In the relentless pursuit of a greener future, copper stands as a critical element, central to the envisioned transition to renewable energy and electrification. However, recent insights bring to light a formidable obstacle: the rate of copper extraction is insufficient to meet the ambitious targets set by current U.S. policies. This blog post highlights this dilemma, as explained by the International Energy Forum’s (IEF) report, and examines the broader implications for energy policy and economic stability.
The Copper Conundrum
Copper is indispensable in the manufacture of electric vehicles (EVs) and the development of renewable energy infrastructure. The IEF report starkly presents the challenge:
“Electric vehicles (EVs) require substantially more copper and other metals than conventional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. For example, manufacture of an ICE automobile requires 24 kg of copper whereas manufacture of an EV requires 60 kg”.
https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.
This statement alone encapsulates the monumental demand for copper driven by the push towards electrification. With policies mandating that 100% of cars manufactured be electric by 2035, the strain on copper supply becomes even more evident. The report quantifies this demand further:
“To meet business-as-usual trends, 115% more copper must be mined in the next 30 years than has been mined historically until now. To electrify the global vehicle fleet requires bringing into production 55% more new mines than would otherwise be needed”.
https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.
Such figures underscore the vast amounts of copper necessary to achieve these electrification goals. The current mining capacity, however, does not align with this escalating demand.
Mining Realities and Economic Implications
The extraction and processing of copper are time-consuming and capital-intensive activities. Current production rates and available mining technology suggest that ramping up copper output to the required levels within the stipulated timelines is not feasible. The study’s findings suggest a significant shortfall in meeting the raw material needs for the electrification agenda:
“Under today’s policy settings for copper mining, it is highly unlikely that there will be sufficient additional new mines to achieve 100% EV by 2035. Policymakers might consider changing the vehicle electrification goal from 100% EV to 100% hybrid manufacture by 2035″.
https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.
This revelation invites critical scrutiny of the underlying assumptions in policy frameworks that advocate for rapid and large-scale transitions to renewable energy. It also raises pertinent questions about the economic feasibility and long-term sustainability of such policies.
The Questionable Premise of a Green Future
The push for a green future is often presented as an inevitable and necessary path. However, this ideology-driven agenda lacks a solid foundation. The transition to renewable energy, while portrayed as essential, is fraught with practical challenges and economic burdens that are frequently overlooked or underestimated.
“Many have expressed concern that the lack of critical mineral resources may not allow full electrification of the global vehicle transportation fleet, and the vehicle electrification resource demand is just a small part of that needed for the transition”.
https://www.ief.org/focus/ief-reports/copper-mining-and-vehicle-electrification#:~:text=To%20electrify%20the%20global%20vehicle,require%20negligible%20extra%20copper%20mining.
The pursuit of sustainability has become a catchphrase devoid of critical examination. The supposed benefits of a green future are speculative at best, hinging on the unproven assumption that these efforts will significantly impact climate change. In contrast, the immediate and tangible costs—economic, social, and environmental—are substantial and often ignored.
Broader Policy and Strategic Considerations
Given the intrinsic link between copper supply and the any successful implementation of electrification policies, a reassessment of strategy is warranted. Policymakers need to consider several factors if they are going to go down this road:
- Diversification of Material Sources: Investing in research to find alternative materials that can either replace copper or reduce its use in key applications.
- Enhanced Recycling Programs: Implementing robust recycling systems to reclaim copper from obsolete electronics and other products, thereby easing the demand on primary copper mining.
- International Cooperation: Engaging in strategic partnerships with countries rich in copper resources to ensure a stable supply chain.
- Technological Innovation: Encouraging innovations in mining and processing technologies to increase the efficiency and output of copper extraction.
Environmental and Social Impact
The race to mine more copper also carries significant environmental and social costs. Increased mining activities can lead to environmental degradation, including deforestation, soil erosion, and contamination of water resources. Additionally, the social implications for communities in mining regions—often marked by displacement and health issues—must not be overlooked. Thus, a balance must be struck between meeting material needs and maintaining environmental and social standards.
