Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Production and Consumption

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/spc

Research article

A dynamic price model based on supply and demand with application

to techno-economic assessments of rare earth element recovery
technologies
Sidi Deng a,b,∗, Denis Prodius c, Ikenna C. Nlebedim c, Aihua Huang a, Yuehwern Yih b,
John W. Sutherland a
a
Environmental and Ecological Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States
b
School of Industrial Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, United States
c
Critical Materials Institute, Ames Laboratory, US Department of Energy, Ames, Iowa 50011-3020, United States

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Rare Earth Elements (REEs) are essential for sustainable energy technologies. Techno-economic Assess-
Received 16 October 2020 ments (TEAs) have been conducted to evaluate innovative approaches to recover REEs from waste
Revised 5 March 2021
streams. However, most TEA studies do not consider the price volatility of REEs, which raises concern
Accepted 8 April 2021
over the reliability of the analysis in an unpredictable dynamic market. To address this shortcoming, a
Available online 20 April 2021
dynamic price model is proposed that adjusts REE price based upon supply-demand conditions. The dy-
Editor: Prof. Ignacio Grossmann namic market behavior is simulated and its effect on a TEA is examined via a case study. The results of
the dynamic simulation indicate a growing trend of the market price for REE materials/products. Com-
Keywords:
Rare earth elements pared to a conventional TEA that does not consider price dynamics, a significant difference in economic
Techno-economic assessment performance metrics is identified from the dynamic TEA results. The proposed dynamic TEA method is
Price oscillation not limited to a specific application and can provide insights for evaluating a broad range of technologies.
Price elasticity
© 2021 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction elements are essential for sustainable technologies including pho-

Worldwide production and consumption rely heavily on the use
of limited natural resources. As industries around the globe transi-
tion to more sustainable and environmentally friendly approaches,
there is a growing utilization of certain critical materials that have
essential and unique properties needed for advanced energy pro-
duction, transmission, storage, and use. The products or systems
reliant on these critical materials are fast becoming key instru-
ments that are indispensable for clean energy technologies.
The market volatility of critical materials (such as price spikes)
results from a disparity between the supply and demand, and has
existed for decades. While global demand for these materials is ris-
ing rapidly due to their extensive applications, the supply is sub-
ject to disruption and often fails to match the increasing demand.
The complex dilemma surrounding critical materials is raising en-
vironmental, economic, political, and social concerns, which in turn
calls for intervention.
Currently, one of the most significant discussions relating to
critical materials revolves around rare-earth elements (REEs). These
∗ ior considerations based on supply and demand price elasticity.
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: deng100@purdue.edu (S. Deng).
tovoltaics, wind turbines, and electric and hybrid vehicles [1]. REEs
are distributed diffusely and are thus difficult to easily extract in
large and economically viable quantities. The uncertainty in the
global supply of REEs may be alleviated somewhat through recy-
cling approaches. Although new innovative technologies are be-
ing explored to recover REEs from used products or other waste
streams, uncertainties still exist about the economic feasibility of
recovery methods.
This prompts the need for a rigorous examination of the eco-
nomic aspects of newly developed REE recovery methods. One
method for performing this economic examination is techno-
economic assessment (TEA), a technique that combines produc-
tion cost modeling with customer/financial analysis, and has
been widely applied to provide guidelines for decision making
to optimize economic performance. At present, most TEAs are
conducted using static modeling assumptions without consider-
ing fluctuations in market price. However, in light of the sup-
ply challenges of REEs, results from conventional TEA meth-
ods may often be misleading. The purpose of this study is
to enhance a static TEA model with dynamic market behav-
In particular, we aim to establish a “Dynamic TEA Model” that

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.013
2352-5509/© 2021 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
Nomenclature
QD Dynamic quantity of demand over time
QS Dynamic quantity of supply over time
P Market price of the product, with steady state de-
noted as P∗
y Relative change of P, with steady state denoted as
y∗
D Static quantity of demand in a fixed demand curve
S Static quantity of supply in a fixed supply curve
α Demand shifter
β Supply shifter
u1 ( t) Relative change of demand shifter (α ) over time
u2 ( t) Relative change of demand shifter (β ) over time
K1 Price elasticity of demand shifter (α )
K2 Price elasticity of supply shifter (β )
ζ Damping ratio of the oscillator
ωn Natural frequency of the oscillator
adjusts the revenue from selling REE-related products or output
materials.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. First, a brief
background on the supply and demand features of the REE mar-
ket is provided. Then, a discussion is provided on how the ever-
changing market supply-demand conditions contribute to the dy-
namic behavior of the price. After that, an oscillator model is pro-
posed to incorporate the dynamic market features into the TEA
framework, where the mathematical formulation is established
based upon the concept of price elasticity. Finally, a case study of
REE recovery from waste hard disk drives (HDDs) is presented to
demonstrate the application of the proposed dynamic TEA model.
2. Literature review
The 15 Lanthanide elements, along with the chemically similar
elements scandium and yttrium, are often collectively known as
the rare earth elements [1]. The reasons that they are considered
as critical materials can be explained from two aspects: demand
and supply. In terms of demand, the unique physical and chemical
properties make REEs indispensable for various products, and there
are no easy substitutes that can alleviate the demand pressure
without compromising performance or product quality [2]. During
the past twenty years, there has been an explosion in demand for
many applications that require REEs, such as fluorescent lighting,
cell phones, and computers. Moreover, as growing environmental
concerns call for sustainable energy approaches, there is a greater
emphasis on electric vehicle (EV) and wind energy technologies.
Consequently, as the market of motors and generators using mag-
nets made with rare earth compounds burgeons, the demand for
REEs continues to soar [3].
Apart from the increasing demand, the global REE supply is un-
stable and susceptible to interruptions. Because of their geochem-
ical properties, REEs are typically dispersed and not often found
in concentrated ore deposits for their exploitation to be economi-
cally viable [4,5]. Furthermore, the unequal geographic distribution
has led to economic and political challenges to secure the REE sup-
ply chain. In fact, China dominates global production/processing of
REEs and when it curtailed its exports in 2011, this resulted in REE
prices skyrocketing by a factor of about 15 [6]. Additionally, envi-
ronmental regulations and policies may also impose challenges on
REE supply reliability [7].
