U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5194

Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of 

Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
Cover photographs. U.S. Capitol and compact disks, courtesy of Microsoft Corporation; lumber and cell phones, courtesy of 

Michael R. Sanio. 
Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of 

Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States

By Grecia R. Matos

Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5194

U.S. Department of the Interior

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

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2007

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

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

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Matos, G.R., 2007, Effects of regulation and technology on end uses of nonfuel mineral commodities in the 

United States: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5194, 15 p.
iii

Contents

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

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

Methods...........................................................................................................................................................1

Overview of Materials Flow .........................................................................................................................2

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Regulation .........................................................3

Arsenic....................................................................................................................................................4

Asbestos.................................................................................................................................................5

Lead ....................................................................................................................................................6

Mercury..................................................................................................................................................7

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Changing Technologies...................................8

Gallium....................................................................................................................................................9

Germanium...........................................................................................................................................10

Indium ..................................................................................................................................................11

Strontium..............................................................................................................................................12

Summary........................................................................................................................................................13

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................14

Figures

1. Flowchart showing mineral materials flow cycle ...................................................................2

2–10. Graphs showing—

 2. Raw, nonfuel mineral materials put into use annually 

 from 1900 through 2003 in the United States...................................................................3

 3. Arsenic end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States...................................4

 4. Asbestos end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States................................5

 5. Lead end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States........................................6

 6. Mercury end uses from 1975 through 2002 in the United States .................................8

 7. Gallium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States ...................................9

 8. Germanium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States..........................10

 9. Indium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States ..................................11

 10. Strontium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States .............................12

Abstract

The regulatory system and advancement of technologies 

have shaped the end-use patterns of nonfuel minerals used in 

the United States. These factors affected the quantities and 

types of materials used by society. Environmental concerns 

and awareness of possible negative effects on public health 

prompted numerous regulations that have dramatically altered 

the use of commodities like arsenic, asbestos, lead, and mercury. While the selected commodities represent only a small 

portion of overall U.S. materials use, they have the potential 

for harmful effects on human health or the environment, which 

other commodities, like construction aggregates, do not normally have.

The advancement of technology allowed for new uses of 

mineral materials in products like high-performance computers, telecommunications equipment, plasma and liquid-crystal 

display televisions and computer monitors, mobile telephones, 

and electronic devices, which have become mainstream products. These technologies altered the end-use pattern of mineral 

commodities like gallium, germanium, indium, and strontium. 

Human ingenuity and people’s demand for different and creative services increase the demand for new materials and industries while shifting the pattern of use of mineral commodities. 

The mineral commodities’ end-use data are critical for the 

understanding of the magnitude and character of these flows, 

assessing their impact on the environment, and providing an 

early warning of potential problems in waste management of 

products containing these commodities. The knowledge of 

final disposition of the mineral commodity allows better decisions as to how regulation should be tailored.

Introduction 

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provides information to policy makers and the public concerning the use 

and flow of nonfuel minerals and mineral materials in the 

United States economy. The USGS collects, analyzes, and 

disseminates minerals information on most nonfuel mineral 

commodities. As part of this endeavor, the USGS developed 

a compilation of historical statistics for mineral and material 

commodities in the United States (Kelly and Matos, 2005). 

Analysis of the data contained in this study reveals changes 

in end-use patterns for selected commodities that result from 

numerous factors. Two of these factors, regulation and the 

development of new technologies, are analyzed for eight nonfuel mineral commodities for the period 1975 to 2003. 

Methods

For most mineral commodities, end-use data are based on 

surveys of U.S. industry by the USGS and are published in the 

USGS Minerals Yearbook (MYB). For several mineral commodities, the end-use data are not available or are of limited 

reliability. In such cases, data usually are calculated by applying estimated end-use shares (percentages) by category, as 

reported in the annual USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 

(MCS), to apparent consumption estimates. For some other 

mineral commodities, USGS mineral-commodity specialists estimate end-use statistics using a variety of sources of 

information. For a limited number of commodities, no end-use 

data are available. More information about the USGS nonfuel 

mineral survey methods is available in Busse (2004).

End-use statistics are considered only an estimate for 

how a mineral commodity has been used in the U.S. economy. 

Ideally, the sum of end uses should equal estimated apparent consumption and, therefore, provide a full accounting. 

However, this is not the case for several commodities. Data 

limitations may result from changes in collection or estimation methodology, the structure or performance of the industry, 

and industry response to the survey. Because of these changes, 

use of the “undistributed” and “other” end-use categories has 

increased over time.

End-use data do not reflect the effects of globalization, 

nor do they account for mineral materials contained in imports 

or exports of finished or semi-finished products. For example, 

imported mercury contained in fluorescent lamps and lead 

contained in batteries of imported cars are not reflected in 

the U.S. statistics. Without these data, complete statements 

cannot be made about U.S. trends in mineral commodity use, 

substitution of materials by U.S. industry, or the environmental 

effects of final disposition of mineral materials contained in 

products. Mineral end uses in the United States are measured 

at the industrial stage (raw, nonfuel mineral materials) because 

data on production and trade in primary metal products are 

easily accessible. 

Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of 

Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States

By Grecia R. Matos
Overview of Materials Flow

The materials flow cycle (fig. 1) provides a conceptual 

overview of the flow of mineral-based materials through the 

economy and the environment. The cycle begins with the 

extraction of mineral resources from the environment and from 

sources available for recycling, remanufacturing, and reuse for 

primary and secondary production; then the flow of mineral 

materials proceeds through the fabrication and manufacturing 

processes. The mineral commodities contained in products provide services in the economy during their useful life, while other 

materials flow to recycling, remanufacturing, reuse, or disposal. 

