LCA on 2022 production year & CO2 scenario 2030
The IPA has completed its third Life Cycle Assessment on 2022 production, covering 95% of global primary and approximately 60% of global secondary (recycling) production.
The study has been performed on the primary production of platinum, palladium, rhodium, ruthenium and iridium, and the secondary production of platinum, palladium, and rhodium.
The results for primary and secondary production per kg of each metal are summarized in the tables below: (copyright: IPA; tables can be used if credit is given)
All information on the goal and scope, system boundaries, key results, and methodological background of the critically-reviewed study can be found in our LCA 3 Fact Sheet.
Key results and tables can be found in the Executive Summary.
The LCA 3 Data sets can be requested through our LCA Data Access questionnaire.
CO2 outlook study on GWP of mining in 2030
LCA 3 has not only generated updated results, but also includes a CO2 scenario study for 2030 production, based on the investments of South African producers in renewable energy and the projected improvements of the South African power utility Eskom, as reflected in the South African Government's draft Integrated Resource Plan 2023.
As a result, we have generated data on the GWP of global primary produced PGMs in 2030, reflecting the ambitious decarbonization roadmap of the industry.
Our CO2 scenario outlook highlights the potential for great reductions in emissions, reinforcing the sector's long-term commitment to greener production.
Overall, the estimated reduction in GWP varies between 35% and 61%, depending on the changes implemented in the 2030 scenario for the South African power supply per PGM producers.
As the study assessed improvements only in South Africa and extrapolated these to global production figures, PGMs predominantly produced there (Pt, Rh, Ru, Ir) show greater benefits than palladium, which is also produced in large volumes in Russia and North America.
The variability in GWP reductions among different PGMs can be attributed to two main factors:
- Variation in Investment:
Different PGM producers invest in renewable electricity to varying degrees. Higher investments in renewable energy result in more significant GWP reductions. - Differences in Production Volumes:
Producers contribute different volumes of production for specific PGMs. For example, a high volume platinum producer that makes substantial renewable energy investments will drive a greater reduction in the global GWP for platinum compared to producers of other metals with lower volumes or lesser investments.
Together, these factors explain why the reductions in GWP vary across the different PGMs.
More information can be found in our FAQs Document.