Author Topic: the dark side of cobalt  (Read 15733 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline madiresTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8276
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
the dark side of cobalt
« on: July 09, 2023, 01:05:03 pm »
Energy transition: The dark side of the electric car battery cobalt rush:



PS: Many Li-Ion batteries use cobalt in the positive electrode. LiFePO4 batteries are cobalt-free.
 

Offline m98

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: de
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2023, 01:47:39 pm »
Oh come on, none of those Amnesty activists owns a smartphone, laptop or camera also using Li-Ion batteries?
Fossil industry shilling going through the roof again.
 
The following users thanked this post: NiHaoMike, tom66, SeanB, bookaboo, Karel, Miyuki

Offline RoGeorge

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7012
  • Country: ro
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2023, 02:31:45 pm »
They lost me in the first 3 minutes with the "In the race of the climate change... whatever..." + insert alleged cause and some % number.  Tell me how significant those % are when other natural causes are considered,  like marine life microorganisms, volcanoes, etc., before complaining of fossil fuels and cow farts.  :horse:

The only race I see is the race for the destruction of the western world.

Sorry for the poor countries and their people being exploited in the name of the climate change.  It was never about climate or pollution.  That's the typical propaganda argument of whatever political decision the globalists want to justify.  It's about making you feel guilty if you don't support/comply/ruin your industry and your country in the name of CO2, diversity, or who knows what other fake justification.

Offline madiresTopic starter

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8276
  • Country: de
  • A qualified hobbyist ;)
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2023, 02:35:38 pm »
Fossil industry shilling going through the roof again.

Nope, the oil industry uses cobalt for desulfurization of crude oil.
 
The following users thanked this post: NiHaoMike, tom66

Offline m98

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 634
  • Country: de
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2023, 02:45:53 pm »
Nope, the oil industry uses cobalt for desulfurization of crude oil.
Valid point, which makes the title of that documentary even more misleading.
 

Offline Infraviolet

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1185
  • Country: gb
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2023, 04:21:12 pm »
All a waste of time anyway, batteries can never have the energy density to match fossil fuels, and in transport applications that really matters. If we want to get fossil fuels out of transport the only hope is hydrogen fuel cells (or hydrogen combustion engines), and the only way to achieve that is to build up the fuelling station infrastructure necessary. We should probably focus on phasing out fossil fuels from static uses (power plants) first, replacing coal/oil/gas with nuclear and renewables where doing so is already feasible without performance loss, transport should be one of the last things to seek to decarbonise, crazed net zero targets for specific dates should be scrapped, with a focus instead on sorting out the easy things ASAP, and laying the groundwork so some-day the harder things can be tackled.
 
The following users thanked this post: nctnico, KaneTW

Online Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9337
  • Country: fi
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2023, 04:48:39 pm »
(random populistic bullshit from 2011 decorated with the hydrogen joke)

Must be a bait, must be a bait, must be a bait  :palm:
 
The following users thanked this post: Ed.Kloonk

Offline Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7198
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #7 on: July 09, 2023, 07:32:29 pm »
Why is it that activists are always telling others what to do, instead of doing it themselves first and inviting others to come along?

At some point, I pointed out to an activist that their one-person yearly vacation flight to the other side of the world produces more emissions than a typical Finnish family car use does in a year, and they only responded with "That's not relevant!" (Se on eri asia!).

I like those who lead by example.  I don't like those who lead from behind, trying to tell others what to do.  I seriously dislike those who construct social narratives to try and exploit others.
 
The following users thanked this post: peter-h, Karel, JPortici, spostma, KaneTW

Offline Gyro

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 10174
  • Country: gb
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2023, 08:00:35 pm »
Instability in the Democratic Republic of Congo was the reason why AlNiCo magnets became uneconomical in the '70s, hastening the rise of Ferrite magnets. I guess the extraction and supply of some elements will always be an issue.
Best Regards, Chris
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15800
  • Country: fr
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2023, 08:06:29 pm »
Of course cobalt exploitation is kind of a disaster. But it's not sustainable as is in the long run anyway. IMHO.

