Not Enough Rare Earth Minerals...The "Green Revolution" is Impossible

[Vrenn]

Just quoting lib tripe. MN has huge amount of nickel needed for your green dream. The Dem Gov wont let them touch it. Everyone up north must work in tourism or gas stations and fast food. Real jobs not allowed

Let's take a look at your most recent lie. In the states with the largest fields in the most desolate areas, what are the Governors Political Parties?

Utah: Governor Cox, Republican
Nevada: Governor Sisolak, Democrat
New Mexico: Governor Grisham, Democrat
Arizona: Governor Ducey, Republican

It's funny, when you build a mega battery factory, you really want to be not far from the lithium mining facility. Tesla is building theirs in Nevada because it's not only close to the lithium supply but it's also very business friendly. Arizona would have been the second choice for exactly the same reasons. Tens of thousands of jobs (not including the hundreds of thousands of temp construction jobs) makes any purple state look long and hard at things.

These things cannot be built near existing cities. They have to be created hundreds of miles from any metro area because they are loud and messy. What you end up with is a brand knew medium sized city created to support the factory, mining, etc.. Built in an area that cannot really support life now. Even Snakes avoid these areas.

 

[AMart]

Long and the short of the matter is that minerals like copper, nickel, and lithium, for starters, would have to be produced at levels that are mathematically impossible to meet the demand of the "green" Brave New World.


Before the video, here are a few screenshots from it. This one shows the principal metals needed for a wind and solar energy system, and compares those requirements with actual production of those commodities as of 2019, the last “normal” pre-covid year. Note that 189 years worth of copper production, 400 years of nickel production, 9,921 years of lithium production, 1,733 years of cobalt production, 29,113 years of germanium production, and so on, would be needed for the first 20 years of wind and solar installations. Then we would have to do it all over again. Talk about a lack of sustainability!

The “Green Revolution” Is Impossible

Liberals tell us that we are in the midst of a transition from fossil fuels to wind and solar energy. The reality is that no such transition is taking place, nor will it. This video by Professor Si…

www.powerlineblog.com

 

[Manonthestreet]

Let's take a look at your most recent lie. In the states with the largest fields in the most desolate areas, what are the Governors Political Parties?

Utah: Governor Cox, Republican
Nevada: Governor Sisolak, Democrat
New Mexico: Governor Grisham, Democrat
Arizona: Governor Ducey, Republican

It's funny, when you build a mega battery factory, you really want to be not far from the lithium mining facility. Tesla is building theirs in Nevada because it's not only close to the lithium supply but it's also very business friendly. Arizona would have been the second choice for exactly the same reasons. Tens of thousands of jobs (not including the hundreds of thousands of temp construction jobs) makes any purple state look long and hard at things.

These things cannot be built near existing cities. They have to be created hundreds of miles from any metro area because they are loud and messy. What you end up with is a brand knew medium sized city created to support the factory, mining, etc.. Built in an area that cannot really support life now. Even Snakes avoid these areas.

Gee dumbass cant point out any lies and B local pols and activist groups can stop a project too. Newest rage is trying to shut off Nat Gas pipelines than have been in place decades

 

[Vrenn]

South America's 'lithium fields' reveal the dark side of electric cars

Demand for lithium-ion batteries is unprecedented - but is mining the chemical harmful to the environment?

www.euronews.com

View attachment 694364
Toxic pools will save the Earth.

Poor try. What y ou are seeing is is the changing of lithium from ore to a useable product. Each color is a different step. These are not polluting the air. Again, you are being dishonest as well as presenting a dishonest cite.

 

[Vrenn]

Gee dumbass cant point out any lies and B local pols and activist groups can stop a project too. Newest rage is trying to shut of Nat Gas pipelines than have been in place decades

Ooh, change the subject when you get caught in your most recent lie. Always go to an old standby.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Joe prolly pulled out of Afghanistan so China can mine it

 

[Oddball]

Let's take a look at your most recent lie. In the states with the largest fields in the most desolate areas, what are the Governors Political Parties?

Utah: Governor Cox, Republican
Nevada: Governor Sisolak, Democrat
New Mexico: Governor Grisham, Democrat
Arizona: Governor Ducey, Republican

It's funny, when you build a mega battery factory, you really want to be not far from the lithium mining facility. Tesla is building theirs in Nevada because it's not only close to the lithium supply but it's also very business friendly. Arizona would have been the second choice for exactly the same reasons. Tens of thousands of jobs (not including the hundreds of thousands of temp construction jobs) makes any purple state look long and hard at things.

