Sustainability 2011, 3, 2027-2049; doi:10.3390/su3102027
sustainability
ISSN 2071-1050
www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Review
Peak Phosphorus: Clarifying the Key Issues of a Vigorous
Debate about Long-Term Phosphorus Security
Dana Cordell and Stuart White *
Institute for Sustainable Futures, University of Technology, Sydney, PO Box 123, Broadway,
NSW 2007, Australia; E-Mail: Dana.Cordell@uts.edu.au
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: Stuart.White@uts.edu.au;
Tel.: +61-2-9514-4950; Fax: +61-2-9514-4941.
Received: 23 August 2011 / Accepted: 3 October 2011 / Published: 24 October 2011
Abstract: This paper reviews the latest information and perspectives on global phosphorus
scarcity. Phosphorus is essential for food production and modern agriculture currently
sources phosphorus fertilizers from finite phosphate rock. The 2008 food and phosphate
fertilizer price spikes triggered increased concerns regarding the depletion timeline of
phosphate rock reserves. While estimates range from 30 to 300 years and are shrouded by
lack of publicly available data and substantial uncertainty, there is a general consensus that
the quality and accessibility of remaining reserves are decreasing and costs will increase.
This paper clarifies common sources of misunderstandings about phosphorus scarcity and
identifies areas of consensus. It then asks, despite some persistent uncertainty, what would
it take to achieve global phosphorus security? What would a ‘hard-landing’ response look
like and how could preferred ‘soft-landing’ responses be achieved?
Keywords: peak phosphorus; global phosphorus scarcity; depletion; global food security;
phosphate rock; phosphorus security
1. Introduction
While the element phosphorus (P) is one of the fundamental building blocks of life and essential for
food production, there has been very little research on the implications of future phosphorus scarcity
for global food security. Ensuring long-term availability and accessibility of phosphorus sources is
critical to the future of humanity [1] yet unlike water and energy scarcity, this topic has been largely
ignored in research and policy debates on global food security and sustainable resource use until
OPEN ACCESS
Sustainability 2011, 3 2028
relatively recently. The short-term 800% price spike in phosphate rock and associated fertilizer
commodities in 2008 triggered a sharp increase in interest in long-term phosphorus security from the
media, policy-makers, farmers, scientists and response from industry and scientific and popular science
articles [2].
There is little disagreement regarding the significance of phosphorus to life, and specifically
humanity’s dependence on phosphorus for food production. However the collective understanding of
the nature of phosphorus scarcity is still embryonic and there are numerous sources of confusion,
misinterpretation, lack of consensus and uncertainly regarding key issues. This paper aims to clarify
some of the sources of misunderstandings and lack of consensus, thereby contributing to clarification
of the nature of global phosphorus scarcity. This paper achieves this goal by reviewing and
synthesizing the recent body of research on global phosphorus scarcity and sustainable future
pathways, drawing both from the authors’ own and others’ research.
2. Phosphorus: Life’s Bottleneck
The critical life-giving properties of the element phosphorus are reasonably well understood today.
There is relatively little disagreement among scientists, industry and scholars as to the key features of
phosphorus (Box 1).
Box 1. Life’s bottleneck: Key features of a critical element, phosphorus:
 phosphorus is essential for all life, including plants, animals and bacteria–it is a fundamental
component of DNA, RNA and ATP responsible for energy transport to the brain;
 There is no substitute for phosphorus in crop growth and therefore in food production;
 phosphorus cannot be manufactured (or destroyed);
 phosphorus is a limiting nutrient in crop growth and hence can limit global crop yields;
 phosphorus is the 11th most abundant element in the earth’s crust, yet practically useful
deposits are geographically concentrated in only a few countries;
 unlike the other fundamental elements underpinning life (carbon, nitrogen, oxygen and
hydrogen), phosphorus has no significant gaseous phase and cannot circulate freely in
the atmosphere;
 As long as humanity exists, there will always be a global demand for phosphorus.
In short, there is no substitute for the element phosphorus in the growth of all living organisms.
While other critical global resources, such as oil, can be replaced with renewable energy sources, such
as wind or solar power, no other element can replace phosphorus in food production.
Phosphorus was chemically identified over 300 years ago. In the late 17th Century the German
alchemist Henning Brandt distilled 50 buckets of urine through heating and evaporation in search of
the legendary ‘Philosopher’s Stone’ which would supposedly turn metal into gold [3]. Whilst he found
no such magical stone, Brandt discovered the pure form of phosphorus, which also glowed in the dark
and was highly flammable.
However it was only when the German chemist Liebig discovered phosphorus was a limiting
nutrient in plant growth in 1840 that phosphorus became routinely used in mineral fertilizers. Prior to
Liebig’s discovery, crop production relied on natural levels of soil phosphorus with the addition of
Sustainability 2011, 3 2029
manure, crop residues and in parts of Asia human excreta [4]. After World Water II, phosphorus
became one of three (N-P-K) essential nutrient ingredients in commercial fertilizers and was applied
extensively worldwide [5]. Fertilizer use increased six-fold between 1950 and 2000 [6]. It has only
been in the past few decades that the severe consequences of mobilizing excess nutrients into the
environment (causing eutrophication and dead zones) became apparent [7].
Industrial agriculture dramatically altered the phosphorus cycle, by transporting harvested crops all
over the world for food processing and consumption, unlike the natural biochemical cycle, which
recycles phosphorus back to the soil via dead plant matter. This also meant that continual application
of phosphorus-rich fertilizer was required to replace the soil with what was removed in harvest.
While there is little doubt today that phosphorus has played a significant role in feeding the world,
humanity is effectively dependent today on phosphorus from mined phosphate rock. Without continual
inputs we could not produce food at current global yields. While phosphate rock seemed like a plentiful
source of highly concentrated phosphorus, humanity was, and still is, relying on a non-homogenous,
non-renewable resource. Increasing environmental, economic, geopolitical and social concerns about
the short and long-term use of phosphate rock in agriculture means there is a need to reassess the way
crops obtain their phosphorus and humanity is fed [8].
3. Clarifying Common Misunderstandings about Phosphorus Scarcity
Whilst the critical nature of phosphorus in food production as highlighted above is not in doubt,
there is much debate over the long-term availability of phosphate rock for meeting future global food
demand. The main point of contention is the ‘timeline’ of remaining phosphate rock, or ‘million tons
of reserves’. Some of the uncertainty is due to lack of data and research, other sources of contention is
due to misunderstandings and oversimplifications of the situation, while other disagreements are again
due to differences in fundamental principles and assumptions around which the arguments are
based [8]. This section clarifies some of the sources of uncertainty and misunderstandings, thereby
providing an improved understanding of the nature of phosphorus scarcity and possible sustainable
future pathways in subsequent sections.
