25 ms·

Does the world have enough lithium to move to electric vehicles?

175 points by bpierre 4y ago

LinuxBender 4y ago
Is Lithium the only barrier to EV's? Are there any global supply chain logistical issues that may arise should ongoing conflicts escalate? Do the same supply chain issues affect ICE and EV's equally? I honestly do not know but I see this get brought up when people discuss EV's more so than Lithium. Could the existing coal mining companies transition or relocate to locations rich in Lithium, possibly offering their employees relocation bonuses? Some of the coal mining companies are in the process of shutting down and it seems like money could be saved by repurposing some of the equipment and utilizing some of the coal mining team experience. Could states offer financial incentives to relocate and switch to mining Lithium? Are we still reliant on Cobalt as part of the Lithium battery? There is an interview with Siddharth Kara that suggests all lithium batteries contain cobalt and thusly depend on child slave labor. [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIWvk3gJ_7E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIWvk3gJ_7E [video][14 mins]
- theshrike79 4y ago
  Yes, the Lithium and Cobalt sources we have currently running wouldn't be enough to turn every single vehicle in the world to an EV. But we don't need to do that. New mines for both Lithium and Cobalt are being started, new battery chemistries are being investigated (including ones based on _wood_ [0]), there is also the option of ethanol/biogas/biodiesel for existing ICEs and maybe even green hydrogen if someone manages to optimise the process about 5x to make it cost-effective. And the main thing people tend to forget: EV batteries are highly recyclable. We're up to 90% now, closing up on 95%. The biggest thing keeping it from being a huge industry is lack of batteries to recycle. Like the article says, reuse of old EV batteries is a hugely valid option, more so than recycling. A 50kWh battery with 50% capacity loss is till a 25kWh battery, which will run a full American McMansion for a few days easily. Compare that to ICEs where the fuel is literally burned up in smoke and is exactly 0% recyclable. [0] https://www.storaenso.com/en/newsroom/regulatory-and-investor-releases/2022/7/stora-enso-and-northvolt-partner-to-develop-wood-based-batteries https://www.storaenso.com/en/newsroom/regulatory-and-investo...
- rapsey 4y ago
  Lithium iron phosphate (lifepo4) do not contain cobalt
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > There is an interview with Siddharth Kara that suggests all lithium batteries contain cobalt and thusly depend on child slave labor That is demonstrably not true. AFAIK the majority of EVs use LFP batteries that have no cobalt. The current RWD Model 3 in the US also uses LFP. That's the direction most EVs will probably head over the next few years.
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    It's not just LFP batteries that don't use cobalt. Tesla's medium density batteries use a "high nickel" cathode rather than a nickel-manganese-cobalt cathode.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      I'd like to learn more about that but I am coming up blank. Everything I've found suggests even the new Tesla 4680 continues to rely on some amount of cobalt.
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    Lithium iron phosphate are not widely used in EVs. They gave poorer energy density, so lithium ion is preferred. I think electric golf carts use LiFePo batteries, to keep costs low and because range is less of an issue.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      The vast majority of EVs in China use LFP, and China has most of the EVs in the world. And even in the US, by volume I wouldn't be surprised if the RWD Model 3 is a reasonable fraction of total EV sales.
    - bryanlarsen 4y ago
      Most EV's in China use LiFePO4 batteries, and China is the largest EV market.
    - tuatoru 4y ago
      LFP batteries have not been widely used outside China till now because CATL[1] owns the important patents. The patents expire this year. The energy density discrepancy is not as bad at a system (whole vehicle) level as it appears at cell level, for various reasons. And there are lots of use cases where LFP has more than enough energy, provided the price is right. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CATL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CATL
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  Lithium is the only major mineral in an EV that does not have a significant use elsewhere. Steel, aluminum, manganese, nickel, iron, phosphate, cobalt, rare earths, et cetera have significant industrial uses outside of EV's. So while EV's can put a lot of pressure on those supply chains, the effect is on a different scale. Traditionally Lithium isn't mined, it's concentrated out of a brine. Some miners are setting up hard-rock Lithium mines, but those are on a vastly different scale than a coal mine, so there would likely be very little equipment overlap. A significant number of batteries still use cobalt, although the percentage of batteries that are cobalt-free is increasing.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jacknews 4y ago
"It’s easy to imagine that decades from now, the chemistry of batteries will have changed so much that they will use two, three, or four times less than today." It's easy to imagine, but is it even possible? My understanding is that the lithium is the charge carrier, and while there is some room to improve efficiency, less lithium means less capacity. OTOH, it's quite possible that, eg, sodium batteries become viable, and the whole debate becomes moot.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  This is correct. It's like saying do "in the future we'll have gasoline that contains 2, 3, or 4 times as much energy." Sure, different gasoline chemistries have different energy densities. But there's thermodynamic limits to it, unless you're switching to an entirely different chemistry. IIRC, we're already at ~40% the thermodynamic limits of lithium, so tripling or quadrupling are out of the question.
- consp 4y ago
  How do lithium-sulfur batteries weight in on this? They have the (theoretical) 2-3 times the wh/kg capacity compared to li-ion.
- tuatoru 4y ago
  > is it even possible? I believe so. As I understand it, in current cell designs, only a fraction of the lithium leaves the anode. This limit is deliberately imposed to preserve the integrity of the physical structure of the anode. Increasing the deintercalation fraction (the percentage of lithium that moves in the electrolyte) is being actively researched. So are other cell types where the whole problem is avoided. And yes, lithium isn't the only possible choice.
- SigmundA 4y ago
  See Lithium-Sulphur which has a theoretical limit of ~2500 wh/kg vs ~250 wh/kg of todays lithium batteries. So you're looking at up 10x improvement, if we can get to 1000 wh/kg that's your 4x. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium–sulfur_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium–sulfur_battery
snarfy 4y ago
Sodium ion batteries work just as well and should be arriving this year [1]. [1] - https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-top-ev-battery-maker-catl-touts-new-sodium-ion-batteries-2021-07-29/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-top-ev-battery-mak...
- imachine1980_ 4y ago
  Sodium ion batteries are less dense than lithium have a third of the range, I'm live in argentine and see the destruction of open mining for rare metals for cents, make me wish this happens, but for now dense electric cars of not low range will probably use lithium and smartphones and notebook probably will continue to use lithium for long time, maybe be replaced by graphen but in the long game.
  - DLwdTxdU6smHQA 4y ago
    > Sodium ion batteries are less dense than lithium have a third of the range Got a source for the "one third" part? According to [1] and [2] lithium ion is up to 265 Wh/kg and sodium ion has 160 Wh/kg. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery [2] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/catl-reveals-sodium-ion-battery-with-160-wh-kg-energy-density/ https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/catl-reveals-sodium-ion... edited for clarity
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > lithium ion is up to 265 Wh/kg and sodium ion has 160 Wh/kg This is what less dense means.
      - DLwdTxdU6smHQA 4y ago
        sure. but it seems one third of the range seems too pessimistic according to those numbers.
        4y ago
LatteLazy 4y ago
One of the core problems with environmentalists, intelligent people and anyone left wing really is that we insist on doing nothing until we have a perfect solution. Instead of trading climate change for a lithium shortage, we will fail to push these cars because there might be some imperfection for someone somewhere someday. And a massive serious issue is better than a tiny possible future issue we didn't foresee. Hence the world is run by stupid, selfish, shorttermists who "just do it".
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  I don't think most of the folks suddenly apprehensive about lithium & cobalt mining are left wing.
  - LatteLazy 4y ago
    I don't think anyone on the right wing cares at all either way. So even if it's only a small part of the left wing, it's composed on 100% left wingers...
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      Anecdotally, the only people in my larger circle of family & friends who bring up cobalt mining are the right wingers. You are probably right that they don't actually care, though. It's concern trolling.