Throughout the life cycle of a mineral material, the 

potential for losses and adverse effects on the environment 

exists through emissions, losses, wastes, or dissipation of 

materials into the environment. A time of residence for the 

mineral materials is reflected in the additions to stock and 

built infrastructure, after which time the material completes its 

useful time in service. Then, the material either is discarded 

in landfills as scrap or demolition material, or is recovered for 

recycling, remanufacturing, or reuse.

Nonfuel mineral materials used in the United States 

changed substantially in the 20th century. In 1900, each person 

consumed approximately 1.2 metric tons (t) of metals and 

minerals; by 2003, the amount had increased to nearly 11 t. 

The quantity of new, raw mineral materials added to the U.S. 

economy in 1900 was 93 million t, and in 2003, the quantity 

was about 3.1 billion t (fig. 2). Changes in the quantity and 

types of mineral materials entering the U.S. economy each year 

often mirror major economic and political events. Over the first 

50 years of the 20th century, the U.S. economy was transformed 

from a predominately-agricultural economy to an industrial 

economy. Starting in about 1950, the economy began to move 

toward a post-industrial or service economy. A detailed analysis 

of these trends is in Matos and Wagner (1998).

Ore Environment: Air, land, and water

Fabrication and 

manufacturing

Primary and

secondary

production

Use, additions to 

stocks, and built 

infrastructure

Dissipative

uses

Emissions,

losses, and 

wastes

Recovered

materials

Recovered

materials

Material for recycling, remanufacturing, and reuse

Emissions,

losses, and 

wastes

Emissions,

losses, and 

wastes

Remanufacturing Recycling Reuse

Landll

Figure 1. Mineral materials flow cycle. 

 Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

1900

1910

1920

1930

1940

19501960

1970

1980

19902000

2003

MILLION METRIC TONS

World War I

World War II

Great Depression

Oil crisis

Recessions

Primary metals

Recycled metals

Industrial metals

Natural aggregates

Figure 2. Raw, nonfuel mineral materials put into use annually from 1900 through 2003 in the United States. 

(Materials embedded in imported goods not included.)

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral 

Commodities Owing to Regulation

Changes in technology, the quest for substitutes, and the 

selection of materials for specific products are often the result 

of industry compliance to regulations issued by Federal, State, 

or local government departments or agencies. Hence, the end 

use of a mineral commodity may be constrained or increased 

directly or indirectly by regulatory actions. 

Awareness of the potentially negative environmental 

effects of some of the mineral commodities, such as arsenic, 

asbestos, lead, and mercury, on human health and nature has 

resulted in regulation on the use of these commodities. For 

example, the use of lead in paints and fuel has been discontinued, and the use of asbestos in thermal insulation has been 

greatly limited. Examples of how the end-use patterns of 

particular mineral commodities have been altered by regulation are presented in the following sections. These commodities were selected because government agencies and nongovernmental groups have concerns about their effects on public 

health and the environment if uncontrolled releases occur, 

even in small amounts. 

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Regulation 
Arsenic

Historically, the leading end-use for arsenic in the United 

States was as a pesticide and fungicide. Arsenic was used as 

a pesticide or desiccant for crops such as cotton, and as an 

insecticide on various small fruits and certain vegetable crops. 

In 1987, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

proposed to cancel registrations of almost all of the non-wood 

preservative uses of inorganic arsenicals based on concerns 

of acute toxicity from accidental ingestion by children and of 

carcinogenicity risk for workers handling inorganic arsenic 

pesticides. In 1993, the U.S. EPA proposed cancellation of the 

use of arsenic acid on cotton, and nearly eliminated the use of 

arsenic in agriculture (fig. 3; Cornell University, 1993; U.S. 

Interagency Working Group on Industrial Ecology, Materials, 

and Energy Flows, 1999). 

End-use analysis shows that the decline in the use of arsenic in agricultural chemicals was offset by its use as a component of wood preservative, primarily in the form of chromated 

copper arsenate (CCA). CCA was used in the construction 

of new homes, outdoor patios and decks, and playgrounds 

for parks and schools. Arsenic use in pressure-treated wood 

increased rapidly during the time period under analysis, rising 

from 700 t in 1975 to approximately 19,200 t in 2003, and 

increased from 5 percent of U.S. apparent arsenic consumption 

in 1975 to about 90 percent in 2003. In 2003, based on consultation with the EPA, the domestic manufacturers of CCA 

began a voluntary transition from CCA to alternative wood 

preservatives in most household uses and play areas, which 

led to a drop in the overall arsenic use from 21,600 t in 2003 

to 6,800 t in 2004 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

2005). Satisfactory alternatives to arsenic-based preservatives now include biocides containing silver (Silver Institute, 

2005) and products resulting from new technologies, such as 

nanotechnology, which enables the incorporation of nanosized 

particles into the wood as an active preservative (Industrial 

Minerals, 2005). 

Arsenic also is used in nonferrous alloys (such as for 

bearings, type metals, lead ammunition, and automotive body 

solder, and it may be added to brass to improve corrosion 

resistance), and electronic components (such as a variety of 

semiconductor applications, including solar cells, light emitting diodes, lasers, and integrated circuits) in small quantities. 

Arsenic oxide is used in glass applications to improve color, 

transparency, and brilliance.

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

20002003

METRIC TONS

Agricultural chemicals

Glass

Nonferrous alloys and

 electronics

Pressure-treated wood

Other

Figure 3. Arsenic end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

 Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
Asbestos

Asbestos fibers historically have been used in a variety 

of industrial applications. Many of these applications have 

now been abandoned and others are pursued under strictly 

regulated conditions. The main properties of asbestos fibers 

that can be exploited in industrial applications led to several 

main classes of industrial applications such as fire protection 

and heat or sound insulation, fabrication of papers and felts for 

flooring and roofing products, pipeline wrapping, thermal and 

electrical insulation, friction products in brake or clutch pads, 

asbestos-cement products, reinforcement of plastics, fabrication of packings and gaskets, vinyl or asphalt tiles, and asphalt 

road surfacing (Virta, 2002). 

