Rare Earth Substitutability in Clean Energy Technology: Using Expert Elicitation to Estimate Elasticities
The Case of Permanent Magnets
Braeton J. Smith and Roderick EggertDivision of Economics and Business
Colorado School of Mines
33rd USAEE/IAEE North American ConferencePittsburgh, PA
October 25-28, 2015
2
Clean Energy and Rare Earth Elements
Clean energy technology• Wind• Solar• EVs• Fluorescent
lighting/LEDs
High efficiency technology• Direct drive
motors in wind and EVs
Direct drive motors• Permanent
magnets
Permanent magnets (PMs)• NdFeB• SmCo
Rare earth elements (REEs)• Neodymium• Dysprosium• Praseodymium• Samarium
3
Rare Earth Price Spike
4
Purpose
• Survey of magnet producer and user responses to rare earth price changes
• Two Purposes:1. Historical - Document and quantify responses during and
following the rare earth (RE) price shock of 2010/20112. Forward Looking - Assess possible future substitution and price
responsiveness
• Estimate price elasticities of demand and substitution of REEs in PMs
• Apply expert elicitation methods to estimate forward-looking elasticities
5
Motivation
• Substitutability is a key indicator of material criticality
• Need to know what to expect if price shock happens again – not necessarily the same (non-constant elasticity)– Estimate elasticities not based on historical data
• Substitutability is an important consideration in simulation modeling
6
Substitution Taxonomy1. No substitution - “do nothing” (low cost share, technically difficult)
a) Cost pass-through
b) Cost absorption
2. Material Substitution – general characteristics of end product are maintaineda) Element for Element
• Substitute or reduce material content (e.g., reduce Dy content of NdFeB magnet)
b) Alloy for Alloy • Use different, but comparable, grade (e.g., N42SH instead of N45SH)
3. System Substitution – requires reengineering of overall systema) Magnet for Magnet
•Use different magnet type altogether (e.g., SmCo instead of NdFeB)
b) System for System• Use different system altogether (e.g., gearbox vs. direct drive)
4. Increased Manufacturing Efficiency – use materials more efficiently
7
• Price elasticity of demand:
• Elasticity of substitution:– Expenditure on good 2 relative to good 1:
– When E21 < 1, c2/c1 falls by less than p2/p1 increases– When E21 > 1, c2/c1 falls by more than p2/p1 increases– When E21 = 1, c2/c1 is independent of relative prices
Price Responsiveness Quantification
8
Variables
• Target Variables– Price elasticity of demand (of Dy in a NdFeB
magnet)– Elasticity of substitution (between Dy and Nd in a
NdFeB magnet)• Query Variables– Price and quantity (% composition) combinations– Composition and cost share for given price
changes
9
Survey Structure
• Survey divided into 2 parts– Part 1: Historical Substitutability and Price
Responsiveness• Historical questions focus on events during and post RE
price shock– Part 2: Future Substitutability and Price
Responsiveness• Probability elicitation of potential future responses
• Four categories provide framework for survey
10
Historical Questions Approach
1. No Substitution:– Sales price change during and after price shock– Cost shares before, during, and after price shock
2. Material Substitution (element for element):– Material composition of magnet before and after price shock
3. Material Substitution (alloy for alloy):– Change in sales and production shares of different grades of
NdFeB magnets during and after price shock4. Increased Mfg. Efficiency: – Reduction in material purchase requirement during and after
price shock
11
Historical Anecdotes• No substitution
– Some evidence of cost pass-through in short run, but difficult for non-Chinese producers
– Some evidence of cost absorption• Material substitution
– Evidence of element for element subst. over time for Dy, less so for Nd– Japanese companies reduced Dy content 6-8% (Roskill, 2015)
• System Substitution– No evidence of magnet for magnet substitution for wind technology,
although much research into alternatives to NdFeB– Evidence of System for System subst. in wind technology
• Increased Mfg. Efficiency– Some evidence of recovery and reuse (Roskill, 2015)
12
Quantifying Uncertainty• Probability Encoding and Sources of Bias
– “Process of extracting and quantifying individual judgment about uncertain quantities” - Spetzler and Von Holstein (1975)
• Fixed probability (FP) vs. fixed value (FV) (Abbas et al., 2008)• Many applications in natural sciences, risk analysis, and
decision analysis• Applications in economics mainly focus on R&D and
technical breakthrough:– Baker et al. (2009), Baker and Keisler (2011), Anadon et al. (2012), Abdulla et al.
(2013), Catenacci et al. (2013), Nemet et al. (2013), many others
• Quantifying uncertainty around future substitutability is new application
13
• Define prototype magnet and market conditions now
• Elicit probabilities using mix of FV and FP methods for each potential response
• Generate probability distribution for each expert and response
Forward Looking Questions Approach
14
Example - PrototypeConsider a sintered N45SH neo magnet that is used in a generator for a 2.5 MW wind turbine.
Material Nd (%) Dy (%) Pr (%)N45SH 23% 7% 3.3%
Properties Br HcB HcJ (BH)max TW
Material Typical mT
Typical Gauss
Min kA/m
Min Oersteds
Min kA/m
Min Oersteds
Typical kJ/m3
Typical MGOe Max oC
N45SH 1,350 13,500 979 12,300 1,592 20,000 354 44.0 150
15
FV Example – Material Substitution
• If the price of the element in Column 1 were to change by the amount in Column 2, what is the probability that the material composition of the element in Column 5 would change by the amount in Column 6?
• E.g.: If the Dy price were to increase by 50 percent, what is the probability that the Dy content of the N45SH magnet would remain the same?
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Element Price Change
Current Price ($/kg)
Future Price ($/kg)
Change Element
Content Change
Current Content
Future Content
Probability Estimate
Dy +50% $500 $750 Dy 0% 7% 7.00% Dy +50% $500 $750 Dy -5% 7% 6.65% Dy +50% $500 $750 Dy -10% 7% 6.30% Dy +50% $500 $750 Dy -25% 7% 5.25% Dy +50% $500 $750 Dy -50% 7% 3.50%
16
FP Example – Material Substitution
• Please give your 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, and 90th percentile estimates for the amount that the material content of the material in Column 1 would change for the price change indicated in Column 2.
Material Price Change 10th 25th 50th 75th 90th
Dy +50%
Dy +100%
Dy +500%
Dy +1000%
17
Thanks!
Questions?
18
Hypothetical Result
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75-0.2
-1.66533453693773E-16
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
CDF
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75-0.004999999999999982.34187669256869E-170.00500000000000002
0.010.015
0.020.025
0.030.035
0.04
Top Related