Due to the imbalance between global supply and demand, the
market for REEs is often subject to unpredictable fluctuations. This
growing REE market crisis calls for government, industry, and re-
1719
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
search institutions to formulate innovative strategies to mitigate
the supply risk of REEs [8]. These efforts can be divided into three
categories: (1) diversify and expand REE sources [9,10], (2) reduce
demand by identifying and developing substitutes [11,12], and (3)
facilitate reuse and recycling to recover waste REEs [13,14]. In par-
ticular, new technologies are being explored to recover materials
from used products and other waste streams. Both technical via-
bility and economic feasibility are crucial factors that incentivize a
transition towards sustainable production/consumption approaches
[15]. Notably, even if a clean energy approach exists, it will not be
implemented if it is not economically attractive [16]. To ensure the
industrial deployment of these newly developed technologies, it is
desirable to apply techno-economic assessments (TEAs) to analyze
market opportunities and technical bottlenecks [17].
Techno-economic assessment (TEA) is a tool used to evalu-
ate the economic prospects of a project, process, or technology
through production cost modeling and financial analysis [18]. It
can provide decision-making insights to research and development.
A TEA investigates all the cost components (e.g., operating, in-
direct, and capital expenses), and revenue components (earnings
from selling the product and non-operating income), to quantify
the economic performance by calculating multiple metrics, such as
break-even point (BEP), net cash flow (NCF), and internal rate of
return (IRR).
There is a need and growing trend for researchers to inves-
tigate the economic performance of clean and renewable energy
technologies, e.g., microbial approaches [19]. Others have recovered
REEs from waste, for example, coal ash [20] and cracking catalysts
[21]. Even though some TEAs consider the time value of money by
applying discount rate for future cash flows, as with the biosorp-
tion process considered by Reed et al. [22], the selling prices of
the target products or materials are assumed to be constant. In
view of this, the result of a TEA that relies on static cost-benefit
analysis would be badly flawed in a situation where the demand
is growing geometrically and supply is at risk. Particularly, when
evaluating the economic feasibility of a REE-related project, most
traditional TEAs do not anticipate a potentially forthcoming large
increase in REE prices, which can undermine the reliability of the
conclusion.
To address the market uncertainty that is essential in deter-
mining economic feasibility, one potential solution is to incorpo-
rate dynamic market behavior into the TEA model by adjusting
the unit price of products/materials based on supply and demand
relationships. The conventional approaches that study price fluc-
tuations are primarily based on time-series analysis of historical
price data. Common techniques, including exponential smoothing
and curve fitting, are applied to capture the features of existing
data and extrapolate future trends [23]. Based on statistical infer-
ence, future prices can be estimated through stochastic simulation
or univariate-based machine learning [24]. One inherent problem
of the conventional price prediction methods is that they often
fail to characterize the extreme events that may cause the price to
surge or plummet, such as a market shortage or a policy change.
This is because it is difficult to infer the patterns of market contin-
gencies solely based on price data, without a good understanding
of the underlying forces that govern price dynamics.
Instead of resorting to pure statistical methods, this work will
study the price dynamics from a microeconomics perspective by
exploring the classical economic model of price determination
based on supply and demand.
3. Methods
3.1. Dynamic market behavior
In microeconomics, the quantities of supply and demand are
regarded as functions of the price of the product. The standard
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
Fig. 1. Static and dynamic price model comparison.
graphical representation for this is known as the supply-demand
curves, which has price on the vertical axis and quantity on the
horizontal axis [25]. Generally, a market equilibrium is defined to
be a situation where the quantity demanded is exactly balanced
by the quantity supplied in a market. It can be graphically rep-
resented by the intersection of supply and demand curves (to be
further discussed later).
However, the supply and demand curves are only a two-
dimensional representation of a multi-variable function and the
quantities of supply and demand are not exclusively influenced by
the price [26]. The changes in any other determinants of the sup-
ply or demand functions cause the curve to shift to a new posi-
tion, which is referred to as “change in demand/supply” or “shifts”
of the curves [27]. A shift (change in demand or change in sup-
ply) could be triggered by some underlying exogenous factors com-
monly known as “shifters.” Since demand directly relates to the
willingness and ability of customers to purchase a product/service,
a change in demand can be caused by changes in income, popu-
lation, price of substitutes/complements, expectations/preferences,
etc. Regarding the supply curve, the quantity supplied at a given
market price can be interpreted as the quantity that producers are
willing and able to sell in order to make a profit; so the shape
and position of the supply curve are determined by the factors
that influence the production cost. Hence, the supply shifters could
include input prices, taxes and subsidies, opportunity costs, and
technological innovations.
The supply and demand curves serve as a static model that
graphically depicts market steady state before and after a shift.
However, it fails to describe the micro progression as the market
moves from one equilibrium to another. Consequently, it is not ap-
plicable in many situations, especially for an REE market that is
undergoing continuous fluctuations. To take account of the price
volatility, it is required to establish a dynamic price model that
better reflects realistic market behavior.
To elucidate the difference between static and dynamic mod-
els, consider a scenario where the demand of a product has just
increased. From the perspective of static analysis, as Fig. 1 shows,
when the position of a demand curve shifts from D1 to D2 , the
market equilibrium will shift from an old state (e1 , with price P1 )
to a new state (e2 , with price P2 ). However, the transition will not
happen either instantly or monotonically. Instead, the market price
1720
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
will undergo some fluctuations before reaching the new equilib-
rium. A general price response over time after the shift has oc-
curred can be illustrated by the conceptual graph at the right-hand
side of Fig. 1.
After a shift of demand has occurred, there will be no supply
response in the very short term, since time is required for the sup-
pliers to increase their production, and new products will not en-
ter the market straightaway. Because of this, a market shortage will
immediately emerge. Therefore, customers are willing to purchase
products with a relatively high price. When a shortage suddenly
occurs, hypothetically, the market status will instantaneously move
from e1 to e1 , and the price will undergo a drastic surge at the
beginning. However, the market shortage (higher price) also acts
as an inducement for suppliers to increase their production. As
the suppliers take actions to meet the demand, the full increase
in price will not be achieved; rather the expected increase will
be attenuated. When the price reaches its peak value P3 (which
is smaller than the price at e1 since the shortage has been miti-
gated), the market surplus caused by overproduction of the prod-
uct is prominent enough to bring down the price, which is a signal
to discourage supply. As the price and supply quantities fall below
their equilibrium values, the market then undergoes a new period
of temporal shortage but less severe, after which the price rises
again. Assuming that the market converges to a new steady state,
the price will overshoot and cross the destined equilibrium price
(P2 ) several times, as it oscillates with a gradually decreasing am-
plitude.