Much of the decline in asbestos use in the United States 

was due to concerns over health risks posed by high-level 

exposures to airborne asbestos fibers. Beginning in the 1970s, 

public pressure to reduce asbestos use helped spur the quest 

for alternatives. In addition, many companies ceased production of asbestos products mainly because of liability issues 

(Virta, 2005). As a result, U.S. consumption of asbestos 

declined from a peak of almost 660,000 t in 1976 to 4,650 t in 

2003 (fig. 4). 

The identification of health risks associated with longterm, high-level exposure to asbestos prompted regulations to 

limit the maximum exposure to airborne fibers in workplace 

environments. In addition, the spraying of asbestos insulation 

onto steel girders, consumer sales of raw asbestos, and artificial fireplace logs containing asbestos were banned. Commercial products such as asbestos-containing insulations, plasters, 

ceiling tiles, cement products, and caulks were slowly phased 

out (Virta, 2002). 

In 1989, the EPA allowed the following asbestos end 

uses: asbestos-cement corrugated sheets, asbestos-cement 

flat sheets, asbestos-cement shingles, asbestos-cement pipes, 

asbestos clothing, automatic transmission components, brake 

blocks, clutch facings, disc brake pads, drum brake linings, 

friction materials, gaskets, millboard, nonroof and roof coatings, pipeline wrap, roofing felt, and vinyl-asbestos floor tile. 

In 2003, the main end use of asbestos was in roofing products 

where the asbestos is encapsulated in the asphalt. 

Liability is a major issue for producers and manufacturers. This burden contributed to a shift by product manufacturers to asbestos substitutes, the redesigning of old products to eliminate the need for asbestos, or the designing of new 

prod­ucts that require neither asbestos nor asbestos substitutes. 

In the United States, the use of substitutes has almost entirely 

replaced the use of asbestos (Virta, 2005). 

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

20002003

METRIC TONS

Asbestos cement pipe

Flooring products

Insulation, thermal

Plastics

Other

Asbestos cement sheet

Friction products

Packing and gaskets

Roong products

Unknown

Coatings and compounds

Insulation, electrical

Paper products

Textiles

Figure 4. Asbestos end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Regulation 
Lead 

Government programs continue to work to protect human 

health and the environment against the dangers of lead by conducting research, designing educational and outreach efforts, 

and developing regulations. Laws and regulations have been 

put into place to address the health and environmental issues 

in the United States. For example, the EPA promulgated rules 

that limit the use of lead in gasoline, reduce lead in drinking 

water, reduce lead in industrial air pollution, and ban or limit 

lead used in consumer products, including residential paint. 

Lead is a widely used metal. It was used as an additive to gasoline to enhance engine performance until 1973. 

A negative consequence of this application was the emission 

of harmful lead compounds into the atmosphere as a component in exhaust. In 1973, the EPA issued standards that called 

for a gradual decrease in the use of lead to reduce the health 

risks from automobile exhaust. In 1986, the EPA announced 

standards to reduce the amount of lead used in gasoline by an 

additional 90 percent; and finally, on January 1, 1996, the EPA 

issued a direct final rule (40 CFR Part 80) that prohibited the 

use of lead in gasoline additives for highway vehicles (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1996). This ruling resulted 

in the reduction of lead consumption in gasoline from almost 

189,000 t in 1975 to zero in 1995. 

Lead use trended upward for most of the time period of 

this analysis (1975–2003) (fig. 5). Lead use in gasoline additives was eliminated, but the use of lead in recyclable lead-acid 

storage batteries increased. Lead use rose from 1 million t per 

year in 1975 to 1.4 million t in 2003, with the highest peak of 

nearly 1.8 million t in the year 2000, primarily because of an 

increase in the use of lead-acid storage batteries. Lead use in 

the production of batteries increased from about 60 percent 

of total lead used in the United States in 1975 to 81 percent 

in 2003. The most common use of lead-acid batteries is to 

start cars and other internal combustion vehicles. Lead-acid 

batteries also are used to power electric vehicle motors, and 

to provide emergency power when the commercial electricity 

supply is disrupted, mostly for computer and telecommunication systems. Recent research by Wilburn and Buckingham 

(2006) indicates that total lead use in the United States is 

greater than reported U.S. apparent consumption statistics 

when imports of lead-embedded manufactured products, like 

batteries, are factored in the consumption estimates. This 

approach may be significant in the estimation of apparent consumption of some commodities; however, measuring mineral 

consumption in products is complicated because it requires 

disaggregating the finished products into specific materials, 

which is a process that requires broad assumptions about the 

composition of the product. 

The recovery of lead from spent lead-acid batteries and 

other lead scrap at secondary smelters in 2003 was sufficient to meet about 92 percent of the demand for lead in the 

manufacture of new batteries (Smith, 2003). The typical new 

lead-acid battery contains 60 to 80 percent-recycled lead and 

plastic. Almost any retailer that sells lead-acid batteries collects used batteries for recycling, as required by law in most 

States. When a spent battery is collected, it is sent to a permitted recycler where, under strict environmental regulations, 

the lead alloy, plastic, and other materials are reclaimed and 

sent to a manufacturer of new batteries. That means the lead 

and plastic in the lead-acid battery in your car, truck, boat, or 

0

300

600

900

1,200

1,500

1,800

2,100

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

20002003

THOUSAND METRIC TONS

Ammunition

Gasoline additives

Storage batteries

Brass and bronze

Sheet lead

Other

Glass, paint, and other pigments

Solder

Figure 5. Lead end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

 Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
motorcycle may have been—and may continue to be—recycled many times (Battery Council International, 2006).