- syntaxing 4y ago
  I’ll take the troll bait, if that’s true then why are “left wing” people the main driver of EVs? Criticizing a technology is one thing. Willing to adopt it is another.
- saiya-jin 4y ago
  Its pointless to make everything a political topic, with you being the righteous one and everybody else wrong (or worse). Ie am neither on any scale, agree with some aspects of each and reject some other stuff, its easier not being in US where society seems extremely polarized and the other group is always to blame for all one's misfortunes. EVs generally currently don't make that much sense, we just fuck up environment in a different way. Maybe you don't see those open pit mines in 3rd world, child slaving for that cobalt in your batteries but I do and I do mind. This isn't some potential issue in far future, but right here right now. Any tesla is running a bit on child labor, now everybody can please get off their high horses for a while? EVs being charged by electricity from coal power plants - sure its transitory, so lets start having a discussion when its about to stop being so. What is an actual solution is very good and cheap public transport. Some less smart part of population in less developed places like US get knee jerk reaction to even suggesting it, but simple fact is - as long as everybody will want to drive in their own ever more massive block of metal and chemistry, we will have numerous issues and will keep shooting ourselves in our own feet long term. No EV is going to fix that, not this century.
bertil 4y ago
This article and the IEA sources that they rely on assumes that an EV is a car. That’s not a good assumption: electric bicycles and trikes like the Aptera are much better direction for the vast majority of individual transport. At that size, you can rely on smaller batteries and solar panels for many journeys (it isn’t fully sufficient for an Aptera but an e-bicycle with a small roof can ride as long as the Sun shines). Using three tons vehicles for long-distance journeys or for the transport of goods isn’t efficient: trains (and last-mile delivery on cargo bikes) are a lot more economical in both energy, accident risk and individual time (or vehicle investment if you assume an autonomous future). If we don’t use the energy transition to shift away from the domination of heavy, polluting, deadly cars, we would have lost an opportunity.
- stby 4y ago
  I agree with anything you said. At this point I'm already happy when the media doesn't try to praise drones (Volocopter, Lilium, Joby, ...) as the ultimate solution to our traffic problems, unfortunately.
- malfist 4y ago
  Aptera is a thing again? I remember reading about it when I was in high school over a decade ago. I thought they smashed their prototypes and went bankrupt?
  - apocalyptic0n3 4y ago
    Their homepage is claiming up to "40 miles of solar powered driving per day" and "1,000 miles on a single charge". Even given the size and layout of the vehicle, that seems impressive as heck if true. It's in reservation stages for ~$26k, which is also not bad.
    - malfist 4y ago
      When I was in college, the car was being advertised as 100 MPG. The car looks virtually the same, if you can get 100MPG you can probably get insane ranges without huge batteries. It's basically a motorcycle on three wheels, those things have great milage.
mansoor_ 4y ago
AFAIK the mineral reserve bottlenecks are cobalt and manganese, not lithium!
- pfdietz 4y ago
  Manganese is not a problem from resource availability. World reserves are 1.5 billion tonnes, and up to a trillion tonnes of manganese are available from seafloor nodules.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  Cobalt isn’t essential in the way lithium is. We already have working cobalt-free chemistries in EVs, e.g. LFP.
dwheeler 4y ago
Even if we have more electric vehicles, that doesn't decarbonize anything unless the source of the energy doesn't generate carbon dioxide. In many places you're just moving the source of carbon dioxide (often with a total increase). I think that part is often overlooked.
- YPCrumble 4y ago
  I find it hard to believe that pulling electricity from the grid would increase carbon emissions vs. a vehicle burning gas in its own engine. How is that possible?
  - bombcar 4y ago
    And even if it were (I suppose a very clean natural gas car vs the worst coal plant ever made) the electric still has the advantage of regenerating braking.
    - slow_typist 4y ago
      Driving overland will not recover much breaking energy. That is only an advantage of EVs under town traffic conditions, where cheap efficient public transportation is the better solution.
  - matsemann 4y ago
    An EV is much heavier, thus you need more energy to move it. But I think in total it should still be a net win for EVs. But the real problem is that we move 2000+ kgs around to move a human of 80 kgs around. EVs don't fix that. EVs are mostly to save the car industry, the solution is to drive less by creating a society where people don't need to own a car and drive everywhere.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      > An EV is much heavier The most popular EVs in the US are roughly 0-10% heavier than the comparable ICEV. Yes, some EVs are much heavier.
k__ 4y ago
Probably depends on the vehicles, right? If we'd use more public transport like trains and busses, we might be very well off.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dumbfounder 4y ago
Can batteries be created to make the process of reclaiming the lithium orders of magnitude easier? A completely different topic: Politics tends to focus on forcing consumer vehicles to go electric, is this really the right move? Most cars are not driven a lot in a day. But cars that are used for work (fleet, uber/deliveries) are used much more, so the benefit to them being electric is far greater. Trucks too most likely. Shouldn't this be where we focus our attention to get the best bang for the buck? And also make sure we don't drive the price up making it more expensive for the vehicles that are driven much more? Imagine the scenario where lithium prices are driven up by legislation-borne demand, we would instead have more cars with less lithium, and thus less range. Maybe that's ok, I dunno. That said, more electric cars means more and better infra and tech that will be created. So obviously some good stuff. Life is so complicated.
- matsemann 4y ago
  Most people shouldn't need to own a car. I don't mean that in a "self driving will save us" way. But that a personal car is parked 95% of the day. In a city huge areas are used for storing these blocks of metal not in use. More accessible car sharing could make less people feel the need to own a car.
  - SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
    Isn't the problem that the car's that are parked 95% of the day are all moving at the same time in the last 5%? It feels like building a carless society is a lot more deliberate effort and requires a lot more public good will than electrifying what we have. That being said, it's probably the better long term goal.
    - scotty79 4y ago
      If some strain of covid crops up that's way more deadly, maybe then we'll permanently transition to not hauling our butts around to stare at computer screens anyways.
      - 4y ago
samwillis 4y ago
Something that I think needs to be considered more is the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs. We should not be putting all eggs in that one basket. Obviously they are the most widely developed, and hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Then there's the fascinating "aluminium air" battery [0] concept which could work so well for people away from traditional infrastructure, or even in small city cars where you can't easily charge at the side of the road in a parking bay. I want to see a future where there are 10s of different types of electric and zero carbon vehicles on the roads. Each tailored to a different market and vehicle type. 0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium–air_battery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium–air_battery
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Scientific development on the technology should continue, but the focus on FCEVs as a use case is misplaced. The idea has been worked on for decades, but we're just about as far away from practical hydrogen infrastructure as we've ever been. It's still only available in any meaningful way in two metro areas in California. There are far more practical solutions to fast EV fueling than hydrogen.
  - hcurtiss 4y ago
    Is that true? The Tesla semi presentation cracked me up with the huge container of batteries prepared to charge a single semi. The grid load for charging any meaningful number of EVs simultaneously is hilariously out of reach (even if we could build the generation capacity, NIMBY-Americans will never accomodate the transmission). It seems to me that hydrogen is a relatively elegant solution to this problem. We are good at transporting and storing compressed gases today. It seems to me that building out that infrastructure is more likely than the gigantic power delivery infrastructure necessary to charge lithium batteries.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs In popular media, perhaps. Research, including industrial R&D, continued on other fronts. That said, the periodic table seems to limit us to hydrogen, lithium, sodium and perhaps potassium. Life chose hydrogen (with carbon). We’re transitioning from hydrocarbons to lithium (with carbon; some are trying silicon). Sodium is close to being a viable contender, but it’s heavier than lithium, which barring a chemistry breakthrough will relegate it below lithium.
