Add lithium to water in a chemistry lab, and you’ll get an incendiary reaction. The same might be said of opening new lithium mines: The prospect can spark conflicts when it comes to water.

Mining companies and the U.S. government are investing in increased extraction for lithium, which is a critical component in some renewable energy technology, especially electric vehicle batteries and large grid-scale storage batteries.

The IRA injected the Department of Energy (DOE) Loan Programs Office with about $11.7 billion to support new loans for energy projects, including mines for needed metals like lithium. This builds on earlier Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) grants for battery material supply chains. The IRA also offers tax credits of up to $7,500 on eligible electric vehicles, creating additional demand for lithium by the auto industry.

With funding from the IRA, DOE and BIL, lithium miners have gained new financial vigor and governmental votes of confidence. Yet some worry what impact this newfound funding will have on the environment.

Domestic mining is still primarily governed by the outdated 1872 Mining Law, which didn’t enshrine environmental protections, but “declared all valuable mineral deposits in land belonging to the United States to be free and open to exploration and purchase,” according to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) website.

Through the National Environmental Policy Act, environmental impact statements are required ahead of major projects like mines, although some statements have been criticized as rushed or insufficient. But ultimately, it’s up to companies to choose and monitor their own environmental protections and community agreements, even if they’re collecting federal subsidies.

Lithium mining poses a range of risks to biodiversity and groundwater supplies, depending on the methods used. There are three main types of lithium extraction: brine evaporation, hard rock mining and clay mining.

In brine evaporation, groundwater is first pumped to the surface. There, 90% of it is evaporated away to concentrate the lithium brine, with additional freshwater needed to complete extraction.

Hard rock and clay mining often begin with “dewatering,” or removing groundwater to reach the ore, in addition to needing more water to process the ore. These methods also require chemicals such as sulfuric acid for processing, which in cobalt and copper mining has led to contamination of local water systems.

Concerned about the risks, local residents and environmentalists have resisted new mines with tactics from protests to litigation — but a government-supported lithium boom appears to be underway regardless.

New mines emerge

A Center for Biological Diversity map lists more than 125 lithium extraction projects in the western U.S. alone. Seven are inactive, and the majority are in various stages from exploration to development. Most of the proposed mines are in Nevada, predicted as a future “Silicon Valley of lithium.”

Albemarle’s Silver Peak mine in Nevada, a brine evaporation mine that has come under scrutiny for depleting groundwater aquifers in an increasingly-arid region, is the only currently active U.S. lithium mine. That’s likely to soon change, since the IRA has incentivized metal and mineral extraction in the United States and in countries with a U.S. free trade agreement.

Through its loan support and EV sales incentives, the IRA has made lithium mines more profitable, and less financially risky for companies opening new ones. Several lithium companies, including ioneer, Allkem and Albemarle, lobbied for the IRA’s passage or for provisions within it. A 2023 IRA impact report from S&P Global noted “aggressive mine capacity additions” for lithium planned in countries including the United States, Chile and Australia.

Domestically, most lithium deposits are in the West, where water supplies are already stressed.

“There’s a critical minerals and specifically a lithium rush unfolding, especially, but not exclusively, across the western U.S.,” says Providence College political scientist Thea Riofrancos, who specializes in studying the impact of resource extraction on communities. She adds that some of the mining interest predates the IRA, “but it’s picked up a lot since the IRA, because that sent such clear signals.”

Yet new mines pose risks to the region’s biodiversity. In a lawsuit against a Rover Metals exploration project, the Center for Biological Diversity and Amargosa Conservancy alleged that even exploratory drilling near springs in the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge in Nevada would threaten endangered and endemic species. Active mines can have even bigger impacts.

“We need lithium as a part of our transition off of fossil fuels, but it can’t come at the expense of biodiversity or our most precious protected areas,” Patrick Donnelly of the Center for Biological Diversity, said in announcing the lawsuit. “Some places have to be off-limits to resource extraction, and Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge is at the top of the list.”

Thacker Pass on track

The Thacker Pass mine run by Lithium Americas is on track to become the second active lithium mine in the United States. The project in far northern Nevada may be indicative of what’s to come as more government-fueled mines pop up.

The lithium clay mine is under construction, with most Phase 1 construction costs covered by IRA support: General Motors is investing $650 million in exchange for the mine’s lithium. The U.S. Department of Energy provided a conditional $2.26 billion low-interest loan. Permitting came earlier, from President Trump’s administration. In 2028, the Thacker Pass mine is expected to reach full capacity production.

The DOE said the loan will provide General Motors with enough lithium for 800,000 electric vehicles a year and “reinforces the Biden-Harris Administration’s whole-of-government approach to strengthening America’s critical materials supply chain, which is essential to building America’s clean transportation future and enhancing our national and energy security.”

