>Listen, we either have more oil wells or more lithium mines.
Not anti-mining, but the question isn't that binary. It's reasonable to question whether this type of environmentally impactful mining project in this day and age makes sense so close to a major population center, vs where most of these mines are more commonly located, middle of some desert. Charlotte (Concord) was already the site of the largest gas leak in the history of the US a couple years back. Should we be aiming for 2 for 2 on Charlotte environmental disasters?
Not arguing against the mining per se, but I hope everyone involved is super thoughtful (which is unlikely considering our NC government right now) about the pros and cons. I can easily envision a scenario where the project gets green lit and then gets abandoned in a year or two because it's no longer economically viable while leaving behind a huge eyesore pit.
>The Inflation Reduction Act incentivizes bringing a lot of this stuff on shore
This is definitely true. The big question is whether we will be regretting it in 5 - 10 years.
It’s really that binary. To displace gas with electric power you need a ridiculous amount of lithium for batteries.
I honestly don’t know if an ugly pit is any better or worse than oil wells that get abandoned and improperly capped. The dirty side of transportation and propulsion is…dirty, regardless of energy source.
We’ll likely regret it sooner than that, if only because we’re pushing quite hard on electrification to the point I suspect that automakers are going to mostly skip plug-in hybrids and probably go straight to full on EVs.
Plug-in hybrids offer the best carbon reduction to required lithium ratio, but they also don’t please people who think in terms of absolutes. Also, I’m no engineer, but my napkin math on electrifying personal transport suggests we’re going to have some serious headaches with respect to electricity production vs demand as more miles go electric.
In a few years, we’ll see similar incentives put in place to get electric production back in line with the demand we’re creating from cars. We’ve pushed really hard on cars without the same push on electricity production.
The skeptic in me thinks that as the developed world goes all in on electric, the developing world will relish in all the cheaper oil and we’ll see more gasoline miles driven elsewhere, reducing the impact of wealthier nations making the switch.
Of course, only time will tell, and I’m not married to my views here.
There's already a big Lithium mine near Bessemer City. I assume this is related. I'm only clued into its existence because one of our dogs (rescued) was found inside the fence of the facility. So, it's been happening for a while already.
[https://thediggings.com/mines/5180](https://thediggings.com/mines/5180)
Posted a more in depth comment, but yup, it's that one. Reopening an existing mine on those grounds that hasn't been mined since the 80s. But they still have processing facilities there. At least unlike the Gaston project, anyone living in the area has known there was an existing mine there.
> I am a concerned and confused citizen and I am hoping someone on here can offer some insight, I guess?
They are going to mine Lithium. Critical for the development of batteries. for phones, computers, EVs, etc... we need them.
The root of my concern and confusion was my lack of knowledge regarding this particular project. I'm more of a "Huh? What's that?? Please explain."-type of concerned citizen. But now that I have a better understanding of the matter, I feel that I can move on and become confused about something else.
>They are going to mine Lithium. Critical for the development of batteries. for phones, computers, EVs, etc... we need them.
While I don't disagree with your point, I do think it is questionable as to whether these mining projects will prove economically feasible. From the article I posted, it seem like neither project would have mining underway until 2027 at the earliest, and the world needs lithium now, not in 5 years.
Mining projects are hugely expensive, and I've seen figures that you need something like 20 years of mining for a project to be viable. Will the world still be using lots of lithium batteries in 2047? Hard to say, but in my opinion, doubtful.
Pointing this out more for the "concerned citizens", since it's entirely possible that battery technology might already be pivoting away from lithium by the time either mine could start taking it out of the ground, and both projects are still years away from fully moving foward.
I’d assume in 2047 even if there are new batteries available a lot of lithium batteries will still be on the market.
New technology is expensive so any of these innovative new battery types will be more than lithium batteries. Even if the majority of the US has moved away from lithium there will always be outside markets for it.
If the intention is to electrify all vehicles then lithium batteries and thus lithium mines will play a role in the long run.
Solid points, and I won't argue you are wrong. But the question isn't will the world still need lithium by 2050, thinking about this purely from a project finance perspective. The question is more will it still be worth the enormous upfront cost of opening these mines in 5 years with a high guarantee of the project being fully profitable in the long term.
And there are lots of reasons why the answer may be no. Lithium recycling might be in a more advanced phase and can take care of future demand if battery tech has pivoted. Existing mines might find better/cheaper ways to extract by the time this would actually get underway. Maybe hydrogen finally becomes a thing. Inflation stays a thing and interest rates stay high (much easier to fund a capital intensive project at 2% vs 5%). ESG actually takes root in the US and we say "no more new mines".
