资源科学 ›› 2020, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (8): 1477-1488.doi: 10.18402/resci.2020.08.04

• 关键矿产资源安全 • 上一篇    下一篇

清洁能源技术关键金属供应风险评估

黄健柏1(), 孙芳1, 宋益2()   

  1. 1.中南大学商学院,长沙 410083
    2.中国地质大学(武汉)经济管理学院,武汉 430074
  • 收稿日期:2020-02-17 修回日期:2020-07-23 出版日期:2020-08-25 发布日期:2020-10-25
  • 通讯作者: 宋益
  • 作者简介:黄健柏,男,湖南临武人,教授,研究方向为资源经济与管理。E-mail: huangjianbai@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重点项目(71633006);湖南省哲学社会科学基金项目(19ZWB45)

Supply risk assessment of critical metals in clean energy technology

HUANG Jianbai1(), SUN Fang1, SONG Yi2()   

  1. 1. School of Business, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China
    2. School of Economics and Management, China University of Geosciences (Wuhan), Wuhan 430074, China
  • Received:2020-02-17 Revised:2020-07-23 Online:2020-08-25 Published:2020-10-25
  • Contact: SONG Yi

摘要:

全球能源结构转型是实现可持续发展的必由之路,而清洁能源技术的发展依赖于多种关键金属材料。本文选取15种清洁能源技术关键金属,从供应减少、需求增加、地缘政治和社会监管4个维度,构建10个评估指标,对清洁能源技术关键金属的供应风险进行定量评估,保障全球清洁能源技术发展和能源结构转型。研究结果表明:①清洁能源技术关键金属的供应风险均处于中风险以上等级,其中铟、镓、锗3种关键金属处于中高风险水平,锂、钴、镉、硒、钼、钯、铂、铜、铝、锌、铁、钛12种关键金属处于中风险等级。②供应减少风险维度中铟、铁、钼、锌、锗、镉6种关键金属属于中高风险,其中铟的风险最高;需求增加风险维度中铟、镓、锗3种关键金属的风险属于中高风险;地缘政治风险维度中有9种关键金属属于中高风险,其中钴的风险最高;社会监管风险维度中有11种关键金属属于中高风险,其中铟的风险最高。因此,需尽快建立关键金属供应安全常态化风险分类管理机制和二次资源回收管理体系,增进与关键金属供应国间的合作,以缓解清洁能源技术发展的关键金属约束。

关键词: 清洁能源技术, 关键金属, 地缘政治风险, 供应风险, 风险评估

Abstract:

The transformation of the global energy structure is the only way to achieve sustainable development, and the development of clean energy technology relies on a variety of critical metal materials. To ensure the development of global clean energy technology and the transformation of the global energy structure, this paper selects 15 critical metals of clean energy technology, establishes a supply risk assessment system from four dimensions of supply reduction, demand increase, geopolitics and social supervision, including 10 assessment indicators. The results show that: (1) the critical metals of clean energy technology are all at medium- risk or above. Among them, the supply risk assessment of indium, gallium and germanium is at a high risk level; 12 metals supply risks of lithium, cobalt, cadmium, selenium, molybdenum, palladium, platinum, copper, aluminum, zinc, iron and titanium are in medium risk level. (2) In the supply reduction risk dimension, six metals such as indium, iron, molybdenum, zinc, germanium, and cadmium belong to medium and high risks, and the risk of indium is the highest; among the risk dimensions of increased demand, the risks of indium, gallium, and germanium are medium to high risks; In the political risk dimension, 9 metals belong to medium and high risks, and cobalt has the highest risk; in the social regulatory risk dimension, 11 metals belong to medium and high risks, and indium has the highest risk. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a normalized risk classification management mechanism for the supply of critical metals and a secondary resource recovery management system as soon as possible, and enhance cooperation with critical metal suppliers to alleviate critical metal constraints for the development of clean energy technology.

Key words: clean energy technology, critical metals, geopolitical risk, supply risk, risk assessment