Gwypaas 4y ago
Always liked the USGS take on mineral reserves. > Reserves data are dynamic. They may be reduced as ore is mined and (or) the feasibility of extraction diminishes, or more commonly, they may continue to increase as additional deposits (known or recently discovered) are developed, or currently exploited deposits are more thoroughly explored and (or) new technology or economic variables improve their economic feasibility. Reserves may be considered a working inventory of mining companies’ supplies of an economically extractable mineral commodity. As such, the magnitude of that inventory is necessarily limited by many considerations, including cost of drilling, taxes, price of the mineral commodity being mined, and the demand for it. Reserves will be developed to the point of business needs and geologic limitations of economic ore grade and tonnage. For example, in 1970, identified and undiscovered world copper resources were estimated to contain 1.6 billion metric tons of copper, with reserves of about 280 million tons of copper. Since then, about 600 million tons of copper have been produced worldwide, but world copper reserves in 2021 were estimated to be 880 million tons of copper, more than triple those in 1970, despite the depletion by mining of much more than the 1970 estimated reserves. https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2022/mcs2022-appendixes.pdf https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2022/mcs2022-appendixes... Appendix C to 2022 Lithium Statistics and Information. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/national-minerals-information-center/lithium-statistics-and-information https://www.usgs.gov/centers/national-minerals-information-c...
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  I'm reminded of the Hunt brothers attempt to corner the silver market in 1980 [1]. > But as the high prices persisted, new silver began to come out of the woodwork. > “In the U.S., people rifled their dresser drawers and sofa cushions to find dimes and quarters with silver content and had them melted down,” says Pirrong, from the University of Houston. “Silver is a classic part of a bride’s trousseau in India, and when prices got high, women sold silver out of their trousseaus.” [2] Price seems to be able to make material availability very elastic. If there is a huge demand for lithium and our collective resources are bent toward obtaining it (or finding a substitute) I think you can trust "The Market" to find a way. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday [2] https://priceonomics.com/how-the-hunt-brothers-cornered-the-silver-market/ https://priceonomics.com/how-the-hunt-brothers-cornered-the-...
benaadams 4y ago
I feel the article violated Betteridge's law of headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
- HPsquared 4y ago
  A better formulation would be "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the null hypothesis.". That is, instead of "no", say "it's nothing".
- Kiro 4y ago
  And many people here comment like it wouldn't. I guess you're so used to Betteridge's being true that you presume the answer in the article is "no".
sgraaf 4y ago
If you have a spare 17 minutes, this great, informative video by Wendover Productions [1] goes more in-depth about the various problems with Lithium-ion batteries. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dnN82DsQ2k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dnN82DsQ2k
naasking 4y ago
For everyone? No. Fortunately we don't need lithium for everyone's EV. Other battery chemistries and designs are already coming to market, like sodium batteries, solid state batteries, and more.
kkfx 4y ago
IMVHO > How much lithium does the world have? We don’t really know for sure. That's the simple main point. The rest are speculation. Oh, sure "not being sure" is not a reason not to try, but is a reason to have some backups. SO far we lack them. And that's the main issue. The secondary issue is recycling of metals, so far we have many experimental procedures, more or less doable at a not-just-lab scale, but nothing usable on scale. The corollary issue is that we do not have just cars, we also have airplanes and ships. So far some eVTOL have popped up but also prove they are not much more than very-short-range cars replacers for certain use cases. We also have some battery-electrical ship (and modern sub), but nothing really usable on large scale. Long story short: the road is very long and looking for alternatives is a MUST. A company can fail, it's perfectly normal, a society should NOT FAIL by all means and when happen it hurt much.
- rootusrootus 4y ago
  > nothing usable on scale There are many battery recyclers in China that grind up lithium ion batteries all day every day and recover the metals.
  - slow_typist 4y ago
    Even if you can do it on scale and with a very high recovery rate of 90%, after 7 cycles half of the lithium is gone. Given the massive environmental effects of the mining and the relatively scarce reserves we need to allocate the metal very carefully. It should not be used to maintain a broken business model IMO.
    - rootusrootus 4y ago
      Where does that 90% figure come from? The state of the art appears to be 99%.
      - slow_typist 4y ago
        99% in a lab, if you are very good. 90% IRL (on industrial scale) is my educated guess given that you have losses in the whole reduction network and diminishing returns in the extraction process.
404mm 4y ago
Isn’t this article quite pointless considering everyone is aware of the current Lithium resource limitations and new technologies targeted to replace lithium are already emerging? For example the Sodium Ion batteries hit the news recently. Similar to oil, we can all speculate what is the remaining capacity we haven’t extracted but eventually it all comes down to - can we get it cheaper somewhere else and preferably using own resources instead of paying 3rd party (country)?
ag315 4y ago
It's not just lithium that's the problem; copper is also a major component, and we don't have nearly enough of that either. A full transition to electric vehicles is not viable with current technologies. If we can make a big leap in solid state battery technology then that could make all the difference, but the viability of those is being continuously postponed.
- stcredzero 4y ago
  In one of his most recent videos, Peter Zeihan cites some things, which actually make me question his objectivity in this matter. - He claims that graphite will be a problem. I'm not sure if this will be if we divert coal and petroleum away from energy to graphite, which would sequester that carbon. - He's not aware that the aluminum industry has made plans to become carbon neutral. I'm not sure if they really mean it, but they've made plans. - He claims that at no point in history, has the world doubled the availability of a resource by a factor of 2 in 10 years. This just strikes me as fishy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf85EuQKWeQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf85EuQKWeQ
- nickspicer1993 4y ago
  I have dug into this rabbit hole recently and haven't seen any studies indicating Copper is going to be a problem, do you have a source? Cheers
- dgudkov 4y ago
  >A full transition to electric vehicles is not viable with current technologies. So maybe, just maybe, Toyota wasn't that wrong by not going full gung-ho about EVs.
cainxinth 4y ago
I had a friend ask me a few years back about investing heavily in some ETFs that were connected to lithium mining and other minerals used for tech products. I cautioned them against it. Not because I don't think the need for these materials will continue to grow, but because I worry that increased demand will spur new innovation in finding, extracting, and processing them -- which would drive down prices in the long run. I don't have a crystal ball, but that seems to be a common pattern in the history of our exploitation of this planet's resources.
bischofs 4y ago
This is such a dumb analysis - Lithium batteries are used in everything - tools, consumer electronics, medical devices, home and grid storage and all of the sectors that will be using it soon. Not to mention if you want to push larger transport sectors and grid de-carbonization you will need massive GwH batteries with 100kg+ of lithium. We clearly need more solutions, stop pushing lithium batteries like they can solve all the world's energy problems.
- hutzlibu 4y ago
  "We clearly need more solutions, stop pushing lithium batteries like they can solve all the world's energy problems." That's right. We need to push natrium based batteries for stationary use cases, like grid storage and reserve the lithium based for mobile use.
kingastachura 4y ago
watching all the drama happening lately around climate change issues, this is very much interesting and needed read, thanks!
pmayrgundter 4y ago
Musk said in a Q&A recently that Tesla will need to start its own mining and refining ops to support battery production https://youtu.be/KeEmVxMFM4Q?t=3063 https://youtu.be/KeEmVxMFM4Q?t=3063
dieselgate 4y ago
Good topic but the tldr wasn't super inspiring for me "Yes, the world has enough lithium for our electric vehicles, decades into the future": decades isn't really sufficient for this imo. It would ideally be.. multiple centuries at the very least? Then the author says something like "we have no idea how much lithium there is" so guess nobody knows this answer, but fair enough as it's quite early stage...
- Zigurd 4y ago
