value: 0.004
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average deep sea permit term")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((60,100), "Average lifetime of copper in use Architecture")) # Original value: 80
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((8,12), "Average lifetime of copper in use Automotive")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((30,75), "Average lifetime of copper in use EnergyInfrastructure")) # Original
value: 50
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((8,12), "Average lifetime of copper in use OtherUse")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((6,10), "Average lifetime of copper in use StationaryElectromotors")) # Original
value: 8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((60,100), "Average lifetime of copper in use WaterTreatment")) # Original value: 80
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((20,60), "Average lifetime of copper mills")) # Original value: 50
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average lifetime of deep sea capacity")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average mine lifetime")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average mine permit term")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average smelting capacity permit term")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.005,0.25), "Average time mining till refining")) # Original value: 0.03
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,2), "Average time scrap to recycling")) # Original value: 0.25
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-1,6), "Base economic growth")) # Original value: 1.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "Capital investment fraction")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Collection rate copper products Architecture")) # Original value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,1), "Collection rate copper products Automotive")) # Original value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Collection rate copper products EnergyInfrastructure")) # Original value:
0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,1), "Collection rate copper products OtherUse")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.05,0.09), "Collection rate copper products StationaryElectromotors")) # Original
value: 0.7
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,0.6), "Collection rate copper products WaterTreatment")) # Original value: 0.3
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Copper price Elasticity of Supply long term")) # Original value: 0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Copper price Elasticity of Supply short term")) # Original value: 0.03
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Copper score during dismembering")) # Original value: 0.9
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Copper score during treatment Architecture")) # Original value: 0.9
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Copper score during treatment Automotive")) # Original value: 0.9
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.6,0.9), "Copper score during treatment EnergyInfrastructure")) # Original value:
0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.6,0.9), "Copper score during treatment OtherUse")) # Original value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.6,0.9), "Copper score during treatment StationaryElectromotors")) # Original
value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Copper score during treatment WaterTreatment")) # Original value: 0.9
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.06,0.08), "Cu in vehicles BEV")) # Original value: 0.0688
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.058,0.078), "Cu in vehicles cityBEV")) # Original value: 0.0652
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.015,0.035), "Cu in vehicles Conventional")) # Original value: 0.025
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.035,0.050), "Cu in vehicles HEV")) # Original value: 0.0435
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.065,0.085), "Cu in vehicles PHEV")) # Original value: 0.0736
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,10), "Deep sea capital investment fraction")) # Original value: 0.2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1000), "Deep sea mined copper before 2000")) # Original value: 5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((37.5,75), "Energy costs of copper smelting and refining")) # Original value: 50
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "GDP growth difference amplifier")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "GDP growth difference amplifier energy")) # Original value: 0.6
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((410000000,890000000), "Goal for copper in infrastructure 2050")) # Original value:
8.9e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.05,0.06), "Growth factor aluminium")) # Original value: 0.005
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.05,0.06), "Growth factor energy")) # Original value: 0.02
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.03,0.045), "Growth in stationary electromotors")) # Original value: 0.038
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.005,0.015), "Growth of copper in architecture")) # Original value: 0.01
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.03,0.07), "Growth of copper in watertreatment")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.02,0.025), "Growth other uses")) # Original value: 0.0226
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.075,0.125), "Growth percentage for infrastructure growth")) # Original value: 0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,25), "Influence of technology on copper mining energy costs")) # Original value:
17.04
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Long term copper price elasticity")) # Original value: 0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect intrinsic demand period")) # Original value: 5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect of substitution period")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect on demand period")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Long term increase demand due to intrinsic demand")) # Original value:
0.12
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term profit period")) # Original value: 5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.1), "Long term substitution strength")) # Original value: 0.15
85
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,0.1), "Maximum increase deep sea mine capacity")) # Original value: 0.2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,0.1), "Maximum increase mine and smelter capacity")) # Original value: 0.15
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.2), "Maximum recommissioning per year")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Minimum usage mining capacity")) # Original value: 0.75
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Minimum usage smelting and refining capacity")) # Original value: 0.75
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.9), "Mining usage investment cap")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((50000000,500000000), "Normalisation value ore grade")) # Original value: 1e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.0000015,0.0000025), "Number of new cars per dollar")) # Original value: 2e-006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,2), "One year")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,0.9), "Part of resource base seabased")) # Original value: 0.708
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Percentage copper recovered from scrap")) # Original value: 0.95
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Percentage lost during mining")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Percentage lost during refining")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Percentage of copper lost during production")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.5), "Percentage of primary scrap")) # Original value: 0.3
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3,20), "Period long sinus")) # Original value: 7
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3,20), "Period long sinus amplitudes")) # Original value: 5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus")) # Original value: 3.1
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus amplitudes")) # Original value: 2.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus")) # Original value: 1
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus amplitudes")) # Original value: 1.2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,0.5), "Power for oregrades")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,1.5), "Price amplifying factor")) # Original value: 1.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Price averaging period")) # Original value: 0.25
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500,10000), "Production costs deep sea copper")) # Original value: 3000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.03,0.08), "Production time")) # Original value: 0.06
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.05), "Short term copper price elasticity")) # Original value: 0.03
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.05), "Short term increase demand due to intrinsic demand")) # Original value:
0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.03), "Short term substitution strength")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.95), "Smelter and refiner usage investment cap")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1.5), "Substitution amplifying factor")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,1), "Substitution threshold Architecture")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1.1,3), "Substitution threshold Automotive")) # Original value: 1.4
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Substitution threshold EnergyInfrastructure")) # Original value: 1.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,5), "Substitution threshold OtherUse")) # Original value: 1.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1.5,3), "Substitution threshold StationaryElectromotors")) # Original value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.2,1), "Substitution threshold WaterTreatment")) # Original value: 0.4
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.00005,0.01), "Threshold for junior companies to start deep sea reserve base
development")) # Original value: 0.0005
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500,2000), "Transport costs of copper")) # Original value: 1000
# Initial values
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1681,1962), "Initial copper price")) # Original value: 1814
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((300000000,1000000000), "Initial copper reserve base")) # Original value: 9.4e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500000000000000,3000000000000000), "Initial copper resource base")) # Original
value: 1.5e+015
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1850000000,7400000000), "Initial copper resources")) # Original value: 3.7e+009
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,100000), "Initial deep sea capacity in preparation")) # Original value: 100
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0,5,0,5), "Initial deep sea long term profit")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,100000), "Initial deep sea mining capacity")) # Original value: 1000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0,5,0,5), "Initial deep sea profitable investments")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((700000,2100000), "Initial inventories of refined copper")) # Original value: 923000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0,5,0,5), "Initial long term profit forecast")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0,5,0,5), "Initial long term profitable investment forecast")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((13800000,14800000), "Initial mining capacity")) # Original value: 1.6048e+007
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((4000000,8000000), "Initial mining capacity in preparation")) # Original value:
5.6e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((5000000,9000000), "Initial preparation of refining capacity")) # Original value:
6.7e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1458,1680), "Initial price of aluminium")) # Original value: 3000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((7.5,30), "Initial price of energy")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((16000000,18000000), "Initial refining capacity")) # Original value: 1.9453e+007
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,1000000), "Initial seabased reserve base")) # Original value: 10000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((350000000,1400000000), "Initial seabased resources")) # Original value: 7e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1600000,4000000), "Initial stock of raw copper")) # Original value: 300000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((30000000,120000000), "Initial total copper in use")) # Original value: 1.65e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10000000,42000000), "Initial total copper scrap")) # Original value: 4.2e+007
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.015,0.03), "Initial use grade for Architecture")) # Original value: 0.02
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.10,0.14), "Initial use grade for Automotive")) # Original value: 0.12
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.22,0.3), "Initial use grade for EnergyInfrastructure")) # Original value: 0.26
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,0.45), "Initial use grade for OtherUse")) # Original value: 0.35
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.09,0.15), "Initial use grade for StationaryElectromotors")) # Original value:
0.12
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.16), "Initial use grade for WaterTreatment")) # Original value: 0.13
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Initial used deep sea capacity")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Initial used mining capacity")) # Original value: 0.925
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Initial used refinery capacity")) # Original value: 0.863
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.02,0.07), "Initial value global copper in scrap Architecture")) # Original value:
0.026
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.12), "Initial value global copper in scrap Automotive")) # Original value:
0.155
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.26,0.5), "Initial value global copper in scrap EnergyInfrastructure")) # Original
value: 0.337
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.13,0.35), "Initial value global copper in scrap OtherUse")) # Original value:
0.283
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.05,0.12), "Initial value global copper in scrap StationaryElectromotors")) #
Original value: 0.136
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.13,0.15), "Initial value global copper in scrap WaterTreatment")) # Original
value: 0.063
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value long term effect price")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value long term effect intrinsic demand")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution Architecture")) #
Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution Automotive")) # Original
value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution EnergyInfrastructure"))
# Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution OtherUse")) # Original
value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution StationaryElectromotors"))
# Original value: 0
86
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution WaterTreatment")) #
Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((100000000,1000000000), "Mined copper before 2000")) # Original value: 6.5e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((300000000,600000000), "Number of cars in 2000")) # Original value: 4.5e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((5000,15000), "Start GDP per capita")) # Original value: 9000
# Delays
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "consumption delay", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Copper price forecast delay", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order deep sea", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order GDP", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order mining", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order mining capacity", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order of smelting capacity", default = 3)) # Original value:
3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order scrap", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
# Switches
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch economic growth", integer=True)) # Original value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch forecast and historical data for capacity", integer=True)) # Original
value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch forecast capacity", integer=True)) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch new cars", integer=True)) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Switch World population", integer=True)) # Original value: 1

