Month: June 2022

The last sentence of the 3rd paragraph should read, U.S. inflation is higher than in Japan, France, Germany, Britain, Italy and Canada. Sorry about that…..Marv

One thing President Biden is finding very difficult to do is to get through a prepared speech or an answer to a reporter’s question without blaming someone or something other than himself or his administration.  I recall the Clintons doing it in the 1990s; they called it “spin” and they took it to a new level.  Call it what you want, it is disgusting, distasteful, and an egregious failure of leadership.  It is inevitably a failing leader’s last resort; blame, blame, blame.

He has blamed the Afghanistan debacle on, “the generals”, blamed tangled supply chains on “inflation”, blamed the over-all economic nose-dive on “COVID and Putin” blamed surging lawlessness on “COVID and guns”, blamed out-of-control fuel prices on “Putin and the Ukraine invasion”, blamed gas prices on “fuel company CEOs”, Blamed increasing meat prices on “CEOs” and on and on and on. 

TRUTH: Truth just doesn’t seem to matter to President Biden; he will say whatever it takes to get past the moment. “The border is not open.” The truth: Every statistic associated with illegal immigration tells us just the opposite.  Biden June, 2022: “We have the fastest growing economy in the world.”  The truth: More than 50 countries are growing faster. Biden: “People have record savings.”  The truth: Wealth losses in the U.S. have exceeded $10 trillion so far in 2022, the most significant catastrophic vaporizations of wealth and savings in U.S. history.  Biden’s spokesperson recently explained that, “The economy is in a better place than it has been historically.”  The truth:  During the Trump presidency, before COVID-19, median household income rose by $6,446, the largest three-year gains in income for middle-class families in history. Under Biden, median income lost $5-6,000 in average wages and salaries when adjusted for inflation over the last year. Biden: “America is in a position to tackle a worldwide problem (inflation) that’s worse everywhere but here.” The truth: Inflation is higher in Japan, France, Germany, Britain, Italy and Canada.

Why is he doing this?  Here is one theory.

Politicians have a reputation for conveniently playing loose with the truth; yet they keep getting reelected. I’m no psychologist but it seems to me that if that behavior (routinely lying) is repeatedly rewarded (reelected) they just may begin to believe lying doesn’t matter; it’s not a big deal.  

Our president spent his entire adult life as a professional politician.  Until 2021 he had never led an organization, built anything, met a payroll, balanced an organization’s budget, been responsible for a dozen or so “senior executives” or had a staff of hundreds or thousands of subordinates. 

Does congressional experience provide an individual with the building blocks to be president of the United States?  Well, here is what we-the-people have been saying about that. For about 50 years Gallop has been conducting an annual poll to gather findings on a couple of   pertinent questions. 

The first has to do with confidence in a long list of American institutions.  The 2021 poll tells us that Congress as an institution is very near the bottom of the list with 12% saying they have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in the U.S Congress.  By contrast the U.S. Military has consistently been at or near the top with (in 2021) military at 69%.    

A similar Gallop poll deals with Honesty and Ethics:  That poll, 2021, Members of Congress were rated “high/very high” by only 9% of the public and low/very low by 62%.   By contrast Members of the Military were rated 81% high/very high and 1% low/very low.

One obvious conclusion from these two Gallop poles is that if the members of an organization are getting an “F” in honesty and ethics, the overall organization will get an “F” in confidence from we-the-people.

ACCOUNTABILITY:  There is another very serious issue associated with blame and lying.  It is his abrogation of one of the foundational elements of leadership, accountability.  He talks to us about “the buck stops with me” but his level of hypocrisy on the issue of accountability is palpable.  Saying and doing are two very different actions.

This is not a “blame game”, it is much too serious to be referred to as anything as trite as a game.  This is about having a leader who is lying about two of the most important issues in this country that is negatively impacting every single person every day; inflation and gas prices. There is no factual data to back up his assertions and everyone knows it.  For example, in 2020 the national average gas price dropped below $2.00 per gallon. It was $2.25 when Biden took office, $3.32 one year later and a month BEFORE Putin invaded Ukraine.  Today, the national average gas price is $4.90 per gallon.  Americans can rightly conclude if he will look at us through his teleprompter and lie about the big issues, he will likely lie about anything else to cover his tracks. 

