Content uploaded by Thomas C. Wanger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Thomas C. Wanger on Sep 08, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Thomas C. Wanger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Thomas C. Wanger on Sep 08, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
POLICY PERSPECTIVE
The Lithium future—resources, recycling, and the environment
Thomas Cherico Wanger1,2
1Environment Institute, University of Adelaide, Australia
2Agroecology, University of G ¨
ottingen, Germany
Keywords
Biodiversity; Bolivia; environmental impact;
human health; Lithium; recycling; resource use.
Correspondence
Thomas Cherico Wanger, Environment Institute,
School of Earth and Environmental Sciences,
Mawson Bld., Room G39, University of Adelaide,
SA 5005, Australia. Tel: +61 (0) 8 8303 5254;
fax: +61 (0) 8 8303 4347. E-mail:
thochewa@gmail.com
Received
16 November 2010
Accepted
9 February 2011
Editor
Devid Pellow
doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00166.x
Abstract:
The demand for Lithium-ion batteries as a major power source in portable
electronic devices and vehicles is rapidly increasing. I use cumulative data of
vehicle, mobile phone, laptop, and digital camera production to show that de-
mand will overshoot the available global Lithium resources before 2025. Even
if 100% of all Lithium-ion batteries were recycled today, recycling could not
prevent this resource depletion in time. As the increasing Lithium scarcity
will increase the price, it will be feasible to mine diluted resources with a
strong environmental impact. I highlight these impacts in Lithium-rich Bolivia,
the potential new “Saudi Arabia of Lithium.” Lithium extraction is likely to
cause substantial water pollution, and—through impacts on native diversity—
facilitate human health impacts from cyanobacteria that are normally kept at
bay by native flamingos. The strongly intertwined Lithium extraction impacts
on the environment, biodiversity, and human health from evaporative ponds
and ore mining need to be taken into consideration when we discuss resource
protection and opportunities from Lithium recycling. Overall, sensible Lithium
recycling strategies can provide effective resource and environmental protec-
tion right now but urgently need to be supplemented by alternative technolo-
gies in the near-future.
Introduction
If you spend some time in public transport, caf´
es, or shop-
ping centres, you will have noticed the omnipresent use
of mobile phones and laptops. Until now, the increas-
ing popularity of affordable electronics has led to an es-
timated total production of 12.7 billion mobile phones
(Ramirez-Salgado & Dominguez-Aguilar 2009), 94.4 mil-
lion laptop computers, and 768.9 million digital cam-
eras (UNdata 2010). Once the status symbol of a small
elite, many people are now striving for the latest tech-
nology of tomorrow. But while technology advances fast,
all portable electronic devices still depend on energy—
nowadays, Lithium-ion batteries. These batteries are the
preferred energy source because of their high-energy
density (compactness), low sensitivity to temperature
variation (ruggedness), and higher resistance to “charging
failure” (no memory-effect). While considered an envi-
ronmentally viable alternative, the demand for Lithium-
containing batteries already now requires 23% of the
global Lithium production (USGS 2010).
The advent of electronic vehicles (i.e., powered from
Lithium-ion batteries) in recent times, has driven global
economic investment projected to reach US$ 30–40 bil-
lion by 2020 (Lache et al. 2008). Depending on the source
considered, one of these vehicle batteries is using 3–20 kg
of Lithium so that the annual Lithium demand for ve-
hicles in the US alone was estimated to be 55,000 tons
by 2050 (Gaines & Nelson 2009). In 2009, the US gov-
ernment made a multibillion dollar investment to open
up a whole new industry to satisfy future demands in
vehicle Lithium-ion batteries (USDE 2009). Thus, there
is a rapidly growing demand and investment in Lithium
for portable electronic device and vehicle batteries, which
has ultimately to be satisfied with the global resources of
25.5 million tonnes. Accessing these resources will be-
come more difficult with devastating impacts on the en-
vironment, but efforts may still not be enough to satisfy
202 Conservation Letters 4(2011) 202–206 Copyright and Photocopying: c
2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
T.C. Wanger The Lithium future
Figure 1 Global Lithium demand for Lithium-ion batteries and available
global resources. The cumulative numbers of globally produced digital
cameras, mobile phones, laptops, and electric cars were used to calcu-
late the future demand of Lithium (Lithium content in the batteries of
electronic devices was calculated based on the formula by the US De-
partment of Transportation; USDT 2008) and battery specifications on all
models from the eight leading manufacturers for digital cameras, mo-
bile phones, and laptops. For the units of produced digital cameras, mo-
bile phones, laptops, cars, and the percentage of electric vehicles see
Hacker et al. (2009), Gaines and Nelson (2009), Ramirez-Salgado and
Dominguez-Aguilar (2009), UNdata (2010), and White (2006). Note that
the y-axis is on log scale to make the contributions of all electrical garment
categories visible.
