Federal Ruling Approves Construction of North America's Largest Lithium Mine (npr.org) 82
schwit1 shares a report from NPR: In a blow to tribes, a U.S. appeals court has denied a last ditch legal effort to block construction of what's expected to be the largest lithium mine in North America on federal land in Nevada. In a decision Monday, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the U.S. government did not violate federal environmental laws when it approved Lithium Nevada's Thacker Pass mine in the waning days of the Trump administration. Lithium is a key component of electric vehicle batteries, and despite pressure from west coast Paiute tribes and environmentalists, the Biden administration did not reverse the decision and had continued to advocate for the mine, which would be located on remote federal land near the Nevada-Oregon border.
Several area tribes and environmental groups have tried to block or delay the Thacker Pass mine for more than two years. Among their arguments was that federal land managers fast tracked it without proper consultation with Indian Country. "They rushed this project through during COVID and essentially selected three tribes to talk to instead of the long list of tribes that they had talked to in the past," Rick Eichstaedt, an attorney for the Burns Paiute Tribe, said in an interview late last month. But in their ruling, the Ninth Circuit judges responded that only after the mine was approved by federal land managers did it become known that some tribes consider the land sacred. Full construction of the mine is expected to begin in earnest this summer.
Several area tribes and environmental groups have tried to block or delay the Thacker Pass mine for more than two years. Among their arguments was that federal land managers fast tracked it without proper consultation with Indian Country. "They rushed this project through during COVID and essentially selected three tribes to talk to instead of the long list of tribes that they had talked to in the past," Rick Eichstaedt, an attorney for the Burns Paiute Tribe, said in an interview late last month. But in their ruling, the Ninth Circuit judges responded that only after the mine was approved by federal land managers did it become known that some tribes consider the land sacred. Full construction of the mine is expected to begin in earnest this summer.
Re: (Score:1)
Conspiracy theory much?
Re: (Score:3)
Why do you think thug Romans were so keen to subdue the local Celtic tribes of Britannia?
Because they knew that at some point Monty Python would come along and when it did they didn't want to have to watch it with subtitles.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
It wasn't stolen. It was taken in conquest, just like virtually every other piece of land on the planet.
As for being sacred...boo hoo! Fucking Indians think EVERYTHING is sacred. It's like their version of "racist".
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness
What? You believe that propaganda?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
under their land.
Nope. Tribes don't own that land.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Right, we made deals with them for the land and then didn't keep up our end of the deals, but still declared that we were keeping the land. Nobody trusts the USA for a reason, and that reason is that it has never been trustworthy.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, the natives in question didn't have the concept of land ownership. Coastal tribes had something approaching the modern concept, but not the inland tribes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Yup. The countless native tribes had been fighting each other for thousands of years in incredibly bloody, genocidal wars when white settlers arrived in North America. And the very first thing that happened was they were attacked, unprovoked, by the nearest tribes, and then wiped out after a treaty was signed.
That led to hundreds of years of war where Europeans were just one more tribe among many. And everyone was horrible, making and breaking treaties as it fit them.
In the end, our side won and put an e
Re: (Score:1)
The countless native tribes had been fighting each other for thousands of years in incredibly bloody, genocidal wars
You're thinking of the Eastern tribes. Those in the South and West barely met each other to have wars.
I'm from Texas, buddy. And we are well aware that you're full of buffalo shit.
And certainly not to extinction.
Is this "brownwashing?"
In the end, our side won and put an end to thousands of years of genocide.
By committing genocide in the name of a peaceful god.
As opposed to the peaceful and not genocidal at all deities of the Comanche? Or Sioux? I wouldn't know, I'm an atheist.
whitewashing
Cool word, "bro." Inspired me.
Re: (Score:3)
You're thinking of the Eastern tribes. Those in the South and West barely met each other to have wars.
I'm from Texas, buddy.
Ah that, explains a lot about you.
And we are well aware that you're full of buffalo shit.
The western tribes had the map pretty nicely parceled off, with agreements about who used what lands when and so on that maintained a state of peace for literally thousands of years. That's why the west was so rich, and why everybody who wasn't already rich (and plenty who were) wanted to move this direction.
