Yves here. We’ve been warning for some time that green energy advocates seldom seem to consider the environmental costs of mining key inputs like copper and lithium. It now turns out that actual costs are going to become more and more of an issue as mining companies have underinvested and seem likely to continue to do so.

We keep arguing that an energy “transition” is not going to do enough to reduce carbon emissions in anything remotely like the time window available to prevent catastrophic outcomes. Radical conservation has to be the leading strategy, but it’s too unappetizing and anti-consumerist for anyone mainstream to advocate it.

By Irina Slav, a writer for Oilprice.com with over a decade of experience writing on the oil and gas industry. Originally published at OilPrice

  • The global energy transition will require a huge volume of metals, and the prices of these metals are

    Keep reading this article on Naked Capitalism (Yves Smith) - Blog.

  • Leave a Reply