Elemental Abundance of Earth
This is quite an important chart to understand the progress of humanity and maybe identify some things that we might have skipped over in our tech tree progress as a civilisation.
Here’s how to read it.
The X axis is all the naturally occurring elements ranked by their atom number (size of their nucleus). Small atoms on left, big atoms on right.
The Y axis is logarithmic and tells you the abundance of each element in the Earth’s crust.
Side note: All of these elements (other than hydrogen) were made inside an old star that existed before our sun and exploded in a supernova. Our planet is made from the ashes of a dead star.
Now different planets that orbit our sun have different orbit distances and at diff distances there are different combinations of all these elements to form each planet.
The chart below is what we rolled for Earth. Some stuff is very abundant, some stuff is rare.
Now, if you think about this from a high level, the stuff that is very common, should be easily come by, it should be readily available to Earthlings, it should be relatively cheap.
Stuff that is rarer should be harder to find, should be less available should naturally be more expensive.
Stuff that is cheap should be very economic for us to use, we should therefore use more of that stuff and we should therefore get really good at working with that stuff.
Stuff that is harder to find, stuff that is therefore relatively expensive would also be stuff that we use less (economic reasons), and therefore we get less good at using that stuff.
This are very general rules that should apply to any civilisation on any planet at any stage of development. You might be able to estimate what sort of materials and technologies a civilisation on a far away planet would be more likely to develop based purely on the abundance profile of their home world.
You can also look introspectively and check are the elements that are most abundant on Earth also the ones that form the cheapest materials in our economy? Did we get good with the thing easier to get good at on Earth? If not why not? Because maybe there’s a huge opportunity there.
This suggests we are underachieving with our use of magnesium, titanium, calcium, sodium, sulphur.
We are overachieving with our use of copper, lithium, silver, nitrogen, carbon, nickel, cobalt.
Human civilisation is currently over optimised for extraction and use of rare conductive and catalytic elements, and we are under optimised for use of our abundant lightweight reactive elements.
Why has this happened?
1. Economic inertia, iron and copper matured before titanium and magnesium.
2. Chemical accessibility, oxides and silicates demand high energy reduction.
3. Utility density, because of transport costs we value compact specific systems rather than bulk designs.
4. Historic lock in, infrastructure path dependence (steel - cu - al).
If we were more rationally utilised…
Structural alloys, we still use Fe and Al when Ti and Mg are superior and more abundant.
Batteries, we use Li and Co when Na, Mg, Al should be more economic.
Catalysis, we use Pt, Rd, Rh when we should be using Ti, Fe, Mo, W, nitrides.
Electronics, we use Cu when Al and graphene should be more economical.
There are myriad reasons for all these but it’s down to economic drivers and usually because we lack some technological step to bring the more abundant material to our economy more efficiently.
Overall this suggests our entire process chemistry industry is not performing for humanity as well as it could. Although we have no alien civilisation for any frame of reference, so maybe we are doing well?
But this exercise shows our economy and material use has massive economic opportunities to rebalance our economy’s material demands to reflect the resource wealth of Earth.
We should think about this much more deeply as we look to develop other worlds and moons.