Assessment of world lithium resources and consequences of their geographic distribution on the expected development of the electric vehicle industry

Full text

Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744
Contents
lists
available
at
SciVerse
ScienceDirect
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
j
ourna
l
h
o
mepage:
www.elsevier.com/locate/rser
Assessment
of
world
lithium
resources
and
consequences
of
their
geographic
distribution
on
the
expected
development
of
the
electric
vehicle
industry
Camille
Grosjeana,∗,
Pamela
Herrera
Mirandaa,
Marion
Perrina,
Philippe
Poggib
aNational
Institute
of
Solar
Energy,
Department
of
Solar
Technologies,
Laboratory
of
Electricity
Storage,
INES-RDI,
BP
332,
73377
Le
Bourget-du-Lac,
France
bUniversity
of
Corsica
Pasquale
Paoli,
Laboratory
of
Physical
Systems
for
the
Environment
(SPE),
UMR
CNRS
6134
CNRS,
Vignola,
Route
des
Sanguinaires,
20000
Ajaccio,
France
a
r
t
i
c
l
e
i
n
f
o
Article
history:
Received
25
October
2011
Received
in
revised
form
8
November
2011
Accepted
9
November
2011
Available online 18 January 2012
Keywords:
Lithium
Electric
vehicle
Lithium-ion
battery
Pegmatite
ores
Brines
a
b
s
t
r
a
c
t
Electric
vehicles
(EVs)
are
on
the
verge
of
breaking
through,
most
presumably
flooding
the
automotive
market
with
lithium-ion
batteries
as
energy
storage
systems.
This
paper
investigates
the
availability
of
world
lithium
resources
and
draws
conclusions
on
its
actual
impact
on
the
EV
industry.
Apart
from
lithium
deposits
geographic
distribution,
our
contributions
to
the
global
knowledge
range
from
a
short-
term
forecast
of
lithium
price
evolution
to
a
picture
of
the
existing
lithium
industry
and
market
plus
a
detailed
explanation
of
the
geologic
origins
of
all
the
inventoried
lithium
resources.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1.
Introduction
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1735
2.
Forecast
evolution
of
lithium
prices
and
consequences
on
the
EV
industry
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1736
3.
Lithium
market
compared
to
EV
particular
needs.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1737
4.
State-of-the-art
of
the
lithium
industry
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1738
5.
Other
potential
lithium
resources
and
geological
origins
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1739
6.
Resources
inventory,
geographic
distribution
and
geostrategic
implications
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1740
7.
Perspectives
and
broadening
prospects
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1743
8.
Conclusion.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1744
Acknowledgements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1744
References
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.1744
1.
Introduction
In
the
context
of
fossil
fuels
depletion
and
climate
change
pending
threats,
expectations
for
cleaner
and
more
sustainable
transport
solutions
are
being
embodied
in
electric
vehicles
(EVs).
Since
no
standard
was
agreed
on,
various
energy
storage
system
(ESS)
technologies
are
still
being
tested
to
propel
EVs.
Among
them,
lithium-ion
batteries
(LIBs)
emerge
as
the
most
presump-
tive
candidate,
for
they
offer
high
energy/power
densities
meeting
EV
application
specific
requisites.
So
far,
much
attention
was
paid
by
researchers
either
to
the
improvement
of
materials
synthesis
∗Corresponding
author.
E-mail
addresses:
camille.grosjean@cea.fr,
c.grosjean@laposte.net
(C.
Grosjean),
marion.perrin@cea.fr
(M.
Perrin),
philippe.poggi@univ-corse.fr
(P.
Poggi).
routes
and
performances
or
to
EV
grid
and
social
integrations,
e.g.
studies
on
battery
swapping
stations,
fast-charging
systems,
vehicle-to-grid
(V2G)
implementation,
etc.
But
still,
the
future
evo-
lution
of
lithium
prices
and
the
very
abundance
of
raw
materials
necessary
to
feed
the
EV
market
with
LIB
has
raised
until
now
lit-
tle
interest
among
the
scientific
community
whereas
it
has
found
a
significant
worried
echo
in
the
media.
The
concept
of
EV
came
back
in
the
late
1990s
and
with
it
the
idea
of
using
new
promising
lithium
batteries
as
ESS.
At
that
time,
an
assessment
of
past,
current,
and
future
trends
of
lithium
market
was
achieved
by
Nicholson
and
Evans
[1].
Geologist
by
profession,
Evans
was
one
of
the
first
witnesses
of
lithium
business
emergence
as
he
became
involved
in
the
Bikita
mining
campaigns
in
the
early
1970s.
From
then
on,
he
made
it
a
point
of
honor
to
actualize
the
inventory
of
world
lithium
resources
[2–6].
With
Kunasz
[7–9],
another
veteran
lithium
geologist,
the
way
was
paved
for
further
1364-0321/$
–
see
front
matter ©
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.rser.2011.11.023

1736 C.
Grosjean
et
al.
