The dependencies needed for the replacement of equipment having a lifetime of many decades are infinitely less dangerous than the dependencies for consumables like fuel.

For critical minerals and metals it is easy to stockpile them to have a buffer sufficient for many years of infrastructure replacement.

Such dependencies may remain a problem during a war, when the infrastructure could be destroyed, but in normal times such dependencies would not be sufficient to enable the kind of blackmailing that can be done with consumables, like food and fuel.

▲

giantg2 4 days ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure the stockpiling you mention will work the way you propose. We already stockpile oil, yet we still see price shocks. Stockpiling metals can still lead to price shocks due to reluctance to release them and the need to eventually replenish them.

We also stockpile foods and medications, and that doesn't provide price stability.

▲

KaiserPro 4 days ago | parent [-]

Yes, but you are missing the critical bit.

Food is a constant need, and you can't exist for long without it.

Sure we need to increase battery sotrage, but in ~5 years time, it'll be maintainance, assuming the correct adoption rate. So yes we will still _need_ batteries, but we don't need a constant supply of new batteries to keep the lights on.

▲

giantg2 4 days ago | parent [-]

A 5 year full adoption rate is not even close to possible.

Once you reach maintenance phase you still have to replace stuff, so just like food you will need a constant supply.

	▲	KaiserPro 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Right, but you realise that even if we manage to buy everything all at once, we are looking at at least a 15 year operating lifespan. Yes, there will need replacement, but not all at once and not the same volume