Conclusion
The reality presented by the IEF report serves as a sobering reminder of the complexities inherent in transitioning to a greener economy. This situation highlights an ironic unforced error of poor planning and idealistic policy, driven by an optimistic yet impractical vision without fully considering the supply constraints of critical materials like copper. Moreover, the very premise of striving for a green future and sustainable development is itself an unfounded ideological pursuit, lacking in practical justification and burdened with significant costs.
As we navigate these challenges, it is imperative to maintain a balanced perspective, recognizing the need for realistic timelines and diversified approaches. The discourse around the frenetic, ill-conceived, and ideological fantasy of “climate policy” must evolve to incorporate these hard truths, ensuring that the path to so-called sustainability is both feasible and responsible—or reconsidered entirely in light of its dubious foundations.
The full report can be downloaded here
HT/Clyde Spencer
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
And of course the Green Blob will oppose all actual mines, anywhere.
Perhaps as an small item of scripture but as a practical application, only mines close to home.
I read somewhere that the current Global Copper mining annual processing would require between a 400% to 800% increase just to meet the UK EV electrification mandates. All global mining needs to increase 8 fold just for the UK to replace current ICE with EV. The UK has some 37M registered vehicles. The US has 278M almost 9 times as much and would require 72 times the current annual global copper production to replace ICE with EV. That’s just replacing the cars then there will be distribution lines and up sized transformers to handle the amperage increase from Home Recharging. Most home EV chargers pull 50 Amps upon plug in unless you want to wait 24 hours to recharge at home
Good points Bryan, and added to that, will be the issue of supply and demand. As demand increases, will create a competitive market, by the stupid west, resulting in increasing costs, thereby, making ruinables even more unaffordable. And, of course, will render us vulnerable, to the whims of foreign agents.
Wow, the surface of Earth will look as pockmarked as the moon for all the new mines that will be needed to save the planet!
Definitely Open-Pitiful
Hardly.
I see you lacking in a sense of humor. 🙂
Fifty years ago a length of copper wire the diameter and length of 100 pennies sold for $1.00 [uninsulated]. Today it only needs to be the diameter of a pencil and the same length it was before 1982.
And if this is being done to reduce CO2 then they need to consider the CO2 released in mining, purifying and shipping all of the copper.
The weight of a transformer needed to increase the voltage output of a wind farm to the level needed to economically transport over a high voltage transmission line needs a flatbed railcar that has over 32 wheels. Every Wind Farm will need one to feed the Transmission line and every Substation will need one to get the voltage back down to the typical urban transmission line voltages.
Worse, 95% of the 15% “Power loss” in transmission of electricity heats the atmosphere around the transmission line and/or transformer. And an all electric “Energy” source will quadruple the heat lost to the atmosphere.
All electricity ends up as heat in the environment.
In addition 65% of the heat released by steam turbine generator fuels ends up as heat in the air or water.
I did a calculation a year or so ago. Based solely on the estimated coal used for electricity, the heat released (world wide) was sufficient to raise the lower 105 feet of atmosphere by 1 C.
You calculations are probably misusing something. While it is a somewhat different thing. the generally accepted estimates for total yearly human activity energy usage is less than 2 hours of incident solar.
Need a little more copper? Try the Pebble Project in SW Alaska.
Proposed Project
Production, financial and cost estimates are provided for a proposed 20-year, 180,000 tons per day open pit operation with conventional processing producing three concentrates (copper-gold, molybdenum-rhenium and gravity gold) – the Proposed Project – as described in the permit application and its amendments.
Forecasts include:
Average annual metal production: 320 million lb copper; 368,000 oz gold; 15 million lb molybdenum; 1.8 million oz silver and 10,000 kg rhenium.
Life-of-Mine metal production over the proposed 20 years: 6.4 billion lb copper; 7.4 million oz gold; 300 million lb molybdenum; 37 million oz silver; and 200,000 kg rhenium.
But don’t worry Tom, just as you said FJoeB’s EPA & the Green Blob has issued a final decision to block any development.