Interestingly, the moving pattern of the price can be analo-
gized to an underdamped physical system that displays harmonic
motion. Such a system may be described by an oscillator model
[28] to analyze the mechanism of price dynamics, as shown in
Fig. 2. Note that the coefficients in the annotation will be discussed
in Section 3.2.
This mechanical oscillator model can interpret market behav-
ior using descriptions from physics [29]. A classic damped har-
monic oscillator consists of three components: mass, spring, and
damper. Here the price is analogous to the vertical position of the
mass, and the supply and demand shifters serve as external driving
forces that trigger the oscillation. As the traders (suppliers and cus-
tomers) tend to make transactions that performed well in the past
[30], there is a momentum of price movement that keeps the price
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
Fig. 2. The supply-demand oscillator model.
moving in a certain direction, e.g., an upward moving price tends
to keep moving upward. Whenever there is a market shortage or
surplus, the traders adjust their activities and act to push back the
price to the equilibrium point. This phenomenon can be physically
interpreted as the mechanical force from the spring that is propor-
tional to the deviation of the mass from the equilibrium. Further-
more, assuming both suppliers and customers prefer a stable mar-
ket, the market activities will mechanically prevent the price from
excessively drastic change. This is a feedback for the rate of change
and can be characterized by the damper in mechanical system.
3.2. Modeling principles
To reach a market equilibrium, it is required that the quantity
of supply be equal to the quantity of demand, i.e., QD = QS . Gener-
ally, price is determined by producers (suppliers) and adjusted in
the light of circumstances. To put it simply, when there is excess
demand, price will rise, whereas when there is excess supply, price
will go down. Based on this principle, a simple model for market
dynamics for a general commodity was proposed by Sandoval et al.
[31]:
QD = α0 − α1 P + α2 P˙ − α3 P̈ , (1)
QS = β0 + β1 P − β2 P˙ + β3 P̈ , (2)
P˙ = λ(QD − QS ). (3)
Here the quantities of supply and demand, as well as the price
P are assumed to be continuous functions of time. The terms P˙
and P̈ denote the first and second derivative of P with respect to
time t. All the α -terms, β -terms, and λ are assumed to be posi-
tive constants. To interpret the expressions in this dynamic model,
P˙ can be considered as the “tendency” or “momentum.” A positive
P˙ indicates that the market has perceived an upward tendency of
price. Accordingly, the P̈ terms (−α3 P̈ and +β3 P̈ ) can be analogized
as “inertia,” which resist the impact of “tendency,” as their coef-
ficients have opposite signs from that of the P˙ terms (+α2 P˙ and
−β2 P˙ ).
By assigning the derivative terms to 0 in Eqs. (1) to (3) and
setting QD and QS to be equal, we obtain the equilibrium price as
P ∗ = (α0 − β0 )/(α1 + β1 ). At the equilibrium, the dynamic system
can be assumed to be in a "stable" or “static” position, i.e., QD = D,
QS = S. Thus, we also have:
D = α0 − α1 P, (4)
S = β0 + β1 P. (5)
This can be considered as the implicit static model behind the
dynamic model, which is linear. To illustrate the market behavior
that accompanies this linear model, without loss of generality, con-
sider a case where an increase in demand has occurred, i.e., the
1721
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
demand curve has shifted outward. The repositioning of the static
demand curve and the corresponding dynamic market reaction are
visualized in Fig. 3.
As evident in Fig. 3, by observing the horizontal dashed lines
at different prices, there are gaps between QD and QS as long as
the price is not at the equilibrium. This is exactly this difference
that forces the price to move and converge to the equilibrium, and
the rate of price change (i.e., the derivative of P) is proportional to
QD –QS as explained by Eq. (3).
Rather than considering the actual price, the relative change in
price, may be considered. Suppose the initial price is P0 , and the
price at an arbitrary time is P; the relative change of price is de-
fined by rescaling P as y = (P-P0 )/P0 . Suppose the price at steady
state is denoted as P∗ . Accordingly, the relative change of price can
de denoted as y∗ . The behavior of the market system will be easily
interpreted by monitoring the y, which in turn allows the model
to be adapted to other scenarios, since the relative change of price
does not concern the specific value of price.
Eqs. (1)-(3) can be rewritten in terms of y as a single sec-
ond order differential equation (as shown by Eq. (6)) by inserting
P = P0 y+P0 into Eq. (1):
d2 y 1 − λ(α2 + β2 ) dy α1 + β1 α0 − α1 P0 − (β0 + β1 P0 )
+ + y= .
dt 2 λ(α3 + β3 ) dt α3 + β3 P0 (α3 + β3 )
(6)
The right-hand side of Eq. (6) serves as the system input, that
is, the driving force that elicits system behavior. Let us observe its
numerator closely. α 0 -α 1 P0 is in fact the demand quantity at the
equilibrium and β 0 +β 1 P0 is essentially the supply quantity at the
equilibrium. This can be easily verified by assigning the deriva-
tive terms as 0 in Eq. (1). The shifting behaviors of the supply
or demand curves are equivalent to changes in α 0 , α 1 , β 0 , and
β 1 . Or equivalently, a shift happens when the steady state price
P ∗ = (α0 − β0 )/(α1 + β1 ) has been updated, i.e., the system will
move from an old equilibrium to a new equilibrium.
To completely describe the system dynamics, all the parameters
in Eq. (6) (α -terms, β -terms, and λ) have to be defined, which also
indirectly explains the dynamics of supply and demand as shown
in Eq. (1) and (2). However, the estimation of all these parameters
is challenging and requires numerous assumptions. In addition, it
may be the case that in practice there are correlations between the
parameters. Given this issue, it is desirable to construct a simpli-
fied expression with less parameters that make the dynamic price
model more manageable. As discussed above, the price plot in the
time domain resembles the fluctuation pattern of an oscillator. This
inspires us to directly implement the classic underdamped har-
monic oscillator model (as shown in Fig. 2) to characterize the
price dynamics. In other words, we can use the standard form of
the second-order linear differential equation that mathematically
describes a general underdamped oscillator [32,33] as a shortcut
to reformulate Eq. (6).
