Sustainable Production of Rare Earth Elements from Mine Waste and Geoethics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The vulnerability of the rare earth element (REE) supply in a global context of increasing demands entails important economic and political issues, and has encouraged several countries to develop their own REE production projects. This study comparatively evaluated the production of REEs from primary and secondary resources in terms of their sustainability and contribution to the achievement of the Geoethics concept as responsibility towards oneself, colleagues, society, and the Earth system. Twelve categories of potential environmental and social impacts were selected: human health toxicity, global warming or climate change, terrestrial and aquatic eutrophication, acidification potential, particulate matter, resource depletion, water consumption, fresh water ecotoxicity, ionizing radiation, fossil fuel consumption, and ozone depletion. The results showed that the environmental impact of REE production from secondary sources is much lower relative to primary sources. A comparison of conventional and non-conventional REE resources showed that significant impact categories were related to particulate matter formation, abiotic resource depletion, and fossil fuel depletion, which could result from avoiding the tailings disposal before reuse. Based on these findings, governments and stakeholders should be encouraged to increase the recycling of secondary REE sources with Geoethics in mind, in order to balance the high demand of REEs while minimizing the overexploitation of non-renewable resources.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it