Questions about ‘voluntary’ mitigation

Lithium Americas plans to recycle and reuse withdrawn water an average of seven times. Its Phase 1 water consumption is estimated to be about 929 million gallons per year, equal to “around five alfalfa irrigation pivots,” according to the company’s blog.

Lithium Americas purchased existing agricultural water rights, so the operation won’t increase groundwater withdrawal, although existing groundwater withdrawal may still be unsustainable. It has also outlined plans for nearby habitat restoration. A post-mining reclamation plan is intended to reduce long-lived environmental impacts by refilling pits and restoring the surface.

But implementing and tracking mitigation strategies like these is left up to the companies. 

“What I think is concerning is the proliferation of lots of voluntary governance mechanisms that companies don’t have to do,” says Riofrancos. “What’s important — and it sounds old-fashioned, maybe — is regulation that’s binding; that’s enforceable; that carries sanctions, fees, punishments, fines, whatever, if the regulations are not obeyed.”

Riofrancos believes such regulations, plus sustained protests against irresponsible mines, could get the mining industry to “do better.” She says the IRA-supported DOE loan program represents a missed opportunity to tie robust regulations to mining projects: “It’s very light on guardrails and requirements for loan recipients.”

It’s also unclear how much mitigation is realistically possible.

“There’s ways to tinker around the edges, but ultimately, there’s no mitigating an open-pit mine,” Donnelly, the Great Basin director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said in an interview. “(These mines) cause impacts to the water table, impacts to wildlife, impacts to local and Indigenous communities.”

He believes IRA loans and other federal subsidies help new mines get permitted in spite of environmental risks: “The DOE’s kind of waving a magic wand and saying, ‘This mine is okay to permit.’ ”

But the exact risks of each new lithium mine are tricky to measure. The three different types of mines can have different effects, depending on variables including location, says David Boutt, a hydrogeology researcher and professor at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Companies are often reluctant to share data that would help scientists evaluate impacts, he says.

“It’s hard to establish a number, like, ‘This one has like a 30% less environmental impact than the others,’ ” Boutt says. “We don’t see these numbers, because a lot of the impacts are local and hard to quantify.”

Sacred site to become lithium mine

Yet for people living near mining sites, the risks can feel tangible. Dean Barlese, an elder from the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe, says he’s opposed to the Thacker Pass mine both because it’s at an Indigenous sacred site, and because his people’s lives are intertwined with the local ecosystem.

“A lot of people think it’s just a desert wasteland,” he says. “But the medicines we use are still out there. As Native people, we still gather our food, roots, berries — we’ve survived here for thousands of years.”

Barlese says he’d rather not see mining projects near Indigenous communities at all, regardless of community benefits agreements and environmental mitigation plans. “I would encourage the public to really look into the devastation that getting a bit of lithium does.”

Lithium demand could be reduced if investments were made in public transit and walkable communities, so fewer people were buying cars, Riofrancos says. Although the IRA includes investments in battery recycling, it doesn’t incentivize efforts to reduce surging lithium demand. Instead, it supports extraction to meet the demand, and helps ensure that the extracting companies can profit.

“ ‘Green energy’ is not green energy,” says Barlese. “Money speaks louder than anything else.”

Another possible solution to the mining debate would be an energy transition that uses less lithium.

“One way to reduce demand for lithium (or any battery metals) would be to make smaller batteries, or batteries that are more resource-efficient,” says Riofrancos. Two-thirds of current EV models are SUVs or large vehicles; small- and medium-sized EVs account for only a quarter of EV sales in the United States. Incentivizing smaller vehicles, which can use smaller batteries, could ultimately lead to fewer lithium mines.

Other battery chemistries are another option.

“Given the complexity of getting a permit, of getting the social license, of having everything in place, it’s going to take a long time (to open new mines),” says Boutt, the hydrogeologist. “And perhaps by the time we get to the point where we are developing those resources, we’ll have different battery technology where we’re not as reliant on lithium.”

Floodlight is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates the powerful interests stalling climate action.

Billions in US funding boosts lithium mining, stressing water supplies is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Electric vehicles are gaining ground in Nevada, with new cheaper models and federal incentives enticing drivers away from gasoline-dependent transportation.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is expected to soon issue updated pollution limits for new passenger cars and trucks that could slash billions of tons of planet-warming carbon dioxide pollution. 

And in Nevada, the push for widespread electric-car adoption by President Joe Biden could also be a boon for the state economy. 

EV advocates at a press conference Wednesday highlighted how electrification has created high-paying union jobs and billions in infrastructure investments.

