For a start, I show how much greenhouse gas is emitted in the production of lithium-ion batteries and all their materials, assessedby many studies over time:
There are different types of lithium batteries, which can be divided into two main groups. One group (blue) has always caused low greenhouse gas emissions, the other (red) has improved to similarly low emissions (which is about 30 – 60 kg per kWh of battery capacity). This means that
an ordinary lithium battery, bought with a PV system at home, emitted the same amount of CO2 in its production that an average petrol car emits in a very few months . Most of this comes from using fossil fuels for the extraction and refinement of raw materials ,  and can be further reduced in future battery production through the use of renewable energies.
So why do lithium batteries have a bad reputation for their impact on the environment? Two factors contribute to this, which we will now look at:
- greenhouse gas emissions are not the only factor in assessing environmental impacts.
- battery manufacturing has improved rapidly, so sometimes outdated problems are projected into the future.
How to assess environmental impacts in general?
Let’s look at the general ways you can obtain an overview of a product’s environmental impact so you have a versatile tool at hand.
At work, you may need to decide which supplier to choose or which component to include in your product. I recommend to look for published results of the so-called “life cycle analysis” or “life cycle assessment” (LCA).
LCA tells how a product is made and gives the environmental impact of each component. An overview on lithium battery production is sketched here:
Each of the coloured stages requires different materials and processes. In the following chart, we look at more details of the “Materials processing” part (orange in the above chart). Don’t worry about the details, I just want to give you an idea of how intricate the manufacturing of lithium batteries is and how many details need to be considered  so a LCA study is reliable:
In contrast, the principle of a battery is simple. Electric current is made up of electrons, which are tiny, charged particles flowing in metal wires. The electrons cannot be easily stored like beans in a bag because their charges repel each other so strongly that either only a small number of electrons can be stored, or a very strong force is needed. In a battery, however, the electrons are used to charge larger particles called ions (in our case: lithium ions), which are kept in a layered solid material that has a high stability in presence of ions. In this setting, ions behave more similar to beans in a bag and can be stored. When the battery is uncharged, the ions reside between the layers of the material at one end. When the battery is being charged, the incoming electrons give the lithium ions sufficient energy to go into a second layered material at the other end.:
When electric current is drawn from the battery, the ions move back to the first material. This reshuffling of lithium ions between the two materials can be repeated thousands of times, making the battery rechargeable.
Now it becomes apparent why there are so many different types of lithium batteries in Fig. 1: Many different materials can be chosen, particularly at one end (at the other end, usually graphite is used). You may have heard in the media of the environmental, social and political problems associated with cobalt and nickel. These are (at this stage of the technology) only necessary if a battery must deliver a strong current, like when strongly accelerating a large electric vehicle. For PV applications and smaller cars, no such strong currents are necessary, so instead of nickel and cobalt, a material containing iron and phosphorus can be used(the battery type is called LFP, standing for lithium ferrous-phosphate).
After all what you heard in the media, it may surprise you that many lithium batteries do not contain cobalt and nickel, nor any other critical metals.
Now, let’s get back to the life-cycle assessment. This graph compares the environmental impact of the different types of lithium batteries:
However, LCA studies disregard social implications . In this chart, the difference between the PV battery and the cobalt-containing batteries would be significantly greater if the social impacts were included. In addition, categories such as “environmental damage” assume that things proceed as intended; this is often not the case in difficult economic and political circumstances, such as cobalt and nickel mining. This again would make the difference between the lithium battery used in PV and the cobalt-containing batteries significantly greater.
Of the different battery types in the above graph, LFP has the lowest impact. This is the case even under difficult mining conditions, because LFP does not contain critical materials such as cobalt . So how come only about half of the batteries supplied with rooftop PV systems are of this type? It’s the money. Batteries for PV systems are a small industry compared to batteries for electric vehicles. Since most electric vehicles are large and powerful, large quantities of batteries containing cobalt and nickel are produced, which makes these batteries cheaper. They could easily be banned for PV applications. And those without cobalt last even longer: about 10 – 15 years in practice –. By comparison, lead batteries must be specially treated for PV and have a lifetime of about 6 – 10 years in PV applications  – and they contain large amounts of lead and sulphuric acid, which we take for granted and “normal” because most of them are recycled .