I live in BC and have seen on the TV several documentary about this mine. Has it been the go ahead?
It is dead dead dead.
If Trump becomes president, the mine will rise from the grave. Then the protests by the first nation people will begin to protect the salmon.
There are virtually no engineers or scientists in congress , thus they quite literally think they can legislate physics, engineering & science.
We can all see how that works out for society!
Idiots … ugh!
No, lawyers.
liars
Politicians are professional liars. Some are even quite proficient at it.
Even before they are elected they are proven liars. They promise to represent you yet they cannot even represent themselves as they are owned by the party. The voters know this yet still vote for them. You can’t fix stupid.
How can you tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.
Climate fisics is whatever the say it is. And homogenisation of data can make it be whatever they want it to be.
And currently reality is that the lunatics are in charge except for a few straight shooters like DeSantis.
Surely by now we’ve learned that laws of physics can be legislated?
There is an inevitable reckoning coming in 2033 or 2035 when the legislated mandates for EVs come due in about 7 states, and it is learned that none of the necessary infrastructure to support those “mandates” exists.
There is a story of a king who decided pi was too complicated and mandated it be specified as exactly 3.0.
Seems about the same as today.
From Renewables copper.org
“Wind Power by the NumbersA three-megawatt wind turbine can contain up to 4.7 tons of copper with 53% of that demand coming from the cable and wiring, 24% from the turbine/power generation components, 4%from transformers, and 19% from turbine transformers”
Will selling all of the copper help pay for the dismantling of industrial wind turbines?
Inevitably it will. Most of what is above ground will have recycle value. Blades and concrete will likely have negative value. So all those heavy foundations will be a challenge for future generations of crop farmers. The piles in the oceans will form reefs for a few centuries. Maybe shipping hazard within decades as the tops are removed for recycle and the monopoly too risky to deconstruct.
They’ll have to anchor bouys over the tops of any remaining underwater pylon base so shipping is aware they’re there
“buoys”…
Bababooey
Dang Lysdexia
I bet most of those heavy foundations will be around thousands of years from now- ruins of our civilization.
Can you imagine what those future archeologists will be concluding about us?
That assumes they can properly decide what those concrete blocks were for.
Our modern Stonehenge?
“and the monopoly too risky to deconstruct.”…. ???
No one is ever going to remove land-based wind turbine foundations from the ground, regardless of what they claim.
Blades are plastic or fiberglass, which will end up in landfills.
Towers are aluminum or steel, which can be recycled.
Copper prices already up 38% this year.
time to cash in my old collection of pennies!
They will have to be old pennies because the copper content of them for decades has been negligible to zero.
I had my coin collection phase around 1960- pennies, nickels and silver dollars. I also have a stamp collection from that epoch. Maybe something in there is valuable. I could use a nice 2 month cruise on the Med.
I read somewhere that a California town had replaced traffic lights with STOP signs because the lights kept getting vandalized for the copper wire.
I heard about a public service announcement that informed people that the traffic red light cameras had 4 pounds of copper in them. That PSA was not from a government entity.
Last I looked, copper was trading at $5/lb. I imagine there’s a lot of scrapping going on from nefarious sources.
High prices always cause a lot of scrapping.
Plus if they do away with all fossil fuels the things will never operate. The bearings need grease, the gears need oil, and the vanes need hydraulics.
Mere “incidentals”. Don’t let reality intrude.
No one has estimated the cost of maintenance and repair.
It to mention they would never get built, transported to the site, maintained, demolished at the end of their operating life, transported to the landfill, or backed up when they are (more often than not) failing to generate any electricity without all those energy inputs coming from fossil fuels.
A few years ago, I read that if the UK was to be able to convert all transportation to electric, it would take all the production of copper that is available in the world today. I’m sure if I looked hard enough, I could find that report, even if on the wayback machine. It might have been here.
