The European Minerals Yearbook was presented in a Stakeholder Workshop in Brussels 3 December 2014 by the Work Package 4 Team, lead by the British Geological Survey (BGS). More information about the Minerals4EU Project is available at www.minerals4eu.eu

1. Minerals4EU – WP4 Workshop
Delivering the European Minerals Yearbook
Wednesday 3 December 2014

2. Outline of the day - morning
09.30 – 10.00 Introduction to Minerals4EU project & Work Package 4
10.00 – 10.20 Data collection methods, initial results and data gaps
10.20 – 10.50 Round table discussion on ideas to fill data gaps
10.50 – 11.00 Feedback to the whole group
11.00 – 11.30 Break – tea & coffee
11.30 – 11.50 Issues and challenges (other than data gaps)
11.50 – 12.20 Round table discussion on issues and challenges
12.20 – 12.30 Feedback to the whole group
12.30 – 13.00 Lunch

3. Outline of the day - afternoon
13.30 – 13.50 Preliminary ideas for the European Minerals Yearbook
13.50 – 14.40 Round table discussion on European Minerals Yearbook
(structure, layout, functionality)
14.40 – 14.50 Feed back to the main group
14.50 – 15.00 Wrap up of Work Package 4 session
15.00 – 15.30 Break – tea & coffee
15.30 – 16.30 Work Package 2 session including stakeholder
consultation on the scope of the network and its
membership
16.30 END

4. Introduction to Minerals4EU
 Mineral Intelligence Network for Europe
 7th Framework Programme for Research and
Technological Development
“The Minerals4EU project is designed to meet the
recommendations of the Raw materials Initiative and will
develop an EU Minerals Intelligence Network structure
delivering a web portal, a European Minerals Yearbook
and foresight studies.”
(First sentence of the Description of Work)

5. Introduction to Minerals4EU
 Duration: 2 years
 Start date 1st September 2013
 A consortium of 31 partners:
 25 National Geological Surveys
 EuroGeoSurveys, Joint Research Centre, Fraunhofer,
Wuppertal, Raw Materials Group, Selor
 6 work packages, 34 deliverables, 9 milestones

6. Minerals4EU – Key points
 The establishment of a sustainable network structure with
a permanent body (WP2)
 so that the work does not end when the project finishes
 Three main products:
 A European Minerals Yearbook (WP4)
 A Knowledge Data Platform (WP5)
 Foresight Studies (WP6)
 For more information, please visit the website:
http://www.minerals4eu.eu/

7. WP1 – Project Management & Scientific Co-ordination (GTK)
WP3 – Knowledge Management (RBINS)

8. Summary WP4, 5 and 6
Work Package 4 Work Package 5 Work Package 6
Mineral Statistics Knowledge Data Foresight Studies
Platform
Gathering Architecture to To use the data
statistical data collect spatial data to study a range of
at national scale on deposit scale topics related to
and presenting and development security of supply
them in a digital of a portal and sustainability
Yearbook issues

9. Introduction to Work Package 4
 Aim: to develop the structure and datasets for a
European Minerals Yearbook
 Scope: non-energy, non-agricultural raw materials,
primary and secondary
 Tasks:
 Task 4.1 – the preparation phase
 Task 4.2 – the data gathering survey
 Task 4.3 – assessment of data availability and quality
 Task 4.4 – developing the Yearbook

10. Work Package 4 Partners
 The National Geological Surveys of:
Austria Norway
Croatia Portugal
Czech Republic Slovakia
Denmark Spain
Finland Sweden
Greece Switzerland
and United Kingdom
 Wuppertal Institute

11. Work Package 4 Deliverables
 5 Deliverables:
 Report on the data gathering methodology and network
(an internal report delivered in February 2014)
 Stakeholder workshop to assist with the data gathering and
collation process (today!)
 Report on the availability of mineral statistics (scheduled for
March 2015)
 Draft European Minerals Yearbook (scheduled for April 2015)
 Final European Minerals Yearbook (scheduled for August
2015)