3.1. Phosphorus is not ‘Running Out’: Law of Mass Conservation
The terms “running out”, “shortage” and “scarcity” are fundamentally different, yet are frequently
used interchangeably with reference to phosphorus in scientific journals, popular science magazines,
newsletters and within the media [9]. However, the element phosphorus is not running out. According
to the Law of Mass Conservation, phosphorus molecules cannot be created or destroyed. There are a
fixed number of phosphorus atoms on the planet (meteors aside) and phosphorus cycles naturally
between the lithosphere and hydrosphere, between land, biota and soil and between aquatic biota and
aquatic sediments. Further, phosphorus is the 11th most abundant element in the earth’s crust
(amounting to some 4,000,000,000,000,000 tons P), so not considered a geochemically scarce element.
Clarity in this regard is therefore important for scientific credibility. Discussions regarding shortage or
scarcity are related to the irreversible depletion of high-concentration rock phosphate reserves and the
economic and energetic barriers to their exploitation as discussed in the next section.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2030
3.2. Mineral Resource Terminology: Phosphorus, Phosphate, Phosphate Rock and Phosphate Reserves
Recent misunderstandings have also arisen in part from inappropriate or vague use of the terms
“phosphorus”, “phosphate rock”, “phosphate”, “phosphate reserves”, which are importantly not
interchangeable. Distinguishing between these is important firstly in relation to substitutability: There
is no substitute for the element phosphorus in the growth of all living organisms [10]. There is
however a substitute for phosphate rock as a source of phosphorus fertilizer and other industrial
applications. Phosphate rock has been the largest source of phosphorus fertilizers since the Second
World War, however, it is not the only source of phosphorus [11].
Secondly, in relation to finite versus renewable resources: phosphorus is ‘renewable’ in the
biosphere in the sense that it cycles between dead and living organisms (e.g., between plants and soil)
at rates of ‘days to years’ (as described in 3.1). Hence organic sources of phosphorus such as crop
residues, food waste, excreta are all considered ‘renewable’ sources of phosphorus. Phosphate rock on
the other hand is classed as ‘non-renewable’, as it cycles between the lithosphere and hydrosphere at
rates of ‘millions of years’. Therefore the concentrated source of phosphorus in rock (phosphate rock)
is considered non-renewable and hence finite.
Thirdly, it is important to distinguish between terms when quantifying these sources. Phosphorus is
rarely found in its elemental form (P), and hence often measured by the phosphate mining and fertilizer
industry as phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5), which contains 44% P. Phosphate rock is the term for
naturally-occurring phosphorus-rich sedimentary or igneous rock, that typically contains around 5–13%
P [5,11,12]. Naturally occurring phosphate rock is often upgraded to a rock production containing
11–15% P. This compares to the average phosphorus concentration of the earth’s upper
crust-approximately 0.1% P [5]. This means that, whilst phosphorus is abundant in the earth’s crust
(approximately 4 × 1015
tons of P total), only a small fraction of this (approximately 0.007%) is
present in the concentrated form of phosphate rock resources. Phosphate rock reserves, is that portion
of phosphate rock resources that have been deemed technically and economically feasible at current
standards (today this represents around 20% of phosphate rock resources) [13]. The amount of reserves
is therefore dynamic and variable from year to year, as it depends on current technology and prices.
However, importantly, the quality of the reserves (such as % P and presence of impurities) is generally
in decline over time. The newest estimates of phosphate rock by the International Fertilizer
Development Center (IFDC) preliminarily estimate reserves to be 60,000 Mt of phosphate rock [13], a
substantial increase on previous estimates by the US Geological Survey [14]—16,000 Mt of phosphate
rock. The USGS has now updated their reserve estimated based largely on these IFDC estimates. This
is largely due to revised reserve estimates for Morocco from 5,600 to 51,000 Mt of phosphate rock.
However these figures are based on secondary literature from 1989 and 1998 and are still considered
preliminary and highly uncertain by the IFDC author and other critics [13,15].
A fundamental point when measuring available phosphate in relation to food security, is that the
amount of phosphorus available for productive use by humanity is orders of magnitude smaller than
the amount of resources (or even reserves) estimated in the ground, due to a range of physical,
ecological, technical, geopolitical, social and legal limitations or ‘bottlenecks’ (Figure 1). An analogy
with water can be made: while freshwater is highly abundant on the planet (in lakes, rivers, glaciers,
groundwater, aquifers), only a very small fraction is available for productive use in society (for
Sustainability 2011, 3 2031
irrigation, drinking, cooking, hygiene and industrial uses). Similarly with phosphorus, only a small
amount will ever be available for use in food production and other industrial applications, yet there is a
dramatic difference in understanding and awareness of phosphorus availability and accessibility
compared to water.
Figure 1. Phosphorus bottlenecks: physical, economic, social and ecological factors
limiting the availability of phosphorus for productive use by humans for fertilizers and
hence food production. Units are in P. Widths are schematic and not to scale.
3.3. Depletion Scenarios versus Peak Resource Theory
Another common source of misunderstanding is the incorrect assumption that depletion estimates
and peak phosphorus estimates are analogous. Depletion estimates are often simply derived by
dividing the total reserves by an average annual consumption (or increasing annual consumption), to
yield the estimated lifetimes of reserves [16]. Table 1 provides different estimated lifetimes of
phosphate rock reserves based on different assumptions.
Peak resource theory (based on empirical evidence) postulates that a critical period (the so-called
‘peak’ in the production of the commodity) will occur long before 100% of the reserve is theoretically
depleted. This is due to the non-homogeneous nature of the reserve and the economic and energy
constraints of accessing the lower quality and more difficult to reach rock. The premises behind peak
phosphorus are explained in detail in section 4. Figure 2 depicts the key differences between
estimating the peak phosphorus timeline (A) and depletion scenario timelines (B & C).
Sustainability 2011, 3 2032
Table 1. Estimates of lifetime of current world phosphate rock reserves by different authors.
Author
Estimated
lifetime of
reserves
Estimated
year of
depletion *
Assumptions
Tweeten [16] 61 years 2050 Assumes 3.6% increase in demand; in [19]
Runge-Metzger [17] 88 years 2083
Assumes 2.1% increase, based on 1992 World Bank/FAO/UNIDO/
Industry Fertilizer Working Group
Steen [18] 60–130 years 2058–2128
Based on range of 2–3% increase demand rates, plus a ‘most
likely’ 2% increase until 2020 and 0% growth thereafter if
efficiency and reuse measures are implemented.
Smil [7] 80 years 2080 At ‘current rate of extraction’
Fixen [19] 93 years 2102 At 2007–2008 production rates
Smit et al. [20] 69–100 years 2078–2109 Assuming 0.7–2% increase until 2050, and 0% increase after 2050.