We all know what blame means, an attempt to deflect responsibility from one’s self. Another way to look at it is to define the exact opposite of blame which is accountability

The seriousness of the absence of accountability goes further.  Very high up on the line-up of desirable leader character traits are trust and respect.  Without accountability, neither trust nor respect will become part of the leadership equation. We cannot trust someone who lacks the moral courage to tell us the truth about the most important issues facing America.  Without trust and accountability how are we going to respect that person as our leader?  The president’s pathetic pole numbers prove this point.

 If you are looking for a single word that sums up the attributes of accountability, trust and respect it would be integrity. A person of integrity will consistently display moral commitment, selflessness and confidence to speak out and act out with honesty and honor. A mid-1900s radio personality, Edward R. Murrow summed it up accurately with this, “To be persuasive you must be believable; to be believable you must be credible; to be credible you must be truthful.”  Amen.

CULTURE:  Having discussed the president’s character, or lack thereof, we also must consider the larger issue; it is about the organization, i.e., the collective U.S.A.

Culture is a powerful and pervasive force in every organization and every organization, no matter how large or small, has a culture. Culture is an organization’s personality; caring, hateful, fast, honest, energetic, visionary, risk-taking, vengeful.  Culture will change over time for better or worse.  Too many times senior leaders pay little or no attention to the culture of their organization until they wake up one day and figure out that it is a disaster and is dragging the entire organization down. The point being, culture needs attention all the time.  A leader does not build an organizational culture by sending out an email or memo.  The leader defines what the culture currently is, decides what he/she wants it to be and then sets in motion all the initiatives necessary to institutionalize it. It’s a lot of work; a leader must get every subordinate leader on board, make them actively participate and sell it, talk about it openly and frequently.  Everyone in the organization should be able to define the culture and its impact on the environment in which they work. 

Here is the key question facing us on the subject of culture; what is happening right now, today at the leader level (the president), at the headquarters level (i.e., the entire Executive Branch) and the organization as a whole (the U.S.A)?  There is no reason to rehash what the president is doing; he is consistently using blame as a leadership tool and it is a disaster. 

Blame is spreading.  It has become obvious that the secretaries of the departments, State, Defense, Transportation, Energy, Homeland Security, etc.  have, by choice or otherwise, bought in to blame as a leadership mechanism.  A perfect example is Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas during a recent congressional hearing on the disaster on the southern border singing directly from the Biden sheet of music about no such thing as an “open border, we are doing everything we can to contain illegal immigration.”  Or to listen to Energy Secretary Granholm explaining that energy CEOs are the problem and if we-the-people would all buy an electric vehicle our energy problems would go away.

Finally, throughout the organization, the political left picks up on the blame culture, it spreads, it is deemed an acceptable course of action by our liberal media and liberal institutions of higher learning. We become capable of creating a next-generation of leaders who believe blame is an acceptable leadership tool.

But there are others in the organization who see culture for what it really is, corrosive behavior that eats away at the foundation of leadership and of the organization.  Morale suffers and pride in workmanship declines by those who realize they are supporting a lie. 

With two schools of thought on a culture of blame, ultimately the nation becomes more divided.  Our president, the “great unifier” is failing the American people and the foundation of the republic.

CONCLUSIONS:

Why are great leaders great?  Some people will refer to a successful leader as a, “born leader.” No such thing.  First is desire.  If a leader does not want to lead or is uncomfortable in the seat, they will likely fail.  Secondly, is preparation.  Great leaders have years of experience at the first-line leader level, the operational level and finally at the strategic level. They are good at what they do as a result of a combination of formal leader development training, self-initiated study, having been properly mentored and by having experienced many successes and failures along the way. 

I believe we can all agree that being president of the United States may be the most difficult, the most demanding leadership position in the world.  A best-case scenario would be for the president to have experienced at least years if not hopefully decades of leader development at tactical through strategic levels, experienced near-term and long-range planning successes and failures, learned how and when to deal with direct-report subordinates as well as dozens, then hundreds or perhaps thousands of worker-bees at the lower levels, experienced how to deemphasize self-interests by always seeking the greater good for the organization as a whole and keeping that thought in the forefront of every action and reaction.