You don't know about this because you've willfully been kept ignorant, and brainwashed into thinking your ignorance is a virtue, so now you're willfully keeping yoursel
Re: (Score:3)
The only one "brainwashed" here is you. The Comanche were very active throughout the South, as were several other very violent tribes, including the Apache, with which they had a blood feud and very much tried to wipe them all out. Both tribes were a constant problem for early Texans, and the Mexican government and were just insanely violent.
You don't know about this because you've willfully been kept ignorant, and brainwashed into thinking your ignorance is a virtue, so now you're willfully keeping yours
Re: (Score:2)
The western tribes
the South
Me: Something
You: Addressing something totally different
Me: GFY
Re: (Score:2)
Me: tribes did genocide
You: no they didn't, look west!
Me: yes they did, look not west!
You: but I said west! Waaa!
Re: (Score:3)
It wasn't stolen, it was taken with force!
Stealing doesn't become not stealing if you do enough of it and employ enough violence.
Re: (Score:2)
Stealing doesn't become not stealing if you do enough of it and employ enough violence.
It does in war, if you didn't start it. European settlers did not start the the Indian Wars, tribes did centuries ago by, unprovoked, attacking then wiping out the first settlers in North America (and breaking a treaty along the way).
Cry me some more crocodile tears.
Re: Stolen land (Score:2)
There are plenty of lithium mines all over the world. The shortage is a lithium refining, not mining
Re: (Score:3)
The shortage is something not controlled by the Chinese.
Re: Stolen land (Score:1)
The shortage is something not controlled by the Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
Tha makes no sense. If there are no domestic Lithium mines then the shortage is of mines controlled by Americans.
Did you leave out a "not" mistakenly?
Re: (Score:1)
Might as well be talking about Tibet.
The untimely cutting off of their internet under the advisement of government and private sector leaders here in the US comes to mind. They say they had nothing to do with it but I don't believe that story.
If you recycled old batteries (Score:1)
Would you even need new mines?
Re:If you recycled old batteries (Score:4, Insightful)
Definitely.
If we follow the (incredibly optimistic) roadmap to widespread use of electric vehicles, we're going to need a LOT of lithium. And other elements, from nickel to cobalt to the rest of the long list that goes into that sort of tech.
As in "three or four times as much mined per year as current production."
So we either open a lot of big lithium mines, or we don't get that many electric cars and trucks any time in your lifetime.
Of course, if we don't start building even more electric power generation, the cars would be a waste of time...
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:2)
"By 2030, 1.2 million EV batteries will be available for recycling, according to the International Council on Clean Transportation, reaching up to 50 million by 2050."
Just how many new EVs are you going to build that recycling can't cover it?
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:4, Informative)
Just how many new EVs are you going to build that recycling can't cover it?
Currently, less than 1% of the cars on the road worldwide are EVs.
So we need to produce a hundred times what recycling can provide.
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:2)
Can you sustainably sell a million new cars with batteries recycled from the previous 10 years?
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:5, Informative)
In 2031, there will be 450,000 batteries available for recycle from 2021. Rember, they're going to need to keep producing batteries, so yearly production can only calculate for the number that were sold/produced 10 years prior. Projections are estimating over 40% of sales are EV by 2030. So, in 2031, they could sell 6mil EVs. That would mean 7.5% of the batteries produced for 2031 would be from recycled lithium. That leaves another 5.5mil that have to be sourced via mining. Even if you go with a more conservative number, recycled batteries are only going to be a fraction of the total needed.
The question is not flawed. It's stupid (Score:2)
Your answer is excellent, but probably too complex for blue trane, given their question's stupidity.
So, simplified: You can't create more recycled batteries than you put into the recycling process. Only allowing recycled material, you would produce fewer and fewer batteries over time (because of losses - you never recycle 100% of the material).
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:4, Informative)
Annual light vehicle sales in the US alone are around 14 million per year over the last 40 years or so. Global sales over the last decade have been around 70 million.
Then there are semis that are coming, plus light aircraft, some construction equipment, and huge quantities of powered yard gear that are currently mostly ICE that will be replaced with battery versions. Home batteries are taking off, too, and may become a very common thing as solar becomes more widespread, especially if the grid starts to look unreliable.
Re: (Score:3)
Home batteries are taking off, too, and may become a very common thing
Unlike the other things on your list, neither weight nor bulk are a big problem for these, so lead-acid or something with less energy density than lithium chemistries would be fine.
