Just to be clear, I get the premise, and appreciate that Lithium mining expansion is a negative (when balancing pro's and con's), but v's FF consumption, don't we need to aim for the good, and not let the perfect be our enemy?
But that aside, my main issue/thought, was that we probably wont be entirely reliant on Lithium. Aren't there very good chances that other battery technologies such as solid state, metal based, sodium ion etc will help to spread the load? Plus many alternatives for stationary batteries, which could again remove demand for Lithium, by them.
Also, TAAS (transport as a service) is almost guranteed now, certainly starting this decade, which would reduce the amount of vehicles needed on our roads, but used more frequently.
So, good article, good points, but I was surprised that it seemed all or nothing lithium based, is that reasonable, or not now?
Revealed: how US transition to electric cars threatens environmental havoc
The US’s transition to electric vehicles could require three times as much lithium as is currently produced for the entire global market, causing needless water shortages, Indigenous land grabs, and ecosystem destruction inside and outside its borders, new research finds.
It warns that unless the US’s dependence on cars in towns and cities falls drastically, the transition to lithium battery-powered electric vehicles by 2050 will deepen global environmental and social inequalities linked to mining – and may even jeopardize the 1.5C global heating target.
But ambitious policies investing in mass transit, walkable towns and cities, and robust battery recycling in the US would slash the amount of extra lithium required in 2050 by more than 90%.
In fact, this first-of-its-kind modeling shows it is possible to have more transport options for Americans that are safer, healthier and less segregated, and less harmful mining while making rapid progress to zero emissions.
