Connect with us

News

Lithium Mining is a Hot Topic In Nevada Thanks to Tesla

Lithium mining is suddenly a hot topic in Nevada, where a local state senator is up in arms about a deal to import lithium from Mexico. Other sources exist.

Published

on

Grid scale electricity storage concept via Tesla Energy

Grid scale electricity storage concept via Tesla Energy

 

Lithium mining has become a hot topic in Nevada largely because of Tesla’s interest in sourcing lithium hydroxide, one of the main ingredients needed for Gigafactory scale production of lithium-ion batteries.

Tesla announced it had signed a deal with Canadian company Bacanora and British company Rare Earth Minerals towards the end of August. Bacanora is a minerals explorer, while Rare Earth Minerals owns Sonora Lithium Project. That partnership is designed to develop a “low-cost”, “sustainable” mining project in Northern Mexico based on clay deposits found in the region.

The Sonora mine does not exist yet, but could yield between 35,000 and 50,000 tons of lithium deposits annually. The deal will be extended and scaled up contingent on the mine’s ability to meet Tesla’s forecasts and actual output from its Gigafactory. The two Sonora project partners will need to find debt or equity to finance the operation and Tesla is permitted under the deal to participate in financing activities.

The state of Nevada has agreed to give Tesla almost a half billion dollars in tax incentives in order to lure the Gigafactory to the site north of Reno, which seems little enough considering the increase in economic activity the factory will bring to the state. But now, a Nevada politician, Democrat state senator Tick Segerblom, has tweeted, “Tesla to get lithium from Mexico – where’s Trump when you need him?”

Advertisement

That got the Las Vegas Sun involved. They contacted Elon Musk, who tweeted back that press interest in the story was “unwarranted” as the lithium deal was “not exclusive” and had “many contingencies”. He said that Tesla would “definitely” be interested in talking to local suppliers of lithium feedstocks. According to the Sun’s sources, developing lithium mines in the US is a lengthy process taking as much as 10 years, while lithium mining operations already located in Nevada are either too small or nearing the end of their planned lifetime.

Now up pops Nevada Sunrise Gold Corporation, which apparently is a played out gold mining operation. It announced on September 2nd that it has “entered into a letter agreement for an option to purchase” a site in Esmeralda County, which is in Nevada’s Clayton Valley. The company believes that area could hold lithium brine deposits in subterranean aquifers, based upon studies and reports made of the local area.

Meanwhile, researchers at the University of Wyoming report they have discovered an enormous supply of lithium at the Rock Springs Uplift, a geological feature in southwest Wyoming. Initial tests indicate the lithium-rich brine from a 25-square-mile area could contain 228,000 tons of the stuff. That’s enough to meet annual U.S. demand and is twice the amount available at Silver Peak in Nevada, which is the biggest domestic lithium producer today.

What has the University of Washington team excited is that the lithium at the Rock Springs Uplift can be processed more cheaply than the lithium found at other locations, due to a number of factors.

Advertisement

First, extracting the lithium from brine requires large quantities of soda ash (sodium carbonate). The Rock Springs Uplift site is located within 30 miles of the world’s largest industrial soda ash supplies, so the cost of transporting it to the production area will be minimal.

Second, magnesium must be removed from brine before it can be used for lithium recovery and that can be an expensive process. The brine from the Rock Springs Uplift reservoirs is lower in magnesium than at other sites. Less magnesium means less money to remove it.

Third, the brine must be heated and pressurized to release the lithium it contains. Because the Rock Springs Uplift brine is far underground, it is already at a higher pressure and temperature than brine at existing lithium operations. That factor may eliminate an expensive step in the process, resulting in significant cost savings.

The Chinese thought they had cornered the market for lithium when they locked up rights to much of the world’s lithium supply located in Bolivia a decade ago. But apparently, the demand has created interest in new sources of supply. Hopefully, all this interest in lithium will spur competition which could lead to lower prices. And that could spell lower battery prices for the electric cars and electrical storage batteries of the future.

Advertisement
Source: PV-Tech

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

SpaceX Board has set a Mars bonus for Elon Musk

SpaceX has given Elon Musk the goal to put one million people on Mars.

Published

on

By

Rendering of a colonized Mars by way of SpaceX

SpaceX’s board approved a compensation plan for Elon Musk that ties his pay directly to colonizing Mars and building data centers in outer space. The details surfaced this week after Reuters reviewed SpaceX’s confidential registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, making it one of the first concrete looks inside the company’s financials ahead of a public offering.

The pay package will reportedly award Musk 200 million super-voting restricted shares if the company hits a market valuation milestone, with the most ambitious targets going further. To unlock the full award, SpaceX would need to reach a $7.5 trillion valuation and help establish a permanent human settlement on Mars with at least one million residents. Additional incentives are tied to developing space-based computing infrastructure capable of delivering at least 100 terawatts of processing power.

SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch

Long before SpaceX filed anything with the SEC, Elon Musk had already spent years framing Mars colonization as an insurance policy against human extinction. The philosophy traces back to at least 2001, when Musk first began researching Mars missions independently, before SpaceX even existed. By 2002 he had founded the company with Mars as the stated long-term goal.

Advertisement

In a 2017 presentation at the International Astronautical Congress, Musk outlined the specific vision that still underpins SpaceX’s architecture today. He described a self-sustaining city on Mars requiring roughly one million people to become viable, the same number now written into his compensation package.

SpaceX’s Starship, still in active development, was designed from the ground up to support the eventual colonization of Mars. Musk has stated publicly that getting the cost per ton to Mars below $100,000 is necessary to make mass migration economically feasible. Everything from Starship’s payload capacity to its full reusability targets flows from that single constraint. One can say that Musk’s latest compensation package has put a formal valuation on Mars for the first time.

