The race to grab all the UK’s lithium before it’s too late(wired.co.uk)
wired.co.uk
The race to grab all the UK’s lithium before it’s too late
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/cornwall-lithium
66 comments
>I wonder if lithium will give us the same geopolitical results as petrol
Highly doubtful. Lithium is one of the most common elements, and the oceans contain hundreds of billions of tons of dissolved lithium. The concentrations are low, but there is plenty of research on sea water extraction [ie., 0] which also may dovetail very nicely with other efforts like desalination (using the resulting concentrated brine), and we're moving to a world with a lot of potential cheap solar/wind energy that will result in extraneous power in need of economic applications. Lithium is also very recyclable. Places with more lucky concentrated lithium certainly can have some economic advantages in pricing, but not in fundamental supply as happens with fossil fuels. At the end of the day that sets a pretty hard ceiling on global pricing, let alone strategic level pricing. Any first world nation with any coast could embark on sea water extraction if they felt it was important enough, combined with aggressive recycling operations, and then just be set. Very different dynamic then consumable fossil fuels.
Edit to your other post:
>Everything is everywhere
That obviously isn't true, oil isn't everywhere. Lots of places simply don't have any domestically at all, at any price. And it's a fuel, unlike lithium. It gets used up. Obviously getting together all the infrastructure for a lithium using energy economy is going to cost a lot, but so did (and does) fossil fuel infrastructure. And surely many countries won't actually bother because of comparative advantage elsewhere, but the fact that they could naturally will reduce the geopolitical leverage.
----
0: Innovative lithium recovery technique from seawater by using world-first dialysis with a lithium ionic superconductor : https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.12.0...
Highly doubtful. Lithium is one of the most common elements, and the oceans contain hundreds of billions of tons of dissolved lithium. The concentrations are low, but there is plenty of research on sea water extraction [ie., 0] which also may dovetail very nicely with other efforts like desalination (using the resulting concentrated brine), and we're moving to a world with a lot of potential cheap solar/wind energy that will result in extraneous power in need of economic applications. Lithium is also very recyclable. Places with more lucky concentrated lithium certainly can have some economic advantages in pricing, but not in fundamental supply as happens with fossil fuels. At the end of the day that sets a pretty hard ceiling on global pricing, let alone strategic level pricing. Any first world nation with any coast could embark on sea water extraction if they felt it was important enough, combined with aggressive recycling operations, and then just be set. Very different dynamic then consumable fossil fuels.
Edit to your other post:
>Everything is everywhere
That obviously isn't true, oil isn't everywhere. Lots of places simply don't have any domestically at all, at any price. And it's a fuel, unlike lithium. It gets used up. Obviously getting together all the infrastructure for a lithium using energy economy is going to cost a lot, but so did (and does) fossil fuel infrastructure. And surely many countries won't actually bother because of comparative advantage elsewhere, but the fact that they could naturally will reduce the geopolitical leverage.
----
0: Innovative lithium recovery technique from seawater by using world-first dialysis with a lithium ionic superconductor : https://sci-hub.se/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.12.0...
Here's a thought that I think of every once in a while: Is there anything you can do with salt to "get rid" of it in a way that makes it insoluble? Like convert it to some other mineral?
Sodium chloride is a base material for many things. But I can't think of anything that would be economically competitive to handle the quantity of brine that a desalination plant might produce.
It won’t.
Lithium is everywhere. No one’s been looking for it until recently. 20years ago it’s biggest use was industrial lubrication etc.
Also recyclability hasn’t even been truly tested and looks promising.
A new battery tech will come long before lithium becomes scarce.
Lithium is everywhere. No one’s been looking for it until recently. 20years ago it’s biggest use was industrial lubrication etc.
Also recyclability hasn’t even been truly tested and looks promising.
A new battery tech will come long before lithium becomes scarce.
Everything is everywhere, it's just a matter of being economically viable to reach, extract and process.