These things cannot be built near existing cities. They have to be created hundreds of miles from any metro area because they are loud and messy. What you end up with is a brand knew medium sized city created to support the factory, mining, etc.. Built in an area that cannot really support life now. Even Snakes avoid these areas.

Al entirely irrelevant to the fact that you'll need to produce nearly 1,000 years worth of lithium -at the 2019 levels of production- in a decade.

You "green" moonbats are pissing in the wind of basic mathematics.

 

[Oddball]

Ooh, change the subject when you get caught in your most recent lie. Always go to an old standby.

You're the jackass who tried to change the subject with your first post in the thread.

Get that plank out of your eye, loser.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Ooh, change the subject when you get caught in your most recent lie. Always go to an old standby.

Same subject........just more ways libs choke our economy.

 

[Vrenn]

Joe prolly pulled out of Afghanistan so China can mine it

Even the Chinese won't go near that hell hole right now.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Even the Chinese won't go near that hell hole right now.

Money talks.....enemy of my enemy is my friend. We mapped it all out for em just bring the equip and cash and weapons to kill the infidel

 

[JGalt]

​

MAGA strikes again. I happen to know that there are lithium fields all through the western US states that have yet to be tapped. This whole thing you present is gaslighting at it's worst.

​

Power Line​

RIGHT BIAS​

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy. See all Right Bias sources.

• Overall, we rate Power Line strongly right biased based on story selection that always favors the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to the use of poor sources that have failed numerous fact checks, as well as rejecting the consensus of science when it comes to climate change.

Analysis / Bias

In review, Power Line often vigorously criticizes Democrats and liberals for dishonesty, lack of morals, bad judgment, and disloyalty to the United States. Headlines and articles often contain strongly loaded language that favors the right such as this: THE DEMS’ APOCALYPSE PRIMARY and END OF THE MUELLER AFFAIR. Both of these stories are properly sourced. When it comes to science, Power Line takes a denialist’s view on climate change, with articles such as this: CLIMATE CHANGE ALARMISM IS FOUNDED ON DISHONESTY. This article is sourced to the No Tricks Zone, which is a human-influenced climate science denial website. On the sidebar of the website, Power Line lists their favorite sources, which consists of all right-leaning sources, and several we have rated as questionable such as the American Thinker and Michelle Malkin. In general, all stories favor the right and denigrate the left.
Failed Fact Checks

• The U.S. Climate Reference Network[…] finds there has been no warming for the past 14 years at least – Inaccurate
• In a 1996 foreclosure case, Judge Martha Kavanaugh ruled against Ralph and Paula Blasey, thus providing motive for revenge for their daughter Christine against Judge Kavanaugh’s son Brett, a Supreme Court nominee in 2018. – False

Overall, we rate Power Line strongly right biased based on story selection that always favors the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to the use of poor sources that have failed numerous fact checks, as well as rejecting the consensus of science when it comes to climate change. (D. Van Zandt 10/30/2016) Updated (10/12/2020)

Lithium fields all over the Western US and yet, there is only one operational lithium field being mined. I really don't think you'd want full-scale lithium mining in the US. Do you have any idea about the environmental impact that would have on that part of the country?

Lithium mining in the United States: where it stands today

The fact that you greentards want it both ways, shows how disingenuous you are. You want this country to be "ecologically-friendly", but you have no problem destroying other countries' ecology. Or even justifying those countries' use of slave or child labor to push your "green" bullshit.

 

[petro]

Poor try. What y ou are seeing is is the changing of lithium from ore to a useable product. Each color is a different step. These are not polluting the air. Again, you are being dishonest as well as presenting a dishonest cite.

You are ignoring the water issue and those ponds are highly toxic and have leaked into the environment.

Lithium Batteries' Dirty Secret: Manufacturing Them Leaves Massive Carbon Footprint

Once in operation, electric cars certainly reduce your carbon footprint, but making the lithium-ion batteries could emit 74% more CO2 than for conventional cars.

www.industryweek.com

The Paradox of "Clean" EVs and the "Dirty" Lithium Mining Business

Is the EV industry hiding some very real "dirty" secrets behind its outward "green" credentials? Let's dissect the paradox.

interestingengineering.com

The Paradox of "Clean" EVs and the "Dirty" Lithium Mining Business​

Are EVs really that "clean"? Let's take a look at this very real paradox.

Christopher McFadden
| Apr 10, 2021 12:03 PM
SCIENCE

Ivan Radic/Flickr

Electrical vehicles (EVs) are commonly hailed as something of a panacea to combating the issue of climate change. By dispensing with "dirty" and polluting combustion engines, these all-electric modes of transport are, so it is claimed, just the ticket for a greener, more sustainable future.
But, is this really true?
To answer this, let's take a long hard look at the validity of EV's "green credentials."

