211–220 of 311 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that true global reserves are much higher than what we know now. Before, Lithium was important, but not nearly in the quantities needed for EV's. Now that EV's have picked up, more people will be looking for Lithium, and that will make all the difference.
> I think that true global reserves are much higher than what we know now. That was certainly true of oil. As reserves got depleted, progressively more advanced techniques allowed people to extract from more difficult locations.
Let's not be fooled again!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That xkcd is not demonstrating the amount of warming, it is demonstrating the velocity of warming. Historic temperatures on a time scale of millions of years are completely irrelevant to the current discussion of climate change, unless you think we have a chance to evolve into dinosaurs in the next few centuries (/s).
The temperature and CO2 concentrations are also unusually low for the Cenozoic Era. That's the post-Dinosaur era (if we're not including avians): https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dynamics-of-global-surfa... The rise of mammals happened almost immediately after the extinction of dinosaurs, when the average surface temperature was around 10°C hotter than today.
My understanding: At the moment, climate projections are that within the next few centuries we will reach temperatures not seen since the eocene. The mammals of the eocene were quite small, because larger mammals had trouble surviving the hot climate. While the broad categories of animals that still exist today also existed back then, in aggregate they looked very different from today. Given current trends, the majority of animals of today will be unable to adapt to the new climate, and will die off.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, and then also follow that up with correcting the scientific consensus of experts who are forecasting drastic and damaging changes to the earth caused by humans.
There is no shortage of lithium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? These are denominated in tons, not dollars.
The point is that reserves are only economically viable at a given price. At $0 there are 0 reserves because no one is willing to give you lithium. At $1 mil per kg, there is basically infinite reverses because you can do things like dig up the entire earth's crust and filter all the lithium out of it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s very likely to go the way of oil. EV demand has slowed down recently (honestly I don’t believe the world is ready for mass adoption and EVs themselves are not ready also), so we’ll keep finding more and more and always beyond the consumption.
I hate the weasel words of "demands slowing down". It's always not clear what exactly is happening from this phrase. Is the production or sales going down year-over-year or quarter-over-quarter? Because that's what people think "demand slowing down" means. However what's actually happening is that demand is going up, but at a rate slower than before. Imagine that in 2022 demand increased by 60% YoY but in 2023 demand…
Its not 15M Tonnes of Lithium. Its 15M Tonnes of lithium containing ore, with an average grade of 0.4% (which i also question without seening core results).
Also terms such as "resource" and "reserve" have very specific meaning in mining (to do with economic viability of deposity/ level of confidence) and this is by no way a "reserve".
Most likely overzealous government minister/media hyper. (sorry to rain on parade!)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The temperature and CO2 concentrations are also unusually low for the Cenozoic Era. That's the post-Dinosaur era (if we're not including avians): https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Dynamics-of-global-surfa... The rise of mammals happened almost immediately after the extinction of dinosaurs, when the average surface temperature was around 10°C hotter than today.
I had hoped that my point was clear without too much elaboration, and that you were joining this discussion in good faith. My understanding: At the moment, climate projections are that within the next few centuries we will reach temperatures not seen since the eocene. The mammals of the eocene were quite small, because larger mammals had trouble surviving the hot climate. While the broad categories of animals that st…
> At the moment, climate projections are that within the next few centuries we will reach temperatures not seen since the eocene.
That seems about right, see e.g.: https://www.marum.de/en/Dr.-thomas-westerhold/CENOGRID.html
> The mammals of the eocene were quite small, because larger mammals had trouble surviving the hot climate.
What makes you think mammal size was limited by the temperature differences we're discussing?
I think the predominant theory is that the asteroid impact killed off the larger ones, and it took a while for larger mammals to evolve. See e.g.: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7645244/
In any case, even if the Earth as a whole was much warmer on average that just means that you'd get the average temperatures that now occur closer to the equator (where some of the largest land mammals presently live) closer to the poles.
So higher average surface temperatures shouldn't preclude the existence of larger mammals.
> Given current trends, the majority of animals of today will be unable to adapt to the new climate, and will die off.
I think this has less to do with climate change per-se, and more to do with the widespread ecological destruction that's followed industrialization, and the reduction in wild habitats.
Although there's surely some species that'll go extinct mainly due to temperature changes, e.g. ones confined to a small atoll that'll get overrun by sea levels rising.
I'm assuming it's not a giant 15M ton chunk of (highly reactive) metal in the ground, but rather they took a bucket of dirt, analyzed it, and extrapolated how much lithium is available in the ground. My question is, how much "earth" do they need to dig up and refine to extract this amount of lithium?
this site says 0.4% so they would need to extract 3.5B tons of rock https://thethaiger.com/news/national/thai-lithium-deposits-o...
This is most likely government minister/media hype.
Dumb question: how do they measure/know it's "15M tonnes". Meaning, it's not like they just found one big 15M tonne solid bar of lithium.
In reality its most likely 15M tonnes inferrred resource of 0.4% lithium content So much smaller amount of actual lithium.
They work this out by doing core drilling, and then inferring/extrapolating the size/shape of the orebody boundaries. (Im a mining engineer)