Vaccari [15] 90 years 2099 At ‘current rates’
Van Kauwenbergh [13] 300–400 years 2310–2410 At ‘current rates’
* year of depletion assumes lifetime estimated from date of publication.
Figure 2. Three different models for estimating the critical point in time when demand for
phosphorus will exceed supply: A. peak phosphorus production, B. depletion scenario
based on average annual consumption and C. depletion scenario based on an assumption of
generally increasing average consumption. In each case, the area under the curve is equal
to the total remaining reserves.
3.4. Uncertain Future Demand
On the consumption side, the future phosphorus demand trends are far from static. While the supply
of high-grade cheap phosphate rock is likely to be constrained in the future for the reasons identified
above, the overall demand for phosphorus is anticipated to increase. Although fertilizer demand is
stabilizing in parts of Europe and North America, where decades of over-application means that soils
are saturated and thus only require application to replace what is lost in harvest [21], the situation is
quite different in developing countries and emerging economies. Global demand is forecasted to increase
in the short-term on average around 3% until 2014/15, with around 2/3 of this demand coming from
Asia [22,23] (see Figure 3). Long-term trends are less clear, but likely to see an increased demand due to
various factors. Key factors likely to contribute to a net increasing future demand for phosphorus include:
Sustainability 2011, 3 2033
 increased population growth (9 billion expected by 2050) causing a surge in food demand [22];
 per capita increased phosphorus demand due to changing dietary preferences towards more
meat and dairy products (especially in growing economies like China and India), which require
significantly more phosphorus fertilizer per capita [23,24].
 increasing demand for non-food crops like biofuels (energy crops require substantial amounts
of phosphorus fertilizers to ensure high crop growth) [25] or lithium-iron-phosphate electric
vehicle batteries, which can require 60 kg of phosphate per battery;
 The need to boost soil fertility in phosphorus-deficient regions. Industry projections of demand
are often based on the current market demand, that is, those players with purchasing power.
However there is a large ‘silent’ demand from poor farmers with phosphorus-deficient soils that
cannot currently access fertilizer markets. In Sub-Saharan Africa for example, where at least 30%
of the population is undernourished, fertilizer application rates are extremely low and 75% of
agricultural soils are nutrient deficient thus yields are falling [26,27].
While improvements in efficiency in phosphorus recovery from mining may decrease demand for
phosphate rock, it is likely that the factors placing upward pressure on demand would still outweigh
these efficiency gains [24].
Figure 3. Global phosphorus fertilizer consumption between 1961–2006 (in million tons
phosphorus, P). The figure indicates that while demand in the developed world reached a
plateau and then declined around 1990, fertilizer demand has been steadily increasing in
the developing world. Data: IFA DATA [25].
3.5. Inherent Data Uncertainty
Finally, the accuracy of phosphate reserve data is limited by the inherent uncertainty around phosphate
rock data. There are substantial concerns regarding the scarcity of phosphorus data, including: a lack of
raw data on phosphate rock reserves, data uncertainty, lack of accountability, lack of transparency of
knowledge production and knowledge management and power imbalances between current data producers
Sustainability 2011, 3 2034
and data users. Of all sources of phosphorus (which include manure and crop residues), most data is
available for phosphate rock. However, there is still a scarcity of reliable, transparent, independent data on
phosphate rock reserves, resources, time series price trends and production, which warrants concern. This
data is very important for estimating a timeline for peak phosphorus production (and other depletion
scenarios) and short-term availability. Key aspects of phosphate rock data scarcity include:
 Physical/geological: Basic uncertainties associated with physically or technically estimating
geological phosphate rock reserves and deposits at the exploration stage (such as
extrapolating ore grades and other characteristics from the analysis of core samples from
drill holes). The recent IFDC study based its conclusions on a 1989 and 1998 study which
estimated reserves based on extrapolating phosphorus soil and rock concentrations in the
Moroccan region [13];
 Economic: Inconsistent economic assumptions behind what constitutes a ‘reserve’. USGS
notes that each country/company uses different assumptions such as $/tonne;
 Commercial: Any data that does exist is typically produced by the mining and fertilizer
industry and is often not publicly available due to ‘commercial in confidence’ reasons. In
Australia, for example, the national government’s geological center, Geoscience Australia,
does not have a complete account of Australia’s phosphate rock reserves and annual
phosphate production because mining and fertilizer firms are not obliged to disclose such
information [26];
 Privatized knowledge: Some commercial data is available, at very high cost. Knowledge
production itself (often undertaken by the mining industry) is also not independent and
transparent and assumptions can influence findings, such as how long current global
phosphate reserves will last;
 Institutional: Currently, USGS is one of only a few organizations that produce publicly
available commodity data on global minerals and metals. This means most analyses rely on
USGS data and there is little opportunity to triangulate with other sources. The World Bank
does produce phosphate rock price data as part of its Commodity Price Data, however these
data sets (both ‘real’ and projected) for phosphate rock missed the 2008 price spike as it
occurred [27];
 Geopolitical: For example, China’s reported reserves doubled over night when it joined the
World Trade Organisation. Further, in 2007, reported world reserves totaled 18,000 million
tons, while in 2008 they decreased to 15,000 million tons, largely because China altered its
reported reserves, and Australia increased its reserves moderately [12];
 Analytical: In some instances, data may exist but there is a lack of data collation and
synthesis. For example, national data on phosphorus flows could be collated and synthesized
from various countries and regions and used to extrapolate to the global scale.
While some of these sources of uncertainty and misunderstandings can be overcome (such as those
related to terminology, methodology, some data collection), others will remain as inherent uncertainty
(such as future trends, commercial-in-confidence data) and thus future sustainable pathways need to be
developed around such risks and uncertainties.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2035
4. Peak Phosphorus: Important Concept or Misleading Doomsday Scenario?
An important dimension of phosphorus scarcity, lies in understanding the critical period when
supply will no longer be able to keep up with demand, so that a smooth transition may be planned for.
The notion of peak phosphorus, in particular, has been hotly contested by scientists, industry,
policy-makers, in recent years, particularly following the short-term price spike [1,11,28]. However,
due to the embryonic nature of the field, peak phosphorus is still poorly understood. This section aims
firstly to clarify the logic and premises behind the concept of the peak phosphorus curve, secondly to
clarify the differences and assumptions behind the two key empirical peak phosphorus analyses that
emerged in recent years, i.e., [1,29,30] to finally to clarify the sources of much debate and confusion.
