“As we [Afghanistan and The United States of America] pursue our shared strategy to defeat al Qaeda, I’m pleased that our two countries are working to broaden our strategic partnership over the long term. Even as we begin to transition security responsibility to Afghans over the next year, we will sustain a robust commitment in Afghanistan going forward. . . across a full range of areas—including development and agriculture”
President Barack Obama, Remarks by President Obama and President Karzai of Afghanistan in Joint Press Availability, Monday, May 12, 2010.
September 29, 2009 | Posted by Michael McCarthy, Joseph S. Nye, Jr. Research Intern - 8:25am | 5 Comments
The Natural Security team has been very interested in critical minerals recently, and in the months to come we’re planning to look deeper into how minerals relate to U.S. national security. As part of our exploration, and hopefully because it informs blog readers like yourself, we will periodically take a good hard look at a particular mineral and issues related to its use and extraction. This week’s mineral of choice is lithium.
Lithium is the lightest metal in nature and an excellent conductor of electricity, and these two properties make it especially useful for batteries. In the past, lithium was used most commonly in glass, ceramics, and pharmaceuticals, but its use in batteries has taken a huge jump in recent years. Currently, 25% of mined lithium is used to produce batteries commonly found in portable electronics and hybrid cars. In fact, The New York Times reports that the hybrid automobile market is likely to generate most of the demand for lithium in the near- to mid-term. The high oil prices in 2008 raised the profile of hybrid cars, which in turn raised lithium’s profile in the automotive industry.
But the defense industry is paying attention to lithium as well. One 2007 report by the Defense Logistics Agency referred to lithium batteries as a “critical go-to-war item” (pdf) and recommended expanding the number of vendors to avoid supply disruptions.
Lithium seems to have bright prospects in automotive manufacturing, along with its use in tech and communication devices that are a major part of modern life as well as modern warfare. Therefore, DoD is probably not the only organization worried about supply chain security. This prompts several important questions about lithium. First, where does the United States get its lithium? The answer to this question is not entirely clear. The United States does have domestic lithium deposits, mainly in two areas of Nevada. But only one U.S. company currently mines lithium, and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) refuses to release U.S. production numbers so that it can protect the company’s proprietary information. (And, interestingly, one of the Nevada sites is being developed by a Canadian company.) But most sources indicate that the United States is one of the top five producers of lithium in the world, even if the exact numbers are unclear.
The USGS does note the countries that export to the United States. Between 2004 and 2007, 61% of U.S. lithium imports came from Chile, while 36% came from Argentina and only 3% from other countries. Chile is politically stable, and Argentina’s long-term outlook is relatively healthy despite economic problems earlier in this decade, so it seems that this wouldn’t present tremendous concerns. But going forward, the center of lithium influence is likely to shift to Bolivia, since vast reserves lie beneath its Salar de Uyuni salt flats. For the United States, this could be a problem: the Morales government remains hostile to U.S. concerns, and there is potential for instability given serious rifts in Bolivian politics.
The second important question about lithium: Are we merely swapping one resource dependency for another? The answer is, on the surface, yes. Energy stored in lithium batteries is not like wind or solar power. Lithium, like petroleum, is nonrenewable. The question then morphs into: How long can lithium remain a key ingredient for important components of our transportation and high-tech sectors? Some resource analysts have concerns about lithium’s long-term viability, while others believe lithium supplies are abundant enough to meet any future demand (CNET has a good summary of the debate here).
No matter who is closest to the truth, we should remember that lithium is not a permanent fix to concerns about energy security. Even if the United States continues to produce lithium, and discovers even more domestic lithium reserves soon, it may still need to import this mineral for the foreseeable future. Beyond this, we’re not entirely sure how much lithium is still hiding beneath the Earth’s surface. Both of these facts have ramifications for transportation and several other major sectors of the U.S. economy, proving that it is useful for the security community to think through the situation carefully.
Hello readers!
I wanted to take just a sec to respond to a critique of this post on a blog called Manifest Destiny (http://www.manifestdensity.net/2009/10/01/lithium/).
First, thank you, Mr. Manifest Destiny! Being a niche area of inquiry, we don't get a lot of debate, much to everyone's disadvantage. If there's one thing we love here at CNAS, it's good, heated debate that comes just short of physical.
There is one characterization I will take major issue with, and that is that he writes: "The other problem with the article is its wishy-washy buy-in of the peak lithium frame (the idea has been more forcefully expressed elsewhere)."