The concept of ‘going electric’ is total folly. It simply cannot be done, not even for the UK alone. Not to mention that the mining of copper is fossil fuel intensive. You burn the fossil fuel to make copper, then use fossil fuel to get it where it is needed, then use fossil fuel to put the vehicles in customers’ reach, and brag that you have renewable energy vehicles. Does any sane person believe that the fossil fuel that made that vehicle will ever be offset by running on electric grids, which are mostly powered by fossil fuels? I wouldn’t ask where the logic is in that, because I already know there is none.
I thought it was at least 4 ~ 7 times current annual global copper production for the UK
Frustrating, you know you’ve read an interesting article on the subject, but have no idea where or when you saw it. I, too, read something on those lines, but, it was phrased in terms of the entire global output of various metals, for several years. Whatever, it was obvious, that there just won’t be the availability of the resources, to achieve the stupid target dates.
I thought that it was the current world production of Cobalt rather than Copper.
Transforming to an all electric society stresses many many mineral resources, depending how you do it.
Which is why we ought to be letting the market find the way through the woods, not have it second guessed by literally ignorant politicians.
I believe we will need to make that transformation but not because of climate change, but simply because there is a limited supply of fossil fuel.
” simply because there is a limited supply of fossil fuel.” Says who?
Since there is a “limited supply,” we shouldn’t be wasting it building worse-than-useless windmills, solar panels and electric cars.
The logic is money is being made.
Eventually you run out of other people’s money. That’s when you print your own.
These are hard facts, but don’t underestimate technical progress. Even today, aluminum can replace copper in many uses. It would be a little more dangerous (aluminum connections tend to spark) or less efficient, but this sermon is not tomorrow’s sermon.
and bends in the wiring tend to become very hot
I don’t see why they would
Electrons corner better in copper LOL
I believe it is part of physical reality, not subject to opinions.
Aluminum can replace copper in electricity distribution systems but not so well in electric motor coils
I could be wrong, but I don’t think aluminium is as ductile as copper.
Not a lot in it as far as I recall.
There are multiple disadvantages to using aluminum. Ductility, amperage capacity, corrosion, and dissimilar metal interactions just off the top of my head.
Not the sort of stuff, suitable for pyrotenax 😊
Oh, it can replace it there as well. It has its plusses and minuses like any material, and its really down to developing technology to use it best. It’s already used in top end loudspeakers, because of its lighter weight.
‘loudspeakers’, especially when they’re listening to heavy metal 😉
LOL!
My point was that aluminium is inherently suitable, if not such an easy metal to work with. It corrodes differently, it doesn’t solder easily, but its current carrying capacity is similar to copper – copper does better where volume is restricted aluminium where weight is restricted.
No for heavy metal you need to use heavy metal. Especially if it goes to 11. 🤣
Processing aluminum ore into useful metal is a different process than copper.
Then again, steel is a conductor, so is silver and gold (think of the pillaging).
Even carbon can be used as conductor.
Copper was used because it was easy and cheap. Those factors change and something else will replace it.
I did a calculation a number of years back, related to EMP shielding, and the amount of known copper (including reserves) was sufficient to cover CONUS with something like a 3 foot thick slab. Getting to that copper is a separate story.
Add to this government interference of the Biden tax on copper mining for “social justice purposes.”
Insanity rules.
George,
copper mining and processing, or aluminium mining and processing, the fact remains that a considerable amount of these metals will be needed over and above that produced today.
Would we want the aluminum for the wire or for the tower structures?
I’ll go with “C None of the above.”
Better to not waste the resources building that worse-than-stupid shit in the first place.
And it burns. Wasn’t that a problem with one of the UK’s ships in its war with Argentina? As if they didn’t know it could happen?
If you go back to the 1930s, you will find copious people explaining how to make thermite, a mixture of aluminium and iron oxide that was used to weld rails and in fact still forms the basis for sparklers fireworks I think And was an important incendiary device in WWII.
Every metal burns, some are just slower at doing it.
I seem to recall that the Hindenburg’s spectacular flames were actually the aluminum that was part of its “skin,” not from the hydrogen it used for buoyancy.
