U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5075

United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and

Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

Sources Distribution 

Anode 

imports 

U.S. 

refined 

copper 

production 

Electrowinning 

Electrolytic 

refineries Anode supply 

Primary 

smelter 

production 

Secondary 

smelter 

production 

Scrap Concentrate 

imports 

Concentrate supply 

Concentrate 

production 

Ore 

imports 

Ore 

domestic 

Fire 

refined 

Figure 3.

U.S. refined 

copper shipments 

Producer stock decrease 

Producer stock increase 

Leaching 
Cover. Generalized flow chart showing the sources and distribution of U.S. refined copper production. 
United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use 

and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

By Thomas G. Goonan

Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5075

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

SALLY JEWELL, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Suzette M. Kimball, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2016

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit http://www.usgs.gov or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit http://store.usgs.gov.

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Goonan, T.G., 2016, United States copper metal and scrap use and trade patterns, 1995–2014: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5075, 10 p., http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20165075.

ISSN 2328-031X (print)

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

ISBN 978-1-4113-4058-9
iii

Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

U.S. Copper Metal Supply.............................................................................................................................2

U.S. Copper Supply for Semi-Manufacturing............................................................................................4

U.S. Copper Scrap Trade ..............................................................................................................................7

Prices...............................................................................................................................................................8

Summary........................................................................................................................................................10

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................10

Figures

1. Line chart showing U.S. production, imports, and exports of refined copper,

1995 through 2014 .........................................................................................................................2

2. Line chart showing U.S. copper-containing scrap flows to manufacturing

(production), to exports, and from imports, 1995 through 2014.............................................3

3. Generalized flow chart showing the sources and distribution of 

U.S. refined copper production ..................................................................................................3

4. Area and line chart showing U.S. refined copper metal production by source,

Chinese refined copper consumption, and U.S. average annual copper

metal price, 1995 through 2014 ...................................................................................................4

5. Flow chart showing the sources and distribution of the U.S. copper supply

for semi-manufacturing ...............................................................................................................6

6. Area and line chart showing U.S. copper semi-manufacturing production

by source, 1995 through 2014......................................................................................................6

7. Area and line chart showing the use of old copper scrap in U.S. production,

U.S. net exports of copper scrap, and U.S. average annual copper 

metal price, 1995 through 2014 ...................................................................................................7

8. Area and line chart showing U.S. exports of copper scrap, by country,

1995 through 2014 .........................................................................................................................8

9. Line chart showing U.S. net exports of copper scrap, with and without China

included, and U.S. average annual copper metal price, 1995 through 2014.......................9

10. Line chart showing constant-dollar prices for copper metal and various

types of copper scrap, 1995 through 2014 ................................................................................9

Table

1. Annual U.S. refined copper supply, 1995–2014........................................................................5
iv

Conversion Factors

International System of Units to Inch/Pound

Multiply By To obtain

kilogram (kg) 2.205 pound avoirdupois (lb)

kilogram (kg) 32.1507 troy ounce

metric ton (t) (1,000 kg) 1.102 short ton (2,000 pounds)

kiloton (kt) (1,000 t) 1,102 short ton (2,000 pounds)

Abbreviation

Mt million metric tons
United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use 

and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

By Thomas G. Goonan

Abstract

In 1995, China accounted for 10 percent of world copper 

consumption (Yue and Lu, 2006; Dove Communications Inc., 

2012). By 2014, China accounted for about 49 percent of 

world copper consumption (World Bureau of Metal Statistics, 

2015). This change has affected global copper and copper 

scrap prices, the sources of copper supply, and U.S. trade of 

copper-containing materials.

