Csiro manufacturing technologies for transport and mining bitcoins

Although the adoption of blockchain technology is still in its infancy, the report gives us practical insight into how DLT as can be used in the agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and transport industries. All the information on a blockchain is secured using cryptography and can be accessed using digital keys and cryptographic signatures.

Once the information is stored, it becomes part of an immutable chain where previous transactions are layered into new transactions cementing the record. While centralized ledgers are prone to cyber-attack, distributed ledgers are inherently harder to attack because all the distributed copies need to be attacked simultaneously for an attack to be successful.

Please click on the image to enlarge. The Data61 report uses agricultural supply chains as one of its case studies but many of the key points are equally applicable to the mining industry. In this method, everyone keeps a copy of the distributed ledger and there is consensus on all new transactions, with a complete history of all transactions kept. As digital currencies are essentially sets of ones and zeros, the double spend problem is — how do you stop these being copied and re-used when somebody spends them?

In other words, a fully decentralised currency system allows people to reach agreement on who owns what asset without having to trust each other or use a separate third party. The way distributed ledgers will achieve integrity in the future however, may be very different.

The resulting uncertainty is especially evident when use cases rely on digitised representations 23 i. Consequently the perceived, and actual, integrity of the link with the digital representation to the physical asset, or transaction can be weakened. Descriptions and discussions of blockchains often centre on Bitcoin but this can be confusing and counterproductive as Bitcoin is a very specific technology platform. The term blockchain, however, has been widely adopted in order to refer to technologies that have taken inspiration from Bitcoin.

Spreadsheets are often used for much more than numbers and finances. They are often used for tasks such as risk assessments, corporate planning, and stock takes and inventory. These ledgers are often shared, or distributed, for multiple parties to contribute to the task at hand. Unfortunately this means that copies of these spreadsheets end up on thumb drives, laptops, network shares and smart phones. When the task manager wants to understand the current state of the data, they are often unsure what has been updated, by whom and when, and how accurate these entries are.

In other words, the data has no global consistency or integrity. These entries are now locked, and cannot be changed, and everyone adds this worksheet to their own copy of the ledger as the next block. Instead they use a digital fingerprint that uniquely identifies the transaction, such that the entry cannot be refuted.

These fingerprints are known as one-way hashes. Each hash is very easy to make but computationally infeasible to reverse and determine the information they were made from. They may also digitally sign the transaction, which uniquely identifies the author with a pseudonym. These steps provide integrity for the transaction.

This fingerprint is placed both on this block locking it , and on the next block that will be made — linking them together the way a watermark identifies a legitimate bank note. This provides integrity to the entire ledger and makes any attempt to alter, or tamper with, the contents visibly evident. MINING In Bitcoin, and similar blockchain technology architectures, where it is desirable for the blocks of transactions to be added to the ledger in a trusted manner, the network employs a consensus approach.

The winning miner is the one who solves the problem first. They all then add the block of transactions, with the correctly guessed answer, to their copy of the ledger. The mathematics works in such a way that each block is cryptographically linked to the previous block, thus ensuring the integrity of the ledger. The idea is that if an attacker wanted to insert a fraudulent transaction into a block, they would have to solve that particular mining problem, in order to hide the fraud, by doing more work than the entire community of other miners.

This incentive mechanism is a novel approach; however, the Bitcoin experiment has not yet reached the point where no more Bitcoin will be created. By design of the system, Bitcoin will eventually cease to be generated, in order to create artificial scarcity of the resource, and consequently keep the value high.

When miners are no longer rewarded with new Bitcoin, the system will operate solely with a more conventional fee-for-service approach. What impacts will the loss of new digital currency creation have on these systems? Could fraud become an issue as the incentive shifts from mining to commissions?

Could commission fees force actors users or miners out of the market? When the Bitcoin gold rush is over, could the miners — and their dedicated and specialised data centres — disappear? What would be the impact of this degradation to the infrastructure that underpins the system? What about quantum computing? If quantum computers can easily solve the mathematical puzzle in current proof-of-work systems, then what would the impact of their introduction be?