We're still finding new ways to scale oil production 100 years after demand exploded. Lithium demand is new. If we can't get enough Lithium, it's almost certainly for logistics reasons rather than because it's a fundamentally intractable problem.
Unlike oil you can recycle lithium. There is only so many new batteries needed and at some point most of the demand will be fed with recycled lithium.
Exactly. You don't burn lithium into the atmosphere. Even depleted cells still have all the lithium they were created with.
The process of getting lithium out of depleted cells and ready for new cells is a rapidly scaling industry at the moment.
The process of getting lithium out of depleted cells and ready for new cells is a rapidly scaling industry at the moment.
Furthermore refining old battery material into new feedstock is far less energy intensive than getting it out of the ground in the first place.
This sounds unlikely:
"This takes a lot of energy: around five per cent of the electricity generated globally is spent crushing rocks in lithium mining."
"This takes a lot of energy: around five per cent of the electricity generated globally is spent crushing rocks in lithium mining."
Having googled a bit, "five percent of the world's electricity used in crushing rocks in all mining" looks plausible.
I thought lithium generally came from salts and was slurped, not crushed?
It’s not. Hard rock lithium mining is such a small industry it’s ridiculous.
Biggest lithium mines don’t even compare to biggest copper/gold/iron ore/zinc mines
Biggest lithium mines don’t even compare to biggest copper/gold/iron ore/zinc mines
Around 4% of the worlds electrical energy comsumption is from comminution aka crushing rocks. [1]
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305693765_Energy_Co...
[1] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305693765_Energy_Co...
Of which, perhaps 1 ton in 100,000 is mined for Lithium.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1224214/production-volum...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1224214/production-volum...
Was about to comment on the same quote.
And if true, wow that’s a chunky carbon footprint on green car batteries!
And if true, wow that’s a chunky carbon footprint on green car batteries!
If you've been paying attention then it's quite clear that buying a new electric car is not always green.
If you're trading in a car that's less than 5 years old, then it takes a long time to offset the "new car" footprint.
Electric cars also do not care how the power is sourced, and if it's coal then can actually add more carbon to the environment than a petrol car.
Not everything is black and white, electric cars are definitely able to be more green than petrol ones and centralising the power generation will help keep our cities less polluted too.
If you're trading in a car that's less than 5 years old, then it takes a long time to offset the "new car" footprint.
Electric cars also do not care how the power is sourced, and if it's coal then can actually add more carbon to the environment than a petrol car.
Not everything is black and white, electric cars are definitely able to be more green than petrol ones and centralising the power generation will help keep our cities less polluted too.
> Electric cars also do not care how the power is sourced, and if it's coal then can actually add more carbon to the environment than a petrol car.
Erm, no. You're absolutely correct about the embodied carbon in the car's production, but an EV consuming pure coal power[0] is less polluting than an (edit) ICE car. And most areas are far from pure coal power. According to the EPA if I bought an EV it would have 1/5th the tailpipe emissions of a gasoline car.
The "EV's are just coal power plants on wheels" is literally oil industry propaganda, FYI.
Edit: I also find the argument about production to be correct, but misguided. A sibling commenter plugged a calculator that they made for lifetime emissions and break even points. Using their assumptions about CO2 cost for the vehicles productions and my car's current mileage (30mpg) and local CO2 production (127g/kWh), the break even point for an EV is ~10,000 miles. This is a bit less than what most Americans drive per year. Given that a lot of people constantly trade up their cars anyways, you'd rather they trade-up to an EV than a ICE vehicle, on the balance.
0 - The EPA has a calculator for tailpipe emissions. Even putting a model Y right next to the largest coal powerplant in the US yielded significantly lower tailpipe emissions than gas; 130g/mi vs 410g/mi. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?year=2021&vehicleId=...
Erm, no. You're absolutely correct about the embodied carbon in the car's production, but an EV consuming pure coal power[0] is less polluting than an (edit) ICE car. And most areas are far from pure coal power. According to the EPA if I bought an EV it would have 1/5th the tailpipe emissions of a gasoline car.