12. WP4 – Six data types
 Primary minerals
1. Production
2. Trade – imports and exports
3. Resources and reserves
4. Exploration
 Secondary raw materials
5. Waste flows
6. Case studies highlighting the potential recovery of specific
commodities from key waste streams

13. Methods, initial results & data gaps
Primary minerals

14. WP4 data collection methods 1
Primary minerals – production data
BGS has been collecting, analysing and
publishing these data for >100 years
Existing BGS procedures have been used
Includes written data requests to primary
data providers in each country
Standardisation and data gap filling using
BGS staff knowledge and experience
Extensive quality control procedures

15. WP4 data collection methods 2
Primary minerals – trade data
Again BGS has been collecting, analysing
and publishing these for many years
Existing BGS procedures have been used
Import and export data are purchased in
bulk from an agency
Assessed against UN, Eurostat or national
Statistical Offices’ published figures
Extensive quality control procedures

16. WP4 data collection methods 3&4
Primary minerals – resources and reserves, exploration
Two completely new datasets
Questionnaires developed and tested
40 European countries divided amongst the WP4 partners
Each partner contacted organisations within each country
using the questionnaires and an accompanying letter from
the EC
Central collation by BGS

17. WP4 Partner
Geological Survey Allocated countries
United Kingdom Ireland, Cyprus *
Portugal Albania, Kosovo, Serbia, Montenegro
Czech Republic Germany, Slovenia, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands
Greece TFYR of Macedonia, Bulgaria, Romania
Spain France, Belgium
Norway Iceland, Ukraine
Slovakia Poland, Hungary
Finland Estonia
Austria Turkey
Denmark Greenland
Sweden Latvia, Lithuania
Croatia Bosnia & Herzegovina
Switzerland Italy
* In addition to their work collecting production and trade data for all countries
and undertaking the central collation of exploration and resources/reserves data

18. Initial results 1- production data
Country Percent complete Country Percent complete
Albania 100% Latvia 90%
Austria 88% Lithuania 100%
Belgium 100% Luxembourg 100%
Bosnia & Herzegovina 100% Macedonia (TFYR of) 100%
Bulgaria 100% Malta 100%
Croatia 100% Montenegro 100%
Cyprus 100% Netherlands 100%
Czech Republic 95% Norway 100%
Denmark 60% Poland 100%
Estonia 100% Portugal 96%
Finland 100% Romania 97%
France 100% Serbia 100%
Germany 98% Slovakia 90%
Greece 100% Slovenia 100%
Greenland 100% Spain 100%
Hungary 100% Sweden 100%
Iceland 100% Switzerland 100%
Ireland 100% Turkey 25%
Italy 48% Ukraine 100%
Kosovo 100% United Kingdom 90%
Data
complete
(or nearly so)
Ongoing work
to complete
the data

19. Initial results 1- production data
 Yearbook will include 10-years’ production data by
country and by commodity
 2013 data collected by BGS to ensure consistency with
previous years
Example shown below: Cyprus
Commodity Units 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Bentonite Tonnes 155,717 155,717 150,620 154,655 155,125 152,722 162,969 160,625 160,180 158,386
Cement (finished) Tonnes 1,688,917 1,688,917 1,786,488 1,872,531 1,913,620 1,480,843 1,328,763 1,206,786 1,080,019 854,778
Copper (mined)
Tonnes (metal
content)
0 0 900 3,012 2,986 2,380 2,595 3,660 4,328 3,631
Copper (refined) Tonnes 1,344 1,344 880 3,012 2,986 2,380 2,595 3,660 4,328 3,631
Gypsum Tonnes 255,000 255,000 270,000 330,000 412,000 317,000 333,000 335,000 327,800 315,000
Primary aggregates
Tonnes 11,600,000 11,600,000 12,198,513 13,129,470 14,174,480 11,467,987 12,981,444 11,816,397 7,308,056 4,561,152
(crushed rock)