  Without knowing the scale of secondary uses of batteries built for cars, or the economics of recycling, I doubt the answer is knowable beyond that horizon.
  - wilg 4y ago
    Here's a video on the former Tesla CTO's battery recycling company: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLr0GStrnwQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLr0GStrnwQ
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
j0li0t 4y ago
Volume is not the only issue. How about the moral aspect of mining in underdeveloped countries with poor working conditions...
- Julien_r2 4y ago
  This is definitely an issue which is well underestimated! Portugal (e.g in Covas de Barroso) [1] and Spain (e.g. in Cáceres) [2] are facing huge pressure to settle for lithium mines, without much consideration for the social and ecological impacts on those regions... It is still considered as a green energy, simply because we decide to forget about part of the process. Just as we did for gas, and plastic. Energy price should take in account all the impacts (recycling included), the avoid being considered as a magical solution, and rush blindly toward the next crisis.. [1] https://www.portugalresident.com/lithium-wars-step-up-in-covas-do-barroso/ https://www.portugalresident.com/lithium-wars-step-up-in-cov... [2] https://www.ft.com/content/459191d9-774d-4a2b-8ec6-ba472017b05e https://www.ft.com/content/459191d9-774d-4a2b-8ec6-ba472017b...
sroussey 4y ago
We won’t be using Lithium by 2050 anyhow. If not aluminum ion batteries, then some other substitute.
- dgudkov 4y ago
  Without strong supporting facts for viability of that "some other substitute" it sounds like "Full self-driving is just around the corner".
  - sroussey 4y ago
    2050 is almost 3 decades away. There are at least two public companies that are in testing phase for such batteries today. Starting at coin sized (they last 2x longer). Then AA and then larger scale. I’d guess 5yr out which means 10.
fwungy 4y ago
1. Lithium isn't the only mineral to be concerned about. 2. "The technology will improve" is not always a reliable strategy. Fusion is perpetually almost here, for example. 3. Without a federal money printer propping up the EV market it would not exist. 4. Just because a lifestyle works great for you, e.g. walkable cities and ebikes, doesnt mean it will work for everyone. 5. How far into a dictatorial, command economy, are we capable of going into to effect a massive energy transition, i.e. how much do we force changes a substantial number of people have serious problems with?
- yakak 4y ago
  All of these concerns, even #1, have applied to communist car driving America and its 25% theft of everything.. I would tax the beejesus out of energy use and personal road use and invert most income tax to make something closer to a free market than the US is.
0xbadcafebee 4y ago
I reject the premise of the question, because you don't need lithium for electric vehicles. We could get by with shitty low-range batteries the way other EVs have. We would just need to standardize battery-swapping at the equivalent of gas stations. Drive 100 miles, drive into a battery-swapping station, service technician swaps the battery, you're back on the road in less than 5 minutes. We did it 100 years ago, we can do it again. So lithium isn't a blocker. I also think we shouldn't own as many personal vehicles as we do, and should start to move legislation toward more funding of better (and faster, and more efficient) public transit, and more taxing of private vehicles. We don't need to have so many private vehicles, we are just addicted to them.
- frickenhamster 4y ago
  This will never work. Components in cars are engineered to be organized as efficiently as possible. The overhead from having replaceable batteries will kill the amount of storage you can have. There is no way you can have generic attendants swap out batteries in 5 minutes. Working with EVs is a dangerous job that you can't just pay an uneducated minimum wage worker to change. The batteries are extremely heavy and are placed in locations that you need a car lift to get to. Plus theres all sort of liability and safety issues from potentially messing up a battery swap or getting a bad battery and blowing up your car.
  - DLwdTxdU6smHQA 4y ago
    I dont know how scalable this is, but Nio (electric car maker from China) are building automatic battery swap stations. See e.g. here (video is in German): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv7OQofChbg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv7OQofChbg edit: I think it takes more than five minutes though, especially when you have to wait in line.
  - 0xbadcafebee 4y ago
    > Components in cars are engineered to be organized as efficiently as possible Ever heard of an SUV? Cars are not designed to be efficient, they are designed to meet product goals. Sometimes those goals are efficiency, such as meeting an emissions or efficiency regulation. But most of the goals are "what do we think some schmuck will pay $30K for?" If 100 years ago, replaceable batteries were not a barrier to storage space, they certainly shouldn't be now, unless we're just admitting that we suck so much at building cars now that we can't even make them like we did 100 years ago. Battery swapping services existed for 20 years. It only stopped because the market decided gas would rule instead.
1970-01-01 4y ago
Once again, Afghanistan has it. China is getting it. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.htm... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/chinese-firms-show-interest-in-afghanistan-s-mineral-reserves https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/chinese-f...
olivermarks 4y ago
We cannot afford to ransack places like Chile to extract lithium for 'electric vehicles', which plumb new depths of pollution and third world degredation. The extraction of rare earth minerals for our electronically surveilled and controlled future comes at a terrible cost, as Siddharth Kara's new book "Cobalt Red: How The Blood of The Congo Powers Our Lives" outlines in excruciating detail. https://read.macmillan.com/lp/cobalt-red/ https://read.macmillan.com/lp/cobalt-red/ No one wins in this race to the bottom. If you are contemplating a BEV I would urge you to read up on just how ecologically appalling the batteries are for our planet and people.
- ok_dad 4y ago
  Oil ain't a picnic either, so what's the answer?
  - elefantastisch 4y ago
    Grid-powered public transit replacing 80% of trips by personal vehicle.
    - olivermarks 4y ago
      This is the sort of elitist fantasy nonsense promoted by the WEF that completely disrespects the average person and family.
      - ok_dad 4y ago
        European families seem to do OK using public transit.
        ohuf 4y ago
        ...only in big cities. Rural areas including the suburbs of the 100k's still depend heavily on individual transport...
      - someNameIG 4y ago
FatActor 4y ago
This article is a great example of how to draw conclusions from changing data, and how to call out the sources of uncertainty at every turn. I think a few were missed based on the comments below but I don't think that was done out of nefarious agenda but rather an attempt to keep the essay short as the author seems to have done enough research that i trust they didn't overlook these second order implications.
cjensen 4y ago
Much of the issue here is from using, in my opinion, terms that are misleading. The article defines resources as all known mineral deposits. It defines reserves as resources which are economically extractible. Here's the issue: when you already have plenty of reserves, you don't go looking for more. None of the charts which detail existing resources and reserves tell you anything about the quantity of lithium which exists on the planet. These numbers are only really useful when mining companies ask themselves "should I prospect for more?" If mining companies are actively prospecting and not finding enough to fill anticipated needs, then you have a problem. Not before.
airbreather 4y ago
It doesn't matter because there is only around a quarter of the copper needed in the world, so unless there's space mining the lithium wont be the problem any time soon.
markeibes 4y ago
If the vehicles are trains then yes.
daniel1969 4y ago
There might be enough lithium for EVs, but lithium is needed not only for EV batteries. Overall, there is no enough lithium to phase out fossil fuels. Not even for the first generation of technology devices. Here is the presentation given by prof. Simon Michaux where the problem is explained in more detail and supported with data: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc Lithium is not the only problem, other minerals are too. And, just like the original article says - the pace of extraction.
tdiff 4y ago
Are not people who make examples of the Netherlands or Norway as bike coutries missing that it is possibly just prohibitively expensive to own a car there, not that most people actually prefer bikes?
timbit42 4y ago
If we have a looming lithium shortage, instead of pushing EVs, we should be pushing PHEVs which use 1/10th the batteries and require 1/10th the energy and time to charge. Over 90% of most driver's daily use is less than 1/10th the range (40 km) of a typical EV (400 km) so a PHEV with 1/10th the battery means they will rarely need gasoline. For longer trips, you can use gas so there is no range anxiety. One EV reduces one driver's gasoline usage by 100%. With the same amount of batteries we could build 10 PHEVs and reduce 10 drivers' gasoline by 90%. This is a 9 times greater reduction in gasoline usage than building EVs. If we're really serious about lowering CO2, we should be pushing PHEVs, not EVs that we don't have enough batteries for.