Improvements in battery manufacturing
A further reason why one needs to collect and choose LCA studies with care: components and their processing have changed over time and may also be brand-specific . The following chart tracks from left to right how the parameters from old LCA studies have been used in newer studies (the darker, the older are the parameters):
As recent as 10 years ago, lithium was mined only in small quantities mainly for special ceramic and glass manufacturing, so not much effort was put into saving energy and optimising processes. Taking these old data in present-day studies gives an enormous environmental impact – but today’s huge lithium factories are much leaner and apply improved technology .
The outcome of LCA studies also depends on a few general factors, which you may watch out for:
- on the system boundary chosen, like which processes are included in the analysis to keep the study within a manageable size,
- the quality of the data, obtained ideally through direct measurements on site, but often also indirectly through data collections that may not represent the specific case very well (see Fig. 6 above)
- and on the choice of impact categories, such as resource depletion, water pollution, land use, global warming, toxicity, and more
- on regional differences and how they are included [Kelly 20], particularly the electric power mix.
Don’t be surprised if different studies come up with different or sometimes even contradictory results – with the four main points above, such discrepancies are usually clarified. Thus:
It is best to watch out for life-cycle assessments (LCAs) that review many LCA studies. This gives you a useful overviewand may enable you to deduce the impact by choosing different suppliers and different components for your product.
Sometimes, the results of LCA studies in different impact categories are bundled together as one single number, the Ecopoints . They are relative to the impact of an EU citizen: 100 Ecopoints is equal to the environmental impact of an average EU citizen over one year. The more Ecopoints, the worse the environmental impact.
Yet another but rather rare measure is to look at the positive and negative impacts on the UN Sustainability Development Goals (SDGs) .
Recycling makes the difference
After all, it is not only important how a product can be recycled , as stated in the LCA, but also whether it is recycled at all in practice. Consumer products tend to have low recycling rates. Mobile phones typically about 10%  (in some countries higher). Millions of tons of electronic waste from Europe tell their stories, piled up in Africa despite export restrictions –. For this reasons, the EU introduced a law to make lithium battery recycling mandatory . Lead is also an example. It is not allowed in consumer electronics due to low recycling rates, but allowed in PV panels because they are not a consumer product and recycling is mandatory as well . In rich countries, nearly all of the usual lead batteries in conventional cars are being recycled .
Can PV storage be sustainable?
Now that we have set the scene, comes the crucial question: can PV battery storage be sustainable?
In the last blog article we saw that a maximum battery capacity of about 60 TWh is needed for the global energy transition, most likely about 47 TWh . These batteries are usually placed in houses or as large units next to solar and wind farms. Let’s assume that battery technology is frozen-in at the current level and that all PV and wind storage is powered by the cobalt-free LFT lithium batteries. And let’s assume that no old batteries from electric cars with degraded capacity are used for PV applications , which is possible because car batteries are about 10 times larger than for PV households.
As in previous blog articles, I sum up the main battery materials needed for a global transition to 100% renewable energy. Then I compare these quantities with their annual global extraction and production:
All the main materials are not a supply problem (natural graphite is but can be replaced by more expensive artificial graphite). Copper mining needs to be expanded because it is also used for many other purposes, as I described in my previous blog. The fact that the current lithium production is needed for 7 years points us to two essential aspects. First, that lithium mining needs to be expanded because lithium batteries are mainly used for electric vehicles and not for photovoltaics. Secondly, there is the question of whether this expansion can be done in a sustainable way at all. A third possibility is to develop other batteries that do not use lithium but non-layered materials, if there is enough time to bring these technologies to market maturity to stabilise the climate.
It is helpful to look at the expansion of mining first from the top down and then from the bottom up. The top-down approach looks at how much lithium there is on the planet in the first place; this is called resources. This figure can be quite useless because many elements are distributed in low concentrations all over the globe, for example dissolved in seawater with countless other elements, but are only available in concentrated form in a few locations. Therefore, it makes more sense to look at the quantities that can be extracted with reasonable effort and at low cost, and this quantity is called reserves. Reserves are a dynamic quantity that depends on current commodity prices, but also on political conditions and technological progress. This graph shows the resources and reserves of lithium estimated in various studies over time using different criteria:
Resources have tended to increase because more exploration has been done so more was found. Reserves have tended to stagnate over the last 10 years, indicating that the large reserves have already been found and the newly discovered smaller deposits do not add significantly to the already known reserves. This is typical of our era of sophisticated discovery and exploration. So,
the top-down view of this graph shows that with current battery technology, only 2% of current lithium reserves need to be mined for PV storage in a global 100% renewable energy mix.