The "EV's are just coal power plants on wheels" is literally oil industry propaganda, FYI.
Edit: I also find the argument about production to be correct, but misguided. A sibling commenter plugged a calculator that they made for lifetime emissions and break even points. Using their assumptions about CO2 cost for the vehicles productions and my car's current mileage (30mpg) and local CO2 production (127g/kWh), the break even point for an EV is ~10,000 miles. This is a bit less than what most Americans drive per year. Given that a lot of people constantly trade up their cars anyways, you'd rather they trade-up to an EV than a ICE vehicle, on the balance.
0 - The EPA has a calculator for tailpipe emissions. Even putting a model Y right next to the largest coal powerplant in the US yielded significantly lower tailpipe emissions than gas; 130g/mi vs 410g/mi. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?year=2021&vehicleId=...
> Erm, no. You're absolutely correct about the embodied carbon in the car's production, but an EV consuming pure coal power[0] is less polluting than a pure EV. And most areas are far from pure coal power.
I think you mean it's less polluting than a ICE? Otherwise I don't think I understand this.
I think you mean it's less polluting than a ICE? Otherwise I don't think I understand this.
Yes, typo.
New EVs are a net benefit over new ICE cars for almost all usage patterns. Only for extremely low yearly mileage over the whole lifespan of the car can an ICE car come out ahead, even if you consider the current electricity mix and ignore any future growth of renewables on the grid.
If you are trading in a driveable car, it doesn't get discarded but sold on the used cars market. In general, the alternative to buying an electric vehicle usually is buying a non-electric vehicle. So it should be evaluated on that base.
The ICE car sold second hand is probably displacing an older, more polluting car so it’s still a net win.
While true in terms that we generate most electricity from fossil fuels so electric cars still pollute the environment but I find it really hard to believe an electric car in any fashion can pollute more than a gasoline/diesel. A regular car is at most 15% efficient at the vehicle level. Even less factoring carbon footprint end to end from oil extraction until you fill the car. An electric car on the other hand by itself is easily over 70% efficient. Burning gas would somehow need to be 5-7X times cleaner than coal factories.
A video I watched recently comes to a very different conclusion on almost every point you raised: that buying a new electric car is better for the environment within ~5 years of use, taking into account the 'new car' footprint.
I'm not an expert, so I won't claim to know who's correct. But the linked video provides lots of numbers, and you didn't, so I lean in favour of that conclusion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2IKCdnzl5k
I'm not an expert, so I won't claim to know who's correct. But the linked video provides lots of numbers, and you didn't, so I lean in favour of that conclusion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2IKCdnzl5k
Do you know some sources for the net footprint of electrical cars? Including the lithium problem and the power source.
I'd really like to run some formula in Python and see the footprint of petrol vs electric cars in terms of CO2, lithium, obsolescence time, other gases, maintenance etc.. (possibly with some parameters such as the composition of the power sources of the grid in your place).
Until I see that I feel I am being scammed by everyone since I don't have a good grasp on the data.
I'd really like to run some formula in Python and see the footprint of petrol vs electric cars in terms of CO2, lithium, obsolescence time, other gases, maintenance etc.. (possibly with some parameters such as the composition of the power sources of the grid in your place).
Until I see that I feel I am being scammed by everyone since I don't have a good grasp on the data.
See my post above - I built a calculator, here: https://www.robinlinacre.com/carbon_electric_car/
The main source is a 2020 EU report. The hyperlink has changed since I published the above, but you can find it here: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1f4...
The main source is a 2020 EU report. The hyperlink has changed since I published the above, but you can find it here: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1f4...
Not that long.
For a fairly typical UK car, it's about 25,000 km (15,000 miles).
You can see the calculation and play with the assumptions here: https://www.robinlinacre.com/carbon_electric_car/
The average UK car does about 20k miles in its first year.