This report considers changes to the copper and copper 

scrap industries of the United States. For the study period, 

1995 through 2014, U.S. refined copper production from 

all sources (primary and secondary materials) decreased 

from 2.28 million metric tons (Mt) of copper1 to 1.05 Mt 

(a 54 percent decrease). During the same period, U.S. copper 

scrap net exports increased from 0.203 Mt to 0.737 Mt 

(a 263 percent increase and a compound annual growth rate 

of about 7.0 percent per year). Copper and copper scrap prices 

(in constant 2014 dollars) rose such that 2014 prices were 

about 48 percent greater than 1995 prices. From 1995 through 

2014, Chinese imports of copper scrap from the United States 

grew from 0.061 Mt to 0.569 Mt (an increase of ~830 percent 

and a compound annual growth rate of ~12.5 percent per 

year). In 2011, Chinese imports of U.S. copper scrap peaked 

at 0.745 Mt of contained copper. In 1995, Chinese imports 

of U.S. copper scrap accounted for 17 percent of U.S. copper 

scrap exports. By 2014, Chinese imports accounted for 

69 percent of U.S. copper scrap exports (by weight), and 

Chinese imports of U.S. copper scrap were valued at 

$1.45 billion.

1

Unless stated otherwise, all weight units are in terms of contained 

copper (the copper content of scrap).

Introduction

Copper-containing products include copper metal, copper 

alloys, and copper chemicals. All of these are manufactured in 

the United States from primary raw materials supplemented by 

significant quantities of secondary materials (recycled scrap). 

Throughout the study period, 1995‒2014, the flows of coppercontaining materials needed for the manufacture of useful 

copper-containing products changed. Trends for these changes 

are reported here. For example, U.S. refined copper production 

in 2014 was less than half of what it was in 1995. Annual 

refined copper imports more than doubled (0.429 to 1.06 Mt)2

from 1995 through 2000 (partly in response to reduced 

domestic refined copper production), then, on average, 

remained relatively level (0.962 Mt) through 2006, thereafter 

declining by about 5 percent per year (compounded annually) 

to the 2014 level of 0.620 Mt. In terms of percentage, the 

U.S. share of world refined copper production decreased by a 

factor of 4 (19 percent to 4.5 percent of world refined copper 

production over the study period). These salient trends are 

shown in figure 1. 

From 1997 through 2002, the average annual use of old 

scrap in U.S. refined and alloy copper production decreased by 

about 72 percent. For the same period, the use of new scrap for 

the same purpose decreased by about 18 percent. This was a 

period characterized by closures of both primary smelting and 

secondary domestic copper production at downstream plants 

and mills. For the same period, the U.S. export of coppercontaining scrap increased by about 35 percent. Compared to 

the dynamics in scrap use and trade, U.S. copper-containing

2

All mass units are reported to three significant figures.
2 United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

Figure 1. Line chart showing U.S. production, imports, and exports of refined copper, 1995 through 2014. 

Sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, U.S. Geological Survey, 

unpub. data, 2016.

0 

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

0 

500,000 

1,000,000 

1,500,000 

2,000,000 

2,500,000 

3,000,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. share of world refined copper production, in percent 

U.S. production, imports, and exports of refined copper, 

in metric tons of contained copper

Year 

U.S. refined copper production 

EXPLANATION

Figure 1.

U.S. imports of refined copper 

U.S. exports of refined copper 

U.S.-to-world ratio (refined copper production) 

scrap imports were relatively steady for the entire 1995–2014 

study period. The average annual use of new scrap in 

U.S. production at the primary and secondary level decreased 

in steps over this study period, as follows: for 1995‒2000, the 

average annual use was 1.02 Mt; for 2003‒2007, the average 

annual use was 0.792 Mt; and for 2009‒2014, the average 

annual use was 0.638 Mt. Since new scrap is basically turnaround material that sustains production levels, the decrease 

mirrors the reduction in level of production in U.S. plants 

and mills. These data are shown in figure 2.