To establish this simplified expression for the price dynamics,
some additional terms need to be defined. Let α denote a param-
eter that shifts the demand curve and β denote a parameter that
shifts the supply curve. Note that α and β can be treated as either
single shifters or “compound shifters” that aggregate the impacts
of multiple shifters as listed in the background section. The static
quantities of demand and supply are defined as D = D (P, α ) and
S = S (P, β ), respectively. The definitions of D and S imply that the
demand shifter α will have no impact on the supply curve, and
supply shifter β will have no impact on the demand curve.
The inputs of the oscillator system should quantify the degree
to which the demand and supply curves have shifted at a given
time t. Applying a similar idea as when we defined y, let u1 (t) rep-
resent the real-time relative change of the demand shifter α , and
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
Fig. 3. Static and dynamic model comparison of the simple linear model.
u2 (t) denote the real-time relative change in the supply shifter β .
Since the shifters can be abstract concepts, by rescaling a shifter by
the relative change, we have avoided obscuring the physical inter-
pretation of its magnitude. Based on the input and output defini-
tions above, by adopting the conventional notations for an under-
damped oscillator, the oscillator model can be written in standard
form as:
d2 y dy
+ 2ζ ωn + ωn2 y = K1 ωn2 u1 (t ) + K2 ωn2 u2 (t ).
dt 2 dt
It is assumed that 0<ζ <1, so the discriminant term (2ζ ωn −
4ωn2 = 4ωn2 (ζ 2 − 1 ) is negative, regardless of the model inputs.
Thus, while Eq. (6) describes a wide range of second order dynamic
systems, Eq. (7) is limited to the underdamped systems, where the
amplitude of the oscillation will gradually decay until the system
reaches a steady state. In other words, as a special case for Eq. (6),
Eq. (7) can be a simpler and more befitting model to characterize
the converging price fluctuations to the equilibrium point. By re-
placing the coefficient of each term in Eq. (6) with its correspond-
ing coefficient in Eq. (7), we can reduce the parameters required
to describe the model to four: the damping ratio ζ , the natural
frequency ωn , and the gains K1 & K2 . These parameters can be eas-
ily interpreted using their corresponding physical concepts as illus-
trated in Fig. 2.
Based on Eq. (6) and (7), the relative price change at equilib-
rium is (see Supporting Information):
y∗ = K1 u1 (t ) + K2 u2 (t ).
Therefore, the impacts of the supply shifter and demand shifter
can be analyzed separately. Suppose the supply curve is fixed, i.e.,
u2 (t) = 0. The demand shifter u1 (t) is assumed to be constant at
the steady state. Thus,
y∗ %ChangeofPrice
K1 = = .
u1 (t ) %Changeofα
It turns out that the expression of K1 precisely matches the def-
inition of price elasticity of the demand shifter in economics [34],
as it measures the price’s sensitivity to the demand shifter α .
Similarly, suppose the demand curve is fixed, i.e., u1 (t) = 0, we
then have:
y∗ % Change of Price
K2 = = .
u2 (t ) % Change of β
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
And K2 is exactly the price elasticity of the supply shifter, which
measures the price’s sensitivity to a change in the supply shifter β .
The settings for K1 and K2 will have deterministic impacts on the
extent of fluctuation of the price response, and will be addressed
in detail in the following subsection.
3.3. Applying the concept of elasticity
(7) The elasticity of a variable Y with respect to another variable X
is termed the “X-elasticity of Y” [35], and may be denoted as eY,X .
)2
It measures the fractional response of Y to a fractional change in
X, and can be expressed as:
Y/Y dY X
eY,X = = . (11)
X/X dX Y
Elasticity quantifies the degree of sensitivity of the output Y
in response to the input X, rather than directly providing a static
prediction from an empirical function. Elasticity can be estimated
based on historical data and statistical analysis, which makes a
prediction based on elasticity more reliable than a baseless pos-
tulation. Moreover, as a dimensionless ratio that is independent of
variable units, elasticity greatly simplifies its interpretation.
Since the elasticity terms K1 and K2 may be calculated through
empirical studies, they can be used as a proxy to establish the
static price model, i.e., to help avoid defining the exact expression
of the supply and demand curves as in Eq. (4) and (5). Besides,
(8) elasticity can be used to separately analyze the price sensitivity
to an individual factor. This is crucial for studying the oscillator
model, since it is assumed that all the external “forces” applied to
the underdamped system are independent of one another.
The next step is to numerically determine the values of K1
and K2 . As explained by its expressions, K1 can be interpreted as
the change in price P caused by a given change in the demand
(9)
shifter α . Therefore, using the conventional terminologies from
economics, essentially K1 is the “α elasticity of the price”, denoted
as eP,α . In the same way, K2 can be termed as the “β elasticity of
the price”, which is denoted as eP,β . Intuitively, they characterize
the effect of a small change in one of the exogeneous parameters
α or β on the market equilibrium price [26]. Without loss of gen-
erality, we assume that α and β are independent.
Let us first only consider the impact of a shift in demand while
(10)
the supply curve is fixed. Specifically, we will analyze the price’s
1722
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727

response to a shift in demand by varying α while keeping β con- Again, assuming S = D = Q, it follows that:
stant. By the application of differential calculus and the general ∂S
chain rule, we have the total derivatives of demand D and supply dP β ∂β β
K2 = eP,β = = ∂D
S with respect to α as: dβ P − ∂S P
∂P ∂P
(19)
∂S β ∂S β
dD dD(P, α ) ∂ D dP ∂ D dα ∂ D dP ∂ D ∂β Q ∂β S eS,β
= = + = + , and (12) =  ∂D  = ∂D = .
dα dα ∂ P dα ∂α dα ∂ P dα ∂α ∂S P P
− ∂∂ PS P eD,P − eS,P
∂P − ∂P Q ∂P D S

The denominator of K2 is exactly the negative of that of K1 . On

dS dS(P, β ) ∂ S dP ∂ S dβ ∂ S dP the other hand, its numerator, eS,β , which characterizes the sup-
= = + = . (13)
dα dα ∂ P dα ∂β dα ∂ P dα ply’s sensitivity with respect to the shifter β , can also be adjusted
by the specific shifter β under study.
