General Discussion Banter GLN, page-12877

Thanks Paul,
Yes, enthusiasm for anthropogenic climate change is starting to get considerable push-back which is growing in volume.
Hard to know just how much pull back will occur.
I believe the pull-back is occurring because...

• "band wagons" only hold the attention span of band-wagon enthusiasts and people who live for a cause for so long. Soon they will be on to the next one. In my life time, it started with concern generally for pollution (SMOG, trash being dumped, water pollution etc.), Vietnam marches, Ban The Bomb, and the hippy rebellion (free love (aka Sex), flower power etc.) - anti-pollution was a good thing. But I was just a bit too young to capitilize on the age of promiscuity (by the time I got my driver's license it was already trending back the other way) and the flowers were wilting. Next cab of off the rank was male chauvinism and the feminist movement, just in time for my prime rooting years (another kick in the nuts), then there were real fears of an impending Ice-Age. Acid rain was next. Then someone discovered global CO2 levels were rising and invented the Green House effect. By then, the natural climate cycle was toward warming and people put 2 plus 2 together and got 9. People have been saturated with climate anxiety and many of the earlier prognostications of melting ice-caps, raising sea levels, and general amageddon haven't come to pass. There are some credibility issues.
• Hardcore believers: But, like the anti-nuclear enthusiasts, the hardcore can persist years into the future, probably will be the same for climate change, Plus many have invested both political capital and real money into it - so it will probably persist for another decade.
• Embarrassed scientists: two kinds, those that questioned the validity of climate science and got ostracized, de-funded, and fired will be looking for pay-back and those that went all in perpetuating the myth will be fighting hard to double down on their position. Going to be fun watching them duke it out.
• Questionable logic: Logical thinkers Initially deduced that electric cars were no better for the environment citing “the long tailpipe” concept; the idea that electric cars simply shifted the place where fossil fuels were burnt back to the power station supplying their charging electricity. Electric car proponents argue that home solar will address this through solar panels. Cars will recharge overnight at home. Small problem, the sun doesn't shine at night. And charging a home solar battery during the day to charge an electric car battery at night is nuts.Maybe the power generation industry will transform to renewables addressing this concern. A lot of expensive cogs have to fall into place.The shortage of charging stations remains a significant hurdle (or a business opportunity). One wonders the effect this will have on already maxed out electricity grids. Despite flaws in the logic, electric vehicles feature prominently in the climate change narrative. Buying an electric car signals virtue. No longer just for tree huggers; electric is going mainstream. And the business opportunities are huge. For many, there is good reason not to question the fundamental assumptions; and most people seem to like the whole climate change zeitgeist; it's defining the current generation. There's just too much emotion, reputation, and investment to contemplate the possibility that the assumptions are wrong. Belief defines its own logic.
• Voters: the average man in the street is happy to go along with any form of nonsense as long as they don't feel too much pain. Right now in Germany the pain is real. In Australia if they can't find a way to keep the lights on at a reasonable price, and keep personal taxation at reasonable levels then the average voter will punish the politicians at the polls. It's coming. The Labor party doesn't really believe in climate change but they believe in siding with the greens and jumping on the current voter belief. The really hard line socialist loony left in the party see crippling the energy sector as another way of making the population dependent on the welfare of the state - a great first step toward socialism.

What does this all mean for the future of Lithium?

I am guessing it will be fine because as I said before, the amount invested in electrification and battery technology has the momentum to push it to the end. But, I can see there will be a tug-of-war over two conflicting ideologies. If public opinion falls on the side of "I think we woz conned" then another very valid reason to continue with electrics will be invented by the marketing guys. Living in a world full of BS is fine as long as you aren't kidding yourself, only others.

Welcome to real world.

(All my opinions and I do enjoy having a rant and like the sound of my own writing - take no notice of what I have written).