Re: (Score:3)
Sodium-ion batteries are likely to replace Lithium-ion batteries in stationary grid storage and home storage for the following reasons:
1. Sodium-ion batteries are cheaper than Lithium-ion batteries to manufacture.
2. Sodium is abundant and readily available.
3. Sodium-ion batteries are less flammable than Lithium-ion batteries.
4. Sodium-ion batteries have a 0 to 100% charging range so battery management is simpler than Lithium-ion batteries.
A downside is that Sodium-ion batteries are bigger and heavier than L
Re: (Score:3)
Do you have any idea how many ICE vehicles there are? There's more then a quarter billion in operation just in the US and well over a billion worldwide. We're already trending toward electric vehicles being cheaper than internal combustion unless we have some sort of better materials shortage.
Re: (Score:1)
You seem to be under the UN-realistic expectation that these Lithium Batteries are 100 % recyclable. They are not.
There is still a lot of waste in the recycling process.
There is also the price of recycled material. As is typical for this type of thing, it's cheaper to get new.
Re: (Score:1)
A simple Google search found this:
https://www.alsym.com/blog/why... [alsym.com]
Re: (Score:1)
Never argue with environmentali extremists. They'll...fuck it, they're dishonest morons.
Re:If you recycled old batteries (Score:4, Interesting)
Battery technology is evolving. Sodium-ion batteries are starting to be deployed in battery electric vehicles. Sodium-ion batteries could be used in car ranges up to 200 miles so Lithium-ion batteries get displaced to the long range and performance end of the BEV market. Sodium-ion is better for stationary storage than Lithium-ion in terms of cheaper cost, 0 to 100% charging range, better for the environment as Sodium is abundant, and a lower risk of fire.
This means that Sodium-ion batteries could be dominating over Lithium-ion batteries by 2030.
Consequently, the projections for Lithium mining drops to a manageable rate this decade. In other words, the current Lithium projections fail to take into account Sodium-ion as a being disruptor to Lithium-ion.
Moreover, industry will transition to alternative solutions such as Sodium-ion when Lithium-ion becomes non-viable for their applications. A problem becomes an opportunity for industry.
Of course, if we don't start building even more electric power generation, the cars would be a waste of time...
Deploying BEV cars and vehicles and grid storage will increase the utilization % rate of existing electricity generators by reducing the daily peak demand and increasing the off-peak demand. Thereby, an existing electricity generator runs longer each day. This is ideal for renewables because the BEV charging can be remotely controlled by the electricity company to match supply against demand (opposite to the traditional demand against supply model).
The expectation is that electricity grids will need to double in capacity with demand management to match renewable generation.
Re: (Score:3)
Sodium-ion batteries are starting to be deployed in battery electric vehicles.
Technically true. It has happened exactly once, in February this year, in China.
Sodium-ion is better for stationary storage than Lithium-ion in terms of cheaper cost, 0 to 100% charging range, better for the environment as Sodium is abundant, and a lower risk of fire.
The downfall of sodium-ion batteries since the '70s has been their very poor longevity. Even today, the best they can do is 900 charge cycles before their capacity craters. Lithium-ion tolerates 3500 cycles today, and can be coaxed to last much longer with careful charge management. That same careful charge management is required to achieve 900 cycles with sodium-ion too. If you pursue 0 to 100% it's much worse.
Sodium-ion b
Re:If you recycled old batteries (Score:4, Insightful)
If we need more batteries than you have right now, don't forget that recycling will only maintain the current number.
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:2)
How many batteries have we already used?
Re: (Score:2)
How many beyond a few years back can still be recovered for recycling?
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:2)
Is the mining industry selling you the story that "none" and are you being a good mark, doing no due diligence, just trusting salesmen?
Re: If you recycled old batteries (Score:4, Informative)
Just personal knowledge. There aren't really any laws in the US regarding lithium battery disposal and a quick Google shows only about 5% of lithium batteries being recycled.
Vehicles use a lot of battery. It would take recycling 2,000 laptop batteries to make one car battery bank at 100% efficiency. We're not anywhere near that good at recovering materials yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, we aren't never going to make a significant amount of EV batteries from recycled laptops.
It would have to come from older EVs, and there the battery packs are large and expensive enough that people reuse them as much as possible already. Not to "free market will solve it" but I think companies will start buying them out once there's a decent amount of old batteries available. If not, it could be mandated of course for manufacturers to recycle their stuff.