175 points by bpierre 4y ago

Is Lithium the only barrier to EV's? Are there any global supply chain logistical issues that may arise should ongoing conflicts escalate? Do the same supply chain issues affect ICE and EV's equally? I honestly do not know but I see this get brought up when people discuss EV's more so than Lithium. Could the existing coal mining companies transition or relocate to locations rich in Lithium, possibly offering their employees relocation bonuses? Some of the coal mining companies are in the process of shutting down and it seems like money could be saved by repurposing some of the equipment and utilizing some of the coal mining team experience. Could states offer financial incentives to relocate and switch to mining Lithium? Are we still reliant on Cobalt as part of the Lithium battery? There is an interview with Siddharth Kara that suggests all lithium batteries contain cobalt and thusly depend on child slave labor. [1] [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIWvk3gJ_7E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIWvk3gJ_7E [video][14 mins]

theshrike79 4y ago
Yes, the Lithium and Cobalt sources we have currently running wouldn't be enough to turn every single vehicle in the world to an EV. But we don't need to do that. New mines for both Lithium and Cobalt are being started, new battery chemistries are being investigated (including ones based on _wood_ [0]), there is also the option of ethanol/biogas/biodiesel for existing ICEs and maybe even green hydrogen if someone manages to optimise the process about 5x to make it cost-effective. And the main thing people tend to forget: EV batteries are highly recyclable. We're up to 90% now, closing up on 95%. The biggest thing keeping it from being a huge industry is lack of batteries to recycle. Like the article says, reuse of old EV batteries is a hugely valid option, more so than recycling. A 50kWh battery with 50% capacity loss is till a 25kWh battery, which will run a full American McMansion for a few days easily. Compare that to ICEs where the fuel is literally burned up in smoke and is exactly 0% recyclable. [0] https://www.storaenso.com/en/newsroom/regulatory-and-investor-releases/2022/7/stora-enso-and-northvolt-partner-to-develop-wood-based-batteries https://www.storaenso.com/en/newsroom/regulatory-and-investo...
rapsey 4y ago
Lithium iron phosphate (lifepo4) do not contain cobalt
rootusrootus 4y ago
> There is an interview with Siddharth Kara that suggests all lithium batteries contain cobalt and thusly depend on child slave labor That is demonstrably not true. AFAIK the majority of EVs use LFP batteries that have no cobalt. The current RWD Model 3 in the US also uses LFP. That's the direction most EVs will probably head over the next few years.
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  It's not just LFP batteries that don't use cobalt. Tesla's medium density batteries use a "high nickel" cathode rather than a nickel-manganese-cobalt cathode.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    I'd like to learn more about that but I am coming up blank. Everything I've found suggests even the new Tesla 4680 continues to rely on some amount of cobalt.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  Lithium iron phosphate are not widely used in EVs. They gave poorer energy density, so lithium ion is preferred. I think electric golf carts use LiFePo batteries, to keep costs low and because range is less of an issue.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    The vast majority of EVs in China use LFP, and China has most of the EVs in the world. And even in the US, by volume I wouldn't be surprised if the RWD Model 3 is a reasonable fraction of total EV sales.
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    Most EV's in China use LiFePO4 batteries, and China is the largest EV market.
  - tuatoru 4y ago
    LFP batteries have not been widely used outside China till now because CATL[1] owns the important patents. The patents expire this year. The energy density discrepancy is not as bad at a system (whole vehicle) level as it appears at cell level, for various reasons. And there are lots of use cases where LFP has more than enough energy, provided the price is right. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CATL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CATL
bryanlarsen 4y ago
Lithium is the only major mineral in an EV that does not have a significant use elsewhere. Steel, aluminum, manganese, nickel, iron, phosphate, cobalt, rare earths, et cetera have significant industrial uses outside of EV's. So while EV's can put a lot of pressure on those supply chains, the effect is on a different scale. Traditionally Lithium isn't mined, it's concentrated out of a brine. Some miners are setting up hard-rock Lithium mines, but those are on a vastly different scale than a coal mine, so there would likely be very little equipment overlap. A significant number of batteries still use cobalt, although the percentage of batteries that are cobalt-free is increasing.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jacknews 4y ago

"It’s easy to imagine that decades from now, the chemistry of batteries will have changed so much that they will use two, three, or four times less than today." It's easy to imagine, but is it even possible? My understanding is that the lithium is the charge carrier, and while there is some room to improve efficiency, less lithium means less capacity. OTOH, it's quite possible that, eg, sodium batteries become viable, and the whole debate becomes moot.

Manuel_D 4y ago
This is correct. It's like saying do "in the future we'll have gasoline that contains 2, 3, or 4 times as much energy." Sure, different gasoline chemistries have different energy densities. But there's thermodynamic limits to it, unless you're switching to an entirely different chemistry. IIRC, we're already at ~40% the thermodynamic limits of lithium, so tripling or quadrupling are out of the question.
consp 4y ago
How do lithium-sulfur batteries weight in on this? They have the (theoretical) 2-3 times the wh/kg capacity compared to li-ion.
tuatoru 4y ago
> is it even possible? I believe so. As I understand it, in current cell designs, only a fraction of the lithium leaves the anode. This limit is deliberately imposed to preserve the integrity of the physical structure of the anode. Increasing the deintercalation fraction (the percentage of lithium that moves in the electrolyte) is being actively researched. So are other cell types where the whole problem is avoided. And yes, lithium isn't the only possible choice.
SigmundA 4y ago
See Lithium-Sulphur which has a theoretical limit of ~2500 wh/kg vs ~250 wh/kg of todays lithium batteries. So you're looking at up 10x improvement, if we can get to 1000 wh/kg that's your 4x. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium–sulfur_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium–sulfur_battery

snarfy 4y ago

Sodium ion batteries work just as well and should be arriving this year [1]. [1] - https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-top-ev-battery-maker-catl-touts-new-sodium-ion-batteries-2021-07-29/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinas-top-ev-battery-mak...

imachine1980_ 4y ago
Sodium ion batteries are less dense than lithium have a third of the range, I'm live in argentine and see the destruction of open mining for rare metals for cents, make me wish this happens, but for now dense electric cars of not low range will probably use lithium and smartphones and notebook probably will continue to use lithium for long time, maybe be replaced by graphen but in the long game.
- DLwdTxdU6smHQA 4y ago
  > Sodium ion batteries are less dense than lithium have a third of the range Got a source for the "one third" part? According to [1] and [2] lithium ion is up to 265 Wh/kg and sodium ion has 160 Wh/kg. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery [2] https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/catl-reveals-sodium-ion-battery-with-160-wh-kg-energy-density/ https://cleantechnica.com/2021/07/30/catl-reveals-sodium-ion... edited for clarity
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > lithium ion is up to 265 Wh/kg and sodium ion has 160 Wh/kg This is what less dense means.
    - DLwdTxdU6smHQA 4y ago
      sure. but it seems one third of the range seems too pessimistic according to those numbers.
      - 4y ago

LatteLazy 4y ago

One of the core problems with environmentalists, intelligent people and anyone left wing really is that we insist on doing nothing until we have a perfect solution. Instead of trading climate change for a lithium shortage, we will fail to push these cars because there might be some imperfection for someone somewhere someday. And a massive serious issue is better than a tiny possible future issue we didn't foresee. Hence the world is run by stupid, selfish, shorttermists who "just do it".

