1	
2	
3	
4	
This	map	shows	the	global	distribu7on	of	gallium,	indium,	and	tellurium	resources	and	produc7on.	The	volume	of	each	sphere	represents	a	

country’s	percent	share	of	either	resources	or	produc7on.	

1. Gallium	

a) Resources	

i. The	red	spheres	show	that	gallium	resources	are	fairly	well	distributed	around	the	world	with	no	single	country	

holding	a	dominant	share	of	total	resources.		

ii. Total	gallium	resources	for	2012	are	es7mated	to	be	543	MT.	Australia,	Guinea,	Brazil,	and	Jamaica	are	the	largest	

holders	of	gallium	resources.		

b) Produc7on	

i. The	gold	spheres	show	that	crude	gallium	primary	produc7on	capacity	in	2011	is	highly	concentrated	in	China,	

which	held	69%	of	total	capacity.	This	is	despite	the	fact	that	China	is	es7mated	to	contain	only	4%	of	total	

resources.		

ii. Other	countries	producing	crude	gallium	include	Germany,	Kazakhstan,	South	Korea,	and	others.	

2. Indium	

a) Reserves	

i. The	dark	blue	spheres	show	that	indium	resources	are	heavily	concentrated	in	China,	which	contained	about	69%	

of	total	resources	in	2011.		

ii. Total	global	indium	resources	are	es7mated	to	be	15,000	MT.	

b) Produc7on	

i. The	light	blue	spheres	represent	both	primary	and	secondary	indium	produc7on,	and	show	that	Japan	and	China	

are	the	world’s	major	suppliers.		

ii. Total	primary	and	secondary	produc7on	in	2011	was	1,340	MT.		

3. Tellurium	

a) Resources	

i. The	green	spheres	show	each	country’s	share	of	global	tellurium	resources,	which	is	es7mated	to	be	about	24	

thousand	metric	tons	in	2011.	

ii. Chile,	Peru,	and	the	U.S.	have	the	largest	shares	of	tellurium	resources.		

b) Produc7on	

i. The	light	green	spheres	show	the	distribu7on	of	refined	tellurium	produc7on	by	country.		

ii. China,	Belgium,	and	Uzbekistan,	and	Russia	are	the	top	four	producers	of	tellurium	metal	with	21%,	19%,	11%,	

and	10%	shares,	respec7vely.	

5	
1.		The	source	of	the	figure	in	the	upper	leW	is	J.	G.	Price,	Mining	Engineering	2011,	

33-34.	

2.		The	source	of	the	curve	in	lower	leW	is	Michael	Woodhouse,	Alan	Goodrich,	

Robert	Margolis,	Ted	L	James,	Ramesh	Dhere,	Tim	Gessert,	Teresa	Barnes,	Roderick	

Eggert	and	David	Albin.		“Perspec7ves	on	the	Pathways	for	CdTe	Photovoltaic	Module	

Manufacturers	to	Address	Expected	Increases	in	the	Price	for	Tellurium”.		Solar	

Energy	Materials	and	Solar	Cells	115	(2013)	199	-	212.	

3.		The	price	history	for	Te	can	be	found	online:	hbp://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/

pubs/commodity/selenium/.		And	no,	it	is	not	a	typo.		Tellurium	and	Selenium	are	

located	on	the	same	web	page.	

4.		The	pie	chart	in	the	lower	right	is	compiled	within	a	developing	technical	report	

being	wriben	by	Professor	Eggert’s	group	at	the	Colorado	School	of	Mines.	

6	
7	
8	
1. The	short-term	tellurium	supply	curve	shows	the	annual	amount	of	tellurium	(Te)	that	will	be	produced	at	various	tellurium	

price	levels.	For	example,	at	a	price	of	$100/kg,	about	500	tonnes	per	year	will	be	produced	globally.	

2. This	supply	curve	shows	that	in	the	short	term,	global	tellurium	produc7on	capacity	is	about	730	tonnes	per	year.	About	500	

tonnes	per	year	of	produc7on	is	possible	at	a	Te	price	of	$100/kg,	and	about	700	tonnes	per	year	of	produc7on	is	possible	at	a	

Te	price	of	around	$250/kg.		