/
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744
market
analyses
and
inventories
whose
publication
rhythm
echoed
the
fluctuating
importance
of
lithium
trade
[10–17].
Due
to
the
very
uncertainty
existing
around
the
resources
amount
accessible
for
industrial
purposes,
the
question
of
lithium
availability
firstly
arouse
very
early
in
its
history,
as
lithium
was
investigated
for
energy
applications
[18].
Before
raising
interest
with
its
possible
use
to
produce
tritium
as
a
fuel
for
fusion
energy
[19],
lithium
was
already
coveted
for
EV
applications.
In
1996,
Will
[20]
was
indeed
the
first
to
wonder
about
the
availability
of
lithium
for
any
industrial
application.
His
study
was
though
too
much
anchored
in
the
economy,
missing
the
points
of
geology
and
geostrategy.
Besides,
the
whole
lithium
industrial
structure
has
changed
since
then.
Tahil
[21,22]
exploited
more
recent
data
and
concluded
that
using
lithium
for
EV
was
not
a
sustainable
choice
since
world
lithium
production
appeared
insufficient
to
cover
the
needs
of
the
EV
industry.
On
the
contrary,
after
applying
to
lithium
the
“cumulative
availability
curve”
method
they
had
experimented
on
copper,
Yaksic
and
Tilton
[23]
concluded
that
depletion
would
not
threaten
lithium
given
its
promised
cheap
extraction
from
sea-
water.
In
their
wake,
Gruber
and
Medina
[24]
went
deeper
in
the
reasoning
by
confronting
major
reference
sources
and
by
evaluat-
ing
the
precise
lithium
content
of
all
deposits.
In
parallel,
Clarke
and
Harben
[25]
created
a
map
on
the
basis
of
such
data,
turning
what
yet
stood
as
science
into
geoeconomics.
This
review
means
to
assess
the
worldwide
availability
of
lithium
resources
in
a
new
way,
confronting
updated
resources
data
with
the
trade
reality,
especially
the
lithium
market
shares
and
prices
evolution,
which
enables
to
draw
conclusions
and
fore-
see
their
impact
on
future
EV
prices.
Special
focuses
are
made
on
the
geological
origin
and
nature
of
all
kinds
of
lithium
resources
and
on
the
current
structure
of
the
lithium
industry.
Eventually,
salient
geostrategic
bottlenecks
following
from
resources
geographic
dis-
tribution
are
discussed
and
perspectives
are
given
to
cope
with
the
emerging
problems.
2.
Forecast
evolution
of
lithium
prices
and
consequences
on
the
EV
industry
When
the
oil
industry
is
on
the
verge
of
collapsing
because
of
declining
reserves
and
increasing
prices,
the
common
sense
of
people
hearing
that
oil-dependent
internal
combustion
engine
(ICE)
vehicles
will
be
replaced
by
LIB-propelled
“electric”
vehicles
induces
them
to
wonder
–
among
other
questions
–
if
there
will
be
enough
lithium
on
the
planet
to
feed
the
whole
automotive
market
and
at
a
price
remaining
steadily
low
or
so.
To
start
this
study,
we
found
important
to
determine
roughly
whether
the
lithium
price
is
susceptible
to
raise
the
price
of
EV
batteries
at
a
non-affordable
level
for
end-users,
i.e.
EV
drivers
and
buyers.
Aiming
at
forecasting
the
future
trends
of
lithium
price
and
comparing
them
with
the
expected
battery
prices,
we
used
past
evolutions
of
lithium
commodity
prices
between
1970
and
2010
(Fig.
1
[26])
as
inputs
for
an
econometric
modeling.
Thanks
to
the
Box
&
Jenkins
methodology,
we
identified
and
evaluated
the
dynamic
model
of
price
series
by
using
normality,
white
noise
and
Dickey–Fuller
tests.
As
we
realized
that
the
stationary
condition
was
not
satisfied,
we
differentiated
the
price
series
to
turn
it
into
a
stationary
one
(Fig.
2).
Then,
correlation
analysis
enabled
us
to
pin-
point
difference
series
as
an
ARIMA(1,1)
model
characterized
by
a
significant
first
peak
and
a
sinusoidal
behavior
(Fig.
3).
Eventually,
with
ε
standing
for
residues
and
t
for
time,
i.e.
the
year
considered,
the
model
expression
is:
pricet−
pricet−1=
0.032
+
0.164pricet−1+
εt+
0.157εt−1
This
modeling
enables
us
to
predict
future
lithium
price
values
(Table
1).
As
a
result,
lithium
price
is
expected
to
be
multiplied
by
Fig.
1.
Non-stationary
evolution
of
lithium
price
series
1970–2010
[based
on
“Lithium
statistics”
from
the
United
States
Geological
Survey,
2010].
