Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

hannahritchie.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 413 posts

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

#311

Post by wilg »

akgerber wrote: post #232
malfist wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But the real problem is that we move 2000+ kgs around to move a human of 80 kgs around. Why is that a problem? If I want to visit my friend who lives 200 miles away, I'm not going to hop on a bike, or walk, or find a horse and buggie to take me there. Vehicles are not inherently evil. In fact they're a great enabler. Even if we take your example at face value and assume nobody travels beyond their city. How is that…

2000kg+ EVs still have substantial lifecycle carbon footprints even if their local emissions are much lower than a gasoline car. They are certainly useful for 200 mile trips, especially with a group of people, with well-developed road networks & underdeveloped transit networks, but the relative development/utility of different transport networks is a political choice. And 200 mile trips are a small percentage of trip…

EV lifecycle carbon footprints are much lower than a gasoline car's.

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

#312

Post by cjensen »

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.

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

#313

Post by wilg »

Zigurd wrote: post #208
dieselgate wrote: post #206

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...

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.

Here's a video on the former Tesla CTO's battery recycling company: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLr0GStrnwQ

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

#314

Post by Karrot_Kream »

rootusrootus wrote: post #110
CalRobert wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The market is profoundly distorted by single use zoning, parking minimums, density maximums, wide (and high speed) stroads, and other urban design choices that force long journeys. It's also not safe to be on an ebike surrounded by electric Hummers, F-350 super duties, and your normal "whole kindergarten class in the blind spot" Escalades. Having just spent a week in Utrecht it's very clear that "the market" can cert…

What's your justification for saying that it's the US with a profoundly distorted market and not places like Utrecht?

In lots of the US it's illegal for developers to propose anything other than Single-Family Homes. They are codified to have large minimum size requirements and often have setback requirements forcing the house to be a certain feet away from the street. Businesses are legally required to be segregated from residential used, even corner stores. Lots of businesses in the US are zoned to mandate a minimum amount of parking.

The justification for a lot of these zoning laws is explicitly that developers and the market will not provide adequate home sizes or parking, so minimum requirements are forced on developers. When law forces huge houses, no mixed use, and huge minimum parking lots, the only built environment that emerges is a car dependent one. Older US suburban neighborhoods, like the post-WWII suburbs, had smaller (900-1200 sq ft.) homes because these minimum lot and floor area size requirements weren't in place yet.

If you're curious about areas with different land-use requirements, there are cities in the US like Boston, Berkeley, or Emeryville (just off the top of my head) with more permissive zoning laws that have much lower car modeshare than other parts of the US.

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

#315

Post by olivermarks »

wilg wrote: post #307
olivermarks wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a very substantial cost to destroying the planet chasing after a toxic, highly inefficient and polluting alternative to ICE vehicles. Hybrid vehicles are clearly the answer. Tire pollution is a far more serious problem than tailpipe emissions. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jun/14/electr... This scene is absolute madness https://twitter.com/siddharthkara/status/1611042107871080449

> Tire pollution is a far more serious problem than tailpipe emissions. What an extraordinary claim.

Not a claim, a fact. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyre...

https://earth.org/tyre-pollution/

Because BEVs are much heavier than ICE vehicles and have very different torque characteristics they produce significantly more pollution. Much of the dirt poluttion attributed to diesel is actually tire particulates.

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

#316

Post by fowkswe »

rangersanger wrote: post #294
fowkswe wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bentonville's core is vastly different from the surrounding suburb/exurb/metro area which is mostly 0.5+ acre lots built in confined subdivisions connected via 4-8 lane arterial stroads - typical American car style suburban planning. The damage is done, retrofitting this development pattern to suit cycling over F150 throughput is just not something that will be achievable in the Bentonville, or the greater US. I live…

Have you looked at what's happened in Bentonville in the last few years? The cycling infrastructure that's been built extends well beyond the core and does a remarkable job connecting the suburban style development with the downtown core. They've built miles and miles of greenways and off street bike paths. I was there three months ago and rode all over town without once feeling threatened by auto traffic. Is it perf…

I'll admit it has been 3 years since we considered moving there (we tried living for a month to get the feel of it), but I wonder how well suburban style development is going to scale for utilitarian cycling to occur. The population is what, maybe 100k now? What about when its 10x that? (think DFW)

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

#317

Post by wilg »

olivermarks wrote: post #315
wilg wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tire pollution is a far more serious problem than tailpipe emissions. What an extraordinary claim.

Not a claim, a fact. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/jun/03/car-tyre... https://earth.org/tyre-pollution/ Because BEVs are much heavier than ICE vehicles and have very different torque characteristics they produce significantly more pollution. Much of the dirt poluttion attributed to diesel is actually tire particulates.

Your claim is that tire pollution is a more serious problem than exhaust. These articles do not support this claim. They state that more particles come off tires than exhaust. That's not the same thing. Does tire pollution contribute to global warming as much as fossil fuel exhaust? I haven't seen anything to indicate that.

I'd like to see a number on the difference in particulate production from tires on EVs – I suspect it's only about 20% more.

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

#318

Post by 0xffff2 »

wpm wrote: post #227
2devnull wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No cars for poor people. I think that’s the obvious direction we’re heading. Congestion pricing. The private jets will still fly off to Davos every spring.

As a former poor person, fine. I hated my car.

Then why did you have one?

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

#319

Post by rangersanger »

fowkswe wrote: post #316
rangersanger wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you looked at what's happened in Bentonville in the last few years? The cycling infrastructure that's been built extends well beyond the core and does a remarkable job connecting the suburban style development with the downtown core. They've built miles and miles of greenways and off street bike paths. I was there three months ago and rode all over town without once feeling threatened by auto traffic. Is it perf…

I'll admit it has been 3 years since we considered moving there (we tried living for a month to get the feel of it), but I wonder how well suburban style development is going to scale for utilitarian cycling to occur. The population is what, maybe 100k now? What about when its 10x that? (think DFW)

I don't think it does, and I don't think bentonville is the ideal. I just think it's proof that it's possible to start mitigating and designing toward a better future with what we have.

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

#320

Post by matsemann »

jbm wrote: post #255
matsemann wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the authoritarian and arrogant attitude is from those thinking it's their right to drive everywhere at whatever cost to others. And you're missing the point. Why do you need a car because of family? Think further than your own nose tip. Wouldn't it be nice with a society where you didn't have to drive to do any little chore? And the few times you needed to drive, a care from some car sharing service was available…

You are talking over the parent poster, not trying to understand the situation. Your rosy picture is not in line with my life experience. I lived in Tokyo where I took the train and walked everywhere. I also lived in Quebec, which is cold and inhospitable during parts of winter. If you have a car, it's possible to do far more in Quebec than Tokyo. I had a car rental service in tokyo that I used (Times Rentalcar) and…

No, the other poster is taking my original post and twisting it. I haven't said people shouldn't be allowed to have cars. I've said we should strive for a society where you don't need to have a car. Of course that won't be possible everywhere or for everyone. But it should be possible for many more than it currently is.

Your example of the car rental service is kinda my point. It's not good enough now, but if it were always available, that would make it possible for many more to ditch owning a car themselves and only rent as needed. We shouldn't look at status quo and use that to decide, we should look at bigger structural changes.

FWIW I currently live in a small mountain town with 2500 people at 1000 meters above sea level, with -18 C yesterday and ~30 cms of snow today. So I know a lot about living in remote and cold areas.

And please don't accuse me of "shaming" people, that's wrong of you. I want to give people more opportunities, not less. For many cars is the only choice, and an expensive one. Walking, biking, public transit as additional choices would make lives better for many.

Post reply on HN