20. Initial results 2 – trade data
Country Current status Country Current status
Albania Latvia
Austria Lithuania
Belgium Luxembourg
Bosnia & Herzegovina Macedonia (TFYR of)
Bulgaria Malta
Croatia Montenegro
Cyprus Netherlands
Czech Republic Norway
Denmark Poland
Estonia Portugal
Finland Romania
France Serbia
Germany Slovakia
Greece Slovenia
Greenland Spain
Hungary Sweden
Iceland Switzerland
Ireland Turkey
Italy Ukraine
Kosovo UK
Data almost
complete
Partial data
Work in
progress

21. Initial results 2 – trade data
 Yearbook will include 10-years’ import and export data
by country and by commodity
 2013 data collected by BGS to ensure consistency with
previous years
Example shown below: Cyprus
Commodity Units 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Aluminium (unwrought and alloys) Tonnes 10,858 9,898 12,481 13,868 13,413 8,761 9,225 7,104 6,458 4,768
Bentonite Tonnes 18,052 3,057 9,063 10,556 12,496 5,709 4,629 142 280 6,246
Cement clinkers Tonnes 28,622 43,375 17,819 17,498 66,787 15,455 29,579 69,780 6,498 10,100
Cement (Portland) Tonnes 2,092 2,339 1,241 1,017 29,311 249 2,512 545 416 466
Coal (including anthracite) Tonnes 108 3 23,473 56,896 46,258 28,911 7,714 129 164 386
Gypsum (crude and calcined) Tonnes 74 3,501 9,849 12,932 15,045 10,807 9,292 6,461 5,165 3,061
Salt Tonnes 8,650 13,795 13,647 12,208 13,445 16,822 23,836 20,998 20,470 16,683

22. Initial results 3 – resources/reserves
Country Current status Country Current status
Albania Latvia
Austria Lithuania
Belgium Luxembourg
Bosnia & Herzegovina Macedonia (TFYR of)
Bulgaria Malta
Croatia Montenegro
Cyprus Netherlands
Czech Republic Norway
Denmark Poland
Estonia Portugal
Finland Romania
France Serbia
Germany Slovakia
Greece Slovenia
Greenland Spain
Hungary Sweden
Iceland Switzerland
Ireland Turkey
Italy Ukraine
Kosovo United Kingdom
Questionnaire
returned
Questionnaire
promised but
not yet
received
Questionnaire
not returned
or no response

23. Examples extracts from completed questionnaires – Resources
SECTION 2 MINERAL RESOURCE DATA Code+resource
type Weighted
average
grade
Code+resource
type Weighted
average
grade
Code+resource
type Weighted
average
Commodity UNITS Reporting Code Quantity Quantity Quantity grade
Copper (Cu) Million
tonnes NI43-101
(NI 43-101)
Measured 1.68%
(NI 43-101)
Indicated 1.18%
(NI 43-101)
Inferred 1.34%
33.946 112.18 54.973
Zinc (Zn) Million
tonnes NI43-101
(NI 43-101)
Measured 5.51%
(NI 43-101)
Indicated 3.70%
(NI 43-101)
Inferred 2.72%
33.946 112.18 47.197
Lead (Pb) Million
tonnes NI43-101
(NI 43-101)
Measured 1.40%
(NI 43-101)
Indicated 0.90%
(NI 43-101)
Inferred 0.64%
33.946 112.18 47.197
SECTION 2 MINERAL RESOURCE DATA Code+resource
type Weighted
average
grade
Code+resource
type Weighted
average
grade
Code+resource
type Weighted
average
Commodity UNITS Reporting Code Quantity Quantity Quantity grade
Graphite Thousand
tonnes
National
reporting code
Potentially
economic
P1
P2
10 447 3 997 5 279
Gypsum Thousand
tonnes
National
reporting code
Potentially
economic
P1
P2
82 137 ZERO ZERO
Industrial sands –
glass sand
Thousand
tonnes
National
reporting code
Potentially
economic
P1
P2
145 040 ZERO 14 927
e.g. Portugal
e.g. Czech Republic

