That is a good read - thanks very much. I learned a lot about...

That is a good read - thanks very much. I learned a lot about the different uses of hydroxide and carbonate. But the article is quoting 2018 data and things have changed to allow for the Ni shortage, and price increase.
One thing overlooked when comparing scalar brines with hard rock is the impact on water quality and availability in populated arid regions where Li is extracted from brine and the water 'wasted' by evaporation.

I was interested in the reference of Li hydride as a storage for H2 as fuel.
Because it is also used as storage of H2 for use in thermo nuclear bombs !!

When that was first proposed the scientists were asked to determine how much of the Li would itself be fused to create extra energy.
As usual the scientists got it wrong, saying that only one isotope of Li would be partially 'burnt'. There are two stable isotopes Li6 and Li7 and quite a few unstable ones which got mixed up in the reaction - I know little about that, and don't intend to study further, but the net result was a very big bang.

During the first test in the South Pacific the Navy declared a danger zone - as usual. They did not move the village just outside the zone, allowed the Japanese 'fishing boat' to stay nearby and also the French frigate.
I have read that the village was lost, several 'fishermen' were blown away and the frigate returned to France for a new paint job.

It truly amazes me how much we rely on and accept the studies done by scientists - I could rant, to no avail no doubt.

[this is not to criticize scientists, rather the policy makers who need to hang their coat on something solid]