President Biden has none of this training and he is, therefore, failing the American people on so many fronts. His natural reaction is to turn to what 50 years of politics taught him; play loose with the truth and resort to blame, blame and more blame.

Almost nothing damages the reputation of a leader faster than attempting to dodge an issue rather than deal with it.  Blame is a dodge.  Nothing positive will ever come of it.

BOTTOM LINE:

Our lives are defined by how we deal with adversity.  When failure manifests its ugly head, the last course of action should be to abandon accountability because doing so ensures there also will be no trust or respect going forward.

A thought from an unknown author, “The only thing that happens when you throw dirt is that you lose ground.”  Blame doesn’t inspire, it breeds malcontent, discord, disarray, frustration and ultimately failure for we-the-people.

All leaders are held accountable for the welfare of their people, some leaders are additionally held accountable for the welfare of the organization.

Marvin L. Covault, Lt Gen US Army, retired, is the author of VISION TO EXECUTION, a book for leaders, and a new book May 2022, FIX THE SYSTEMS, TRANSFORM AMERICA as well as the author of a blog WeThePeopleSpeaking.com

It is not very encouraging when an article begins with a disclaimer, but for this one it is necessary.  This article contains a lot of numbers associated with the Green Movement and many of them conflict from source to source.  My intent is to use the numbers to paint a picture of what is going on in the world with regard to carbon emissions.  Some of the numbers may be exactly wrong but also about right.  About right means more than one source had the same or similar number so I used it.

THE WORLD WE LIVE IN: 

Humans: What human population can our earth support?  Guestimates abound but there are some very convincing arguments that the maximum could be 9-10 billion.  With the population closing in on 8 billion, we may already be on borrowed time. What immediately comes to mind is that a little over 100 days ago Russia invaded Ukraine.  While there are already about 47 million people in 81 countries on the edge of famine, The World Food Program warns that the Russia/Ukraine conflict could result in 276 million facing “acute food insecurity.”   Not a comforting thought. 

One final thought to keep in mind about the human race today; 17% are illiterate and probably poor, 26% live less than 14 years, 66% die between ages 15 and 64 due primarily to malnutrition and/or lack of adequate medical care because they are poor.  These poor people live in poor countries.

Minerals: None of earth’s minerals are renewable.  Already, 17 of the 78 minerals contained in the earth’s crust are classified as, ‘rare earth metals,” some of which are essential to manufacturing almost anything electric. And, you guessed it, China controls about 80% of the world’s supply.  Controlling the supply, provides opportunity to control processing which leads to controlling price and also who gets what share.  Not a comforting thought.

Electricity: World-wide requirement for electricity has been steadily increasing since Alexander Graham Bell lit up the first light bulb in 1879. Throughout the last century central heating and air conditioning became commonplace in the hundreds of millions of structures, including an ever-increasing demand for electric power.  But since the turn of this century, demand for electricity has been increasing at an increasing rate. An estimated 900,000 people are going online for the first time every day.  Access to the internet increased by 54% in 2021.  Consider that about 84% of the world’s population, over 6.6 billion people, recharge smart phones and laptops every day? Now we are talking about charging hundreds of millions of car batteries that weigh in at about 1000 pounds.

CREATING ELECTRIC POWER FROM RENEWABLE WIND AND SOLAR:  Building one wind turbine requires 45 tons of plastic (processed from petroleum), 900 tons of steel, 2,500 tons of concrete and 2 tons of rare-earth elements. To produce the 900 tons of steel needed for one turbine requires about 150 tons of coking coal and about 300 tons of iron ore. 

More bad news. Cement is the number one carbon contributor in the world.  The production of one pound of cement also produces one pound of CO2.

More bad news, the 45 tons of plastic is nonrecyclable.

If we want to produce half the world’s electricity from wind, we will need to build about 3 million more turbines.  Back to the 900 tons of steel required for one turbine, 3 million turbines would require 2.7 billion tons of earth materials. 

Yes, one more bad news point; after a turbine life-cycle of about 20 years, start all over.