Now I agree with the fact that these activists use questionable methods and have questionable goals.
Sorry, but just look at where their money comes from. These guys gotta eat. Do you know how wealthy Greta Thunberg has become? :popcorn:
 

Offline AVGresponding

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4931
  • Country: england
  • Exploring Rabbit Holes Since The 1970s
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2023, 09:34:58 pm »
And she's pledged the money to charity. Her parents are fairly well off anyway. Perhaps you could explain the relevance?
nuqDaq yuch Dapol?
Addiction count: Agilent-AVO-BlackStar-Brymen-Chauvin Arnoux-Fluke-GenRad-Hameg-HP-Keithley-IsoTech-Mastech-Megger-Metrix-Micronta-Racal-RFL-Siglent-Solartron-Tektronix-Thurlby-Time Electronics-TTi-UniT
 

Offline Njk

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 348
  • Country: ru
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #11 on: July 09, 2023, 10:58:34 pm »
Ten years ago we'd adopted a kitten. When he'd reached his teenage, we'd decided to let him to see the vet. I was not very excited, but that was the only way to stop him from pissing on everything. Looking at him now, I don't think he would be happier without the visit to the vet. Really. Now look at Putin, Trump, Travis Kalanick and the other guys of that sort. No matter where they are, they all are just different facets of the same evil: ambitions. When one wants to build a cabin in the wood by the DIY method, it hardly can be called an ambition. Ambition is when he wants to convince the others to do it for him. Of course, it's more effective way. More people involved, more damage is done. With more damage, more people are happy, the other living thing does not matter. It's not a technology problem, it's something more fundamental. I don't know how to handle it. To feed the ambitious guys with sedative drugs? In which way? To let them to see the doctor? How? That's the first problem to address, not the technology.
 

Online Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9337
  • Country: fi
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #12 on: July 10, 2023, 12:44:03 pm »
The silver lining is, cobalt is not absolutely mandatory for li-ion. The most energy dense NCA chemisty (as used by Tesla for example) already cuts the cobalt use by 80% or so compared to the classic LCO, but completely cobalt-free chemistries like LMO or LFP are not showstoppers, even though a tad worse in performance, LMO specifically in high-temperature calendar life and LFP in energy density.

If the price of cobalt or political pressure of using it becomes a problem, then we will see shift to those others chemistries whenever their performance is sufficient. Tesla is already producing LFP cars too, which was considered to be too low on energy density just a few years ago, and their owners seem to be quite happy about them. They have less range than the NCA-based models but still a lot more than the earlier generation EVs.
 
The following users thanked this post: NiHaoMike, tom66

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #13 on: July 10, 2023, 12:54:19 pm »
Why is it that activists are always telling others what to do, instead of doing it themselves first [snip]
Because if they do that, they'll end up living in caves or huts made from tree branches.
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline langwadt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4857
  • Country: dk
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #14 on: July 10, 2023, 01:17:03 pm »
Why is it that activists are always telling others what to do, instead of doing it themselves first [snip]
Because if they do that, they'll end up living in caves or huts made from tree branches.

freezing, hungry, in th dark ...
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7336
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #15 on: July 10, 2023, 02:10:04 pm »
All a waste of time anyway, batteries can never have the energy density to match fossil fuels, and in transport applications that really matters. If we want to get fossil fuels out of transport the only hope is hydrogen fuel cells (or hydrogen combustion engines), and the only way to achieve that is to build up the fuelling station infrastructure necessary. [...]

Hydrogen fuel cell cars are a joke that no one is laughing at.  And don't even get me started about hydrogen internal combustion.  The emissions from NOx and the terrible efficiency, even worse than fuel cells, means that it makes even less sense.

Batteries make far more sense for electric vehicles.

If you do the maths on the infrastructure required for EVs you will see that if every passenger car switched overnight we'd need approx 15-20% more electricity to be generated.  That isn't nothing, but it's also not ridiculous to expect the grid to grow by such a size by 2040 or so by which time the vast majority of cars will be electric.

Meanwhile if we produced truly green hydrogen from electrolysis the production method would require around 3x more electricity, plus another 10% of that to compress and distribute hydrogen.  You also need to fill the country with hydrogen filling stations which are not trivial constructions.  EV chargers (slow types) just need an AC grid connection, though it's not free it's not anywhere near as complicated as the infrastructure required for hydrogen.
 
The following users thanked this post: DenzilPenberthy, srb1954

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7336
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #16 on: July 10, 2023, 02:12:43 pm »
If the price of cobalt or political pressure of using it becomes a problem, then we will see shift to those others chemistries whenever their performance is sufficient. Tesla is already producing LFP cars too, which was considered to be too low on energy density just a few years ago, and their owners seem to be quite happy about them. They have less range than the NCA-based models but still a lot more than the earlier generation EVs.