For a fairly typical UK car, it's about 25,000 km (15,000 miles).
You can see the calculation and play with the assumptions here: https://www.robinlinacre.com/carbon_electric_car/
The average UK car does about 20k miles in its first year.
Do you have any sources for your "ICE uplift" default value of 50%? I'd also be curious to know where you got your numbers for manufacturing CO2 from.
Yes - the main source is a 2020 EU report. The hyperlink has changed since I published the above, but you can find it here: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1f4...
If I remember correctly, I think you can see it in the 'fuel production cycle' part of figure ES5.
Where did you get the numbers for coal? I have a hard time imagining how a building sized power plant/modern grid is less efficient than a tiny gasoline generator, unless perhaps it's a REALLY old coal plant, which I supposed might exist in the UK if they exist anywhere.
One of the largest coal plants in Europe, the Bełchatów power plant in Poland, is estimated to produce 1.75kg(!!!!) of CO2 for every kWh of electricity produced[0].
If you charge your electric car from that power plant, it's literally better(CO2 wise) to just drive a modern diesel. It's insane how bad that power plant is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be%C5%82chat%C3%B3w_Power_Stat...
Edit: and of course, it's currently being expanded, because Polish government is incapable of resisting the miner unions in this country.
If you charge your electric car from that power plant, it's literally better(CO2 wise) to just drive a modern diesel. It's insane how bad that power plant is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Be%C5%82chat%C3%B3w_Power_Stat...
Edit: and of course, it's currently being expanded, because Polish government is incapable of resisting the miner unions in this country.
> might exist in the UK if they exist anywhere.
That's a bit unfair to the UK.
Only 1.8% of power in the UK was generated from coal in 2020, down from 40% in 2012. The three remaining plants are all scheduled to close by October 2024:
• Kilroot Power Station is due to be converted to gas in 2023/2024.
• Ratcliffe-on-Soap Power Station is due to close in September 2024, although ¼ of it will close next year.
• West Burton Power Station is to close in September 2022.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/end-to-coal-power-brought...
That's a bit unfair to the UK.
Only 1.8% of power in the UK was generated from coal in 2020, down from 40% in 2012. The three remaining plants are all scheduled to close by October 2024:
• Kilroot Power Station is due to be converted to gas in 2023/2024.
• Ratcliffe-on-Soap Power Station is due to close in September 2024, although ¼ of it will close next year.
• West Burton Power Station is to close in September 2022.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/end-to-coal-power-brought...
> If you're trading in a car that's less than 5 years old, then it takes a long time to offset the "new car" footprint.
Then again, your old car is resold not destroyed and it will probably be bought on the second hand market by someone replacing a more polluting car.
Then again, your old car is resold not destroyed and it will probably be bought on the second hand market by someone replacing a more polluting car.
That more polluting cr will also be resold.
Pretty much all cars will be used until they're not worth the maintenance anymore. It's all good.
Pretty much all cars will be used until they're not worth the maintenance anymore. It's all good.
The upfront cost is negative green; but however, knowing that these vehicles last long, the time-integrated cost is net positive for green.
I thought drastic measures were needed to slash CO2 emissions, to stave off the Climate Catastrophe? Most analysis puts the lifecycle CO2 savings of an EV over an ICE at somewhere near 50%. Hardly seems worth it, with all of the extra pollution created by new mining and disposal cycles.
Seems it would be much better advice to walk or cycle more, instead of lining the pockets of big mining (which is working well for me - my wife's company is making money faster than they can count it. She likes to tell people she works in "Renewables".).
Seems it would be much better advice to walk or cycle more, instead of lining the pockets of big mining (which is working well for me - my wife's company is making money faster than they can count it. She likes to tell people she works in "Renewables".).
Your model might be comparing an EV versus nothing situation. Since it is going to be EV vs. ICE, the ‘extra pollution’ will be created unless people stop driving, so EV still wins in that case.
