Why is "Defining sustainable management as 'not using too many resources'." a common mistake in Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals?

Why it happens: Students simplify the concept without including 'future generations'. How to avoid it: The Cambridge definition MUST include 'future generations' — it is a standard mark-scheme requirement. Learn it exactly: 'meeting present needs without compromising future generations' ability to meet their own needs'. Source: 0680 Mark Schemes 2022-2024 — 'future generations' is consistently awarded a dedicated mark.

Why is "Treating recycling as a perfect solution with no drawbacks." a common mistake in Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals?

Why it happens: Students think recycling is always positive and ignore its limitations. How to avoid it: Always balance: recycling still requires energy and transport; consumer education is needed; some materials degrade after recycling; collection infrastructure is costly to set up.

Why is "Assuming legislation automatically solves resource depletion." a common mistake in Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals?

Why it happens: Students think laws are always followed. How to avoid it: Legislation is only as effective as its **enforcement**. In LICs (low-income countries), corruption, limited government resources, and remote locations often allow illegal mining to continue.

Natural ResourcesCambridge IGCSE Environmental Management (0680)

Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals

Work through the notes, try the practice questions, then take the quiz. The report tells you exactly what to revise next.

Previous Next

Learn this Topic

Start with the slides for the quick version, then go deeper with the full study notes.

Detailed Notes

Full prose, callouts and a recap — built for A* mastery, not just a quick scan.

Take these study notes with you

Download a branded PDF — full prose, callouts, recap and memorise list for Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals, ready to print or save offline.

Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals — Cambridge IGCSE Environmental Management 0680

Because rocks, ores and minerals are non-renewable, their use must be managed sustainably. This subtopic examines recycling, reducing demand, more efficient extraction, and the concept of a circular economy.

What you’ll learn

Mapped to the Cambridge IGCSE 0680 syllabus (2027-2029).

1.3a — Explain why rocks, ores and minerals should be managed sustainably.
1.3b — Describe strategies for the sustainable use of rocks, ores and minerals, including recycling, reducing demand and improving extraction efficiency.
1.3c — Evaluate the effectiveness of these strategies.

Why Sustainable Management is Needed

Non-renewable resources will eventually run out — sustainability extends their availability and reduces damage.

The problem: non-renewability.

Mineral resources (metals, industrial minerals, fossil fuels) form over geological timescales — typically millions to hundreds of millions of years. The rate at which humans extract and consume them vastly exceeds the rate at which geological processes replenish them. This makes them effectively non-renewable.

Consequences of unsustainable extraction:

Resource depletion: Known reserves of some metals (e.g. indium, gallium, rare earths) are expected to last only decades at current extraction rates.
Environmental damage: Continued extraction destroys habitats, pollutes water and causes long-term landscape damage.
Economic instability: Countries that depend on a single mineral export are vulnerable when reserves run out or prices fall.
Intergenerational equity: Future generations have a right to access the same resources as people alive today — depleting them now violates this right.

The 3Rs framework: A standard framework for sustainable management of material resources:

Reduce — use fewer resources in the first place.
Reuse — extend the life of products.
Recycle — recover materials from waste for reprocessing.

These are listed in order of environmental preference: reducing demand is better than recycling.

The waste hierarchy ranks options from most sustainable (reduce demand) to least (landfill) — recycling alone is not enough.

Non-renewable: form over millions of years; humans deplete them in decades.
Depletion → economic vulnerability for resource-dependent nations.
Intergenerational equity: future generations need these resources too.
3Rs: Reduce > Reuse > Recycle (in order of preference).

Recycling Metals and Minerals

Recovering metals from used products reduces the need for virgin ore extraction.

How recycling works: Metal recycling involves collecting used metal products, sorting them by type, and remelting them to produce new metal of equivalent quality.

Benefits of recycling metals:

Benefit	Detail
Conserves ore reserves	Less virgin ore needed
Reduces energy use	Recycling aluminium uses ~5% of the energy of smelting from ore
Reduces habitat destruction	Less mining = less land clearance
Reduces pollution	Less acid mine drainage, fewer tailings
Reduces CO₂ emissions	Smelting fossil fuels → less if recycling
Economic value	Recycling industry creates jobs

Recycling rates for key metals:

Aluminium: Very high recycling rates (>70% in many countries). Aluminium is 100% recyclable without loss of quality.
Steel/iron: ~85% recycling rate globally — most scrap steel is remelted in electric arc furnaces.
Copper: ~35% recycling rate globally — used in wiring and electronics.
Rare earth elements: Very low recycling rate (<1%) — difficult to recover from complex electronics.