U.S. Copper Metal Supply

Refined copper metal, in the form of cathode 

(99.99 percent pure copper), is produced from domestic ores 

and imported materials (ores, concentrates, anodes, and other), 

with minor augmentation by scrap. Refined copper is produced 

either by electrolysis of anodes (a product of pyrometallurgical 

smelting) or by electrowinning of copper from copper-bearing 

solutions (a product of hydro-metallurgical leaching of 

domestic ores). Fire-refined copper (99.25 percent pure 

copper) adds a small amount of refined copper to annual 

supply. The main components of U.S. refined copper 

production are shown as a generalized flow diagram in 

figure 3 and annual contributions to U.S. refined copper 

production are shown for the study period in figure 4.

U.S. annual refined copper metal production has continuously decreased (5.5 percent per year, compounded annually) 

from its study-period peak-year level, 2.49 Mt in 1998, to 

1.01 Mt in 2014, a difference of 1.48 Mt. During the same 

period, Chinese consumption of refined copper increased 

(15.8 percent per year, compounded annually) from 1.48 Mt 

in 1998 to 15.4 Mt in 2014 (Yue and Lu, 2006; China Mining 

Association, 2012; Dove Communications Inc., 2012; and 

World Bureau of Metal Statistics, 2015).

In 1998, U.S. electrolytically refined copper production 

was 1.53 Mt using seven primary (concentrate) smelters and 

three secondary (scrap) smelters to feed seven electrolytic 

refineries. In 2003, U.S. electrolytically refined copper 

production was 0.662 Mt (a 15.4 percent per year decrease, 

compounded annually), and used the facilities of just three 

primary (concentrate) smelters to feed four electrolytic refineries. From 1998 through 2003, fire-refined copper production 

decreased (reflecting closure of three facilities) by 0.110 Mt, 

and electrowinning copper production decreased by 0.018 Mt. 

From 1998 through 2003, total U.S. refined copper 

production decreased by 1.20 Mt, of which about 76 percent 

was attributable (by a sequence of reduced production ending 

in closure) to four primary smelters, 13 percent to three 

secondary smelters, 10 percent to three fire refineries, and 

1 percent to three electrowinning refineries. The 1.20 Mt 

reduction in U.S. refined copper production was partially 

offset by increased imports of refined copper (0.199 Mt), for 

a net loss to U.S. refined copper supply of about 0.939 Mt.
U.S. Copper Metal Supply 3

0 

200,000 

400,000 

600,000 

800,000 

1,000,000 

1,200,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. copper-containing scrap flows to production, to exports,

and from imports, in metric tons of contained copper 

Year 

Figure 2.

New scrap use in U.S. manufacturing 

EXPLANATION

Old scrap use in U.S. manufacturing 

U.S. scrap imports 

U.S. scrap exports 

Figure 2. Line chart showing U.S. copper-containing scrap flows to manufacturing (production), to exports, 

and from imports, 1995 through 2014. Sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); 

Mark Brininstool, U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016.

Figure 3. Generalized flow chart showing the sources and distribution of U.S. refined copper production. 

Sources Distribution 

Anode 

imports 

U.S. 

refined 

copper 

production 

Electrowinning 

Electrolytic 

refineries Anode supply 

Primary 

smelter 

production 

Secondary 

smelter 

production 

Scrap Concentrate 

imports 

Concentrate supply 

Concentrate 

production 

Ore 

imports 

Ore 

domestic 

Fire 

refined 

Figure 3.

U.S. refined 

copper shipments 

Producer stock decrease 

Producer stock increase 

Leaching 
4 United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

When supply reduction occurs, it is usually the marginal 

producers that close. In the U.S. case, lower copper prices 

and higher production costs associated with lower ore grades, 

increased energy costs, and pollution control expenses (fines, 

and capital requirements) were sufficient to force closures 

(Edelstein, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005).

From 1998 through 2003, average annual U.S. copper 

producer prices (in constant 2014 dollars per metric ton) were 

at their nadir for the study period. From 1998 through 2003, as 

U.S. refined copper production decreased by 1.20 Mt, Chinese 

annual consumption of refined copper increased by 1.61 Mt. 