While this sounds good in terms of sustainability, we also need to look from bottom-up at
Environmental and social impacts
The locations where it is economical to mine lithium are concentrated in fewer countries than fossil oil:
Because only a tiny fraction of reserves is mined each year, the size of reserves has rather little influence on mined volume. It is a multitude of regional factors that matter for the competitiveness of mines.
Lithium occurs mainly in two forms . In rocks, like in Australia, partly China, Portugal and some African countries. Mining lithium from rock has a rather small environmental impact  mainly due to dust generation, as lithium has only low toxicity,so its mining wastes.
More than half of lithium is mined from brines that accumulated at the bottom of salt flats in deserts. About 3/2 of the reserves are situated in the “Lithium Triangle”, a high-altitude region on the border with Chile, Bolivia, and Argentina. Typically, a borehole is drilled and the brine is pumped into solar evaporation ponds, similar to what you may have seen with the extraction of common salt by the sea . When about 90% of the water has evaporated within one to two years, the brine is processed and dried into a lithium-containing powder. Because salt flats have more than 300 days of sunshine a year, solar energy can readily be used for processing  and there is room for improvements in processing . In contrast to most metal mining, lithium brine and its waste is not toxic unless in high concentration , like most naturally occurring salts.
This sounds all ok. But freshwater is also used in different stages. Freshwater is very scarce and is pumped locally from aquifers or at the edges of the salt flats, and puts heavy stress  on the hydrogeological balance of these salt flats. A sensitive indicator of environmental stress are flamingos, which live off the freshwater at the edges. Their population has declined significantly compared in other nearby salt flats that are not (yet) mined , .
Technologically, the fresh water is not needed. After use, it can be turned back into fresh water through solar desalination ,  and kept in a closed circle. But as so often, this is more expensive and therefore not done.
Lithium mining has also affected the local population , . These people are often caught between two fronts: the mining companies and the conservation efforts, who both want their land .
Suggestions for sustainable PV batteries
Current lithium PV battery technology is able shift a sufficient amount of electricity from midday to the evening hours and longer. And it can do so at competitive prices, see the previous blog. So we can expect the market for PV batteries to grow faster. In terms of sustainability described in previous blogs, these batteries can be sustainable when a global mix of 100% renewables is achieved, if the following suggestions are taken into account:
- The batteries must not contain any critical materials. For example, LPF (or new battery types currently under research and development).
- Not too much lithium brine is pumped out of each salt flat so that the water layers under the surface crust are not significantly disrupted.
- The fresh water used is desalinated with solar energy to form a closed cycle.
- The lithium is processed using renewable energy.
- Social impacts are taken care of.
- Well-known environmental precautions are taken for rock mining.
- For copper mining, see an earlier blog.
- The batteries are almost all recycled, although they do not contain any valuable materials.
My suggestions for brine mining are likely to require collaboration between governments in Bolivia, Chile and Argentina so that higher production costs are introduced jointly. The current high lithium prices are a great opportunity for joint action. Recycling should be made economically feasible for many products, not just batteries, through a mix of policy, prdouct designand consumer behavior.
These suggestions are feasible and can certainly be improved further when going into more detail. No excuses.
In the next blog article, the last component of a 100% renewable electricity grid will be tested for sustainability: Pumped storage plants and electrolysers for balancing power between summer and winter, windy&sunny and overcast&windless days. If they too can be scaled up sustainably, we can create a globally 100% renewable energy supply in a sustainable manner. This will enable to decouple renewable energies from many other entangled issues like biodiversity, freshwater availability, soil fertility, social impacts, and many more. Decoupling means we can push ahead with CO2 reduction and not have to worry that this will have incalculable consequences for our Earth system.