try:
self.resultFile = r'\CurrentBottomUp.vdf'
except:
super(CopperBottomUp, self).model_init(policy, kwargs)
#=========================================================================================================
#The Regional model
#=========================================================================================================
class CopperRegions(VensimModelStructureInterface):

super(CopperRegions, self).__init__(workingDirectory, name)
#model
self.modelFile = r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA Policies NoEconFeed.vpm'

self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Relative growth GDP Region 1', time=True))
self.outcomes.append(Outcome('Relative part of deep sea mining r1', time=True))
#Uncertainties
# floats
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,2), "Administration time")) # Original value: 1
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,6), "Ampl long sin r1")) # Original value: 4
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,6), "Ampl long sin r2")) # Original value: 5.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,6), "Ampl long sin r3")) # Original value: 7
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Ampl med sin r1")) # Original value: 2
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Ampl med sin r2")) # Original value: 2.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Ampl med sin r3")) # Original value: 3
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,2), "Ampl short sin r1")) # Original value: 2
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,2), "Ampl short sin r2")) # Original value: 2.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,2), "Ampl short sin r3")) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor for substitution")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor of intrinsic demand")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-2,2), "Amplification factor of relative price effect")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Amplifier GDP growth effect on energy price")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Automatic decay of unfulfilled demand")) # Original value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.0004,0.04), "Autonomous reserve development factor")) # Original value: 0.02
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average deep sea permit term r1")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average lifetime of copper in use r1")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((20,60), "Average lifetime of copper mills")) # Original value: 50
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average lifetime of deep sea capacity")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,50), "Average mine lifetime")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average permit term r1")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,20), "Average smelting capacity permit term r1")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.005,0.25), "Average time mining till refining")) # Original value: 0.025
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,2), "Average time scrap to recycling")) # Original value: 0.25
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-1,4), "Base economic growth r1")) # Original value: 2.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-1,8), "Base economic growth r2")) # Original value: 4
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-3,10), "Base economic growth r3")) # Original value: 5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "Capital investment fraction")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,1), "Collection rate copper products r1")) # Original value: 0.62
87
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Copper price Elasticity of Supply long term")) # Original value: 0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Copper price Elasticity of Supply short term")) # Original value: 0.03
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Copper score during dismembering")) # Original value: 0.9
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Copper score during treatment")) # Original value: 0.82
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,10), "Deep sea capital investment fraction")) # Original value: 0.2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((37.5,75), "Energy costs of copper smelting and refining")) # Original value: 50
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Export priority ptype r1", integer=True)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Export priority pwidth r1")) # Original value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "GDP growth difference amplifier")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,5), "GDP growth difference amplifier energy")) # Original value: 0.6
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.05,0.06), "Growth factor aluminium")) # Original value: 0.005
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.05,0.06), "Growth factor energy")) # Original value: 0.02
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Import priority ptype r1", integer=True)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Import priority pwidth r1")) # Original value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((10,25), "Influence of technology on copper mining energy costs")) # Original value:
17.04
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Long term copper price elasticity")) # Original value: 0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect intrinsic demand period")) # Original value: 5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect of substitution period")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term effect on demand period")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Long term increase demand due to intrinsic demand")) # Original value:
0.12
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,15), "Long term profit period")) # Original value: 10
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.1), "Long term substitution strength")) # Original value: 0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,1), "Maximum increase deep sea mine capacity")) # Original value: 0.2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.01,1), "Maximum increase mine and smelter capacity")) # Original value: 0.15
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Maximum recommissioning per year")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Minimum usage mining capacity")) # Original value: 0.75
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Minimum usage smelting and refining capacity")) # Original value: 0.75
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,4), "Mining ptype", integer=True)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Mining pwidth")) # Original value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.95), "Mining usage investment cap")) # Original value: 0.8
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((50000000,500000000), "Normalisation value ore grade")) # Original value: 1e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3000,30000), "Normalisation value GDP")) # Original value: 9000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,2), "One year")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,0.9), "Part of resource base seabased")) # Original value: 0.708
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Percentage copper recovered from scrap")) # Original value: 0.95
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Percentage lost during mining")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.5), "Percentage lost during refining")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.2), "Percentage of copper lost during production")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,0.5), "Percentage of primary scrap")) # Original value: 0.3
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3,20), "Period long sinus")) # Original value: 7
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((3,20), "Period long sinus amplitudes r1")) # Original value: 4
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus")) # Original value: 3.1
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus amplitudes r1")) # Original value: 2.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus amplitudes r2")) # Original value: 3
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,3), "Period medium sinus amplitudes r3")) # Original value: 4
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus")) # Original value: 1
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus amplitudes r1")) # Original value: 1.2
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus amplitudes r2")) # Original value: 1.5
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.25,1), "Period short sinus amplitudes r3")) # Original value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.3,0.5), "Power for oregrades")) # Original value: 0.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,1.5), "Price amplifying factor")) # Original value: 1.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.1,1), "Price averaging period")) # Original value: 0.25
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500,10000), "Production costs deep sea copper")) # Original value: 3500
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.03,0.08), "Production time")) # Original value: 0.05
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.2,0.2), "Regional difference with calculated resources and reserves r1")) #
Original value: 0
Original value: 0
Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.05), "Short term copper price elasticity")) # Original value: 0.01
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.05), "Short term increase demand due to intrinsic demand")) # Original value:
0.1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.03), "Short term substitution strength")) # Original value: 0.02
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,0.95), "Smelter and refiner usage investment cap")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,1.5), "Substitution amplifying factor")) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.5,5), "Substitution threshold")) # Original value: 1.5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.00005,0.01), "Threshold for junior companies to start deep sea reserve base
development")) # Original value: 0.001
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500,2000), "Transport costs of copper")) # Original value: 1000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.02,0.2), "Transportation time")) # Original value: 0.2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.0023,0.0027), "Yearly copper use related to GDP")) # Original value: 0.0025
# Initial values
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1000), "Deep sea mined copper before 2000")) # Original value: 5
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1.5e+008,6.2e+008), "Initial copper in use r1")) # Original value: 3.1e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1681,1962), "Initial copper price")) # Original value: 1814
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((50000,200000), "Initial CuScrap in transit")) # Original value: 100000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,100000), "Initial deep sea capacity in preparation r1")) # Original value: 100
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,100000), "Initial deep sea mining capacity r1")) # Original value: 1000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.5,0.5), "Initial deep sea profitable investments")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.5,0.5), "Initial long term profit forecast")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.5,0.5), "Initial long term profitable investment forecast")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1200000,2000000), "Initial mining capacity in preparation r1")) # Original value:
1.6e+006
1e+006
3e+006
88
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((4000000,5500000), "Initial mining capacity r1")) # Original value: 5e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1200000,1650000), "Initial mining capacity r2")) # Original value: 1.5e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((8000000,11000000), "Initial mining capacity r3")) # Original value: 1e+007
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1125000,1875000), "Initial preparation of refining capacity r1")) # Original value:
1.5e+006
3e+006
3e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1458,1680), "Initial price of aluminium")) # Original value: 3000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((7.5,30), "Initial price of energy")) # Original value: 30
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((40000,60000), "Initial RawCu in transit")) # Original value: 50000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((50000,100000), "Initial RefCu in transit")) # Original value: 100000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((4800000,7200000), "Initial refining capacity r1")) # Original value: 6e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((350000000,1400000000), "Initial seabased resources")) # Original value: 7e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((400000,1000000), "Initial stock of raw copper r1")) # Original value: 500000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((400000,1000000), "Initial stock of raw copper r2")) # Original value: 500000
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((800000,2000000), "Initial stock of raw copper r3")) # Original value: 1e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0,1), "Initial used deep sea capacity r1")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Initial used mining capacity r1")) # Original value: 0.925
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((0.7,1), "Initial used refinery capacity r1")) # Original value: 0.863
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((500000,10000000), "Initial value global copper in scrap r1")) # Original value:
1e+006
1e+006
1e+006
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value long term effect price")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value long term effect intrinsic demand")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((-0.1,0.1), "Initial value of long term effect substitution")) # Original value: 0
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((176000000,264000000), "Mined copper before 2000 r1")) # Original value: 2.2e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((104000000,156000000), "Mined copper before 2000 r2")) # Original value: 1.3e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((240000000,360000000), "Mined copper before 2000 r3")) # Original value: 3e+008
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((20000,40000), "Start GDP per capita r1")) # Original value: 30000
# Delays
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "consumption delay", default = 3)) # Original
value: 8
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Copper price forecast delay", default = 3)) # Original
value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "CuScrap transport delay order", default = 3)) # Original
value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order GDP", default = 3)) # Original
value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order last years intrinsic demand", default = 1)) # Original
value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order mining", default = 3)) # Original
value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Delay order scrap", default = 3)) # Original
value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "RawCu transport delay order", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "RefCu transport delay order", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
self.uncertainties.append(CategoricalUncertainty((1,3,10,100), "Regional delay order r1", default = 3)) # Original value: 3
# Switches
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), "Switch copper use related to GDP", integer=True)) # Original value: 2
# self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch economic growth", integer=True)) # Original value: 2 This switches
of
# the chaotic economic growth
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch forecast and historical data for capacity", integer=True)) # Original
value: 2
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,2), "Switch forecast capacity", integer=True)) # Original value: 1
self.uncertainties.append(ParameterUncertainty((1,4), '"Switch World population - region 1"', integer=True)) # Original value: 1