From 2003 through 2007, copper metal prices rose, driven 

up by increased refined copper consumption in China as the 

Chinese economy rapidly expanded. Prices decreased for the 

period 2007 through 2009, which was attributable to the global 

economic downturn. Prices then increased sharply through 

2011, again declining through 2014.

Figure 4. Area and line chart showing U.S. refined copper metal production by source, Chinese refined 

copper consumption, and U.S. average annual copper metal price, 1995 through 2014. U.S. copper producer 

prices have been discounted to constant 2014 dollars using the “Historical Consumer Price Index for All Urban 

Consumers” from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (Crawford and others, 2016, p. 72). 

Other sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Yue and Lu (2006); China Mining Association (2012); Dove 

Communications Inc. (2012); Brininstool (2015a,b); World Bureau of Metal Statistics (2015); Mark Brininstool, 

U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016. 

U.S. Copper Supply for SemiManufacturing

U.S. refined copper production (previous section), after 

adjustment for producer inventory changes, becomes refinery 

shipments. U.S. semi-manufacturers (brass and wire-rod 

mills, foundries, and chemical plants) use refined copper, 

copper-containing scrap, and small amounts of other forms of 

copper to make their products. The refined copper available to 

semi-manufacturers includes U.S. refined copper shipments 

less exports, plus imports, adjusted for changes to the inventories of copper at the U.S. warehouses owned by commodity 

exchanges (COMEX and LME)3. 

3

COMEX, Commodity Exchange, Inc., a division of the New York 

Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX). LME, London Metal Exchange.

0 

2,000 

4,000 

6,000 

8,000 

10,000 

12,000 

0 

2,000,000 

4,000,000 

6,000,000 

8,000,000 

10,000,000 

12,000,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. average annual copper metal price,

in constant 2014 dollars per metric ton of copper 

U.S. refined copper metal production by source, and Chinese refined 

copper consumption, in metric tons of contained copper 

Year 

Figure 4.

Production from old scrap

Production from new scrap

Electrolytically refined

Electrowon

Chinese refined copper consumption

U.S. average annual copper metal price 

EXPLANATION
U.S. Copper Supply for Semi-Manufacturing 5

Table 1. Annual U.S. refined copper supply, 1995–2014.

[All values are in million metric tons of contained copper. Values have been rounded to three significant digits. A negative number in the commodity exchange (COMEX and LME) inventory change column indicates an addition to refined copper available to U.S. semi-manufacturers, 

and a positive number is a subtraction therefrom. Sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, 

U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016. Abbreviations: COMEX, Commodity Exchange, Inc. (a division of the New York Mercantile 

Exchange [NYMEX]); LME, London Metal Exchange] 

Year

U.S. refined copper Sum of 

COMEX and LME 

inventory change

Total addition

to U.S. refined 

copper supply

Refined copper 

available for

U.S. semimanufacturers Supply Imports Exports

1995 2.290 0.429 0.217 0.066 0.147 2.440

1996 2.360 0.543 0.169 – 0.025 0.399 2.760

1997 2.440 0.632 0.093 0.147 0.392 2.830

1998 2.500 0.068 0.086 0.214 0.383 2.880

1999 2.160 0.837 0.025 0.069 0.743 2.900

2000 1.790 1.060 0.093 – 0.232 1.200 2.990

2001 1.790 0.991 0.023 0.598 0.370 2.160

2002 1.530 0.927 0.027 0.102 0.798 2.330

2003 1.310 0.882 0.093 – 0.373 1.160 2.470

2004 1.310 0.807 0.118 – 0.511 1.200 2.510

2005 1.260 1.000 0.040 – 0.072 1.030 2.290

2006 1.230 1.070 0.106 0.100 0.864 2.090

2007 1.320 0.083 0.051 – 0.032 0.810 2.130

2008 1.250 0.724 0.037 0.067 0.620 1.870

2009 1.160 0.664 0.081 0.232 0.351 1.510

2010 1.100 0.605 0.076 – 0.030 0.560 1.660

2011 1.020 0.670 0.040 0.022 0.607 1.630

2012 0.991 0.630 0.169 – 0.181 0.642 1.630

2013 1.040 0.734 0.111 0.016 0.607 1.640

2014 1.020 0.620 0.127 – 0.074 0.567 1.580

The annual U.S. refined copper supply for the study 

period is shown in table 1.

