A New Book We All Should Read

[Spock]

A new book we all should read so we can understand some of the costs (and not only the benefits) of the move to "Green Energy."

I found a new book at the library that obviously peaked my interest.

"Cobalt Red: How The Blood of the Congo Powers Our Lives"

I think I saw a clip of Joe Rogan talking about this book.

We are probably all familiar with "Blood Diamonds" maybe the best way to give a quick elevator speech on this book is "Blood Green Energy."

Cobalt is used in almost every rechargeable lithium-ion battery from smartphones to electric vehicles and about 75% of it comes from the Congo.

[mrkelley23]

I first heard about this book on NPR's program Fresh Air earlier this year. I don't disagree with the author's warnings, or his conclusions. The supply chain is going to be brutal, especially since China is ahead of us on monopolizing sources of essential resources. Any intelligent discussion of green energy should include analysis of the supply chain and the human cost. That's why the US is pushing hard for new battery tech. Because cobalt (along with the other metals used in current EV batteries) is a limited resource, possibly (probably?) even more limited than petroleum, something's gotta give.

[Spock]

I first heard about this book on NPR's program Fresh Air earlier this year. I don't disagree with the author's warnings, or his conclusions. The supply chain is going to be brutal, especially since China is ahead of us on monopolizing sources of essential resources. Any intelligent discussion of green energy should include analysis of the supply chain and the human cost. That's why the US is pushing hard for new battery tech. Because cobalt (along with the other metals used in current EV batteries) is a limited resource, possibly (probably?) even more limited than petroleum, something's gotta give.

The thing that surprised me the most so far is just how concentrated the "Cobalt-Copper Belt" in the Conga (and Zambia?) is.

It is located in an area of 100 KM by 400KM=an area incredibly rich in all sorts of rare earth minerals. So it is likely that whatever way we move that requires Rare Earths-the Congo will still be a supplier.

Another early surprise was that most of the ore heads to China. I am well aware of China's footprint in Africa, but the specifics never fail to surprise me.

The author comes from a background of studying modern-day slavery (Sexual and otherwise) so his focus is more on the human cost. My interests run more in the environmental line but I am guessing there will be plenty of that to keep me interested.

[mrkelley23]

The more recent attempts to provide high-capacity storage batteries are trying to use more common materials that still don't increase CO2 emissions -- or at least, not as much.

LFP batteries, or Lithium-iron batteries, show potential as a potential bridge to solid state batteries. They still use lithium, which is shorter supply than some resources, but it gets away completely from the cobalt-nickel mess that the current tech needs.

Maybe someone will have a breakthrough in nuclear fusion, and we'll be able to use the manufactured lithium from that process to make batteries. From there it's only a short conceptual step to dilithium crystals.

[Spock]

The more recent attempts to provide high-capacity storage batteries are trying to use more common materials that still don't increase CO2 emissions -- or at least, not as much.

LFP batteries, or Lithium-iron batteries, show potential as a potential bridge to solid state batteries. They still use lithium, which is shorter supply than some resources, but it gets away completely from the cobalt-nickel mess that the current tech needs.

Maybe someone will have a breakthrough in nuclear fusion, and we'll be able to use the manufactured lithium from that process to make batteries. From there it's only a short conceptual step to dilithium crystals.

You are illustrating one of the more frustrating rhetorical techniques of your side in the push toward "Green Energy."

IE-we don't have to worry about any of the current (and for the foreseeable future) human and environmental costs of the push towards so-called "Green Energy" because something will be invented and those costs will just disappear.

And yes, I am aware of the costs of oil drilling and I am strongly opposed to drilling in ANWR and I would prefer that we not drill in the swampy river deltas-ie Niger and Mississippi.

[Spock]

I am sure we all tell ourselves that we are better than King Leopold of Belgium (He of the "Heart of Darkness" and chopping hands off for rubber in the Congo-circa 1900).

However, there is a Congolese province (Tanganyika) that has a different mineral portfolio than the cobalt belt does. Currently, coltan (used for whatever we use it for in the modern economy) is the big thing there.

Tanganyika is even more dangerous than the Cobalt belt and there is basically no way that an outsider could get in there.

Interestingly, Tanganyika has lithium deposits and lithium mining is getting underway there.

Reports from Tanganyika indicate torture by the militias-up to and including the chopping off of hands are used to force people into mining for them.

Or as people here say now.

"King Leopold was really bad and no way can I ever support what he did-Oh, wait-I can get lithium and cobalt and other things needed for "Blood Batteries" from the Congo-I guess I really don't care about the conditions in the Congo after all."

[Beebs52]

Driving thru Arkansas this last week and read yttrium and cerium are abundant there.

[Spock]

Driving thru Arkansas this last week and read yttrium and cerium are abundant there.

My only mining experience was in Arkansas at the diamond mine thing. We sifted through the dirt there as the tourists do. There were a couple of guys there who do it every day.

I guess we should have been looking for yttrium and cerium.

Off to Google those 2 to see what they are used for.

[mrkelley23]

The more recent attempts to provide high-capacity storage batteries are trying to use more common materials that still don't increase CO2 emissions -- or at least, not as much.

LFP batteries, or Lithium-iron batteries, show potential as a potential bridge to solid state batteries. They still use lithium, which is shorter supply than some resources, but it gets away completely from the cobalt-nickel mess that the current tech needs.

