Comment by elihu | Hacker News Reader

Comment by elihu | Hacker News Reader

> "But every ton of lithium carbonate extracted from underground using this cheap, low-tech method typically dissipates into the air about half a million gallons of water that is vital to the arid high Andes. The extraction lowers water tables, and because freshwater often sits on top of salty water, this has the potential to dry up the lakes, wetlands, springs, and rivers that flourish where the underground water reaches the surface."

What's the cost of importing 500,000 gallons of water to replace what evaporates? If the miners had to pay that cost, would it still be economical for them to sell that ton of lithium carbonate?

The first result in Google says lithium carbonate costs $17,000 per ton in 2021. It might be more now.

This fluid-hauling train car has a capacity of around 30,000 gallons:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOT-111_tank_car

So, about 16 train cars worth of water for $17,000 worth of lithium. Not sure if that's a good trade or not. It might depend on how far they have to go for the water. (Maybe sea water would be good enough, if the ground water they're removing is already brine, then maybe adding more salt isn't a problem.)

What about taking the ore to sea level and doing the process there. It's downhill.

This is the greatest flaw in markets. It's said that markets compute the right values for trade goods. But it should be qualified to: Value now (or in the short term).

In any specific moment value has certain dispersion due to multiple factors. The uncertainty of value in the future is huge because those factors compound.

My point is that I believe markes only work in the short term. For long term planning (~one huamn lifetime, a civilization life time) markets don't work.

Markets are shaped by the cultural, institutional, and legal frameworks. Markets reflect these values

Markets are a function of the political regimes within which they operate. They depend on the existence of money, freedom of movement, reasonable taxation, and private property—and a certain level of protection from theft and violence—all of which are features a well-functioning state.

Often markets also depend on standardization and regulation that can only be enforced by governments.

If the markets that exist today fail to take into consideration the true societal costs of their operation—if there is no accounting for future costs—that is not a failure of markets in general, but of the current political regime.

You make an interesting point but the same problem is now on the hands of the political regime(hopefully a wide segment of society) to decide the value of things.

The way the lithium brine is extracted from the ground is by pumping water down, allowing the lithium brine to dissolve in the water, and pumping it back to the surface.

And whats the fuel required to haul 30 000 gallon trains of water up 5000 meters ? I estimate 170L per train car just to go up the hill. So about 2500 l just to go up the hill.

Or for every ton of lithium requires two tons of diesel just to replace the water. I assumed 100% thermal efficiency, so probably double that.

And where is the water coming from? You need fresh water, adding salt to brine just adds salt to the area.

And now you still have to make a battery out of the stuff

> What's the cost of importing 500,000 gallons of water to replace what evaporates?

Freedom unit warning.

1 gal of water weights 8.33lbs. Andes are about 12,000 feet up. So 500,000 gallons would take about 50,000,000,000 ft-lbs.

2.655 million ft-lbs/kwh.

So about 18.8 kwh.

So why aren't you using Btu?

He's talking about using electricity to move water, and the US measures electricity in kW-h like everyplace in the world, as far as I know.

That's actually not nearly as bad as I expected, though it assumes perfectly efficient energy use. 18.8 kwh to obtain enough lithium carbonate to make batteries for maybe a hundred cars? That seems like a pretty good deal, if the water itself is available at sea level. (If sea water is good enough and doesn't create additional environmental concerns, then it's basically free.)

I can't help but think there must be a math error somewhere, since the result would imply that it should be approximately possible for a Nissan Leaf to pull a train of over a dozen fluid-containing cars from sea level to 12,000 feet on a single charge. That doesn't seem right, but I don't see anything wrong with the math so maybe my intuition is just wrong.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com