rootusrootus 4y ago
I don't think most of the folks suddenly apprehensive about lithium & cobalt mining are left wing.
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  I don't think anyone on the right wing cares at all either way. So even if it's only a small part of the left wing, it's composed on 100% left wingers...
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    Anecdotally, the only people in my larger circle of family & friends who bring up cobalt mining are the right wingers. You are probably right that they don't actually care, though. It's concern trolling.
syntaxing 4y ago
I’ll take the troll bait, if that’s true then why are “left wing” people the main driver of EVs? Criticizing a technology is one thing. Willing to adopt it is another.
saiya-jin 4y ago
Its pointless to make everything a political topic, with you being the righteous one and everybody else wrong (or worse). Ie am neither on any scale, agree with some aspects of each and reject some other stuff, its easier not being in US where society seems extremely polarized and the other group is always to blame for all one's misfortunes. EVs generally currently don't make that much sense, we just fuck up environment in a different way. Maybe you don't see those open pit mines in 3rd world, child slaving for that cobalt in your batteries but I do and I do mind. This isn't some potential issue in far future, but right here right now. Any tesla is running a bit on child labor, now everybody can please get off their high horses for a while? EVs being charged by electricity from coal power plants - sure its transitory, so lets start having a discussion when its about to stop being so. What is an actual solution is very good and cheap public transport. Some less smart part of population in less developed places like US get knee jerk reaction to even suggesting it, but simple fact is - as long as everybody will want to drive in their own ever more massive block of metal and chemistry, we will have numerous issues and will keep shooting ourselves in our own feet long term. No EV is going to fix that, not this century.

bertil 4y ago

This article and the IEA sources that they rely on assumes that an EV is a car. That’s not a good assumption: electric bicycles and trikes like the Aptera are much better direction for the vast majority of individual transport. At that size, you can rely on smaller batteries and solar panels for many journeys (it isn’t fully sufficient for an Aptera but an e-bicycle with a small roof can ride as long as the Sun shines). Using three tons vehicles for long-distance journeys or for the transport of goods isn’t efficient: trains (and last-mile delivery on cargo bikes) are a lot more economical in both energy, accident risk and individual time (or vehicle investment if you assume an autonomous future). If we don’t use the energy transition to shift away from the domination of heavy, polluting, deadly cars, we would have lost an opportunity.

stby 4y ago
I agree with anything you said. At this point I'm already happy when the media doesn't try to praise drones (Volocopter, Lilium, Joby, ...) as the ultimate solution to our traffic problems, unfortunately.
malfist 4y ago
Aptera is a thing again? I remember reading about it when I was in high school over a decade ago. I thought they smashed their prototypes and went bankrupt?
- apocalyptic0n3 4y ago
  Their homepage is claiming up to "40 miles of solar powered driving per day" and "1,000 miles on a single charge". Even given the size and layout of the vehicle, that seems impressive as heck if true. It's in reservation stages for ~$26k, which is also not bad.
  - malfist 4y ago
    When I was in college, the car was being advertised as 100 MPG. The car looks virtually the same, if you can get 100MPG you can probably get insane ranges without huge batteries. It's basically a motorcycle on three wheels, those things have great milage.

mansoor_ 4y ago

AFAIK the mineral reserve bottlenecks are cobalt and manganese, not lithium!

pfdietz 4y ago
Manganese is not a problem from resource availability. World reserves are 1.5 billion tonnes, and up to a trillion tonnes of manganese are available from seafloor nodules.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
Cobalt isn’t essential in the way lithium is. We already have working cobalt-free chemistries in EVs, e.g. LFP.

dwheeler 4y ago

Even if we have more electric vehicles, that doesn't decarbonize anything unless the source of the energy doesn't generate carbon dioxide. In many places you're just moving the source of carbon dioxide (often with a total increase). I think that part is often overlooked.

YPCrumble 4y ago
I find it hard to believe that pulling electricity from the grid would increase carbon emissions vs. a vehicle burning gas in its own engine. How is that possible?
- bombcar 4y ago
  And even if it were (I suppose a very clean natural gas car vs the worst coal plant ever made) the electric still has the advantage of regenerating braking.
  - slow_typist 4y ago
    Driving overland will not recover much breaking energy. That is only an advantage of EVs under town traffic conditions, where cheap efficient public transportation is the better solution.
- matsemann 4y ago
  An EV is much heavier, thus you need more energy to move it. But I think in total it should still be a net win for EVs. But the real problem is that we move 2000+ kgs around to move a human of 80 kgs around. EVs don't fix that. EVs are mostly to save the car industry, the solution is to drive less by creating a society where people don't need to own a car and drive everywhere.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    > An EV is much heavier The most popular EVs in the US are roughly 0-10% heavier than the comparable ICEV. Yes, some EVs are much heavier.

k__ 4y ago

Probably depends on the vehicles, right? If we'd use more public transport like trains and busses, we might be very well off.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dumbfounder 4y ago

Can batteries be created to make the process of reclaiming the lithium orders of magnitude easier? A completely different topic: Politics tends to focus on forcing consumer vehicles to go electric, is this really the right move? Most cars are not driven a lot in a day. But cars that are used for work (fleet, uber/deliveries) are used much more, so the benefit to them being electric is far greater. Trucks too most likely. Shouldn't this be where we focus our attention to get the best bang for the buck? And also make sure we don't drive the price up making it more expensive for the vehicles that are driven much more? Imagine the scenario where lithium prices are driven up by legislation-borne demand, we would instead have more cars with less lithium, and thus less range. Maybe that's ok, I dunno. That said, more electric cars means more and better infra and tech that will be created. So obviously some good stuff. Life is so complicated.

matsemann 4y ago
Most people shouldn't need to own a car. I don't mean that in a "self driving will save us" way. But that a personal car is parked 95% of the day. In a city huge areas are used for storing these blocks of metal not in use. More accessible car sharing could make less people feel the need to own a car.
- SketchySeaBeast 4y ago
  Isn't the problem that the car's that are parked 95% of the day are all moving at the same time in the last 5%? It feels like building a carless society is a lot more deliberate effort and requires a lot more public good will than electrifying what we have. That being said, it's probably the better long term goal.
  - scotty79 4y ago
    If some strain of covid crops up that's way more deadly, maybe then we'll permanently transition to not hauling our butts around to stare at computer screens anyways.
    - 4y ago

samwillis 4y ago

Something that I think needs to be considered more is the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs. We should not be putting all eggs in that one basket. Obviously they are the most widely developed, and hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Then there's the fascinating "aluminium air" battery [0] concept which could work so well for people away from traditional infrastructure, or even in small city cars where you can't easily charge at the side of the road in a parking bay. I want to see a future where there are 10s of different types of electric and zero carbon vehicles on the roads. Each tailored to a different market and vehicle type. 0: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium–air_battery https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium–air_battery

rootusrootus 4y ago
> hydrogen fuel cell technology isn't anywhere near the point where it is ready. But we shouldn't stop developing it. Scientific development on the technology should continue, but the focus on FCEVs as a use case is misplaced. The idea has been worked on for decades, but we're just about as far away from practical hydrogen infrastructure as we've ever been. It's still only available in any meaningful way in two metro areas in California. There are far more practical solutions to fast EV fueling than hydrogen.
- hcurtiss 4y ago
  Is that true? The Tesla semi presentation cracked me up with the huge container of batteries prepared to charge a single semi. The grid load for charging any meaningful number of EVs simultaneously is hilariously out of reach (even if we could build the generation capacity, NIMBY-Americans will never accomodate the transmission). It seems to me that hydrogen is a relatively elegant solution to this problem. We are good at transporting and storing compressed gases today. It seems to me that building out that infrastructure is more likely than the gigantic power delivery infrastructure necessary to charge lithium batteries.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> the now dominant thought that Electric Vehicles = Lithium BEVs In popular media, perhaps. Research, including industrial R&D, continued on other fronts. That said, the periodic table seems to limit us to hydrogen, lithium, sodium and perhaps potassium. Life chose hydrogen (with carbon). We’re transitioning from hydrocarbons to lithium (with carbon; some are trying silicon). Sodium is close to being a viable contender, but it’s heavier than lithium, which barring a chemistry breakthrough will relegate it below lithium.