future Lithium demands. Although Lithium plays such an
important role, it is surprising that the economic, envi-
ronmental, and health impacts of future Lithium scarcity
have not fully been looked at.
Unlimited Lithium resources?
While the advantages of Lithium-ion batteries and the fu-
ture economic profits are undeniable, Lithium may be-
come a limited resource. A conservative estimate of how
long Lithium resources will last when we only consider
electric vehicles (assume a maximum use of 20 kg of
Lithium per vehicle battery, global Lithium resources of
25.5 million tonnes, a moderate vehicle production
of 60 million per year leading to a total production
capacity of 1.2 billion electric vehicles) suggest that ve-
hicle production will succumb before 2031 (i.e., within
21 years)! However, considering the cumulative esti-
mated car production until 2030 in addition to produc-
tion estimates of laptops, digital cameras, and mobile
phones, we are likely to exhaust Lithium reserves (i.e.,
minable resources; USGS 2010) even before 2020 (Fig. 1).
The total global Lithium resources are likely to be de-
pleted before 2025—in less than 15 years. This increasing
scarcity in Lithium will be paralleled by a price increase.
As a result, Lithium recycling as well as difficult to access
resource mining strategies will become feasible.
Can Lithium recycling make a difference?
Current recycling efforts of Lithium-ion batteries focus
mainly on the economically interesting cathode materi-
als cobalt and nickel, but largely neglect Manganese and
Lithium even where sophisticated recycling systems are
in place (Dewulf et al. 2010). In Germany, for example,
the consumer returns used batteries in provided boxes
at public places. A recycling system, the GRS founda-
tion supported by major global battery manufacturers,
will then recycle the batteries as required by German law.
However, Lithium is not considered for recycling (GRS
2010) because it is still cheap enough to dump old bat-
teries and to mine the virgin material. Given the likely
future increase in Lithium prices, it will pay to start using
simple methods such as hydrometallurgical separation for
Lithium recycling now (Ferreira et al. 2009). In addition,
recycling of nickel and cobalt from these batteries can
Conservation Letters 4(2011) 202–206 Copyright and Photocopying: c
2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 203
The Lithium future T.C. Wanger
Figure 2 Effect of Lithium recycling on global Lithium demand. Shown are three scenarios assuming that 0, 40, and 100% of all Lithium required is recycled
(40% was chosen because of current recycling efforts for other cathode materials like Nickel or Cobalt from Lithium-ion batteries; Dewulf et al. 2010). Due
to a Lithium-ion battery lifetime, all scenarios assume a 10 years time lag (e.g., batteries produced in 2010 will be available for recycling only in 2020).
save 51% of the natural resources required (Dewulf et al.
2010). Thus, immediate recycling efforts would have eco-
nomic and environmental benefits.
However, recycling alone—even if implemented on the
spot—may not do the job. Assuming an average battery
lifetime of 10 years and that 40 or 100% of all pro-
duced Lithium-ion batteries are recycled, future Lithium
consumption may be reduced by 10.2 or 25.5%, re-
spectively, by 2030 (Fig. 2). While not even the advent
100% recycling will prevent Lithium demand to over-
shoot the globally available resources before 2025, we
are far from having a recycling system at this capac-
ity. This suggests that recycling alone will not assure us
Lithium battery powered mobile phones, laptops, cam-
eras, and cars. Even with enormous recycling efforts, fu-
ture Lithium scarcity will facilitate mining of lower grade
deposits. The penalty of excessive exploitation in resource
(Lithium-)-rich countries will be to the detriment of local
people, biodiversity, and ecosystem services.