24. Example extracts from completed questionnaires – Reserves
SECTION 3 RESERVE DATA Code+reserve type Code+reserve type
tonnes JORC (JORC) Proved 0.80% (JORC) Probable 1.40% Yes
tonnes NI43-101 (NI 43-101) Proven 0.27% (NI 43-101) Probable 0.41% Yes
tonnes NI43-101 (NI 43-101) Proven 1.00% (NI 43-101) Probable 0.17% No
SECTION 3 RESERVE DATA Code+reserve type Code+reserve type
Is this quantity
included within the
resources stated
above?
Commodity UNITS Reporting Code Quantity
Weighted
average
grade
Quantity
Weighted
average
grade
Graphite Thousand
tonnes
National
reporting code
Economic explored
Economic prospected
No
1 106 2 606
Gypsum Thousand
tonnes
National
reporting code
Economic explored
Economic prospected
No
119 100 302 990
Industrial sands –
glass sand
Thousand
tonnes
National
reporting code
Economic explored
Economic prospected
No
84 755 25 077
Is this quantity
included within the
resources stated
above?
Commodity UNITS Reporting Code Quantity
Weighted
average
grade
Quantity
Weighted
average
grade
Copper (Cu) Million
1.5 5.3
Copper (Cu) Million
189 77
Copper (Cu) Million
7.5 1.5
e.g. Finland
e.g. Czech Republic

25. Initial results 3 – resources/reserves
 Questionnaires also included metadata questions, e.g.
 Is there a central body responsible for collating these data?
 Who is responsible for collecting and collating the data?
 Is the data provision a statutory requirement?
 How often are the data collected?
 Are all commodities treated the same?
 What are the sources for the data?
 Do the figures include marine or offshore deposits?
 The majority of returned questionnaires have also
answered these questions

26. Initial results 4 – exploration
Country Current status Country Current status
Albania Latvia
Austria Lithuania
Belgium Luxembourg
Bosnia & Herzegovina Macedonia (TFYR of)
Bulgaria Malta
Croatia Montenegro
Cyprus Netherlands
Czech Republic Norway
Denmark Poland
Estonia Portugal
Finland Romania
France Serbia
Germany Slovakia
Greece Slovenia
Greenland Spain
Hungary Sweden
Iceland Switzerland
Ireland Turkey
Italy Ukraine
Kosovo United Kingdom
Questionnaire
returned
Questionnaire
promised but
not yet
received
Questionnaire
not returned
or no response

27. Example extracts from completed questionnaires – Exploration
Commodity Group Commodity Expenditure
€
Total
number of
exploration
licence(s)
active
during 2013
Total
number of
exploration
licence(s)
issued
during 2013
Total size of
area (km2)
under
exploration
licence(s) at
the end of
2013
Total
number of
companies
exploring for
this
commodity
Non Ferrous Base Metals e.g. Cu, Pb, Zn, Sn Sn-W ores N/A 5 - *14,52 4
Industrial Minerals e.g. Potash, Fluorspar, Gypsum, Kaolin Kaolin N/A 4 - 6.15 2
Industrial Minerals e.g. Potash, Fluorspar, Gypsum, Kaolin Bentonite N/A 6 2 3.80 2
Industrial Minerals e.g. Potash, Fluorspar, Gypsum, Kaolin Feldspar N/A 2 2 4.80 4
Industrial Minerals e.g. Potash, Fluorspar, Gypsum, Kaolin Silica minerals N/A 1 - 0.17 1
Industrial Minerals e.g. Potash, Fluorspar, Gypsum, Kaolin Graphite N/A 2 2 2.51 1
But, where no exploration was undertaken in 2013 …
Activity summary
no known exploration activity
… this is still a valid return.
e.g. Czech Republic
e.g. Luxembourg

28. Initial results 4 – exploration
 Questionnaires also included metadata questions, e.g.
 Is the exploration licensing system the same for all
commodities?
 How are exploration licenses granted in your country?
 Who grants the exploration license?
 Are companies required to meet certain criteria?
 Which organisation monitors exploration activity?
 Is there a required minimum spend under the terms of the
exploration license?
 Is there a requirement to report on exploration activities?

