Advertisement

Brine: Key To Cheaper, Longer-Lasting Electric Car Batteries?

 
2,054 views Jun 4, 2012
Follow Antony

Extracting Lithium Carbonate From Brine

Extracting Lithium Carbonate From Brine

Enlarge Photo

Related Photo Galleries


See more photos »

There may not be a magic bullet for battery technology, but improvements can come from the most unlikely places. One of those is the San Andreas fault in California, where one of battery tech's futures is bubbling out of the ground.

As a tectonic fault line, the area is a great source of geothermal energy, where hot brine bubbling out of the ground is used to drive turbines, generating electricity.

The brine has another use, however. As it bubbles through the earth's crust, it collects minerals.


One of these, the BBC reports, is lithium--a key component in modern electric car batteries, and many other electrical devices.

Simbol Materials is extracting this lithium from the brine, not only accessing large reserves of this important metal, but doing away with the need to dig large, ecologically-dubious mines to extract the ore.

Battery startup Envia Systems has been using this lithium to great effect, and now believes it can make a battery of higher energy density and lower cost than has previously been possible.

Reduce the cost of the batteries and the cost of electric cars comes down--and with greater range, the appeal will also broaden.

A muddy, uninviting stretch of the San Andreas fault line may seem like an unlikely place to plan the future of EVs, but in providing both the minerals and the energy, it's also one of the greenest yet.

+++++++++++

Follow GreenCarReports on Facebook and Twitter.





Tags:
Posted in:
 
Contribute
Send us a tip Comment Contact the editor
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (16)

  1. fb_1001015277 avatar John Briggs Posted: 6/4/2012 5:14am PDT

    Very creative. Always nice to see a cleaner cheaper why to do something.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. brianoflondon avatar Brian of London Posted: 6/4/2012 5:26am PDT

    A key component of the flawed theories of Malthusian disciples (of which modern global warming proponents are just the latest in a long line) are claims that we are running out of everything.

    A key refutation of this is that every time we look like something is getting scarce, we look a little harder and find more of it or something better to replace it.

    Looks like we looked a little harder and found it. Again. Bravo.
     
    Post Reply
    0
    Bad stuff?

     

  3. Chris O avatar Chris O Posted: 6/4/2012 5:54am PDT

    Note that this article just reports a specific type of brine as a source of lithium, it says nothing about the amounts that could be extracted and the cost effectiveness of the process. Mind you: great to learn about a new lithium source, but the EVs-can't-work-because-there-isn't-enough-lithium myth has long since be debunked.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  4. SunPwr avatar Steve M Posted: 6/4/2012 7:16am PDT

    Scientific American did an article about this back on 9-29-11

    They say "You can produce 16,000 metric tons of lithium carbonate for every 50-megawatt geothermal power plant...Also, the company would not need to purchase soda ash to enable production of lithium carbonate, as is typically done today. Instead, Simbol will take advantage of waste carbon dioxide from the geothermal power plant itself to create the material."

    It sounds like a win-win situation.
     
    Post Reply
    +3
    Bad stuff?

     

  5. Chris O avatar Chris O Posted: 6/4/2012 8:16am PDT

    Thanks for the numbers, because when it comes to energy that's all that counts and the article doesn't have any. 16,000 metric tons of lithium carbonate is roughly good for 10 million KWH worth of battery capacity (1.5kg/KWH) so roughly 450,000 Nissan Leaf batteries. Sounds pretty impressive, depending of how many megawatt of these plants are installed or will be installed in the not too distant future.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  6. James Davis avatar James Davis Posted: 6/4/2012 5:36am PDT

    There is a geo geyser power plant in California, the oldest in the world, and they extract 100 tons of lithium a year from the brine; it is all shipped to China though because China owns the extraction company. From that same geyser, they extract about 10 tons of silver a year, about 3 to 5 tons of gold a year, and about 30 tons of other minerals a year. That sounds like a good solution to put in batteries. The best part...it's free.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  7. Chris O avatar Chris O Posted: 6/4/2012 5:40am PDT

    Title is incorrect: brine isn't the key to cheaper longer lasting car batteries, it's just a source of lithium. It's Envia systems work on lithium based batteries that could be the key to cheaper long lasting car batteries.

    In fact Envia Systems made some waves a few months ago claiming energy density of 400 watt-hours per kilogram energy density and $125/KWH cost, but quickly had to admit that "more work needs to be done to improve cycle life". Now Envia having fixed that little detail, that would be news...
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  8. fb_61206378 avatar Antony Ingram Posted: 6/4/2012 8:36am PDT

    Hi Chris, thanks for your comments.