No “shist”, Einsteins!! Insanity truly reigns. Oh, and of course, all of those other minerals that need to be mined in huge future quantities. The stupid, It burns.
The two largest known remaining US copper mining reserves, Pebble near Bristol Bay Alaska and Boundary near Boundary Waters Minnesota, have both been shut down by Greenies. Hard to have it both ways for very long.
Copper is now so valuable that the US penny is copper plated zinc. Makes an easy elementary school lemon battery demonstrator. Not good for much else.
I recall reading that it takes 3¢ to make a penny.
I suggest everyone start saving them, even going to the bank and buying a bunch.
In Canada, the copper penny was phased out many decades ago. Cash sales a rounded to the nickel or dime. Credit card sales are charged to the penny.
Largest copper reserves appear to be in Chile, by a large amount… then Australia.
But Chile needs to be supplemented by mines in the US and not be totally dependent on foreign sources that are subject to strikes shutting everything down.
There is also the potential for another rich mine in Arizona, but it is also experiencing opposition from the Apaches and the Biden administration appears to be sympathetic to their complaints.
Some copper could be regained by eliminating coin money. At least in the US most coins are copper sandwich
Please! Coin money is worth more than paper money. Although, if the ‘Controllers’ have their way, it will soon be digital, and your finances not yours.
Except pennies, which are copper-plated zinc.
…experiencing opposition from [paid activists using the name of] the Apaches…
TFIFY.
I understood their arrowheads were flakes of stone…
perhaps they recognized copper in that stone?
The opposition is based on them considering the land on top the copper deposit to be “sacred.”
I heard in November that one was right on the verge of authorization. Will have to dig into it a bit.
Actually, Biden had a direct hand in both closures.
“Actually, o’bummer had a direct hand in both closures.” brandon doesn’t have a ‘direct’ hand in anything.
The closures took place while Biden was in office and he took credit for the actions. I have no first-hand knowledge of what goes on behind closed doors. Apparently, the Capitol Police don’t either because they never solved the case of who brought the brick of cocaine into the WH.
LOL. The future is going to be very interesting. Factor in this latest development with copper:
“A California city removed the traffic lights from a four-way intersection as the city grapples with thefts attributed to a massive homeless encampment nearby.
Oakland has been experiencing high crime and theft, including people stealing copper wires and the city’s infrastructure, according to locals who spoke to CBS News. The city attempted to thwart criminals tampering with its electrical boxes by placing cement barriers over them – to no avail. Now, the city has taken to removing the traffic lights at a busy intersection and replacing them with stop signs.”
If copper becomes high in demand, copper prices will necessarily rise, which will make copper theft more profitable. Better not leave your EV unattended while charging. If you do you’ll be buying a replacement charging cable.
“Better not leave your EV unattended while charging. If you do you’ll be buying a replacement…” EV!
I can just see it. Four guys pushing an EV, when someone asks where they’re going with it, and their answer is ‘to the scrapyard for the copper’.
Heat pumps contain about 5kg (10-12lbs) of copper and produce nothing useful except government subsidies. Perhaps they might get stolen for the copper…um…oops they already are
Sounds, like we should be investing in copper, not gold.
Studies show that roughly 50% of all stolen cars are torched. If they are EVs we’re going to need a bigger fire department! Buy your gas masks, now!
There was a segment on local TV news about stealing the charging wires from EV charging stations. So the almost useless became totally useless.
At least it did manage to serve one useful purpose at the end of it’s life.
This is what they do in South Africa. They cut down the “robots” and take all the cables. Real deal third world/undeveloped world stuff.
Or a new battery or a new electric motor or or or or
Not to mention the very large amounts of FOSSIL FUELS required to mine and refine the copper. !
The advocates of NetZero have no intention of replacing ICE vehicles with EVs. They intend to make EVs required and simultaneously far to expensive, thereby forcing nearly everyone onto public transit. Since that won’t work for most people they will lose employment and become wards of the state.
“Culling” will be the Final Solution.