As is numerically evident from Eqs. (12) and (13), the supply It has been identified that both K1 and K2 can be expressed in
will not be directly influenced by α . Instead, the supply will re- terms of eD,P (<0) and eS,P (>0), and that these two price elastic-
spond to the change in equilibrium price (as the term ∂ S/∂ P in ities are usually obtained by examining the static supply and de-
Eq. (13) implies), and the equilibrium price will be shifted when α mand curves. As discussed in Section 3.2, the dynamic oscillator
changes (as dP/dα in Eq. (12) and (13) implies). Suppose the mar- model implies that both D (P, α ) and S (P, β ) are linear. For linear
ket reaches a new equilibrium after a shift in demand, it means supply and demand curves, the price elasticities of demand and
that dD/dα = dS/dα . Then we obtain: supply (eD,P and eS,P ) are not constant. Instead, they change as the
∂D
price changes [26], which in turn makes it impossible to derive
dP
= ∂ S ∂α ∂ D . (14) fixed values for K1 and K2 .
dα
∂P − ∂P In fact, the linear oscillator model as described by
Eq. (7) should be considered as a linear approximation of the
Recall that our goal is not to analyze the supply-demand pro- “true” price dynamics, and accordingly the associated static model
cess by analyzing derivatives based on specific algebraical con- D (P, α ) and S (P, β ) can be considered as linear approximations of
struction of supply and demand curves. Instead, we intend to use the “true” demand and supply curves. In view of this, one possible
the concept of elasticity as a shortcut. Based on the symbolic ex- solution to define fixed elasticities is to model the “true” static
pression dP/dα , it follows that K1 , the α -elasticity of the price eP,α , supply and demand curves as nonlinear isoelastic functions. Then
can be calculated according to Eq. (11). By denoting the equilib- the elasticities extrapolated from the nonlinear form can be used
rium quantity of supply and demand as Q (Q = S = D), the deriva- as estimations for the fixed eD,P and eS,P , which determine the K1
tion of K1 is as follows: and K2 in the linear oscillator model.
∂D
A general isoelastic function can be expressed in exponential
dP α α form as Y = aXb . Given this functional form, elasticity can be writ-
K1 = eP,α = = ∂ S ∂α ∂ D
dα P − P ten as:
∂P ∂P
∂D α ∂D α
(15)
eD,α dY X X
=  ∂S
∂α Q
 = ∂S ∂α D = . eY,X = = abX b−1 b = b. (20)
∂D P ∂ dX Y aX
S,P − eD,P
P D P e
∂P − ∂P Q ∂P S
− ∂P D
So, in this case the “X-elasticity of Y” is exactly the exponent
We conclude that K1 can be expressed in terms of three differ- parameter, b. A logarithmic transformation of the X-Y relationship
ent elasticities. The two terms in the denominator are frequently results in ln Y = ln a+b ln X, which allows b to be estimated
referred as “price elasticity of supply” and “price elasticity of de- through a linear regression model with ln X as the input variable,
mand,” which can be inferred from historical data. The term eD,α in and lnY as the output variable. With this in mind, we define the
the numerator characterizes the demand’s sensitivity to the shifter “true” demand curve as D = a1 Pb1 , which may be approximated
α . Since there are many factors that can shift the demand curve, as D= α 0 - α 1 P in Eq. (4), with b1 representing the price elasticity
the value of eD,α will depend on the specific α that is investigated. of demand (eD,P ). Similarly, the “true” supply curve is defined as
The impact of β on the equilibrium price can be analyzed in a S = a2 Pb2 , which is approximated as S = β 0 + β 1 P in Eq. (5), with
similar way. For both demand and supply, we obtain the deriva- b2 representing the price elasticity of supply(eS,P ).
tives with respect to β , where α is fixed. Recall that a “shift” in either supply or demand is caused by
the shifter α or β rather than a change in price. To mathemat-
dD dD(P, α ) ∂ D dP ∂ D dα ∂ D dP ically explain this, a1 can be perceived as a function of the de-
= = + = (16)
dβ dβ ∂ P dβ ∂α dβ ∂ P dβ mand shifter α , and a2 can be perceived as a function of the supply
shifter β . Whether the demand and supply curves shift or not, i.e.,
dS dS(P, β ) ∂ S dP ∂ S dβ ∂ S dP ∂ S whether α and β stay constant or not, the elasticities (b1 and b2 )
= = + = + . (17)
dβ dβ ∂ P dβ ∂β dβ ∂ P dβ ∂β will not be influenced. Therefore, elasticity separates the impacts
from price and impacts from shifters on the supply/demand quan-
Similar to the way α indirectly influences the supply, although tity, which makes it particularly suitable to analyzing supply and
the demand curve will not be directly shifted by β , the demand demand curves with exponential forms. To sum up, the shifters (α
quantity at the equilibrium will still change in response to a and β ) influence the curves by altering the scalar parameters (a1
change in β . That is because the equilibrium quantity of demand and a2 ), which are independent from the exponent parameters (b1
is related to equilibrium price (as the term ∂ D/∂ P in Eq. (16) im- and b2 ) that represent the price elasticities.
plies), and P varies as β changes(as the term dP/dβ in Eq. (16) and With nonlinear static models for supply and demand curves de-
(17) indicates). fined, the next step is to estimate the elasticity (b1 and b2 ) through
By setting Eqs. (16)and (17) equal to one another we obtain: regression. Historical data regarding the supply, demand, and
prices of different REE products from 1998 to 2018 in the United
∂S
dP ∂β States were collected from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) an-
= ∂D . (18) nual mineral commodities summaries [36]. There were multiple
dβ ∂S
∂P − ∂P sources of price data for different categories of REE products, and

1723
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
the most representative one needed to be selected. The price data
for mischmetal were available for each year, which makes it a rel-
atively consistent and reliable data source compared to data for
other REEs. It is also noteworthy that mischmetal is mainly com-
posed of Ce, La, and Nd (with perhaps a small amount of Pr) [37],
which are some of the most commonly utilized REEs. Thus, mis-
chmetal is a good proxy for the price behavior of the overall REE
market. Therefore, we selected the price of mischmetal as a price
index to establish a multipurpose price model for most REEs.
After some necessary data preprocessing, model adjustments,
and parameter tuning (see Supporting Information for details), val-
ues of eD,P = -2.4863 and eS,P = 0.4472 were obtained from regres-
sion. So, the shifter-elasticities of supply and demand can be cal-
culated as:
eD,α eD,α
K1 = = = 0.3409eD,α , and (21)
eS,P − eD,P 0.4472 − (−2.4863 )
eS,β eS,β
K2 = = = −0.3409eS,β . (22)
eD,P − eS,P −2.4863 − 0.4472
With every coefficient of the oscillator model now estimated,
the next section will demonstrate how the oscillator model works
to describe the REE price in a dynamic market, and how the dy-
namic features can be applied in a TEA.