U.S. brass mills, chemical plants, foundries, wire-rod 

mills, and miscellaneous facilities use refined copper and old 

scrap to manufacture shapes (pipes, slabs, rods, wire, castings, 

and other products) composed of copper and copper alloys. 

New scrap generated by semi-manufacturers is returned to the 

process and does not add to supply, but rather sustains output 

levels. Figure 5 shows these generalized flows. 

Changes in the average annual semi-manufacturing 

copper production, 1995‒2014, are shown in figure 6. Total 

average annual use of refined copper and scrap together in 

U.S. semi-manufacturing (brass and wire-rod mills, foundries, 

and other facilities) decreased in steps during the study period 

as follows: 1995‒2000, 3.77 Mt; 2001‒2007, 3.14 Mt; and 

2008‒2014, 2.35 Mt. These reductions in semi-manufactured 

copper production were the result of reductions in the number 

of domestic facilities operating, due to higher costs and 

reduced competitiveness. While the number of wire-rod mills 

remained relatively constant over the study period (15‒16), the 

number of brass mills decreased from 35 to 30, and the number 

of foundries and other facilities decreased from 600 to 500.

Average refined copper usage in domestic semimanufacturing decreased as follows: 1995‒2000, 74.2 percent: 

2001‒2007, 72.7 percent; and 2008‒2014, 70.0 percent. The 

decrease in refined copper usage was offset by increased use 

of new scrap (indicating better recovery thereof) as follows: 

1995‒2000, 21.3 percent; 2001‒2007, 23.2 percent; and 

2008‒2014, 25.5 percent. Usage of old scrap for the entire 

study period remained level at 4.5 percent.
6 United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

Sources Distribution 

U.S. 

copper 

supply 

for 

semimanufacturing 

New scrap 

generated 

Semimanufactured 

product 

shipments 

Figure 5. 

U.S. refined 

copper shipments 

COMEX and LME 

stock increase 

Semi-manufacturer 

stock decrease 

Semi-manufacturer 

stock increase Old scrap 

Refined copper 

exports 

COMEX and LME 

stock decrease 

Refined 

copper 

imports 

Refined copper 

Figure 5. Flow chart showing the sources and distribution of the U.S. copper supply for semi-manufacturing. 

Figure 6. Area and line chart showing U.S. copper semi-manufacturing production by source, 1995 

through 2014. Values for annual averages reported within the graphic are in million metric tons (Mt) of 

contained copper. Sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, 

U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016.

0 

500,000 

1,000,000 

1,500,000 

2,000,000 

2,500,000 

3,000,000 

3,500,000 

4,000,000 

4,500,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. copper semi-manufacturing production by source, 

in metric tons of contained copper 

Year 

Figure 6.

Annual average

2.35 Mt (total)

Refined copper 70.0 percent

New scrap 25.5 percent

Old scrap 4.5 percent

Annual average

3.14 Mt (total)

Refined copper 72.7 percent

New scrap 23.2 percent

Old scrap 4.2 percent

Annual average

3.77 Mt (total)

Refined copper 74.2 percent

New scrap 21.3 percent

Old scrap 4.5 percent

Old scrap

New scrap (runaround,

 or process sustaining) 

Refined copper 

EXPLANATION
U.S. Copper Scrap Trade 7

U.S. Copper Scrap Trade

In general, scrap trade is dominated by old scrap 

recovered from post-consumer sources. New scrap is generated 

and returned to use domestically. The United States is, and has 

been for the entire study period, a net exporter of old copper 

scrap. Most U.S. imports of copper scrap are sourced from 

Canada, Mexico, and Caribbean and South American countries.