Finally, the worse news of all: After we dig out of the earth billions of tons of raw materials, transport it, process it into a usable product, again transport it and finally construct a turbine, we will have unavoidably created an enormous carbon emissions footprint. Some researchers believe the actual CO2 reduction is so insignificant that one large windfarm saves less in a year than is given off over the same period by a single jumbo jet flying daily between the U.S. and England.

Wind turbine cost:  The average is about $3 million.  Again, if we need 3 million of them, the total is in the neighborhood of $9 trillion.  Add to that an annual maintenance cost of $45,000 each ($1.35 billion for the world) and you will likely conclude that most of the countries in the world cannot afford to be part of the program.  That fact takes us back to the Paris Accords; good ideas but probably not within the art of the possible. 

Electricity from solar panels: The discussion of cement/steel requirement for energy from wind are sobering.  I’m sorry to report that energy from solar power requires even more cement and steel than wind turbines to produce the same amount of electricity.  Additionally, production of solar panels requires large amounts of silver and indium.  Mining of these metals is expected to increase by 250% and 1200% respectively over the next twenty years and some day we will likely run out of both. Solar panels require other rare-earth elements which are not currently mined in the US.  Demand for these elements is expected to rise 250-1000% by 2050.  Access to these metals is questionable.  For example, the Republic of the Congo produces 70% of the world’s raw cobalt and China controls 90% of cobalt mining and refining

More facts bearing on the Green Revolution:

BIDEN’S FOLLY:  The afternoon of 20 January, 2021, our new president took a sharp left turn, signed away our short-lived energy independence thereby setting in motion an economic disaster, all to make a point about moving the world away from fossil fueled vehicles.  All this without consultation with Congress, let alone the American people who he had just a few hours earlier pledged to support and defend. His action was not a bold move for mankind, a world-leader move, it was plain and simple gotcha-Trump move.  How much research had he and his staff done on the viability of a world full of electronic vehicles, EVs? 

Fact:  The world has a greenhouse gas emissions problem and passenger vehicles account for about 15% of the carbon.

THE PARIS ACCORDS, fact:  the Accords entered into force on November 4, 2016, and has been signed by 195 countries and ratified by 190 as of January 2021.  The objective is to limit greenhouse gas emissions by 50% by 2030 and ultimately to levels that would prevent global temperatures from increasing more than 3.6 °F before the end of this century. 

Each signatory to the Paris Climate Agreement was asked to submit a plan.  The “plan” was to specify their year-by-year program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. So, what happens if a nation does not submit a plan or does not achieve their objectives?  Nothing, absolutely nothing. The plans are not enforceable and there are no penalties for failure. The Paris Climate Agreement is a glorified global PR effort.  No teeth. No funding.  No sanctions for failure.  But the story gets worse.

Under the Paris agreement, “developed countries” such as the United States pledged to provide funding and technical support to “developing countries”, such as India to assist with emissions reductions; wherein India promptly estimated that is would need “at least U.S. $2.5 trillion” in aid by 2030 to achieve their emissions reduction targets. the World Bank officially categorizes 139 nations as “developing.” How many of the 139 will want a handout from the U.S. taxpayers to achieve their unenforceable environmental goals?

To date, almost 75% of the nations’ pledges are insufficient to achieve the 2030 target. And then there is China’s “pledge”. They will continue to increase emissions of carbon dioxide at least until 2030′ i.e., zero reduction planning.

COAL-FIRED POWER PLANTS, Fact:  Coal-fired power plants account for about 26% of global greenhouse emissions.  The world has about 10,000 coal-fired power plants; the US has less than 250. China and India combined have over 35% of the world’s population and about 50% (5,100) coal-fired power plants.  That’s the bad news; the worse news is that between the two of them China and India are in the process of building 634 new coal-fired power plants by 2030. China is also building and financing hundreds of other coal-fired power plants in countries such as Turkey, Vietnam, Indonesia, Philippines, Egypt, and Bangladesh. 

Fact: How much leverage does President Biden have to get the likes of China and India on board with greenhouse gas reductions?  About zero.? 

With that background information, let’s get to the heart off the EV issue, the battery.