Lithium extraction and the
environmental impact
Globally, the most important Lithium-production sites
are in South America (Chile and Argentina). In large salt
lakes, Lithium carbonate is produced through evapora-
tion and washing with sodium carbonate in large scale
polyvinyl chloride (PVC)—lined shallow ponds (Garrett
2004). To a lesser extend, spodumene ores as the main
Lithium carrier are mined, for example, in Western Aus-
tralia. In contrast to ore mining, environmental impacts
of evaporative Lithium extraction are little understood
but must be carefully evaluated.
A good example to illustrate side effects of Lithium ex-
traction is the Bolivian salt pan Salar de Uyuni, harboring
the world’s second largest but untouched Lithium reserve
(∼5.4 million tonnes; USGS 2008). The salt pan is occa-
sionally flooded by the Rio Grand river of Uyuni that pro-
vides freshwater for agriculture in the region (Messerli
et al. 1997). In addition, the river and the Salar create
an important but fragile habitat for the native biodiver-
sity. Due to its natural beauty, the lake is the most visited
tourist attraction in Bolivia and is considered to be one of
the major income sources for the local people (Aguilar-
Fernandez 2009).
Lithium processing in this region may cause changes
in freshwater availability and water pollution with severe
consequences for human health and native biodiversity.
PVC barriers for the evaporation basins may leak chem-
ical substances such as softeners into the environment.
An evaluation of PVC drinking water pipes revealed
204 Conservation Letters 4(2011) 202–206 Copyright and Photocopying: c
2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
T.C. Wanger The Lithium future
that various compounds pose severe reproductive and
functional health concerns to humans (Stern 2006).
Chemical leakage may be worse for material involved
in Lithium extraction and not related to human con-
sumption. It has also been shown that aquatic diversity
in the Neotropics is strongly affected by water pollution
(Barletta et al. 2010), landscape modifications, and in-
troduced sediments (Donohue & Molinos 2009). Nega-
tive effects on native biodiversity may have far-reaching
consequences, also reflecting back onto local people.
For example, the experimental reduction of flamin-
gos feeding on cyanobacteria in Salar de Uyuni (Bauld
1981) changed ecosystem structure by increasing micro-
bial biomass (Hurlbert & Chang 1983). While toxicity of
cyanobacteria in hypersaline habitats is little understood,
a survey across saltwater habitats in the US revealed that
85% of all species produced detectable levels of micro-
cystins (Hudnell 2008). Microcystin, a toxin produced
by various cyanobacteriae can have fatal consequences
for humans and biodiversity (Chen et al. 2009; Hamil-
ton 2009). As such, Lithium extraction will only bene-
fit the poorest South American country (as suggested by
Aguilar-Fernandez 2009), if impacts on the environment,
biodiversity, and human health are taken into consid-
eration. Moreover, it has to be assured that exploitative
strategies, as seen during the past silver extraction in Bo-
livia, are not repeated.
Apart from evaporitic sequences, Lithium is also mined
from pegmatite ores, for example, in Zimbabwe and
Canada. Processing of spodumene, the main Lithium
carrier in magmatic rocks is cost and energy consum-
ing because the Lithium-incorporating silicates must be
separated and then mostly transformed into carbonates
for further processing. For ore mining and processing
in general, environmental impacts such as physical land
rearrangements (which can interfere with ground wa-
ter carrying soil layers) and waste products (tail water
from the mining sides often contain high concentrations
of toxic compounds) are well documented and require
proper management actions (Bridge 2004). Shocking ex-
amples come from eastern Africa, where mismanaged
gold mining has lead to exorbitant mercury concentra-
tions in rivers threatening aquatic diversity and down-
stream communities. There, mining workers are also suf-
fering major health impacts from inhalation of siliceous
dust and increasing malaria risk (Ogola et al. 2002). In
collaboration with realistic conservation managers, it is
the responsibility of mining companies to apply sustain-
able mining practice including suitable (i.e., low impact)
extraction technology.
The environmental impact of evaporation ponds may
be lower than that of Lithium or gold ore mining. Nev-
ertheless, it is crucial to include environmental aspects in
the discussion of how to sustainably manage Lithium re-
sources with recycling and additional technologies.