4. Results
4.1. Simulating the dynamic price
The oscillator will predict REE prices through a dynamic sim-
ulation, which will be conducted under a synthetic market sce-
nario. Let us first define ζ and ωn ; these two coefficients together
are enough to define the homogeneous dynamics of the system.
Without loss of generality, the damping ratio ζ is assumed to be
0.2. We set the time for a single undamped oscillation period as 6
months, which implies that there are 2 oscillation cycles per year,
so the undamped natural frequency ωn equals to 2π × 2 = 4π .
To fully define K1 and K2 from Eq. (21) and (22), we assume the
value of eD,α to be 7.0 (which quantifies the demand’s sensitivity to
the demand shifter α ), and the value of eS,β to be 5.0 (which quan-
tifies the supply’s sensitivity to the shifter β ). Note that although
these predetermined values were selected arbitrarily, it does not
limit the applicability of the model to just this particular scenario.
All the numerical assumptions are intended to help easily demon-
strate how the dynamic price model operates, and the magnitudes
of eD,α and eS,β can always be adjusted according to a specific sit-
uation.
As discussed above, the complete expression for the oscillator
model can be written as:
d2 y dy
+ 5.03 + 157.91y = 376.83u1 (t ) − 269.16u2 (t ). (23)
dt 2 dt
The model simulates the market contingency or fluctuations by
predefining the system input u1 (t) and u2 (t) as specific functions
(e.g., step, impulse, periodic functions), and these functions charac-
terize the expected tendency or variations of the shifter variables
(i.e., α and β ). If necessary, random noise can also be applied to
input functions to represent market uncertainties.
Assuming that January of 2020 is the starting point (origin on
the time axis), we simulated the REE price for the next 20 years.
To define u1 (t), we plan to use the REE investment amount as the
indicator α , which is assumed to be proportional to the GDP of the
United States (at the official exchange rate). In this setting, the rate
of change in GDP will be the same as the rate of change in REE in-
vestment. The GDP data for the next 20 years were predicted with
machine learning methods based on historical data [38] (this is ex-
plained in detail in the Supporting Information). In summary, u1 (t)
1724
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
is a piecewise function that maintains a constant value throughout
the year (the time unit) and updates its value at the end of each
year. Equivalently, this implies that the static demand curve shifts
to a new position at the beginning of each year.
We then define u2 (t), i.e., the relative change of β that quan-
tifies the future supply behavior. As noted in Section 2, there are
increasing concerns about the reliability of the REE supply chain.
Hence, first u2 (t) was assumed to be a piecewise function that
takes random values from a normal distribution with a mean of
0 and a standard deviation of 0.1. Additionally, since we expect the
US supply to have a downward trend, we only keep the negative
values. A change in u2 (t) indicates a shift of the static supply curve,
which only happens at the beginning of each year.
Similar to the assumptions for model coefficients, it is noted
that the input functions u1 (t) and u2 (t) were defined for demon-
stration. And they can always be customized for other situations.
The simulated dynamic relative/percentage change of REE price y
from year 1 to year 20 along with the values of model inputs u1 (t)
and u2 (t), are illustrated in Fig. 4.
As can be observed from the three plots in Fig.. 4, whenever
the demand and supply shift instantly, the price will not reach a
new steady value straightaway (although it responds immediately).
Instead, the price of REE will be updated every month and grad-
ually converge to a value. The response y of the oscillator mani-
fests the synergistic impact from both demand shifter α and sup-
ply shifter β . It is possible that a new shift would occur before the
price reaches a steady state.
As y represents the estimated dynamically-changing price for
the 20-year duration of the simulation, it is denoted as a dynamic
price index. In the next subsection, a case study will be used to
demonstrate how to incorporate this dynamic price index into the
techno-economic assessment framework.
4.2. Case study: Recovering REE from HDDs
To provide critical resources needed for clean energy technolo-
gies, it has been suggested that REEs may be recovered from used
hard disk drives (HDDs) [39]. It is also to be noted that there is a
currently high availability of used HDDs and the disposal of used
HDDs is carefully managed for data security purposes [40]. These
factors serve to incentivize the development of innovative tech-
nologies for value recovery from HDDs. In this study, we performed
a TEA on a newly developed acid-free leaching process for HDD
value recovery, developed by Ames Laboratory [41]. This leach-
ing technology can be illustrated by the simplified process flow
diagram shown in Fig. 5. The feedstock of this approach is the
End-of-Life (EoL) HDDs that contain Nd-Fe-B magnets. At the first
step, shredded HDD-magnets are dissolved using CuSO4 solution at
room temperature. Followed by filtration, precipitation, and calci-
nation, the process produces rare earth oxide (primarily Nd2 O3 ),
FeSO4 , and copper powder as the main outputs. Based on the ex-
perimental data, around 0.32 metric tons of rare earth oxide (REO)
can be produced per year through processing 125 metric tons of
EoL HDDs.
A TEA was conducted to analyze the economic performance of
the new technology on the basis of a 20-year industrial-scale op-
eration. Based on the mass and energy flow analysis, the cost and
revenue components were identified and modeled. A normal TEA
that does not consider the dynamic features shows that the project
is economically feasible: the net present value (NPV) is $1.2M, and
the internal rate of return (IRR) turns out to be 38%. More informa-
tion including detailed process flow, cost and revenue breakdowns
and comprehensive TEA outputs are available in Supporting Infor-
mation.
The next step is to incorporate the market dynamics of REEs
into the TEA framework. A TEA model with dynamic features is
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al. Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727

Fig. 4. REE price dynamic simulation.

Fig. 5. Process flow diagram for acid-free REE leaching route.

1725
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
Fig. 6. Net cash flow (NCF) comparison between normal and dynamic TEA models.
denoted as “dynamic TEA,” contrary to the normal TEA. As dis-
cussed above, by simulating the dynamic behavior of the oscilla-
tor price model, we have obtained the dynamic price index y that
indicates the relative change of the REE prices. For the dynamic
TEA model, all products are assumed to be sold every month with
equal amount (note that the selling frequency and amount distri-
bution can be adjusted). The prices for REO products will be up-
dated every month based on the value of y as illustrated in Fig. 4.
The monthly revenue gained from selling the REO products can be
considered as “dynamic revenue” that will be constantly changing
over the plant life.
To summarize how the oscillation model contributes to the
analysis, a comparison for the net cash flow (NCF) of the normal
and dynamic TEA outputs are given in Fig. 6.