Nevada has pulled in $15 billion in private investment in electric vehicle and battery production, creating more than 12,000 jobs, according to a recent analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund, an environmental advocacy group.

Nevada ranks fifth in the country for new investments in electric vehicle and battery manufacturing, according to the Environmental Defense Fund. The state also ranks fifth in terms of electric vehicle adoption per 1,000 vehicles, with about 45,000 registered electric cars on the road.

Investments in infrastructure for electric vehicles have been spurred by $27 billion in federal, states, and local investments nationally.

The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245 in Nevada has trained thousands of union workers to meet those new demands of electric vehicle infrastructure. Hunter Stern, assistant business manager of IBEW Local 1245, said large investments in charging stations in the state have already resulted in good-paying union jobs for Nevada residents.

In 2021, the Nevada Legislature passed a mandate requiring NV Energy to implement a plan to expand infrastructure for charging stations. The utility invested $100 million in an effort to build nearly two thousand electric vehicle chargers over three years.

“That’s now jobs for IBEW members,” Stern said, during the press conference at the Las Vegas Convention Center. “We hope to install more and more charging stations at facilities like the convention center. We’ve gotten charging stations in many of the casinos and hotels here in Las Vegas, and in Reno and Sparks, but we want more.”

A recent analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation found that the growth of charging infrastructure could create more than 160,000 jobs by 2032, while about 50% of those jobs will be electrical installation, maintenance and repair jobs.

“Those numbers are going to be skewed higher here in Nevada because of the commitment the state has already made, the plans that are being made, and the work that is coming,” Stern said.

Stern said IBEW Local 1245 in Nevada has trained more than 1,000 workers in the state to work on transportation electrification and has increased the training capacity at facilities in the state to train enough workers to meet demand. 

“The state adopted an aggressive, IBEW-endorsed EV charging infrastructure plan that has already met several of its targets. We are meeting the moment,” Stern continued.

Nevada is also on track to receive $38 million from the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) program, funding that will pay for even more charging stations in the state.

Clark County Commissioner William McCurdy highlighted the county’s plan to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, a goal that will require electric vehicle buy-in, said McCurdy.

“It’s our job as elected officials to address extreme heat and attain air quality standards. Nearly a third of greenhouse gas pollution comes from the transportation sector, and zero emission clean cars will protect the health of Las Vegas and help clean our air,” McCurdy said.

“We’re doing everything we can to improve our electric vehicle infrastructure,” he continued.

Electric vehicles are also becoming more affordable in Nevada, according to the International Council on Clean Transportation.

There are 37 EV models available in Nevada for less than the average new vehicle purchase price of $48,000, with 12 models available for less than $35,000, said David Kieve, president of Environmental Defense Fund Action, the political arm of the group. On average, Nevadans can save up to $27,900 on an electric vehicle compared to a gas-powered vehicle over 10 years, according to the group’s analysis.

Americans are being incentivized more than ever to purchase elective vehicles. Electric vehicle owners can receive as much as a $7,500 federal tax rebate on a new EV or $4,000 for a used one.

“If you’re not sure whether your next car, truck, or SUV should be electric, just ask one of the 45,000 people in the state who own them. Ask them whether they miss spending their hard-earned money at the gas pump, or on costly repairs,” Kieve said.

Nevada Current is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Nevada Current maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Hugh Jackson for questions: info@nevadacurrent.com. Follow Nevada Current on Facebook and X.

Electric vehicles a boon for Nevada’s economy, workers and environment, say groups is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.

Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2021. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals. 

A fight over the future of natural gas is simmering in Nevada, highlighting questions about equity and energy costs that could cloud efforts to decarbonize the buildings sector.

Nevada is one of at least seven states this year where lawmakers are considering proposals to phase out or reduce the use of natural gas in homes and businesses, according to a tally by the American Gas Association. A state lawmaker, Assemblywoman Lesley Cohen (D), is set to introduce legislation that would set emissions reduction targets for buildings over the next 30 years, to ultimately achieve a 95% decrease in emissions from buildings by 2050. Under the plan, energy efficiency measures and electrification would be the primary means for decarbonization.

While it’s unclear if the bill will pass, Gov. Steve Sisolak (D) backed a climate strategy last year that called for switching from gas-powered to all-electric buildings. The Nevada debate is also showcasing how gas ban proposals nationally can face resistance not just from gas utilities, but from business and union groups in states with Democratic-controlled legislatures.

Supporters say the measure provides a framework for the state to plan a gradual, cost-effective transition away from natural gas that protects ratepayers from potential so-called stranded assets — such as new gas infrastructure that could be of little value in the future. They say the proposal is a natural step for Nevada to move toward its commitment to “zero or near-zero” greenhouse gas emissions economywide by 2050, as the state pledged to do under a bill passed in 2019.

