Talk:Peak copper

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peak copper article.

Article policies
This article is within the scope of the Economics WikiProject, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve economics-related articles..
Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.

Start rated as start-Class on the assessment scale
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
WikiProject Environment
Portal
This environment-related article is part of the Environment WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment.
The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized.
See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Peak copper is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
To-do list for Peak copper:

Here are some tasks you can do:


    [edit] So where is it going?

    Where is all the copper going? It's not being burned up, like oil. Perhaps the article could mention this. --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 11:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


    The copper price graph needs units. pounds, tons, kilograms ???

    Rick brade (talk) 05:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] Where did all this come from?

    For instance, Poland's production is in the 550,000 metric tonne region, not the 2 million tonnes given in the text (see the USGS figures). Chile's production is still expanding. There is no mention of the +3 billion tonnes of land based resources (USGS again). The payablility of these resources is very price sensitive. The whole thing smacks of the Club of Rome in the Seventies which was clearly compiled by people with virtually no knowledge of mining. As for the section on supply - words fail me. Beware of environmental analysts when they tangle with subjects that require a lot of specialist knowledge like mining. Mafestel (talk) 14:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

    [edit] P.S.

    Cochilco(Comisión Chilena de Cobre) forecasts an increase in Chilean output to 6,718,000 tonnes by 2012 on currently announced plans compared with approx 5,700,000 tonnes in 2007, hardly the 'Irreverisble decline' from 2008 onwards forecast in the article. I am not sure whether articles like this that require a crystal ball have a place in Wikipedia Mafestel (talk) 15:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)