29. Data gaps 1&2 – production/trade
 There will be very few
 How do we fill them?
 As much data from primary data providers as possible
 Seek out alternative contacts (primary data providers)
 Data from secondary sources
 Other organisations who do similar work (e.g. USGS)
 BGS staff estimates, based on trends and non-statistical
information (e.g. a mine closed during the year)
 Only as a last resort are figures left as “not available”

30. Data gaps 3&4 – resources/reserves
and exploration
 Unsurprisingly there are more of them!
 Key reasons
 No response to the request for data
 Data are confidential
 No requirement to report data to a central organisation
 Questions
 Are there other reasons?
 How should we attempt to fill the gaps?

31. Methods, initial results & data gaps
Secondary raw
materials

32. WP4 data collection methods 5
Secondary raw materials – waste flows
Data availability was known to be an issue
Decision taken to collect statistical data on waste flows
from particular segments of European Waste Classification
scheme representing mineral waste
Data for most countries extracted from Eurostat, examined
in detail by BGS staff
Attempts to fill data gaps for countries not on Eurostat via
national Statistics Offices and other sources

33. WP4 data collection methods 6
Commodity
Example:
Iron/steel
Sectors
Example:
construction;
automotive;
transportation
2/3 of
Step 2 Step 3 Steps 4 &5
Recycling
rate
Estimate
recycling rate
in key
applications
demand
in
Stocks,
lifespan,
flows Estimate
resource
potential
and
substitution
potential for
end-of life
products
Step 1
Estimate
metal
content,
lifespan and
flows for key
applications
Resource
potential
-commodities considered: dysprosium, yttrium, indium, platinum, palladium, silver,
gold, aluminium, copper, steel/iron
-37 products and applications

34. Initial results 5 – waste flows
Country Current status Country Current status
Albania Latvia
Austria Lithuania
Belgium Luxembourg
Bosnia & Herzegovina 2012 statistics only Macedonia (TFYR of)
Bulgaria Malta
Croatia Montenegro 2012 statistics only
Cyprus Netherlands
Czech Republic Norway
Denmark Poland
Estonia Portugal
Finland Romania
France Serbia
Germany Slovakia
Greece Slovenia
Greenland Spain
Hungary Sweden
Iceland Switzerland
Ireland Turkey
Italy Ukraine
Kosovo 2012 statistics only UK
Data available
from Eurostat
Data available
from other
sources
Work in
progress

35. Mineral-based waste categories (EWC-Stat classification)
C & D waste concrete, bricks, ceramic tiles, track ballast, road surfacing waste
Metallic waste
ferrous
mill scales, discarded moulds, filings and turnings, ferrous metal, iron and steel
Metallic waste
non-ferrous
Metallic waste
mixed
Other mineral
waste
Combustion
waste
aluminium, copper, brass, bronze, zinc, tin, lead and other non-ferrous
waste
metallic packaging, mixed metallic wastes
waste with asbestos, waste of naturally occurring minerals,
artificial mineral waste, waste refractory materials
flue gas purification waste, slags and ashes

36. Mineral-based waste categories (EWC-Stat classification)
Dredging spoil dredging spoil (hazardous and non-hazardous)
Discarded
equipment
Batteries and
accumulators
Glass waste
end-of life vehicles
alkaline batteries, lead batteries, Ni-Cd batteries, mercury
containing batteries, other batteries and accumulators
glass packaging waste, other glass waste
Mineral waste
from waste
treatment and
stabilised waste
waste treatment waste (i.e. ashes), solidified or stabilised waste,
vitrified waste
Discarded
vehicles
discarded electrical and electronic equipment, other discarded machines
and equipment components

37. Mineral-based waste flows
Recovery operations Imports Disposal operations
Waste
generation
Waste management
Recovery – backfilling
Recovery – except
backfilling
Incineration- energy
recovery
Incineration-disposal
Land treatment
and release into
water bodies
Deposit into/onto
land (e.g. landfill)
Exports
Residual

