Improving lithium recovery in batteries will reduce EV costs. This is where a single source or two source spodumene supply is a benefit for a battery producer IMO because this is where significant cost savings can be made in lithium (and probably other battery materials). Been in a JV at the mining stage, downstream producers might have better luck in ensuring the LCE per kWh will head closer to the theoretical efficiency of the actual lithium need in batteries (the need for solid state batteries is higher than typical batteries, so not dealing here with solid state batteries in these conversions of theoretical efficiency). Currently you need roughly 0.9 kg per kWh, whilst the theoretical efficiency is closer to 0.4 kg per kWh.The difference as to why the theoretical lithium content in batteries differs to what you may see is simply that the batteries don't operate at 100% efficiency, like all batteries of whatever persuasion, and there are a number of reasons why, which are best explained in these links below. Reasons are among others irreversible capacity loss, discharge loss, cycle life capacity fade. IMO this is where I think the next phase of development will happen - improving battery efficiency to reduce the cost and thus exacerbate quicker EV takeup. Why this drivel - I think it is going to be a lot easier for battery makers to ensure they have a single source supply or few source supply options where been at the ground level (JV at the mine) they are able to get a better handle of the METs and what might need to be done to ensure that when they make the battery they can improve the efficiency and thus ensure greater energy density from each unit of lithium in the battery, thus getting closer to the theoretical efficiency, and that means lower cost.
http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/230991/local_230991.pdfhttp://www.meridian-int-res.com/Projects/How_Much_Lithium_Per_Battery.pdf
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-much-lithium-li-ion-vehicle-battery-paul-martin/The theoretical efficiency of lithium is 0.371 kg LCE per kWh, but at the moment we are at 0.9 kg LCE per kWh. Overtime (longer term) I see that coming down to around 0.6 kg per kWh - 0.7 kg per kWh, and that is not a concern were it to do that. It is unlike you will ever get to theoretical efficiency but I would expect overtime - say next 5 years - the LCE kg need per kWh to start reducing as technology/science continues to improve in this area. Given lithium is the 3rd lightest element hence lightness is the reason for speed of vehicle and why lithium is not going away any time soon, any reduction in lithium content per kWh, as long as it does not adversely impact speed and distance to recharge, is a good thing.(Note: Solid state batteries require around 2kg LCE per kWh at the moment, and that would come down too overtime with technology improvement, but this post is about traditional batteries.)Improving battery efficiency in terms of inputs per kWh, would mean the costs of EVs would further reduce, and more importantly take up of EVs would further increase meaning demand for EVs would further increase beyond current forecasts (which are largely built largely on 0.9 kg LCE per kWh). Or another way to put it, despite EVs needing less lithium (and other materials per kWh) at some point in time, the increase in EV demand more than compensates for the fall in LCE need in EVs. A bit like what you saw with takeup of say computers and typical technology change overtime - they become cheaper and functions improve, but demand accelerates.With demand projected to grow strongly for EVs as forecast now, any acceleration of that can only be good for lithium producers like LTR who will be getting to market early is my point - improving battery efficiency also means input prices don't have to fall drastically to accelerate demand is my point because of the demand growth itself and cost of vehicles coming down as material inputs in EV batteries reduce.For those wanting to understand where the 0.371kg LCE per kWh comes from - did this a while ago and posted it here when seeking to understand the articles above.1. The atomic weight of lithium is 6.94 grams/mole -https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/lithium
2. You get one electron per lithium atom, and there are 96485 coulombs per mole of electrons (or what some may refer to as the Faraday unit of charge)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_constant
3. Further more you have 3 electrons and 3 ions in lithium so becomes 1:1 so probably makes conversions easier
http://resources.schoolscience.co.uk/stfc/14-16/partch3pg2.html
4. One ampere is one coulomb per second.
5. One Amp Hour (Ah) therefore equals 3600 coulomb (60*60)
6. Theoretical lithium content becomes 96485/3600 = 26.80 AH, then divide by 6.94 grams/mole and you get 1 gram lithium = 3.86 Ah (or 0.26 grams lithium i= 1 Amp)
7. If your battery has a voltage of 3.6V multiply this by 3.86 Ah and you get 14.282 Watt Hours. See voltage data for batteries here:https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/confusion_with_voltages
8. 1000 Watt Hours = 1 kWh so divide 1000/14.282 = 70 g of pure lithium per kWh. If voltage is say 3.2V * 3.86Ah = 12.352 and divide this by 1000 and you get 81 g pure lithium per kWh
9. Multiply point 8 outcomes by 5.3 (to get to lithium metal) and you get a theoretical 371 grams of LCE per kWh of battery capacity, or 0.371 LCE per 1 kWh.
Lithium is the 3rd element in the periodic table - only helium and hydrogen are lighter elements. So in totality if you are going to produce a battery it needs to be light - meaning higherenergy density per kg of battery material- whilst having good voltage and watt release to pull the vehicle weight. There is a reason lithium is used in batteries, in combination with other minerals, and weight is one, and the important other is potential for energy density per kg of battery material (as that contributes to a less weighter battery).
Voltage is the other element. For example, the voltage of sodium batteries is around 2.7 volts, compared to about 3.7 for lithium ion batteries, meaning sodium has a slower recharge/discharge rates than lithium batteries, ultimately meaning they are not suitable for applications where a lot of power is required immediately for use - like EVs.
There is a lot to a battery is my point
As there is to deleterious elements and how they impact costs and battery performance. It is why spodumene as against lepidolite is preferred as a battery material input. To understand specs etc: Post #:71667622
All IMO
(20min delay)