3. This	supply	curve	was	derived	using	the	following	informa7on:	

a. Public	informa7on	on	the	tellurium	prices	necessary	for	producers	to	cover	their	variable	costs	(opera7ng	costs)	

b. The	Te	grade	of	the	copper	anode	slime	used	by	specific	facili7es	to	produce	tellurium	metal	

c. The	es7mated	produc7on	capacity	of	exis7ng	tellurium	producers	

d. First,	the	unit	cost	for	a	tellurium	producer	with	an	es7mated	Te	grade	of	2.9%	in	their	copper	anode	slime	is	

assumed	to	be	$100/kg	of	Te	based	on	public	statements	by	producers	and	recent	Te	prices.	Second,	data	on	the	Te	

grade	of	specific	producers	is	used	to	es7mate	their	corresponding	unit	cost	(e.g.	a	producer	with	a	Te	grade	of	5.8%	

is	expected	to	have	half	the	unit	cost	($50/kg)	of	a	producer	with	a	Te	grade	of	2.9%).	Third,	the	produc7on	capacity	

for	each	facility	is	used	to	es7mate	their	poten7al	produc7on.	Tellurium	is	primarily	produced	as	a	by-product	of	

copper	refining	and	to	a	lesser	extent	a	by-product	of	lead.	

4. The	Dashuigou	mine	in	China	is	believed	to	be	the	only	mine	currently	producing	tellurium	as	a	main-product,	where	tellurium	

is	the	primary	metal	of	economic	interest.	Based	on	the	market	prices	when	interest	in	developing	the	Dashuigou	mine	arose	

(2008	and	2009),	we	es7mate	a	variable	unit	cost	of	$250/kg	of	tellurium	for	this	mine.	

5. Note	that	we	state	an	18%	average	net	recovery	efficiency	of	Te	from	mined	Cu	ores.		This	is	not	to	be	confused	with	the	

recovery	efficiency	most	typically	discussed—the	recovery	efficiency	from	Cu	anode	slime—which	is	typically	cited	as	being	

40-60%	efficient.	

9	
10
This	is	more	completely	described	in	the	peer-reviewed	journal	ar7cle	by	Michael	

Woodhouse,	Alan	Goodrich,	Robert	Margolis,	Ted	L	James,	Mar7n	Lokanc	and	

Roderick	Eggert.		“Supply-Chain	Dynamics	of	Tellurium,	Indium	and	Gallium	Within	

the	Context	of	PV	Module	Manufacturing	Costs”.		IEEE	Journal	of	Photovoltaics,	3	(2)	

833-837.	

11	
This	is	more	completely	described	in	the	peer-reviewed	journal	ar7cle	by	Michael	

Woodhouse,	Alan	Goodrich,	Robert	Margolis,	Ted	L	James,	Mar7n	Lokanc	and	

Roderick	Eggert.		“Supply-Chain	Dynamics	of	Tellurium,	Indium	and	Gallium	Within	

the	Context	of	PV	Module	Manufacturing	Costs”.		IEEE	Journal	of	Photovoltaics,	3	(2)	

833-837.	

12	
13

Notes: 

1. Please see the later slides for how these IA and CA+T values might change 

over time. 
1. This	curve	is	derived	from	the	data	and	formulas	represented	in	slides	9,	10,	11	and	12.	

For	calcula7ng	the	material	intensity	(IA)	and	$/Wp	cost,	it	is	assumed	that	the	nearterm	thickness	(d)	is	2.5	micron,	the	Te	u7liza7on	(UA)	is	70%,	the	CdTe	density	is	6.20

g.cm-3,	the	recovery	of	Te	in	manufacturing	(RA)	is	20%,	XA		=	0.53,	and	the	sunlight	

power	conversion	efficiency	is	12%.		This	gives	a	calculated	IA	of	78	MT/GW.		

