[Mikeb85]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium

Hmmm, 500,000 litres of water per ton of lithium. Electrolysis required to create lithium metal. Plus the required dirt being moved, water being moved, energy for electrolysis, etc...

Sounds very energy efficient...

/s

[jnsaff2]

I know you are a sarcastic troll.

But still, that 5 billion tons of coal gets mined, transported and then burned to produce energy once.

A kg of coal contains about 8kWh of energy which it can release once. This is the best kind of coal. Also you only get about 40% of it as electricity.

A kg of lithium will store about 1.1kWh energy in a battery .. thousands of times before it needs to be RECYCLED.

Your efficiency is off by many orders of magnitude.

[landemva]

That just compared coal 'to produce energy once' to batteries which have no inherent energy. These are different things.

Coal is an existing form of energy reserve which has stable long-term storage and can be consumed once. Batteries are not native energy, though batteries can be manufactured and then charged to temporarily time-shift energy.

[jnsaff2]

Sure, same goes for hydrogen. I don't think there are any hydrogen deposits that can be readily used.

But important distinction nonetheless.

[landemva]

Yes, I also see hydrogen as a energy storage medium. Compressed air and pumped hydro and hydraulic accumulators have similar functions.

Sometimes the media conflates energy production, storage, and transport. This leads to confusing arguments.

[Mikeb85]

Who's comparing coal to batteries? We're talking the lifetime energy cost of producing batteries from the ground to the recycling depot.

Coal production is terrible and I'll never support it.

[jnsaff2]

You compared them to coal. You put out 100 Billion tons of waste number. Biggest share of that is from mining coal.

So why are you attributing the coal mining waste to lithium then?

If you actually look at the numbers the benefits of mining for lithium FAR outweigh its downsides.