4.1. The Premises behind Peak Phosphorus Curve and Concept
While Hubbert [31] originally developed the peak oil curve empirically (that is, from aggregating
oil reserve production data from the lower 48 States of the USA), the curve can be applied to estimate
the peak year/period of reserves that have not yet peaked. Hubbert’s analytical framework has since
been applied to other non-renewable resources, such as other fossil fuels [32], other metals and
minerals [32-34] and phosphorus [1,29]. Peak theory has also been applied more conceptually to
renewable resources such as water [35], soils [36,37], food [38], and even to human resources such as
population. A fundamental notion behind the broad use of peak theory in the above cases is that the
growing demand for the critical resource (be it oil or fertile soil) will outstrip economically available
supply (annual production) at some point, if left unchecked, despite some advances in technology
and efficiency.
The concept and analysis of peak phosphorus is based on the following premises:
1. Phosphate rock is a finite resource that takes 10s to 100s of millions of years to cycle or
‘renew’ naturally;
2. Phosphate rock is non-homogenous resource, where the higher quality, more easily accessible
layers are mined first;
3. As a result of 1 and 2 above, this means that over time, the average quality of phosphate rock is
decreasing, in terms of P2O5 percentage (and also the increasing presence of impurities and
heavy metals). This is also supported by empirical evidence [39];
4. Premise 3 means that increasing energy, resources, and costs are required per unit output
of nutrient. That is, to extract the same nutrient content (e.g., P2O5) over time requires
increasing inputs;
5. Premise 3 also means that extracting the same nutrient output generates more waste byproducts;
6. While the short and medium tern costs may fluctuate due to short term changes in demand or
improvements in production methods, over the long term costs and energy inputs will increase,
and indeed will increase not linearly, but exponentially as ore concentrations decline and will
require an increasing amount of phosphate rock to be mined. Observable changes over time
typically occur once approximately 50% of the resource has been consumed;
Sustainability 2011, 3 2036
7. While there may be some fluctuations causing year-to-year variation in phosphate production
(due to supply-side or demand-side variables), there will always be a global demand for
phosphorus, as argued in section 2);
8. This means at some critical point, the increasing annual production of phosphate rock will
become unviable due to increasing energy, economic and other constraints, while demand will
continue to increase.
A key significance of peak phosphorus analysis is that the critical point in time is not when 100% of
the reserves are depleted, but much sooner than this. This means, preparing for a soft-landing will need
to take this timeline in to account, given that most measures (such as those outlined later in section 7
and [40]) will take decades to be implemented. It must be re-iterated here that farmers need both
annual and long-term access to phosphorus fertilizers in order to achieve high crop yields. If no action
is taken decades before the anticipated peak, a hard-landing response to peak phosphorus is likely to
result in a situation of:
• increased energy and raw material consumption;
• increased production, processing and transport costs;
• increased generation of waste and pollution;
• further short-term price spikes;
• long-term trend of increased mineral phosphate prices;
• increased geopolitical tensions;
• reduced farmer access to fertilizer markets;
• reduced global crop yields; and
• increased global hunger.
4.2. Two Empirical Peak Phosphorus Studies—1988 Peak Year versus 2033 Peak Year
While numerous scholars and visionaries have alluded to the finiteness of phosphate rock or the
notion of future phosphorus scarcity over the past century [41,42], the term ‘peak phosphorus’ in this
context only emerged in the scientific and public domains relatively recently. To date, all secondary
references to peak phosphorus explicitly or implicitly refer to either the peak phosphorus analysis
undertaken by Dery and Anderson [29], indicating a peak in phosphorus production occurred in 1988,
or, the analysis undertaken by the authors in Figure 4 [1,30], indicating a peak phosphorus year of
2033. It is important to first clarify the key differences between these two studies, in order to discuss
the relevance of peak phosphorus, and some common misunderstandings of the concept.
Whilst these two studies emerged around the same time, they were undertaken in isolation from one
another. While the underlying concepts of these two analyses remain the same, they differ in two
important ways. Dery and Anderson arrive at a peak year in the past (that is, 1988), because they do
not use a constraining figure for total remaining reserves, citing a lack of reliability and distrust in the
production of USGS data sets. Further, production data for the period up until 2006 is used, which
results in a peak year of 1988.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2037
Figure 4. Peak phosphorus curve indicating a peak in production by 2033, derived from
US Geological Survey and industry data. Source: [1].
In our analysis, the published production data is fitted to a Gaussian distribution using a least
squares method, in which the production data is fitted to the Gaussian and the total area under the
curve is matched to the estimated total reserves. Therefore, when the published estimates of global
phosphate rock reserves (that were available in 2008–2009) are used, this constrains the area under the
curve and thus the solution for the peak year, and results in an estimate of the peak production of
around 2033, as shown in Figure 4.
4.3. Limitations of Peak Phosphorus Analysis
Whilst there is a strong case for the validity of the peak phosphorus concept, and the implications
for humanity of not preparing for a soft-landing approach in good time are serious, the analysis itself
has several limitations. This section highlights some drawbacks of the peak phosphorus analysis.
Firstly, determining the peak year is fraught with difficulties due to the unreliable estimates of the
phosphate reserves. In fact, the peak is likely to be an extended and ‘lumpy’ plateau, rather than
providing a specific year, in much the same way as the peak of oil production.
Whilst the application of Hubbert’s curve can be informative for timely resource management
(particularly critical for those resources like phosphorus which cannot be substituted), it is limited in
the sense that it represents an ideal or single-variable situation. That is, it accounts for the time
variable, however does not account for other variables such as external supply or demand-side factors.
Some ‘real-world’ variables that can distort the perfect or ideal curve include:
1) Supply-side variables (can increase or decrease annual production):
o Deliberate manipulation of annual production by major producing nations (for example, as
in the case of OPEC fixing annual production of oil);
o Geopolitical instability in a producing nation can disrupt and hence reduce annual output;
o Raw material input constraints (such as the price of oil or sulfur) can reduce
annual production;
Sustainability 2011, 3 2038
2) Demand-side variables (can increase or decrease demand):
o Deliberate market distortions by major producing nations (such as China’s export tariff on
phosphate rock which further increased the price of phosphate rock thereby reducing
short-term demand of the commodity);
o Global or regional economic booms or crashes (for example the 2008–2009 global economic
downturn was thought to be responsible for a reduced demand in phosphate rock, while
the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989 led to a sudden drop in demand from a major
phosphate consuming country);
o Local, regional or international policies directly or indirectly related to phosphate (such as
environmental policies to use phosphorus more efficiently on the farm to reduce runoff and
subsequent pollution); and
o Once critical soil phosphorus levels are reached in agricultural soils, only applying
phosphorus to replace what is taken away in harvest is theoretically required, hence
potentially reducing the demand for phosphate fertilizers.
These factors indicate that the exact timeline of the peak should be taken with a degree of caution (as
with any predictive model to a greater or lesser extent). However (as noted in Section 3.4), there will
always be a demand for phosphorus for food production for which a corresponding supply will be required.