try:
self.resultFile = r'\CurrentRegions.vdf'
except:
super(CopperRegions, self).model_init(policy, kwargs)
#=========================================================================================================
#The run specifications
#=========================================================================================================
numberOfExperiments = 10
def run1():
EMAlogging.info("starting run1...")
model = Copper2(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models', 'copper')
numberExperiments = numberOfExperiments
experimentName = 'PoliciesCopper2'
ensemble = SimpleModelEnsemble()
ensemble.set_model_structure(model)
policies = [{'name': 'BaseModel',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA Policies NoEconFeed.vpm'},
89
{'name': 'RecyclingPolicy1',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA RecyclingPolicy1.vpm'},
{'name': 'RecyclingPolicy2',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA RecyclingPolicy2.vpm'},
{'name': 'RecyclingPolicies',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA RecyclingPolicies.vpm'},
{'name': 'DeepSeaPolicy',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA DeepSeaPolicy.vpm'},
{'name': 'SubstitutionPolicy1',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA SubstitutionPolicy1.vpm'},
{'name': 'SubstitutionPolicy2',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA SubstitutionPolicy2.vpm'},
{'name': 'SubstitutionPolicies',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA SubstitutionPolicies.vpm'},
{'name': 'StrategicReservePolicy',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA StrategicReservePolicy.vpm'},
{'name': 'AllPolicies',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel 2 ESDMA AllPolicies.vpm'}
]
ensemble.add_policies(policies)
ensemble.parallel = True
results = ensemble.perform_experiments(numberExperiments)
expWorkbench.util.save_results(results, r'C:\ema workspace\copper\cPickle\result'+str(numberExperiments)+experimentName+'.cPickle')
EMAlogging.info("...finishing run1")
def run2():
model = CopperBottomUp(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models', 'copper')
experimentName = 'PoliciesCopperBottomUp'
policies = [{'name': 'BottomUpBaseModel',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA policies No EconFeed.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpRecyclingPolicy1',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA RecyclingPolicy1.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpRecyclingPolicy2',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA RecyclingPolicy2.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpRecyclingPolicies',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA RecyclingPolicies.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpDeepSeaPolicy',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA DeepSeaPolicy.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpSubstitutionPolicy1',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA SubstitutionPolicy1.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpSubstitutionPolicy2',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA SubstitutionPolicy2.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpSubstitutionPolicies',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA SubstitutionPolicies.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpStrategicReservePolicy',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA StategicReservePolicy.vpm'},
{'name': 'BottomUpAllPolicies',
'file': r'\20110902 WL Auping Kopermodel Bottom up vraag ESDMA AllPolicies.vpm'}
]
def run3():
model = CopperRegions(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models', 'copper')
experimentName = 'PoliciesCopperRegions'
policies = [{'name': 'RegionsModel',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA Policies NoEconFeed.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsRecyclingPolicy1',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA RecyclingPolicy1.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsRecyclingPolicy2',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA RecyclingPolicy2.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsRecyclingPolicies',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA RecyclingPolicies.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsDeepSeaPolicy',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA DeepSeaPolicy.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsSubstitutionPolicy1',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA SubstitutionPolicy1.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsSubstitutionPolicy2',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA SubstitutionPolicy2.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsSubstitutionPolicies',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA SubstitutionPolicies.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsStrategicReservePolicy',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA StrategicReservePolicy.vpm'},
{'name': 'RegionsAllPolicies',
'file': r'\20110828 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA AllPolicies.vpm'}
]
if __name__ =='__main__':
import logging, multiprocessing
EMAlogging.log_to_stderr(logging.INFO) # DEFAULT_LEVEL, INFO, DEBUG
logger = EMAlogging.get_logger()
formatter = logging.Formatter(multiprocessing.util.DEFAULT_LOGGING_FORMAT)
handler = logging.FileHandler(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\log.txt')
handler.setFormatter(formatter)
90
logger.addHandler(handler)
run1()
time.sleep(2)
run2()
time.sleep(2)
run3()
D.2. Script for generating graphs

'''
Created on 11 aug. 2011
For use with the EMA of the copper model varieties part of the graduation project
"The Future of Copper in a Sustainable World"
Delft
This file is only intended to generate graphs. The outcomes are only specified to be able to select them
for the graphs.
@author: wauping
'''
#import cPickle
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from analysis.envelopes3D import envelopes3d
from expWorkbench.outcomes import Outcome # needed for the old graphs
from expWorkbench.util import load_results

from expWorkbench import EMAlogging as logging
from analysis.graphs import envelopes, lines, multiplot
if __name__ =='__main__':
logging.log_to_stderr(logging.DEFAULT_LEVEL) # DEFAULT_LEVEL
fileName = r'C:\Data\Studie\TB\SPM 5910 - Thesis project\ESDMA\Python\hello\cPickle\result1000PoliciesCopper2_RecyclingPolicies.cPickle'

results = load_results(fileName)
outcomes1 = [
# 'Real price of copper',
'Global consumption of refined copper',
# 'Part of original demand substituted',
# 'Recycling Input Rate',
'Year left of copper mining'
]
outcomes2 = [
'Marginal costs of copper',
'Marginal costs deep sea copper',
# 'Relative part of deep sea mining',
# 'Year left of copper mining'
]
outcomes3 = [
'Relative part of deep sea mining r1',
'Relative part of deep sea mining r2',
'Relative part of deep sea mining r3'
]
outcomes1Oud = [Outcome('Year left of copper mining', time=True),

Outcome('Recycling Input Rate', time=True),
Outcome('Global consumption of refined copper', time=True),
Outcome('Part of original demand substituted', time=True),
Outcome('TIME', time=True)]
policiesWWEconFeed = [{'name': 'NoEconomicFeed'},

{'name': 'WithEconomicFeed'}
]
policiesCopper2 = [
{'name': 'BaseModel'},
# {'name': 'RecyclingPolicy1'},
# {'name': 'RecyclingPolicy2'},
{'name': 'RecyclingPolicies'},
# {'name': 'DeepSeaPolicy'},
# {'name': 'SubstitutionPolicy1'},
# {'name': 'SubstitutionPolicy2'},
# {'name': 'SubstitutionPolicies'},
# {'name': 'StrategicReservePolicy'},
# {'name': 'AllPolicies'}
]
policiesBottomUp = [
# {'name': 'BottomUpBaseModel'},
# {'name': 'BottomUpRecyclingPolicy1'},
# {'name': 'BottomUpRecyclingPolicy2'},
# {'name': 'BottomUpRecyclingPolicies'},
# {'name': 'BottomUpDeepSeaPolicy'},
{'name': 'BottomUpSubstitutionPolicy1'},
{'name': 'BottomUpSubstitutionPolicy2'},
{'name': 'BottomUpSubstitutionPolicies'},
{'name': 'BottomUpStrategicReservePolicy'},
{'name': 'BottomUpAllPolicies'}
]
policiesRegions = [
{'name': 'RegionsModel'},
# {'name': 'RegionsRecyclingPolicy1'},
# {'name': 'RegionsRecyclingPolicy2'},
{'name': 'RegionsRecyclingPolicies'},
# {'name': 'RegionsDeepSeaPolicy'},
# {'name': 'RegionsSubstitutionPolicy1'},
# {'name': 'RegionsSubstitutionPolicy2'},
91
# {'name': 'RegionsSubstitutionPolicies'},
# {'name': 'RegionsStrategicReservePolicy'},
# {'name': 'RegionsAllPolicies'}
]
ylabels = {}
ylabels['Year left of copper mining'] = 'Year'
ylabels['Recycling Input Rate'] = 'Dmnl'
ylabels['Global consumption of refined copper'] = r't/Year'
ylabels['Part of original demand substituted'] = 'Dmnl'
ylabels['Real price of copper'] = r'Dollar/t'
ylabels['Marginal costs of copper'] = r'Dollar/t'
ylabels['Marginal costs deep sea copper'] = r'Dollar/t'
ylabels['Relative part of deep sea mining'] = 'Dmnl'
ylabels['Relative part of deep sea mining r1'] = 'Dmnl'
ylabels['Relative growth GDP'] = r'1/Year'
policiesOfChoice = policiesRegions
policiesOfChoice = [policy.get('name') for policy in policiesOfChoice]
# envelopes1 = envelopes(results, outcomes=outcomes1, column='policy', categories=policiesOfChoice,