Statistics for lead use in the “glass, paint, and other pigments” category are aggregated to avoid disclosing company 

proprietary data (fig. 5). Lead was added to paint as pigment 

and to speed drying, increase durability, retain a fresh appearance, and resist moisture, which caused corrosion. While the 

trend in this combined end-use category appears level, because 

of its toxicity, paint containing more than 0.06 percent lead 

was banned for residential use in 1978 by the U.S. Consumer 

Product Safety Commission. Paint with significant lead 

content is still used for commercial purposes in industry and 

by the military. For example, leaded paint is sometimes used 

to paint roadways, parking lot lines, and for artists’ paint. The 

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission also banned toys 

and other children’s products, such as playground equipment, 

bearing paint containing lead in excess of 0.06 percent by 

weight because these products pose a risk of lead poisoning in 

young children. Although lead improved the performance of 

paint, it is extremely toxic especially to children under age six 

whose bodies are still developing. In 1992, the U.S. Congress 

enacted the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction 

Act. Title X of that Act uses 0.5 percent lead by weight as the 

maximum allowed lead level in paint for lead hazard-control 

measures. This was designed to focus attention and resources 

on controlling the most significant lead paint hazards (U.S. 

Consumer Product Safety Commission, 1996). The use of lead 

in the glass, paint, and other pigments category has been maintained, primarily owing to lead being added to glass in televisions and computer monitors to protect users from radiation. 

Much of the decline in nonbattery uses of lead was the 

result of the U.S. manufacturers’ compliance with environmental regulations to reduce or eliminate the use of lead 

in products, including gasoline, paints, solders, and water 

systems. The amount of lead used in ammunition remained 

constant from 1975 to 2003. 

Mercury 

Federal, State, and local government agencies are 

concerned about the potentially toxic effects of mercury on 

the environment and human health. In the United States, 

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and 

the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) mandate regulation of the 

production, use, generation, waste treatment, and disposal of 

products that contain mercury. Sznopek and Goonan (2000) 

developed a comprehensive timetable of mercury-related 

regulations at the Federal level that limited mercury use in 

the United States. In 1978, RCRA established regulations for 

disposal of mercury-bearing waste. In 1992, the EPA banned 

land disposal of wastes with high mercury content generated 

from chlor-alkali facilities. In 1993, the EPA canceled registrations of the last two mercury-containing fungicides at the 

manufacturer’s request. In 1996, the Mercury-Containing and 

Rechargeable Battery Management Act prohibited the sales of 

regulated batteries without recyclability or disposal labels and 

phased out most batteries containing mercury. Regulations and 

environmental standards relating to mercury use in products 

are likely to continue as major factors in limiting domestic 

mercury supply and demand. End-users of mercury-­containing 

products may face fines and prosecution if these products 

are improperly recycled or not recycled. In the United States, 

several large companies and a number of smaller companies 

collect these products from a variety of sources, then reclaim, 

and recycle the mercury. Mercury reclamation from fabricated 

products has become the main domestic source of mercury; 

the commodity has not been mined as a principal product in 

the United States since 1992 (Brooks and Matos, 2005). 

Mercury used in battery manufacture was the leading 

domestic end use of mercury until 1989 (fig. 6). The most 

common battery is the nonrechargeable alkaline primary 

battery. Before 1989, this battery type contained mercury in 

the insulating paper surrounding the battery to prevent the 

buildup of hydrogen gas in the canister of the battery, which 

could cause it to leak. (For the purpose of this paper, the 

categories of batteries, electrical lighting, and wiring devices 

were estimated from 1975 through 1978. During this time, 

the MYB grouped these categories in the electrical apparatus 

category.) Although the amount of mercury used in each of 

these batteries was small, the number of batteries sold in the 

United States was enough to make alkaline batteries the largest 

source of mercury in the municipal waste stream (Jasinski, 

1994). The large number of batteries sold and disposed was 

attributed to the increasing numbers of consumer electronic 

items such as electronic games, portable radios, tape players, and toys. After 1988, mercury use in batteries decreased 

rapidly because of several States’ regulations banning its use. 

Mercury used in batteries dropped from 55 percent of mercury 

use in 1985 to about 1 percent in 1994. In anticipation of the 

Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management 

Act that became law on May 13, 1996, the use of mercury 

in the production of alkaline batteries was eliminated in the 

United States by 1995. The purpose of this law was to ensure 

the phase out of mercury use in batteries and to provide for the 

efficient and cost-effective collection and recycling, or proper 

disposal, of used nickel cadmium batteries, small sealed leadacid batteries, and certain other batteries. 

The manufacture of paint was the third largest use of 

mercury until 1989. In latex paint, mercury acted as a preservative to prevent the growth of bacteria during storage and as 

a fungicide to prevent mildew formation after use. In 1990, the 

EPA, in cooperation with the domestic paint industry, banned 

the use of mercury in interior latex paint. As a justification for 

the action, the EPA cited a risk of poisoning, especially in children, when using the paint in poorly ventilated areas (Jasinski, 

1994). By 1991, mercury used in exterior paint was only 6 t; 

the use of mercury in all types of paint ended in the United 

States by 1992. 

Since 1989, the leading use of mercury in the United 

States has been in the manufacture of chlorine and caustic 

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Regulation 
soda (fig. 6). The manufacturing process in the chlor-alkali 

plants created waste that was landfilled domestically, shipped 

abroad as industrial waste, accumulated within pipes in the 

plant, or lost through evaporation creating pollution. After 

1992, the EPA ban on land disposal of high mercury-bearing 

waste required chlor-alkali plants to construct onsite treatment facilities, or ship their waste material to be processed 

elsewhere. The use of mercury by the chlor-alkali facilities 

declined owing to the closing of a number of plants using the 

mercury cell process, the development of nonmercury technologies, and the increasing concern over human health and 

the environment (Brooks and Matos, 2005). 