U.S. trade in old copper scrap has changed along with 

the changes in old copper scrap usage in the production of 

U.S. refined copper and mill products. Figure 7 shows the 

distribution of U.S. old copper scrap supply among usage 

in domestic production and trade as net exports, with the 

U.S. price of copper for context. 

Figure 7 shows that old scrap usage for U.S. domestic 

copper production decreased sharply from 1997 (period peak, 

0.790 Mt) through 2002 (0.224 Mt). During this 5-year period, 

major scrap users either reduced operations or closed (four 

primary smelters, four secondary smelters, three fire refiners, 

and five brass mills) under pressure of low prices and high 

costs (Edelstein, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005). From 1999 through 

2012, scrap suppliers increasingly exported old scrap. Higher 

copper prices from 2009 through 2012 caused the collection of 

additional scrap for export, of which a high percentage went to 

China. With lower prices in 2013 and 2014, less old scrap was 

collected and exported.

Figure 8 shows the quantities and destinations for 

U.S. copper scrap exports for the study period. From 1995 

through 2014, U.S. copper scrap exports increased from 

0.375 to 0.830 Mt of contained copper, a growth rate of 

4.3 percent per year, compounded annually. The subtotal of 

U.S. exports of copper scrap to countries other than China 

was relatively stable for the study period. 

The importance of U.S. exports of copper scrap to China 

is clearly seen by the placement of the China data at the top 

of the area chart in figure 8. Virtually all of U.S. copper scrap 

export growth was attributable to Chinese imports thereof, 

which increased from 0.061 Mt of contained copper in 1995 

to 0.569 Mt of contained copper in 2014, a 12.5 percent-peryear growth rate, compounded annually. From 1998 onward, 

China’s demand for copper was much greater than could be 

fulfilled from primary smelting, so China was forced to go 

heavily into the world scrap market, thereby driving up copper 

scrap prices (Yue and Lu, 2006). China’s consumption of 

copper, including that sourced from scrap, totaled 49 percent 

Figure 7. Area and line chart showing the use of old copper scrap in U.S. production, U.S. net exports 

of copper scrap, and U.S. average annual copper metal price, 1995 through 2014. U.S. average annual 

copper metal price is based on producer prices that have been discounted to constant 2014 dollars 

using the “Historical Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers” from the U.S. Department of Labor, 

Bureau of Labor Statistics (Crawford and others, 2016, p. 72). Production data from U.S. Geological 

Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016.

0 

2,000 

4,000 

6,000 

8,000 

10,000 

12,000 

0 

200,000 

400,000 

600,000 

800,000 

1,000,000 

1,200,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. average annual copper metal price, 

in constant 2014 dollars per metric ton of copper 

Old scrap use in U.S. production of refined copper and mill products, 

and net exports, in metric tons of contained copper

Year 

Figure 7 .

Net exports

Used in mill production

Used in refined copper production

U.S. average annual copper metal price

EXPLANATION
8 United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

of global production in 2014 (World Bureau of Metal Statistics, 2015). The trade-value of U.S. copper scrap exports in 

2014 was $3.48 billion, and the trade-value of the Chinese 

fraction was $2.10 billion, or 60 percent.

In figure 9, U.S. net exports of copper scrap are shown 

with and without China included, and copper price is added. 

Based on the endpoints of the linear trendline for 

U.S. net exports (China excluded), U.S. net exports to the 

rest of the world (the greater part of which are other Asian 

countries) increased 2.9 percent per year, compounded 

annually, over the study period. After 1998, Chinese imports 

of U.S. copper scrap (and therefore U.S. net exports [China 

included]) increased rapidly, and, as shown in figure 7, 

compensated for reductions in U.S. usage of old scrap for 

domestic production of refined copper and mill products. 

