Comment on: "Recent revisions of phosphate rock reserves and resources: a critique" by Edixhoven et al. (2014) - Phosphate reserves and resources: what conceptions and data do stakeholders need for sustainable action?

Several recent papers predict a scarcity of phosphate reserves in the near future. The paper by Edixhoven et al. (2014), for instance, expresses the doubts about whether the upward estimate of reserves by the IFDC (2010) and the USGS (2010) provide an accurate, reliable, and comparable picture, as they are based on reports that do not clearly differentiate between phosphate ore and phosphate products (i.e., marketable phosphate rock concentrate). Further the indistinct use of the terms reserves and resources is criticized. Edixhoven et al. ask for a differentiated inventory of world phosphate reserves including "guidelines which determine the appropriate drill hole distances." The claim that humanity is on the safe side with respect to future phosphate is supply is doubted as the validity of the IFDC's upgrading of the Moroccan data to 50 Gt phosphate is questioned. The present paper identifies and discusses basic conceptual errors of the paper by Edixhoven et al. and related papers that predict a short or mid-term phosphorus scarcity. These include the non-acknowledgment of the dynamic nature of reserves (which depends on price, technology, and innovation for exploiting low-grade deposits, etc.), the mixing of finiteness and staticness of the ultimate recoverable resources (i.e., phosphorus that may be mined economically in the long-term future), the improper use of the Hubbert analysis (which, e.g., simply uses the USGS estimates of reserves as a substitute of an estimate of ultimate recoverable resources) and the geostatistical naïve/unprofessional demand for fixed drilling plans to assess reserves. We reconstruct the IFDC and USGS estimates and conclude that there is no evidence for considering the 50 Gt phosphate concentrate as an unreasonable estimate for Moroccan reserves. However, the partial mixing of different units (e.g., phosphate ore and phosphate concentrate or marketable product) in the USGS data may be avoided by improving the data base and using proper conversion factors. When applying these factors and assess all reserves in marketable Gt of phosphate rock (PR-M), which is a common scale for measuring annual consumption, the magnitude of the USGS estimates 2014 of 67 GtPR reserves does not change essentially yet decrease to 64 (IFDC assessment) to 58.3 Gt PR-M (worst case calculation). We argue that, a better harmonization of the (national) classification systems is meaningful. The discussion suggests that the discrepant estimates of resource estimates that can be found in literature are due to different system understandings, different conceptions of sciences, and diverging worldviews. Finally, we discuss in what way an independent and scientifically sound assessment of the phosphate resources can be realized in the long-term. We suggest the establishment of a solidly funded, international standing committee that regularly analyzes global geopotential as the source of future resources and reserves. Such a committee may be hosted by international science associations of geoscientists, given that a comparative assessment with other environmental threats reveals that investments in this field are proportional and meaningful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]