It would be better if we had the funds to rebuild our cities to make them not dependent on vehicles, but our hands our tied.
It would be better if we had the funds to rebuild our cities to make them not dependent on vehicles, but our hands our tied.
>It would be better if we had the funds to rebuild our cities to make them not dependent on vehicles, but our hands our tied.
And transportation technology is partly intended to reduce the power that specific plots of land hold.
And transportation technology is partly intended to reduce the power that specific plots of land hold.
My back of the napkin calculations say it's impossible.
The world produces around 25 000 TWh of electricity and 82 000 tonnes of lithium annually.
EDIT: wrongly assumed that 100% of the world's electricity is used for lithium mining. Correct version below:
For this to be true at $30/MWh one gram of lithium would need to cost ~$0.45, so a kWh of li-ion batteries would clock in at around $90 just for the lithium.
Li-ion batteries are already bought and sold for less than that.
The world produces around 25 000 TWh of electricity and 82 000 tonnes of lithium annually.
EDIT: wrongly assumed that 100% of the world's electricity is used for lithium mining. Correct version below:
For this to be true at $30/MWh one gram of lithium would need to cost ~$0.45, so a kWh of li-ion batteries would clock in at around $90 just for the lithium.
Li-ion batteries are already bought and sold for less than that.
I'd check your napkin ;)
5% of the world electricity usage divided by wholesale electricity cost, divided by world lithium production in grams ->
(5% * 2.5e+16 Wh X $30/1e+6 Wh) / 8.2e+10 g = $0.45 per gram (or 15kWh per gram of lithium)
The takeaway is that energy is currently unreasonably cheap.
5% of the world electricity usage divided by wholesale electricity cost, divided by world lithium production in grams ->
(5% * 2.5e+16 Wh X $30/1e+6 Wh) / 8.2e+10 g = $0.45 per gram (or 15kWh per gram of lithium)
The takeaway is that energy is currently unreasonably cheap.
I don't understand why this is surprising. The embodied energy of lithium cells is enormous, and it takes 30,000 miles or more of EV driving before you've paid back the CO2 debt of manufacturing the battery pack (that is, assuming you're driving an EV largely manufactured using fossil fuels, which they are, and you are driving somewhere with a reasonably high percentage of renewable electricity sources in the grid).
More fun calculations include "how many solar panels would we need to power one Gigafactory" and "how many wind turbines would we need to manufacture that many solar panels".
More fun calculations include "how many solar panels would we need to power one Gigafactory" and "how many wind turbines would we need to manufacture that many solar panels".
Most recent estimates are that under typical electrical grid power sources, it takes 8,000 miles to pay off the manufacturing CO2 debt for an EV, not 30,000 miles. I believe that larger figure is if you’re grid were 100% powered by coal.
That would be the most optimistic estimate I've ever seen - do you have a source for it?
Assuming 73kg/CO2e per kWh of EV pack[1], an 85kWh EV pack, an ICE that gets 40mpg (and thus 40 miles per 11kg CO2), grid production of 0.30kg CO2e / kWh (which is far lower than the US grid output), and 3 miles per kWh for the EV, the breakeven point is at 35,000 miles.
[1] https://www.transportenvironment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021...
Assuming 73kg/CO2e per kWh of EV pack[1], an 85kWh EV pack, an ICE that gets 40mpg (and thus 40 miles per 11kg CO2), grid production of 0.30kg CO2e / kWh (which is far lower than the US grid output), and 3 miles per kWh for the EV, the breakeven point is at 35,000 miles.
[1] https://www.transportenvironment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021...
Only 35,000 miles? Then I guess the break even point comes before the average first owner switches to a new vehicle.
I have heard that globally about 2% of energy goes to crushing rocks. Or so said years ago a government geologist I was chatting with. But I am thinking they meant harder ores in general
So 5% isn’t that far off.
So 5% isn’t that far off.
