New study on Li in several supply/demand scenarios.
They claim this a 1.5˚-compatible path:
3bn cars in 2050 or 0.3🚗/capita. (EU's density today 0.48 🚗/capita)
of which 49% are assumed EV sales by 2030 or 86% by 2050.
How can it be 1.5˚compatible?!
nature.com/articles/s4146…
They claim this a 1.5˚-compatible path:
3bn cars in 2050 or 0.3🚗/capita. (EU's density today 0.48 🚗/capita)
of which 49% are assumed EV sales by 2030 or 86% by 2050.
How can it be 1.5˚compatible?!
nature.com/articles/s4146…
1.5˚with 3bn cars on additional global roads?
Repeat – 3-fold, and in 30yrs
our 100yr ecocide in EU and US
in pristine Africa, Asia & S-America?
*🏠sprawl, material and⚡️use
*destruction of biomes, habitat, carbon sinks,
*tyre ruboff
*construction material + machinery
*...
Repeat – 3-fold, and in 30yrs
our 100yr ecocide in EU and US
in pristine Africa, Asia & S-America?
*🏠sprawl, material and⚡️use
*destruction of biomes, habitat, carbon sinks,
*tyre ruboff
*construction material + machinery
*...
I should expand the list of destruction but
to call that 1.5˚-compatible is ....
TBH, the narrow field of view smacks of the car AND construction industry justifying their existence and growth!
No surprise then that acc to that study, Lithium supply until 2050 for 3bn EV is ✅
to call that 1.5˚-compatible is ....
TBH, the narrow field of view smacks of the car AND construction industry justifying their existence and growth!
No surprise then that acc to that study, Lithium supply until 2050 for 3bn EV is ✅
This nhm.ac.uk/press-office/p… looks at 6 metals for ALL req tech, incl wind turbines, PV...It also sheds light on UK's target of 2035 100% EV.
15 yrs is too short for high% voluntary lifestyle change so UK alone wd need high%age of
global extraction CAPACITY/a
for <= 35mio 🚗
15 yrs is too short for high% voluntary lifestyle change so UK alone wd need high%age of
global extraction CAPACITY/a
for <= 35mio 🚗
That one looks a bit more realistic, doesn't it. But I can't find the original "Letter", only this press statement.
Here's a condensed version of the new paper in #1. pv-magazine.com/2020/09/15/how…
Here's a condensed version of the new paper in #1. pv-magazine.com/2020/09/15/how…
The paper in #1 is a very narrow, sectoral view, looking to translate (and grow) transport sector 1:1 acc to emission reduction scenarios. But such narrow view disregards sustainability guidelines where all damage & CO2e of a product needs evaluation. Eg:
https://twitter.com/anlomedad/status/1306116047259480066
The attempt described in my second link, to replace existing fleets with EV within 15yrs, is what EV-pushers dream of.
But they ignore the very real extraction bottleneck to satisfy "western" nations' quick transformation. It can't serve even UK's small fleet until 2035.
But they ignore the very real extraction bottleneck to satisfy "western" nations' quick transformation. It can't serve even UK's small fleet until 2035.
So. What physics demands of the world to stay WELL below 2˚or near 1.5˚, neutral ~2040, and what #Equity demands of us, ~2030,
can't be achieved by maintaining today's car fleet 1:1 and our unsustainable lifestyles. Mining capacity isn't nearly enough and
can't be achieved by maintaining today's car fleet 1:1 and our unsustainable lifestyles. Mining capacity isn't nearly enough and
https://twitter.com/anlomedad/status/1298137352091701248
All the EV-pushers in Germany and the western world should listen to the science and finally #FaceTheClimateEmergency.
The lifestyle enabled by cars can't go on and can not be exported any further. We need less and different concepts of mobility, energy and raw material use. GO!
The lifestyle enabled by cars can't go on and can not be exported any further. We need less and different concepts of mobility, energy and raw material use. GO!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