4.4. Criticisms of Peak Phosphorus Analysis
Critics of the idea of peak production often argue that the market will take care of scarcity, that
resource scarcity is relative, and one scarce resource can simply be replaced by another indefinitely,
because as price rises, investment in new technology will always improve efficiency of extraction and
use [42]. This is the basis of the market system–neoclassical economic theory—which functions for a
narrowly defined system, but does not acknowledge the finite nature of non-renewable resources like
phosphate rock (or oil). This means that the concepts of peak oil and peak phosphorus (which are
based on the non-homogenous nature of non-renewable resources) are not supported by the adherents
of the market system.
Other skeptics don’t deny that phosphorus peaks will one day occur; rather, they dispute the
timeline and insist a peak is more in the distant future [43]. For example: “peak phosphate in my view
will not be a peak phosphate on the supply side, which is the arguments being raised right now. In my
view it will be a peak phosphate on demand, and that will be probably within the next 40 years” [44].
However there is little analysis on which to base this, as most demand studies do not include the
growing per capita demand for phosphorus-intensive meat and dairy products and the other changes
described earlier. For example, Van Kauwenbergh’s conclusion in the recent IFDC report that “there is no
indication there is going to be a “peak phosphorus” event within the next 20–25 years” [45], is not based
on any analysis of demand trends, let alone a peak phosphorus analysis [45] for a revised peak phosphorus
analysis based on the IFDC reserve estimates.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2039
5. Geopolitical, Environmental and Institutional Dimensions of Global Phosphorus Scarcity
Regardless of whether the timeline of peak phosphorus or the depletion of phosphate rock reserves
is 30 or 300 years, there are a number of other pertinent challenges that in themselves contribute to
phosphorus scarcity, including inequitable distribution of remaining reserves, environmental impacts
and inefficient use.
5.1. Environmental Challenges
The processing of lower grade phosphate rock results in increasing concentrations of impurities
(such as clays) or heavy metals like cadmium and uranium that are toxic to soils and humans and hence
must be removed. Increasing energy (and other resources like sulfur) are therefore required to mine,
process and extract the same nutrient value from phosphate rock while simultaneously generating more
waste. Every ton of phosphate generates five tons of by-product phosphogypsum—which has higher
levels of radiation that are currently considered as too high to allow re-use and hence must be
stockpiled. Further, these environmental challenges are compounded by ongoing and increasing
phosphorus pollution problems leading to eutrophication and dead zones around the world [46].
Exploration and mining (like most surface mining operations) disturbs the immediate natural
landscape and ecosystems where the mine is located due to local land disturbances, air emissions,
water contamination, noise and vibration. Such activities can have a relatively greater environmental
impact in ecologically sensitive areas or highly populated areas (such as Florida). During the
beneficiation (concentration) and the cleaning process some phosphate is lost when contaminants (such
as iron phosphate) are removed and discharged to rivers or contained. Water pollution can also occur at
this stage due to inappropriate management (such as breaking of tailings dams) [47].
However, the sustainability impacts of phosphate rock extend far beyond the mine. Processing and
transporting phosphate fertilizers from the mine to the farm gate, which up to now have relied on
cheap fossil fuels, involve an ever-increasing energy cost. For example, phosphate rock is one of the
most highly traded commodities on the international market. Each year, around 30 million tons of
phosphate rock and fertilizers are transported across the globe [48]. Also, phosphate fertilizer applied
to Australian soils may have started as phosphate rock mined in Western Sahara or Morocco, shipped
to the USA for processing into high analysis fertilizers and then shipped to Australia for distribution to
inland farms. Typically, studies that aim to estimate the embodied energy of food do not take into
account the embodied energy in the transport of fertilizers and their raw materials from the mine to
processing to the farm gate in addition to the production and processing of the food itself.
5.2. Geopolitical Dimensions of Phosphorus Scarcity: Inequitable Distribution and Access
While all farmers need access to phosphorus, approximately 95% of the remaining reserves are
controlled by five countries, including Morocco, China, USA, South Africa and Jordan (Figure 5).
According to the recent IFDC and USGS studies [44,49], Morocco alone controls 85% of remaining
reserves. Such an uneven distribution of one of the world’s most important resources presents
significant risks and warrants the attention of national leaders. Yet there are currently no international
policies, guidelines or institutional arrangements in place to effectively govern phosphorus to ensure
Sustainability 2011, 3 2040
short and long-term accessibility and availability [8]. While China is one of the largest annual
producers, it recently imposed a 135% export tariff on phosphate, effectively banning any exports in
order to secure domestic supply. The USA, historically the world’s largest producer, consumer,
importer and exporter of phosphate rock and phosphate fertilizers, has approximately 25 years left of
domestic reserves [41]. US companies import significant quantities of phosphate rock from Morocco
to feed their phosphate fertilizer plants [50]. This is geopolitically sensitive as Morocco currently
occupies Western Sahara and its massive phosphate rock reserves, contrary to international law.
Trading with Morocco for Western Sahara’s phosphate rock has been condemned by the UN and
importing rock via Morocco has been boycotted by several Scandinavian firms [51,52].
Figure 5. Remaining global phosphate rock reserves as reported in 2010 by International
Fertilizer Development Center (IFDC). Remaining reserves are highly geographically
concentrated and are under the control of only a handful of countries. Data: [44].
In the long term, it is widely acknowledged that cheap fertilizers will become a thing of the past. As
the remaining reserves decrease (below approximately 50%), capital costs can start to increase
exponentially. This will have significant implications for farmers and food production systems. In the
short term, an 800% spike in 2008 in the price of phosphate rock and other fertilizer commodities
resulted from a combination of factors (including the price of oil, increased demand for fertilizers due
to increasingly meat- and dairy-based diets, increased demand for non-food crops like biofuels and
lack of short-term supply capacity to produce enough phosphate rock to meet demand). As a result of
the price spike, farmers around the world held back on purchasing fertilizers, which partly caused the
price to drop. The subsequent global financial crisis led to the sharp decline in demand and hence
price. However the global financial crisis also pushed global food insecurity to an unprecedented level,
with over one billion people hungry [53]. As of January 2011, the food price index has reached
unprecedented levels, and phosphate rock prices are on the increase (Figure 6). There is general
Sustainability 2011, 3 2041
consensus that the quality and accessibility of the remaining phosphate reserves are decreasing, and
costs are, and will continue to increase.
Figure 6. Phosphate rock price 2006–2011, indicating a spike in 2008, and gradual
increase in 2010. Source: World Bank data 2006–2011.