Mercury used in wiring devices and switches in older 

cars, fluorescent lamps (“electrical lighting” on figure 6), and 

thermostats (“measuring and control devices” on figure 6) is 

of environmental concern because of the potential for mercury 

releases during demolition, scrapping, and waste treatment. 

More detailed information on usage than is currently available 

is necessary to understand the use of mercury and its effects 

on people and the environment. Additionally, the amounts 

of mercury incorporated into the economy are significant 

because imports of finished products containing mercury are 

not included in the end-use statistics, but are relevant for the 

characterization of the total U.S. mercury use and disposal of 

these products.

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral 

Commodities Owing to 

Changing Technologies 

One complex societal challenge is reduce environmental 

degradation while maintaining or increasing services from 

mineral materials and products. Understanding how the applications of technologies affect the use of mineral commodities 

is a key element in reducing contamination and conserving 

resources. The following commodities were selected for the 

analysis of the end-use shifts resulting from the emergence of 

new technologies: gallium, germanium, indium, and strontium. 

These new technologies either created new applications for 

these mineral commodities in products, or eliminated the need 

for the commodity in some products. 

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

20002002

METRIC TONS

Chlorine/caustic soda

 manufacturing

Other chemicals and

 allied products

Wiring devices and

 Switches

Other

Laboratory uses

Batteries

Dental equipment and

 supplies

Paint

Electrical lighting

Measuring and control

 devices

Figure 6. Mercury end uses from 1975 through 2002 in the United States.

 Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
Gallium

New technologies allow for new uses for gallium owing 

to its properties of conductivity, transparency, and resistance 

to high temperatures. Gallium also easily alloys with most 

metals. Analog integrated circuits (IC) are the most common 

application for gallium, with optoelectronic devices (mostly 

laser diodes, light-emitting diodes [LEDs], photodetectors, 

and solar cells) as the second largest end use. Gallium has 

semiconductor properties, especially as gallium arsenide 

(GaAs), which can convert electricity to light for use in LEDs 

for electronic displays. Increasing sales of electrical and 

electronic products have increased the use of gallium. ICs are 

used in defense applications, high-performance computers, 

and telecommunications equipment. The other major end use, 

optoelectronic devices, is used in aerospace, consumer goods, 

industrial equipment, medical equipment, and telecommunications (Kramer, 2006). 

LEDs remain in widespread use for many electronic 

displays, owing to its characteristic of producing brighter 

and longer lasting lights. New applications for GaAs are in 

automotive lighting, cellular telephones, backlighting for 

liquid crystal displays and television monitors, entertainment 

and decorative lighting, and signage. GaAs-based laser diodes 

were used in such items as compact disks and digital videodisk 

players, and GaAs-based ICs are used in sophisticated military 

radars (Kramer, 2004). 

Gallium consumption rose 168 percent from 1975 to 

2003. Most noticeable was the growth in the overall amount 

of gallium used in the production of IC which grew from 

3.15 t in 1988 to 8.14 t in 2003, reaching a peak 2000 of 26 t 

or nearly 66 percent of total gallium use. Consumption of 

gallium in optoelectronic devices reached a peak in 1995 of 

nearly 88 percent of total gallium use (14.80 t). In 2000, the 

apparent consumption of gallium, most of which was imported 

in raw mineral form from China, Japan, and Ukraine, reached 

a peak of nearly 40 t. The precipitous drop in gallium use after 

2000 probably is attributable to the off-shoring of a significant 

portion of the GaAs-wafer manufacturing capacity to other 

countries, such as China, the Republic of Korea, and Taiwan. 

Gallium metal imports, therefore, were not as large as they had 

been in previous years, which reduced the total U.S. apparent 

gallium consumption. The stagnant economy, especially in the 

wireless communications segment limited the use of gallium. 

In addition, manufacturers built up inventories of GaAs based 

on expectations of continuing demand and fears of a wafer 

shortage; this also contributed to a limited use of gallium 

metal (Kramer, 2002). 

0

10

20

30

40

50

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

20002003

METRIC TONS

Integrated circuits

Optoelectronic devices

Research and development

Other

Figure 7. Gallium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Changing Technologies 
Germanium

Shifts in the patterns of germanium use in the United 

States provide a clear demonstration of advances of new 

technologies and applications that require the use of this mineral commodity. Germanium is an important semiconductor 

material with electrical and insulation properties. Unlike most 

semiconductors, germanium responds efficiently to infrared 

light; therefore, it is used in optical equipment that requires 

extremely sensitive infrared detectors. 

These germanium-based optical systems have been used 

principally for defense applications, military guidance and 

weapon-sighting applications, including satellite systems and 

personnel detection equipment for poor visibility environments. Germanium optical glass also is used for nonmilitary 

purposes in monitoring systems and night-vision surveillance 

equipment. The ability to ‘see’ in the dark, or through fog or 

smoke, led to its widespread use by the military for weapons 

guidance and sighting (U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1980). Germanium usage in infrared systems increased sharply at the end 

of the 1970s, reaching a peak in 1988 of nearly 70 percent 

of U.S. apparent consumption (fig. 8). Then, a rapid downward trend in infrared devices occurred because, among other 

reasons, the radiation emitted from an active device makes it 

locatable (Butterman and Jorgenson, 2005). Nonmilitary applications of infrared devices have increased, but not enough to 

compensate for the decline of the use of germanium in military 

applications; therefore, the overall demand for germanium in 

the infrared systems category has decreased sharply since the 

late-1980s. 