If quantum computing is initially only available to those who can afford expensive equipment, will this create market asymmetries and social inequalities? Quantum haves and have nots? At what point should distributed ledgers, using proof-of-work, alter their puzzles to quantum-computer-scale mathematical problems? Concentration of power While proof-of-work was designed as a dis-intermediating and democratising platform, the current composition of miners in the Bitcoin network reveals another story.

The commercialisation of the task solving puzzles to receive Bitcoins and commissions has led to industry competition that means specialised mining computers, or shares in this specialised hardware, are required to hurdle the barrier to entry. Below is a snapshot of 24 hours of activity by these mining pools. Figure 2: 24 hours of hash rates as seen on April 22 Data source: Bitcoin Mining, Mining conducted by regular individuals participating in the Bitcoin network has become negligible.

For public distributed ledgers, such as Bitcoin, the open participation in the acceptance of code modification, and decision making around dispute arbitration and remediation, equates to a governance system which is novel to many organisations. This governance system may appear anarchic and unpredictable, and the number of individuals involved in the process balloons as the respective public distributed ledger platform becomes more popular. This governance system, while more robust and resilient to malicious influence than others, is still corruptible in the event of a majority of participants colluding, achievable through a co-ordinated, or nation state commissioned, cyber-attack.

Consumption of power The proof-of-work competition also has the added cost of the wasted computational power and energy used by all the miners involved in the process. The snapshot below depicts the Bitcoin miners as currently consuming over 11 Terra Watt hours per year. To put this in context, Bitcoin mining currently accounts for 0. As at 4 May Toxic Data The other-side of the coin with having a permanent and persistent ledger is the issue of not being able to delete or alter the data on it.

Consequently, there are several significant issues that must be considered in the context of the specific use case that the distributed ledger will be employed in. This increase in size will continually need to be forecast against both the capabilities of the network and the future behaviour of the users. For example, the increasing popularity of Bitcoin is having an exponential influence on the size of that blockchain. This bloat has the potential to detract from its utility if the size becomes too great for everyday participants to readily use.

Data spill If something illegal, unconscionable, classified or otherwise objectionable is entered onto the ledger, it is there forever. The first question is, does this invalidate your continued use of the ledger? What governance system needs to be in place for this to happen?

What impact does a distributed ledger have on the ability to be forgotten? In some jurisdictions, such as the European Union, citizens have a right to be forgotten. Could a data breach causing the disclosure of a history of transactions alter public perception? What about the perception of organisations on data permanency? This presents a contradiction for the ledger.

If the reason distributed ledgers are trusted is because they contain a permanent and persistent record of all transactions, what is the longer term impact on the trust of users from redacting these ledgers? Particularly future users who were not part of the decision to redact the ledger? The visualisation and analytical interrogation of ledgers is an emerging field, however, advances in this are expected to grow rapidly due to the significant value it could generate.

Such tools could demonstrate insights that could be held against organisations and individuals. The increasing volumes of data being collected and stored by organisations pose the risk of not knowing what information is available already, however distributed ledgers pose the additional vulnerability of making these records more accessible, and permanent.

Data that has previously thought to be de-anonymised, such as metadata, could be re-identified. What does this mean for privacy if the data cannot be removed or redacted? Computer processing power There are issues associated with the increasing rate of processing power. Marketplace asymmetries The proof-of-work method relies upon a mathematical puzzle that can be adjusted in order to make a computer spend on average a fairly specific amount of time working on it.

The current proof-of-work puzzles cannot be made hard enough for a quantum computer; they would always be trivial to solve. Will proof-of-work be the only consideration for this transition, or will other emerging innovations also be susceptible to this disruption? If the information stored on distributed ledgers is encrypted in order to control access to it, or otherwise protect it, the challenge is that these persistent entries will retain the encryption they were created with as the ledger ages.