You’re forgetting the part of making public transit much more inconvenient and much more expensive, apart from the fact that it can never be useful for things such as trips to the laundromat, grocery store, hardware store, etc
Politicians are great at solving problems 20 years in the future. It is today’s problems that they have trouble with.
Putting a problem and a politician together is an automatic conflict of interest. If any politician ever solves one of his adopted (read created) problems, he’s out of a job because then he has nothing to run on anymore!!!
Politicians are great at pretending to solve imaginary problems 20 years in the future. It is today’s ACTUAL problems that they have trouble with.
FIFY
This “problem” jumps up a lot in the context of needed critical metals for the transition. The transition is a false front for the New World Order/WEF planned crimes against humanity to eliminate several billions of people and destroy the economic well-being and freedom of those remaining. So, my remarks are in no way intended to support the ugly transition.
However, I began my career as an engineer and geologist graduating in 1971 but working in the field starting in 1958. Most of my work related to the mining industry – in Canada, U.S, several countries in Africa, with consulting trips to Mexico, Portugal, Sweden , Brazil and China. Copper is an abundant resource.
If we insisted on wasting it on this foolhardy adventure the industry could, if permitted, crowd you out with copper.
https://www.statista.com/topics/1409/copper/#topicOverview
Mine production 2022: 22M tonnes
the total global copper reserves have increased from 630 million metric tons in 2010 to 880 million metric tons as of 2021. Meanwhile, the total global copper production from mines amounted to an estimated 21 million metric tons in 2021
https://internationalcopper.org/policy-focus/climate-environment/recycling/
Recycling ~30% of copper used is from recycled material
https://www.usgs.gov/news/national-news-release/global-undiscovered-copper-resources-estimated-35-billion-metric-tons
The first-ever, geologically-based global assessment of undiscovered copper resources estimates that 3.5 billion metric tons of copper may exist worldwide.
Okay the resources are there with a huge safety factor. I could go down the list of metals virtually all with a similar story. There is lots of everything. It boils down to one dumb thing…….
https://www.adn.com/business-economy/2024/04/16/reports-biden-administration-set-to-deny-200-mile-ambler-mining-road-through-alaska-wilderness/
“The transition is a false front for the New World Order/WEF planned crimes against humanity to eliminate several billions of people and destroy the economic well-being and freedom of those remaining.”
It’s becoming more and more obvious that the grand plan is not to accommodate ANY of the necessary expansion of resources. They want us gone.
Lots of copper is needed to alloy with zinc to make brass. Large amounts of brass used to make ammo for all the militaries, police, and hunters. I saw on the TV a documentary about how the US military recycles about billion dollars worth of brass every year.
Does that include the top brass ? 😉
No!
The generals get to keep their stars when they retire.
Considering who this administration put into high positions in the military, it should!
I have noticed our politician exhibit excessive brass.
These must be all the highly-paid “green” jobs we’ve been promised
‘shovel ready’
“‘shovel ready’”
Why use a fossil fuel powered excavator when there are perfectly good “green” digging jobs available !.
Aluminium is an acceptable if less easy to deploy alternative to copper for electrical purposes. In fact weight for weight its better than copper, which is why it is used in overhead transmission lines.
It is also smelted using electrolysis rather than coal, which fits very well with a nuclear electric grid.
So I don’t think that copper shortages are ultimately such a serious issue as they might have been.
Lithium looks to be a far more serious issue.
But of course all this raises the question of how much governments should dictate technology when the implications of the technology are unknown.
If you want to reduce carbon fuel usage, tax carbon, and that’s it. The market will then find the least cost alternatives.
But, why on Earth would we want to reduce carbon fuel usage? It will have zero effect on Climate Change™, so why should we bother?
He posed it as an “if” not a desire.
Copper
1.72 E-8 Ohm Meter
Aluminum
2.65/2.82 E-8 Ohm Meter
For a given size (diameter & length) aluminum is roughly 50% more resistive than copper, which means for a given amperage, aluminum will drop more voltage and dissipate more heat.
This does not disqualify aluminum. Just the physics need to be considered.