Fig.
2.
Stationary
difference
series
obtained
after
price
series
differentiation
[based
on
our
own
works].
five
within
ten
years
from
5.42
in
2010
to
25.50
$/kg
in
2020,
and
this
with
an
annual
growth
rate
which
appears
to
slowly
decrease
along
time
from
17.2%
to
16.5%.
Lithium
price
future
evolution
is
a
precious
input
for
later
cal-
culations
meant
to
assess
the
impact
of
lithium
prices
on
EV
prices,
when
progressive
battery
cost
reductions
are
taken
into
account
(Table
1).
With
an
annual
cost
reduction
postulated
on
the
basis
of
a
potential
economy
of
scale
and
estimated
to
$100
between
2010
and
2012
and
$50
between
2012
and
2020,
we
arbitrarily
Fig.
3.
Autocorrelation
diagram
of
difference
series
typical
of
ARIMA(1,1)
[based
on
our
own
works].

C.
Grosjean
et
al.
/
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744 1737
Table
1
Forecast
of
lithium
costs
and
shares
in
the
price
of
EV
batteries
(2010–2020)
[own
works].
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Lithium
price
[Econometric
model
ARIMA(1,1)]
($/kg)
5.42
6.35
7.40
8.60
10.13
11.82
13.80
16.10
18.77
21.88
25.50
Lithium
price
for
battery
(hypothesis:
LCE
=
0.6
kg
Li/kWh)
($/kWh)
3.25
3.81
4.44
5.16
6.08
7.09
8.28
9.66
11.26
13.13
15.30
Lithium
cost
in
HEV
battery
(hypothesis:
Capacity
=
2
kWh)
($)
6.50
7.62
8.88
10.32
12.16
14.18
16.56
19.32
22.52
26.26
30.60
Lithium
cost
in
PHEV
battery
(hypothesis:
Capacity
=
7
kWh)
($)
22.76
26.67
31.08
36.12
42.55
49.64
57.96
67.60
78.83
91.90
107.10
Lithium
cost
in
EV
battery
(hypothesis:
Capacity
=
25
kWh)
($)
81.30
95.25
111.00
129.00
151.95
177.30
207.00
241.44
281.55
328.20
382.50
Battery
price
forecast
[Crédit
Suisse]
($/kWh)
1100
1000
900
850
800
750
700
650
600
550
500
HEV
battery
price
forecast
(hypothesis:
Capacity
=
2
kWh)
($)
2200
2000
1800
1700
1600
1500
1400
1300
1200
1100
1000
PHEV
battery
price
forecast
(hypothesis:
Capacity
=
7
kWh)
($)
7700
7000
6300
5950
5600
5250
4900
4550
4200
3850
3500
EV
battery
price
forecast
(hypothesis:
Capacity
=
25
kWh)
($)
27,500
25,000
22,500
21,250
20,000
18,750
17,500
16,250
15,000
13,750
12,500
Lithium
share
in
battery
price
(%)
0.30
0.38
0.49
0.61
0.76
0.95
1.18
1.49
1.88
2.39
3.06
reduce
the
global
cost
of
EV
batteries,
but
as
lithium
unit
quan-
tity
is
conserved,
we
also
arbitrarily
enlarge
the
share
of
lithium
in
this
global
cost
of
EV
batteries.
But
still,
even
by
doing
so,
the
corresponding
lithium
share
only
increases
from
0.30%
to
3.06%,
thus
suggesting
that
the
economic
impact
of
a
fivefold-increased
lithium
price
is
still
acceptable
for
EV
buyers
hence
for
EV
market
penetration.
Looking
back
at
the
past
evolution
of
lithium
prices
(Fig.
1),
one
can
be
surprised
by
the
apparently
erratic
behavior
of
the
curve,
as
lithium
price
remains
stable
from
1970
to
1990
before
fluctuating
alternatively
upward
and
downward
with
particularly
sharp
peaks
in
1997
and
2008.
These
variations
are
linked
simul-
taneously
to
the
structure
of
lithium
industry
and
to
the
end-use
sectors
in
which
lithium
is
consumed;
a
consequence
of
the
trade
imbalance
between
offer
and
demand,
somehow.
From
1970
to
1990,
a
few
industrials
exploited
hard
rock
minerals
as
a
source
of
lithium
under
the
form
of
mineral
concentrates
for
the
glass
and
ceramics
industry,
mostly
in
Australia
and
the
United
States
but
also
in
Portugal
and
Spain.
As
such
rare
applications
were
non-captive,
prices
were
stable.
Little
by
little,
though,
the
Ger-
man
firm
Chemetall
bought
all
the
small
dispersed
companies
that
were
mining
lithium-rich
ores
throughout
the
world,
thus
forming
a
monopoly.
This
fact
explains
the
slow
increase
of
lithium
price
observed
from
1990
to
1996.