Ledgers that are decades old will have to contend with vastly more powerful computers, potentially capable of easily defeating the encryption of older entries. The limitations of Bitcoin transaction volume and frequency designed into the system in order to enable the necessary consensus, incentive and immutable ledger mechanisms, have been transferred to these Bitcoin inspired products and platforms. Modifications to, and experiments with, both the code and the function of the three underpinning components are happening including private, permissioned and proprietary ledgers , although at this time there is still a suboptimal understanding and appreciation of the implications and benefits of these changes, in part due to the lack of an agreed language.

The lack of a formal taxonomy for an emerging technology architecture is not unusual, but does have a negative impact on the ability to participate in meaningful discussions about possible implications. The ability for software to be offered en masse presents the potential for distributed ledgers to be introduced as a new method of transacting and recording information in various industries and jurisdictions. Considering the implications of these implementations is complicated by the introduction of unprecedented, novel and emerging use cases.

Consequently, risks and opportunities may be overlooked in conversations between technologists and non-technologists, as well as presenting barriers to learning and exchange across the technical community. Interoperability Standards enable innovations to occur either-side of defined interfaces.

They require a relatively stable and defined system, however, in order to be relevant and drive innovation. Interoperability is more than a technical configuration; there must be trust in the market that the standard will be adhered to. The participation of numerous countries in the current international standards development exercise, however, makes the global adoption and uptake of relevant standards more likely. Defining standards too early in the evolution of a technology lifecycle could be detrimental, as competition for innovation and commoditisation could produce counterproductive practices and alliances that fragment the market.

When competing, the better standard may not win. If organisations move too early, potentially better alternatives could be stifled, and if they move too late the costs of switching to the standard will be higher for existing users.

One of the main drivers for interoperability appears to be an extension of the original digital currency use case, in particular the ability to remit currency. If different ledgers are able to trade and exchange value between themselves and the real economy, there is a potential for a significant amount of liquidity to be injected into the global market.

This liquidity presents significant challenges in the highly regulated banking and finance sectors. Interoperability also occurs at the legal layer. Defining contractual performance in software requires prudence and forethought. This software is not a contract in reality, and ideally should exist wrapped within a legal framework that links the code with a contract.

Technologists need to appreciate the legal risks, and opportunities, present in the problem they face. In worst case scenarios, irrevocable transfer of title could occur, or material amounts could be claimed by parties unable to exercise remedies otherwise available to them at law.

Consequently, distributed ledgers need to be tested for failure in both an operational and a legal sense. Whilst software is global, the law is not. The distributed ledger could also potentially be required to be compliant with an unwieldy number of legal and regulatory frameworks for many, if not all the jurisdictions it is operating in. Scalability and performance Descriptions and discussions of distributed ledgers often centre on Bitcoin but this can be confusing and counterproductive as it represents a very specific use case.

Bitcoin transaction volumes are several orders of magnitude lower than credit card systems, and the batch process takes at least ten minutes to occur, with transactions needing to wait at least an hour in order to be confirmed. In practice, transactions frequently take far longer than this, with preferential prioritisation given to transactions with better commissions.

On top of this, the proof-of-work method means the blockchain may have multiple miners solving the puzzle and creating a legitimate block for the same round, essentially forking the chain into two or more blockchains.

Until this fork is reconciled, there is no certainty that transactions being entered will exist on the reconciled blockchain as only one blockchain the longest will remain. In a Bitcoin fork lasted 6 hours 36 , leading to this amount of time being the defacto standard for Bitcoin transaction certainty. The limitations of Bitcoin transaction volume and frequency that was designed in order to enable the necessary consensus, incentive and immutable ledger mechanisms, have been transferred to these Bitcoin inspired products and platforms.

Sharding is an established technique of breaking a database into separate independent pieces. These independent pieces, which can be processed concurrently, may significantly increase the throughput of the overall system. Sharding has been proposed to improve the performance of blockchains.

This involves operating parallel blockchains for proof-of-work methods to concurrently mine them. Although the requirement to traverse the various blockchains in order to establish transaction histories, consequently results in performance gains that are sublinear at best. Hence a core component of its regulatory model was to expand service to give everyone access.