Essentially, a large part of the process of adding value to 

copper scrap through manufacturing was transferred from the 

United States to China. Regardless of the location of scrap 

value-enhancement, Chinese demand for copper drove copper 

metal prices from a year-2002 low of $2,230 (constant 2014 

dollars per metric ton of copper) to a year-2011 high of $9,570 

(constant 2014 dollars per metric ton of copper), a 4.3-fold 

increase. From 2011 through 2014, copper prices decreased 

to $7,120 (constant 2014 dollars per metric ton of copper).

Prices

Throughout this report, the price of copper metal 

(U.S. producer) has appeared in the graphics, even when the 

subject was scrap. Figure 10 shows the relationship of copper 

scrap prices (brass mill, refiners’, and New York dealers’ 

buying) to the copper metal price. 

Figure 10 demonstrates that the prices for copper scrap 

are closely linked to the price of copper metal, such that use of 

the copper metal price throughout this report was warranted. 

Copper market supply and demand factors determine the price 

of copper and the price of copper scrap. The correlation is 

strongest for high-quality (clean, high copper content) scrap, 

but holds also for lower quality scrap.

Figure 8. Area and line chart showing U.S. exports of copper scrap, by country, 1995 through 2014. 

Sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, U.S. Geological 

Survey, unpub. data, 2016.

0 

100,000 

200,000 

300,000 

400,000 

500,000 

600,000 

700,000 

800,000 

900,000 

1,000,000 

1,100,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. exports of copper scrap, by destination, in metric tons of contained copper 

Year 

Figure 8.

China

Other

Taiwan

Spain

Mexico

Korea, Republic of 

EXPLANATION

Japan

India

Hong Kong

Germany

Canada

Belgium 
Prices 9

Figure 9. Line chart showing U.S. net exports of copper scrap, with and without China included, and U.S. average 

annual copper metal price, 1995 through 2014. U.S. copper producer prices have been discounted to constant 

2014 dollars using the “Historical Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers” from the U.S. Department of 

Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (Crawford and others, 2016, p. 72). Production data from U.S. Geological Survey 

(1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016.

Figure 10. Line chart showing constant-dollar prices for copper metal and various types of copper scrap, 1995 

through 2014. U.S. copper producer prices, as well as scrap prices as reported by American Metal Market, have all 

been discounted to constant 2014 dollars using the “Historical Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers” from 

the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (Crawford and others, 2016, p. 72). Production data from 

U.S. Geological Survey (1995–2013); Brininstool (2015a,b); Mark Brininstool, U.S. Geological Survey, unpub. data, 2016.

0 

2,000 

4,000 

6,000 

8,000 

10,000 

12,000 

0 

100,000 

200,000 

300,000 

400,000 

500,000 

600,000 

700,000 

800,000 

900,000 

1,000,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

U.S. average annual copper metal price, in

constant 2014 dollars per metric ton of copper 

U.S. net exports of copper scrap, in metric tons of contained copper 

Year 

China included

China excluded

Linear (China excluded) 

U.S. average annual 

 copper metal price 

EXPLANATION

Figure 9.

0 

2,000 

4,000 

6,000 

8,000 

10,000 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 

Prices for copper and various copper scrap types, 

in constant 2014 dollars per metric ton

Year 

Figure 10.

Copper metal

Brass mill no. 1

Refiners’ no. 2

New York dealers’ no. 2

New York dealers’ red brass 

 (turnings and borings) 

EXPLANATION
10 United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014

Summary

The worldwide demand for copper has increased, and 

much of that demand (49 percent in 2014) originated from 

China as its economy became increasingly industrialized to 

service both Chinese domestic consumption and Chinese 

exports of assembled products. China’s demand for the 

world’s copper resources has driven up copper prices. 

The United States, with its mature industrial economy and 

its shrinking refined copper industry, has been supplying 

increasingly more scrap to the world, mainly to China. 

Although the U.S. continues to fill part of its domestic demand 

for finished copper products by means of domestic production, 

it is acquiring copper-containing products to a greater degree 

from foreign sources, including China. Chinese demand for 

U.S. scrap decreased from its high in 2011 of 0.745 Mt of 

contained copper to 0.569 Mt in 2014, a 24 percent decrease. 