I most certainly don't buy into this, let alone in a wishy-washy way. I can't speak for the author of this post, as CNAS doesn't take institutional positions on anything (quite the contrary, really). But if you click the minerals tag to the side of this blog you'll see a fuller explanation on what we're thinking with regard to minerals - including reviews of historical lit where past scholars have considered questions of what the status of world trade, specifically in minerals, means to the United States economy and to our defense sector in particular. I think you'll find a lot more nuance there than this critique gives us credit for.
The problem is that the world is very different today, even compared to a decade ago. That does not mean that we're running out of anything per se, or that any shortages are (or are not) temporary. However, to dismiss out of hand that there are ANY considerations for DOD or for the country is equally inaccurate. Indeed, we would not be trying to scope out what the actual issues are on minerals given current circumstances if it the U.S. security community itself was not already reassessing the situation. There are brilliant recent NAS studies that we link to throughout our posts flagging the very real issues (again, issues regardless of finite or infinite quantities), as well as news articles of minerals working their way into our bilateral relations, and hopefully a bit of useful analysis from us on the subject. Concerns span from our stockpile management to export regimes, and these issues are ripe for further thinking and discussion.
I hope anyone interested goes on to read more of what we've said on this topic - and hits us with any critiques, any time. We're in the phase of exploring this problem and talking to people around Washington and beyond about the problems they are seeing, with the goal of advancing thought on this subject far beyond debates about peak anything.
Have a great weekend everyone...and Go Bucks!
Christine Parthemore
Alexwrote 47 weeks 5 days ago
I think you're missing the point when you refer to lithium as renewable or non-renewable. It's not a fuel, it's just a material, similar to copper or aluminum. The energy stored in lithium batteries comes from electricity, which can be generated from wind or solar power. Batteries can be recycled and the lithium in them reclaimed, similar to aluminum cans. I wouldn't really call aluminum a renewable resource, but it's not like there's any foreseeable shortage or worries about hostile countries refusing to trade it with us.
cparthemorewrote 47 weeks 5 days ago
Good points Alex. Lithium is definitely not the top mineral of concern, for the reasons you point out, but we're trying to tease out any future issues (not shortages per se, but any concerns) as different materials become more important to the economy, and particularly to defense systems. It may all be management issues, but they still need to be worked out and managed well. NAS did 2 great studies on minerals that we'll pull some points from for Monday's post. Need good figures on recycling though for this and some other minerals. Let us know if you have any good sources!
sburkewrote 47 weeks 4 days ago
The fact that lithium and some other minerals are recyclable (renewable is the wrong word) is, indeed, important. Many minerals -- especially those used in consumer electronics -- are not recycled much, though. Not a great situation, but a promising "resource" -- it's certainly possible to improve recycling through education and incentives, and that would greatly cut demand. It's been done...
Richard Grabmanwrote 46 weeks 3 days ago
Uh... how "recyclable" is lithium when used for such industrial processes as nuclear fusion (in H-bombs) and as a rocket propellant? Or, for that matter, in its relatively benign use in pharmaceuticals?
Your article also misses the fact that there are significant lithium deposits throughout the Americas (a huge new deposit was just discovered in Zatatecas this week), including the United States, as well as Portugal, Serbia, Australia. I realize it was just underpaid interns put to work on this, but this is the flimsiest excuse for U.S. intervention in Bolivia I've seen in years.
Add your comment
CNAS retains the right to delete comments that include words that incite violence; are predatory, hateful, or intended to intimidate or harass; or degrade people on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, or disability. In summary, don't be a jerk.
I think you're missing the point when you refer to lithium as renewable or non-renewable. It's not a fuel, it's just a material, similar to copper or aluminum. The energy stored in lithium batteries comes from electricity, which can be generated from wind or solar power. Batteries can be recycled and the lithium in them reclaimed, similar to aluminum cans. I wouldn't really call aluminum a renewable resource, but it's not like there's any foreseeable shortage or worries about hostile countries refusing to trade it with us.
The fact that lithium and some other minerals are recyclable (renewable is the wrong word) is, indeed, important. Many minerals -- especially those used in consumer electronics -- are not recycled much, though. Not a great situation, but a promising "resource" -- it's certainly possible to improve recycling through education and incentives, and that would greatly cut demand. It's been done...
Uh... how "recyclable" is lithium when used for such industrial processes as nuclear fusion (in H-bombs) and as a rocket propellant? Or, for that matter, in its relatively benign use in pharmaceuticals?
Your article also misses the fact that there are significant lithium deposits throughout the Americas (a huge new deposit was just discovered in Zatatecas this week), including the United States, as well as Portugal, Serbia, Australia. I realize it was just underpaid interns put to work on this, but this is the flimsiest excuse for U.S. intervention in Bolivia I've seen in years.
Add your comment