What is the environmental impact of EVs?​

There are some very real environmental benefits to EVs on paper, in reality, there is no such thing as "free lunch"; they may not be that "clean" after all.




A paradox, if you will.
EVs, like anything manufactured, require raw materials in order to be produced, and some of these materials come bundled with very serious potential environmental costs.
One of the most serious being lithium. Forming the cathode of most lithium-ion batteries, some of the ways that lithium is sourced are far from environmentally friendly.

Source: Peter Miller/Flickr
An alkali metal, lithium has seen enormous growth in demand over the last few decades.
This is partly a result of the growth in demand for EVs, but also the fact that lithium is used in the batteries of many electronic devices, such as smartphones and laptops. Lithium is also an important raw resource for the production of glass and ceramics, too.
And its use has been accelerating over time. According to some sources, between 2008 and 2018, annual production of lithium rose from 25,400 to 85,000 tons.
Li-ion battery production aside (we'll dedicate a section to that later), other environmental impacts include the kinds of motors used in EVs. Depending on the model, these will either be permanent magnets or induction motors.
The former tend to be made of rare-earth metals which require energy-intensive extraction and refinement processes. The mining of these materials can also lead to the release of toxic byproducts that, in countries with less than ideal environmental practices, can be devastating for the environment.
Another environmental impact of EVs is the method in which the electricity used to power them is sourced. For many countries, this still includes large amounts of fossil fuel power stations.

​

Possibly the most important environmental impact of EVs is the way lithium for their batteries are sourced.
These batteries tend to consist of lithium cobalt for the cathode and graphite for the anode. A typical EV lithium-ion battery's electrolyte is also made of lithium salt.
More than half of this lithium comes from the so-called Lithium-Triangle that lies under Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile. To extract it, miners drill holes in the salt flats and pump the salty, mineral-rich brine to the surface, leaving it to evaporate in huge artificial lakes or ponds.
This process uses a lot of water, over 500,000 gallons (close to 2 million liters) for each ton of lithium produced. Such enormous consumption of water impacts not only the surrounding ecosystems but also has a huge impact on local farmers — for obvious reasons.

Piles of salt ready for collection at the Uyuni Salt Flat in Bolivia. The crust sits a few centimeters above a pool of lithium-rich brine. Source: Dan Lundberg/Flickr
Not only that, but these large evaporation pools are often far from sealed. This can, and has, led to the leaching of toxic substances into the surrounding water supply. As happened in Tibet a few years ago, the accidental release of substances like hydrochloric acid kills large amounts of aquatic animals such as fish.
But EV batteries are not just all about lithium. There are some other key components that are just as potentially harmful to the environment as lithium, if not more — enter cobalt and nickel.
The former is found in large deposits across the Democratic Republic of Congo and central Africa. And this is one of the main problems — its geographical location.

 

[Oddball]

You are ignoring the water issue and those ponds are highly toxic and have leaked into the environment.

Lithium Batteries' Dirty Secret: Manufacturing Them Leaves Massive Carbon Footprint

Once in operation, electric cars certainly reduce your carbon footprint, but making the lithium-ion batteries could emit 74% more CO2 than for conventional cars.

www.industryweek.com

The Paradox of "Clean" EVs and the "Dirty" Lithium Mining Business

Is the EV industry hiding some very real "dirty" secrets behind its outward "green" credentials? Let's dissect the paradox.

interestingengineering.com

The Paradox of "Clean" EVs and the "Dirty" Lithium Mining Business​

Are EVs really that "clean"? Let's take a look at this very real paradox.

Christopher McFadden
| Apr 10, 2021 12:03 PM
SCIENCE

Ivan Radic/Flickr

Electrical vehicles (EVs) are commonly hailed as something of a panacea to combating the issue of climate change. By dispensing with "dirty" and polluting combustion engines, these all-electric modes of transport are, so it is claimed, just the ticket for a greener, more sustainable future.
But, is this really true?
To answer this, let's take a long hard look at the validity of EV's "green credentials."

What is the environmental impact of EVs?​

There are some very real environmental benefits to EVs on paper, in reality, there is no such thing as "free lunch"; they may not be that "clean" after all.




A paradox, if you will.
EVs, like anything manufactured, require raw materials in order to be produced, and some of these materials come bundled with very serious potential environmental costs.
One of the most serious being lithium. Forming the cathode of most lithium-ion batteries, some of the ways that lithium is sourced are far from environmentally friendly.