For the same period, the copper metal price decreased from 

$9,570 to $7,120 (constant 2014 dollars per metric ton of 

copper), a 26 percent decrease. If Chinese demand for copper 

falters further, there could be an additional oversupply of 

copper scrap, and prices could continue to fall.

References Cited

Brininstool, Mark, 2015a, Copper [advance release], in

Metals and minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals 

Yearbook 2012, v. I, p. 20.1‒20.27, accessed April 1, 2016, 

at http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/

copper/myb1-2012-coppe.pdf.]

Brininstool, Mark, 2015b, Copper [advance release], in

Metals and minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals 

Yearbook 2013, v. I, p. 20.1‒20.29, accessed April 1, 2016, 

at http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/

copper/myb1-2013-coppe.pdf.]

China Mining Association, 2012, China 2013 refined 

copper consumption to rise 5.5 percent—Antaike: 

China Mining Association, October 31, 2012, accessed 

February 10, 2015, at http://en.chinamining.com.cn/

News/2012-10-31/1351653346d59632.html.

Crawford, Malik, Church, Jonathan, and Akin, Bradley, 

eds., 2016, CPI detailed report data for February 2016: 

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 

117 p., accessed April 1, 2016, at http://www.bls.gov/cpi/

cpid1602.pdf. [See table 24 on p. 72.]

Dove Communications Inc., 2012, China copper consumption trends (1): Online graphic accessed February 10, 2014, 

at http://www.dovecommunications.ca/copper-promiseslong-term-value-for-commodities-investors/china-copperconsumption-trends-1/

Edelstein, D.L., 2002, Copper, in Metals and minerals: 

U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2000, v. I, 

p. 23.1‒[23.25]. [Also available at http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/

minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/240400.pdf.]

Edelstein, D.L., 2003, Copper, in Metals and minerals: 

U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2001, v. I, 

p. 22.1‒[22.27]. [Also available at http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/

minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/coppmyb01.pdf.]

Edelstein, D.L., 2004, Copper, in Metals and minerals: 

U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2002, v. I, 

p. 22.1‒22.28. [Also available at http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/

minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/coppemyb02r.pdf.]

Edelstein, D.L., 2005, Copper, in Metals and minerals: 

U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2003, v. I, 

p. 21.1‒21.27. [Also available at http://minerals.er.usgs.gov/

minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/coppemyb03.pdf.]

U.S. Geological Survey, 1995–2013, Copper, in Metals and 

minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook, 

1994–2011, v. I [variously paged], accessed April 1, 2016, at 

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/copper/.

World Bureau of Metal Statistics, 2015, January to 

December 2014 metal balances: World Bureau of Metal 

Statistics News and Announcements Web site, accessed 

March 21, 2016, at http://www.world-bureau.com/readnews.asp?id=19.

Yue, Qiang, and Lu, Zhong-wu, 2006, An analysis of contemporary copper recycling in China: The Chinese Journal of 

Process Engineering, v. 6, no. 4, August 2006, p. 683‒690. 

[Also available at http://www.jproeng.com/qikan/manage/

wenzhang/206530.pdf.]
Manuscript approved May 27, 2016

Prepared by the USGS Science Publishing Network

Reston Publishing Service Center

 Edited by James R. Estabrook

 Illustrations and layout by Caryl J. Wipperfurth

 Web support by Angela E. Hall

For additional information, please contact:

Director, National Minerals Information Center

U.S. Geological Survey

12201 Sunrise Valley Drive

988 National Center

Reston, VA 20192

Email: nmicrecordsmgt@usgs.gov

Or visit the USGS Minerals Information Web site at

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/
Goonan—United States Copper Metal and Scrap Use and Trade Patterns, 1995–2014—Scientific Investigations Report 2016–5075

Printed on recycled paper

ISSN 2328-031X (print)

ISSN 2328-0328 (online)

http://dx.doi.org/10.3133/sir20165075