When I think of batteries after all this, it still comes to my mind that I valued them years ago as a child when secretly reading at night with a flash light – and the batteries didn’t last long back then. And we threw them into the bin. I am glad that this has changed.
P. S. After reading this, you may wonder about the impact of batteries for electric cars. Climate-neutral transport will be covered in a later blog article. So far, I say that it is definitely better to replace conventional cars with electric cars. The environmental impact of buying an electric car is smaller than if you continue to drive your conventional car for another 4 years in almost all countries with their electricity mix of fossil and renewables . But don’t expect to do something sustainable by owning a car: nearly all cars require too much material.
 J. F. Peters, M. Baumann, B. Zimmermann, J. Braun, and M. Weil, “The environmental impact of Li-Ion batteries and the role of key parameters – A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 67, 491–506 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.039.
 Agora Verkehrswende, “Klimabilanz von Elektroautos. Einflussfaktoren und Verbesserungspotenzial (Climate footprint of electric cars. Influencing factors and potential for improvement),” 2019, https://www.agora-verkehrswende.de/fileadmin/Projekte/2018/Klimabilanz_von_Elektroautos/Agora-Verkehrswende_22_Klimabilanz-von-Elektroautos_WEB.pdf
 E. Crenna, M. Gauch, R. Widmer, P. Wäger, and R. Hischier, “Towards more flexibility and transparency in life cycle inventories for Lithium-ion batteries,” Resour Conserv Recycl 170, 105619 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105619
 Q. Dai, J. C. Kelly, L. Gaines, and M. Wang, “Life Cycle Analysis of Lithium-Ion Batteries for Automotive Applications,” Batteries 5, 48 (2019), https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries5020048
 E. Emilsson and L. Dahllöf, “Lithium-Ion Vehicle Battery Production Status 2019 on Energy Use, CO2 Emissions, Use of Metals, Products Environmental Footprint, and Recycling,” 2019, https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1549551&dswid=-1439
 J. C. Kelly, Q. Dai, and M. Wang, “Globally regional life cycle analysis of automotive lithium-ion nickel manganese cobalt batteries,” Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Chang 25, 371–396 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-019-09869-2
 M. Philippot, G. Alvarez, E. Ayerbe, J. van Mierlo, and M. Messagie, “Eco-Efficiency of a Lithium-Ion Battery for Electric Vehicles: Influence of Manufacturing Country and Commodity Prices on GHG Emissions and Costs,” Batteries 5, 23 (2019), https://doi.org/10.3390/batteries5010023
 Q. Qiao, F. Zhao, Z. Liu, X. He, and H. Hao, “Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of Electric Vehicles in China: Combining the vehicle cycle and fuel cycle,” Energy 177, 222–233 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.04.080
 J. Sadhukhan and M. Christensen, “An In-Depth Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Lithium-Ion Battery for Climate Impact Mitigation Strategies,” Energies (Basel) 14, 5555 (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/en14175555
 This is calculated assuming 0.125 kg CO2/km in Europe according to https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/society/20190313STO31218/co2-emissions-from-cars-facts-and-figures-infographics and 11500 km per year driving, average in the EU according tohttps://www.odyssee-mure.eu/publications/efficiency-by-sector/transport/distance-travelled-by-car.html
 F. Degen and M. Schütte, “Life cycle assessment of the energy consumption and GHG emissions of state-of-the-art automotive battery cell production,” J Clean Prod 330, 129798 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129798
 C. Aichberger and G. Jungmeier, “Environmental Life Cycle Impacts of Automotive Batteries Based on a Literature Review,” Energies (Basel) 13, 6345 (2020), https://doi.org/10.3390/en13236345
 H. H. Heimes, A. Kampker, C. Lienemann, M. Locke, S. Michaelis, and E. Rahimzei, “Lithium-ion battery cell production process,” 2019, https://www.pem.rwth-aachen.de/global/show_document.asp?id=aaaaaaaaabdqbtk
 S. Chae, S. Choi, N. Kim, J. Sung, and J. Cho, “Integration of Graphite and Silicon Anodes for the Commercialization of High‐Energy Lithium‐Ion Batteries,” Angewandte Chemie International Edition 59, 110–135 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201902085