From
1997
on,
the
way
of
extracting
lithium
fundamentally
changed
with
the
appearance
of
salt
lake
brines
exploitation
for
lithium
carbonate
sales.
From
1997
to
2000,
the
Chilean
company
SQM
(=Chemical
Mining
Society)
became
market
leader
thanks
to
very
low
production
costs,
obliging
by
the
way
many
hard-rock-exploiting
sites
to
close.
Applications
also
changed
with
the
development
of
lithium
batteries
in
mobile
appli-
cations
and
the
will
of
aviation
and
car
industries
to
lighten
their
products
with
lithium-containing
aluminum
alloys.
From
2005
to
2006,
a
slight
increase
of
the
price
is
noticeable
due
to
a
trade
bot-
tleneck
caused
by
production
problems
in
the
Chilean
salt
lake
of
Atacama
and
a
concomitant
increase
of
the
captive
battery
demand.
Presumably
because
of
the
soaring
price
of
oil,
the
average
exporta-
tion
cost
of
lithium
also
rose
sharply
from
2007
to
2008
till
reaching
a
6.4
$/kg
record
value.
More
recently,
the
economic
crisis
affected
most
of
the
lithium
users
who
accordingly
restrained
their
con-
sumption.
Analyzing
lithium
price
evolution
is
packed
with
information.
So,
to
perfectly
understand
what
is
at
stakes
with
lithium
avail-
ability
for
the
EV
industry,
we
must
decompose
things:
on
the
one
hand,
the
lithium
market
and
EV
industry
particular
needs;
on
the
other
hand,
the
structure
of
lithium
industry.
3.
Lithium
market
compared
to
EV
particular
needs
There
are
plenty
of
lithium-based
products
on
the
market.
As
shown
in
Fig.
4
lithium
carbonate
(Li2CO3),
mineral
concen-
trates
and
lithium
hydroxide
(LiOH)
are
lithium
most
common
commercial
forms,
standing
for
80%
of
market
shares
[17].
Min-
eral
concentrates
are
raw
materials
directly
involved
in
ceramics
or
glass
production
whereas
lithium
carbonate
and
hydroxide
are
chemically
processed
ingredients
mainly
used
in
secondary
batteries,
greases,
aluminium
alloys,
etc.
Surprisingly,
the
major
application
of
lithium
products
in
2007
was
in
the
ceramics
and
glass
industry
with
37%
of
market
share
against
20%
for
batter-
ies
[25].
As
far
as
LIBs
are
concerned,
lithium
is
mostly
contained
in
positive
electrodes
(90%)
and
electrolytes
(9%)
[17].
However,
its
yet
scarce
utilization
in
negative
electrodes
may
soon
evolve
with
the
increasing
interest
for
lithium
titanium
oxide
(LTO)
materials.
Apart
from
mineral
concentrates
which
can
be
used
in
their
raw
form,
all
lithium-based
commercial
products
appear
to
be
chemical
derivatives
of
lithium
carbonate.
In
the
rest
of
this
paper,
the
study
of
lithium
and
EV
industry
will
thus
be
reduced
to
that
of
lithium
carbonate
production
and
consumption.
In
2009,
only
80
t
of
lithium
carbonate
were
reported
to
form
stockpiles
in
South
Korea
[27].
As
such,
the
global
lithium
pro-
duction
can
be
assimilated
to
that
of
global
consumption
whose
progression
is
constant
with
12,500
tons
(t)
produced
in
1998
[1],
20,340
t
in
2005
[12],
and
21c300
t
in
2008
[25].
Looking
at
the
Fig.
4.
Market
shares
of
lithium-based
commercial
products.
Based
on
data
from
Roskill
[17].

1738 C.
Grosjean
et
al.
/
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744
Fig.
5.
Recent
evolution
of
lithium
carbonate
demand
by
applications.
Roskill
[17].
historical
evolution
of
global
lithium
carbonate
demand
(Fig.
5
[17])
an
average
annual
growth
rate
of
6%
is
observed
between
2000
and
2008
before
a
sudden
fall
caused
by
the
economic
crisis
of
2009.
The
same
figure
is
very
informative
on
the
lithium
dependence
of
all
end-use
application
sectors.
Lithium
demand
from
both
bat-
teries
and
aluminium
branches
appears
to
keep
on
growing
even
during
the
very
period
of
crisis,
thus
representing
an
artificially
bigger
proportion
of
lithium
end-use.
In
all
likelihood,
and
as
pre-
dicted
by
other
studies
dealing
with
its
world
market
forecast
[16],
lithium
will
thus
be
replaced
or
abandoned
in
most
of
its
current
applications,
except
for
batteries
whose
extremely
captive
use
will
undoubtedly
put
the
LIB
industry
into
a
first-rank
consumer
posi-
tion.