Gwypaas 4y ago

Always liked the USGS take on mineral reserves. > Reserves data are dynamic. They may be reduced as ore is mined and (or) the feasibility of extraction diminishes, or more commonly, they may continue to increase as additional deposits (known or recently discovered) are developed, or currently exploited deposits are more thoroughly explored and (or) new technology or economic variables improve their economic feasibility. Reserves may be considered a working inventory of mining companies’ supplies of an economically extractable mineral commodity. As such, the magnitude of that inventory is necessarily limited by many considerations, including cost of drilling, taxes, price of the mineral commodity being mined, and the demand for it. Reserves will be developed to the point of business needs and geologic limitations of economic ore grade and tonnage. For example, in 1970, identified and undiscovered world copper resources were estimated to contain 1.6 billion metric tons of copper, with reserves of about 280 million tons of copper. Since then, about 600 million tons of copper have been produced worldwide, but world copper reserves in 2021 were estimated to be 880 million tons of copper, more than triple those in 1970, despite the depletion by mining of much more than the 1970 estimated reserves. https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2022/mcs2022-appendixes.pdf https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2022/mcs2022-appendixes... Appendix C to 2022 Lithium Statistics and Information. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/national-minerals-information-center/lithium-statistics-and-information https://www.usgs.gov/centers/national-minerals-information-c...

JKCalhoun 4y ago
I'm reminded of the Hunt brothers attempt to corner the silver market in 1980 [1]. > But as the high prices persisted, new silver began to come out of the woodwork. > “In the U.S., people rifled their dresser drawers and sofa cushions to find dimes and quarters with silver content and had them melted down,” says Pirrong, from the University of Houston. “Silver is a classic part of a bride’s trousseau in India, and when prices got high, women sold silver out of their trousseaus.” [2] Price seems to be able to make material availability very elastic. If there is a huge demand for lithium and our collective resources are bent toward obtaining it (or finding a substitute) I think you can trust "The Market" to find a way. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silver_Thursday [2] https://priceonomics.com/how-the-hunt-brothers-cornered-the-silver-market/ https://priceonomics.com/how-the-hunt-brothers-cornered-the-...

benaadams 4y ago

I feel the article violated Betteridge's law of headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...

HPsquared 4y ago
A better formulation would be "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the null hypothesis.". That is, instead of "no", say "it's nothing".
Kiro 4y ago
And many people here comment like it wouldn't. I guess you're so used to Betteridge's being true that you presume the answer in the article is "no".

sgraaf 4y ago

If you have a spare 17 minutes, this great, informative video by Wendover Productions [1] goes more in-depth about the various problems with Lithium-ion batteries. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dnN82DsQ2k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dnN82DsQ2k

naasking 4y ago

For everyone? No. Fortunately we don't need lithium for everyone's EV. Other battery chemistries and designs are already coming to market, like sodium batteries, solid state batteries, and more.

kkfx 4y ago

IMVHO > How much lithium does the world have? We don’t really know for sure. That's the simple main point. The rest are speculation. Oh, sure "not being sure" is not a reason not to try, but is a reason to have some backups. SO far we lack them. And that's the main issue. The secondary issue is recycling of metals, so far we have many experimental procedures, more or less doable at a not-just-lab scale, but nothing usable on scale. The corollary issue is that we do not have just cars, we also have airplanes and ships. So far some eVTOL have popped up but also prove they are not much more than very-short-range cars replacers for certain use cases. We also have some battery-electrical ship (and modern sub), but nothing really usable on large scale. Long story short: the road is very long and looking for alternatives is a MUST. A company can fail, it's perfectly normal, a society should NOT FAIL by all means and when happen it hurt much.

rootusrootus 4y ago
> nothing usable on scale There are many battery recyclers in China that grind up lithium ion batteries all day every day and recover the metals.
- slow_typist 4y ago
  Even if you can do it on scale and with a very high recovery rate of 90%, after 7 cycles half of the lithium is gone. Given the massive environmental effects of the mining and the relatively scarce reserves we need to allocate the metal very carefully. It should not be used to maintain a broken business model IMO.
  - rootusrootus 4y ago
    Where does that 90% figure come from? The state of the art appears to be 99%.
    - slow_typist 4y ago
      99% in a lab, if you are very good. 90% IRL (on industrial scale) is my educated guess given that you have losses in the whole reduction network and diminishing returns in the extraction process.

404mm 4y ago

Isn’t this article quite pointless considering everyone is aware of the current Lithium resource limitations and new technologies targeted to replace lithium are already emerging? For example the Sodium Ion batteries hit the news recently. Similar to oil, we can all speculate what is the remaining capacity we haven’t extracted but eventually it all comes down to - can we get it cheaper somewhere else and preferably using own resources instead of paying 3rd party (country)?

ag315 4y ago

It's not just lithium that's the problem; copper is also a major component, and we don't have nearly enough of that either. A full transition to electric vehicles is not viable with current technologies. If we can make a big leap in solid state battery technology then that could make all the difference, but the viability of those is being continuously postponed.

stcredzero 4y ago
In one of his most recent videos, Peter Zeihan cites some things, which actually make me question his objectivity in this matter. - He claims that graphite will be a problem. I'm not sure if this will be if we divert coal and petroleum away from energy to graphite, which would sequester that carbon. - He's not aware that the aluminum industry has made plans to become carbon neutral. I'm not sure if they really mean it, but they've made plans. - He claims that at no point in history, has the world doubled the availability of a resource by a factor of 2 in 10 years. This just strikes me as fishy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf85EuQKWeQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf85EuQKWeQ
nickspicer1993 4y ago
I have dug into this rabbit hole recently and haven't seen any studies indicating Copper is going to be a problem, do you have a source? Cheers
dgudkov 4y ago
>A full transition to electric vehicles is not viable with current technologies. So maybe, just maybe, Toyota wasn't that wrong by not going full gung-ho about EVs.

cainxinth 4y ago

I had a friend ask me a few years back about investing heavily in some ETFs that were connected to lithium mining and other minerals used for tech products. I cautioned them against it. Not because I don't think the need for these materials will continue to grow, but because I worry that increased demand will spur new innovation in finding, extracting, and processing them -- which would drive down prices in the long run. I don't have a crystal ball, but that seems to be a common pattern in the history of our exploitation of this planet's resources.

bischofs 4y ago

This is such a dumb analysis - Lithium batteries are used in everything - tools, consumer electronics, medical devices, home and grid storage and all of the sectors that will be using it soon. Not to mention if you want to push larger transport sectors and grid de-carbonization you will need massive GwH batteries with 100kg+ of lithium. We clearly need more solutions, stop pushing lithium batteries like they can solve all the world's energy problems.

hutzlibu 4y ago
"We clearly need more solutions, stop pushing lithium batteries like they can solve all the world's energy problems." That's right. We need to push natrium based batteries for stationary use cases, like grid storage and reserve the lithium based for mobile use.

kingastachura 4y ago

watching all the drama happening lately around climate change issues, this is very much interesting and needed read, thanks!

pmayrgundter 4y ago

Musk said in a Q&A recently that Tesla will need to start its own mining and refining ops to support battery production https://youtu.be/KeEmVxMFM4Q?t=3063 https://youtu.be/KeEmVxMFM4Q?t=3063

dieselgate 4y ago

Good topic but the tldr wasn't super inspiring for me "Yes, the world has enough lithium for our electric vehicles, decades into the future": decades isn't really sufficient for this imo. It would ideally be.. multiple centuries at the very least? Then the author says something like "we have no idea how much lithium there is" so guess nobody knows this answer, but fair enough as it's quite early stage...

Zigurd 4y ago
Without knowing the scale of secondary uses of batteries built for cars, or the economics of recycling, I doubt the answer is knowable beyond that horizon.
- wilg 4y ago
  Here's a video on the former Tesla CTO's battery recycling company: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLr0GStrnwQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLr0GStrnwQ

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

j0li0t 4y ago

Volume is not the only issue. How about the moral aspect of mining in underdeveloped countries with poor working conditions...