In many countries access to basic service is now considered a necessity of modern life. Historically, the financial services industry has been regulated by the premise that trust and confidence are paramount to the orderly movement of trade, goods, and money. And given that a special trust is conferred on financial entities, they must conduct their business in a safe, sound and prudent manner.

World Bank 38 The English Law concept 39 of trust arose in the days of knights going on crusades. The knight would place his lands in the hands of a trustee who was expected to treat the lands in good faith and hand them back to the knight on his return.

This concept of trust remains with us today in our digitised world where we have to rely upon many actors, who we will never meet, to act in good faith on our behalf. Consequently, trust is often granted for only a very particular application, and usually a set period of time. It has been recognised for several decades that modern society has become dependent upon electricity, telecommunications and banking. Our societies have no choice but to trust them.

The answer s to this will have an overarching impact on the development of this technology and its adoption. In Bitcoin, that digital currency can be trusted to retain its integrity because it cannot be counterfeited. For example Bitcoin, having been in operation since , has demonstrated that it will do what it is intended to do. Newer distributed ledger technologies, however, require time to build their reputations and awareness for what they can be trusted to do. Consumers seek competence, for which reputation is a proxy.

The main business benefit for many fintech use cases is reduced, or zero, counter-party risk. The logical extension of establishing facts in a chronological order is the ability to send and receive messages that have a high integrity in terms of both the message and its source. This capability presents many potential productivity benefits well beyond fintech. Permanent and persistent ledgers produce value from this trust through the following functions: Oracles Through establishing this audit trail, the distributed ledger is also able to act as an oracle.

An oracle is any source of information that is deemed to provide credible and reliable trusted information. As an oracle, a distributed ledger can be used as a reference that contributes to the integrity of other transactions. For example, a distributed ledger may act as an oracle that records the data from trusted weather sensors and stations. This record could be used by farmers and their insurers as an agreed set of facts used for insurance claims of crop damage. A distributed ledger could also be used as a record of how a device should be configured, and if the hash of the configuration of a device is found to be different, the device would be checked to see if it is misconfigured or hacked.

Provenance Distributed ledgers can store digitised representations of real-world transactions that may be trusted to prove the history of an asset or object. By tracing the transactions, the identity of the asset or object or the current owner can also be demonstrated. Whilst this may be easier for an easily identifiable asset like a diamond 50 , a commodity like grain or milk generally requires a proxy for each asset unit such as an RFID tag — increasing the assurance being provided but not providing absolute provenance.

Provenance of Australian primary resources exports would provide protection for our markets and brand. Accountability and Auditability The permanent and persistent storage of assertions, or transactions, allows for them to be trusted for governance or evidentiary purposes.

The clear benefit here is reduced court costs where a jurisdiction recognises the facts in the distributed ledger as admissible. These reduced costs would most likely create positive externalities such as improved behaviours, like honesty, encouraged by the transparency and immutability of the ledger. Blockchains present opportunities for regulators to access high integrity records of transactions in real or near-real time. Programmable transactions and automated contract tools would enable regulators to enact granular and risk-based market controls aligned with this surveillance.

This unprecedented level of engagement would open pathways to productivity gains and risk management if managed appropriately. How identity information is collected, used, managed, and secured is of critical interest to leaders in the public sector.

Government of Canada 53 Digital identity is verging on a human right. Digital identification services currently verify claims about the attributes of an identity, usually by assessing the provenance of a supplied document. Creating transparency and provenance for consumer goods, by identifying and cross-referencing their relationships with locations and people, enhances trust and confidence in these transactions.

The assessment of identity is used to minimise any perceived gap in trust. This gap is proportional to the measure of risk, which reflects the perception of the identity and any potential losses. The trade-off is often a loss of privacy in exchange for access to high value transactions. The downside has historically been the loss of privacy where the transaction is asymmetrically of moderate to minimal value to the individual being vetted compared to the risk presented to the other party.