This
is
all
the
truer
since
the
figures
we
relied
on
are
only
representative
of
the
lithium
used
in
batteries
for
portable
elec-
tronic
devices.
This
becomes
critical
when
we
think
that
the
future
lithium
demand
of
millions
of
EVs
will
be
added
to
this
already
existing
captive
lithium
consumption.
Considering
that
a
LIB
contains
8%
Li2CO3wt.
and
that
packs
of
batteries
will
at
least
weigh
200
kg
in
future
EVs,
a
minimum
of
16
kg
of
lithium
carbonate
would
be
required
for
each
pack
of
batteries.
For
the
whole
annual
lithium
production
of
21,300
t,
it
means
that
a
maximum
of
7.1
million
packs
of
batteries
can
be
annually
fabricated,
considering
that
EV
LIB
fabrication
monopo-
lizes
all
the
market.
There
are
presently
more
than
1
billion
vehicles
running
in
the
world
and
a
total
of
65
million
new
vehicles
are
registered
each
year
[28].
So,
if
we
consider
the
market
share
of
25%
for
batteries,
the
lithium
is
only
available
for
a
shrunk
fig-
ure
of
2
million
packs
of
batteries
which
now
hardly
represents
3%
of
the
new
vehicle
registrations.
As
a
result,
the
current
annual
lithium
production
stands
out
clearly
insufficient
to
quickly
pro-
vide
a
future
EV
market
with
LIBs.
The
question
is
henceforth
to
know
if
the
lithium
industry
is
able
to
raise
the
levels
of
production
and
at
which
price.
Studying
the
current
lithium
production
struc-
tures,
processes
and
resources
gives
significant
clues
to
answer
this.
4.
State-of-the-art
of
the
lithium
industry
Lithium
carbonate
is
today
mostly
fabricated
by
mining,
extract-
ing
and
treating
two
main
resources:
spodumene
ores
and
salt-lake
brines.
The
way
they
are
exploited
is
detailed
and
compared
here-
after.
Spodumene
is
a
lithium-rich
ore
contained
into
a
special
type
of
stone
called
pegmatite.
Historically,
it
was
the
first
resource
exploited
to
produce
lithium
at
an
industrial
scale
but
it
is
now
only
extracted
in
a
few
places,
mostly
in
the
mine
of
Greenbushes
(Australia),
often
as
a
by-product
of
rare
earth
elements
(REE)
such
as
tantalum
(Ta)
or
niobium
(Nb),
or
of
other
elements
like
rubidium
(Rb)
and
cesium
(Cs).
In
such
pegmatite
hard-rock
miner-
als,
lithium
contents
(1–4%)
and
recovery
rates
(60–70%)
are
high,
thus
allowing
a
good
profitability
of
the
mining
sites.
However,
they
are
made
challenging
to
exploit
due
to
the
hardness
of
their
gangue
and
inner
material
plus
the
tough
access
to
the
belt-like
deposits
that
host
pegmatite
veins.
All
steps
of
exploration,
probe
drilling,
sample
analysis,
and
process
testing
pave
the
way
for
a
complex
but
usual
mining
process
consisting
in
digging
pits,
exca-
vating
tons
of
rocks
and
having
them
thermochemically
treated
in
a
nearby
factory.
Based
either
on
an
acid
lixiviation
or
a
soda
ash
syn-
thesis
route,
the
treatment
of
hard-rock
minerals
like
spodumene
is
short
(i.e.
five
days
long)
and
constantly
productive
throughout
the
year.
However,
it
requires
the
use
of
energy-consuming
high
furnaces
and
rock-crushing
devices
in
addition
to
the
usual
pollut-
ing
fuels
and
concentrated
chemicals.
Concerning
financial
aspects,
mining
process
and
facilities
require
huge
investments.
The
cost
for
their
enlargement
is
however
more
affordable
for
it
only
consists
in
increasing
excavators
and
trucks
rate
of
production.
Mining
thus
appears
very
advantageous
as
it
can
fit
a
potential
growth
in
lithium
demand.
Its
backwards
are
the
environmental
damages
caused
by
pit-digging
machines,
plus
the
pollution
involved
in
the
processing
chain
turning
excavated
raw
minerals
into
ready-to-sell
lithium
carbonate.
Salt
lake
brines
are
water
resources
with
high
concentrations
of
mineral
salts.
They
are
reachable
either
at
the
surface
or
not
deep
in
the
ground
of
lake-like
saline
expanses
located
in
par-
ticularly
dry
areas
whose
climate
special
conditions
allow
salts
persistence.
Such
an
area
is
also
called
salar,
from
Spanish.
Amidst
other
elements,
salt
lake
brines
contain
lithium
but
their
lithium
grades
are
low
(0.017–0.15%)
and
vary
a
lot,
between
different
salars
(Table
2
[29])
but
also
between
the
different
areas
of
a
same
salar
(Fig.