2. One	could	use	this	IA	to	translate	the	curves	on	slide	9	to	the	manufacturing	poten7al	

that	is	represented	above.		Remember	to	include	the	non-PV	demand	for	Te	as	well	

(we	calculate	a	60%	demand	share	for	Te	in	2013	for	the	non-PV	uses).		

3. The	tolling	charge	(T)	is	not	included	because	these	costs	are	for	the	Te	contribu7on	

only.			

4. The	source	of	CdTe	manufacturing	capacity	es7mates	and	commercial	produc7on	

average	efficiencies:	M	Ahearn,	M	Widmar,	and	D	Brady	‘First	Solar	2012	

Guidance’	(Presenta7on	from	First	Solar);	and	"First	Solar	to	Boost	Produc7on	as	Profit,	

Sales	Climb,"	Wall	Street	Journal,	August	1,	2012.		Available	online	at:	hbp://

sec.online.wsj.com/ar7cle/BT-CO-20120801-722119.html?mod=crnews.			

5. Note	that	we	state	an	18%	average	net	recovery	efficiency	of	Te	from	mined	Cu	ores.		

This	is	not	to	be	confused	with	the	recovery	efficiency	most	typically	discussed—the	

recovery	efficiency	from	Cu	anode	slime—which	is	typically	cited	as	being	more	in	the	

40-60%	range.	

14	
1. The	medium-term	tellurium	supply	curve	shows	the	annual	amount	of	tellurium	(Te)	that	might	be	produced	at	various	price	levels	in	2031.	

2. This	supply	curve	shows	that	in	the	medium	term,	global	tellurium	produc7on	could	reach	over	3,500	tonnes	per	year.	At	price	levels	of	

$350,	$600,	and	$1,200,	the	corresponding	annual	Te	produc7on	levels	are	about	2,000,	3,000,	and	3,500	tonnes,	respec7vely.	

3. Total	tellurium	supply	in	2031	will	come	from	three	principal	sources:		

a. By-product	supply	associated	with	copper	produc7on	

b. Main-product	supply	from	mines	where	Te	is	the	mineral	of	primary	economic	interest	

c. Secondary	supply	from	recycled	CdTe	solar	panels	

d. We	expect	by-product	supply	to	be	the	dominant	source	of	supply	in	2031	with	main-product	and	secondary	supply	making	up	

only	a	minor	share	of	total	supply.	

4. The	by-product	supply	curve	is	similar	to	the	short-term	supply	curve	with	three	modifica7ons:	

a. Capital	cost	are	included	in	the	total	tellurium	produc7on	cost	in	addi7on	to	the	variable	cost	(or	opera7ng	cost)	included	in	the	

short-term	supply	curve.	Capital	cost	es7mates	are	based	on	public	informa7on	of	the	capital	investments	made	for	exis7ng	

tellurium	recovery	facili7es.	

b. Tellurium	recovery	efficiencies	are	improved	based	on	recent	technologies	and	beber	recovery	throughout	the	tellurium	supply	

chain.	Currently,	only	10-30%	of	mined	tellurium	is	recovered	as	refined	Te	metal.	With	adop7on	of	new	technologies	and	

minimizing	tellurium	losses,	recovery	could	reach	70%.	

c. Growth	in	copper	produc7on	will	allow	for	more	tellurium	to	be	poten7ally	recovered	in	2031.	We	es7mate	a	range	of	annual	

growth	in	copper	produc7on	of	0.8%	to	3.0%	with	a	base	case	of	2.6%.	

5. The	main-product	supply	curve	is	derived	using	es7mates	of	the	poten7al	annual	produc7on	and	produc7on	costs	of	three	main-product	

tellurium	mines:	Dashuigou	and	Majiugou	in	China	(Apollo	Solar)	and	La	Bambolla	in	Mexico	(Minera Teloro).	A	minimum	Te	price	of	$500/kg	

to	economically	develop	these	projects	is	es7mated	by	UK	Energy	Research	Centre	(2013).	