“Responsible energy planning isn’t just a necessity, it’s an unparalleled opportunity to create good jobs, diversify our economy, and lead the nation in renewable energy innovation,” Cohen said in a statement. “In a legislative session full of economic challenges and tough choices, this one is easy: let’s make sure we’re getting the best returns on our energy investments in the years to come.”

But Southwest Gas, the utility that services the majority of homes and businesses in the state, plans to oppose the bill, and real estate and minority business groups are also raising concerns. Echoing arguments made in statehouses and cities around the country that have considered similar gas transition measures, opponents say that limiting the ability of new businesses and homes to connect to the gas system will drive up energy costs and hurt small businesses.

Under the plan, gas providers would need to decrease emissions 2.5% by the end of 2022 relative to 2016 levels and continue reducing emissions every two years thereafter. To achieve the initial 2.5% reduction, Southwest Gas estimates that it would need to electrify over 120,000 homes and businesses by the end of next year, which could drive up rates for customers still in the system, said Scott Leedom, the utility’s director of public affairs.

“The legislation would eliminate consumer energy choice and eliminate the smallest utility bill to replace it with an all-electric bill that would typically be the highest,” Leedom said.

The Natural Resources Defense Council — which helped craft the bill along with the Nevada Conservation League and Cohen — argues that the measure would actually lower energy costs by ensuring that ratepayers don’t foot the bill for new, costly gas projects.

The bill also directs the state Public Utilities Commission to assess strategies for minimizing impacts on low-income customers and managing workforce changes that could result from reduced gas use. The PUC would prepare a report in 2022 recommending policies for easing the transition, the bill states.

“What this bill does is give the commission more tools to scrutinize gas investments,” said Dylan Sullivan, a senior scientist with NRDC in Reno, Nev. “We’re at risk of gas utilities wasting ratepayer money and making the transition problem more difficult.”

A ‘job killer’?

Backers of the Nevada bill say the evidence in favor of all-electric buildings is significant and is supported by state reports.

Last year, the Nevada Climate Initiative — a division of the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources — released a report supported by the governor on potential policies the state could pursue to meet its climate goals, which included a transition from gas to all-electric buildings (Energywire, Dec. 3, 2020).

A separate report from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection also said last year that the state could provide incentives for new construction and existing buildings “to switch from fossil fuels to all electric,” to reduce emissions from buildings.

“The fact that [electrification] is prevalent in each of those reports shows a real commitment from the governor to invest in those proposals to make sure we’re moving forward and reaching our greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals,” said Paul Selberg, executive director of the Nevada Conservation League.

Some national studies have also found that connecting heating systems and appliances to the electric grid could be a cost-effective way to decarbonize buildings. A major report released in December from Princeton University, for example, said that electrification of buildings must increase dramatically this decade if the United States is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 (Energywire, Dec. 16, 2020).

Others who support the bill say it could boost jobs and the economy. Unlike some other states considering building electrification, such as Colorado and California, Nevada has no significant gas reserves, but it does have solar and geothermal resources and a growing clean energy economy.

The gas industry counters that electrification is prohibitively expensive. It has instead promoted low-carbon fuels such as renewable natural gas and “green” hydrogen. But it’s not clear whether large quantities of those fuels could be safely mixed into gas pipelines at a reasonable cost, and few utilities are currently planning RNG or hydrogen investments that would substantially reduce emissions.

Other skeptics, like the local chapter of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, disagree that the plan would create jobs. The bill could effectively end the gas industry in the state and drive up energy costs in the process, said Danny Thompson, a consultant for IBEW Local 1245 and two local chapters of the International Union of Operating Engineers, a union within the AFL-CIO.

“We’re looking at this as a job killer,” Thompson said.

Some Democrats in the Legislature may oppose the measure, as well. During a recent committee meeting on the state’s climate change strategy, Democratic Assemblywoman Daniele Monroe-Moreno questioned the idea of getting rid of gas stoves, saying she wasn’t ready to give hers up “just yet.”

For now, the NRDC and other groups supporting the bill are meeting with different groups and individuals about the proposal, Sullivan said.

Cohen, the bill sponsor, said she is hopeful that lawmakers will support the bill, given that the Legislature unanimously approved a 50% renewable energy standard during the last session.

“I’m working hard to do that outreach and listen to all perspectives about this energy transition,” Cohen said in a statement.

Fight over natural gas ban roils Nevada is an article from Energy News Network, a nonprofit news service covering the clean energy transition. If you would like to support us please make a donation.