Worth also noting that a Chinese manufacturer has just launched a sodium-ion battery car.  Sodium is even more abundant than lithium.  The energy density of the sodium-ion battery is said to be comparable to LFP.  Early days, but a very interesting technology.

https://www.electrive.com/2023/04/17/chery-becomes-launch-customer-for-catls-sodium-ion-batteries/
 
The following users thanked this post: NiHaoMike

Offline fastbike

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 72
  • Country: nz
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2023, 12:37:10 am »
Regardless of energy source, current levels of consumption critical resources of are unsustainable.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06083-8

The irresponsible mining of Cobalt is just a symptom of a dysfunctional economic system
 

Offline AVGresponding

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4931
  • Country: england
  • Exploring Rabbit Holes Since The 1970s
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2023, 05:37:31 am »
All a waste of time anyway, batteries can never have the energy density to match fossil fuels, and in transport applications that really matters. If we want to get fossil fuels out of transport the only hope is hydrogen fuel cells (or hydrogen combustion engines), and the only way to achieve that is to build up the fuelling station infrastructure necessary. [...]

Hydrogen fuel cell cars are a joke that no one is laughing at.  And don't even get me started about hydrogen internal combustion.  The emissions from NOx and the terrible efficiency, even worse than fuel cells, means that it makes even less sense.

Batteries make far more sense for electric vehicles.

If you do the maths on the infrastructure required for EVs you will see that if every passenger car switched overnight we'd need approx 15-20% more electricity to be generated.  That isn't nothing, but it's also not ridiculous to expect the grid to grow by such a size by 2040 or so by which time the vast majority of cars will be electric.

Meanwhile if we produced truly green hydrogen from electrolysis the production method would require around 3x more electricity, plus another 10% of that to compress and distribute hydrogen.  You also need to fill the country with hydrogen filling stations which are not trivial constructions.  EV chargers (slow types) just need an AC grid connection, though it's not free it's not anywhere near as complicated as the infrastructure required for hydrogen.

Please demonstrate the maths for this claim. I work for a local authority as a sparks and I have some knowledge of the difficulties we're facing in our plan to change the fleet to full EV; our infrastructure alone will require a very large (>£100m) capital investment to be able to handle this, and that's for just a few hundred vehicles.
nuqDaq yuch Dapol?
Addiction count: Agilent-AVO-BlackStar-Brymen-Chauvin Arnoux-Fluke-GenRad-Hameg-HP-Keithley-IsoTech-Mastech-Megger-Metrix-Micronta-Racal-RFL-Siglent-Solartron-Tektronix-Thurlby-Time Electronics-TTi-UniT
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #19 on: July 11, 2023, 07:51:11 am »
Let's not go there again. EV zealots keep making bold claims and ignoring hydrogen is becoming the new oil rather quickly. Realistically there will be a surplus of hydrogen which is generated during the summer using excess electricity which would be unused otherwise. That hydrogen needs to be used somewhere and transportation is a good use case. Just sit back and wait for the outcome  :popcorn:
« Last Edit: July 11, 2023, 07:57:12 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 

Offline tom66

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7336
  • Country: gb
  • Electronics Hobbyist & FPGA/Embedded Systems EE
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2023, 08:32:41 am »
No, let's go there because this keeps getting brought up and it needs to be put down as a myth.  You don't have to be a zealot to be disappointed by people misrepresenting the situation.  Hydrogen is the new oil...? Okay... it's not an energy source so I'm not sure what you're going with there, you still need electricity or natural gas to make it.  It's a rather inefficient way to store energy, it has some interesting use cases where batteries can't compete on power/energy density but it's really not that interesting outside of those areas.  Seasonal energy storage is definitely an interesting use case - but use the electricity produced to charge cars!

Please demonstrate the maths for this claim. I work for a local authority as a sparks and I have some knowledge of the difficulties we're facing in our plan to change the fleet to full EV; our infrastructure alone will require a very large (>£100m) capital investment to be able to handle this, and that's for just a few hundred vehicles.

Average EV efficiency = ~3.5 miles per kWh (e.g. VW ID.3,  Hyundai Kona,  Tesla Model 3 size car)
Average UK driver = 6800 miles per year [1]
Average energy consumption per car per year = 9000 / 3.5 = ~2570kWh + 10% for charging losses so call it 2800kWh
Number of cars on UK roads = 33 million [2]
Total annual energy consumption for cars = 2800kWh * 33 million = 93.2 TWh
Annual UK electricity production = 333TWh [3]

Proportion is therefore 27.8%.  A little higher than I remembered, I quoted 15-20%, but let's call it within the margin of napkin math.  Average mileage has been falling precipitously over the last two decades so it may well end up closer to 20%.