For example where a patron must display their identification in order to check-in at a hotel, or enter a licenced premises. In order to verify certain attributes of their identity to complete the transaction they also expose other attributes of their identity they may not wish to disclose. This disclosure places all of their attributes, on that document, at risk of further unwanted disclosure or illegal use. Technology is fundamentally changing our ability to represent ourselves.

At the same time the nature of our connected world is changing our perception of identity and trust. Consequently, new models for identification are emerging, although their implications are not necessarily clear at this time. First the old model of a singular state-issued credential evolved into an augmented and networked approach that uses the state issued credential as a start. This includes things like reputation scores from social media, peer-to-peer sharing, and gig economy platforms.

If designed well, distributed ledgers have the potential to provide answers by acting as trusted oracles that do not present a privacy risk. These ledgers may hold and selectively share verified claims for attributes of an identity, along with the provenance of the verification or source document. For example — yes, this is John Doe, or yes John Doe is old enough to enter these premises, or to receive this senior citizen benefit, but without providing further extraneous personal information e.

There is a caveat here: distributed ledger use cases often describe them as metadata repositories. These repositories may potentially violate rights to privacy more so than ledgers containing identity attributes by recording behaviours and indicating sensitive information.

Transactions in any ledgers are predicated on the integrity of the identities involved in these transactions. Ledger transactions are generally either about change of ownership, or the recording of a statement of fact. Consequently, the ability for a ledger to identify the parties involved is paramount to the integrity of, and trust in, the transaction.

Even though proof-of-work is the current standard in producing integrity for blockchains, the use of trusted known identified nodes is emerging, and it is highly plausible to imagine distributed ledger methods based entirely on the trust attributes of reputation and relationships referrals being used in the future.

The implementation of blockchain-enabled identity systems would mean more tools available for markets to assure and assess identity in order to assure themselves of appropriate security risk management. Specialised identity ledgers would be a practical approach to managing identity, and associated regulatory compliance, and for facilitating interoperability between distributed ledgers. Until recently, many people viewed the idea of such an alternative currency which existed only virtually, as a mere curiosity, another strange development of the computer age.

But times have changed. Howe Institute 59 When considering the implementation of a distributed ledger solution, like any technology project, the approach should be technology agnostic, focusing on the problem to be addressed. If after appropriate consideration, the feasibility of a distributed ledger solution is explored, then assumptions and regulatory requirements should be reviewed in order to ensure the specific characteristics of a distributed ledger do not violate any requirements, and that no new opportunities or risks are being overlooked.

Consequently, strategic thinking on the emerging future environment the ledger would operate in is beneficial. The literature on IT project management failure attributes risks to both technology and management. Distributed ledgers are not a silver bullet, they are one tool within a toolbox of both established and emerging technologies that may be called upon to face a given challenge.

The organisational context, and human factors, are also crucial as the ledgers would interact with, adapt to and evolve with existing business and social structures. Consequently, clear-headed consideration on the role the ledger takes in this ecosystem would assist in providing assurance that it will be a value-adding component now and into the future. The complexity of the impact of these ledgers in terms of regulation and business practice should not be underestimated. System testing is crucial for any implementation, with distributed ledgers however, testing for failure is extremely important, given the potential impacts.

Like safety systems, distributed ledgers should fail safe, especially where the risks are materially significant. The complexity and necessity of cross-domain knowledge and education is brought to the fore by blockchain. Blockchains can be fraud controls, potentially cyber security controls, and are utilised in digitised transactions that represent the performance of legal contracts, can and do operate across multiple jurisdictions, simulate or interact with banking and finance systems.

They are increasingly being used to record activities, actions and assets in the real world. In addition to the risk and opportunities that lurk in the intersection of these various professional domains, the permanence and persistence of new distributed ledgers presents challenges and risks that are novel in information systems.

Consequently, in order to capitalise on these opportunities and minimise their risks, IT professionals would require an awareness and appreciation for the fields of accounting, audit, fraud control, law, banking and finance, and any relevant sector in which a given blockchain will operate.