Challenges of recycling:

Collection systems must exist and be used by consumers.
Sorting mixed materials is difficult and costly.
Contamination can degrade recycled material quality.
Design for disassembly: many products are not designed to be easily disassembled and recycled.
Economic competition: when virgin ore is cheap (low commodity prices), recycled metal may be uncompetitive.

Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR): Some countries require manufacturers to take back products at end-of-life (e.g. electrical goods in the EU). This incentivises designing products for recyclability.

Recycling aluminium uses only ~5% of the energy of extracting from bauxite.
Steel recycling rate ~85% globally — electric arc furnaces.
Rare earths: <1% recycled — locked in complex electronics.
Challenges: collection, sorting, contamination, product design, economics.

Reducing Demand and Improving Efficiency

Using less is better than recycling — product redesign and substitution conserve finite resources.

Reducing demand (the most sustainable approach): If products are designed to use fewer materials, or if consumers simply buy less, less extraction is needed in the first place.

Strategies:

Product miniaturisation: Smartphones and computers use far less metal than they did 20 years ago. Reducing the mass of metal per device reduces total demand even as production volumes rise.
Product lifespan extension: Making products more durable (longer-lasting) reduces the frequency of replacement and therefore the demand for new raw materials.
Modular design and repair: Products designed to be repaired rather than replaced (e.g. replaceable batteries, modular smartphones) extend product life.
Substitution: Replace scarce or high-impact minerals with more abundant or lower-impact alternatives. Example: fibre-optic cables (silica — very abundant) replacing copper cables in telecommunications.
Dematerialisation: Digital services replacing physical products (e.g. streaming music instead of CDs) reduce material demand.

Improving extraction efficiency: Even when extraction occurs, waste can be reduced:

Improved ore processing technology recovers a higher percentage of the target mineral from each tonne of ore.
Using lower-grade ores: As technology improves, it becomes economic to mine lower-grade deposits that were previously uneconomical.
Waste rock use: Waste rock from mining can be used as aggregate for road building and construction instead of being dumped.
Hydrometallurgy and bioleaching: New chemical and biological methods of extracting metals from low-grade ore use less energy and fewer chemicals than traditional smelting.

The Circular Economy: The circular economy is an economic model that aims to eliminate waste by keeping materials in use for as long as possible:

Design products for durability, repairability, and recyclability.
Recover and regenerate materials at end of life.
Contrast with the linear 'take-make-dispose' economy.

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation is a leading organisation promoting the circular economy model globally.

Reduce demand: miniaturisation, longer lifespan, repair, substitution.
Substitution: fibre-optic (silica) replacing copper in telecomms.
Improve efficiency: better processing, bioleaching, waste rock use.
Circular economy: design for durability, repair, and recyclability — no waste.

Legislation and International Agreements

Governments and international bodies set standards to make extraction less harmful.

National legislation:

Environmental impact assessments (EIAs) are required before new mines open in many countries.
Pollution limits set standards for water discharge and air quality from mines.
Rehabilitation bonds require companies to fund land restoration.
Licensing systems control where and how mining occurs.

International agreements:

The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) include targets on responsible consumption (SDG 12), climate action (SDG 13), and life on land (SDG 15), all of which relate to mineral resource management.
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) promotes transparency in how mining revenues are used by governments — preventing corruption and ensuring money is reinvested in communities.
Certification schemes (e.g. Kimberley Process for diamonds — preventing conflict diamonds) control the trade of specific minerals.

Challenges of regulation:

Artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM): Millions of informal miners (often in developing countries) work outside formal regulatory frameworks — using mercury for gold extraction, destroying habitats, without safety standards.
Regulatory gaps: Multinational companies may move operations to countries with weaker environmental laws ('pollution havens').
Enforcement: Even good laws may not be enforced due to corruption or lack of capacity.

