What about from an environmental standpoint if we think about that these Lithium--Ion batteries will have to be replaced and recycled every (as the article says, not sure if true) <12 years. We have a history of not pricing in negative externalities, did we do that this time?

> environmental standpoint if we think about that these Lithium--Ion batteries will have to be replaced and recycled every

I am very interested in this question, but those who raise it never have answers about the negative impacts of mining lithium.

For example, the amount of lithium needed for an EV is an order of magnitude less than the amount of steel needed. What is so bad about lithium mining that it's 10x worse than iron mining, pound for pound?

Nobody has ever answered my request for environmental concerns with a concrete environmental lithium mining concern, such as acidification that can sometimes happen with iron mining.

I've researched and researched, found nothing, which leaves me thinking that the worst case scenario for lithium is no worse than the worst case for iron.

Meanwhile, we have such immense documented harms from fossil fuel extraction that nobody ever questions again, or with the same intensity that's reserved for supposedly toxic lithium batteries.

The apparent benefit is massive, so any delay seems to cause massive harm to the environment.

I think we need to flip the question: where is the proof that coal/oil/iron is better for the environment than mining and recycling batteries? (BTW, it's at least 20 years now for grid batteries, with lifetime going up all the time...)

I think 12 years is an underestimate. Lithium-ion batteries will degrade, but they still have usable capacity. There are Tesla Roadsters still going strong, 15 years in. And the battery cell chemistry has since shifted to LFP, which has longer cycle life.

What do you think the negative externalities actually are? Off of the top of my head: mining, landfill. Same as other metals.

If the processes to extract Lithium from recycling become cheap enough to compete with the prices of mined Lithium, then that happens.

Processes still need to be invented/scaled for that to happen: the only real way to deal with damaged or charged cells that I know of is to deep freeze them, shred them, and then defrost them slowly.

But in either case: Lithium is going to end up as waste. Making it cheaper to make cars affordable and the grid more stable means that disposable batteries will be even cheaper.

I don’t know how modern batteries fare in landfills: Most modern solar panels, for example, are relatively clean (mostly aluminum, silicon, copper, wee bits of lead). But not a waste management expert.

Some LFP batteries now get rated for 5000 or more cycles or more. Even if you cycle them fully every day, that's 14 years. And that's unlikely to be needed or happening. These might last decades. At which point, battery tech might be massively better. Also, even better batteries might be on the way. E.g. Sodium Ion would be a bit less energy dense and have a similarly long life. It doesn't contain any lithium and could be cheap to manufacture in a few years. The biggest driver here would be cost and other properties (like how quickly can it deliver the power and at what capacity).

> We have a history of not pricing in negative externalities, did we do that this time?

I worry the answering that question requires answering this question: whose negative externalities?

What is the negative externality of recycling batteries? That is way better than having to mine minerals out of the ground, eventually there won't need to be any significant mining and all the battery minerals will be in a constant cycle of being used then recycled

You want to price in negative externalities for lithium because we didn't price in negative externalities for fossil fuels? Am I understanding you right?