SpaceX is targeting an IPO around June 28, Musk’s birthday, at a valuation of approximately $1.75 trillion. Between the Mars rover contract, the Golden Dome software group, Space Force satellite launches, and now a pay structure built around interplanetary colonization, SpaceX has become the single most consequential contractor in American space and defense. The IPO will put a public price tag on all of it for the first time.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla’s biggest rivals fights charging wait times with a modern approach

Published

on

Tesla V4 Supercharger installation ramping in Europe

Earlier this week, we wrote a story on how Tesla is launching a new Supercharging Queue system to mitigate problems between drivers when there is a wait to charge.

Rather than potentially having people end up in a physical conflict, Tesla’s approach is to determine who is next to charge based on geographic data.

Tesla launches solution to end Supercharger fights once and for all

But some companies, notably Tesla’s biggest rival in China, BYD, are taking a different approach, focusing on charging speeds rather than how they will manage delays.

Advertisement

BYD’s approach, especially with its tests of ultra-fast “Flash Charging” technology, is to eliminate the length of a charging session. At the heart of this strategy is BYD’s second-generation Blade Battery paired with 1,500-kW Flash Chargers.

Unveiled earlier this year, the system charges compatible vehicles from 10 percent to 70 percent state of charge in just five minutes and from 10 percent to 97 percent in nine minutes.

Real-world demonstrations on models like the Yangwang U7 and Denza Z9 GT have shown the tech delivering roughly 250 miles (400 kilometers) of range in just five minutes. This would essentially match or beat the time it takes to fill a gas tank.

Advertisement

Sometimes, gas pumps get congested, and there are lines. You rarely see conflicts at pumps because filling up a tank rarely takes more than five minutes.

Tesla’s fastest Supercharger build currently is the v4, which can deliver up to 325 kW for Cybertruck and 250 kW for other models, but there are “true” sites that are capable of up to 500 kW. This enables speeds of up to 1,000 miles per hour, or 1,400 miles for 350 kW-capable vehicles.

The breakthrough stems from BYD’s vertically integrated ecosystem: a new 1,000-volt architecture, 10C charging rates, and proprietary silicon-carbide chips that minimize internal resistance while protecting battery health.

The company plans to install 20,000 Flash Charging stations across China by the end of 2026, with thousands already operational and global expansion eyed for Europe and beyond later this year.

Advertisement

Early rollout targets popular models, including upgrades to high-volume sellers like the Seal and Sealion series, bringing five-minute charging to mainstream prices around 100,000 yuan (about $14,000).

This approach contrasts sharply with Tesla’s software solution. Tesla’s Virtual Queue uses geofencing and the app to assign turns at crowded sites, addressing driver disputes and idle time. It’s a clever fix for today’s network realities.

Yet, BYD’s philosophy is simpler: make charging so fast that waits barely exist. A five-minute stop becomes as convenient as a gas-station visit, reducing station dwell time, easing grid strain, and lowering range anxiety for long trips.

For consumers, the difference is potentially tangible. They’ll spend more time driving and less time parked. It is just another way Tesla and BYD are pushing one another to improve the overall experience of EV ownership.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla wins big as NHTSA drops three-year, 120k unit probe against Model Y

In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Asia | X

A probe into over 120,000 2023 Tesla Model Y units has been closed by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The probe ends without the agency requiring any action from Tesla.

The probe, designated PE23-003, opened in March 2023 and stemmed from just two consumer complaints involving low-mileage Model Y SUVs.

In all, 120,089 Model Ys were impacted, but in two cases, drivers reported the complete detachment of the steering wheel from the steering column while the vehicle was in motion. NHTSA’s initial review revealed that the vehicles had been delivered without the critical retaining bolt that secures the steering wheel to the splined steering column.

Factory records showed each car had undergone an “end-of-line” repair at Tesla’s facility, during which the steering wheel was removed and reinstalled. The bolt was apparently omitted after the repair, leaving only a friction fit between the wheel and column to hold it in place temporarily.

According to NHTSA documents, this friction fit maintained the connection during initial low-mileage driving until forces during normal operation caused the wheel to detach. Both vehicles that were impacted were repaired under warranty with no injuries reported, and no additional incidents surfaced during the agency’s three-year review.

Advertisement

Tesla Model Y steering wheel detachments prompt NHTSA probe

After analyzing manufacturing processes, complaint data, and field reports, NHTSA concluded the issue was isolated to those two post-repair vehicles rather than indicative of a systemic defect in Tesla’s production or quality control.

The closure means the agency has determined no recall or further enforcement is warranted for this specific missing-bolt condition.

This outcome marks the second NHTSA investigation into Tesla closed without action this month, as a recent probe into the company’s “Actually Smart Summon” feature was also resolved in April.

Advertisement

Tesla Full Self-Driving feature probe closed by NHTSA

The two resolutions provide some relief for Tesla amid the continuous and somewhat unfair regulatory scrutiny of its vehicles, including open inquiries into driver assistance systems.

Importantly, the closed probe does not involve or affect Tesla’s separate May 2023 voluntary recall of certain 2022-2023 Model Y vehicles. That recall addressed a different issue—steering-wheel fasteners that were installed but not torqued to specification—prompted by a service technician’s observation of a loose wheel during unrelated repairs.

Tesla identified a small number of related warranty claims and proactively addressed the matter without NHTSA mandate.

Advertisement

The Model Y remains one of the world’s best-selling vehicles, and Tesla continues to refine its lineup, including the recent “Juniper” refresh. While federal oversight of the electric vehicle pioneer remains intense, this decision underscores that isolated manufacturing anomalies do not always translate into broader safety defects requiring recalls.

Continue Reading