The expansion of the telecommunications industry in the 

1990s required the use of germanium as a dopant, which is an 

impurity, added to silica glass to raise the index of refraction, in 

the manufacture of fiber optics. This end use expanded significantly in 2002 accounting for nearly 61 percent of U.S. germanium use (up from 8 percent in 1990). Until the 1980s, the trunk 

lines of telephone systems were made out of copper; by the end 

of the 20th century, nearly all copper lines had been replaced 

with fiber-optic lines (Butterman and Jorgenson, 2005). 

In 1996, changes were made to the categorization of 

statistical data by the USGS. The use of germanium in semiconductor electronics in some of the radiation detectors was 

moved to the “electrical and solar panels” category. Concurrently, the use of germanium in “polymer catalysts” was 

separated from the “other” uses category. Germanium is used 

as a polycondensation catalyst for the late-stage polymerization of polyethylene terephthalate (PET), which is used in 

plastic bottles, films, food packaging, and many other products 

(Jasinski, 2004). 

In 2003, germanium use in fiber optics decreased 

substantially in the United States owing to the downturn 

of the telecommunications industry, the closures of several 

source (zinc) mines in Australia, Canada, and the United 

States, and the reduction of output of byproduct germanium 

in smelting facilities in Europe (Jasinski, 2004). Both worldand domestic-use patterns decreased because of the strong 

downturn in telecommunications. After 2003, the United 

States no longer used germanium in polymerization catalysts. 

Germanium contained in imported products is not accounted 

for by domestic statistics. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1975

1980

1985

1990

19952000

METRIC TONS

2003

Infrared systems

Polymer catalysts

Semiconductors

Electrical/solar

 panels

Fiber optics

Radiation detectors

Other

Figure 8. Germanium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

10 Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
The use of germanium is expected to grow with a recovery of the telecommunications industry and the development 

of new technologies. Germanium is used in sterling alloy and 

in the thin-film application for DVDs (Jorgenson, 2002). The 

recent rise in energy costs has created a market for solar-panel 

applications. A possible new use for germanium that may 

change the future end-use pattern is the potential replacement 

of gallium arsenide by silicon-germanium (SiGe) in wireless 

telecommunication devices. SiGe is becoming an important 

semiconductor material for use in high speed IC. SiGe chips 

enable manufacturers to combine the high-speed properties 

of germanium with the low-cost, well-established production 

techniques of the silicon-chip industry (Gabby, 2006). 

Indium

The first large-scale application for indium was as a coating for bearings in high-performance aircraft engines during 

World War II. Since then, technologies have been developed 

that require the use of indium, such as electrical components, 

semiconductors, solders, and alloys (fig. 9). The development 

of indium phosphide semiconductors and indium-tin-oxide 

(ITO) thin films for liquid-crystal displays (LCD) has shown 

strong growth in recent years. ITO is an essential component 

of plasma and LCD televisions as well as for computer monitors and many small LCD screens in mobile telephones and 

electronic devices, which have become mainstream products.

The coatings category is the leading indium end use. Two 

types of coatings contain indium—electronically-conductive 

and infrared-reflective. Indium on LCD for portable computer screens, television screens, video monitors, and watches 

are the major commercial applications for electronicallyconductive coatings. They also are used to defog aircraft and 

locomotive windshields and to keep glass doors on commercial refrigerators and freezers frost-free. Indium coatings 

on window glass use indium’s infrared-reflective properties 

and limit the transfer of radiant heat through the glass. This 

property of indium is used to heat and cool buildings more 

efficiently (Carlin, 2004). 

Indium use in the United States grew from 3.5 t in 

1975 to 90 t in 2003, representing a total increase of nearly 

2,500 percent. This increase reflects advancements of technology, especially in televisions, flat-panel displays, and other 

LCDs that use ITO coatings. Additionally, an increase in the 

size of monitors and television screens also contributed to the 

higher usage levels. The use of indium in coatings constituted 

nearly 66 percent of apparent consumption in 2003, up from 

33 percent in 1975. 

Indium in the electrical components and semiconductors 

category was used in infrared detectors, high-speed transistors, 

and high-efficiency photovoltaic devices. Indium phosphide 

components can be substituted for GaAs in solar cells and 

many semiconductor applications, which could change the 

indium end-use pattern in the future (Carlin, 2006).

 The analysis of the end-use data suggests the need to 

explore the potential recovery of indium contained in electronic appliances including LCD panels used in televisions and 

monitors, and mobile phones owing to the increasing preference for these products and the short supply of this commodity globally (Metal-Pages, 2006). Indium contained in these 

products is potentially toxic, therefore, recycling technologies 

are becoming increasingly important to deal with the environmental consequences of the final disposal of these products.

0

20

40

60

80

100

1975

19801985

1990

1995

20002003

METRIC TONS

Coatings

Solders and alloys

Electrical compontents and

 semiconductors

Research and other uses

Figure 9. Indium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

Shifts in End Uses of Mineral Commodities Owing to Changing Technologies 11
Strontium

All color televisions and other devices that contain color 

cathode-ray tubes sold in the United States are required by law 

to contain strontium in the faceplate (glass) of the picture tube 

to block x-ray emissions. Major manufacturers of television 

picture-tube glass incorporate about 8 percent strontium oxide 

by weight, in the faceplate material. Strontium also improves 

the appearance of the glass and enhances the television picture 

quality (Ober, 2004). 

As production of flat screens, which do not require 

strontium, continues to increase, the use of strontium will 

continue to decline (fig. 10). Strontium use in the United 

States generally increased until 1999, mainly owing to use in 

television picture tubes. Since then, overall use has declined 

with the shift to flat screens, and because color television 

faceplate glass production was shifting production from the 

United States to Asia and Mexico. The end-use pattern of 

strontium shifted owing to technology no longer needing the 

use of this commodity for these applications. Strontium’s leading end use, television picture tubes, reached a peak in 1999 

at 28,200 t, representing 75 percent of total U.S. apparent 

consumption of strontium (37,600 t). In spite of the decline, 

in 2003, the television picture-tubes application remained the 

predominant end use for strontium. 