6. The	secondary	supply	curve	is	derived	from	es7mates	of	the	cost	of	recovering	tellurium	from	recycled	CdTe	solar	panels,	the	tellurium	

15	
1. This curve is derived from the data and formulas represented in slides 10, 11, 

12 and 15. For calculating the material intensity (IA) and $/Wp cost, it is assumed 

that the medium-term thickness (d) is 1.5 micron, the Te utilization (UA) is 90%, 

the CdTe density is 6.20 g.cm-3, the recovery of Te in manufacturing (RA) is 5%, 

XA = 0.53, and the sunlight power conversion efficiency is 18%. This gives a 

calculated IA of 29 MT/GW. 

2. One could compare this IA to the curves on slide 14 to verify the manufacturing 

potential that is represented. Remember to include the non-PV demand for Te 

as well (we calculate a 30% demand share in 2031 for the non-PV uses with 

3-5% CAGRs for those alternative uses). By category, the assumed CAGRs 

were: Thermoelectrics (5.0%) Metallurgy (3.0%) and Chemicals (3.0%). 

3. The tolling Charge (T) is not included because these costs are for the Te 

contribution only. 

16	
1. The	long-term	tellurium	supply	curve	shows	the	annual	amount	of	tellurium	that	might	be	

produced	at	various	price	levels	in	2051.	

2. This	supply	curve	shows	that,	in	the	long	term,	global	tellurium	produc7on	could	reach	over	

6,500	tonnes	per	year.	At	price	levels	of	$200,	$500,	and	$1,000,	the	corresponding	annual	Te

produc7on	levels	are	about	2,000,	4,500,	and	6,000	tonnes,	respec7vely.	

3. Total	tellurium	supply	in	2051	could	come	from	three	principal	sources:		

a. By-product	supply	associated	with	copper	produc7on	

b. Main-product	supply	from	mines	where	Te	is	the	metal	of	primary	economic	interest	

c. Secondary	supply	from	recycled	CdTe	solar	panels	

4. We	expect	by-product	supply	to	be	the	dominant	source	of	supply	in	2051	with	secondary	

produc7on	having	the	poten7al	to	contribute	a	sizable	share	of	total	produc7on.	There	is	

insufficient	informa7on	on	poten7al	main-product	produc7on	over	the	long	term	to	include	it	

in	the	long-term	supply	curve.	

5. The	long-term	supply	curves	are	similar	to	the	medium-term	supply	curves	with	excep7on	that	

supply	is	es7mated	for	the	year	2051	rather	than	2031.	We	expect	that	in	2051,	greater	

copper	produc7on	and	recycled	CdTe	solar	panels	will	allow	for	more	tellurium	produc7on.		

17	
1. This curve is derived from the data and formulas represented in slides 10, 11,12 and 17. 

For calculating the material intensity (IA) and $/Wp cost, it is assumed that the long-term 

thickness (d) is 1.0 micron, the Te utilization (UA) is 90%, the CdTe density is 6.20

g.cm-3, the recovery of Te in manufacturing (RA) is 5%, XA = 0.53, and the sunlight power 

conversion efficiency is 19%. This gives a calculated IA of 18 MT/GW. 

2. One could compare this IA to the curves on slide 16 to verify the manufacturing potential 

that is represented. Remember to include the non-PV demand for Te as well (we 

calculated a 35% demand share in 2051 when assuming 4% CAGR in non-PV demand 

growth from the mid-term, 2031, projection). 

3. The tolling Charge (T) is not included because these costs are for the Te contribution 

only. 

18	
19	
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

As the reader will notice, the major cost difference between the U.S. and Malaysia production 

locations is the labor costs. As the basis of our calculated manufacturing costs, we assume 

600 direct and indirect employees per 250 MW (at 11.6% efficiency and 63 MW line run rates) 

for both U.S. and Asian manufacturing locationss. This assumption is largely based upon the 

following press releases: 

http://www.pv-tech.org/news

first_solar_breaks_ground_on_its_pv_module_manufacturing_plant_in_vietnam 

and 

http://www.pv-tech.org/news/print/

made_in_the_usa_first_solar_selects_mesa_az_as_site_for_second_domestic_pv 
27
28
29