5.3. Demand Mis-Management
While the apparent demand for phosphorus is increasing, the use of phosphorus in the entire food
system from mine to field to fork is currently extremely inefficient. The global phosphorus flows
analysis through the food production and consumption system in Cordell et al. [1] found that 80% of
the phosphorus in rock never reaches the food consumed by humans—it is lost at all key stages.
During mining and fertilizer production, as much as 30–40% of phosphorus can be lost during
extraction and primary processing [38], while much of the phosphorus entering livestock and cropping
systems ends up in manure and soils respectively. Losses in the ‘post-harvest’ food system
(i.e., between farm and fork) have been largely ignored until relatively recently. The globalized food
commodity chain has resulted in more players, more processes, further distances and increased trade of
commodities. Longer production chains in turn contribute to more food losses in the transport,
production, storage and retail stages [54]. While Smil estimated global food losses in the commodity
chain at approximately 50% [55], Lundqvist et al. [54] went on to estimate the embodied water in food
losses. Further, recent studies have calculated the value of household food waste, which is in the order
of £10 billion in Britain alone [56].
These multiple dimensions of phosphorus scarcity suggest that regardless of the exact year of peak
phosphorus production, our local and global food systems are leaky and vulnerable to phosphorus
scarcity and thus deliberate changes are required to create more sustainable and resilient systems.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2042
6. Taking Stock: Consensus and Certainty Following Three Years of Rapid Change
There have been dramatic shifts in our collective understanding of, and the debate on, phosphorus
scarcity since 2007. This section takes stock of where there is general consensus today, and which
aspects are still largely contested [8]. There is a strong or reasonable level of consensus regarding:
o The essentiality of phosphorus food production and that there will always be a demand for
phosphorus for the foreseeable future;
o That eutrophication of lakes and rivers is to a large degree a result of phosphorus run off and
discharges from agriculture, sewage effluents and due to land use changes;
o That the global population (and hence mouths to feed) is increasing and expected to peak around
2050. Most of the new growth is likely to occur in peri-urban areas of developing countries;
o That Sub-Saharan African soils in particular are highly phosphorus deficient (both naturally
and due to mismanagement or low application rates) and will require a significant boost in
soil fertility in order to achieve high crop yields;
o That the demand for phosphorus is increasing, at least over the next few decades (associated
with population, changing diet, and biofuels);
o That costs of mining and processing phosphate rock are increasing;
o That quality of phosphate ore is decreasing;
o That despite the uncertainty, more reliable data and analysis of phosphate rock is required;
o That phosphate rock is a finite resource and because large inefficiencies exist in the system,
more sustainable use of phosphorus should involve increasing efficient use and recovery
of phosphorus.
However there are still areas which are contested or uncertain, including:
o The peak phosphorus concept and timeline;
o The size of remaining phosphate rock reserves, in part due to the uncertainty regarding
assumptions used for reporting what is ‘economically and technically feasible’ which varies
from country to country;
o The actual long-term phosphorus demand (due to the latent demand in Africa, increasing
meat-based diets, demand for biofuels and electric vehicle batteries);
o The extent to which new technology and the market can ‘fix’ the problem;
o The risk of exposure to elevated radiation levels from the decay of uranium in crushed rock
is a risk associated with storage and use of phosphogypsum by-product;
o The amount of phosphorus potentially available for recovery contained in food waste,
organic waste, phosphogypsum and other by-products during the mining, refining and
fertilizer production processes;
o Implications and linkages to other resources, such as uranium, sulphur, potash;
o Sphere of responsibility regarding direct or indirect support for Morocco’s occupation of
Western Sahara, and control of phosphate in that region;
o The quantity of organic (non-phosphate rock or guano) phosphorus sources used annually is
very unclear due to lack of official or standardized monitoring and data collection. This
includes the generation and reuse of manure, excreta, crop residues and other sources;
Sustainability 2011, 3 2043
o The impacts of climate change on the demand and use of phosphorus resources, given
changing rainfall patterns and increasing atmospheric CO2 and the consequent impacts on
agricultural production;
o The impacts of climate change policies on phosphorus use, for example, through changing
land use and agricultural practices;
o Institutional roles and responsibilities and appropriate policy instruments (at the
international and national level) for governing and coordinating the long-term management
of phosphorus for food security.
Consensus is at least needed regarding the existence of the problem, the need to change the current
system and the nature of the key challenges. However there will always be a degree of persistent
uncertainty, that is, there will be issues we don’t even know about, such as interlinked effects between
phosphorus and other global drivers. Such uncertainties need to be managed as risks. This will require
the application of the ‘precautionary principle’ of sustainable development and a response to the
call from the resilience community to design more flexible systems able to adapt to new and
unforeseen circumstances.
7. A Sustainable Future Pathway: Hard-Landing versus Soft-Landing Responses
Despite the presence of uncertainty and a lack of consensus about the timeline of phosphate
reserves, it is highly likely that, unless we intentionally change the way we source and use phosphorus,
we will end up in a ‘hard-landing’ situation. Not only will the gap between demand and supply widen,
but the environmental and economic costs will continue to grow. For example, even if reserves are
larger than previously thought, the geopolitical concentration of the reserves and increasing costs
means importing nations and their food production systems are still highly vulnerable to fluctuations in
availability and price volatility. Such countries will need to ensure all farmers have short- and
long-term access to sufficient phosphorus to grow enough crops to feed a growing population. This is
likely to require an integrated approach that includes (a) diversifying sources of phosphorus, by
investing in renewable phosphorus fertilizers, and/or a high recovery rate of all sources of phosphorus
from the food chain (crop residues, manure, food waste, human excreta); and (b) a large reduction in
the demand for phosphorus brought about through measures ranging from increasing efficiency in
agricultural use to reducing losses in the food chain and changing diets (Figure 7). In the sustainable
scenario in Figure 7, the supply of phosphate rock is diverted earlier than the peak year, to (a) account
for uncertainty if the actual peak is earlier, and (b) due to the substantial environmental and geopolitical
issues associated with a dependence on one source.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2044
Figure 7. A preferred scenario for meeting long-term global phosphorus demand:
integrated demand management (efficiency) measures (blue) and supply-side (reuse)
measures (red). Source: redrawn from [42].
