I agree with your point about the veracity of these sorts of...

I agree with your point about the veracity of these sorts of articles/reports. One can never be sure of other people's motivations (are they acting in good faith or are vested interests involved?). And in the long run it's the paranoid who survive! I also agree that the recycling aspect of metals production is generally underappreciated. However, I am not convinced of the ability of the global mining industry to increase supply significantly in coming decades.

Copper mining provides a good example of this lack of capacity. The ancient Romans were mining copper deposits with 20%+ copper ore. That was the low hanging fruit. Such high-grade deposits are virtually non-existent today as they've already been exploited long ago. Today many of the world's largest producing copper mines operate at circa 0.5% (half of one per cent) copper ore. I've heard some industry experts predict it will be closer to 0.1% (one tenth of one per cent) by the end of this century. The lower the copper content, the more earth has to be moved (and more energy required) to produce the same amount of copper.

This kind of low-grade bulk mining is only possible because of abundant cheap energy (oil). As ore grades continue to fall, more and more energy will be required to move more and more earth to supply the same amount of copper.

The term that is commonly used to describe these phenomena is the "Red Queen Effect" (a reference from Lewis Carol's novel Alice Through the Looking Glass) whereby one must run faster and faster just to stay in the same place.

And we are slowly running out of the abundant cheap oil we need for low-grade bulk mining. In inflation adjusted terms (I.e., today's money) oil was under $10 for most of the first half of the 20C and the two decades following WW2. But an inflection point was reached around 1970. This is approx. the time when Hubbert predicted the world would reach peak oil (refer to the Hubbert peak theory for more details). Since then, governments around the world have piled on massive amounts of debt (and bringing forward future consumption) in order to keep the system operating. Since 1970 the price of oil has increased by close to an order of magnitude (in inflation adjusted terms--I.e., in real terms, not nominal terms). Massive leverage (sovereign debt) and technological improvements have allowed (and continues to allow) the system to continue to function.

But as Herbert Stein famously pointed out: "If something cannot go on forever, it will stop."

Copper is a finite resource and there are real limits to how much more can be produced. The vast mines in Chile and Peru are already hitting hard limits and large miners such as BHP have been throwing money at the problem to little avail. For example, BHP has been disappointed after it recently spent a fortune to upgrade its vaunted Escondida mine in Chile. But after an initial boost to production, head grades have already fallen back, and production decreased below expectations. And this is problem not unique to BHP or to Chile.

IMO, at some point in the coming decades the world will experience an energy crunch and a commodity supply shock more acute than it has ever experienced before. Just a matter of time. Personally, I think the warning signs will go largely ignored right up until the point it hits. Then supply chains will break down and the global system will stop functioning. The consequences will be horrific. It will happen the way Hemingway said: "gradually and then suddenly". At some point going forward mining output is going to decline drastically, and most people won't see it coming until it's too late.

All just my opinion, of course.