7 ms·

The report doesn't even mention price. That is a whole other level of analysis. The fact is, the known global reserves of several minerals (not just lithium) ne

by evilos 4y ago

The report doesn't even mention price. That is a whole other level of analysis. The fact is, the known global reserves of several minerals (not just lithium) needed for a primarily wind/solar grid are insufficient for today's battery tech. We need a new plan. Underground hydrogen storage looks more promising than batteries, but again we don't have anything scalable ready to go today in terms of cheap energy storage.

bryanlarsen 4y ago
That's why the report is completely useless. "proven reserves" is a function of price. It's not like fossil fuels where it is plausible that there are limited amounts. Elements are created by the same processes that formed the universe. And all the elements in a LiFePO4 battery are exceedingly common.
- evilos 4y ago
  > It's not like fossil fuels where it is plausible that there are limited amounts. Elements are created by the same processes that formed the universe. This is a non sequitur. There is a limited amount of anything on Earth. The pertinent question is: can we get enough of these minerals economically to use them as storage by 2050. If it is not economical, it won't happen. If you think extracting more than 4x the known global reserves of lithium is going to be economical, I don't know what to tell you.
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    The 10x price increase that Lithium has experienced is going to expand reserves by a heck of a lot more than 4X.
    - evilos 4y ago
      It hasn't even doubled in the past 10 years. At today's global lithium mining rate, it would take 220 years to get today's known reserves out of the ground. Nevermind 4x. And then there's the human and environmental impact of all that mining. We're just talking about a single element. There's several more that are just as constrained if not worse. Today's batteries just aren't suited for grid storage.
      - defrost 4y ago
        > It hasn't even doubled in the past 10 years. It was set to triple, except reasons. Still, "almost tripled" is better than "hasn't even doubled". 35K metric tonnes in 2012, 38K metric tonnes in 2016, 69K metric tonnes in 2017, 95K metric tonnes in 2018, 100K in 2021. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/606684/world-production-of-lithium/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/606684/world-production-... [2] https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/campaigns/metals-mining https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/campaigns/met...
        evilos 4y ago
        That's production. We were talking about global reserves. Which hasn't even doubled in 10 years.
        defrost 4y ago
        Why would they though? There's sufficient known and proven reserves to not put any pressure on proving known resources. Why expend the capital on techical reports and economic feasibility studies to raise resources to reserves ahead of lead time on production demand?
        evilos 4y ago
        Because mines take 10 years to open on average from minerals found to minerals being moved out of the ground. 1% of surveyed mineral deposits become mines. Because for the better part of a decade, the green transition plan has been to move to solar/wind plus energy storage. The obvious question is, how many machines will we need? What kind? How much will it cost? The author of this report described how he convinced his management to fund this work. He works at a Finnish government geological survey organization. He told his management, "Who do you think the EU leadership will blame when they realize that we don't have anywhere near the resources needed to complete the green transition as it is imagined today?" They haven't done the math.
        4y ago

by evilos 4y ago

bryanlarsen 4y ago

That's why the report is completely useless. "proven reserves" is a function of price. It's not like fossil fuels where it is plausible that there are limited amounts. Elements are created by the same processes that formed the universe. And all the elements in a LiFePO4 battery are exceedingly common.

evilos 4y ago
> It's not like fossil fuels where it is plausible that there are limited amounts. Elements are created by the same processes that formed the universe. This is a non sequitur. There is a limited amount of anything on Earth. The pertinent question is: can we get enough of these minerals economically to use them as storage by 2050. If it is not economical, it won't happen. If you think extracting more than 4x the known global reserves of lithium is going to be economical, I don't know what to tell you.
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  The 10x price increase that Lithium has experienced is going to expand reserves by a heck of a lot more than 4X.
  - evilos 4y ago
    It hasn't even doubled in the past 10 years. At today's global lithium mining rate, it would take 220 years to get today's known reserves out of the ground. Nevermind 4x. And then there's the human and environmental impact of all that mining. We're just talking about a single element. There's several more that are just as constrained if not worse. Today's batteries just aren't suited for grid storage.
    - defrost 4y ago
      > It hasn't even doubled in the past 10 years. It was set to triple, except reasons. Still, "almost tripled" is better than "hasn't even doubled". 35K metric tonnes in 2012, 38K metric tonnes in 2016, 69K metric tonnes in 2017, 95K metric tonnes in 2018, 100K in 2021. [1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/606684/world-production-of-lithium/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/606684/world-production-... [2] https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/campaigns/metals-mining https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/campaigns/met...
      - evilos 4y ago
        That's production. We were talking about global reserves. Which hasn't even doubled in 10 years.
        defrost 4y ago
        Why would they though? There's sufficient known and proven reserves to not put any pressure on proving known resources. Why expend the capital on techical reports and economic feasibility studies to raise resources to reserves ahead of lead time on production demand?
        evilos 4y ago
        Because mines take 10 years to open on average from minerals found to minerals being moved out of the ground. 1% of surveyed mineral deposits become mines. Because for the better part of a decade, the green transition plan has been to move to solar/wind plus energy storage. The obvious question is, how many machines will we need? What kind? How much will it cost? The author of this report described how he convinced his management to fund this work. He works at a Finnish government geological survey organization. He told his management, "Who do you think the EU leadership will blame when they realize that we don't have anywhere near the resources needed to complete the green transition as it is imagined today?" They haven't done the math.
        4y ago