EIA required before mining in many countries.
Rehabilitation bonds force companies to fund restoration.
EITI: mining revenue transparency.
Kimberley Process: certifies conflict-free diamonds.
Artisanal mining often outside regulation — mercury, habitat damage.

Sources: Cambridge IGCSE Environmental Management 0680 syllabus 2027-2029, Section 1.3; 0680/12 May/Jun 2022 — Q3 (recycling and sustainable mining); Ellen MacArthur Foundation — Circular Economy concept; UN SDGs — Goal 12: Responsible Consumption and Production. Last reviewed 2026-05-15.

Master this Topic

Worked examples, formulae, definitions and the mistakes examiners flag — everything you need to push from a pass to an A*.

Take this whole topic with you

Download a branded revision sheet — worked examples, formulae, definitions and common mistakes for Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals, ready to print or save as PDF.

Step-by-step worked examples — Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals

Step-by-step solutions to past-paper-style questions on sustainable management of rocks, ores and minerals, written exactly the way a tutor would explain them at the board.

1Define finite resource and sustainable management
Core• definitions, key terms
Question
Define (a) a finite resource and (b) sustainable management of resources.
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  (a) Finite resource: a natural resource that is used up at a faster rate than it is replaced (or cannot be replaced at all on a human timescale). Rock, ore and mineral deposits take millions of years to form, so they are effectively non-renewable.
2. Step 2
  (b) Sustainable management of resources: the use of strategies that ensure the needs of the present are met without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. (This is the Brundtland definition used by Cambridge mark schemes.)
Answer
(a) A resource used up faster than it is replaced. (b) Meeting present needs without compromising future generations' ability to meet theirs.
Examiner tip
Both definitions are directly quoted in the syllabus and appear on mark schemes. Learn them word-for-word — 'future generations' is essential and worth 1 mark alone.
2Describe and evaluate sustainable management strategies
Core• Adapted from 0680/22 May/Jun 2023• strategies, evaluate
Question
Describe THREE sustainable management strategies for rocks, ores and minerals. For each, give one benefit AND one limitation.
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Recycling — collecting used metals (e.g. aluminium cans, copper wiring) and processing them to make new products. Benefit: reduces demand for virgin ore; saves energy (recycling aluminium uses 95% less energy than extracting from bauxite). Limitation: requires consumer awareness and infrastructure; some materials degrade in quality after repeated recycling.
2. Step 2
  Reduce and reuse — using fewer resources in the first place and reusing items rather than discarding them. Benefit: directly lowers extraction demand with no energy-intensive reprocessing needed. Limitation: requires behaviour change and may conflict with commercial interests (manufacturers prefer new product sales).
3. Step 3
  Legislation and enforcement — governments set legal limits on extraction rates, require permits, impose fines for illegal mining. Benefit: legally binding — sets clear standards; can halt environmental damage quickly. Limitation: difficult to enforce in remote regions; corruption and bribery may undermine effectiveness; may reduce national income from mining.
Answer
Recycling (saves energy/reduces demand; limited by infrastructure), reduce and reuse (direct demand reduction; needs behaviour change), legislation (legally binding; hard to enforce).
Examiner tip
Evaluation questions (6+ marks) require BOTH sides. Only listing benefits = maximum half marks. Structure each strategy as: describe → benefit → limitation.
3Case study: why recycling aluminium is more sustainable than extracting it
Core• recycling, case study
Question
Explain why recycling aluminium is considered a more sustainable approach than extracting new aluminium from bauxite ore.
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Extracting aluminium from bauxite requires opencast mining — destroying habitats, causing soil erosion, and producing large volumes of toxic red mud waste.
2. Step 2
  Smelting bauxite into aluminium requires enormous amounts of electricity (about 15,000 kWh per tonne), usually from fossil fuels, releasing large amounts of CO₂.
3. Step 3
  Recycling uses 95% less energy than primary production. It prevents landfill, conserves bauxite reserves (a finite resource), and reduces habitat destruction from mining.
4. Step 4
  However, recycling requires collection infrastructure, consumer participation, and some energy input. Contaminated or mixed materials cannot always be recycled.
Answer
Recycling aluminium uses ~95% less energy, avoids habitat destruction from bauxite mining, reduces CO₂ emissions, and conserves finite reserves — though it still requires infrastructure and energy.
Examiner tip
This case study demonstrates 'increased efficiency of extraction' and 'recycling' as strategies. Examiners reward specific data (e.g. 95% energy saving) — use it.
4Apply circular economy principles to a high-tech product lifecycle
Extended• circular economy, e-waste, rare earth metals
Question
A modern smartphone contains over 60 different elements, including rare earth metals such as neodymium and dysprosium, cobalt, and lithium. Currently, less than 1% of rare earth metals are recycled globally. (a) Explain why these metals are particularly difficult to recover through recycling. (b) Suggest TWO design changes manufacturers could make to improve recyclability. (c) Evaluate the economic argument for and against governments requiring manufacturers to fund end-of-life recycling of their products.
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Why rare earth metals are difficult to recover: (1) Rare earth elements are used in extremely small quantities across many components — a single phone may contain milligrams of neodymium in the speaker magnet, cobalt in the battery, and dysprosium in vibration motors. These traces are dispersed throughout the device and difficult to separate. (2) Existing recycling processes (shredding, smelting) are designed to recover bulk metals like steel, copper and aluminium — fine rare earth concentrations are lost in slag. (3) The complex mixture of alloys, ceramics, plastics and adhesives makes disassembly technically challenging and expensive. (4) Global collection rates for e-waste are low (~20%) — most devices are discarded in landfill or informally dismantled in conditions that recover only the most accessible materials.
2. Step 2
  Two design changes for improved recyclability: (1) Design for disassembly — using screws instead of glue, standardised connectors, and modular components so phones can be taken apart quickly and components sorted by material. This reduces labour costs in recycling. (2) Material reduction and substitution — replacing rare earth metals with more recyclable alternatives (e.g. ferrite magnets instead of neodymium magnets), or clearly labelling material composition of each component so recyclers know what they are handling.
3. Step 3
  Economic argument FOR requiring manufacturers to fund recycling (Extended Producer Responsibility / EPR): Manufacturers currently externalise the cost of disposal onto governments and consumers. EPR internalises this cost, creating a financial incentive for manufacturers to design products that are cheaper to recycle. It generates revenue from recovered materials, funds formal recycling infrastructure, and reduces the burden on public waste management budgets. Countries with EPR (e.g. EU's WEEE Directive) have achieved significantly higher e-waste collection rates.
  