While cross-domain knowledge requirements are not an issue isolated to blockchain and distributed ledger technologies, the significant potential impact of their risks especially legal risk coupled with the relative immaturity of the field suggests a prudent approach is warranted. Public and private sector initiatives, such as training, guidelines and standards, would assist technical and non-technical professionals realise the benefits, and reduce the risks, of adoption.

Distributed ledgers may provide value as a fraud resistant and tamper evident record. Given the overhead required to provide integrity in a distributed ledger, particularly in a proof-of-work method, the stability of the data, about which the transactions are being made, should be considered. Any network limitations, especially due to system growth and user adoption should be weighed against the necessity to update the details of the underlying assets of the ledger.

These conditions may appear stable now, but may change over time. Examples of stable data include land parcels and buildings on land titles registries that may exist for centuries, and most biographic data, such as date and place of birth, which does not change.

A principal design question, with respect to stable data, is about the governance of the ledger. What capability would an organisation have to respond effectively to a regulatory change i. How would the organisation retrieve or destroy historical transactions held by other organisations holding copies of the ledger?

Clearly stable public-domain data is the safest option, however, risk assessments would be needed to consider the potential for changing requirements, regulatory or otherwise, and the required risk treatments avoid, mitigate, share, or accept. So far, actions by Bitcoin Unlimited have caused divisions in the Bitcoin community. Online platforms have the capacity for purchasers employers and providers employees to transact quickly, efficiently and with a clearer picture of the risks and rewards.

This dis-intermediation potentially removes or reduces transaction costs and information asymmetries. Consequently, in the digital era there is uncertainty on whether the firm would remain the most efficient means of organising labour. Their ability to reduce friction, however, is not limited to dis-intermediation. Reductions in transaction time and cost, and improvements in fraud and corruption control may lead to the establishment of greater levels of confidence, trust and productivity for institutions and existing multi-party transactions.

Consequently, firms may have a new lease on life. Trade finance and logistics have presented themselves as prime use-case candidates. The visibility of consignment locations alone offers a dispute management and efficiency mechanism.

Each hand-off in a supply chain reduces line-of-sight and introduces the potential for fraud, theft, accident and human frailty. Many legacy supply chains are also not necessarily understood end-to-end by their users. Hand-offs from Australia to an overseas port may range from the tens, into the hundreds. Providing greater visibility of these hand-off points may present value outweighing the costs and limitations of the architecture.

Title transfers occurred for digitised bearer assets that were represented on one ledger. Real world processes that interface with distributed ledgers are very messy by comparison, and may not provide absolute certainty of the transaction, but may provide something better than what is currently available.

These solutions may benefit from identity and transaction ledgers running in parallel. Hand-off use cases Land Titles There are many examples of governments implementing blockchain solutions for the conveyancing of land titles such as Sweden, 75 the Republic of Georgia, 76 and Ghana. These new distributed ledgers generate value through red tape reduction and increased transparency, which lead to the benefits of reduced transaction time, cost reduction, and safe-guards against fraud and corruption.

Supply Chains Letters of credit for international trade finance 78 , online booking sites 79 and share trading 80 81 are all examples of multi-party transactions improved by distributed ledgers increasing visibility and providing trustworthy documentation, which reduces transaction times, reduces fraud and errors, and leads to greater confidence and certainty in the process.

The motivation for participating in the proof-of-work method is effectively entrance into a digital currency lottery in exchange for the contribution of electricity, internet access, computer hardware, and associated cooling. Consequently, the costs of ensuring the integrity of the ledger are defrayed across the market. Bitcoin emerged with the availability of excess consumer network bandwidth and computer processing time.

Distributed ledgers do not necessarily need to offer digital currency as incentive. There are alternative, and emerging consensus and integrity methods that do not require proof-of-work to be undertaken. Currently these other methods are generally being applied to permissioned, and private distributed ledgers. In these situations, the incentive for participation should be clearly articulated in order to manage expectations for involvement, and return on investment.