The Lithium future
Overall, we will likely face a Lithium shortage with
economic and environmental consequences. Like in the
US, governments should make an effort to allocate
funds for Lithium recycling projects (Hamilton 2009;
USDE 2009). Immediate implementation of Lithium re-
cycling will benefit investors, natural resources, and lo-
cal people alike because resource exploitation costs and
environmental impacts can be reduced. Given that re-
cycling cannot prevent resource scarcity, Lithium tech-
nology must be supplemented by alternative energy
concepts. In addition, effective recycling is only neces-
sary, because consumption of Lithium demanding gad-
gets is ever growing and, hence, has to be sustainable
itself.
There are already various alternative energy con-
cepts. Metal-air batteries for instance seem promising
but cannot yet serve a large energy market (insufficient
power supply, short battery lifetime, inadequate recharg-
ing technology, and spacious design; MacKay 2008). Bio-
electric battery concepts do not require natural resources
as they generate power, for example, from glucose
(Palmore 2004), but power supply is still very limited
(GRS 2010). For electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel-cell
powered cars with hydrogen produced from clean energy
sources seems a promising solution. However, this tech-
nology has to become affordable for the public market,
so that a new large-scale transportation industry can de-
velop around this field (Zhang & Cooke 2009).
For economic growth, products (including electronic
garments) are made for fast breakdown while advertise-
ments suggest the consumer to always strive for the lat-
est product; that is, products are designed for the dump
(http://storyofstuff.org/electronics/). As such, Lithium re-
cycling is urgently needed but the recycling process it-
self must be sustainable. In particular in poor parts of
the world, where work labor is cheap and environ-
mental standards are low, the recycling process must
be strictly monitored. Ultimately, producers must find a
better balance between economic growth and increased
product longevity while the use of toxic material is min-
imized. Major policy actions should stringently regulate
take-back actions and the subsequent recycling activities.
In the meantime, everybody can contribute to resource
protection beyond Lithium by wise consumer behavior:
choose green products and think twice about how often
you need to replace your car, mobile phone, laptop, and
digital camera!
Conservation Letters 4(2011) 202–206 Copyright and Photocopying: c
2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 205
The Lithium future T.C. Wanger
Acknowledgments
I thank B.W. Brook, N. Sodhi, T. Tscharntke, J. Schilling,
I. Motzke, L. Traill, B. Scheffers, Q. Lan, and K. Dar-
ras for comments on the manuscript. Funding was pro-
vided through an Endeavour International Postgraduate
Research Scholarship and a University of Adelaide schol-
arship, while preparing the manuscript.
References
Aguilar-Fernandez, R. (2009) Estimating the opportunity cost
of Lithium extraction in the Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia. Page
58. Nicholas school of the environment. Duke University,
Durham.
Barletta, M., Jaureguizar A.J., Baigun C. et al. (2010) Fish and
aquatic habitat conservation in South America:
a continental overview with emphasis on neotropical
systems. J Fish Biol 76, 2118–2176.
Bauld, J. (1981) Occurrence of benthic microbial mats in
saline lakes. Hydrobiologia 81–2, 87–111.
Bridge, G. (2004) Contested terrain: mining and the
environment. Annu Rev Environ Resour 29, 205–259.
Chen, J., Zhang D.W., Xie P., Wang Q., Ma Z.M. (2009)
Simultaneous determination of microcystin contaminations
in various vertebrates (fish, turtle, duck and water bird)
from a large eutrophic Chinese lake, Lake Taihu, with toxic
Microcystis blooms. Sci Total Environ 407, 3317–3322.
Dewulf, J., Van Der Vorst G., Denturck K. et al. (2010)
Recycling rechargeable lithium ion batteries: critical
analysis of natural resource savings. Resour Conserv Recycl
54, 229–234.
Donohue, I., Molinos J.G. (2009) Impacts of increased
sediment loads on the ecology of lakes. Biol Rev 84,
517–531.
Ferreira, D.A., Prados L.M.Z., Majuste D., Mansur M.B.
(2009) Hydrometallurgical separation of aluminium,
cobalt, copper and lithium from spent Li-ion batteries.