  Economic argument AGAINST: Compliance costs are substantial, particularly for smaller manufacturers — potentially reducing competition. Costs may be passed on to consumers through higher product prices. Manufacturers in countries without EPR laws gain a competitive advantage, potentially driving production offshore. In low-income countries, informal recycling sectors (which provide livelihoods for millions) may be undermined by formalised systems.
Answer
Rare earths are in tiny dispersed quantities, mixed with diverse materials, making separation technically and economically infeasible with current recycling technology. Design changes: design for disassembly (modular, screwed), material substitution/labelling. EPR for: internalises costs, incentivises better design, funds infrastructure. Against: higher prices for consumers, competitive disadvantage vs. countries without EPR.
Examiner tip
Extended circular economy questions test whether students can apply principles (reduce, reuse, recycle, design) to an unfamiliar product. Quote specific data when available — '60+ elements', '<1% rare earth recycling', 'EU WEEE Directive'. For economic arguments, always give both sides with reasoning, not just labels.
5Evaluate whether a mandatory recycled-content law is economically justified
Extended• Adapted from 0680/22 Oct/Nov 2023• legislation, recycling, cost-benefit, evaluation
Question
A government proposes a law requiring all copper products sold in the country to contain at least 30% recycled copper. Evaluate the economic and environmental arguments for and against this law.
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  Environmental arguments FOR: Increasing the proportion of recycled copper reduces demand for virgin copper ore, slowing the rate of extraction and thus extending the lifespan of finite reserves. Copper mining causes extensive habitat loss, acid mine drainage, and significant CO₂ emissions from energy-intensive smelting. Recycling copper uses approximately 85% less energy than primary production, directly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The law provides a regulatory floor — without it, market forces may prefer cheaper virgin ore when commodity prices fall.
2. Step 2
  Environmental arguments AGAINST: If recycled copper supply is insufficient to meet the 30% requirement, manufacturers may source recycled material from countries with lower environmental standards (recycling facilities may themselves cause pollution through smelting fumes, leachate, and worker exposure). The law does not address end-of-life collection — if consumers do not return copper products for recycling, the supply of scrap remains limited. Energy used in collection, transportation and reprocessing also has an environmental cost.
3. Step 3
  Economic arguments FOR: Recycled copper is generally cheaper to produce than primary copper (lower energy costs), so mandating a minimum recycled content could reduce average manufacturing costs over time. It creates domestic demand for recycled copper, stimulating investment in recycling infrastructure and creating green economy jobs. It reduces national dependence on imported copper ore, improving trade balance and resource security.
4. Step 4
  Economic arguments AGAINST: In the short term, if recycled copper supply is constrained, prices rise for manufacturers, increasing costs for industries using copper (construction, electronics, energy transmission). This may reduce competitiveness of domestic manufacturers relative to foreign competitors not subject to the law. Small manufacturers face proportionally higher compliance costs. If the law applies only domestically, copper product imports from countries without such a law may undercut domestic producers.
Answer
FOR: reduces mining demand, 85% less energy in recycling, conserves finite reserves, regulatory certainty. AGAINST: supply constraints may raise prices, imports may circumvent intent, enforcement challenges, recycled supply depends on collection infrastructure. Overall: the law is beneficial long-term but requires complementary collection policies to be effective.
Examiner tip
Extended evaluation of legislation requires you to structure your answer as environmental FOR / environmental AGAINST / economic FOR / economic AGAINST. A final judgement earns the top marks — e.g. 'The law is justifiable IF collection infrastructure is also mandated; recycled-content targets without collection targets are insufficient'. Never reach a one-sided conclusion.
6Compare bioleaching with conventional smelting as a sustainable extraction strategy
Extended• bioleaching, smelting, sustainable extraction, evaluation
Question
A mining company is deciding whether to use bioleaching (using Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans bacteria) or conventional pyrometallurgical smelting to extract copper from a low-grade ore deposit (0.3% copper). (a) Describe how bioleaching works and explain why it is particularly suitable for low-grade ores. (b) Evaluate bioleaching compared to smelting from an environmental and economic perspective.
Step-by-step solution
1. Step 1
  How bioleaching works: Acidithiobacillus ferrooxidans and related bacteria oxidise sulfide minerals in copper ore. The bacteria catalyse the reaction: 4FeS₂ + 15O₂ + 2H₂O → 2Fe₂(SO₄)₃ + 2H₂SO₄. This produces an acidic leachate containing copper sulfate (CuSO₄) in solution. The copper-rich leachate ('pregnant leach solution') is then processed by solvent extraction and electrowinning (SX-EW) to produce pure copper metal. The overall process is low-technology and can operate at ambient temperature and pressure.
  