Since the major revenue source for this case study is actually
the data destruction fee charged for e-waste management, and due
to the limited amount of REO that can be extracted from the HDDs,
the impact of dynamic revenues from selling REE-products is not
particularly dominant. However, if we examine the data closely, we
do observe more promising economic performance with the dy-
namic price index added to the analysis. The NPV of the dynamic
TEA output is about 31% higher than that of the normal (static)
TEA, and the internal rate of return (IRR) increases from 38% to
57%. All these results indicate that incorporating dynamic behav-
ior of the product price will influence the evaluation of economic
performance.
This case study serves as an example to showcase how to im-
plement dynamic elements into a TEA, and its consequential influ-
ence on the evaluation results. Economic performance metrics that
account for market dynamics will provide more trustworthy results
for the development of processes used to recover critical materials
that are subject to high price volatility. As discussed above, the as-
sumptions for the supply-demand shifters can always be adjusted
to meet a specific scenario, and the dynamic price index y will vary
from case to case.
5. Conclusion
Motivated by the desire to move toward environmental sustain-
ability, there is increased demand for REEs that are needed for
clean energy technologies. This study applied a mechanical oscil-
lator model to physically interpret and model the price dynamics
of an REE market. The concept of elasticity was used as a proxy
to quantify the sensitivity of price to demand and supply shifters,
then a price prediction model based on dynamic supply-demand
was proposed. The price dynamics under a specific setting were
simulated and then incorporated into a TEA case study.
Unlike mainstream price estimation methods primarily based
on statistics, this study explores the price dynamics by analyzing
1726
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
its underlying factors: supply and demand. The proposed oscilla-
tor model simulated how exactly the market equilibrium moves
over time in response to shifts in the supply and demand. The
study also highlights the benefits of using a mechanical system as
an inspiration to model economic features and extends the utility
of price elasticities of supply and demand. The freedom of choice
for input functions endows tremendous flexibility upon the oscil-
lator model. As the input functions can be customized for various
market scenarios, the model allows us to simulate certain extreme
events that are hard to manifest from the results of conventional
time-series analysis. This study will also provide policymakers with
decision-making guidelines since governmental interventions (e.g.,
legislation, taxes, subsidies, investments, and trade policies) can be
characterized as demand and supply shifters. By applying the os-
cillator model, the impact of new policies on the market price can
be simulated and evaluated first to prevent strategic failure.
One limitation of the price dynamic model might be the issue
of overgeneralization. The model assumes the same demand and
supply tendencies (as described by u1 (t) and u2 (t)) for all REEs. In
regard to supply, this is acceptable, since REEs are often co-mined,
and the supply of individual REEs tends to be highly correlated.
However, the demand varies according to the REE type, and de-
pends on the market for products derived from individual REEs.
It is beyond the scope of this study to examine the price dynam-
ics for every specific REE due to the limited data availability. To
overcome this drawback, more rigorous empirical models for price
elasticities is recommended for future study.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the Critical Materials Institute
(CMI), an Energy Innovation Hub funded by the U.S. Department
of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Ad-
vanced Manufacturing Office. CMI is led by Ames Laboratory, oper-
ated for the U.S. Department of Energy by Iowa State University of
Science and Technology under Contract No. DE-AC02-07CH11358.
To Professor Thomas L. Morin, your legacy of 45 years of service
to Purdue IE will be remembered forever.
Supplementary materials
Supplementary material associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.spc.2021.04.013.
S. Deng, D. Prodius, I.C. Nlebedim et al.
References
N.Connelly, T.Damhus, R.Hartshorn, and A.Hutton, “Nomenclature of Inor-
ganic Chemistry – IUPAC Recommendations 2005,”Chemistry International
– Newsmagazine for IUPAC, vol. 27, no. 6. RSCPublishing, pp. 25–26, doi:
10.1515/ci.2005.27.6.25.
Nassar, N.T., Du, X., Graedel, T.E., 2015. Criticality of the Rare Earth Elements. J. Ind.
Ecol. 19 (6), 1044–1054. doi:10.1111/jiec.12237.
N.Mathur, S.Deng, S.Singh, Y.Yih, and J. W.Sutherland, “Evaluating the environmental
benefits of implementing Industrial Symbiosis to used electric vehicle batteries,”
2019, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2019.01.074.
G. J. O. Gordon B.Haxel, James B.Hedrick, “Rare Earth Elements—Critical Resources
for High Technology,” 2002. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2002/fs087-02/.
MIT, 2016. Rare Earth Elements-A Comprehensive Background. Strategic Mineral
Management https://web.mit.edu/12.0 0 0/www/m2016/finalwebsite/elements/
ree.html.
Hatch, G.P., 2012. Dynamics in the Global Market for Rare Earths. Elements 8 (5),
341–346. doi:10.2113/gselements.8.5.341, Oct.
Alonso, E., Sherman, A.M., Wallington, T.J., Everson, M.P., Field, F.R., Roth, R., Kir-
chain, R.E., 2012. Evaluating rare earth element availability: A case with revo-
lutionary demand from clean technologies. Environmental Science and Technol-
ogy 46 (6), 3406–3414. doi:10.1021/es203518d.
Tukker, A., 2014. Rare earth elements supply restrictions: Market failures, not
scarcity, hamper their current use in high-tech applications. Environmental Sci-
ence and Technology doi:10.1021/es503548f.
Vaccarezza, V., Anderson, C., 2020. An Overview of Beneficiation and Hydrometal-
lurgical Techniques on Eudialyte Group Minerals. Mining, Metallurgy and Explo-
ration doi:10.1007/s42461- 019- 00132- 5.
K. L.Lyon, V. P.Utgikar, and M. R.Greenhalgh, “Dynamic Modeling for the Separation
of Rare Earth Elements Using Solvent Extraction: Predicting Separation Perfor-
mance Using Laboratory Equilibrium Data,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., vol. 56, no. 4,
pp. 1048–1056, doi: 10.1021/acs.iecr.6b04009.
Sridharan, N., Cakmak, E., List, F.A., Ucar, H., Constantinides, S., Babu, S.S., Mc-
Call, S.K., Paranthaman, M.P., 2018. Rationalization of solidification mechanism
of Nd–Fe–B magnets during laser directed-energy deposition. J. Mater. Sci.
doi:10.1007/s10853- 018- 2178- 7.