Source: Peter Miller/Flickr
An alkali metal, lithium has seen enormous growth in demand over the last few decades.
This is partly a result of the growth in demand for EVs, but also the fact that lithium is used in the batteries of many electronic devices, such as smartphones and laptops. Lithium is also an important raw resource for the production of glass and ceramics, too.
And its use has been accelerating over time. According to some sources, between 2008 and 2018, annual production of lithium rose from 25,400 to 85,000 tons.
Li-ion battery production aside (we'll dedicate a section to that later), other environmental impacts include the kinds of motors used in EVs. Depending on the model, these will either be permanent magnets or induction motors.
The former tend to be made of rare-earth metals which require energy-intensive extraction and refinement processes. The mining of these materials can also lead to the release of toxic byproducts that, in countries with less than ideal environmental practices, can be devastating for the environment.
Another environmental impact of EVs is the method in which the electricity used to power them is sourced. For many countries, this still includes large amounts of fossil fuel power stations.

​

Possibly the most important environmental impact of EVs is the way lithium for their batteries are sourced.
These batteries tend to consist of lithium cobalt for the cathode and graphite for the anode. A typical EV lithium-ion battery's electrolyte is also made of lithium salt.
More than half of this lithium comes from the so-called Lithium-Triangle that lies under Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile. To extract it, miners drill holes in the salt flats and pump the salty, mineral-rich brine to the surface, leaving it to evaporate in huge artificial lakes or ponds.
This process uses a lot of water, over 500,000 gallons (close to 2 million liters) for each ton of lithium produced. Such enormous consumption of water impacts not only the surrounding ecosystems but also has a huge impact on local farmers — for obvious reasons.

Piles of salt ready for collection at the Uyuni Salt Flat in Bolivia. The crust sits a few centimeters above a pool of lithium-rich brine. Source: Dan Lundberg/Flickr
Not only that, but these large evaporation pools are often far from sealed. This can, and has, led to the leaching of toxic substances into the surrounding water supply. As happened in Tibet a few years ago, the accidental release of substances like hydrochloric acid kills large amounts of aquatic animals such as fish.
But EV batteries are not just all about lithium. There are some other key components that are just as potentially harmful to the environment as lithium, if not more — enter cobalt and nickel.
The former is found in large deposits across the Democratic Republic of Congo and central Africa. And this is one of the main problems — its geographical location.

Yeah, but that only affects the poor African negroes....Expendables in the "green" revolution.

 

[elektra]

Isn't that why they are going to the Moon and Mars for more materials?

yes, we are going to the moon and mars to bring back entire train loads of material to make solar panels and wind mills, it is a shame that the childlike imagination of those who support green energy has no relation to reality

you really proved how dumb you are

 

[petro]

Lichu River Poisoned – Case of Minyak Lhagang Lithium Mine Protest

tibetnature.net

Vrenn gave this a funny.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

yes, we are going to the moon and mars to bring back entire train loads of material to make solar panels and wind mills, it is a shame that the childlike imagination of those who support green energy has no relation to reality

you really proved how dumb you are

That's probably 200 years away.. if ever

 

[Moonglow]

yes, we are going to the moon and mars to bring back entire train loads of material to make solar panels and wind mills, it is a shame that the childlike imagination of those who support green energy has no relation to reality

you really proved how dumb you are

Not near as dumb as your attitude which can only exude hate.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Trump had opened up areas in the US for extraction of these resources but Biden immediately reversed that order.
That’s just how petulant, hypocritical and stupid democrats are.

 

[night_son]

Long and the short of the matter is that minerals like copper, nickel, and lithium, for starters, would have to be produced at levels that are mathematically impossible to meet the demand of the "green" Brave New World.


Before the video, here are a few screenshots from it. This one shows the principal metals needed for a wind and solar energy system, and compares those requirements with actual production of those commodities as of 2019, the last “normal” pre-covid year. Note that 189 years worth of copper production, 400 years of nickel production, 9,921 years of lithium production, 1,733 years of cobalt production, 29,113 years of germanium production, and so on, would be needed for the first 20 years of wind and solar installations. Then we would have to do it all over again. Talk about a lack of sustainability!

The “Green Revolution” Is Impossible

Liberals tell us that we are in the midst of a transition from fossil fuels to wind and solar energy. The reality is that no such transition is taking place, nor will it. This video by Professor Si…

www.powerlineblog.com

See, first the green globalist goblins are going to build an interstellar drive, fly out to another solar system, mine and bring back all the rare resources they need, and only THEN will they implement their green cult agenda, thank you very much. Sure . . .