  Suitability for low-grade ore: At 0.3% copper, the cost of heating enormous volumes of rock to smelting temperatures (1,200°C+) would be prohibitive — the energy cost per tonne of copper produced would exceed the market price. Bioleaching simply heaps the ore and irrigates with acidic bacterial solution, allowing bacteria to work over weeks to months, making low-grade deposits economically viable.
2. Step 2
  Environmental evaluation — bioleaching vs. smelting:
  
  Bioleaching advantages: (1) No sulfur dioxide (SO₂) gas emissions — conventional copper smelting produces large volumes of SO₂, a major cause of acid rain. This is bioleaching's most significant environmental advantage. (2) Lower energy consumption — no high-temperature furnaces needed, reducing fossil fuel use and CO₂ emissions. (3) Can be applied in situ (in place) with minimal surface disturbance in some settings.
  
  Bioleaching disadvantages: (1) The acidic leachate (pH 1–2) can contaminate groundwater and surface water if not contained — this is equivalent to causing acid mine drainage deliberately. (2) The process is very slow (weeks to months vs. days for smelting), requiring large heap areas. (3) Toxic heavy metals dissolved in the leachate (arsenic, lead, cadmium) require careful management.
3. Step 3
  Economic evaluation:
  
  Bioleaching advantages: Capital costs are much lower than building a smelter (no high-temperature furnaces). Operating costs are lower (no coke or fuel for smelting). Makes low-grade ore economically viable — expanding the resource base. Technology is established and reliable (used commercially since the 1980s at Copper mines in Chile, USA).
  