BATTERY POWERED VEHICLES:  The Green New Deal seeks to replace gas guzzling vehicles with battery power to reduce hydro carbon buildup.  This is not a simple matter. Some factors impacting on this green issue:

All world transportation (cars, trucks, planes, boats, trains) account for about 23% of greenhouse gas emissions while vehicles alone contribute about 15%.  There are over 1.45 billion vehicles in the world and less than half of one per cent are electric. There are about 291 million vehicles in the U.S., 20% of the world total, also with only about half of one percent electric.  Point being, we have a long way to go to reach the Paris Agreement goal of, “limiting greenhouse gas emissions by 50 % by 2030”. 

Fact:  Increasing the number of EVs is not just a U.S. issue, it is a world issue: 80% of vehicles are outside the U.S. 

One electric car battery, weighs in at about 1000 pounds.  To produce one battery requires digging up and processing about 500,000 pounds of raw materials such as cadmium, cobalt, lead, lithium, and nickel. For example, for some of these type materials, the end product is about one half of one percent of the weight of the material dug out of the ground.

Here is the magnitude of the problem: To power 50% of the world’s vehicles by batteries, we would have to dig up, transport and process about 175 billion tons of earth’s materials. Currently, electric car battery life is about ten years and then we need to dig another 175 billion tons, and again and again and that is just to power half the cars.

A new favorite sound-bite by the Green folks is “net zero.”  Well, Green folks, try this one on for size:  Producing an electric vehicle contributes, on average, twice as much to global warming and uses double the amount of energy than producing a combustion engine car. This is mainly because of its lithium-ion battery. Given all that, it takes about nine years for an electric car to be “greener” than a gas/diesel car, assuming an annual average mileage of 8100 miles.  With average lithium battery life of about ten years, what is the net gain?  Not much.

BTW, another fact the Green environmentalists won’t tell you about is (with half the world’s vehicles EV) every 10 years we will have about 350 million tons of  spent, very toxic, lithium-ion batteries. Well, they might say, “let’s just recycling them.”  Without major advances in battery technology, recycling lithium is currently cost prohibitive.

Finally, we get to the title question, LITHIUM, HOW MUCH FOR HOW LONG?

Any discussion of lithium will make reference to the amount of lithium in terms of “resources” and/or “reserves.”  Resources is an estimate of the amounts believed to be physically contained in the earth’s crust while reserves refer to an estimate of the amount that can technically and economically be expected to be produced from a geological formation.

LITHIUM AND THE CHINA FACTOR:

China is the best long-range strategic planner in the world and they have used their expertise to control the supply of lithium.  China has been quietly buying lithium producers and deposits around the world for years.

Australia:  China owns a 51% stake in Australia’s Greenbushes mine, currently the world’s largest.

Chile: May, 2022 China acquired a stake in Chile’s lithium mining operations for $4.1 billion. Chile is currently the largest producer of lithium in the world.

Congo: China is gaining control over lithium deposits in the Congo which are being hailed as, “the world’s largest undrilled lithium resource.”

UK: China has a controlling 73% stake in the lithium mines in south-western England.

Afghanistan:  Since the U.S. fall in Afghanistan, the Taliban rewarded China for its support by granting it effective control of the lithium mines in Afghanistan.

Canada: January, 2022, China bought Canada’s Lithium mining company for $919 million.

Chinese chemical companies account for about 80% of the world’s total output of raw materials for EVs, smart phones and laptop computers. China controls the processing of most of the critical minerals in lithium-ion batteries; rare earth minerals, lithium, cobalt and graphite.

 Additionally, of the 136 lithium-ion plants expected to be operational by 2029, 101 will be based in China.

Whoever controls lithium mining and processing will control the price of lithium and by extension the price of electronic vehicle batteries.

When looking for an answer to the question, how long will the earth’s supply of lithium last, there are many variables to consider. For example, what are the current lithium reserves (mineable and available) and resources (exist but may not be currently mineable), can we find more, which size battery (small, medium, large) do we use in the computations, what will the total world-wide demand be, can new technology expand battery life, etc.?  Some studies conclude that demand will exceed supply by 2050, others say we should be OK on supply until 2100.  I could not find a study that was optimistic about lithium supply beyond 2100. Stanford University has published some good work on the subject; here is one:

Eric Eason, Stanford University has done some interesting research on lithium supply as it relates to EV batteries.  Keep in mind that over a billion mobile phones are produced globally every year so there is great demand outside EV needs. Having said that Mr. Eason concludes that if we could use the entire world’s lithium reserves, we can make 4.1 billion medium-sized EV batteries.  That means, with half the world’s vehicles electric (700 million and increasing) and with a battery life of about 10 years, the known lithium reserves will be gone by 2080.