Other end uses consumed relatively small amounts 

of strontium and strontium compounds. Strontium titanate 

sometimes is used as a substrate material for semiconductors 

and in some optical and piezoelectric applications. Strontium 

chloride is used in toothpaste for temperature-sensitive teeth. 

Strontium phosphate is used in the manufacture of fluorescent 

lights, and the entire range of strontium chemicals is used in 

analytical chemistry laboratories (Ober, 2004). 

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

METRIC TONS

2003

Electrolytic production

 of zinc

Pyrotechnics and

 signals

Ferrite ceramic magnets

Television picture tubes

Pigments and llers

Other

Figure 10. Strontium end uses from 1975 through 2003 in the United States.

12  Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
Summary

Several factors have contributed to changes in the use pattern of mineral commodities in the United States. The regulatory system and advancement of technologies are explored 

as factors that have been the drivers behind the end use in the 

eight selected commodities investigated in this report. 

Awareness of the potentially negative environmental 

effects and concerns over public safety of some of the mineral 

commodities has resulted in regulation on the use of commodities like arsenic, asbestos, lead, and mercury. The level of arsenic use in agricultural chemicals, for example, shifted mainly 

because of several regulations enacted by the EPA that considerably reduced its use. The decline in this trend was counteracted by the increased use of arsenic in wood preservatives, 

which uphold the amount of the overall arsenic use in the 

United States. The use of asbestos is tracked under rigorous 

regulated conditions. Health risks associated with high-level 

exposure to asbestos in workplace environments prompted 

regulations to limit the maximum exposure to airborne fibers. 

Because of public awareness of the negative effects on health 

and because of industry concerns for liability, several asbestos 

applications also were banned and domestic production closed 

down. The result was a sharp decline in asbestos use. The lead 

end-use pattern of consumption has been altered by the EPA 

which limited the use of lead in several products of dissipated 

use such as gasoline and paint to address issues associated 

with air pollution and public health, especially in children’s 

ingestion of leaded paint chips. While lead use in gasoline 

additives decreased, lead used in storage batteries increased, 

becoming one of the success stories of recycling, due to law 

requirements in most States. Environmental regulations in the 

United States, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 

and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act regulate mercury generation, waste 

treatment, use, and disposal of mercury-containing products. 

End-users of these products may face fines and prosecution 

if the products are improperly recycled or not recycled. The 

manufacture of mercury-containing products like batteries, 

paint, and electrical and electronic instruments are eliminated 

in the United States; however, the products are still flowing 

into the economy through imports.

Advancements in technology and demand for new products have shifted the end-use pattern of selected commodities 

like gallium, germanium, indium, and strontium in the United 

States. The expansion of the telecommunications industry 

and increasing demand for electrical and electronic products, 

which have become mainstream products, require the use of 

these mineral materials. Gallium consumption, for example, 

increased in 168 percent from 1975 to 2003. The expansion 

of the telecommunications industry which requires integrated 

circuits, and the increasing sales of electrical and electronic 

products that use light-emitting diodes displays were the 

strong force behind the upward trend in gallium consumption. 

Germanium was used mainly for military applications. The 

germanium contained in infrared systems was used in optical 

equipments and extremely sensitive infrared detectors until 

the late 1980s, when this application dropped sharply. Subsequently, the expansion of the telecommunications industry and 

development of technology found new applications for germanium in fiber optics. Indium use grew substantially from 1975 

to 2003; new technologies have been developed that require 

the use of indium in electrical components, semiconductors, 

and a variety of alloys. Indium is an essential component of 

plasma and LCD televisions as well as for computer monitors 

and many small LCD screens in mobile telephones and electronic devices, which have become mainstream products. To 

deal with the environmental consequences of the final disposal 

of these products, recycling technology is becoming more 

important. Finally, strontium illustrates a case where technology and industry preferences no longer need the use of this 

commodity for the color cathode-ray tubes included in televisions and other devices. The strontium use in television picture 

tubes is declining as the preference for flat-screen panels and 

computer monitors has increased.

In general, information on the end use of a mineral commodity provides an overview of the flow of that commodity 

through the economy and an indication of how the mineral 

commodity is used over time. Detailed analysis of end-use 

trends can be a valuable tool for understanding the quantities and types of materials used, and for gaining insights into 

future use. This information is helpful for understanding the 

magnitude and character of these flows, assessing their effects 

on the environment, and providing an early warning of potential problems. 

End-use analysis informs the public and decision makers 

of possible issues regarding the final disposition of products 

containing the mineral commodity, the subsequent implications for waste management, and where possible recycling 

opportunities for the mineral commodity may take place. The 

USGS plays a vital role in this effort by collecting and analyzing mineral commodity data. 

Summary 13
References Cited

Battery Council International, 2006, Battery recycling: Battery 

Council International, accessed March 24, 2006, at http://

www.batterycouncil.org/recycling.html

Brooks, W.E., and Matos, G.R., 2005, Mercury recycling in 

the United States in 2000, in Sibley, S.F., comp., Flow studies for recycling metal commodities in the United States: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1196–U, 21 p, accessed 

October 19, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/c1196u/

Busse, J.P., 2004, Survey methods for nonfuel minerals, in

Metals and minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals 

Yearbook 2002, v. I, p. 1.1–1.3, accessed October 20, 2006, 

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

survey_methods/survemyb04.pdf

Butterman, W.C., and Jorgenson, J.D., 2005, Mineral commodity profiles—Germanium: U.S. Geological Survey 

Open–File Report 2004–1218, 19 p., accessed February 8, 

2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2004/1218/

Carlin, J.F., Jr., 2004, Indium, in Metals and minerals: U.S. 

Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2002, v. I, p. 36.1–

36.5, accessed October 20, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.

gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/indium/indiumyb04.pdf

Carlin, J.F., Jr., 2006, Indium: U.S. Geological Survey Mineral 

Commodity Summaries 2006, p. 82–83, accessed October 20, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/

commodity/indium/indiumcs06.pdf

Cornell University, 1993, Inorganic arsenicals; conclusion of 

special review 11/93: Cornell University, accessed July 12, 

2006, at http://pmep.cce.cornell.edu/profiles/miscpesticides/

alphaalkyl-metaldehyde/inorganic-arsenicals/in-arsenicalsp-rev.html

Gabby, P.N., 2006, Germanium: U.S. Geological Survey 

Mineral Commodity Summaries 2006, p. 72–73, accessed 

October 20, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/

pubs/commodity/germanium/germamcs06.pdf

Industrial Minerals, 2005, Applications of nano-sized materials: Industrial Minerals, no. 448, p. 47.

Jasinski, S.M., 1994, The materials flow of mercury in the 

United States: U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 

9412, 28 p., accessed October 20, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.

gov/usbmic/ic-9412/

Jasinski, S.M., 2004, Germanium, in Metals and minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2002, 

v. I, p. 31.1–31.4, accessed October 24, 2006, at http://

minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/germanium/

germamyb04.pdf

Jorgenson, J.D., 2002, Germanium, in Metals and minerals: 

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

p. 32.1–32.5, accessed October 24, 2006, at http://minerals.

usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/germanium/germmyb02.

pdf

Kelly, Thomas, and Matos, Grecia, comps., 2005, Historical statistics for mineral and material commodities in the 

United States (ver. 1.0): U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 

2005-140, accessed September 26, 2006, at http://minerals.

usgs.gov/ds/2005/140/

Kramer, D.A., 2002, Gallium, in Metals and minerals: U.S. 

Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2000, v. I, p. 29.1–

29.11, accessed October 24, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.

gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/gallium/gallmyb02.pdf

Kramer, D.A., 2004, Gallium, in Metals and minerals: U.S. 

Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2002, v. I, p. 28.1–

28.15, accessed October 24, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.

gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/gallium/gallimyb04.pdf 

Kramer, D.A., 2006, Gallium: U.S. Geological Survey Mineral 

Commodity Summaries 2006, p. 66–67, accessed October 24, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/

commodity/gallium/gallimcs06.pdf

Matos, G.R., and Wagner, L.A., 1998, Consumption of 

materials in the United States, 1900–1995: Annual Review 

of Energy and the Environment 1998, v. 23, p. 107–122, 

accessed October 24, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/annrev/

ar-23-107/aerdocnew.pdf 

Metal-Pages, 2006 (February 21), Japan to increase imports of 

electronic wastes for recycling: Metal Pages Ltd., accessed 

March 29, 2006, at http://metal-pages.com

Ober, J.A., 2004, Strontium, in Metals and minerals: U.S. 

Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2002, v. I, p. 73.1–

73.9, accessed October 24, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.

gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/strontium/stronmyb04.pdf

The Silver Institute, 2005, Silver ions in house frames helps 

resist mold and mildew, in Silver News: The Silver Institute, p. 4, accessed November 23, 2005, at http://www.

silverinstitute.org/news/3q05.pdf

Smith, G.R., 2003, Lead, in Metals and minerals: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2001, v. I, p. 43.1–43.27, 

accessed October 25, 2006, at http://minerals.usgs.gov/

minerals/pubs/commodity/lead/lead_myb03.pdf

Sznopek, J.L., and Goonan, T.G., 2000, The materials flow 

of mercury in the economies of the United States and 

the world: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1197, 28 p., 

accessed October 25, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

circ/2000/c1197/

14  Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States
U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1980, Minor metals, in Metals and minerals: U.S. Bureau of Mines Minerals Yearbook 1980, v. I, 

p. 927–929, accessed October 25, 2006, at http://digicoll.

library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/EcoNatRes/EcoNatRes-idx?type=

article&did=ECONATRES.0056.0934.0075&isize=M 

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 1996, Consumer 

product safety review: U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, v. 1, no. 2, accessed May 4, 2006, at http://www.

cpsc.gov/cpscpub/pubs/cpsr_nws02.pdf 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996, Prohibition on 

gasoline containing lead or lead additives for highway use: 

Federal Register, v. 61, no. 23, p. 3832–3838. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2005, Chromated 

copper arsenate: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

accessed January 9, 2006, at http://www.epa.gov/oppad001/

reregistration/cca/

U.S. Interagency Working Group on Industrial Ecology, 

Materials, and Energy Flows, 1999, Materials report: U.S. 

Interagency Working Group on Industrial Ecology, Materials, and Energy Flows, Washington, D.C., 29 p.

Virta, R.L., 2002, Asbestos–Geology, mineralogy, mining, and 

uses: U.S. Geological Survey Open–File Report 2002–149, 

28 p., accessed January 9, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/

of/2002/of02-149/ 

Virta, R.L., 2005, Mineral commodity profiles—Asbestos: 

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1255–KK, 56 p., accessed 

January 9, 2006, at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2005/1255/kk/

Wilburn, D.R., and Buckingham, D.A., 2006, Apparent 

consumption vs. total consumption—A lead-acid battery 

case study: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations 

Report 2006-5155, 9 p., accessed January 9, 2007, at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2006/5155/

References Cited 15
Matos—Effects of Regulation and Technology on End Uses of Nonfuel Mineral Commodities in the United States—Scientific Investigations Report 2006–5194