Julien_r2 4y ago
This is definitely an issue which is well underestimated! Portugal (e.g in Covas de Barroso) [1] and Spain (e.g. in Cáceres) [2] are facing huge pressure to settle for lithium mines, without much consideration for the social and ecological impacts on those regions... It is still considered as a green energy, simply because we decide to forget about part of the process. Just as we did for gas, and plastic. Energy price should take in account all the impacts (recycling included), the avoid being considered as a magical solution, and rush blindly toward the next crisis.. [1] https://www.portugalresident.com/lithium-wars-step-up-in-covas-do-barroso/ https://www.portugalresident.com/lithium-wars-step-up-in-cov... [2] https://www.ft.com/content/459191d9-774d-4a2b-8ec6-ba472017b05e https://www.ft.com/content/459191d9-774d-4a2b-8ec6-ba472017b...

sroussey 4y ago

We won’t be using Lithium by 2050 anyhow. If not aluminum ion batteries, then some other substitute.

dgudkov 4y ago
Without strong supporting facts for viability of that "some other substitute" it sounds like "Full self-driving is just around the corner".
- sroussey 4y ago
  2050 is almost 3 decades away. There are at least two public companies that are in testing phase for such batteries today. Starting at coin sized (they last 2x longer). Then AA and then larger scale. I’d guess 5yr out which means 10.

fwungy 4y ago

1. Lithium isn't the only mineral to be concerned about. 2. "The technology will improve" is not always a reliable strategy. Fusion is perpetually almost here, for example. 3. Without a federal money printer propping up the EV market it would not exist. 4. Just because a lifestyle works great for you, e.g. walkable cities and ebikes, doesnt mean it will work for everyone. 5. How far into a dictatorial, command economy, are we capable of going into to effect a massive energy transition, i.e. how much do we force changes a substantial number of people have serious problems with?

yakak 4y ago
All of these concerns, even #1, have applied to communist car driving America and its 25% theft of everything.. I would tax the beejesus out of energy use and personal road use and invert most income tax to make something closer to a free market than the US is.

0xbadcafebee 4y ago

I reject the premise of the question, because you don't need lithium for electric vehicles. We could get by with shitty low-range batteries the way other EVs have. We would just need to standardize battery-swapping at the equivalent of gas stations. Drive 100 miles, drive into a battery-swapping station, service technician swaps the battery, you're back on the road in less than 5 minutes. We did it 100 years ago, we can do it again. So lithium isn't a blocker. I also think we shouldn't own as many personal vehicles as we do, and should start to move legislation toward more funding of better (and faster, and more efficient) public transit, and more taxing of private vehicles. We don't need to have so many private vehicles, we are just addicted to them.

frickenhamster 4y ago
This will never work. Components in cars are engineered to be organized as efficiently as possible. The overhead from having replaceable batteries will kill the amount of storage you can have. There is no way you can have generic attendants swap out batteries in 5 minutes. Working with EVs is a dangerous job that you can't just pay an uneducated minimum wage worker to change. The batteries are extremely heavy and are placed in locations that you need a car lift to get to. Plus theres all sort of liability and safety issues from potentially messing up a battery swap or getting a bad battery and blowing up your car.
- DLwdTxdU6smHQA 4y ago
  I dont know how scalable this is, but Nio (electric car maker from China) are building automatic battery swap stations. See e.g. here (video is in German): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv7OQofChbg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vv7OQofChbg edit: I think it takes more than five minutes though, especially when you have to wait in line.
- 0xbadcafebee 4y ago
  > Components in cars are engineered to be organized as efficiently as possible Ever heard of an SUV? Cars are not designed to be efficient, they are designed to meet product goals. Sometimes those goals are efficiency, such as meeting an emissions or efficiency regulation. But most of the goals are "what do we think some schmuck will pay $30K for?" If 100 years ago, replaceable batteries were not a barrier to storage space, they certainly shouldn't be now, unless we're just admitting that we suck so much at building cars now that we can't even make them like we did 100 years ago. Battery swapping services existed for 20 years. It only stopped because the market decided gas would rule instead.

1970-01-01 4y ago

Once again, Afghanistan has it. China is getting it. https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.html https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/world/asia/14minerals.htm... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/chinese-firms-show-interest-in-afghanistan-s-mineral-reserves https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/chinese-f...

olivermarks 4y ago

We cannot afford to ransack places like Chile to extract lithium for 'electric vehicles', which plumb new depths of pollution and third world degredation. The extraction of rare earth minerals for our electronically surveilled and controlled future comes at a terrible cost, as Siddharth Kara's new book "Cobalt Red: How The Blood of The Congo Powers Our Lives" outlines in excruciating detail. https://read.macmillan.com/lp/cobalt-red/ https://read.macmillan.com/lp/cobalt-red/ No one wins in this race to the bottom. If you are contemplating a BEV I would urge you to read up on just how ecologically appalling the batteries are for our planet and people.

ok_dad 4y ago
Oil ain't a picnic either, so what's the answer?
- elefantastisch 4y ago
  Grid-powered public transit replacing 80% of trips by personal vehicle.
  - olivermarks 4y ago
    This is the sort of elitist fantasy nonsense promoted by the WEF that completely disrespects the average person and family.
    - ok_dad 4y ago
      European families seem to do OK using public transit.
      - ohuf 4y ago
        ...only in big cities. Rural areas including the suburbs of the 100k's still depend heavily on individual transport...
    - someNameIG 4y ago

FatActor 4y ago

This article is a great example of how to draw conclusions from changing data, and how to call out the sources of uncertainty at every turn. I think a few were missed based on the comments below but I don't think that was done out of nefarious agenda but rather an attempt to keep the essay short as the author seems to have done enough research that i trust they didn't overlook these second order implications.

cjensen 4y ago

Much of the issue here is from using, in my opinion, terms that are misleading. The article defines resources as all known mineral deposits. It defines reserves as resources which are economically extractible. Here's the issue: when you already have plenty of reserves, you don't go looking for more. None of the charts which detail existing resources and reserves tell you anything about the quantity of lithium which exists on the planet. These numbers are only really useful when mining companies ask themselves "should I prospect for more?" If mining companies are actively prospecting and not finding enough to fill anticipated needs, then you have a problem. Not before.

airbreather 4y ago

It doesn't matter because there is only around a quarter of the copper needed in the world, so unless there's space mining the lithium wont be the problem any time soon.

markeibes 4y ago

If the vehicles are trains then yes.

daniel1969 4y ago

There might be enough lithium for EVs, but lithium is needed not only for EV batteries. Overall, there is no enough lithium to phase out fossil fuels. Not even for the first generation of technology devices. Here is the presentation given by prof. Simon Michaux where the problem is explained in more detail and supported with data: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBVmnKuBocc Lithium is not the only problem, other minerals are too. And, just like the original article says - the pace of extraction.

tdiff 4y ago

Are not people who make examples of the Netherlands or Norway as bike coutries missing that it is possibly just prohibitively expensive to own a car there, not that most people actually prefer bikes?

timbit42 4y ago

If we have a looming lithium shortage, instead of pushing EVs, we should be pushing PHEVs which use 1/10th the batteries and require 1/10th the energy and time to charge. Over 90% of most driver's daily use is less than 1/10th the range (40 km) of a typical EV (400 km) so a PHEV with 1/10th the battery means they will rarely need gasoline. For longer trips, you can use gas so there is no range anxiety. One EV reduces one driver's gasoline usage by 100%. With the same amount of batteries we could build 10 PHEVs and reduce 10 drivers' gasoline by 90%. This is a 9 times greater reduction in gasoline usage than building EVs. If we're really serious about lowering CO2, we should be pushing PHEVs, not EVs that we don't have enough batteries for.