  Bioleaching disadvantages: Very slow throughput — the time from heaping ore to copper extraction is 60–90+ days versus days for smelting. Not suitable for all ore types — only sulfide ores are amenable. Revenue is delayed, affecting cash flow. Ongoing costs for leachate management and groundwater monitoring are substantial.
Answer
Bioleaching: bacteria oxidise sulfide ore → acidic leachate → copper recovered by SX-EW. Ideal for low-grade (0.3%) ore where smelting is uneconomic. Environmental advantage: no SO₂ emissions (no acid rain). Disadvantage: acidic leachate must be contained. Economic advantage: low capital cost, enables low-grade deposits. Disadvantage: slow process, delayed revenue.
Examiner tip
Questions comparing two extraction/management strategies require point-by-point comparison, not two separate descriptions. Structure as: environmental comparison (each point is bioleaching vs. smelting), then economic comparison. The SO₂ elimination point is the highest-scoring environmental advantage of bioleaching — examiners look for it explicitly.

Key Definitions and Keywords — Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals

Definitions to memorise and the exact keywords mark schemes credit for sustainable management of rocks, ores and minerals answers — sharpened from recent examiner reports for the 2026 0680 sitting.

Finite resource
Examiner keyword
A natural resource that is used up at a faster rate than it is replaced — effectively non-renewable on a human timescale.
Example
Iron ore, copper, coal, natural gas — all finite resources.
Sustainable management of resources
Examiner keyword
The use of strategies that ensure the needs of the present generation are met without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Related: finite resource, recycling, reduce and reuse
Recycling
The process of converting waste materials or used products back into raw materials or new products, reducing the need to extract new resources.
Related: reduce and reuse, sustainable management
Reduce and reuse
Strategies to lower the total quantity of materials consumed (reduce) and to use items multiple times before disposal (reuse), extending the life of existing materials.
Related: recycling, sustainable management
Alternative materials
Materials used instead of scarce minerals or metals to reduce dependence on finite resources (e.g. carbon fibre or plastics replacing steel; bamboo replacing timber).
Related: sustainable management, finite resource

Common Mistakes and Misconceptions — Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals

The traps other students keep falling into on sustainable management of rocks, ores and minerals questions — taken from recent Cambridge IGCSE 0680 examiner reports and mark schemes — and how to avoid them.

✕Defining sustainable management as 'not using too many resources'.
0680 Mark Schemes 2022-2024 — 'future generations' is consistently awarded a dedicated mark.
Why it happens
Students simplify the concept without including 'future generations'.
How to avoid it
The Cambridge definition MUST include 'future generations' — it is a standard mark-scheme requirement. Learn it exactly: 'meeting present needs without compromising future generations' ability to meet their own needs'.
✕Treating recycling as a perfect solution with no drawbacks.
Why it happens
Students think recycling is always positive and ignore its limitations.
How to avoid it
Always balance: recycling still requires energy and transport; consumer education is needed; some materials degrade after recycling; collection infrastructure is costly to set up.
✕Assuming legislation automatically solves resource depletion.
Why it happens
Students think laws are always followed.
How to avoid it
Legislation is only as effective as its enforcement. In LICs (low-income countries), corruption, limited government resources, and remote locations often allow illegal mining to continue.

Past paper style quiz

Get a report showing which sub-topics you've nailed and which ones still need work.

Sustainable Management of Rocks, Ores and Minerals

Detailed Notes

What you’ll learn

1Define finite resource and sustainable management

2Describe and evaluate sustainable management strategies

3Case study: why recycling aluminium is more sustainable than extracting it

4Apply circular economy principles to a high-tech product lifecycle

5Evaluate whether a mandatory recycled-content law is economically justified

6Compare bioleaching with conventional smelting as a sustainable extraction strategy

Finite resource

Sustainable management of resources

Recycling

Reduce and reuse

Alternative materials

✕Defining sustainable management as 'not using too many resources'.

✕Treating recycling as a perfect solution with no drawbacks.

✕Assuming legislation automatically solves resource depletion.

Past paper style quiz