Anybody Want Some Lithium (& other assorted items)?

[1984Echoes]

I figure I'd start a thread on the impact of Biden's policies focusing on a few specific items (mostly my interests from my manufacturing background...); although there may be some overlap:

1) The push to bring some key manufacturing back to the U.S. - specifically microchips, but also EV incentives, EV batteries, etc.

2) Infrastructure - the rebuilding of U.S. roads, bridges, electrical grid, national internet, etc...

3) The sourcing of key industries & raw materials within the US. This also might be primarily microchips and EV batteries, but may also include other specific items as well as the key issue driving the supply lines for these items: The sourcing of raw materials.

IE: Lithium, one of the current key raw materials for EV batteries, as well as countless rare earth metals. As for lithium, a nice find:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/colossal-cache-lithium-found-us-100005781.html

[MIguy]

Kind of ironic that the same groups that are for EV's replacing ICE vehicles are against the mining of one of the elements needed to make the batteries.  

[romad1]

2 hours ago, 1984Echoes said:

I figure I'd start a thread on the impact of Biden's policies focusing on a few specific items (mostly my interests from my manufacturing background...); although there may be some overlap:

1) The push to bring some key manufacturing back to the U.S. - specifically microchips, but also EV incentives, EV batteries, etc.

2) Infrastructure - the rebuilding of U.S. roads, bridges, electrical grid, national internet, etc...

3) The sourcing of key industries & raw materials within the US. This also might be primarily microchips and EV batteries, but may also include other specific items as well as the key issue driving the supply lines for these items: The sourcing of raw materials.

IE: Lithium, one of the current key raw materials for EV batteries, as well as countless rare earth metals. As for lithium, a nice find:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/colossal-cache-lithium-found-us-100005781.html

I saw this article as well.

https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/lithium-discovery-in-us-volcano-could-be-biggest-deposit-ever-found/4018032.article

I'm all over getting more of this out of the hands of kleptocrats. 

[romad1]

17 minutes ago, MIguy said:

Kind of ironic that the same groups that are for EV's replacing ICE vehicles are against the mining of one of the elements needed to make the batteries.  

Your saying that environmentalists are wishing to stop people from mining something in Nevada?   

I'm searching for the right analogy for that.  

My question:  is this actually a good investment?  I dropped a small amount of money into an Australian/Malaysian mining company that the US DoD had invested in to develop an Australian lithium field and that investment has not been the big gainer I thought it would.  Maybe more to do with the uncertainty in the market. 

[gehringer_2]

15 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Your saying that environmentalists are wishing to stop people from mining something in Nevada?   

I'm searching for the right analogy for that.  

My question:  is this actually a good investment?  I dropped a small amount of money into an Australian/Malaysian mining company that the US DoD had invested in to develop an Australian lithium field and that investment has not been the big gainer I thought it would.  Maybe more to do with the uncertainty in the market. 

Lithium is not rare, but some of what is out there is harder to utilize. This will be a case where the least expensive to recover deposits will end up driving the others out of business, and even if you think you've found a low cost to recover source, it's hard to be sure you won't be undercut later because we are so early on the learning curve. No-one has spent a lot of time looking for lithium yet so I would expect more reports like this one are yet to come.

WyandotteChem/BASF had a good business for decades making Soda Ash downriver in Wyandotte, by what was then the standard process, then someone stumbles across a natural deposit in Wyoming that needs almost no processing. Bye-Bye to a large chemical works. In the natural resource business, sh*t happens.

Edited September 10, 2023 by gehringer_2

[1984Echoes]

As long as the U.S. has "the necessaries".

[romad1]

3 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

Lithium is not rare, but some of what is out there is harder to utilize. This will be a case where the least expensive to recover deposits will end up driving the others out of business, and even if you think you've found a low cost to recover source, it's hard to be sure you won't be undercut later because we are so early on the learning curve. No-one has spent a lot of time looking for lithium yet so I would expect more reports like this one are yet to come.

WyandotteChem/BASF had a good business for decades making Soda Ash downriver in Wyandotte, by what was then the standard process, then someone stumbles across a natural deposit in Wyoming that needs almost no processing. Bye-Bye to a large chemical works. In the natural resource business, sh*t happens.

My limited knowledge of the science is that they want to find a better material for these batteries and that Li-Ion batteries are sort of an interim step of sloppy, semi-hard to get stuff until we figure out how to make them out of .. I dunno pig entrails.   I used to be fascinated with knife steel and thought 440C was the cat's pajamas and I now find out they have like 30 better knife steels than that since I last paid attention to this in the early 1990s.   Quantum computing requires building sized computers and intense cold to work.  But, by the time I have hugged my grand kids (i'm in my late 50s with a kid in college) I expect that will be a a room sized machine at room temperature and it will do things we never thought possible. 

