The Discussion section is sort of an odd beast because it is here where you speculate, but must avoid rambling, guessing, or making logical leaps beyond what is reasonably supported for your data. The solution that has evolved over time is to set up the Discussion section as a "dialogue" between Results and Theories -- yours and everyone elses'. In other words, for every experimental result you want to talk about, you find results from other publications bearing the relationship to your result that you want the reader to understand. Most often, your result either agrees with (corroborates), extends , refines , or conflicts with the other result. This is how the new data you've generated is "situated" in the field -- by your careful placement of what is new against that which is already known. Results can take the form of data, hypotheses, models, definitions, formulas, etc. (I imagine the Results section like a dance with swords -- sometimes you are engaging your partner with the pointy end and sometimes you are gliding along side them).
A ‘critical metal’ is one that has important economic uses, but which also faces supply risks for geopolitical or environmental and sustainability reasons. The constrained nature of critical metals supply means proposed solutions to the problem commonly involve reducing demand and therefore reliance, via recycling, substitution and thrifting. However, most critical metals are presently only small markets and therefore such an approach ignores the potential of transformational market growth to reduce supply risk, by creating large, diverse, transparent markets with multiple sources of primary mine supply, akin to modern base metals markets. Research is therefore required into which critical metals have the greatest potential for such transformational market growth. This study therefore conducts an evaluation of 49 critical metals to determine which are nearest to the combined breakthroughs in discovery, supply and demand that may lead to transformational market growth. The study concludes that 13 markets from the 49 critical metals, being magnesium, silicon, barium, boron, lithium, cobalt, chromium, vanadium, gallium, strontium, cerium, lanthanum and scandium have the highest potential for transformational market growth and thus efforts to resolve supply risk in these markets may be better focussed on overcoming current market constraints and growing these markets, rather than lessening reliance by reducing demand. ( http:///doi/full// )