 Z. Gao et al., “All-Solid-State Batteries: Promises, Challenges, and Recent Progress of Inorganic Solid-State Electrolytes for All-Solid-State Lithium Batteries,” Advanced Materials 30, 1870122 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.201870122
 T. le Varlet, O. Schmidt, A. Gambhir, S. Few, and I. Staffell, “Comparative life cycle assessment of lithium-ion battery chemistries for residential storage,” J Energy Storage 28, 101230 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2020.101230
 M. Baumann, J. Peters, and M. Weil, “Exploratory Multicriteria Decision Analysis of Utility‐Scale Battery Storage Technologies for Multiple Grid Services Based on Life‐Cycle Approaches,” Energy Technology 8, 1901019 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1002/ente.201901019
 R. Hassan, B. K. Das, and M. Hasan, “Integrated off-grid hybrid renewable energy system optimization based on economic, environmental, and social indicators for sustainable development,” Energy 250, 123823(2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2022.123823
 R. Kennedy, “How long do residential storage batteries last?,” PV Magazine, 2021, https://www.pv-magazine.com/2021/09/23/how-long-do-residential-storage-batteries-last/
 J. F. Peters, M. Baumann, B. Zimmermann, J. Braun, and M. Weil, “The environmental impact of Li-Ion batteries and the role of key parameters – A review,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 67, 491–506 (2017), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.08.039
 J. Wen, Q. Zou, Z. Zhang, J. Shi, and Y. Wei, “The scaling of charging rate and cycle number of commercial batteries,” Acta Mechanica Sinica 38, 222108 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10409-022-22108-x
 J. Liu et al., “Capacity fading mechanisms and state of health prediction of commercial lithium-ion battery in total lifespan,” J Energy Storage 46, 103910 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103910
 N. Narayan et al., “Estimating battery lifetimes in Solar Home System design using a practical modelling methodology,” Appl Energy 228, 1629–1639 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.06.152
 K. Yanamandra, D. Pinisetty, A. Daoud, and N. Gupta, “Recycling of Li-Ion and Lead Acid Batteries: A Review,” J Indian Inst Sci 102, 281–295 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1007/s41745-021-00269-7
 “What is an Ecopoint? How can I explain Ecopoints to my colleagues?,” BRE Group, https://bregroup.com/hrf_faq/what-is-an-ecopoint-how-can-i-explain-ecopoints-to-my-colleagues/
 M. A. Hannan et al., “Impact assessment of battery energy storage systems towards achieving sustainable development goals,” J Energy Storage 42, 103040 (2021), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103040
 M. Zhou, K. Liu, M. Wei, J. Zhang, S. Chen, and W. Cheng, “Recovery of Lithium Iron Phosphate by Specific Ultrasonic Cavitation Parameters,” Sustainability 14, 3390 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063390
 M. D. Bovea, V. Ibáñez-Forés, V. Pérez-Belis, and P. Juan, “A survey on consumers’ attitude towards storing and end of life strategies of small information and communication technology devices in Spain,” Waste Management 71, 589–602 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.040
 S. Abalansa, B. el Mahrad, J. Icely, and A. Newton, “Electronic Waste, an Environmental Problem Exported to Developing Countries: The GOOD, the BAD and the UGLY,” Sustainability 13, 5302 (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095302
 E. Garcia-Vazquez, P. Cartón, M. Domínguez, N. Rodríguez, A. Bustillos, and E. Dopico, “For a good selfie. Enhancing mobile phone recycling through simulated exposure to cobalt mining,” Sustain Prod Consum 26, 44–53 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2020.09.012
 S. K. Ghosh et al., “Waste electrical and electronic equipment management and Basel Convention compliance in Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) nations,” Waste Management & Research: The Journal for a Sustainable Circular Economy 34, 693–707 (2016), https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X16652956
 European Parliament, “New EU rules for more sustainable and ethical batteries,” 2022, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/headlines/economy/20220228STO24218/new-eu-rules-for-more-sustainable-and-ethical-batteries
 A. Jäger-Waldau, H. Ossenbrink, H. Scholz, H. Bloem, and L. Werring, “EU Directives, national regulations and incentives for photovoltaic solar energy,” 19thE uropean Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, 2004,https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264052713