Kassen, A.G., White, E.M.H., Tang, W., Hu, L., Palasyuk, A., Zhou, L., Anderson, I.E.,
2017. Compression Molding and Novel Sintering Treatments for Alnico Type-8
Permanent Magnets in Near-Final Shape with Preferred Orientation. JOM doi:10.
1007/s11837- 017- 2453- 0.
L.Cong, H.Jin, P.Fitsos, T.McLntyre, Y.Yih, F.Zhao, and J. W.Sutherland, “Modeling the
value recovery of rare earth permanent magnets at End-of-Life,” 2015, doi:
10.1016/j.procir.2015.02.015.
Brewer, A., Dohnalkova, A., Shutthanandan, V., Kovarik, L., Chang, E., Sawvel, A.M.,
Mason, H.E., Reed, D., Ye, C., Hynes, W.F., Lammers, L.N., Park, D.M., Jiao, Y.,
2019. Microbe Encapsulation for Selective Rare-Earth Recovery from Electronic
Waste Leachates. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53 (23), 13888–13897. doi:10.1021/acs.
est.9b04608, Dec.
A. A.Taleizadeh, V. R.Soleymanfar, and K.Govindan, “Sustainable economic produc-
tion quantity models for inventory systems with shortage,” J. Clean. Prod., vol.
174, pp. 1011–1020, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.222.
Deng, S., Zhou, X., Huang, A., Yih, Y., Sutherland, J.W., 2020. Evaluating economic
opportunities for product recycling via the Sherwood principle and machine
learning. Resour. Conserv.Recycl., 105232 doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105232,
no. October.
National Energy Technology Laboratory, “2019 Project Portfolio Disclaimer,” 2019.
https://www.netl.doe.gov/sites/default/files/2019-04/2019- REE- Project- Portfolio.
pdf (accessed Jun. 20, 2020).
1727
Sustainable Production and Consumption 27 (2021) 1718–1727
Lauer, M., 2008. Methodology guideline on techno economic assessment (TEA). In-
tell. Energy Eur..
M.Van Dael, S.Kreps, A.Virag, K.Kessels, K.Remans, D.Thomas, and F.De
Wilde, “Techno-economic assessment of a microbial power-to-gas plant
– Case study in Belgium,” Appl. Energy, vol. 215, pp. 416–425, doi:
10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.01.092.
M.Alipanah, D. M.Park, A.Middleton, Z.Dong, H.Hsu-Kim, Y.Jiao, and H.Jin, “Techno-
Economic and Life Cycle Assessments for Sustainable Rare Earth Recovery from
Coal Byproducts using Biosorption,” ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng., vol. 8, no. 49, pp.
17914–17922, doi: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.0c04415.
S.Deng, J.Perez-Cardona, A.Huang, Y.Yih, V. S.Thompson, D. W.Reed, H.Jin, and J.
W.Sutherland, “Applying design of experiments to evaluate economic feasibil-
ity of rare-earth element recovery,” 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2020.02.005.
Jin, H., Park, D.M., Gupta, M., Brewer, A.W., Ho, L., Singer, S.L., Bourcier, W.L.,
Woods, S., Reed, D.W., Lammers, L.N., Sutherland, J.W., Jiao, Y., 2017. Techno-
economic Assessment for Integrating Biosorption into Rare Earth Recovery Pro-
cess. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.7b02147.
E. S.Gardner, “Exponential smoothing: The state of the art—Part II,” Int. J. Forecast.,
vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 637–666, doi: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.20 06.03.0 05.
Laptev, N., Yosinski, J., Li, L.Erran, Smyl, S., Li, E.L., Smyl, S., 2017. Time-series Ex-
treme Event Forecasting with Neural Networks at Uber,” Int. Conf. Mach. Learn.
- Time Ser. Work..
Marshall, A., 2013. Principles of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan UK, London.
Nicholson, W., Snyder, C., 2011. Microeconomic Theory: Basic Principles and Exten-
sions 11th edition.
Bryant, W.D.A., 2021. Advanced Microeconomics. WORLD SCIENTIFIC.
Kluever, C.A., 2015. Dynamic Systems: Modeling, Simulation, and Control. Wiley.
Stádník, B., 2014. Spring Oscillations within Financial Markets. Procedia - Soc. Behav.
Sci. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.12.964.
Y.Khoroshilov, “Momentum trading strategy and investment horizon: an experimen-
tal study,” J. Econ. Stud., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 4–12, doi: 10.1108/01443581211192071.
Sandoval, L., Franca, I.D.P., 2011. Shocks in financial markets, price expectation,
and damped harmonic oscillators. Cornell University Library arXiv.orgarXiv.org,
Ithaca[Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.1992 .
Riley, K.F., Hobson, M.P., Bence, S.J., 2002. Mathematical Methods for Physics and
Engineering.
“Second-Order Linear Ordinary Differential Equations.” http://sites.science.
oregonstate.edu/math/home/programs/undergrad/CalculusQuestStudyGuides/
ode/second/so_lin/so_lin.html (accessed Aug. 06, 2020).
A.Hayes, “Elasticity,” 2020. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/elasticity.asp.
Becker, G.S., Michael, G., Michael, R.T., 2017. Economic Theory. Routledge.
“Rare Earths Statistics and Information,” National Minerals Information Center. https:
//www.usgs.gov/centers/nmic/rare- earths- statistics- and- information.
Jurczyk, M., Rajewski, W., Majchrzycki, W., Wójcik, G., 1999. Mechanically alloyed
MmNi 5-type materials for metal hydride electrodes. J. Alloys Compd. 290 (1),
262–266. doi:10.1016/S0925- 8388(99)00202- 9.
IndexMundi, “United States GDP (official exchange rate).” https://www.indexmundi.
com/united_states/gdp_(official_exchange_rate).html.
Nlebedim, I.C., King, A.H., 2018. Addressing Criticality in Rare Earth Elements via
Permanent Magnets Recycling. JOM doi:10.1007/s11837- 017- 2698- 7.
H.Jin, K.Frost, I.Sousa, H.Ghaderi, A.Bevan, M.Zakotnik, and C.Handwerker, “Life cycle
assessment of emerging technologies on value recovery from hard disk drives,”
Resour. Conserv.Recycl., vol. 157, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.104781.
Prodius, D., Gandha, K., Mudring, A.V., Nlebedim, I.C., 2020. Sustainable Urban Min-
ing of Critical Elements from Magnet and ElectronicWastes. ACS Sustain. Chem.
Eng. doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b05741.