# ylabels = ylabels, fill=True, density=True) #
# ylabels = ylabels, fill=True, density=True) #column='policy', categories=policiesOfChoice,
# ylabels = ylabels, fill=True, density=True) #column='policy', categories=policiesOfChoice,
# copperLines1 = lines(results, outcomes=['Real price of copper'],
# ylabels = ylabels, density = True) #outcomes=outcomes1, column='policy', categories = policiesOfChoice,
# copperLines2 = lines(results, outcomes=['Global consumption of refined copper'],
# ylabels = ylabels, density = True) #outcomes=outcomes1, column='policy', categories = policiesOfChoice,
# copperLines3 = lines(results, outcomes=outcomes3, ylabels = ylabels, density = True)
# copperMPlot1 = multiplot(results, outcomes=outcomes1,
# ylabels = ylabels) #column='policy', categories=policiesOfChoice, legend=True, discretesize
# copperMPlot2 = multiplot(results, outcomes=outcomes2,
# ylabels = ylabels) #column='policy', categories=policiesOfChoice, legend=True, discretesize
envelopes3d(results, outcome='Global consumption of refined copper', ymin=0, ymax=30000000) #, policy='NoEconomicFeed'
plt.show()
D.3. Script for sorting Vensim variables to a csv file

'''
Created on 4 Aug 2011
This script intends to sort the vensim variables to a csv file.
@author: Willem L. Auping, with much thanks to Jan Kwakkel

'''
import csv
from expWorkbench.vensimDLLwrapper import get_varnames, get_varattrib
from expWorkbench.vensim import load_model
vensimRootName = r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models'

vensimFileName = r'\20110809 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA' # The name of the vensim model of interest
vensimExtension = r'.vpm'
csvFileName = vensimFileName+'.csv' # The name of the csv file
csvArray = ['Nr', 'Name', 'Equation', 'Unit', 'Comments', 'Type', 'Float', 'Int'] # The order of the elements in the array of every row
firstLine = ['ESDMA factors'] # The first lines of the csv file
secondLine = ['Model title',vensimFileName]
thirdLine = ['Time unit','Year'] # Write here the time unit of the model (or can it be found in the
model?)
blank = ''
lineNumber = 1
randomString = 'Delay everything till tomorrow'
attributeNames = ['Units', 'Comment', 'Equation', 'Causes', 'Uses', 'Initial causes',

'Active causes', 'Subscripts', 'Combination Subscripts', 'Minimum value',
'Maximum value', 'Range', 'Variable type', 'Main group']
attributes = range(len(attributeNames))
attributesInterest = [3, 1, 2, 12]
varTypeNames = ['All', 'Levels', 'Auxiliary', 'Data', 'Initial', 'Constant', 'Lookup',
'Group', 'Subscript Ranges', 'Constraint', 'Test Input', 'Time Base',
'Gaming']
varTypes = range(len(varTypeNames))
varTypes[0:2] = [1] # Do not look at all types
varTypes[4:] = [5] # Do not look after lookup
print 'Vensim file: '+ vensimRootName + vensimFileName + vensimExtension
print 'CSV file: '+ vensimRootName + csvFileName
print 'Converting starts...'
load_model(vensimRootName + vensimFileName + vensimExtension)
with open (vensimRootName + csvFileName, 'wb') as f:

writer = csv.writer(f)
writer.writerow(firstLine) # The first lines are written
writer.writerow(secondLine)
writer.writerow(thirdLine)
writer.writerow(blank)
writer.writerow(csvArray)
for varType in varTypes: # Now get the variables per type
type = varTypeNames[varType]
typeNr = varType
varNames = get_varnames(0, varType)
for varName in varNames: # per name, look in to their attributes
csvArray[0]=lineNumber # setup the line which needs to go to the csv
csvArray[1]=varName
csvArray[5]=varTypeNames[varType]
for attributeInterest in attributesInterest: # put the attributes also in the line, in the right place
92
attribute = get_varattrib(varName, attributeInterest)
if attribute == []:
attribute = [blank]
if attributeInterest == 1: # Unit
Unit = attribute[0]
csvArray[3] = Unit
elif attributeInterest == 2: # Comment
csvArray[4] = attribute[0]
elif attributeInterest == 3: # Equation
equation = attribute[0]
equation = equation.lstrip(varName)
equation = equation.replace(r'\\n','')
equation = equation.replace(r'\\t','')
equation = equation.replace(r'\n','')
equation = equation.replace(r'\t','')
equation = equation.replace(r' ','')
equation = equation.lstrip('=')
equation = equation.lstrip(r' ')
csvArray[2] = equation
if typeNr == 4: # if type is Initial
csvArray[6] = 'x' # The value for the 'Float' column is 'x'
csvArray[7] = blank # The 'Int' column is empty
elif typeNr == 5: # if type is Constant
if varName[0:5] == 'Delay':
csvArray[6] = blank
csvArray[7] = ', integer=True'
elif varName[0:6] == 'Switch':
csvArray[6] = blank
csvArray[7] = ', integer=True'
else:
csvArray[6] = 'x'
csvArray[7] = blank
else:
csvArray[6] = blank
csvArray[7] = blank
# print csvArray
writer.writerow(csvArray)
# print varTypes
lineNumber += 1
print 'Converting ended.'
D.4. Script for creating a debugging model

After building a SD model and using it with ESDMA, often sensitivities of the model result in different problems. With the copper
models, some floating point errors occurred and further the models had some runs which were extremely slow to run, i.e. run
times per run of over 10 minutes, while a “normal” run required less than a second. This script allows using the initial values of a
problematic run together with the text version of the Vensim model of interest to create a new model, with the proper variables.
This allows the researcher to experiment with the errors which occurred and by doing so, learn more about strengths and
weaknesses of the model.
'''
Created on 11 aug. 2011
@author: wauping, jkwakkel

'''
from expWorkbench.vensimDLLwrapper import command

from expWorkbench.vensim import load_model, set_value
from expWorkbench import vensimDLLwrapper, vensim
'''
To be able to debug the vensim model, a few steps are needed:
1. The input of the model run that gave a bug, needs to be saved in a text file (.txt). If this information comes from
the debugger, the separator is a ';', from a cPickle file, it is ','
2. Reform and clean your model ( In the vensim menu: Model, Reform and Clean).
Choose Equation Order: Alphabetical by group (not really necessary)
Equation Format: Terse
3. Save your model as text (File, Save as..., Save as Type: Text Format Models
4. Run this script
5. If the print in the end is not set([]), but set([array]), the array gives the values that were not found and changed
5. Run your new model (for example 'new text.mdl')
6. Vensim tells you about your critical mistake
'''
debuggerPath = r'C:\models\KOPER\Problem runs'

fileName = r'\WrongRunRegions2'
for line in open(debuggerPath+fileName+'.txt'):

splitOne = line.split(';') # Separator: normal debugger: ';', from cPickle: ','
variable = {}
for n in range(len(splitOne)-1):
splitTwo = splitOne[n].split(':')
variableElement=splitTwo[0]
variableElement=variableElement.lstrip() # Delete the spaces and other rubbish on the sides of the variable name
variableElement=variableElement.lstrip("'")
variableElement=variableElement.rstrip()
variableElement=variableElement.rstrip("'")
print variableElement
valueElement=splitTwo[1]
valueElement=valueElement.lstrip()
valueElement=valueElement.rstrip()
93
variable[variableElement] = valueElement
print variable
# This generates a new (text-formatted) model

changeNextLine = False
file = open(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models\Debugging Model.mdl', 'w') # The name of the new model
settedValues = []
for line in open(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models\20110809 WL Auping Kopermodel Regions ESDMA text.mdl'): # The name of your text model
if line.find("=")!= -1:
elements = line.split("=")
value = elements[0]
value = value.strip()
if variable.has_key(value):
elements[1] = variable.get(value)
line = elements[0] + " = " + elements[1] + "\n"
settedValues.append(value)
# print line
file.write(line)
notSet = set(variable.keys())-set(settedValues)
print notSet
# This runs your model directly

