4 ms·

> Batteries are a nightmare at grid scale from an environmental perspective. Which part[0], exactly? I think most people dramatically overestimate the level of

> Batteries are a nightmare at grid scale from an environmental perspective. Which part[0], exactly? I think most people dramatically overestimate the level of "nightmare", and battery contents are highly recyclable. We don't have a ton of battery recycling right now because there aren't enough failing batteries yet to support the necessary facilities, but several companies are starting to ramp up. Also worth considering that even after a battery is "too old" to use in an EV, it is perfectly fine to use in stationary storage applications for quite awhile longer ("reuse") even before it is time to recycle and rebuild those components into a new battery. > It's fundamentally far more difficult and costly to adjust supply (or to buffer with storage) than it is to reduce demand during periods of low renewable generation. As more EVs and their chargers come online, instantaneous load reductions become cheap and easy - and possible. I completely agree with this, and most people either can't or won't see this point in discussions about renewables. The more predictable load that comes online, the easier it is to justify more production. Even if that production is using so-called "intermittent" renewables, when the need arises, asking people to voluntarily avoid charging for a day would be equivalent to adding a huge amount of production suddenly, just by removing load. (And EVs have enough range for a week of normal commuting for most people, easily. The few people who need to charge desperately would be able to charge without problems.) If you pay people for volunteering to participate in Demand Response, you will get plenty of volunteers. "Demand response" is a critical part of the grid of the future. [0]: https://cen.acs.org/content/dam/cen/97/28/WEB/09728-cover-schematic.jpg https://cen.acs.org/content/dam/cen/97/28/WEB/09728-cover-sc...

arcticbull 4y ago
> Which part[0], exactly? I think most people dramatically overestimate the level of "nightmare", and battery contents are highly recyclable. We don't have a ton of battery recycling right now because there aren't enough failing batteries yet to support the necessary facilities, but several companies are starting to ramp up. Lithium mining is horrible for the environment. [1, 2] We will keep doing it for as long as it remains cheaper to extract than to recycle, which is why we don't recycle. It's the reason we don't recycle that vast majority of what you put into the recycle bin. [1] https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-li... [2] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environment-impact https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environmen...
- coder543 4y ago
  All mining is bad for the environment to some degree or another. Lithium mining allows us to stop doing other harmful forms of mining, and it is infinitely recyclable; it isn't being blasted away into the atmosphere like gasoline. Eventually, we should have enough in the recycling pipeline that mining it becomes relatively uncommon. If people are willing to pay a price premium for it, then it is apparently possible to mine lithium from the seawater directly: https://cen.acs.org/materials/inorganic-chemistry/Can-seawater-give-us-lithium-to-meet-our-battery-needs/99/i36 https://cen.acs.org/materials/inorganic-chemistry/Can-seawat... The researchers claim it has the potential to be very cost effective, but that remains to be seen. Their process sounds very environmentally neutral, which is always something to strive for. For it to be an "environmental nightmare", it has to be worse than what we’re already doing. So, no, a couple of articles complaining about lithium mining is not equivalent to evidence that this is worse for the environment than mining coal and oil, or other things you might want to mine instead of lithium. Nickel and cobalt are more of a problem than lithium according to my understanding, but we have some nickel-free and cobalt-free battery chemistries that are becoming more common, like LFP batteries. > We will keep doing it for as long as it remains cheaper to extract than to recycle, which is why we don't recycle. It's the reason we don't recycle that vast majority of what you put into the recycle bin. This is a misunderstanding of the economics, then. The batteries involved are huge, so it is very hard to “lose” these lithium-rich containers. These are not small coke cans which could easily end up in a landfill. But even then, more than 50% of the aluminum in coke cans is made from recycled aluminum. Recycling giant lithium ion batteries should be very profitable for everyone involved compared to mining new lithium. Plastic recycling is unfortunately a bad joke, of course.
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    > All mining is bad for the environment to some degree or another. Lithium mining allows us to stop doing other harmful forms of mining, and it is infinitely recyclable; it isn't being blasted away into the atmosphere like gasoline. Eventually, we should have enough in the recycling pipeline that mining it becomes relatively uncommon. I agree, but the choice isn't mine lithium or burn gasoline. There are other choices. Nuclear, renewables, and a grid that can adjust demand instead of needing to adjust supply. Transit. We don't need electric cars if we have trains, and trains have pantographs or third rails so don't require batteries. If we're willing to adjust our way of life, then we can have a much smaller impact. Lithium from seawater is definitely interesting. But yes to your point other metals are equally or more problematic, for instance rare earths, copper, nickel, etc.

arcticbull 4y ago

> Which part[0], exactly? I think most people dramatically overestimate the level of "nightmare", and battery contents are highly recyclable. We don't have a ton of battery recycling right now because there aren't enough failing batteries yet to support the necessary facilities, but several companies are starting to ramp up. Lithium mining is horrible for the environment. [1, 2] We will keep doing it for as long as it remains cheaper to extract than to recycle, which is why we don't recycle. It's the reason we don't recycle that vast majority of what you put into the recycle bin. [1] https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-lithium-fields-reveal-the-dark-side-of-our-electric-future https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/02/01/south-america-s-li... [2] https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environment-impact https://www.wired.co.uk/article/lithium-batteries-environmen...

coder543 4y ago
All mining is bad for the environment to some degree or another. Lithium mining allows us to stop doing other harmful forms of mining, and it is infinitely recyclable; it isn't being blasted away into the atmosphere like gasoline. Eventually, we should have enough in the recycling pipeline that mining it becomes relatively uncommon. If people are willing to pay a price premium for it, then it is apparently possible to mine lithium from the seawater directly: https://cen.acs.org/materials/inorganic-chemistry/Can-seawater-give-us-lithium-to-meet-our-battery-needs/99/i36 https://cen.acs.org/materials/inorganic-chemistry/Can-seawat... The researchers claim it has the potential to be very cost effective, but that remains to be seen. Their process sounds very environmentally neutral, which is always something to strive for. For it to be an "environmental nightmare", it has to be worse than what we’re already doing. So, no, a couple of articles complaining about lithium mining is not equivalent to evidence that this is worse for the environment than mining coal and oil, or other things you might want to mine instead of lithium. Nickel and cobalt are more of a problem than lithium according to my understanding, but we have some nickel-free and cobalt-free battery chemistries that are becoming more common, like LFP batteries. > We will keep doing it for as long as it remains cheaper to extract than to recycle, which is why we don't recycle. It's the reason we don't recycle that vast majority of what you put into the recycle bin. This is a misunderstanding of the economics, then. The batteries involved are huge, so it is very hard to “lose” these lithium-rich containers. These are not small coke cans which could easily end up in a landfill. But even then, more than 50% of the aluminum in coke cans is made from recycled aluminum. Recycling giant lithium ion batteries should be very profitable for everyone involved compared to mining new lithium. Plastic recycling is unfortunately a bad joke, of course.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  > All mining is bad for the environment to some degree or another. Lithium mining allows us to stop doing other harmful forms of mining, and it is infinitely recyclable; it isn't being blasted away into the atmosphere like gasoline. Eventually, we should have enough in the recycling pipeline that mining it becomes relatively uncommon. I agree, but the choice isn't mine lithium or burn gasoline. There are other choices. Nuclear, renewables, and a grid that can adjust demand instead of needing to adjust supply. Transit. We don't need electric cars if we have trains, and trains have pantographs or third rails so don't require batteries. If we're willing to adjust our way of life, then we can have a much smaller impact. Lithium from seawater is definitely interesting. But yes to your point other metals are equally or more problematic, for instance rare earths, copper, nickel, etc.