Absolutely, I only commented on the scarcity aspect.
The local pollutions of mining is a subject I never dived enough into and I wonder how much of it is really necessary and how much hinges on the fact that you always go to the lowest bidder who is often the one with the lowest environmental regulations.
Minerals are very fungible. Even if it is possible to mine one in an environmentally friendly way, in a socially acceptable manner, the person undercutting you by 10% by using slavery and dumping toxic waste in the environment is going to win.
When I started looking into that, I realized that this was much more than a simple technical and environmental discussion but a broader criticism of the global trade system.
Also true, and actually greatly applicable to lithium mining. There are ways to make it greener, they are just more expensive and thereby less competitive.
I’m not saying it is nothing, but the environmental cost of 1 car battery has to be compared to the environmental damage of 1 tonne of gasoline/year it is replacing. So 500 kg of batteries or 10-15 tonnes of gasoline for a typical car…
It absolutely is better, especially if you drive often. For example, in the US where you wouldn’t get places without a car and drive it back and forth everyday, it’s a no-brainer.
But, it is still quite an impact. Add to that all the other impacts of cars, be it tyres, parking lots, materials, e-waste, and so on and so forth, and no one in their right mind would call electric cars environmentally friendly. But hey, at least it’s somewhat better.
I absolutely agree, but that wasn’t what you brought up in regards to electric cars. As for the stuff you bring up besides the lithium, EVs eat more tires, but for the rest of it, the rest can be said about fossil cars as well.
Yes, you are right, cars are bad, but if you need a car, electric is better. And unfortunately, not all places are planned to be livable without a car. And that part isn’t the fault of the car driver.
Keeping more to the original point, installing a sodium battery in a car will be more ecologically and otherwise beneficial - materials are more common and less environmentally damaging to acquire, battery has a longer lifespan, and can operate much better at low temperature, reducing the need of pre-heating during winters. All of these are not only convenient, but environmentally positive.
The only downside, and the reason sodium-ion batteries are not everywhere, is that the range under normal conditions would be lower. Still, it does crawl into automotive tech thanks to Chinese manufacturers. I think it’s a good development, and one I watch more than new advancements in lithium.
TIL.
Thanks for sharing!
Environmental point still stands, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impacts_of_lithium-ion_batteries
Absolutely, I only commented on the scarcity aspect.
The local pollutions of mining is a subject I never dived enough into and I wonder how much of it is really necessary and how much hinges on the fact that you always go to the lowest bidder who is often the one with the lowest environmental regulations.
Minerals are very fungible. Even if it is possible to mine one in an environmentally friendly way, in a socially acceptable manner, the person undercutting you by 10% by using slavery and dumping toxic waste in the environment is going to win.
When I started looking into that, I realized that this was much more than a simple technical and environmental discussion but a broader criticism of the global trade system.
Also true, and actually greatly applicable to lithium mining. There are ways to make it greener, they are just more expensive and thereby less competitive.
I’m not saying it is nothing, but the environmental cost of 1 car battery has to be compared to the environmental damage of 1 tonne of gasoline/year it is replacing. So 500 kg of batteries or 10-15 tonnes of gasoline for a typical car…
It absolutely is better, especially if you drive often. For example, in the US where you wouldn’t get places without a car and drive it back and forth everyday, it’s a no-brainer.
But, it is still quite an impact. Add to that all the other impacts of cars, be it tyres, parking lots, materials, e-waste, and so on and so forth, and no one in their right mind would call electric cars environmentally friendly. But hey, at least it’s somewhat better.
I absolutely agree, but that wasn’t what you brought up in regards to electric cars. As for the stuff you bring up besides the lithium, EVs eat more tires, but for the rest of it, the rest can be said about fossil cars as well.
Yes, you are right, cars are bad, but if you need a car, electric is better. And unfortunately, not all places are planned to be livable without a car. And that part isn’t the fault of the car driver.
Keeping more to the original point, installing a sodium battery in a car will be more ecologically and otherwise beneficial - materials are more common and less environmentally damaging to acquire, battery has a longer lifespan, and can operate much better at low temperature, reducing the need of pre-heating during winters. All of these are not only convenient, but environmentally positive.
The only downside, and the reason sodium-ion batteries are not everywhere, is that the range under normal conditions would be lower. Still, it does crawl into automotive tech thanks to Chinese manufacturers. I think it’s a good development, and one I watch more than new advancements in lithium.