# variables = variable
# file = r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models\20110809_WL_Auping_Kopermodel_2_ESDMA jan.vpm'
# load_model(file)
# for key, value in variable.items():
# set_value(key, value)
## vensimDLLwrapper.be_quiet(0)
# command(r'SETTING>SHOWWARNING\1')
# vensim.run_simulation(r'C:\ema workspace\copper\models\Current.vdf')
94
Appendix E. Results of ESDMA experiments
The following text is a complete experimental report of the different runs of the ESDMA experiments. This
appendix contains the experimental setup of the experiments, the effect of the economic feed structure on the
results, the behavioural description of all (K)PIs.
E.1. Experimental setup

In this research, essentially two experiments were performed, using three different SD models for the copper
system. First some characteristics will be given about the SD models.
All SD models, built in Vensim (Ventana Systems, 2010), had a run time from the year 2000 till 2050.
The time step for these models was 0.007812 year, or 2-7, while the results were not saved every time step but
per 0.125 year to save memory. The time unit for the models was thus year. For integrating the model, the
fourth order Runge-Kutta integration method was used (Borelli & Coleman, 2004: 122-129; Ventana Systems,
2010: 213).
The first ESDMA experiment regarded the effects of the economic feed discussed in Box II. For this
experiment, 200 runs were performed with the same input parameters for each model, except of course the
economic feed input parameters, which were only used in the model with economic feed. Essentially this means
that 100 different sets of input variables were generated by sampling with the Latin Hypercube method (Iman et
al., 1981) over the uncertainty space. Two runs were performed per set, one for the model with economic feed
and one for the model without economic feed.
For the main experiment the same idea was used, except that the variations in the different model
varieties were now the different policy measures. For each model variety, 1000 sets of input variables were
generated, also with the Latin Hypercube method. The base model was compared with the six policy options
defined in Table 8.1 and the three combinations of options, resulting in a total of 10 runs per model variety per
parameter set. In total thus 3 * 1000 * 10 = 30000 runs were performed in the main ESDMA experiment.
E.2. The effect of the ESDMA economic growth structure

In chapter 4 (Box II) it was mentioned that a SD structure was added to the models to simulate the unpredictable
economic growth. It is interesting to see how large the influence is of this structure on the behaviour of the
copper system, as it was modelled. This is done by making two sets of hundred runs with the same set of
parameters, but with the economic growth turned respectively off and on. The results can be seen in Figure E.1.
At first sight, the economic growth does not seem to make a large difference in behaviour. In the
envelope visualisations of the (K)PIs it is visible that the envelopes are largely overlapping, just like the Kernel
density estimations (KDE, see Parzen, 1962; Rosenblatt, 1956) at the right sides. The lines, where a run with or
without economic growth has the same colour, result in the same insight. The economic growth seems to only
add variation around the behaviour patterns generated by the model without economic growth.
This can be proven with a regret analysis, but this has not been performed due to the scope of the
research. There is however some logic behind the little difference: the economic growth drives stocks: the GDP,
the aluminium price and the energy price. These stocks smooth the capricious behaviour of the economic growth.
Some difference could have been expected due to the substitution threshold, where a small difference can
already cause substitution or resubstitution. Long term effects are however, as well with substitution, more
important than the fluctuations generated by the economic growth.
96
Figure E.1: Envelopes with KDEs and line graphs of the different (K)PIs
E.3. Top down model
E.3.1. Real price of copper

The first KPI to be discussed is the Real price of copper. In lines graph (Figure E.2) it is visible that the copper
price show diverse and extreme behaviour. The highest prices found in this case are well over 1 million Dollars
per ton. Most strikingly is the behaviour the price shows. In many runs, sharp in- and decreases are visible, or
copper crises as defined in section 6.3. These crises seem to occur multiple times in a run, alternating between a
strong drop and strong rise in price. They indicate a strong disbalance between the availability and the demand of
copper over a prolonged period of time. In the line graph it is unclear whether these crises tend to increase in
severity during the run time, stay rather stable or are dampened and what the chances are for either of these
options. The lines graph cannot help in this case, but clustering of the behaviour could. This analysis has however
not been performed here.
Figure E.2: Lines graph for the Real price of copper
97
The trends for the price show a different picture (Figure E.3). The trend in the price seems to be rather constant,
but the decreasing distribution height (the z-axis) shows the ever increasing uncertainty towards the end of the
run time. To be able to explain this trend, it is important to look at further (K)PIs.
Figure E.3: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper [Dollar/t]. The red, green and blue arrows show the respective direction of
x, y and z axis. The price is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t
E.3.2. Global consumption of copper

The next outcome of interest is the Global consumption of copper. The consumption shows some values over
twenty million t/Year, but all higher values are followed by a sudden drop in behaviour. This behaviour can again
be explained by the disbalance between supply and demand of refined copper. When the supply of refined
copper is too high for a period of time, the stocks will be rising globally, while these cause the copper price to
drop below the marginal costs. This relatively low price will let the demand rise. In this case, the price stabilises
as soon as the production and consumption are equal. The high stocks keep the price still low, resulting in a
further increase in demand, with no increase or even a decrease in the production due to the losses made. At the
moment the stocks cannot comply with the demand, the consumption drops. This is a well perceivable situation,
which is linked to the crises in price described above.
Another mechanism which can cause this behaviour is the postponing of demand in case of a shortage in
copper. As soon as the refined copper stocks increase, this will form an addition to the new demand. As soon as
this demand is satisfied, a drop in the copper consumption can be observed.
Figure E.4: Lines graph for the Global consumption of copper
Now it is interesting to look at the overall trends for the global consumption (Figure E.4). This seems to be slowly
decreasing after 2010. This is probably due to the relatively high marginal costs of copper compared to the costs
of substitutes. This makes it interesting to look at the next PI, the Part of original demand substituted. Overall the
98
global copper consumption explored by the ESDMA effort seems low however, since the present consumption
(see Table 5.1) was considerably higher than the values displayed in Figure E.5. There are two possible
explanations for this low value. First, the RIR, which will be discussed in section E.3.4, is probably an
underestimation of the true RIR. Second, the assumption about the composition of the global consumption of
refined copper in the model may have been wrong. In this variable, both the losses during production and the
primary scrap flow have been considered part of the copper consumption. Adding these relative losses to the
demand copper would change this picture as well.
The initial value problem visible in Figure E.5 is caused by the way in which the availability of copper,
crucial for the amount of copper which can be consumed, is calculated. This happens by dividing the global
inventories of copper by the production time. The first variable is a stock, while the second is modelled as a
constant. Both values are in essence uncertain, but the range of the first is considerably smaller due to the latter
given its well documented nature. Since the consumption is defined as the smallest value of either the availability
of refined copper, or the copper demand combined with the postponed demand, a relatively high availability in
the initial state may cause a very short termed higher consumption of copper.
Figure E.5: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of refined copper [t/Year]. The graph is truncated at 30 million tonne per
Year
E.3.3. Part of original demand substituted

The substitution of the copper demand tends to be increasing during the run time in many cases, but it is also
visible that this happens with oscillatory behaviour (Figure E.6). This movement is caused by the copper price
which oscillates around the price of the substitutes. This behaviour can be explained with the modelling
assumptions for substitution (Box IV). For example, when at a certain moment in time 20% of the demand is
substituted and new demand arises due to the economic situation, this percentage will remain the same only
when the copper price is equal to the substitution threshold on short term and when the average copper price
over a longer period is also comparable to this value. Especially the long term effect is important here. A
prolonged period of time with a higher price for copper than the substitution threshold will cause a rapid increase
in the part of the demand that is substituted. The subsequent strong decrease in demand for copper will result in
a lower copper price, which can in term become lower than the substitution threshold for a longer period of time,
reversing the process.
99
Figure E.6: Lines graph for Part of original demand substituted
The trends of substitution show some bifurcation, as can be seen both in Figure E.7 and the KDE of Figure E.6.
This means that two trends seem plausible, one with relatively little substitution (up to 30%) and one with
relatively much substitution (over 30%, with a peek around 90%). This bifurcation probably caused by the long
term effects described above.
Figure E.7: 3D envelopes of the Part of original demand substituted [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated, so the values for the
substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100%
E.3.4. Recycling Input Rate