Having read through the comments, an amusing contradiction springs to mind, between those who think that all technological problems will be solved by ‘new technology’ and those who insist that there aren’t enough uranium reserves to run a nuclear reactor fleet for more than a few years.
And the observed fact that these are often exactly the same people.
In technical matters it is advisable to separate the ‘we can’t do it that way’ from the ‘we can’t do it at all‘.
And I can assure you that in this case transition to aluminium would be trivial. Motors would get larger, but probably no heavier.
The contrast between this and say lithium shortage, which has no viable alternatives, is marked..
Looking at recent history with the cancellation of the NuScale SMR project in Idaho, it wasn’t an increase in regulatory requirements which did that project in. The NRC requirements in force in 2023 were the same as those in force in 2014.
What did the NuScale project in was a steep increase in the cost of basic industrial commodities combined with growing worldwide competition for the industrial resources needed to build any kind of energy delivery system, not just a nuclear energy system.
And then there is the opportunity cost of renewable energy technology.
Every important industrial commodity which goes into an EV, or into a low energy density system such as a wind turbine, or into a solar panel, or into a grid-scale battery is an industrial commodity which does not go into a high density energy delivery system such as a gas-fired power plant or a nuclear plant.
Well I wont comment on Nu Scale, because for every well thought out SMR project there are probably 5 whose main aim is to get investment.
The market has a life of its own, if commodity X gets expensive and rare, people will if they are able, substitute commodity Y, or stop using the technology altogether.
But of all the metals aluminium has to be about the most abundant in the lithosphere, and the ability to smelt aluminium using nuclear electricity is well understood.
Wiki.
So we will run out of a lot of other stuff before we run out of aluminium
In the case of NuScale cancellation, the cost increases which eventually did the project in weren’t just those increases associated with the SMR modules and the power generation turbines. Other substantial increases for the power transmission and distribution equipment needed to tie the NuScale reactor complex into the regional power grid were a substantial part of the cost growth picture.
You mean we have to plug it in??? Who knew?
Historically, as the price of electricity has increased it has become more profitable for aluminum producers to sell electricity rather than produce aluminum. Expect that to become more economically compelling, going forward.
Leo, I’ve read several of your posts on this subject and find most of your remarks are right on. Regarding lithium, however, I’d like to point out that in 2000, there were only 5 or 6 significant lithium producers operating (Li markets were comparatively modest tonnage).
With the development of large new markets after 2005, an exploration boom around the world resulted in over 400 projects many put into production in the ensuing 10-12yrs. The market then swooned with oversupply and prices for Li-carbonate equivalent (LCE) fell by more than 50% to ~$/20,000/mt closing high cost producers.
With the Malthusian propaganda flooding minds particularly since the 1960s, there is a strong widely held erroneous belief that minerals and metals are scarce. This view has been debunked and re-debunked ever since then.
Perhaps you missed my post above on the abundance of copper.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/05/19/the-inconvenient-truth-about-copper-implications-for-u-s-electrification-goals/#comment-3913130
Thankfully, it only takes about fifteen years to get a new mine permitted in the US.
Something that you overlooked is the cross-sectional conductivity of aluminum versus copper. It means that aluminum carrying the same current produces more waste heat. If aluminum was such a good alternative, we would already have motors with aluminum windings in order to save money.
Many users can swap to aluminum. Others can use cooling systems to reduce how much copper they need.
We use a lot of copper because it has been cheap, not because of unsolvable technical problems.
Remember the head of the US Trucking industry on this website last year saying that for the US trucking industry to go battery only would require the Earth’s entire production of Lithium for the next 7 years.
Alan M: “Remember the head of the US Trucking industry on this website last year saying that for the US trucking industry to go battery only would require the Earth’s entire production of Lithium for the next 7 years.”
By golly, if the world’s lithium miners are to save the earth from a climate catastrophe, they had darn well better get their a$$es in gear!
Light up the foundries, burn coal! We need more steel for those shovels.
Our society is set to hit many materials roadblocks within the lifetimes of my children and grand-children. Copper, aluminum, lithium, cobalt and other rare minerals as well.