Mr. Eason’s concluding remark is, “It is certainly possible to build millions of electric vehicles with lithium-ion batteries, but it may not be possible to make billions of them.”  We will need billions and billions.  And keep in mind that carbon emissions from vehicles represents only 15% of the total of the world’s green-house gas problem.

Supply and demand.  Every time a truckload of lithium ore departs the mining area, world supply goes down as demand is increasing exponentially. Lithium carbonate prices have increased 413% since the start of 2021.  What does that portent for the price of EVs?

Let me be clear, lithium is not the overriding issue in the green revolution.  But, I do believe it is emblematic of what is going on.  President Biden and Department of Energy Secretary Granholm seem fixated on EVs in America as if that is THE overriding solution to carbon emissions. We ae engaged in a soundbite planning regime. Have we heard anyone in the current administration talk about any of the issues in the above paragraphs?  No.  No details, just a soundbite end state. No accounting for the massive number of assumptions they have made and the absence of factual content.  Where is the expert testimony from Congressional committee hearings? Where is the long-range strategic plan from the Energy Department?

Should we consider ALTERNATIVES TO ELECTRIC VEHICLES?

Liquefied and compressed natural gas; both are fuel-efficient for vehicles. They are not expensive to build and reduce carbon monoxide emissions by over 90% compared to gas-power.  The U.S. has about 500 trillion cubic feet of known reserves of recoverable natural gas.  It is estimated that there is at least 800 trillion cubic feet of natural gas under the African continent. Over 100 countries have known, recoverable reserves of natural gas.

Is natural gas a viable alternative to gas/diesel powered vehicles?  Here is a statement from Waste Management Inc.  “Transitioning our fleet (4000 of 16,000 trucks) from diesel to natural gas yields a range of environmental benefits, including saving over 350 million gallons of fuel and reducing about 3.5 million metric tons of CO₂ emissions. Our vehicles powered by compressed natural gas (CNG) have nearly zero particulate emissions, cut greenhouse gas emissions by over 20 percent, and are far quieter than their diesel counterparts.”

What have we heard from the Biden administration about natural gas-powered vehicles as a supplement or alternative?  Nothing, because their tunnel vision on electric vehicles is an unfailing 20-20. 

Should we consider ALTERNATIVES TO POWER FROM WIND AND SOLAR? 

Electricity generation emits more carbon dioxide in the United States than does transportation or industry, and nuclear power is the largest source of carbon-free electricity in the country. Nuclear power generation is also relatively cheap. Here is the problem; due to government regulations, environmentalists’ concerns and law suits, it takes anywhere from 20 to 30 years from inception to bringing a nuclear power plant on line in the U.S.  Nuclear power plants are safe, clean and produce the cheapest power; a reliable source of clean energy

China has 27 nuclear power reactors in operation, 24 under construction and is planning to construct seven new nuclear power plants annually between now and 2030. By 2050, nuclear power should exceed 400 new nuclear reactors; a trillion-dollar investment.

There are 93 nuclear reactors operating in the U.S. at 55 locations in 28 states.  Eight new licenses have been issued and two nuclear sites are under construction.  

However, the face of nuclear energy is changing.  Oklo, a 22-person Silicon Valley start-up company has a plan to build mini-nuclear reactors, powered by the waste from conventional nuclear reactors.

Their concept is to build a micro-reactor in a year or less to power, for example, utility companies, industrial sites, large companies, medium-sized communities and university campuses. 

Are small reactors a viable option?  The U.S. Navy commissioned its first nuclear powered ship in 1961.  There are currently 80 nuclear powered ships in the U.S. Navy with over 5,700 reactor-years of safe operations. Yes, small reactors, brought on line quickly can provide the U.S. with cheap, clean, safe power.