The recycling myth (Score:4, Insightful)
Just as you can't convert back lumber into trees, recycling can't get you all the precious metals back in their raw form without making another huge environmental mess of it's own.
Re: The recycling myth (Score:2)
Could you recycle Amazon delivery boxes sp you don't need to cut down more trees?
Re: (Score:2)
What a mess (Score:5, Insightful)
But most of that stuff happened in the 1800s. Are there any actual burial grounds in the area? Historically important ruins? Is it the site of an ancient Indian city that was the capitol of a tribal empire? Is there a currently-used holy site there? Or is it just another patch of earth that their religion says is sacred because “the Earth is sacred and we controlled that spot 300 years ago”?
Maybe that sounds inflammatory. If so, very sorry. I’m just pointing out that the American Indians have a tendency to draw a box around large tracts of land and say “this whole area is holy to us”. With all due respect to their religion, that just isn’t going to work in the current day and age. I’m not defending or justifying it. But it’s the reality.
Re: (Score:1)
Sacred = stupid.
Re: (Score:1)
you didn't state a single thing you disagreed with or thought was incorrect
bro, your post is the most virtue signalling in this entire thread.
hang your head in shame
Re: (Score:3)
America didn't violate all Indian treaties. We honored our treaty with the Crow Tribe, which was facing a genocidal war of extermination by the Sioux and Cheyenne confederation. They were saved when the American Army arrived on the prairie. They united with the U.S. Army and fought with them against their enemies. Crow warriors fought and died alongside the 7th Cavalry in the Valley of the Little Bighorn. They now have a reservation in Montana that is twice the size of the Pineridge Reservation of the Lakot
Re: (Score:2)
The Crow reservation is still desperately impoverished. They havent done very well for themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What a mess (Score:5, Interesting)
Iâ(TM)m just pointing out that the American Indians have a tendency to draw a box around large tracts of land and say âoethis whole area is holy to usâ.
That's not unique to American Indians, it happens in most countries that had a primitive (stone-age or similar) indigenous society that was colonised at some point. Suddenly every location where someone wants to do something is a sacred site. A common indicator of a sacred site here is that there's a midden on it, which is a trash heap. So what's literally an abandoned garbage dump will turn into a sacred site when it's convenient.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Is there a currently-used holy site there?
No, but I'm sure we'll build a casino there if the mine doesn't go ahead.
Why should it matter that only after the mine was (Score:2)
Not that the judges or the is government cares a whit about anything sacred other than âoedevelopment,â it seems the timing of the âoediscoveryâ (by whom, anyway?) shouldnâ(TM)t matter at all.
The spice must flow (Score:2)
"Control the coinage and the courts — let the rabble have the rest." Thus the Padishah Emperor advises you. And he tells you; "If you want profits, you must rule." There is truth in these words, but I ask myself: "Who are the rabble and who are the ruled?"
Muad'Dib's Secret Message to the Landsraad from Arrakis Awakening by the Princess Irulan
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/... [wikiquote.org]
Worth it (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry, but a 'sacred past' isn't worth protecting at the cost of the future. Barring a very near future massive change in battery technology, lithium mining is going to be critical to maintaining a modern standard of living.
Especially if the land is 'sacred' because the local tribes believe massacres happened there. Anywhere people have lived there's been murder and if we didn't build on the sites of historical battles we'd have to live on rafts in the middle of the ocean.
Re: Worth it (Score:2)
Have you simply substituted lithium as your sacred fetish?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Going to be lots more of this (Score:1, Insightful)
The mandatory electric future is going to throw a lot of sacred cows under the e-bus, this includes anyone opposed to mining.
Lots of key minerals are on the cusp of being nationalized and so the government will force mining to be allowed where currently it's not.
The Indian land is just the start. They are coming for you, East Coast.
"But"? (Score:2)
Normally "But" is contrastive, but this reads as agreement. If the land managers had talked to all of the tribes before approving, they would have had their views before rather than after making their decision.
It's sacred to us too, matey (Score:2)
That there will feed us for a bloomin' month. Yes, I know, not a current movie reference and not exactly on par but ultimately, you can't mandate going green and ban every cost-effective avenue to get there. IMHO, every legal mandate should have a nullification clause that states that the law becomes null and void if it can't be implemented within one year and at a lower cost than outsourcing to a foreign country.