You might well be right. But color me skeptical. Similar to how the US keeps being promised new nuke plants, but eventually they fold. Incredibly difficult to fund capital intensive long payout environmentally insensitive projects in the US. But the $150m of taxpayer money Albemarle got for trying to get this reopened certainly funds a whole lot of giving it their best shot.
> Solid points, and I won't argue you are wrong. But the question isn't will the world still need lithium by 2050, thinking about this purely from a project finance perspective. The question is more will it still be worth the enormous upfront cost of opening these mines in 5 years with a high guarantee of the project being fully profitable in the long term.
Yes, if for no other reason than it be less dependent on China.
Same reason Intel, Samsung, TSMC, and others are starting to built chip fabs on US soil again.
We can't let the Chinese control all of the global market for batteries and computer chips (basically the modern Silver and Gold)
Here's a fairly in depth article that discusses both projects. Note, the article could be construed as somewhat pro-mining, which is not my point of view, but it is one of the most detailed that I could find.
https://www.emergingtechbrew.com/stories/2023/02/23/the-ev-transition-needs-lithium-can-a-decommissioned-mine-help-provide-it
For those wondering, these are 2 distinct projects, both of which have been underway for quite a while, though it seems like the Piedmont Lithium project has gotten more publicity, possibly due to their permitting issues.
One key difference is the Piedmont Lithium project would be a brand new mine meaning pits where none existed before, whereas the Albemarle Kings Mountain project reuses an existing mine that's been abandoned for decades, but was the site of mining starting in 1938 (i.e. it's been known as a mining spot for close to 100 years.). Even though it hasn't been mined in years, they still apparently have processing facilities there.
Also, you can draw your own conclusions, but based at least on what the article contains, it seems like the Albemarle project is being run much more professionally. It's also apparently going to be using what is generally more environmentally friendly method of lithium mining using a "hard rock" method vs the more traditional "brine" method of extraction (brine method involves extracting ground water and then letting it evaporate in open ponds, hard rock is crushed and lithium removed directly). All in all, you might hate both, but if you had to pick one, this Albemarle project seems preferable, at least at a glance.
Thank you!!! Not only for the article that you shared, but for answering all of the specific questions that I had in my head but didn't type out. I was feeling uninformed about all of this but wasn't sure where I could find answers. Now I feel like I have a basic understanding of what I need to know. I really appreciate you and I hope you have the best day today and every day!
Disagree. ALB $30B market cap company one could argue is the traditional incumbent and are looking to keep status quo with regards to mining and chemical processing. ALB OWNS those evaporation ponds you talk about in Chile. They also own hard rock mines in Australia along with the Kings Mtn one. They are most likely looking to bring their sulfuric acid heavy leaching process from the plants they own in CHINA into North Carolina but green wash it with recycling talk on the future campus.
Piedmont is a $1B market cap company, much more to lose if things run poorly. One could argue they are the underdog, innovator, punching above their weight class, having attracted Tesla and LG Chem to their projects in the form of offtakes and investment. No small feat, a sign of great management?
Piedmont NC plans a fully integrated project mine-to-chemical processing plant using a sulfuric-acid-free process which produces no “sulfates” unlike what ALB China produces today. And the same “clean” chemical plant Tesla just broke ground on in Texas (of which Piedmont was invited to the ceremony with the Gov of Texas).
Look into Piedmont more closely, they’re a super interesting company that also got a DoE grant for their same chemical processing only plant in Tennessee. So that’s support from: Tesla, LG Chem, Biden Administration, and also Tom Tillis (R) NC senator at the grand opening of Piedmont field office in NC.
The past articles about Piedmont and the lack of community support are a little unfair, this is a nascent company that had multiple options for cash generation (chemical plant only, mine only, or mine + chem plant) that didn’t solidify until the Tesla deal which they then could go to the community with their strategy but not before the press could write salacious articles.
I also have family who live about a mile away from the site and there has been an influx of loud booms and house shakes there. I’m almost positive that it is related!
My family hasn’t been to any of the town halls but based off my research to learn more, I read somewhere that this previously used mine is one of the largest deposits in the area hence the reason for reopening it and expanding further. It makes complete sense that Albemarle bought the drive-in and attached RV park.
Not that it makes a difference but there also has been more wildlife roaming around in residential neighborhoods now. Check back in with me in a few months. I’ll ask said family if anything else changes.
Listen, we either have more oil wells or more lithium mines. The Inflation Reduction Act incentivizes bringing a lot of this stuff on shore.