38. Initial results 5 – waste flows
Example shown below: Austria (2010 data shown)
Total NACE_R2
EWC-STAT
code
Waste generated
(tonnes)
Waste imported
(tonnes)
Waste exported
(tonnes)
Waste treated
(tonnes)
Metal wastes,
ferrous 06.1 1,197,721 2,760 7,782 1,427,171
Metal wastes, non-ferrous
06.2 222,013 860 29,811 256,510
Metal wastes, mixed 06.3 0 0 0 0
Mineral waste from
construction and
demolition 12.1 5,478,631 3,337 41,090 5,908,180
Other mineral
12.2+12.3
wastes
+12.5 321,305 1,509 885 210,720
Combustion wastes 12.4 677,382 11,778 104,471 673,650
Dredging spoils 12.7 0 0 0 0

39. Example: Austria waste flows (2010 data)
Waste
generation Waste management- treatment
Imports
10,203,630t 9,583,543t
Exports
Deposit onto or
into land (landfill)
Incineration/ energy
recovery
Recovery except backfilling (other
than energy recovery)
Incineration/disposal
1,353,571t
223,034t
8,161,468t
2,788t
4,329t
Residual/
secondary waste
1,544,379t
Residual waste
Deposit onto or into land
101,175t

40. Initial results 6 – case studies
Product / Application
Commodity
Indium Yttrium
Desktop PCs
Laptops (LED)
Laptops (CCFL)
LCD TV (LED)
LCD TV (CCFL)
LCD Monitor (LED)
LCD Monitor (CCFL)
CRT TV
CRT Monitor
Smartphones
Large LCD Video Screens (CCFL)
Large LCD Video Screens (LED)
Large LED Video Screens
LED Lamps
Fluorescent Lamps
Example 1: Quantification of
aluminium and copper in automotive
Specific material
content or range
Imprecise or
incomplete
data
No data
Example 2: Quantification of indium and
yttrium in EEE products
39 mg (per
product)
258.4 mg (per
product)
32.15 mg per
product
Product / Application
Commodity
Aluminium Copper
Electric Vehicles
Hybrid Electrical Verhicles
Non-electric vehicles
Trucks
Busses
Trains / subway
100 - 145 kg (per
vehicle)
22.7 - 25.0 kg
(per vehicle)

41. Data gaps 5&6 – Secondary RMs
 Gaps in statistical data used to calculate stocks of products/
applications (Prodcom codes, Trade statistics).
 A few gaps on data for countries that do not show on
Eurostat, especially for past years (<2010).
 Key reasons
 Data resolution is poor or data are unavailable
 No requirement to report them to Eurostat
 Data withheld for confidentiality reasons
 Questions: How could we fill these gaps now and in the
future?

42. A reminder of timings
09.30 – 10.00 Introduction to Minerals4EU project & Work Package 4
10.00 – 10.20 Data collection methods, initial results and data gaps
10.20 – 10.50 Round table discussion on ideas to fill data gaps
10.50 – 11.00 Feedback to the whole group
11.00 – 11.30 Break – tea & coffee
11.30 – 11.50 Issues and challenges (other than data gaps)
11.50 – 12.20 Round table discussion on issues and challenges
12.20 – 12.30 Feedback to the whole group
12.30 – 13.00 Lunch

43. Questions for first table discussion
 Are there reasons for data gaps that we have not
already identified?
 Should we attempt to fill data gaps or merely display
them as “not available”?
 For each data type (production, trade,
resources/reserves, exploration, secondary raw
materials), what are your ideas for filling data gaps?
Please include both primary minerals and secondary raw
materials in your consideration.

44. A reminder of timings
09.30 – 10.00 Introduction to Minerals4EU project & Work Package 4
10.00 – 10.20 Data collection methods, initial results and data gaps
10.20 – 10.50 Round table discussion on ideas to fill data gaps
10.50 – 11.00 Feedback to the whole group
11.00 – 11.30 Break – tea & coffee
11.30 – 11.50 Issues and challenges (other than data gaps)
11.50 – 12.20 Round table discussion on issues and challenges
12.20 – 12.30 Feedback to the whole group
12.30 – 13.00 Lunch