Importantly, this indicates that to meet future food demand, sustainable phosphorus use initiatives
will need to go beyond the current focus on efficiency in agriculture (on the demand side) and beyond
recovery of phosphorus from excreta/wastewater (on the supply side). While demand management
measures are typically the lowest-cost options to society, the exact situation will vary from country to
country, hence region-specific phosphorus strategies should be developed. At the global scale, moving
towards phosphorus security will result in outcomes such that [8]:
o the amounts of phosphorus (and related resources) that are wasted throughout the entire food
production and consumption system are kept to a minimum;
o the use of phosphorus has no net negative impact, from its at-source effects or its
downstream effects, on the environment, including water, land and biota;
o phosphorus fertilizers are produced, transported, used, recovered and managed in a way that
minimizes life cycle energy consumption;
o sufficient phosphorus of appropriate quality is physically available both in the short term
and longer term for farmers to utilize for fertilizers and the whole-of-society costs of
producing, trading, using and recovering phosphorus are minimized;
o all the world’s agricultural soils are sufficiently fertile to ensure high crop yields (with
appropriate management) and sufficient fertilizers for food availability are secured ensuring
global food security;
o all people have sufficient phosphorus intake for a healthy and balanced diet;
o geopolitical interests do not steer the sourcing, use or reuse of phosphorus for
food production;
o there is equitable access to phosphorus sources and current and future generations are not
compromised directly or indirectly by the sourcing, use or re-use of phosphorus for
food production;
o there is independent, equitable and transparent governance of phosphorus resources for
long-term food security.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2045
8. Conclusions
The sudden emergence of the peak phosphorus and global phosphorus scarcity debate on the
international arena has perhaps raised more questions than it has resolved. This paper has clarified the
nature of many misunderstandings, particularly regarding what peak phosphorus is and is not, and
through doing so, provides a more solid scientific basis from which sustainable pathways can be
developed. While there is substantial uncertainty and lack of consensus regarding the size and
longevity of remaining phosphate rock reserves, there is sufficient consensus between the scientific
community, industry and others that the current situation is unsustainable with respect to the
environmental impacts associated with the linear use (throughput) of phosphorus for food production
(in particular eutrophication), inequitable access and geopolitics surrounding the unequal distribution
of phosphate resources, the finite nature of phosphate rock and the inefficiency of phosphorus use
throughout the current food production and consumption system.
In order to achieve a preferred ‘soft-landing’ outcome, an integrated and globally coordinated
approach to managing phosphorus is required. This is likely to require substantial change in both the
physical and institutional infrastructure surrounding the sourcing and supply of phosphorus for food
production. There is no single solution to meeting future phosphorus demand and, while strategies
need to respond to global issues, their design and implementation need to be context-specific. For
example, for each region, country or catchment area, strategies could consider: what are the most
cost-effective, energy efficient, equitable, environmentally compatible means of using and reusing
phosphorus in a given food production & consumption system? Which actors need to be involved and
what roles and responsibilities can they play to ensure long-term phosphorus security?
References and Notes
1. Cordell, D.; Drangert, J.-O.; White, S. The story of phosphorus: Global food security and food for
thought. Glob. Environ. Change 2009, 19, 292-305.
2. Dery, P.; Anderson, B. Peak phosphorus. Energy Bull. 2007, Available online:
http://www.energybulletin.net/node/33164 (accessed on 13 August 2007).
3. Emsley, J. The 13th Element: The Sordid Tale of Murder, Fire, and Phosphorus; John Wiley &
Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2000; ISBN:0-471-39455-6.
4 Mårald, E. I Mötet Mellan Jordbruk Och Kemi: Agrikulturkemins Framväxt på
Lantbruksakademiens Experimentalfält 1850–1907; Institutionen för idéhistoria, University of
Umeå, Sweden, 1998.
5. Brink, J.W. World resources of phosphorus. Ciba Found. Symp. 1977, 57, 23-48.
6. International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA). IFADATA; IFA: Paris, France, 2009. Available
online: http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/ifadata/search (accessed on 22 January 2009).
7. Barnard, J.L. Elimination of eutrophication through resource recovery. In Proceedings of
International Conference on Nutrient Recovery from Wastewater Streams; Ashley, K.,
Mavinic, D., Koch, F., Eds.; IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2009; ISBN:9781843392323.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2046
8. Cordell, D. The Story of Phosphorus: Sustainability Implications of Global Phosphorus Scarcity
for Food Security. Doctoral Thesis, Collaborative PhD between the Institute for Sustainable
Futures, University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) & Department of Thematic Studies—Water
and Environmental, Linköping University, Sweden, Linköping University Press: Linköping,
Sweden, 2010; No. 509, ISBN:9789173934404.
9. Warren, M. Warning of World Phosphate Shortage; The Australian: Sydney, NSW, Australia, 2008.
Available online: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23360117-30417,00.html
(accessed on 12 March 2008).
10. Johnston, A.E. Soil and Plant Phosphate; International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA):
Paris, France, 2000.
11. Gilbert, N. The disappearing nutrient. Nature 2009, 461, 716-718.
12. Jasinski, S.M. Phosphate Rock, Mineral Commodity Summaries, US Geological Survey:
Reston, VA, USA, 2009. Available online: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/
phosphate_rock/mcs-2009-phosp.pdf (accessed on 31 December 2009).
13. Van Kauwenbergh, S. World Phosphate Reserves and Resources; International Fertilizer
Development Centre (IFDC): Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
14. Vaccari, D. Phosphorus: A looming crisis. Sci. Am. 2009, 300, 54-59.
15. Global Phosphorus Research Initiative (GPRI). GPRI Statement on Global Phosphorus Scarcity;
GPRI: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2010. Available online: http://phosphorusfutures.net/files/
GPRI_Statement_responseIFDC_final.pdf (accessed on 26 September 2010).
16. Tweeten, L. Agricultural Policy Analysis Tools for Economic Development; Westview Press:
Boulder, CO, USA, 1989; ISBN: 0813377463.
17. Runge-Metzger, A. Closing the Cycle: Obstacles to Efficient P Management for Improved Global
Food Security. SCOPE 54—Phosphorus in the Global Environment—Transfers, Cycles and
Management, 1995. Available online: http://www.icsu-scope.org/downloadpubs/scope54/3runge.htm
(accessed on 16 June 2010).
18. Steen, I. Phosphorus availability in the 21st Century: Management of a non-renewable resource.
Phosphor. Potassium 1998, 217, 25-31.
19. Fixen, P.E. World fertilizer nutrient reserves—A view to the future. Better Crops 2009, 3, 8-12.
20. Smit, A.L.; Bindraban, P.S.; Schröder, J.J.; Conijn, J.G.; van der Meer, H.G. Phosphorus in
Agriculture: Global Resources, Trends and Developments. Report to the Steering Committee
Technology Assessment of the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. Plant Research
International, Wageningen University: Wageningen, The Netherlands, September 2009.
21. European Fertilizer Manufacturers Association (EFMA). European Fertilizer Manufacturers
Association, Phosphorus: Essential Element for Food Production; EFMA: Brussels, Belgium, 2000.
22. United Nations (UN). World Population Prospects: The 2006 Revision; United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division: New York, NY, USA, 2007.
23. Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations (FAO). Plant Nutrition for Food
Security: A Guide for Integrated Nutrient Management; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2006;
ISBN: 92-5-105490-8.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2047
24. Cordell, D.; White, S.; Drangert, J.-O.; Schmid-Neset, T. Preferred future phosphorus scenarios:
A framework for meeting long-term phosphorus needs for global food demand. In Proceedings of
International Conference on Nutrient Recovery from Wastewater Streams, Mavinic, D.,
Ashley, K., Koch, F., Eds.; IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2009; ISBN: 9781843392323.
25. International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA). Feeding the Earth: Fertilizers and Global
Food Security, Market Drivers and Fertilizer Economics; IFA: Paris, France, 2008.
26. International Center for Soil Fertility and Agricultural Development (IFDC). Global Leaders Launch
Effort to Turn Around Africa’s Failing Agriculture: New Study Reports Three-Quarters of African
Farmlands Plagued by Severe Degradation; IFDC: New York, NY, USA, 2006.
27. Van Kauwenbergh, S. World Phosphate Reserves and Resources; International Fertilizer
Development Centre (IFDC): Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
28. Ward, J. Peak Phosphorus: Quoted Reserves vs. Production History; Energy Bulletin: Santa
Rosa, CA, USA, 26 August 2008. Available online: http://www.energybulletin.net/node/46386
(accessed on 26 August 2008).
29. Dery, P.; Anderson, B. Peak Phosphorus; Energy Bulletin: Santa Rosa, CA, USA, 2007.
Available online: http://www.energybulletin.net/node/33164 (accessed on 13 August 2007).
30. White, S.; Cordell, D. Peak Phosphorus, Information Sheet 2; Global Phosphorus Research
Initaitve (GPRI): Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2008. Available online:
http://phosphorusfutures.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19&Itemid=33#_Th
e_Story_of_P_information_sheet_series (accessed on 1 October 2008).
31. Hubbert, M.K. Energy from fossil fuels. Science 1949, 109, 103-109.
32. Heinberg, R. Peak Everything: Waking Up to the Century of Declines; New Society Publishers:
Gabriola Island, BC, Canada, 2007.
33. Mudd, G.M. The Sustainability of Mining in Australia: Key Production Trends and Their
Environmental Implications for the Future. Research Report No RR5. Department of Civil
Engineering, Monash University and Mineral Policy Institute: Melbourne, Australia, 2007.
34. Giurco, D.; Prior, T.; Mudd, G.; Mason, L.; Behrisch, J. Peak Minerals in Australia: A Review of
Changing Impacts And Benefits; Cluster research report 1.2. Institute for Sustainable Futures,
University of Technology and Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University: Sydney,
Australia, 2010.
35. Gleick, P.H. The World’s Water 2008–2009 The Biennial Report on Freshwater Resources; Island
Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2008; Chapter 1, ISBN:9781597265058.
36. Friedemann, A. Peak Soil: Why Cellulosic Ethanol, Biofuels are Unsustainable and A Threat to
America; Energy Bulletin: Santa Rosa, CA, USA, 2007. Available online:
http://www.energybulletin.net/28610.html (accessed on 13 April 2007).
37. Chambers, J. Peak soil. New Sci. Mag. 2008, 198, 1-24.
38. Judge, A. Checklist of Peak Experiences Challenging Humanity; Laetus in Praesens. 12 August
2008. Available online: http://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/peaks.php (accessed on 14
August 2008).
39. Prud’Homme, M. Peak Phosphorus: An Issue to Be Addressed; Fertilizers & Agriculture,
International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA): Paris, France, 2010; Volume 1.
40. Asimov, I. Asimov on Chemistry; Anchor Books: Garden City, NY, USA, 1975.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2048
41. Roosevelt, F.D. Message to Congress on Phosphates for Soil Fertility; Online by Peters G.;
Woolley, J.T. The American Presidency Project. 20 May 1938. Available online:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=15643 (accessed on 13 March 2011).
42. Stewart, W.; Hammond, L.; Kauwenbergh, S.J.V. Phosphorus as a Natural Resource.
Phosphorus: Agriculture and the Environment, Agronomy Monograph No.46.; American Society
of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI,
USA, 2005.
43. Caveny, R. Global Oil Production About To Peak? A Recurring Myth, in ‘Peak Oil Forum’;
WorldWatch: Washington, DC, USA, 2006; Volume 19, No. 1, pp. 13-15.
44. Van Kauwenbergh, S. World Phosphate Reserves and Resources; International Fertilizer
Development Centre (IFDC): Washington, DC, USA, 2010; p. 43.
45. Lindstrom, T.; Cordell, D.; White, S. Improved Peak Phosphorus Estimations: Determining the
Real Crunch Time for Food Security, forthcoming article.
46. Carpenter, S.R.; Bennett, E.M. Reconsideration of the planetary boundary for Phosphorus.
Environ. Res. Lett. 2011, 6, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/6/1/014009.
47. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Environmental Aspects of Phosphate and
Potash Mining; United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and International Fertilizer
Industry Association (IFA): Nairobi, Kenya and Paris, France, 2001.
48. International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA). Production and International Trade Statistics;
IFA: Paris, France, 2009. Available online: http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/statistics/pit_public/
pit_public_statistics.asp (accessed on 22 January 2009).
49. Jasinski, S.M. Phosphate Rock, Mineral Commodity Summaries; US Geological Survey: Reston,
VA, USA, 2011
50. Jasinski, S.M. Phosphate Rock, Mineral Commodity Summaries; US Geological Survey: Reston,
VA, USA, 2008; Available online: http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/
phosphate_rock/ (accessed on 15 January 2008).
51. Corell, H. Letter dated 29 January 2002 from the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, the
Legal Counsel, addressed to the President of the Security Council, S/2002/161. United Nations
Security Council, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs The Legal Counsel. Available
online: http://www.arso.org/Olaeng.pdf (accessed on 6 June 2008).
52. The Norwegian Support Committee for Western Sahara. One more Shipping Company Quits
Western Sahara Assignments; The Norwegian Support Committee for Western Sahara website,
2008. Available online: http://www.vest-sahara.no/index.php?parse_news=single&cat=49&art=949
(accessed on 6 June 2008).
53. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). More People than Ever Are Victims
of Hunger; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Roma, Italy, June 2009.
54. Lundqvist, J.; de Fraiture, C.; Molden, D. Saving Water: From Field to Fork—Curbing Losses
and Wastage in the Food Chain; Stockholm International Water Institute: Stockholm, Sweden,
2008; SIWI Policy Brief.
Sustainability 2011, 3 2049
55. Smil, V. Phosphorus in the environment: Natural flows and human interferences. Ann. Rev.
Energy Environ. 2000, 25, 53-88.
56. Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP). The Food We Waste, Food Waste Report v2;
WRAP: Banbury, UK, 2008.
© 2011 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).