What have we heard from the Biden Administration or Congress about fast-tracking construction of hundreds of cheap, safe, efficient, power generation facilities with mini-nuclear reactors? Nothing, because it conflicts with their tunnel vision on wind and solar. How do we recharge our car, iPhone, laptop, lawn mower, hand tools, etc. etc. etc. if the sun doesn’t shine and/or the wind doesn’t blow?

CONCLUSIONS:

Every element in the earth’s crust is finite with some minerals already in short supply. The potential massive demand for lithium may well place this mineral on the list of “rare earth metals.”

While the supply and demand for lithium is presently balanced, many of the on-going studies have concluded that sustainability of the long-term supply of lithium is at risk. Therefore, we should consider developing alternate options for reducing carbon buildup from the transportation sector; e.g., natural gas-powered vehicles.  

Vehicles contribute about 15% of the world-wide carbon build-up.  If half the vehicles become electric, we may end up transforming world-wide transportation for a nominal 7% saving.  

By the turn of the next century, it is conceivable that we will have a world with literally billions of junked EVs with no batteries.

Lithium battery technology has been evolving for over 50 years. Economically feasible recycling of batteries must take center stage now.

China’s control of the world’s lithium reserves as well as the production of lithium carbonate can become a game-change.  While the cost of an EV is already out of reach for most of the world’s population, the future cost of the battery alone could put the price of most electric vehicles too high for billions more people. 

Carbon build-up is a world problem.  Analysis of the Paris Accords indicates that only a few of the 195 countries can afford to play a meaningful role in the green revolution. Wind, solar and moving water are the only renewable sources of power. Moving towards production of a large percentage of power from wind turbines and solar farms is too expensive for most countries to implement.  Power supplies from both wind and solar have to be backed up with some alternative source for when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.

Mining, transporting and processing leading to the construction of wind turbines and solar farms requires such massive amounts of earth materials and power that the net carbon reduction is drastically reduced; a factor not discussed by green advocates.

Power demand and consumption will continue to rise as, many experts predict, the world population grows to 11 billion in the next few decades. We should consider rapid development of reliable, clean power production alternatives; e.g., nuclear.

BOTTOM LINE:

We are at the front end of a dramatic transition for mother earth. For eons humans have been removing unrenewable substances from the earth.  But there has always been so much of “it” that we didn’t notice and neither our lives nor decision making were negatively impacted by shortages.  But now we are in the process of determining remaining reserves of that which has become essential to the everyday lives of 8 billion people.  We are counting the billions of barrels of oil remaining, the trillions of cubic feet of natural gas, the billions of tons of iron ore and copper, sources of clean water and we already have a working-list of earth’s rare metals.

About 6.6 billion people have a smartphone.  The magic in the glass is due to a dash of the rare metal indium which serves as the transparent conductor between the phone and your finger. A little europium and terbium provide red and green hues on the screen, a speck of tantalum regulates power and lithium stores the power.  These and other rare earth metals are essential to most of our communications gadgets, cars, etc.  Someday all of these earth materials will be used up. The same assumption applies to crude oil, natural gas, uranium, trees, iron ore, clean water, etc.

While the degradation of natural resources has been going on for centuries, we are now, for the first time, face to face with the reality that we cannot do something that needs to be done because we will run out of some essential resource, for example lithium.  From now on, if we are provided with a new technology that will make our lives better, we will have to pause and ask, is there enough mineral reserves available to sustain the capability? Will one nation be able to control the outcome?  Will this further divide the world’s nations into the “haves” and “have-nots”?  This is a new revelation for the world but unfortunately, we see our nation’s leaders single-mindedly plowing ahead, the facts be damned, believing other nations will follow when it is obvious they will not because they can not.

Mother earth is in an unstoppable retrograde.  At some point in the future, be it two or three hundred years, what remains of the human race will in all likelihood live in a rural sixteen-hundreds type of self-sustaining environment.

Marvin L. Covault, Lt Gen US Army, retired, is the author of VISION TO EXECUTION, a book for leaders, and a new book May 2022, FIX THE SYSTEMS, TRANSFORM AMERICA as well as the author of a blog WeThePeopleSpeaking.com.