    With the greatest respect, anyone actually getting past the simplified (not inaccurate) title will realize that there's a full explanation of the concept in the text.

    The key here is that lithium can be extracted from brine. Without the brine the lithium would have to be mined, so the title is correct.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  9. Chris O avatar Chris O Posted: 6/4/2012 1:20pm PDT

    Hi Anthony, thanks for the explanation but the title still makes little sense to me. Could you explain to me what a specific method of extracting lithium has to do with cheaper, longer lasting batteries? Because that's what the title explicitly suggests to me.

    My guess is that the title was meant to cover two completely unrelated stories in one article and it ends up suggesting a connection that just isn't there.

    BTW I did find the story about this new way of extracting lithium very interesting though some numbers could have added the context needed to judge it's relevance. Of course there is always the comment section to add to the fact finding!
     
    Post Reply
    +2
    Bad stuff?

  10. Roy_H avatar Roy Harvie Posted: 6/4/2012 5:40am PDT

    Although it is good to hear of a low-cost local source for lithium, I was under the impression that the material costs of lithium batteries is quite low and high volume production is required to reduce price. Am I right that the cost of lithium in a battery is almost insignificant?
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  11. fb_61206378 avatar Antony Ingram Posted: 6/4/2012 8:37am PDT

    I think the benefits are ecological as much as economical Roy - many will be pleased to hear that it's possible to extract lithium without requiring huge mines in order to do so.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  12. fb_100000502624690 avatar John McVicker Posted: 6/4/2012 10:03am PDT

    Another aspect is how many cells are needed "per car". The Volt has a 288-cell pack setup in three series strings of 96 cells of 15Ah each making 355V or so. If this pack could be made up of 96 cells of 45Ah each, that is far less input parts leading to better costs associated with the full pack. With three sets in parallel, one cell could go bad and 2 strings could propel the vehicle but throw a check engine light. One string going bad means no propulsion. I think in the end, it will come down to packing more capacity into each cell's physical dimensions and this is done through chemistry modifications. It may be that the best solution is two strings of x-cells is best to allow for some redundancy but not having to have three.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  13. fb_100000005296979 avatar Kent Beuchert Posted: 6/4/2012 6:05am PDT

    Recent results from researchers at Washington State University using nanotechnology (tin wire electrodes) has shown vast improvement - light years ahead of anything Envia has achieved - batteries which hold three times the capacity , recharge super fast and have the ability to be recharged many times more than batteries like Envia's. Presumably much cheaper in terms of initial costs and certainly enormously cheaper in terms of overall, lifespan costs ( two or more times cheaper). Claims that it can be commercialized in less than 12 months. If true, THE giant step required to make EVs practical and competitive. We won't have to wait long to find out if all this is true. Pray.
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  14. fb_1470388190 avatar David Laur Posted: 6/4/2012 9:52am PDT

    the amounts and varied elements that can be extracted from the brine (if true)is amazing to me and why not?? its already there. no need to dig for it. the brine is essentially a by product of the geo thermal plant so full utilization of the materials in the brine has to be better that dedicated holes in the ground to get the silver, gold, Lithium, etc!~!
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

  15. fb_100000502624690 avatar John McVicker Posted: 6/4/2012 9:58am PDT

    Does anyone know more about how much Li is needed per battery kWh? That would be a good indication of how much Li is really needed by the EV and grid-storage industries in the future. We have Li in all our consumer electronics (phones, iPads, iPods, RC cars, etc.) But more is needed for an EV. But how much Li is *really* needed per unit of storage (I picked kWh but it could also be per-cell which is about 15Ah or 20Ah).
     
    Post Reply
    +1
    Bad stuff?

     

  16. James Davis avatar James Davis Posted: 6/4/2012 1:20pm PDT

    John, there was a person commented, and I think it was on this blog, that he lives in America but owns an European electric car and the lithium battery was built in China and when he drives his car in London, and his electric stays in London, he gets 200 MPC. Now, if Europe and Japan can get over 200 MPC from a battery that Tesla Motors already has, why can't all electric cars get over 200 MPC? Maybe this blog should ask GM and the other two big three automakers, who thinks that batteries should only be good for a 40 MPC, why they do not want to build an electric car in America that can get over 200 MPC, or 350 MPC.
     
    Post Reply
    -1
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Advertisement
Advertisement

Find Green Cars

Go!

Advertisement

More from High Gear Media

 
 
Green Car Reports
  • Follow Us
  • Twiiter
  • Facebook
 
 
© 2013 Green Car Reports. All Rights Reserved. Green Car Reports is published by High Gear Media. Send us feedback. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC.