This article discusses the issue of lithium as a rare and vital material for making electric car batteries, and how this might affect the future of Bolivia. It actually raises more questions than it answers, but I’ve got a few more to add.
Will Bolivia Be Ruined, Improved, or Hated Because of Electric Cars?
With growing speculation that electric cars and other energy efficient vehicles will soon dominate markets worldwide, Bolivia is a nation that perhaps stands to benefit (or suffer) more than any other from the energy revolution.
Most electric cars will be powered by lithium batteries, and Bolivia has more lithium than any other nation worldwide. How this development will affect Bolivia is unknown, but will squarely place the South American country at an intriguing and crucial crossroads.
Three Questions
1) One reason for our problems is that we tend to throw away things instead of conserving them. Could lithium in batteries be recycled to conserve a limited supply?
2) Might we find other materials to make batteries and/or power cars, so that we don’t have to rely on a solitary resource, but could instead spread out the burden through diversification?
3) How do we avoid repeating the same mistakes of petroleum with new materials and different countries?
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
Bryan 02.10.09 at 1:00 pm
I’m really glad you asked these questions. I don’t consider myself an “environmentalist”, per se, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to destroy the world, either. My biggest problem with 90% of the people who call themselves environmentalists is that they treat the symptoms with knee-jerk reactions, instead of taking a step back and truly trying to solve the problem.
1) Without looking it up, my guess would be yes. The question would be: at what expense (monetarily, energetically, and materially)? Unfortunately, though, since the demand for lithium is increasing, at some point you still have to mine more, and people who already have lithium batteries aren’t giving them up any time soon.
2) The problem with electrolytics is that you can categorically say that one material works better than another. Without getting into the nitty gritty, it has to do with ion potentials, and each element has it’s own voltage potential. I presume that lithium is either the best or the best for it’s cost, and I’m willing to wager that there is no direct substitute. It’s possible that there are other things, but they likely cost a lot more (or are even more detrimental to mine or otherwise procure).
3) Like I said before, we avoid these problems by taking a giant breath before doing anything. We are not (yet) at the point where a couple of years one way or another is going to be irreversible, but if we keep using knee-jerk responses we will never truly find the answer we are looking for. Additionally, more rational responses are better received by opponents. We could simply say “we will solve the global crisis by banning cars”, and that would probably actually cease global warming. But practically, such a solution would never be realized. If we who care about the environment (at least somewhat) spent all our time trying to ban cars, in the mean time the Earth would only get worse, and no alternative solutions will be found.
Reply
Elizabeth Barrette 02.10.09 at 9:25 pm
Yes, and the converse is also true. Economists tend to forget that the economy — like the rest of civilization — is a subset of the environment. And environmentalists tend to forget that when people don’t get their needs met, they’ll devour everything in sight in attempt to survive. We have to find a way of creating a balance, hence my interest in sustainable development. You can only do that when you account for all the different perspectives. It won’t happen as long as people simply view each other as adversaries.
I think we need to look at recovering and recycling a lot more stuff than we currently do. Otherwise, we are going to run out of a great many resources. Not everything may be recyclable, but we should recover as much as we possibly can so that we don’t run out.
With regards to climate change, we’re already past the point of prevention and into the range where we could minimize but not avoid it. (Egad, look at poor Australia! Drought and fire and flood!) With regards to transportation, we do have some time before the situation goes critical; but we’re close enough that panic can cause severe problems, as witness the recent gas price spikes.
I personally prefer rational analysis and decisions. Sadly I have discovered that they are not popular among the general populace, who prefer knee-jerk reactions. Which largely explains the mess the world is in.
You might get a kick out of The World Without Us which I reviewed recently.
Yes. We need to find solutions that are both effective and achievable, if there are any. Otherwise, eventually we will run out of time and the full consequences of generations of foolishness will descend on whomever is left. I’d rather avoid that.
Reply