Connect with us

Published

on

Ultimate Guide to Lithium and Lithium Prices

What is Lithium?

Lithium, hailed as the ‘white gold‘ of modern times, is reshaping battery technology. Known for its lightweight nature, unparalleled electrochemical potential, and high energy density, lithium stands at the forefront of energy storage, driving the global transition to renewable energy. Its journey from a basic mineral to a crucial battery component highlights its pivotal role in technological advancement and sustainable energy solutions.

Amid the push for net zero emissions by 2050, lithium assumes paramount importance. The soaring demand necessitates ramped-up production, urging advancements in mining, refining, and sustainable extraction and processing technologies. 

As nations and industries align towards a greener future, lithium emerges as a linchpin in driving technical innovation and sustainability efforts. But before lithium turns out to be this important, it’s interesting that this unique element has a fascinating origin story. 

Humanity’s interaction with lithium spans just over 200 years. In the 1790s, Brazilian scientist José Bonefácio de Andrada e Silva discovered two new minerals, petalite and spodumene, on the Swedish island of Utö. 

Later, in 1817, Swedish scientist Johan August Arfwedson identified a new element in these minerals. Working in the lab of chemist Baron Jöns Jacob Berzelius, Arfwedson isolated a sulfate that did not contain any known alkali or alkaline earth metals. He named this new element lithium, derived from the Greek word “lithos,” meaning stone, due to its grey, stone-like appearance.

Where Does Lithium Come From?

Some of the lithium found in the rechargeable batteries of our smartphones, laptops, and EVs dates back almost 14 billion years ago.

The lithium cycle begins with magma that contains lithium rising to the Earth’s crust during volcanic activity. This magma cools and crystallizes into rocks such as granites or pegmatites. Over thousands of years, weathering breaks down these rocks, releasing lithium salts that flow into rivers. Most of this dissolved lithium ends up in the oceans. 

However, in some high mountainous regions like the South American Andes, rivers terminate in closed basins. Here, water evaporation leaves behind lithium-enriched brine in salt flats, known as salars.

salt flats or salars

Besides these natural deposits, lithium can also be sourced from oilfield brines, geothermal brines, and clays. Although lithium is not rare, it is highly reactive and never found in its pure form in nature. It ranks as the 33rd most abundant element in the Earth’s crust, with an estimated 98 million tonnes.

What Are The Applications and Uses of Lithium?

Lithium stands out for its extraordinary properties. It is the lightest and least dense solid element on the periodic table, with a standard atomic weight of 6.94. Highly reactive, lithium metal ignites on contact with water, a familiar demonstration in chemistry labs. 

Consequently, it is only found in mineral or salt forms in nature. In its metallic form, lithium is a soft, silvery-grey metal with excellent heat and electric conductivity, making it ideal for storing and transmitting energy.

Lithium is so soft it can be cut with a knife and has one of the lowest melting points (180.5 °C) and boiling points (1,347°C) among metals. Its high electrode potential and low atomic mass provide a high charge and power-to-weight ratio, which makes lithium especially suitable for use in rechargeable batteries.

Lithium Batteries: Powering the Future

A critical element in the production of rechargeable batteries, lithium is vital for electric vehicles (EVs), hybrids, laptops, and mobile phones. Lithium-ion batteries are favored by car manufacturers for their ability to store significant energy in compact spaces and quick recharge capabilities. 

EV batteries

Notably, lithium iron phosphate batteries are esteemed for their safety and durability, making them ideal for stationary storage and secure EV applications.

In the realm of EVs and lithium-ion batteries, two primary types of lithium, lithium carbonate, and lithium hydroxide, dominate. Major lithium producers often supply both variants to meet the demands of EV manufacturers, alongside catering to other industries requiring diverse lithium applications. 

Conversely, smaller lithium companies typically specialize in the production of a single lithium type.

Diverse Applications Beyond Batteries

The versatility of lithium goes beyond battery technology, impacting various sectors that leverage its unique properties. In aerospace, lithium’s lightweight yet robust characteristics enhance fuel efficiency and performance in aircraft and spacecraft. 

Incorporating lithium into glass and ceramics yields stronger, more durable products with enhanced thermal resistance, ideal for sturdier and more efficient cookware, tiles, and household items.

Furthermore, lithium compounds serve as high-temperature lubricants, enduring extreme conditions to ensure smooth operation for heavy machinery and vehicles under intense stress and temperature. This wide array of applications underscores lithium’s pivotal role, not only in driving cleaner energy solutions like electric vehicles but also in propelling manufacturing processes and product functionalities across diverse industries. 

The breadth of its applications underscores global dependence on lithium for technological advancements and sustainability initiatives. But how exactly is lithium produced or mined?

How is Lithium Mined?

Various ways are available to extract lithium, but two major ones exist to produce industrial lithium.

  1. Conventional Lithium Brine Extraction

The majority of commercial lithium production today comes from extracting lithium from underground brine reservoirs, primarily located in the Lithium Triangle of the Andes (Bolivia, Argentina, and Chile) and in China.

li brine recovery

Lithium brine recovery is a straightforward but time-consuming process. Salt-rich water is pumped to the surface and into evaporation ponds. Over months, water evaporates, precipitating various salts and increasing lithium concentration in the remaining brine.

During evaporation, hydrated lime (Ca(OH)2) is added to remove unwanted elements like magnesium and boron. Once lithium concentration is sufficient, the brine is pumped to a recovery facility where the following steps occur:

  • Brine purification to remove contaminants.
  • Chemical treatment to precipitate desirable products and byproducts.
  • Filtration to remove solids.
  • Treatment with soda ash (Na2CO3) to precipitate lithium carbonate (Li2CO3).
  • Washing and drying of lithium carbonate to produce the final product.

2. Hard Rock Mining

Hard rock mining, more complex and energy-intensive than brine extraction, involves extracting lithium from minerals such as spodumene, lepidolite, petalite, amblygonite, and eucryptite. Spodumene is the most abundant, providing most of the world’s mineral-derived lithium.

hard rock mining or spodumene

Australia leads in spodumene production, with operations also in Brazil, Portugal, southern Africa, and China. New mines are expected in North America and Finland by 2025. The process involves:

  • Mining and crushing the ore.
  • Roasting at 2012°F (1100°C), cooling to 140°F (65°C), milling, and roasting again with sulfuric acid at 482°F (250°C) (acid leaching).
  • During acid leaching, lithium ions replace hydrogen in the acid, forming lithium sulfate and insoluble residue.
  • Adding lime to remove magnesium.
  • Using soda ash to precipitate lithium carbonate.
  • Lime slurry may adjust pH to neutralize excess acid.

3. New Lithium Production Methods

In the US, commercial-scale lithium production mainly comes from a brine operation in Nevada. However, there’s growing pressure to increase domestic production to secure lithium supplies.

Opportunities for new methods include:

  • Direct lithium extraction from geothermal brines (e.g., Salton Sea, CA) and produced water from shale gas fracking (Texas).
  • Extraction from lithium-bearing clays in Nevada.

Various production methods are being tested, including:

  • Acid leaching with sulfuric and hydrochloric acid.
  • Using hydrated lime to remove impurities and neutralize waste before returning it to the environment.

These innovations aim to enhance domestic lithium production and ensure a stable supply of this critical metal.

What is The Current State of the Lithium Market?

In the rapidly evolving landscape of the lithium market, competition is fierce and dynamics are swiftly changing. With the price of lithium batteries constituting 40% of an electric vehicle’s production costs, major EV manufacturers like Tesla, Ford, and BYD are actively seeking cost-effective alternatives. 

As global aspirations for emission-free transportation by 2050 intensify, about 30 nations have committed to phasing out the sale of new fuel-engine cars, driving demand for critical EV minerals.

China currently leads the lithium battery production market, but the United States and latecomer South Korea are aiming to challenge its dominance. Amid this dynamic environment, understanding the nuances of lithium is crucial. The next sections explore market and price dynamics, the key players, and the outlook associated with the burgeoning lithium industry.

Asia-Pacific’s Dominance and Its Global Impact

The global lithium market has been significantly shaped by the commanding influence of the Asia-Pacific region, spearheaded by economic powerhouses such as China, Japan, and Korea. Recognizing the transformative potential of lithium, especially in battery technology, these nations swiftly invested in the industry, initially targeting consumer electronics and later expanding into EVs.

Their strategic vision included not only production and processing but also the entire lithium supply chain, from extraction to advanced battery manufacturing. This comprehensive approach has granted them considerable leverage over global battery technology trends and pricing dynamics.

In contrast, North America has struggled to keep pace with this rapid progress. Hindered by a fragmented approach and a lack of cohesive strategy and investment, the region’s lithium industry lags behind its Asia-Pacific counterparts. 