45. Issues and challenges
Aim: National-level statistics that are comparable across
the countries of Europe
 Standardisation of data presentation
 Systems of reporting for resources/reserves
 Terminology and language used
 Metrics for exploration
 Data resolution for waste statistics
Some of these will take longer than the lifetime of the project
to resolve

46. Standardisation
 There are many differences between countries:
 Units used
 Form in which figures are reported
 Reporting requirements
 Reporting methods
 Procedures for estimating production
 Procedures for revisions in subsequent years (production)
 Precision (degree of rounding of figures)
 Fiscal years vs calendar years (mainly production)

47. Standardisation1&2
 How do BGS staff standardise production data?
 Conversion of units
 Standardisation of form (metal content or gross ore)
 Seek out additional data sources
 Requests for multiple years’ data to capture revisions
 Where we show totals they will be rounded to an
appropriate level of precision
 All fiscal years are footnoted
 Trade data are reported to international systems of trade
codes, greater level of standardisation

48. Standardisation 3, 4, 5 & 6
 More complicated for resources and reserves data
 Systems of reporting used
 Purpose of reporting
 Cut off grades
 Polymetallic deposits
 Economics
 Different requirements for different commodities
 Exploration – different metrics used
 Waste flows – less of an issue due to Eurostat coding
system

49. Reporting codes for resources and
reserves
 Varies between and within countries
 JORC
 NI 43-101
 Fennoscandian Review Board standard
 UNFC
 Russian system
 National reporting codes
 None
 None of the replies so far are using PERC

50. Terminology / language 1&2
For production data:
BGS has a standard list of commodity names used in its
current publications
Data for other commodities are sometimes received, but
are not used
For trade data:
Terms are defined by the coding system, but need careful
interpretation

51. Terminology / language 3
 Variation between countries in the use of the terms
“resource” or “reserve”
 Variation generally expressed in terms of the degree of
geological knowledge of a deposit
 Variation generally expressed in terms of the degree of
current economic viability of a deposit
 e.g. ‘known resource’, ‘estimated reserve’

52. Terminology / language 3&4
 Terminology issues surrounding the names given to
commodities
 Different types of clays used for different purposes
 Limestone used for crushed rock aggregates or industrial
purposes
 Construction sand, silica sand, quartz sand, foundry sand,
glass sand, backfilling sand…….
 Should we standardise on a common list? Or should we
include all the variations country by country?

53. Metrics – exploration data
 We were not sure what metrics would be available so we
requested six parameters(for 2013)
 Of those returned:
 Expenditure – 9 (some of these are partly confidential)
 Number of active licences – 15 (1 in part only)
 Number of licences issued – 15 (2 in part only)
 Size of area under licence – 15 (2 in part only)
 Number of companies – 17 (2 in part only)
 Activity summary (free text) – 11
 Zero activity - 2
 How should we handle the exploration data, which is
varied and patchy?

54. Statistics on waste
 Waste framework legislation was developed for a
different purpose
 The categories used by Eurostat (EWC-STAT) are too
broad to yield useful information for resource potential
 For example: “metal wastes, ferrous”, “metal waste, non-ferrous”
 Statistical data used to calculate stocks are not
comparable

55. A reminder of timings
09.30 – 10.00 Introduction to Minerals4EU project & Work Package 4
10.00 – 10.20 Data collection methods, initial results and data gaps
10.20 – 10.50 Round table discussion on ideas to fill data gaps
10.50 – 11.00 Feedback to the whole group
11.00 – 11.30 Break – tea & coffee
11.30 – 11.50 Issues and challenges (other than data gaps)
11.50 – 12.20 Round table discussion on issues and challenges
12.20 – 12.30 Feedback to the whole group
12.30 – 13.00 Lunch

56. Questions for 2nd table discussion
 What level of standardisation can realistically be carried
out this year?
 (For resources/reserves, we are proposing only to standardise units)
 What recommendations should be made with regards to
standardisation of data in future?
 Should we standardise on a commodity list for
resources/reserves? Or should we include all the
variations country by country?
 Which metrics should we use for exploration data?