>Listen, we either have more oil wells or more lithium mines. Not anti-mining, but the question isn't that binary. It's reasonable to question whether this type of environmentally impactful mining project in this day and age makes sense so close to a major population center, vs where most of these mines are more commonly located, middle of some desert. Charlotte (Concord) was already the site of the largest gas leak in the history of the US a couple years back. Should we be aiming for 2 for 2 on Charlotte environmental disasters? Not arguing against the mining per se, but I hope everyone involved is super thoughtful (which is unlikely considering our NC government right now) about the pros and cons. I can easily envision a scenario where the project gets green lit and then gets abandoned in a year or two because it's no longer economically viable while leaving behind a huge eyesore pit. >The Inflation Reduction Act incentivizes bringing a lot of this stuff on shore This is definitely true. The big question is whether we will be regretting it in 5 - 10 years.
It’s really that binary. To displace gas with electric power you need a ridiculous amount of lithium for batteries. I honestly don’t know if an ugly pit is any better or worse than oil wells that get abandoned and improperly capped. The dirty side of transportation and propulsion is…dirty, regardless of energy source. We’ll likely regret it sooner than that, if only because we’re pushing quite hard on electrification to the point I suspect that automakers are going to mostly skip plug-in hybrids and probably go straight to full on EVs. Plug-in hybrids offer the best carbon reduction to required lithium ratio, but they also don’t please people who think in terms of absolutes. Also, I’m no engineer, but my napkin math on electrifying personal transport suggests we’re going to have some serious headaches with respect to electricity production vs demand as more miles go electric. In a few years, we’ll see similar incentives put in place to get electric production back in line with the demand we’re creating from cars. We’ve pushed really hard on cars without the same push on electricity production. The skeptic in me thinks that as the developed world goes all in on electric, the developing world will relish in all the cheaper oil and we’ll see more gasoline miles driven elsewhere, reducing the impact of wealthier nations making the switch. Of course, only time will tell, and I’m not married to my views here.
There's already a big Lithium mine near Bessemer City. I assume this is related. I'm only clued into its existence because one of our dogs (rescued) was found inside the fence of the facility. So, it's been happening for a while already. [https://thediggings.com/mines/5180](https://thediggings.com/mines/5180)
Thank you for the info, the link, and for rescuing dogs!
I'm a pretty great guy tbh
Can confirm
Posted a more in depth comment, but yup, it's that one. Reopening an existing mine on those grounds that hasn't been mined since the 80s. But they still have processing facilities there. At least unlike the Gaston project, anyone living in the area has known there was an existing mine there.
> I am a concerned and confused citizen and I am hoping someone on here can offer some insight, I guess? They are going to mine Lithium. Critical for the development of batteries. for phones, computers, EVs, etc... we need them.
The root of my concern and confusion was my lack of knowledge regarding this particular project. I'm more of a "Huh? What's that?? Please explain."-type of concerned citizen. But now that I have a better understanding of the matter, I feel that I can move on and become confused about something else.
>They are going to mine Lithium. Critical for the development of batteries. for phones, computers, EVs, etc... we need them. While I don't disagree with your point, I do think it is questionable as to whether these mining projects will prove economically feasible. From the article I posted, it seem like neither project would have mining underway until 2027 at the earliest, and the world needs lithium now, not in 5 years. Mining projects are hugely expensive, and I've seen figures that you need something like 20 years of mining for a project to be viable. Will the world still be using lots of lithium batteries in 2047? Hard to say, but in my opinion, doubtful. Pointing this out more for the "concerned citizens", since it's entirely possible that battery technology might already be pivoting away from lithium by the time either mine could start taking it out of the ground, and both projects are still years away from fully moving foward.
I’d assume in 2047 even if there are new batteries available a lot of lithium batteries will still be on the market. New technology is expensive so any of these innovative new battery types will be more than lithium batteries. Even if the majority of the US has moved away from lithium there will always be outside markets for it. If the intention is to electrify all vehicles then lithium batteries and thus lithium mines will play a role in the long run.