 D. Bogdanov et al., “Radical transformation pathway towards sustainable electricity via evolutionary steps,” Nat Commun 10, 1077 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08855-1
 N. Fallah and C. Fitzpatrick, “How will retired electric vehicle batteries perform in grid-based second-life applications? A comparative techno-economic evaluation of used batteries in different scenarios,” J Clean Prod 361, 132281 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132281
 US Geological Survey, “Mineral Commodity Summaries 2021,” 2022, https://doi.org/10.3133/mcs2021
 O. Egbue, S. Long, and S. D. Kim, “Resource Availability and Implications for the Development of Plug-In Electric Vehicles,” Sustainability 14, 1665 (2022), https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031665
 C. B. Tabelin et al., “Towards a low-carbon society: A review of lithium resource availability, challenges and innovations in mining, extraction and recycling, and future perspectives,” Miner Eng 163, 106743 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mineng.2020.106743
 P. M. S. M. Rodrigues, A. M. M. C. Antão, and R. Rodrigues, “Evaluation of the impact of lithium exploitation at the C57 mine (Gonçalo, Portugal) on water, soil and air quality,” Environ Earth Sci 78, 533 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-019-8541-4
 V. Flexer, C. F. Baspineiro, and C. I. Galli, “Lithium recovery from brines: A vital raw material for green energies with a potential environmental impact in its mining and processing,” Science of The Total Environment 639, 1188–1204 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.223
 P. Dellicompagni, J. Franco, and V. Flexer, “CO2 Emission Reduction by Integrating Concentrating Solar Power into Lithium Mining,” Energy & Fuels 35, 15879–15893 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.1c01951
 The Economist, “Two new ways of extracting lithium from brine,” Feb. 26, 2022. www.economist.com
 N. Bolan et al., “From mine to mind and mobiles – Lithium contamination and its risk management,” Environmental Pollution 290, 118067 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2021.118067
 W. Liu, D. B. Agusdinata, and S. W. Myint, “Spatiotemporal patterns of lithium mining and environmental degradation in the Atacama Salt Flat, Chile,” International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 80, 145–156 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2019.04.016
 J. S. Gutiérrez, J. N. Moore, J. P. Donnelly, C. Dorador, J. G. Navedo, and N. R. Senner, “Climate change and lithium mining influence flamingo abundance in the Lithium Triangle,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 289 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2021.2388
 P. Marconi, F. Arengo, and A. Clark, “The arid Andean plateau waterscapes and the lithium triangle: flamingos as flagships for conservation of high-altitude wetlands under pressure from mining development,” Wetl Ecol Manag 30, 827–852 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11273-022-09872-6
 J. J. Feria-Díaz, F. Correa-Mahecha, M. C. López-Méndez, J. P. Rodríguez-Miranda, and J. Barrera-Rojas, “Recent Desalination Technologies by Hybridization and Integration with Reverse Osmosis: A Review,” Water (Basel) 13, 1369 (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/ w13101369
 C. F. Baspineiro, J. Franco, and V. Flexer, “Potential water recovery during lithium mining from high salinity brines,” Science of The Total Environment 720, 137523 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.137523
 W. Liu and D. B. Agusdinata, “Interdependencies of lithium mining and communities sustainability in Salar de Atacama, Chile,” J Clean Prod 260, 120838 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120838
 F. M. Dorn, “Changing territorialities in the Argentine Andes: lithium mining at Salar de Olaroz-Cauchari and Salinas Grandes,” Die Erde, Journal of the Geographical Society of Berlin 152, 1–17 (2021)https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Felix-Dorn/publication/350400373_Changing_territorialities_in_the_Argentine_Andes_lithium_mining_at_Salar_de_Olaroz-Cauchari_and_Salinas_Grandes/links/605dacc1458515e834707ca1/Changing-territorialities-in-the-Argentine-Andes-lithium-mining-at-Salar-de-Olaroz-Cauchari-and-Salinas-Grandes.pdf
 M. Vuola, “The intersections of mining and neoliberal conservation,” World Dev 152, 105816 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.105816
 F. Knobloch et al., “Net emission reductions from electric cars and heat pumps in 59 world regions over time,” Nat Sustain 3, 437 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0488-7
Leave a Reply