Maybe someone will have a breakthrough in nuclear fusion, and we'll be able to use the manufactured lithium from that process to make batteries. From there it's only a short conceptual step to dilithium crystals.

You are illustrating one of the more frustrating rhetorical techniques of your side in the push toward "Green Energy."

IE-we don't have to worry about any of the current (and for the foreseeable future) human and environmental costs of the push towards so-called "Green Energy" because something will be invented and those costs will just disappear.

And yes, I am aware of the costs of oil drilling and I am strongly opposed to drilling in ANWR and I would prefer that we not drill in the swampy river deltas-ie Niger and Mississippi.

And this post is an example of why I don't engage much in political posts here any more. Because, see, I don't think I have "a side." Yes, if you drew a line directly down the middle of the American populace, I would probably wind up on the other side from you when it comes to "green energy." But I also think I am a persuadable person, if a logical argument is posed. I even agreed with most of your major points on the original post in this thread. Still, you seem to assume I am antagonistic toward people who believe the same as you. And yet, at the end of your post here, you make a strong argument that we are more alike than different on certain aspects of the energy debate.

Why can't we focus on the points of agreement, instead of turning everything into a binary "my-team's-better-than-your-team?"

[Spock]

The more recent attempts to provide high-capacity storage batteries are trying to use more common materials that still don't increase CO2 emissions -- or at least, not as much.

LFP batteries, or Lithium-iron batteries, show potential as a potential bridge to solid state batteries. They still use lithium, which is shorter supply than some resources, but it gets away completely from the cobalt-nickel mess that the current tech needs.

Maybe someone will have a breakthrough in nuclear fusion, and we'll be able to use the manufactured lithium from that process to make batteries. From there it's only a short conceptual step to dilithium crystals.

You are illustrating one of the more frustrating rhetorical techniques of your side in the push toward "Green Energy."

IE-we don't have to worry about any of the current (and for the foreseeable future) human and environmental costs of the push towards so-called "Green Energy" because something will be invented and those costs will just disappear.

And yes, I am aware of the costs of oil drilling and I am strongly opposed to drilling in ANWR and I would prefer that we not drill in the swampy river deltas-ie Niger and Mississippi.

And this post is an example of why I don't engage much in political posts here any more. Because, see, I don't think I have "a side." Yes, if you drew a line directly down the middle of the American populace, I would probably wind up on the other side from you when it comes to "green energy." But I also think I am a persuadable person, if a logical argument is posed. I even agreed with most of your major points on the original post in this thread. Still, you seem to assume I am antagonistic toward people who believe the same as you. And yet, at the end of your post here, you make a strong argument that we are more alike than different on certain aspects of the energy debate.

Why can't we focus on the points of agreement, instead of turning everything into a binary "my-team's-better-than-your-team?"

I knew I wouldn't say what I meant to say in the right way-and I apologize if I offended you.

Having said that I think it is fair to say that the "Green Energy" side generally acts as if they are on the side of the angels and there are no costs and only benefits to their chosen path. Therefore, my earlier attempt to highlight the landscape chewing impact of industrial solar complexes and now the "Blood Batteries" from the Congo via China thing.

And, Yes, I am purposely using the term "Blood Batteries" repeatedly to drive home the point.

Interestingly, I checked another book out of the library the same day as "Cobalt Red."

"Gold, Oil and Avocados: A Recent History of Latin America in Sixteen Commodities"

You will probably not be surprised that one of the 16 is Lithium-so that will be an interesting chapter. But hell-they all look good.

[mrkelley23]

There are the equivalent of evangelists in the energy debate, that's for sure. The Union of Concerned Scientists is a favorite nemesis of mine. They've been providing misinformation on nearly every scientific question of the past 50 years, yet they continue to be quoted by news sources as if they were scientists, rather than the advocacy group they are. And don't get me wrong, I have no problem with advocacy, as long as it's clearly labeled as such.

What I'm looking for are solutions. I don't think attitudes like Mr. Ramaswamy's -- Global warming is a lie, let's drill, frack, and burn, baby! -- are helpful to my grandchildren's future. I agree with Nikki Haley that India and China are far bigger current environmental threats than the US, but I'm not sure I see a way to persuade them to go the other way, at least not for several decades.

The storage issue is the biggie. It's no wonder that the whole foundation (sic) for Robert Heinlein's Future History series was the invention (and Salkization) of a cheap, clean, free means of energy storage. Lithium-ion batteries are definitely not the final solution. People 100 years from now are going to laugh at these car designs that are like 60% battery space. I'm just not smart enough to know what the answer is going to be.

All I am saying in response to your original post is that, in context, blood batteries may be the equivalent of the horrific start to the petroleum industry. Any time you mix human greed with scarcity, people get hurt.

[mrkelley23]

Just to show that the "liberal media" are not ignoring this issue, here's an article by the Washington Post's editorial board (note: it is clearly labeled as an opinion piece) that does a pretty good job of showing the quandary the US finds itself in with respect to China and renewable energy.

[Spock]

This kind of turned into a thread on batteries for electric vehicles (partially by my design) and that makes sense as they use the most cobalt-but the saddest part is that this unbelievable amount of human misery (and I hit some really heartbreaking anecdotes) is (at the core) so we can recharge our smart phones.