> This math for lithium stands before we consider really disruptive things such as: maybe lithium isn’t it for grid storage, or even autos? This is a key point

> This math for lithium stands before we consider really disruptive things such as: maybe lithium isn’t it for grid storage, or even autos? This is a key point. There are several chemistries, at least, that are near competitive in various applications with lithium despite being manufactured in much smaller quantities and so being much earlier in their learning curves. Off the top of my head:- Vanadium redox flow - been around since the 1980s at least as an idea, now being realised by various people. Ambri's molten calcium salt batteries. PolyJoule's organic polymer-based batteries (based on chains of carbon atoms as the "ion"). CATL's sodium-ion batteries. Iron-air, aluminum air, aluminum sulfur, lithium metal, sodium metal, various alloys. The point is that sticking with lithium is the worst case. It only happens if all the alternatives fail, despite them all being in commercial use today. It's all upside, with a known and mild downside. By which I mean that batteries can only get cheaper, either very quickly, or only quickly.