57. A reminder of timings
13.30 – 13.50 Preliminary ideas for the European Minerals Yearbook
13.50 – 14.40 Round table discussion on European Minerals Yearbook
(structure, layout, functionality)
14.40 – 14.50 Feed back to the main group
14.50 – 15.00 Wrap up of Work Package 4 session
15.00 – 15.30 Break – tea & coffee
15.30 – 16.30 Work Package 2 session including stakeholder
consultation on the scope of the network and its
membership
16.30 END

58. European Minerals Yearbook
 A digital yearbook
 Delivered online via a web portal
 Open access
 National scale statistical data with accompanying notes,
explanations and metadata
 Glossary
 Possibly some diagrams

59. European Minerals Yearbook
 Image is a draft
version of the
proposed project
portal
 Yearbook will be
accessible via a link
as shown

60. European Minerals Yearbook
The user will then have
three choices:
To view the data by country
(both for primary minerals
and waste statistics)
To view the primary minerals
data by commodity
To view the waste statistical
data by category

61. European Minerals Yearbook
 Example of
how it might
look – by
country,
production
data

62. European Minerals Yearbook
 User can scroll
to the right to
see the
remainder of
the years
 User can also
reorder the
columns using
the small
triangles

63. European Minerals Yearbook
 User can
search for a
commodity
using the
search box

64. European Minerals Yearbook
 Example of how
it might look –
by commodity,
export data
 There will need
to be different
colours for “no
data” and
“non-exporter”

65. European Minerals Yearbook
 There could be
charts showing
trends over ten
years
 The data can
also be viewed
in a table using
the button

66. European Minerals Yearbook
 User will be able
to select an
individual
country and
see the detail
just for that one
country

67. European Minerals Yearbook
 The user will be
able to select
multiple
countries

68. European Minerals Yearbook
 Tables (where available) will be viewed on screen with
the option of opening them in Excel
 Data relating to secondary raw materials presented
alongside primary minerals
 Additional functions that will be available
 A link to the front page of the Minventory metadata portal
 A link to a glossary
 The option of downloading an entire chapter to a pdf
document
 Links to National Geological Surveys or other data providers

69. European Minerals Yearbook
 Additional functions that could be available in future
 Top producing countries in the World/Europe ranked
 Typical end uses shown and/or described
 More interactive charts or diagrams
 More analysis of the data, for example pan-European
summaries by commodity or discussion on topics such as
import dependence
 Increased number of case studies relating to the recovery of
commodities from waste streams

70. A reminder of timings
13.30 – 13.50 Preliminary ideas for the European Minerals Yearbook
13.50 – 14.40 Round table discussion on European Minerals Yearbook
(structure, layout, functionality)
14.40 – 14.50 Feed back to the main group
14.50 – 15.00 Wrap up of Work Package 4 session
15.00 – 15.30 Break – tea & coffee
15.30 – 16.30 Work Package 2 session including stakeholder
consultation on the scope of the network and its
membership
16.30 END

71. Questions for 3rd table discussion
 What are your views on the proposed layout and
structure of the digital Yearbook?
 What specific information do you consider to be
essential for your needs?
 What specific functions would you like to see in the first
edition of the Yearbook?
 What specific functions would you like in future?

72. Wrap up of WP4 session
 WP4 methods, initial results and data gaps
 Including your ideas for filling those gaps
 Issues and challenges
 Including your ideas on standardisation, terminology and
the metrics for exploration data
 Preliminary ideas for the Yearbook
 Including your views on the structure, layout and functions
Teresa Evi Gus
tbrown@bgs.ac.uk evpeta@bgs.ac.uk agg@bgs.ac.uk

73. A reminder of timings
13.30 – 13.50 Preliminary ideas for the European Minerals Yearbook
13.50 – 14.40 Round table discussion on European Minerals Yearbook
(structure, layout, functionality)
14.40 – 14.50 Feed back to the main group
14.50 – 15.00 Wrap up of Work Package 4 session
15.00 – 15.30 Break – tea & coffee
15.30 – 16.30 Work Package 2 session including stakeholder
consultation on the scope of the network and its
membership
16.30 END