After the substitution, it is interesting to look at the RIR (Figure E.8), which was defined as the relation between
the input of primary and secondary refined copper. The behaviour of this KPI is not always stable. In this
research the assumption was made that both the collection rate and the end of life recycling efficiency rate
remain constant during the runs. Since much oscillation is not to be expected from the discarding of copper
products to waste, which was calculated by dividing the stock of copper in use by the average lifetime of copper
products. It therefore directly related to fluctuations in the production of primary copper.
Figure E.8: Lines graph for the Recycling Input Rate
100
The main trend of the RIR seems to be a gradually rising percentage (Figure E.9). This can be explained by the
trend in the global copper consumption and the stock of copper in use. In a stable system, the amount of End of
Life (EOL) copper is equal to the copper consumption. The output of secondary copper is than equal to the
collection rate times the Recycling Efficiency Rate (RER), while when we assume that all recycled copper is used,
this is exactly the RIR. Since in this research both the collection rate and the RER are modelled statically, change
in the RIR is only dependent on changes in the copper consumption. A growing copper consumption will thus
result in a lower RIR and vice versa. The higher RIR here is consequently caused by the gradually declining
copper consumption visible in Figure E.5.
It is typical to notice however that the RIR generated by the ESDMA research is lower than the RIR of
around one third mentioned by the ICSG (2010b). The easiest, and probably partly true, way of explaining this is
by an exaggeration of the uncertainties regarding the collection rate and the RER. The four uncertainties relevant
in this case (collection rate, copper score during treatment, copper score during dismembering, and the
percentage of copper recovered from scrap) (Angerer et al., 2010) need however to have an average value of
almost 76% to create an RIR of 33.3%, while an average value of 50% gives an RIR of no greater than 6.25%,
both in a system in equilibrium. This indicates the importance of both high collection rates and RER, despite the
fact that the values presented in Figure E.9 might be an underestimation of reality. When thinking about the
possible RIR however, these values indicate clear the fact that with growing marginal costs for copper mining it is
of utmost importance to increase both collection rate of EOL copper and the RER. In chapter 8 and 9 is more
focus on the RIR and the effect of a higher RER and before that in the discussion of the bottom up model, where
on average higher values for the (use dependent) recycling coefficients were used.
Figure E.9: 3D envelopes of the Recycling Input Rate [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated, so the values for the substitution lie
between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100%
E.3.5. Marginal costs of conventional and deep sea copper

The marginal costs of (conventional) copper and the marginal costs of deep copper show an exponential growth
without much fluctuation. Since the colours of both PIs are similar per run, i.e. the red line with high values in
Figure E.10 is the same run as the red line with high values in Figure E.11, both marginal costs can be compared.
By doing so, it seems that the run values lie for most runs relatively close together.
101
Figure E.10: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of copper Figure E.11: Lines graph for the Marginal costs deep sea
copper
When looking at the trends of both the marginal costs of copper and the marginal costs deep sea copper it is
clear however that on initial average the marginal costs of deep sea copper are higher than their equivalent for
conventional copper. The conclusion should thus be that on average deep sea mining remains more expensive for
some time, but that deep sea mining will be developed with marginal costs comparable with, but just under the
marginal costs of conventional copper.
Figure E.12: 3D envelopes of the Marginal costs of copper Figure E.13: 3D envelopes of the Marginal costs deep sea
[Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t copper [Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t
This idea is confirmed by comparing the marginal costs of copper with the marginal costs deep sea copper
(Figure E.13). This makes clear that the marginal costs of deep sea
mining never rise above the marginal costs of copper.
E.3.6. Relative part of deep sea mining

The same image is generated by the next (K)PI, the relative part of
deep sea mining (Figure E.15 and Figure E.16). In some cases the
deep sea mining will form a substantial part of the total amount of
mined copper. In the behaviour of the runs it is visible that some
violent oscillation takes place. This is caused by a discrepancy in the
Figure E.14: Multiplot of Marginal costs of
copper [Dollar/t] and Marginal costs deep sea development of deep sea copper resources and copper mining, as
copper [Dollar/t]
was described in Box VI. The strong expansions of the relative part
of deep sea mining can be explained in the same way: the development of deep sea mining capacity than the
development of the deep sea reserve base. At the moment when a new part of the deep sea resources has been
explored, the deep sea mining capacity can be finally used and the relative part of deep sea mining suddenly
increases.
102
Figure E.15: Lines graph for the Relative part of deep sea mining
The trends for deep sea mining follow the same pattern as expected comparing the marginal costs. The coming
forty years some deep sea mining will be developed, but most likely it is not going to be more than a few percent
of total mining. Please note however that, considering the size of the yearly copper production, that this will be
very large operations.
Figure E.16: 3D envelopes of the Relative part of deep sea mining [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated, so the values for the
substitution lie between 0 and 1, or 0% and 100%
E.3.7. Year left of copper mining

The lines graph for year left of copper mining shows a remarkable empty view (Figure E.17). This has to do with
the extraordinary high values for this KPI that some runs show. This variable is calculated by looking dividing the
reserve base (contrary what was done for example by Koppelaar (2011), who looked at the reserves) by the
global mine production. The reserve base can only decrease by mining, while it grows semi-autonomous by
findings of the junior companies. The drastic growth of the year left of mining can thus only be explained by
cases in which the production declines heavily compared to the reserve base present. This can be caused by
strong substitution, of which cases were visible in Figure E.6.
Figure E.17: Lines graph for the Year left of copper mining
103
Figure E.18 shows a similar view as the copper price development in Figure E.3. After some time the year left of
copper mining has diverged so much, that not many trends can be seen, other than the divergence itself. This
view corresponds with the idea that the copper production is likely to decrease in the coming period of forty
years. This is also clearly visible when the year left of copper mining is plotted against the copper consumption
(Figure E.19). A high value for the year left of copper mining only exists with a low value for the global
Figure E.18: 3D envelopes of the Year left of copper mining Figure E.19: Multiplot of Global consumption of refined
[Year]. The graph is truncated at 500 year copper [t/Year] and year left of copper mining [Year]
E.4. Bottom up model

In this section the outcomes of the bottom up model will be discussed. This will not be done by discussing all
(K)PIs in the same depth as in section E.3, but by emphasizing on the differences in behaviour and trends
between the model varieties.

The Real price of copper in the bottom up model seems to have a strong tendency for cyclical, oscillatory
behaviour, which seems to have a far more constant period than the behaviour of the top down model. This is
visible in both Figure E.20 and Figure E.21. It is unclear what causes this very distinct behaviour, since all
parameters of the model were varied in the ESDMA experimental setup. Further analysis by means of the Patient
Rule Induction Method (PRIM) (Friedman & Fisher, 1999), Random Forests (Breiman, 2001), clustering the
behaviour or other machine learning methods might help in this case. It is interesting to see however that the
prices are on average less high than the prices in the top down model. This is also indicated by the highest value
of the KDE, which is almost 1.8 10-5, which is significantly higher than the value just under 1.0 10-5 in Figure E.2.
104
Figure E.21: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper
Figure E.20: Lines graph for the Real price of copper [Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t

The first big difference of the global consumption of refined copper generated by the Bottom up model is higher
than the consumption displayed in Figure E.4 and Figure E.5, but in the period 2000 – 2010 on average still lower
than the historical data found in Table 5.1. A second feature of the top down consumption behaviour, the
serration in the different run lines, seems to be less distinguished, although it is still visible.
The overall higher consumption of copper, which was just noticed, is probably caused by a higher
average value for the RIR, which is discussed in E.4.4. The same assumption was made however for the relation
between primary scrap and copper consumption, causing the values to be too low again.
Figure E.22: Lines graph for Global consumption of refined

copper Figure E.23: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of
refined copper [t/Year]. The graph is truncated at 30 million
t/Year

The behaviour of the demand substitution in the bottom up model (Figure E.24) is largely the same as the
substitution displayed in Figure E.6 and Figure E.7, although the form of the end state KDE is slightly different.
On close examination of the behavioural patterns of Figure E.6 the slopes of the substitution patterns are less
steep. Further, on average some less demand was substituted, which could also have been caused by the slightly
higher availability of copper due to the higher RIR. The slope of the runs seems also to be less steep. This is well
understandable with some knowledge of the structural differences between both models. The top down model
used only one substitution threshold, while the bottom up model used six, one for each major use of copper (the
different uses were visible in Figure 4.4). When the copper reaches the threshold of one of the uses, this
particular use will be more substituted, while other uses, with higher thresholds, may even experience
resubstitution. Since the speed of substitution seems to have a great influence on price volatility in the copper
105
system due to sudden drops and increases of the demand, this would explain fewer occurrences of copper crises,
as defined in section 6.3, in the bottom up model.
Figure E.24: Lines graph for the Part of original demand substituted