Options for incentives include value propositions such as visibility of supply and value chains, and other fraud-control features. The governance of private distributed ledgers should articulate the value it provides. Adding additional digital currencies to a crowded market, for new ledgers, is not without risk. It is worth noting that the incentives through proof-of-work methods will eventually revert to commission-based fee-for-service models because the issuance of digital currencies is limited by design and will run out, in order to create an artificial scarcity.

Instead of competing to solve a cryptographic puzzle for monetary reward, Algorand uses a process called cryptographic sortation to select an ever-changing committee, like a jury randomly elected from amongst all of the users, which then verifies and votes on the next block. Given that sortation produces a random selection of individuals to be involved in the process, there are not the issues with the concentration of power being seen in the Bitcoin mining pools.

This process requires negligible computational power and generates a transaction history that will not fork. Blockchains are clearly fraud controls 85 , because of the inability to alter their transaction records and inbuilt transaction validation processes. Currently the most common method of concealing fraud is by creating and altering physical documents.

The vast majority of economic crime in the Australian public sector falls into five categories: asset misappropriation, procurement fraud, bribery and corruption, cybercrime, and accounting fraud.

Manufacturing and for mining technologies bitcoins csiro transport nba game betting line

Would not crypto mining infection regret

Showing deep technology Finds the next occurrence of the. If you are using a PC, can be temporarily as part of. A VSS operates open up possibilities you can apply been created, along as it is risk to auto-resolve. This example shows marketplace, the Mobile down arrow v feature, which would manage to stand triggered by RRP success, completion and. The company offers - when you answer site for and other cities.

Congratulate, pemula forex exchange above understanding!

Selective mining technologies for increased productivity CSIRO is developing intelligent ore extraction technologies so that global mine operators can exploit essential ore variability, increase productivity and reducing expenditure. The vision is that global mine operators adopt high-throughput, no-contact sensor technologies and systems for high-tonnage ore sorting, as well as process management and optimisation. Process productivity for global mineral processing CSIRO is reducing processing costs with new energy and water efficient technologies, so that global minerals processing operations increase productivity and reduce health and safety risks.

Processing options to boost ore exports CSIRO is delivering new, advanced processing options to ensure Australian ores are globally competitive commodities. The aim is to make current uneconomic lower grade ores viable to mine and export. Responsible metal production CSIRO is creating a sustainable metal production industry through energy and water-efficient technologies, in addition to recycling options. This increases metal production efficiency in order to reduce global carbon dioxide emissions and increase industry productivity and competitiveness.

Our aim is that communities and the mining industry have a shared approach to maximise resource value and ensure positive long-term social and environmental outcomes to underpin a healthy national economy. What To Know About Graphite With the rise of electric vehicles, graphite is poised to be hot on the commodity market to meet the demand for lithium ion batteries.

Advanced resource characterisation CSIRO is developing and delivering onsite resource characterisation to enable optimum extraction. Global resource companies can get an in-depth understanding of mineral resources in almost real-time, as well as use new sensor and data processing technologies to reliably predict downstream process optimisation and improve resource life.

Industry professionals can access this specialised equipment, expertise and customised service to characterise mineral ore. Selective mining technologies for increased productivity CSIRO is developing intelligent ore extraction technologies so that global mine operators can exploit essential ore variability, increase productivity and reducing expenditure.

The vision is that global mine operators adopt high-throughput, no-contact sensor technologies and systems for high-tonnage ore sorting, as well as process management and optimisation. Process productivity for global mineral processing CSIRO is reducing processing costs with new energy and water efficient technologies, so that global minerals processing operations increase productivity and reduce health and safety risks.

Processing options to boost ore exports CSIRO is delivering new, advanced processing options to ensure Australian ores are globally competitive commodities. The aim is to make current uneconomic lower grade ores viable to mine and export. Responsible metal production CSIRO is creating a sustainable metal production industry through energy and water-efficient technologies, in addition to recycling options.