As for the cost to your local authority, the cost of local infrastructure upgrades is not the same as overall generation capacity; there's no doubt that we'll need to increase capacity there e.g. for rapid chargers or businesses/LAs needing to charge their fleet every night.  But, that being said for passenger cars (which is my figure), a car doing 6,800 miles per year would need to charge for only about 4 hours per week.  With smart charging, and cars spending most of their time parked up somewhere, it's possible to distribute loads in areas where there are capacity constraints.  Look into Octopus Intelligent for an energy company experimenting with this at an early stage, dispatching cars as load for wind turbine overproduction for instance.

[1] https://www.nimblefins.co.uk/cheap-car-insurance/average-car-mileage-uk
[2] https://www.racfoundation.org/motoring-faqs/mobility#a1
[3] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1094628/DUKES_2022_Chapter_5.pdf
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #21 on: July 11, 2023, 08:39:42 am »
Again, stop digging your own grave. There are numerous reports out there (easely found by Google) that have calculated that hydrogen infrastructure for mass use by cars is cheaper. And many of these reports seem to base their price comparison on charging your EV from your own socket instead of (more expensive) public charging. And again, if you start out from efficiency, then your calculation is wrong right off the bat. The only thing that counts are costs per distance travelled.

Also the notion to use cars as grid storage is flawed. First of all batteries are way too expensive (also due to needing lots of materials, including those which are harmfull for the environment to mine) for storing electricity for more than a half a day. Let alone seasonal storage which is what is needed. Secondly using a car's battery as storage means using a battery in a way that it hasn't been designed for and you'll be wearing the most expensive part of the car without getting the monetary value for that wear. The idea is similary stupid as using solar roadways to heat roads in the winter. The power companies love it though because it means a free lunch. No, it is making money with a lunch on top for them.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2023, 08:59:31 am by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 
The following users thanked this post: KaneTW

Offline PlainName

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7509
  • Country: va
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #22 on: July 11, 2023, 01:55:08 pm »
Quote from: nctnico
There are numerous reports out there (easely found by Google) that have calculated that hydrogen infrastructure for mass use by cars is cheaper

I'm not in either camp (happy with my petropolluter) but it seems to me that EV is the sensible way even if it costs more. Reason being that it's flexible: with hydrogen or petrol or fermented poo or whatever the infrastructure necessary is tied to the product. Sure, you can convert petrol garages to hydrogen, but it costs and takes forever (relatively speaking). On the other hand, with EV you can use ALL those products to produce the electricity in a few central places, and even combine mixed producers. The major infrastructure won't change depending on source.

Obvious advantage: if we were already EV-based and burning oil to get the electricity, the switch to solar and wind power would have zero effect on any car or the way they are charged or the way that charge is delivered. So hydrogen may be the next best thing, but it should be in deriving the electricity for EVs, not creating work to replace infrastructure that will itself be replaced when the next best thing comes along.
 
The following users thanked this post: tom66

Online Siwastaja

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 9337
  • Country: fi
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #23 on: July 11, 2023, 01:58:45 pm »
No, let's go there because this keeps getting brought up and it needs to be put down as a myth.

That will simply never happen. People with non-engineer mindsets will never understand this, even if it's totally obvious to anyone who has ever worked on the numbers or made observations of the reality around us. This hydrogen car revolution was supposed to happen numerous times already and the fact it never happens, exactly as predicted by physics and engineering, does not change the belief of those who want to believe.

It's exactly the same as with solar roadways. It's all demonstrable and doable, but doesn't make any practical sense. People like nctnico love these kinds of projects.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2023, 02:00:50 pm by Siwastaja »
 

Offline nctnico

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 28429
  • Country: nl
    • NCT Developments
Re: the dark side of cobalt
« Reply #24 on: July 11, 2023, 02:12:25 pm »
And yet extra hydrogen fueling infrastructure is being rolled out further every year. That is my real world observation. Another real world observation is that many car manufacturers have hydrogen cars ready for production in large numbers. That kind of puts a pin in 'it is obvious it will never happen'. If hydrogen is an obvious non-starter then why are companies investing billions into cars on hydrogen. Better apply for a job as CEO there, you'd save them lots of money. In the real world: cars on hydrogen take longer to arrive as the hydrogen needs to be sourced renewable, but it will get there. Likely at the end of this decade.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2023, 02:17:54 pm by nctnico »
There are small lies, big lies and then there is what is on the screen of your oscilloscope.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf