"To have, or not to have- that is the question", like Hamlet faced the dilemma on minerals. Geological survey of Finland (GTK) and their A/Prof S. Michaux faced too, and answered: “World doesn’t have enough mineral reserves for the energy transition” What's that all about?🧵

"Vetytalouden haaste ei ole teknologia vaan kannattavauus"- kirjoittaa @duunijukka ja näihin ajatuksiin realiteeteista on helppo yhtyä. Suoremmin sanottuna vetytalouden kannattavuus laskettiin joko tahallisesti tai tahattomasti moninkertaisesti pieleen. hs.fi/paivanlehti/15102026/a…

Jenny's annual solar- and storage thread.- without jargon 🌤️ Recommendation. xitter.cf/solar_chase/status/210…

Erittäin hyvä ajankohtaiskatsaus @fingrid_oyj:ltä sähkön riittävyydestä. Fingrid on tilanteen tasalla. Lyhykäisyydessään verkkoa suunnitellaan kaksinkertaisen sähkönkulutustilanteen varaan 2035 mennessä kuten pitääkin. Haasteita voi olla tehovajetuntien osalta luvassa kuitenkin jo 2030 jälkeen, koska markkinan ei odoteta korjaavan kaikkea kapasiteettivajetta.

Getting outside your bubble can be a challenging task but with books you can do it in a comfortable setting. Having argued with @triofrancos about the extent and the harm caused by the energy transition and especially lithium mining, I'm glad to find that from technological perspective, there's a thorough background work that has gone into this book. The need to address the climate change through technology is understood although, the motivation and some of the offered solutions might be different. If you want to understand the different grass-root setting of both mining activism but also the officials directing the legislation work there are vivid accounts and interviews in this book. The point where I find myself most at odds are some of the scale factors. Proper studies such as USGS and Apple's rock-to-metal ratio are cited. It is said that world's 12 000 mines cover roughly 65 000 km2 of land according to satellite data but then comes the catch. That figure is multiplied with a 50 km radius because according to a cited study, that is a buffer zone in which mining directly or indirectly contribute to the deforestation in the tropical conditions: "If you incorporate the 50-kilometer buffer zone, mining has a global footprint of 24,5 million square kilometers." (p. 65) That's: - 2,5-times the Europe's total land area- 10 Mkm2 - more than half of the global Agriculture land- 48 Mkm2 - more than half of all the global forests- 40 Mkm2 - more than 20-times the global urban and built-up land area- 1 Mkm2 World's total area is 141 million km2. I understand the need to account the total environmental harm caused by mines and mineral extraction, the tailings and so on, but it's impossible to continue the argumentation based on this kind of scale-factor issue. As said, there are good parts about this book in relation to countries in question, the extraction history, and the qualitative worries among some of the local indigenous groups nearby these mines. My main focus was to understand the quantifying method behind undertanding the harm caused by energy transition and especially battery mineral mining. From that point of view, I'm afraid that I cannot recommend this book. On the other hand, If you want to understand the mindset of different people affected by mines, yes go for it.

This is a balanced article although quite brief in detail which is why I’m happy to say that my 500 page (AI-free) book about the battery value chains (in editing process) will build on top of these general but perhaps not as generally known findings.

Imagine a market where electric heavy duty vehicles are already cheaper to operate than diesel trucks and where the RFNBO mandates will kick in further increasing the diesel price for the logistics companies in the next 5 to 10 years. Good luck with the RFNBO production projects. You'll need it. Findings by @transenv

That's 1% if the global medium and heavy duty truck sales. 📈 4,7 million last year. Can't wait to see these things on the road. xitter.cf/tesla_semi/status/2103…