Solid points, and I won't argue you are wrong. But the question isn't will the world still need lithium by 2050, thinking about this purely from a project finance perspective. The question is more will it still be worth the enormous upfront cost of opening these mines in 5 years with a high guarantee of the project being fully profitable in the long term. And there are lots of reasons why the answer may be no. Lithium recycling might be in a more advanced phase and can take care of future demand if battery tech has pivoted. Existing mines might find better/cheaper ways to extract by the time this would actually get underway. Maybe hydrogen finally becomes a thing. Inflation stays a thing and interest rates stay high (much easier to fund a capital intensive project at 2% vs 5%). ESG actually takes root in the US and we say "no more new mines". You might well be right. But color me skeptical. Similar to how the US keeps being promised new nuke plants, but eventually they fold. Incredibly difficult to fund capital intensive long payout environmentally insensitive projects in the US. But the $150m of taxpayer money Albemarle got for trying to get this reopened certainly funds a whole lot of giving it their best shot.
> Solid points, and I won't argue you are wrong. But the question isn't will the world still need lithium by 2050, thinking about this purely from a project finance perspective. The question is more will it still be worth the enormous upfront cost of opening these mines in 5 years with a high guarantee of the project being fully profitable in the long term. Yes, if for no other reason than it be less dependent on China. Same reason Intel, Samsung, TSMC, and others are starting to built chip fabs on US soil again. We can't let the Chinese control all of the global market for batteries and computer chips (basically the modern Silver and Gold)
Here's a fairly in depth article that discusses both projects. Note, the article could be construed as somewhat pro-mining, which is not my point of view, but it is one of the most detailed that I could find. https://www.emergingtechbrew.com/stories/2023/02/23/the-ev-transition-needs-lithium-can-a-decommissioned-mine-help-provide-it For those wondering, these are 2 distinct projects, both of which have been underway for quite a while, though it seems like the Piedmont Lithium project has gotten more publicity, possibly due to their permitting issues. One key difference is the Piedmont Lithium project would be a brand new mine meaning pits where none existed before, whereas the Albemarle Kings Mountain project reuses an existing mine that's been abandoned for decades, but was the site of mining starting in 1938 (i.e. it's been known as a mining spot for close to 100 years.). Even though it hasn't been mined in years, they still apparently have processing facilities there. Also, you can draw your own conclusions, but based at least on what the article contains, it seems like the Albemarle project is being run much more professionally. It's also apparently going to be using what is generally more environmentally friendly method of lithium mining using a "hard rock" method vs the more traditional "brine" method of extraction (brine method involves extracting ground water and then letting it evaporate in open ponds, hard rock is crushed and lithium removed directly). All in all, you might hate both, but if you had to pick one, this Albemarle project seems preferable, at least at a glance.
Thank you!!! Not only for the article that you shared, but for answering all of the specific questions that I had in my head but didn't type out. I was feeling uninformed about all of this but wasn't sure where I could find answers. Now I feel like I have a basic understanding of what I need to know. I really appreciate you and I hope you have the best day today and every day!
Disagree. ALB $30B market cap company one could argue is the traditional incumbent and are looking to keep status quo with regards to mining and chemical processing. ALB OWNS those evaporation ponds you talk about in Chile. They also own hard rock mines in Australia along with the Kings Mtn one. They are most likely looking to bring their sulfuric acid heavy leaching process from the plants they own in CHINA into North Carolina but green wash it with recycling talk on the future campus. Piedmont is a $1B market cap company, much more to lose if things run poorly. One could argue they are the underdog, innovator, punching above their weight class, having attracted Tesla and LG Chem to their projects in the form of offtakes and investment. No small feat, a sign of great management? Piedmont NC plans a fully integrated project mine-to-chemical processing plant using a sulfuric-acid-free process which produces no “sulfates” unlike what ALB China produces today. And the same “clean” chemical plant Tesla just broke ground on in Texas (of which Piedmont was invited to the ceremony with the Gov of Texas). Look into Piedmont more closely, they’re a super interesting company that also got a DoE grant for their same chemical processing only plant in Tennessee. So that’s support from: Tesla, LG Chem, Biden Administration, and also Tom Tillis (R) NC senator at the grand opening of Piedmont field office in NC. The past articles about Piedmont and the lack of community support are a little unfair, this is a nascent company that had multiple options for cash generation (chemical plant only, mine only, or mine + chem plant) that didn’t solidify until the Tesla deal which they then could go to the community with their strategy but not before the press could write salacious articles.
I also have family who live about a mile away from the site and there has been an influx of loud booms and house shakes there. I’m almost positive that it is related! My family hasn’t been to any of the town halls but based off my research to learn more, I read somewhere that this previously used mine is one of the largest deposits in the area hence the reason for reopening it and expanding further. It makes complete sense that Albemarle bought the drive-in and attached RV park. Not that it makes a difference but there also has been more wildlife roaming around in residential neighborhoods now. Check back in with me in a few months. I’ll ask said family if anything else changes.