6
[30]).
As
a
result,
the
initial
phase
of
resource
estimation
which
is
subservient
to
any
deposit
exploitation
is
a
very
long-lasting
process
based
on
grid-shaped
salt
crust
and
core
samplings,
chemical
analysis,
precipitation
tests,
and
pilot
plant
operations.
It
delays
any
subsequent
action
for
two
to
three
years.
As
regards
the
extraction
process,
it
is
very
simple
and
environment-friendly
as
it
only
relies
on
having
brines
pumped
and
evaporated
under
solar
natural
effect.
From
one
decantation
pond
to
the
other,
it
is
still
a
long
series
of
time-consuming
steps.
Gradually,
the
decantation
basins
show
a
higher
lithium
grade
and
their
color
visibly
tends
to
blue
as
the
other
salts
in
pres-
ence
are
taken
out
after
precipitation.
Once
production
facilities
are
settled
and
ready
to
run,
it
lasts
between
one
to
two
years
until
the
processed
lithium
carbonate
is
ready
to
be
sold.
It
can
last
even
longer
in
regions
submitted
to
the
effects
of
winter
for
the
evaporation
process
is
put
back.
It
is
being
the
case
in
a
few
developing
deposits
in
Tibet,
China.
Such
a
long
extraction

C.
Grosjean
et
al.
/
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744 1739
Table
2
Diversity
of
brines
composition
in
mineral
salts
for
various
salars.
(a)
Country
Salar
or
lake
Li
Mg
K
Na
Chile
Salar
de
Atacama
0.15
0.96
1.80
7.6
Bolivia
Salar
de
Uyuni
0.096
2.0
1.67
9.1
Argentina Salar
del
H
ombre
Muerto 0.062
0.089
0.61
10.4
United
States Great
Salt
Lake,
UT 0.006
0.8
0.4
7.0
Salton
Sea,
CA 0.022
0.028
1.42
5.71
Searles
Lake.
CA
0.0083
0.034
2.30
15.20
Silver
Peak,
Nev
0.03
0.04
0.6
6.20
Israel-Jordan
Dead
Sea
0.002
3.40
0.6
3.00
China Lake
Zabuye 0.097
0.001
2.64
10.80
(b)
Salar Hectares Samples Li
(ppm)
up
to K
(ppm)
up
to
Salar
Grande 4000
4
123
2770
Piedra
Parada
1500
14
103
2040
La
Isla 16,500 19 1080 10,800
Agua
Amarga
3100
6
157
2490
Las
Parinas 5400 7
477
7820
Aguilar
8800
3
337
3990
Maricunga
104
18
916
11,400
Total
39,404
(a):
“Lithium
and
lithium
compounds”
[29];
(b):
Salares
Lithium
Inc.
process
stands
out
quite
unsuited
to
possible
sudden
change
in
lithium
demand.
Huge
quantities
of
lithium
are
contained
in
oceans
and
seas.
However,
its
concentration
is
so
small
(170
ppb,
i.e.
parts
per
bil-
lion)
that
it
would
be
industrially
complex
and
costly
to
isolate
lithium
amid
the
other
seawater
mineral
salts.
There
is
only
one
Japanese
laboratory
working
on
the
topic
[31]
but
even
after
years
of
improvement
and
although
they
obtain
a
very
high
quality
lithium,
their
process
still
leads
to
a
production
cost
of
80
$/kg,
i.e.
much
more
than
salt
lake
brines
(2–3
$/kg)
or
spodumene
(6–8
$/kg).
Despite
simple,
cheap,
and
environment-friendly
processes,
the
lithium
carbonate
production
from
salt
lake
brines
shows
impor-
tant
drawbacks
as
regards
low
lithium
grades,
high
dispersions
of
Fig.
6.
Example
of
salar
composition
dispersion
with
bromide
concentration
[Salar
of
Uyuni,
Risacher
&
Fritz,
1999].
composition,
uncertainty
of
recovery
rate
and
very
long
durations
necessary
either
to
build
new
production
facilities
or
to
enlarge
existing
ones.
It
is
furthermore
subservient
to
the
settling
of
work-
ers
and
the
transportation
of
the
obtained
product
in
and
from
isolated
desert-like
regions.
Lithium
extraction
from
hard-rock
minerals
is
more
secure
with
good
lithium
grades,
high
recovery
rates,
and
quick
process
durations
that
make
it
way
more
suited
to
any
market
change.
However,
the
mining
damages
and
thermo-
chemical
processes
involved
are
costly
and
may
represent
a
heavy
load
for
the
environment
in
terms
of
landscape
damage
and
pol-
lution.
No
matter
how
different
their
production
costs
are,
both
technologies
of
lithium
mining,
extraction
and
treatment
from
spo-
dumene
ores
and
salt
lake
brines
are
likely
to
play
an
equally
important
role
in
the
near
future.
Apart
from
seawater,
there
is
room
for
other
conceivable
resources
that
show
good
potential
for
lithium
production
and
thus
lately
raised
interest.
5.
Other
potential
lithium
resources
and
geological
origins
Apart
from
spodumene,
lithium
carbonate
can
stem
from
other
ores
also
contained
in
pegmatite
rocks.
These
contain
1–6%
Li
wt.
and
are
called
amblygonite,
eucryptite,
lepidolite,
petalite,
or
zinnwaldite.
Thanks
to
high
iron
content,
petalite
is
particularly
employed
to
manufacture
glass.
Lepidolite
was
one
of
the
first
ores
to
be
exploited
for
marginal
uses
like
lithium
salts
production
and
specialty
glass
fabrication
but
then
it
slowly
lost
importance
on
the
market
due
to
high
fluorine
content.
Although
the
mining
phase
is
common
to
spodumene
exploitation,
the
great
variety
of
lithium-
holding
hard-rock
minerals
illustrated
by
differences
in
terms
of
composition,
hardness,
and
lithium
content
(Table
3
[32])
denotes
an
intrinsic
limitation
for
any
industrial
utilization
because
new
processes
need
to
be
developed
individually
for
each
ore,
with
another
great
variety
of
by-products.
The
aforementioned
discrepancies
plus
the
belt-like
aspects
of
pegmatite
deposits
find
their
origin
in
the
fascinating
geological
mechanisms
which
led
to
pegmatite
formation.
Pegmatite
comes
from
the
Greek
word
pegma
standing
for
“congealed”,
“hardened”.
It
has
a
granite-like
composition
for
it
stems
from
granite
magmatic
waters,
i.e.
liquids
that
remain
after
the
granitic
magma
crystal-
lization.
450
million
years
ago,
when
the
terrestrial
magma
was

1740 C.
Grosjean
et
al.
/
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744
Table
3
Characteristics
of
lithium-rich
pegmatite
hard-rock
minerals.
Name,
formula
Li
content
(wt.%)
Color
Hardness
Density
Spodumene
LiAlSi2O63.73
Grayish
white,
pink,
violet,
emerald
green,
yellow
6.5–7
3.1–3.2
Petalite
LiAlSi4Ol0 2.09
Colorless,
gray,
yellow,
yellow
gray,
white
6–6.5
2.39–2.46
Amblygonite
(Li,Na)AlPO4(F,OH)
3.44
White,
yellow,
gray,
bluish
gray,
greenish
gray
5.5–6
2.98–3.11
Lepidolite
K(Li,Al)3(Si,Al)4O1D(F,OH)33.58
Colorless,
gray
white,
lilac,
yellowish,
white
2.5–3
2.8–2.9
Zinnwaldite
KLiFe2+Al(AlSi3)O10 (F,OH)21.59
Light
brown,
silvery
white,
gray,
yellowish
white,
greenish
white
3.5–4
0.9–3.1
Eucryptite
L1AlS1O45.51
Brown,
colorless,
white
6.5
2.67
Lithium
occurrence
[32].
cooling
down,
the
molten
magma
heated
at
400–700 ◦C
made
his
way
through
the
crust
to
the
surface
by
seeping
through
the
faults
and
rifts
of
the
already
cooled
and
hardened
blocks
of
granite.
By
getting
infiltrated
inside
or
in
contact
with
granitic
plutons
and
shields,
it
was
enriched
with
the
most
diffusive
granite
minerals
(e.g.
rare
earth
elements;
alkaline
metals
like
lithium,
rubidium,
and
cesium)
and
formed
pegmatite
pockets,
veins,
seams,
and
cor-
dons
that
spread
around
and
radially
from
the
granitic
block
they
escaped
from
before
hardening
(Fig.
7).
Aside
granite-bordering
pegmatite
hard-rock
minerals,
lithium
can
also
be
found
in
two
“soft”-rock
silicates
also
called
evaporates
for
they
are
assumed
to
result
from
salar
evaporation
and
sedi-
mentation:
hectorite
is
a
white
soft
greasy
clay
whereas
jadarite
comes
in
white
chalk-like
powder-aggregate
form.
Salt
lake
brines
and
evaporates
result
from
the
complex
geological
mechanism
of
endorheism
based
on
the
hydrological
closure
of
freshwater
or
sea-
water
areas.
These
newly
formed
retention
and
drainage
basins
were
enriched
with
minerals
through
the
bleaching
and
dissolu-
tion
of
the
bordering
rocks.
Two
different
phenomena
led
to
their
current
aspect:
sedimentation,
resulting
from
the
deposition
of
non-drained
alluvia
carried
along
by
rainfalls;
evaporation,
result-
ing
from
combined
effects
of
sun
and
wind.