If 2% of global energy goes in to crushing rocks - in general. Then 5% to crushing lithium is so far off that its hilarious, unless nearly all rocks crushed are crushed for lithium.
Yeah no way that is true.
> You’re mining two million tonnes of rock to make 20,000 tonnes of lithium carbonate.
1% by weight. Oof. Iron ores are more in the 20% range.
1% by weight. Oof. Iron ores are more in the 20% range.
You can’t compare the two. Most open pit gold mines average 2-4g/tonne or 0.0002%
It's ok because we don't need 10kg of gold per car battery, with 1.5b vehicles on earth that adds up quickly. Gold is still mostly used for jewelry and investment, its rarity and price aren't really a problem for these, quite the contrary
We don't really need all of that for cars either. We could build 5 or 6 Chevy Volts with the same battery capacity as a single Tesla, and each of those Volts (with daily charging) would still almost never need to burn gas. (I'm the second owner of my Chevy Volt, with 60,000k miles on it, it has a real-world car-recorded all-lifetime average of 181 MPG).
We're building every EV car to handle every possible EV-only road trip because we can and because it's cool, not because it's actually necessary. We could still eliminate 90%+ of all road emissions instantly with just PHEV's using much smaller batteries, if some sort of lithium shortage made such a thing necessary.
We're building every EV car to handle every possible EV-only road trip because we can and because it's cool, not because it's actually necessary. We could still eliminate 90%+ of all road emissions instantly with just PHEV's using much smaller batteries, if some sort of lithium shortage made such a thing necessary.
It comes down to economics, whether or not it costs more to add an internal combustion engine, ancillaries, generator etc. than it does for the additional battery cells.
I used gold as a random example.
Highest grade copper mines 3-4%
Zinc mines and other base metals sit at 2-3%
Highest grade copper mines 3-4%
Zinc mines and other base metals sit at 2-3%
You don't need 10kg of gold, but you do need about 5g of platinum group metals for the catalytic converter. Not sure how many tonnes of rock that is, and how it compares to electric car batteries, but it's not nothing.
But it's notable that the formation of iron-rich ore was a biological process that happened a long time ago. Also, the iron would have originally been leached via saltwater from iron exposed to the sea, which given iron is 5.6% of the crust, is a lot vs (way) less than 0.1% for lithium.
In fairness, lithium is 8 times lighter than iron atomically...
Germany also recently found large deposits of Lithium. It's not quite clear yet how economical it will be to extract them: https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/can-rh...
Being in the mining industry I can see that I will have a huge Gell-Mann amnesia effect coming after reading this article.
It’s so cringy Urgh.
It’s so cringy Urgh.
Somehow I can never remember what that means, ironically.
https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/
https://www.epsilontheory.com/gell-mann-amnesia/
Could you say more about what you don't like about it?
The first half of the article describes regular exploration geology like its some unique process these company’s are doing.
All for a 20ktpa lithium mine, which wouldn’t pass feasibility in a pro mining environment like Australia let alone the Cornish country side.
Also it confuses what it’s actually mining. You don’t mine lithium carbonate directly.
All for a 20ktpa lithium mine, which wouldn’t pass feasibility in a pro mining environment like Australia let alone the Cornish country side.
Also it confuses what it’s actually mining. You don’t mine lithium carbonate directly.
Now you can get lithium from saltwater.
It all feels like we're repeating history, I wouldn't be surprised experts in 2050-75 will tell us we fucked up big times with lithium battery vehicles, lithium extraction seems to be already quite energy intensive and pretty dirty, it doesn't seem like it'll get easier with time either, especially with the exponentially growing demand. EV feels like the last adrenaline shot trying to keep the beast of personal/individual transportation alive, between Scylla and Charybdis....
[0] https://www.arte.tv/en/videos/092970-001-A/petrol-a-story-of...
[1] https://www.indiatoday.in/diu/story/global-players-eyeing-af...