←back to thread

288 points antidnan | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.404s | source
Show context
_heimdall ◴[] No.41919400[source]
Well I guess this is a good win for short term energy infrastructure, though I'm always pretty torn when its at the cost of ripping open huge swaths of earth to get at the raw material.

It is interesting to see how much of this data could be modelled based on wastewater brines from other industries in the area, assuming we go on to mine the lithium it will say a lot if the ML predictions prove accurate.

One thing I couldn't tell, and its probably just a limitation of how much time I could spend reading the source paper, is what method would be needed to extract the bulk of the lithium expected to be there. If processing brine water is sufficient that may be easier to control externalities than if they have to strip mine and get all the overburden out of the way first.

replies(3): >>41919627 #>>41920208 #>>41922599 #
jeffbee ◴[] No.41920208[source]
> ripping open huge swaths of earth

Do you have the same trepidation about aluminum, iron, dish soap, and table salt? I ask because the amount of "ripping open" involved in lithium production is like a speck in the eye of a whale compared to all the other mining. In terms of scale all existing and proposed lithium mines are teensy tiny by the standards of mines.

replies(1): >>41920326 #
_heimdall ◴[] No.41920326[source]
Sure, yes I do wish that we weren't opening such huge holes as we are for aluminum, iron, coal, etc. I worked in the upstream oil industry for a bit and live in an area heavily coal mined, I just wasn't clear how lithium mining compared and didn't want to assume that damage was on the same scale as the others.
replies(1): >>41920368 #
jeffbee ◴[] No.41920368[source]
It's not even close to as large as the footprint of oil and gas. The Thacker Pass project, which is one of several that are all individually described as satisfying global demand, will ultimately disturb only 7000 acres. Fossil fuel wells usually disturb 5 net acres each, and there are five million such wells in America alone.
replies(1): >>41921287 #
lazide ◴[] No.41921287[source]
Additionally, that area in Nevada can be - at best - charitably described as moonscape.

Which, for those of us that like moonscape, is a bit sad. But there is a lot of moonscape in that region, and there aren’t a huge number of moonscape fans. At least that are going to try to picket any projects. So overall, meh.

That area of Nevada is also pretty economically ‘challenged’, so why not.

replies(1): >>41923587 #
1. pfdietz ◴[] No.41923587[source]
Also, at some point you need to tell people "you don't own this land, so you don't get to say what gets done to it."

I'm half expecting the future more conservative SCOTUS to shoot down land use regulation as a taking, requiring such regulation to be combined with payment for the value lost instead.

replies(1): >>41923719 #
2. Schiendelman ◴[] No.41923719[source]
If we get there, it will solve the housing crisis single-handedly. My fingers are crossed.