We can’t create raw materials out of nothing.
It would be interesting to list the basic materials we will run short/out of.
The planet has lots of reserves of everything we need. Just not available at the cost we want to pay. And money is (supposed to be) a measure of the human toil required, expended, saved.
The planet has lots of reserves of everything we need.
No. The problem is that it hasn’t. We have to make do without the Big Rock Candy Mountain. Unlimited oil reserves. Infinite supplies of coal and natural gas. Unlimited land area and rainfall to grow popcorn and feed hamburger factories.
Only transgender people think that the world is what they decide it to be. And not after all what it is.
You may self identify as natural gas, but you wont light many stoves.
Unless you have a box of matches, that is.
It isn’t just a matter of resources. To be a reserve, it has to be minable at a profit, meaning that is a hard, calculable limit, not just what “we want to pay.”
https://www.geologyforinvestors.com/classification-of-mineral-resources-and-reserves/
Aluminium is not rare, its extremely common.
Things we wont be running out of will be:
It takes time for quickly rising demand for industrial commodities to translate into increases in production capacity for those commodities. Prices quickly rise as a direct consequence.
Quickly rising prices for industrial commodities then slows the increase in demand for those commodities. For awhile, anyway. Unless the commodity is electricity. Or gasoline.
Well… the supply of electricity is relatively inelastic in the short term, but more flexible in the long term. Ask the State of Washington about WHOOPS… That was the 1970’s conclusion (by central planners of course) that they would need some ungodly number of nuclear reactors, completed before the end of the century, in order to meet the anticipated demand by the end of the century. And they began construction on something like 8 of them, there are several huge man-made pits in the landscape still remaining to exhibit that start. But then as time went by, people began purchasing more fuel efficient vehicles, insulating their homes, turning off unnecessary lights and appliances, etc, etc., until low and behold none of those reactors was needed anymore (I think one was far enough along that it was deemed more advantageous to complete it, but all the others were abandoned). And, see, it was only the increasing costs of energy, combined with a reasonably foreseeable future of even higher costs, that brought about this change. IT DID NOT HAPPEN BY GOVERNMENT MANDATE OR SUBSIDIES (READ BRIBES) OR PRISON SENTENCES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT!!! It happened because the market functioned as a market should.
I’m well familiar with the WPPSS reactor projects of the late 1970’s and early 1980’s. Too well, in fact.
Had WPPSS gone for two reactors of the same design rather than for five reactors using two different designs, then those two cookie-cutter reactor designs could have been completed, as opposed to the one reactor that was eventually finished.
Forty years later, the Northwest Power & Conservation Council’s 2021 power plan calls for the addition of 3500 megawatts of wind & solar plus 720 megawatts of demand response to the Northwest’s regional power supply.
The NWPCC hasn’t got a firm answer as what that 3500 Mw / 720 Mw of additional capacity will cost. Nor does the NWPCC’s 2021 plan state directly what kind of annual generation performance the additional capacity is expected to achieve.
By all rational logic, the upcoming NWPCC power plan, due in late 2026 or early 2027, ought to address that lack of specificity. But will it? I have my doubts.
You could run out of oxygen if it all is locked up on oxides like
dihydrogen-monoxide
dihydrogen-dioxide
Ferrous Oxide
Etc.
If CO2 levels are forced down low enough plants will cease to flourish and their O2 byproduct goes away as well
From Day After Tomorrow:
For years, we operated under the belief that we could continue consuming our planet’s natural resources, without consequence. We were wrong. I was wrong.
Of all the bad science and errors in that movie, that one closing quote was remarkably accurate and astute.
This does not advocate for not using what we are blessed with, but we much consider the consequences of each decision we make.
I have to disagree with the claim that opening new copper mines will “displace” people, at least until such time as the Biden administration has completely populated the deserts of Arizona with illegal aliens.
As I recall, Biden imposed a tax on copper ore mining.
What’s behind the looming copper shortage | Watch (msn.com)