How much lithium is needed to replace all internal combustion engines in the world?

[alang1216]

Where is your counterpoint to his posted math of page one?

Waiting
waiting.....

His math is fine, his premise is flawed.

 

[ding]

We will replace a good fraction of that 88M. Not today and not tomorrow and not with one single solution but that is the direction we are headed. We're still using goal but that is declining every. Oil will suffer the same fate. Eventually.

Is it though because they seem to be asking for more to be produced?

 

[ding]

His math is fine, his premise is flawed.

That's the spirit. Pay no attention to the math.

 

[alang1216]

Is it though because they seem to be asking for more to be produced?

Does the lithium disappear once the battery is exhausted or can it be recycled?

 

[alang1216]

Is it though because they seem to be asking for more to be produced?

Who is 'they'?

 

[ding]

Does the lithium disappear once the battery is exhausted or can it be recycled?

Dunno. I'm assuming no.

 

[ding]

Who is 'they'?

The world.

 

[alang1216]

Dunno. I'm assuming no.

You know what happens when you assume. As I said, your premise is flawed.

Link

 

[ding]

You know what happens when you assume. As I said, your premise is flawed.

Link

I'm pretty sure the lithium isn't consumed, so it was a more cautious answer to assume it wasn't than it was.

Now... are you getting ready to tell me they will recycle the batteries or not? Because I don't see that happening.

 

[ding]

As I said, your premise is flawed.

My premise is that 18 trillion kg of lithium is needed to build enough batteries to hold a 110.7 tWh charge to replace 65 million barrels of daily gasoline and diesel use.

Nothing flawed about that. That's just math.

 

[ding]

Who knew math could make so many people upset

 

[alang1216]

I'm pretty sure the lithium isn't consumed, so it was a more cautious answer to assume it wasn't than it was.

Now... are you getting ready to tell me they will recycle the batteries or not? Because I don't see that happening.

We recycle plenty of things where I live. If it has enough value and the replacement cost is high, it will be recycled. Case in point: Aluminum

 

[alang1216]

My premise is that 18 trillion kg of lithium is needed to build enough batteries to hold a 110.7 tWh charge to replace 65 million barrels of daily gasoline and diesel use.

Nothing flawed about that. That's just math.

Did you drop part of the original equation? What happened to the 'every 8 years' or does recycling change your math?

 

[ding]

We recycle plenty of things where I live. If it has enough value and the replacement cost is high, it will be recycled. Case in point: Aluminum

Have you looked into this? Because it's not an aluminum can. It's a little more complicated.

 

[ding]

Did you drop part of the original equation? What happened to the 'every 8 years' or does recycling change your math?

The title of the OP is...

How much lithium is needed to replace all internal combustion engines in the world?​

 

[alang1216]

The title of the OP is...

How much lithium is needed to replace all internal combustion engines in the world?​

I guess this joker didn't understand the OP.

 

[ding]

I guess this joker didn't understand the OP.

He's a highly intelligent poster so I'm pretty sure he did. I think that was an additional point to the original premise. One I am assuming you don't disagree with because it's just math, right?

 

[WorldWatcher]

How much lithium is needed to replace all internal combustion engines in the world?

IMHO, that there is the flaw in the OP. The OP sets an unrealistic premise which requires 100% of ICE powerplants to be replaced by EVs. A false premise. Not dismissing the math of the premise, but the logic that the math is based on is faulty.

Why?

#1 The biggest logic flaw is that 100% of ICE powerplants must be replaced with EVs. That isn't going to happen anytime in the foreseeable future with a much more likely outcome to be the market setting into a mixed powerplant model. Each occupying a niche that makes performance and economic sense. For example:

• In many suburban households with two working adults it may make sense to have one family ICE vehicle used for a longer commute and then an EV for the shorter commute and local errands,
• Take another example. A "working" pickup used by contractors that have to carry/haul heavy loads vs. a "home" pickup used because the person likes trucks but mostly used for a weekend trip to Lowes for gardening supplies. In one an ICE makes sense, for the other an EV is perfectly fine.
• EVs are not likely to replace long-haul trucking do to range, towing capacity and recharge times,
• EVs may not be practical for many mass transit systems such as busses that must operate for longer periods and many of those have already been replaced with cleaner burning natural gas ICE powerplants over diesel.
• Then there are the railroad applications of diesel engines with their range and towing capacity that an EV train just isn't going to match in terms of transporting raw materials and commercial goods.

#2 The second is that sources of lithium are not limited to land mining. As demand increases, research gets funded and other sources of lithium will/are developed which become economical at different price points. A major source of lithium in the future will likely be seawater, and even before that happens extracting large amounts of lithium is already being planned for in the Salton Sea with a lot of that being done through expansion of existing geothermal plants. See below.

#3 EV batteries can be recycled but right now they are designed for operation not recycling. That means recycling is difficult and it can be cheaper to create new batteries then recover materials through recycling. This will change as EV batteries become more standardized and the ability to recycle become part of the design criteria and manufacturing standards.

WW

The Salton Sea could produce the world's greenest lithium, if new extraction technologies work

Amid the shrinking, toxic Salton Sea, there's enough lithium to meet the United States' entire projected demand and fuel the electric-vehicle revolution.

www.cnbc.com

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

 

[ding]

IMHO, that there is the flaw in the OP. The OP sets an unrealistic premise which requires 100% of ICE powerplants to be replaced by EVs. A false premise.

The premise is the stated climate goal of zero fossil fuel emissions.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The premise is the stated climate goal of zero fossil fuel emissions.

I can't help it some buy into a false premise.

There will never be, well not for a few hundred years probably, "zero fossil fuel emissions". We can make major reductions in the next 20-50 years, but "zero fossil fuel emissions" is bumper sticker slogan for the yokals.

WW