 

[gehringer_2]

48 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Li-Ion batteries are sort of an interim step

Yes and no. Their are sure to be completely unknown energy storage technologies out there just waiting for their discovery, but with respect to the device we call a 'battery', it's going to be hard to top Lithium for energy/lb unless we also get a new periodic table of the elements, which might well exist on the other side of whatever black hole our part of the universe is fated to eventually get sucked though, should anyone want to get there.  💥✨

 

[romad1]

7 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

Yes and no. Their are sure to be completely unknown energy storage technologies out there just waiting for their discovery, but with respect to the device we call a 'battery', it's going to be hard to top Lithium for energy/lb unless we also get a new periodic table of the elements, which might well exist on the other side of whatever black hole our part of the universe is fated to eventually get sucked though, should anyone want to get there.  💥✨

 

The irony of quantum computing is that the one nation -- the PRC -- that has a Apollo Moon/Manhattan Project to build it and expand our technical knowledge thereby leaping them forward technologically -- is the one that will -- to borrow the line from Orwell's O'Brien character in 1984 -- use it to smash the human face with a boot forever.    Perhaps there will still be needles and haystacks but it will be a lot harder to be one in that society.

Edited September 11, 2023 by romad1

[Tigeraholic1]

I work for a fleet rental company. We had some big wigs from Ford come do a demo witht the new Ford E-Lightning. Seems fine until you get into winter or hot areas. When the temp dips below freezing or above 90 battery capacity usage drops by 30-40%. Plus he said the Ford Battery system allows for only 25 rapid charges in its life cycle after that you start boiling it and decrease life cycle. Unless you install the large 220 charger at home, standard wall plug charge equates 1 hour gets you 3 miles. 

I just don't see the current EV technology being a great plug and play right now. I did take one of the the lightnings home last weekend. They are nice to drive and having a Frunk (ford term, compartment where engine used to be) allows for nice secure storage space. I am heading to lunch with some clients in an EV Hummer in a minute, looking foward to checking it out. I will post some pics.  

[Tigeraholic1]

Not sure I like the truck bed option. My boss said to keep it for the week and see if I can break something. We rent to energy companies and they are really tough on our equipment. EV’s will be driven by Foreman so they are a little nicer.

[gehringer_2]

the best use case for the 1st generation of EVs is moderate distance commuting - lighter vehicles with much smaller batteries than the market has persuaded itself it has to build. That probably covers 70% - maybe 90% of current fuel consumption? Instead everyone is chasing the corner cases - extreme battery life and heavier vehicles to create the 'one size can fit all' vehicle when most families have two anyway, and that really strains the available tech and so may end up over promising what is delivered and in turn souring the public on the tech. It's America - go figure.

[ewsieg]

14 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

the best use case for the 1st generation of EVs is moderate distance commuting - lighter vehicles with much smaller batteries than the market has persuaded itself it has to build. That probably covers 70% - maybe 90% of current fuel consumption? Instead everyone is chasing the corner cases - extreme battery life and heavier vehicles to create the 'one size can fit all' vehicle when most families have two anyway, and that really strains the available tech and so may end up over promising what is delivered and in turn souring the public on the tech. It's America - go figure.

Ultimately the goal is regardless of your use case, there is an EV that can provide what you want.  From a technology standpoint, it's pretty cool to see how far we've come in a short time.  Unfortunately it just seems like politics has seeped into the market.  If you're pro-electric, then you have to claim there are no fallbacks and you have to negate any criticism you see against it as petty issues that are being blown out of control.  If you're anti electric, than you negate what the market can provide now and focus on long term concerns, like a power grid to handle the influx or cold/hot weather.

I'm not going to pretend to know if your 70-90% number is accurate, and I would argue that even if that number is right, the fear of not having that long driving range, even if you rarely need it, will still hold people back.  That said, I feel like our current technology can support a significant percentage of our driving population.  If we can set expectations better, hopefully we avoid any sour taste with this transition.

 

[romad1]

34 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Ultimately the goal is regardless of your use case, there is an EV that can provide what you want.  From a technology standpoint, it's pretty cool to see how far we've come in a short time.  Unfortunately it just seems like politics has seeped into the market.  If you're pro-electric, then you have to claim there are no fallbacks and you have to negate any criticism you see against it as petty issues that are being blown out of control.  If you're anti electric, than you negate what the market can provide now and focus on long term concerns, like a power grid to handle the influx or cold/hot weather.