J Power Sources 187, 238–246.
Gaines, L., Nelson P. (2009) Lithium ion batteries: possible
materials issues in U.S. Department of Energy. Agonnee
National Laboratory Publication, Washington, D.C.
Garrett, D.E. (2004) Handbook of lithium and natural calcium
chloride – their deposits, processing, uses and properties.
Academic Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
GRS (2010) Wertvolle Rohstoffe zur ¨
uckgewinnen. Gemeinsames
R¨
ucknahme System, Hamburg, Germany.
Hacker, F., Harthan R., Matthes F., Zimmer W. (2009)
Environmental impacts and impact on the electricity market of a
large scale introduction of electric cars in Europe—critical review
of literature. European Topic Centre on Air and Climate
Change, Bilthoven, The Netherlands. Available from:
http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/docs/ETCACC TP 2009 4
electromobility.pdf. Accessed 24 April 2010.
Hamilton, T. (2009) Lithium battery recycling gets a boost.
Technol Rev. Available from: http://www.technologyreview.
com/energy/23215/page1/?a=f. Accessed 16 April
2010.
Hudnell, H.K. (2008) Cyanobacterial harmful algal blooms: state of
the science and research needs. Springer-Verlag Berlin, Berlin.
Hurlbert, S.H., Chang C.C.Y. (1983) Ornitholimnology –
effects of grazing by the Andean Flamingo (Phoenicoparrus
andinus). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A-Biol Sci 80,
4766–4769.
Lache, R., Galves D., Nolan P. (2008) Electric cars: plugged in:
batteries must be included. Deutsche Bank, New York.
MacKay, D. (2008) Sustainable energy – without the hot air.UIT
Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Messerli, B., Grosjean M., Vuille M. (1997) Water availability,
protected areas, and natural resources in the Andean desert
altiplano. Mt Res Dev 17, 229–238.
Ogola, J., Mitullah W., Omulo M. (2002) Impact of gold
mining on the environment and human health: a case
study in the Migori gold belt, Kenya. Environ Geochem
Health 24, 141–58.
Palmore, G.T.R. (2004) Bioelectric power generation. Trends
Biotechnol 22, 99–100.
Ramirez-Salgado, J., Dominguez-Aguilar M.A. (2009) Market
survey of fuel cells in Mexico: niche for low power portable
systems. J Power Sources 186, 455–463.
Stern, S.E. (2006) Simple and accurate one-sided inference
based on a class of M-estimators. Biometrika 93, 973–987.
UNdata (2010) Industrial commodity statistics database.
United Nations Statistics Division, New York. Available
from: http://data.un.org/Explorer.aspx?d=ICS. Accessed 26
April 2010.
USDE (2009) President Obama announces $2.4 billion in
grants to accelerate the manufacturing and deployment of
the next generation of U.S. batteries and electric vehicles.
U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. Available
from: http://www.energy.gov/7749.htm. Accessed 21 April
2010.
USDT (2008) Safe.travel.dot.gov – Equivalent Lithium
content. U.S. Department of Transportation. Washington,
D.C. Available from: http://safetravel.dot.gov/definitions.
html#lithium. Accessed 21 April 2010.
USGS (2008) Mineral Yearbook – Lithium. U.S. Geological
Survey. Available from: http://minerals.usgs.gov/
minerals/pubs/commodity/lithium/myb1-2008-lithi.pdf.
Accessed 14 April 2010.
USGS (2010) Mineral Commodity Summaries – Lithium. U.S.
Geological Survey. Available from: http://minerals.usgs.
gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/lithium/mcs-2010-lithi.pdf.
Accessed 14 April 2010.
White, J.B. (2006) One billion cars. The Wall Street Journal.
Available from: http://online.wsj.com/public/article/
SB114487401909024337-ouwLdesvUMPaejrsk
WhxkaZzNU 20060516.html?mod=tff main tff top.
Accessed 15 April 2010.
Zhang, F., Cooke P. (2009) The green vehicle trend: electric,
plug-in hybrid or hydrogen fuel cell? DIME – Dynamics of
Institutions and Markets in Europe 3, 1–40.
206 Conservation Letters 4(2011) 202–206 Copyright and Photocopying: c
2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