The bottom up generated RIR (Figure E.25 and Figure E.26) is clearly higher than the top down generated RIR.
This is mainly due to different input values for the different elements regarding the RER and the collection rates
per copper use. The RIR seems still considerably lower than the values displayed in Table 5.1. This is mainly due
to an exaggerated lower bound for the percentage copper recovered from scrap, just like the top down model
had.
Development in the RIR is in the bottom up model also possible due to shifts in the usage of the
different copper product categories, contrary to the top down model. Without further analysis it is nevertheless
difficult to attribute changes in the RIR to these changes. The RIR seems to show less increase during the run
time period. This is can be related to a less drastic decline in the copper consumption, which was visible in Figure
E.23.
Figure E.25: Lines graph for the RIR
Figure E.26: 3D envelopes of the RIR [Dmnl]. The graph is

not truncated

The behaviour of the marginal costs for conventional and deep sea copper (Figure E.27 and Figure E.28) are
largely similar to the modes seen in Figure E.10 and Figure E.11, and show exponential growth with some
fluctuations. On average, the marginal costs seem to be a little lower compared to the top down model. The
marginal costs of deep sea copper are considerably lower however than the values which can be seen in Figure
E.11 and results a slightly higher relative part deep sea mining (Figure E.29 and Figure E.30). It is unclear why
this variable does not develop in the same way as the top down equivalent, since the model structures
concerning the marginal costs are identical for both models. Further analysis could create more insight in this
issue.
106
Figure E.27: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of copper Figure E.28: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of deep sea
copper
E.4.6. Relative part deep sea mining

As was noticed in the former section, the relative part of deep sea mining is on average higher in the bottom up
model (Figure E.29 and Figure E.30), compared to the top down model. This is most likely due to the larger
difference between the marginal costs of conventional and deep sea copper. The behaviour of the runs seems to
be similar, which can be explained by the identical structure regarding (deep sea) mining development in both
models.
Figure E.29: Lines graph for the Relative part of deep sea
mining
Figure E.30: 3D envelopes of the Relative part of deep sea
mining [Dmnl]. The graph is not truncated

Despite the fact that the extreme values are slightly lower in Figure E.31 than in Figure E.17, the overall
behaviour of this indicator is similar to the behaviour observed earlier, as is also demonstrated by Figure E.32.
The lower extreme values could be caused by the slightly higher RIR, which causes higher consumption.
Figure E.31: Lines graph for the Year left of copper mining Figure E.32: Multiplot of Global consumption of refined
copper [t/Year] and Year left of copper mining [Year]
107
E.5. Regional model
The outcomes of the Regional model will now be discussed. Again, emphasis will lie on the differences between
this model and the other model varieties.

The real price of copper for the regional model shows the most extreme view for possible price developments in
the coming forty years. While clustering could shed more light on the exact behavioural modes of the runs, the
behaviour of the copper price seems to be characterised by strong surges followed by a gradual decreases
(Figure E.33). The strong increases can be caused by the same disbalance noticed in section E.3.1. Figure E.34
shows no distribution of data after approximately 2020. This is due to the fact that the differences between the
runs are so great, that no concentration of values can be seen. Between 2010 and 2020 this already happens, but
to a lesser extent. It is unclear why specifically in this model variety the prices show this wide distribution of
possible values. Further analysis could help in this case by distinguishing which uncertainties play a major role in
causing the price volatility and distribution.
Figure E.33: Lines graph for the Real price of copper
Figure E.34: 3D envelopes of the Real price of copper

[Dollar/t]. The graph is truncated at 100000 Dollar/t

The global consumption of copper in the regional model, obtained by summing the consumption from the three
regions, shows more extreme peeks than the top down model (compare Figure E.35 with Figure E.4). Probably
this booms and busts are caused by the same mechanisms that were discussed earlier in E.3.2. The peaks in the
consumption behaviour also cause a wider distribution of possible values in the period between roughly 2010 and
2040.
This behaviour can be explained by looking into the difference in structure of the regional model. In
contrast with the other models, this model has a regionalised supply and demand structure. Regarding the supply
structure, this also means that export and import of raw and refined copper, as well as copper scrap takes place.
This means that while one or two regions experience a shortage, the surplus of the other region(s) can fill the
gap between regional supply and demand. The result of this may be that production of copper is reduced in one
region is being reduced, while the other regions already experience ongoing shortages. The global pricing of the
metal limits possibilities for an earlier reaction of the market in this case. This could be a good reason to develop
adaptive policies (Walker et al., 2001) regarding the development of copper production capacity, which would
react to early warning mechanisms in the copper system.
108
Figure E.35: Lines graph for the Global consumption of Figure E.36: 3D envelopes of the Global consumption of
refined copper refined copper [t/Year]. The graph is truncated at 30 million
t/Year

The substitution of copper demand in the regional model (Figure E.37) shows similar behaviour as the
substitution of the models discussed above. It is typical to see however that the bifurcation that was visible in the
part of original demand substituted for the top down and bottom up model (respectively Figure E.6 and Figure
E.24) is not visible in these results, which show on average less substitution. The reason for this could be the
differences in regional availability of copper and fluctuation in copper import and export related to that. In the
regional model regional shortages of refined copper are no reason for extra substitution, solely the price
mechanisms discussed in Box IV are. The substitution lines thus show less steep slopes than the top down model
and are more comparable to the bottom up model, despite the fact that the underlying structure is practically
identical to the top down model. The regional system seems to react consequently slower than the models with a
global market paradigm.
Figure E.37: Lines graph for the Part of original demand substituted

The inputs for the RIR are comparable to the values used in the top down model, again resulting in a distribution
of run values which shows relatively much low values. The behavioural modes of the RIR show much volatility
(Figure E.38) just like the RIR of the top down model, but the behaviour is more smoothed. This has to do with
the fact that this outcome is an aggregated, global version of the regional RIRs. The regional differences, not
visible here, showed a behaviour similar to the data provided by the ICSG (2010b: 53), where the resource
abundant regions had a considerably lower RIR than the other regions. Higher values for the regional collection
rates of copper and the coefficients regarding the RER could however still add more validity to the model and this
outcome in specific.
109
Figure E.38: Lines graph for the RIR

The marginal costs of copper in the regional model are calculated by taking the highest marginal costs for copper
in any copper producing region. This could explain the strange behaviour visible in Figure E.39 which is
understandable with the possibility of declining energy prices, a already low regional initial ore grade and with
practically no copper mining capacity,, causing little rise in costs due to the falling ore grades. This distinguishes
the regional model from both globalised models.
The further behaviour is similar to the other models, being on average exponential growth without much
fluctuation. The relation between the marginal costs of conventional (Figure E.39) and deep sea copper (Figure
E.40) is however more similar to the bottom up model than the top down model, since the marginal costs of deep
sea copper do not seem to reach the values of for conventional copper mining, making it interesting to
investigate whether the same mechanisms cause this cost differences.
Figure E.39: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of copper Figure E.40: Lines graph for the Marginal costs of deep sea
copper
E.5.6. Relative part of deep sea mining

The development of deep sea mining is modelled different in the regional model. The assumption is that the
possibility for deep sea mining is dependent on the regional GDP per capita, in order to simulate the higher
technological demands necessary for this kind of mining and which is probably not available in lower income
countries. A threshold was thus built in, only enabling the possibility for deep sea mining development when the
GDP per capita in a certain region is higher than this value.
The behaviour visible in Figure E.41 resembles this assumption. The wealthiest region, region 1, starts
first with the development of deep sea mining, followed in time by respectively region 2 and 3. The strong
fluctuations in the relative part of deep sea mining in regions 1 and 2 probably originate in an overall low amount
of regional conventional copper mine production. The behaviour of deep sea mining in the third region is
therefore, when it finally starts, more fluent in nature. Despite this, only the first region seems to give the
possibility for a substantial contribution of deep sea copper relative to the production of conventional copper,
which is in line with the assumption discusses earlier in this section.
110
Figure E.41: Lines graphs for the regional relative parts of deep sea mining

The regional model shows the highest values for the outcome year left of copper mining (Figure E.42). Earlier in
this report high value for this KPI were coupled to a strong decrease in copper consumption. The slower reaction
of the regional model to fluctuations in the copper system might cause this extreme behaviour. A consequence is
also the bigger spread in year left of copper mining compared to the results of the other model varieties (Figure
E.43).
Figure E.42: Lines graph for the Year left of copper mining
Figure E.43: 3D envelopes of the Year left of copper mining

[Year]. The graph is truncated at 500 year
111
Appendix F. Minutes of personal communication with P.H. van
der Kleijn
This appendix contains the minutes of the personal communications with Ir. P.H. van der Kleijn and e-mails
before and after the meeting with him. The initial e-mail is to Ir. J.J. de Ruiter, faculty CITG, department
Resources Engineering, who recommended contacting Van der Kleijn. All communication is in Dutch. For
translation, please contact the author.
F.1. Initial e-mail to Hans de Ruiter

Geachte heer De Ruiter,
In verband met mijn afstudeerproject bij Technische Bestuurskunde ben ik bezig met het maken van een
exploratieve System Dynamics model en analyse, dus een exploratieve modelstudie, over de globale kopermarkt
tot 2050. Hiervoor heb ik enkele vragen over de winning van koper. Mijn broer, Thomas Auping, suggereerde dat
ik hiervoor met u contact op zou nemen.
Het voornaamste probleem dat ik momenteel heb zit in het feit dat (volgens de International Copper Study
Group) het gebruik van de globale kopermijncapaciteit de afgelopen jaren is afgenomen van 92,5% in 2000 tot
80,9% in 2010, terwijl de koperprijs in deze tijd sterk is gestegen.
Ik heb hier de volgende vragen over:

· Hoe definieert men de capaciteit van een mijn?
· Wat zijn motivaties om die capaciteit niet te gebruiken?
· Als de mijn zijn capaciteit niet geheel wil gebruiken, hoe gaat dat dan fysiek in zijn werk: wat wordt er
dan precies niet gebruikt?
· Weet u wat in dit geval de reden is om de capaciteit niet te gebruiken, terwijl de marktprijs daar wel
aanleiding toe geeft?
Verder heb ik nog wat algemenere vragen over koperwinning:

· Op basis van wat voor soort informatie wordt besloten tot het uitbreiden van de capaciteit van mijn/het
ontwikkelen van nieuwe mijnen?
· Wat voor termijn wordt aangehouden voor het besluit om een mijn te ontwikkelen tot de opening van
deze mijn?
· Over reserves/resources: in de jaren 70 heeft B.J. Skinner een hypothese geponeerd over een
zogenaamde “mineralogical barrier” tussen koper in normale rots (common rock) en koper in ertsen. Is
er consensus over het (on)gelijk van deze stelling?
Ik zou graag over deze vragen met u willen praten, zodat ik dit mee kan nemen in mijn onderzoek.
Bij voorbaat dank,
Willem Auping
112
F.2. Minutes meeting 5 July 2011
Datum: 5 juli
Tijd: 10:00 – 12:45
Locatie: Faculteit Civiele Techniek en Geowetenschappen, 3.21
Aanwezig: Piet Hein van der Kleyn (oud-docent Mijnbouw), Willem Auping
Skinners Thesis (Gordon, Koopmans, Nordhaus & Skinner, 1987: 39; Skinner, 1976) lijkt afkomstig te zijn van een
som van de verdeling van reserve en reserve base in een typische mijn (Figuur G.1). De reserve bevindt zich dus
rechts van de cut-off ore grade, die tegenwoordig rond de 0,2 – 0,3% koper ligt. De bewezen reserve is daarmee
ook afhankelijk van de marktprijs.
Log (Tonnage)
Reserve base
Reserve
Log(Grade)
Figure G.1
De definities van reserve, reserve base en resources en hoe deze bepaald moeten worden, zijn gedefinieerd door
de Joint Ore Reserve Committee (JORC, 2004) .
Nieuwe resources worden grotendeels gevonden door zogenaamde “Junior Companies” die de nieuwe kennis
verkopen aan mijnbouwbedrijven.
Het recovery percentage is ongeveer gelijk aan 90%: dit is dus de hoeveelheid koper die beschikbaar komt in de
winning ten opzichte van het totale gewicht aan koper dat in de rots gezeten heeft. Zodra het feedgehalte
omlaag gaat, gaat ook het recovery percentage omlaag.
De kosten van het mijnen wordt grotendeels door het volgende bepaald:
Kosten = overburden + winnen & (kwaliteit + ertsgraad)
De kwaliteit wordt bepaald tot de types van de ertsen die zich in de reserve bevinden.
De capaciteit van de mijn wordt traditioneel bepaald door de capaciteit van de breker (breaker), die naast de mijn
staat. Als de reserves niet verwerkbaar blijken (door bijvoorbeeld de overburden), dan wordt niet alle capaciteit
gebruikt.
Een onbekend deel van de grondstoffen wordt ook illegaal gewonnen
F.3. Further e-mail communication

Beste Willem,
Re. Mijn productiecapaciteit.
Betreffende je vraag naar mijncapaciteiten en daaraan gekoppeld levensduren van reserves na aanvang van
productie bijgesloten Hfd 8, Production lifetime.
113
uit Wellmer, F.W., Dalheimer, M. and Wagner, M., 2006. Economic Evaluations in Exploration. Springer Verlag,
pp. 239
Erg theoretisch wordt de produktiegrootte (capaciteit van de eerste breker) afgeleid van de ratio
Reserve/Levensduur.
In de zeventiger jaren heeft Taylor in Noord Amerika/Canada een empirische correlatie gelegd tussen
ertsvoorraden en mijn-levensduren. Er valt het nodige hierop af te dingen. Er wordt b.v. geen rekening gehouden
dat gedurende de levensduur nieuw gevonden en gedefinieerde ertsvoorraden in-en rond de mijn worden
bijgevonden en/of de cut off grade omlaag gebracht kan worden waardoor de berekende ertsvoorraad groter
wordt. De spreiding van de getallen rond de correllatiecurve is aanzienlijk. Maar laten we zeggen dat met
correllatie-statistiek gefilterd wordt met behoud van een relatie tusen X en Y. Mogelijk kan je (vlp.) eens kijken of
deze benadering in je model valt toe te passen om levensduren en productiecapaciteiten mee te laten wegen in
je uitkomst.
Taylor HK (1974) General background theory of cutoff grade. In: Jones MJ (ed) Geological, mining and
metallurgical sampling. Inst Min Metall, London, pp 136–155
Taylor HK (1977) Mine valuation and feasibility studies. In: Mineral industry costs. Northwest Mining
Assoc., Spokane, 1976, pp 1–17
Re. Ertsreserves classification. JORC code
Het is belangrijk dat je de begrippen rond ertsreserve en resources definitie op de juiste wijze hanteert. Zoals
besproken bijgaand een verwijzing naar de Australische definitie die ± in lijn is met wat later in de USA en
Canada op initiatief van de stock exchanges is gedefinieerd. Zie de Quick Reference ver.2 en de JORC site voor
meer informatie.
http://www.jorc.org/
Ik zal naar kontakten om mee te praten nog rondkijken.
Het was leuk om te praten maar ik moet bekennen dat ik de fundamenten van jullie model nog niet goed kan
overzien.
Een thema waarover we niet hebben gesproken is de toekomstige beperking tot het in exploitatie nemen van
prospects voortvloeiend uit eisen aan de duurzaamheid en milieu milieuwetgeving en regulations.
Tevens is het nuttig denk ik om gegevens te verzamelen rond het begrip exploratie, uitgaven en success rate en
toename van de voorraden t.o.v. de productie. Of zit dat al in je model ?
Met groeten,
Piet Hein
114

Auping WL - SPM5910 - Thesis Report - The Uncertain Future of Copper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Auping WL - SPM5910 - Thesis Report - The Uncertain Future of Copper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The uncertain future of copper

An Exploratory System Dynamics Model and Analysis of the global

Delft University of Technology

Chairman graduation committee: Prof.dr.ir. W.A.H. Thissen

W.L. Auping, 1014153

Delft, 28 October 2011, Willem Auping

1.1. The energy transition

1.2. Emerging economies

1.3. Uncertainties in the copper system

1.4. Research introduction

2.1. Problem exploration

2.1.1. Societal relevance

2.1.2. Scientific relevance

2.2. Problem statement

2.3. Research objectives

2.4. Choice for research method and modelling software

2.5. Scope of research

R/P (“Years left of copper mining”)

- + Global copper consumption

Part of original subsituted

Extra Performance Indicators:

Figure 2.1: Copper System diagram

2.6. Research questions

3.1. Exploratory Modelling and Analysis (EMA)

Box I: System Dynamics

Figure 3.1: Simple SD model

3.2. Exploratory System Dynamics Modelling and Analysis (ESDMA)

3.3. Research design

Traditional SD approach Ex ante ESDMA approach Ex post ESDMA approach

Conceptualisation Building experimental setup

Calibrating experimental setup

Figure 3.2: Traditional and two ESDMA research approaches compared

4.1. Main drivers for copper demand and model varieties

4.1.1. Top down

Figure 4.1: Top down intrinsic demand

Period long sinus

Period medium sinus Economic sinus medium Yearly economic

+ Copper use in stationary

Figure 4.4: Bottom up intrinsic demand

Fractions of new cars - Dominance Fractions of new cars - Pluralism

Box III: Modelling uncertainty: Relations for demand

Loss in demand due

4.2. Copper substitution

Change in demand due Present

Figure 4.10: Relating copper price and the aluminium

Average lifetime Investments in

5.1. Resources and reserves

Identified resources Undiscovered resources

5.1.2. Reserve base and reserves

5.2. Mining, smelting/SX-EW and refining

Box V: Modelling uncertainty: Mining and refinery capacity

Figure 5.5: SD structure for mining capacity

5.2.2. Smelting and refining

5.3. Deep sea mining

Box VI: Modelling uncertainty: Deep sea mining capacity

New autonomous Relation between deep sea <Normal resource

Figure 5.6: Deep sea copper resource and reserve development

Relation deep sea and <Mining

Figure 5.7: SD structure for new mining capacity

5.4. Copper recycling or secondary copper

6.1. Parametric uncertainties

6.2. Structural uncertainties