Hectorite
is
by
the
way
a
special
case
of
evaporite
since
it
is
assumed
to
originate
from
the
alteration
of
volcanic
ash
and
tuff
into
alkaline
lakes
which
were
confined
and
heated
by
hot
springs.
Last
but
not
least,
lithium
can
be
extracted
deep
in
the
ground
from
geothermal
and
oilfield
brines.
Contained
in
water
pockets
and
saline
aquifers,
these
brines
were
enriched
with
lithium
at
the
contact
with
underground
granitic
massifs.
As
it
could
be
an
energy-
free
by-producing
technology,
for
their
main
goal
is
to
produce
heat
and
electricity
and
respectively
oil
and
gas,
lithium
extraction
from
such
resources
stands
out
very
promising.
On
the
one
hand,
new
processes
were
found
to
eliminate
silica
from
geothermal
fluids,
silica
being
a
major
ordeal
as
a
source
of
scaling
and
corrosion
of
the
circuits;
on
the
other
hand,
oilfield-based
lithium
extraction
gives
the
opportunity
for
oil
industry
to
find
an
unprecedented
interest
in
EVs,
which
may
help
unlocking
EV
industry
and
market.
Now
that
we
have
depicted
the
whole
structure
of
lithium
indus-
try
and
listed
all
kinds
of
resources,
it
is
time
to
analyze
at
the
planet
scale
the
global
availability
and
the
local
repartition
of
these
resources.
6.
Resources
inventory,
geographic
distribution
and
geostrategic
implications
The
total
amount
of
world
lithium
resources
was
already
assessed
by
some
researchers,
organizations
or
firms
who
actually
did
not
reach
an
agreement
neither
on
figures
nor
on
the
way
to
calculate
them
(Table
4
[24]).
In
2005,
the
United
States
Geology
Service
(USGS)
stated
that
there
were
some
15
million
tons
(Mt)
of
lithium
reserve
base
and
6.8
Mt
of
reserves.
In
2008,
Clarke
and
Harben
[25]
mentioned
39.4
Mt
of
resources
and
27.7
Mt
of
reserve
base.
The
global
resource
estimate
is
indeed
stated
in
terms
of
sev-
eral
different
quantities:
“resource”,
“reserve
base”,
and
“reserves”.
The
resource
is
the
gross
concentration
of
lithium
occurring
nat-
urally
in
the
Earth’s
crust
with
a
form
and
amount
that
make
it
currently
or
potentially
feasible
to
extract.
Reserve
base
is
the
part
of
lithium
resource
that
meets
specified
physical
and
chemical
cri-
teria
related
to
mining
and
production
practices
(e.g.
grade,
quality,
thickness,
and
depth).
As
such,
it
is
the
in
situ
demonstrated
(mea-
sured
plus
indicated)
resource
from
which
reserves
are
estimated.
It
includes
the
resources
that
are
currently
economic
(reserves),
marginally
economic
(marginal
reserves),
and
even
currently
sube-
conomic
(sub
economic
resources).
The
reserve
is
the
part
of
reserve
Fig.
7.
Sectional
view
of
Quebec
Lithium
deposit
and
mine
project
[Canada
Lithium
Corp.].

C.
Grosjean
et
al.
/
Renewable
and
Sustainable
Energy
Reviews
16 (2012) 1735–
1744 1741
Table
4
Comparison
of
lithium
resource
estimations
amid
bibliographic
references.
Li
resources
Deposits
included
References
Li
reserves
Deposits
included
References
19.2
15
Tahil
[22]
4.6
11
Tahil
[22]
25.5
8*USGS
[26] 9.9
8*
USGS
[26]
29.9
24
Evans
[5,6]
29.4
40
Yaksic
and
Tilton
[23]
64.0
40
Yaksic
and
Tilton
[23]
39.4
61
Clarke
and
Harben
[25]**
Gruber
and
Medina
[24].
*USGS
lists
information
by
country,
not
deposits.
** Clarke
&
Harben
define
their
estimate
as
‘broad-based
reserves’.
base
which
could
be
economically
extracted
or
produced
at
the
time
of
determination.
Extraction
facilities
are
not
necessarily
in
place
and
operative.
When
synthesizing
all
the
available
data
and
adding
to
them
new
ones
about
recently
found
deposits,
mostly
in
China
and
Rus-
sia,
we
found
out
that
there
were
between
37.1
Mt
and
43.6
Mt
of
lithium-rich
resources
(Table
5).
Amidst
all
of
them,
62%
consist
of
brines
and
38%
of
rock
minerals.
The
recent
discoveries
however
mostly
concern
rock
deposits.
When
compared
to
the
lithium
specific
needs
of
an
EV
LIB,
those
37.1–43.6
Mt
of
lithium
(=197.4–231.9
Mt
of
Li2CO3)
appear
to
guarantee
resources
for
a
maximum
of
12.3–14.5
billion
electric
vehicles,
i.e.
ten
times
the
current