I'm not going to pretend to know if your 70-90% number is accurate, and I would argue that even if that number is right, the fear of not having that long driving range, even if you rarely need it, will still hold people back.  That said, I feel like our current technology can support a significant percentage of our driving population.  If we can set expectations better, hopefully we avoid any sour taste with this transition.

 

EV performance i.e., acceleration is amazing.  The problem is that its the gun without a bang.  (That's a reset to classic science fiction).   

Now for politics.  I'm all for taking power away from the energy oligarchs that have DOMINATED our political system since Rockefeller.   They have tilted the field toward energy producing places.  Will those oligarchs allow a realignment to occur?  I dunno.  Eventually marijuana got legalized.  Things can change.  

[ewsieg]

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

EV performance i.e., acceleration is amazing.  The problem is that its the gun without a bang.  (That's a reset to classic science fiction).   

Not to mention less moving parts... many plusses with EV's.

1 hour ago, romad1 said:

Now for politics.  I'm all for taking power away from the energy oligarchs that have DOMINATED our political system since Rockefeller.   They have tilted the field toward energy producing places.  Will those oligarchs allow a realignment to occur?  I dunno.  Eventually marijuana got legalized.  Things can change.  

Oligarchs will encourage the realignment, once they feel they are in position to profit from it.

[romad1]

3 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Not to mention less moving parts... many plusses with EV's.

Oligarchs will encourage the realignment, once they feel they are in position to profit from it.

Different ones.  Non-oil rich ones.

[gehringer_2]

6 hours ago, ewsieg said:

the fear of not having that long driving range, even if you rarely need it, will still hold people back.

absolutely. The key right now is lack of social imagination. The IC automobile and it's fuel distribution infrastructure has conditioned us that the same vehicle should be capable of a grocery run as well as a 3 wk cross country tour. That is the social learning that may have to give way to some new understanding based on some new technological or social investment outcomes. This is mostly an American problem. In Europe and Asia few people have any desire to take long trips in cars because there are good alternatives - primarily efficient passenger rail systems. The 5,000 mile car trip is sort of a US/Canada Unicorn because of the size of the continent as well the relatively empty 1000 miles in the middle in between the places a lot of people want to go.

Obviously, if battery charging tech can get us to a 15 min recharge that doesn't destroy the battery on regular application, then technology may yet save us of from having to change our transportation expectations, but it's not going to be the end of world if it doesn't, we can figure out another way to go on trips. Or maybe the long distance liquid fueled auto never goes away but its use case becomes so limited that it's not a significant CO2 source. Right now we are in panic mode (and rightly so), but the truth is that the planet already cycles massive amounts of CO2 - we have just managed to overload it anyway. In the end, small contributions from it's inhabitants will not *need* to be regulated away if rational management can be found - which is questionable of course. But lots of future to yet to happen.

Edited September 12, 2023 by gehringer_2

[1984Echoes]

1 hour ago, gehringer_2 said:

absolutely. The key right now is lack of social imagination. The IC automobile and it's fuel distribution infrastructure has conditioned us that the same vehicle should be capable of a grocery run as well as a 3 wk cross country tour...

This really needs to be broken down into a DAILY expectation of driving mileage. Which requires two things:

1) The Daily Expectation: What is a top daily driving expectation? 12 hours at 60 miles per hour average (stops for bio-breaks, traffic slowdowns, meals, slower MPH driving areas, stoplights, etc...), TOPS? That's 720 miles per day, which should be roughly topping out the mileage expectation... Recalibrate expectations, per your point, and maybe we could live with lower expectations... BUT... even at that top expectation (or even higher), batteries are not too far off as is... although the additional point here is that current batteries lose top daily mileage with charges/ battery life/ temperatures/ etc.

2) The Second Point is that: Infrastructure. No matter where you are in the US, overnight anyone/ anywhere MUST be able to recharge their car/ battery to a full charge for the next day's driving.

[1984Echoes]

OR...

PS: The ability to recharge an EV battery quickly enough to not break a daily planned mileage (reasonable) expectation. And the Infrastructure to do so. IE: A 1/2 hour Breakfast/ Lunch/ and Dinner stops, plus the ability to recharge at least partially at each and EVERY 1/2 hour break/stop = the ability to travel the 720 daily mileage without problems...

 

 

Edited September 12, 2023 by 1984Echoes

[gehringer_2]

44 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said:

That's 720 miles per day, which should be roughly topping out the mileage expectation.

One additional thing to remember is that gasoline is light - you don't really incur much driving penalty for having a 20gal gas tank, and even then it only averages half full so you're only carrying around 10 gal - or about 65lb. Put that 720 mile capable battery in your everyday car - it's going to be about 180 kWhr, and you are lugging around nearly a ton of battery at today's tech level - all the time. That's why I think in the end the average person is going to end up with two different modes of transportation replacing their current car. Whether that means two different types of vehicles in your garage or a shift to specialty hi-range rental vehicles for long haul travel or even a shift away from long distance car travel., whatever - there is a significant penalty, both in vehicle efficiency, but also in the capital cost tied up in the battery,  to hauling around a lot of mostly always unused battery capacity that is fundamentally different from the situation with liquid fueled vehicles, and at this point I have to guess the economics of that will eventually force change into new arrangements. And of course by tomorrow the tech situation may change!

[1984Echoes]

56 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

One additional thing to remember is that gasoline is light - you don't really incur much driving penalty for having a 20gal gas tank, and even then it only averages half full so you're only carrying around 10 gal - or about 65lb. Put that 720 mile capable battery in your everyday car - it's going to be about 180 kWhr, and you are lugging around nearly a ton of battery at today's tech level...

That's the key point:

Improvements in kW/Hr/Weight required to meet efficacy needs...

[chasfh]

I just don’t see EV having any chance of overtaking gas cars until (a) we can get 500+ miles on a charge; (b) EV recharging stations are at least close to being as plentiful as gas stations, and preferably more; and (c) we can recharge from zero to full in no more than 15 minutes.

[gehringer_2]

48 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I just don’t see EV having any chance of overtaking gas cars until (a) we can get 500+ miles on a charge; (b) EV recharging stations are at least close to being as plentiful as gas stations, and preferably more; and (c) we can recharge from zero to full in no more than 15 minutes.

well, assuming we *allow* ourselves to keep driving gas cars. If they are banned we're driving EVs whether they go 500 miles or not. 

Btw, weird weather all around the world this year, ain't it?

 

Seriously, cars might be a place where a cap and trade system might work. You get a fossil fuel allotment and you can sell it someone who needs to drive long daily distances. Those with fossil attachment syndrome can keep their F150s if they pony up.

Another interesting question,  assuming EV adoption continues apace, is whether there is some critical mass of EV adoption where the gas station distribution business starts to fall apart? I suppose trucking will not be electrified for a longer time - maybe if you are a gasoline holdout you're going to be relegated to truck stops to refuel? At any rate I think there is an assumption that both systems can co-exist for an extended period. Maybe that is true, maybe not. When do you suppose the last public stables closed in Detroit?

Edited September 13, 2023 by gehringer_2

[1984Echoes]

41 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I just don’t see EV having any chance of overtaking gas cars until (a) we can get 500+ miles on a charge; (b) EV recharging stations are at least close to being as plentiful as gas stations, and preferably more; and (c) we can recharge from zero to full in no more than 15 minutes.

That's in the ballpark I named...:

720 miles, geographically available recharging stations wherever needed, 1/2 hour to recharge (15 min's wouldn't be needed as much if a full day's drive were within a battery, every overnight would get a full recharge...).

[chasfh]

10 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

well, assuming we *allow* ourselves to keep driving gas cars. If they are banned we're driving EVs whether they go 500 miles or not. 

Btw, weird weather all around the world this year, ain't it?

 

Seriously, cars might be a place where a cap and trade system might work. You get a fossil fuel allotment and you can sell it someone who needs to drive long daily distances. Those with fossil attachment syndrome can keep their F150s if they pony up.

Another interesting question,  assuming EV adoption continues apace, is whether there is some critical mass of EV adoption where the gas station distribution business starts to fall apart? I suppose trucking will not be electrified for a longer time - maybe if you are a gasoline holdout you're going to be relegated to truck stops to refuel? At any rate I think there is an assumption that both systems can co-exist for an extended period. Maybe that is true, maybe not. When do you suppose the last public stables closed in Detroit?

I don’t think even a Bernie Sanders Congress would be able to snap their fingers and outlaw gas cars, and probably wouldn’t even want to in the interest of the people. But I could see a gradual process leading to an EV-dominant future neither you nor I will live to see.

The cap and trade thing might be a bit complicated to implement on a peer to peer basis, but a market exchange system managed by friendly AI might be workable for that kind of thing in the next couple decades.