This disparity has hindered the development of a robust domestic lithium market in North America. This leaves the region vulnerable to supply fluctuations and pricing determinations driven by Asia-Pacific leaders.

China’s stronghold extends beyond LFP batteries, encompassing lithium-ion battery, cathode, and anode production, as well as lithium, cobalt, and graphite processing and refining. 

Despite efforts by governments in Europe, the United States, and South Korea to develop domestic battery supply chains, the majority of the EV battery supply chain is expected to remain concentrated in China for the foreseeable future, maintaining its lead in global battery production capacity until 2030, as projected by the International Energy Agency (IEA).

The Shifting Trend in Lithium Batteries

Tesla and Ford Motor, along with other major automakers, have embraced lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries as a cost-effective alternative for some of their EVs, moving away from cobalt-based and nickel-based lithium-ion batteries prevalent in Europe and the US. LFP batteries, identified as the most economical lithium-ion battery type in 2022, now constitute around 40% of global EV production. Demand for this battery is projected to rise substantially in the coming years. 

Tesla’s shift to LFP batteries at its Shanghai plant since October 2022 signals a broader industry trend. Its peers like Mercedes-Benz Group AG, Volkswagen AG, and Rivian Automotive Inc. also commit to integrating LFPs into their vehicles. 

This shift is largely facilitated by Chinese manufacturers like Contemporary Amperex Technology (CATL) and BYD, which dominate the LFP market, accounting for 99% of global LFP battery production. CATL, in particular, stands as the world’s largest EV battery maker, supplying batteries to Tesla and various other automakers. 

Understanding Lithium Prices: Key Factors and Trends 

The global appetite for lithium has surged, propelled by the burgeoning battery industry and the widespread adoption of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles (EVs). This surge in demand casts a glaring spotlight on the current state of lithium supply, underscoring the escalating consumption rates worldwide. 

In this segment, we delve into the intricate dynamics of various factors driving the market, examining how the industry is responding to this mounting need. Key factors such as supply and demand dynamics, mining capacities, geopolitical influences, and technological advancements play pivotal roles in shaping the delicate balance between supply and demand. 

Understanding these factors is crucial for stakeholders in the lithium industry, from miners to battery manufacturers and investors. Here are the primary elements that impact lithium prices:

Navigating the Supply-Demand Dynamics

The lithium market exhibits characteristics of an immature market. The supply swings between deficit and surplus due to strong growth and infrastructure development challenges. 

With rechargeable batteries constituting around 85% of global demand, the surge in EV uptake has led to soaring demand. 

However, the slow pace of infrastructure development has hindered supply growth, resulting in price spikes in 2022. As EV subsidies decrease and prices normalize, we anticipate a controlled decline, settling around $20,000 per tonne by the decade’s end.

Therefore, any imbalance in the supply and demand equation directly affects prices. Any oversupply can depress prices until demand catches up. 

Conversely, a surge in demand, driven by the EV boom, can outpace supply, pushing prices up. This is exactly what happened in November 2022 when a record-breaking lithium price rally happened, reaching over five-fold increase. 

battery grade lithium prices

Unraveling Geopolitical Influences

Geopolitical factors significantly influence the lithium market due to the concentration of lithium reserves in specific regions. Countries like Australia, Chile, and Argentina hold substantial lithium reserves and are major players in the global supply chain. Political stability in these countries is crucial. Any political unrest or policy changes can disrupt supply and affect global prices.

Moreover, government policies regarding mining operations, environmental standards, and export regulations can also impact lithium production and prices. Favorable policies can boost production, while restrictive regulations can hinder it.

International trade policies, including tariffs and trade agreements, further influence the flow of lithium across borders. For example, trade tensions between major economies can lead to tariffs on lithium products, affecting global supply chains and prices.

This is what happen recently with the United States announcing its plan to increase tariffs on Chinese imports, including EVs, batteries, and solar cells. 

Breaking Down Technological Developments

Advancements in technology have a dual impact on lithium prices by affecting both demand and supply. 

  • Battery Technology: Breakthroughs in battery technology can significantly influence lithium demand. The development of alternative battery chemistries, such as solid-state batteries or sodium-ion batteries, could reduce reliance on lithium, potentially decreasing its demand and price. On the other hand, innovations that enhance lithium-ion battery performance can boost demand.
  • Extraction and Processing Technologies: Technological improvements in lithium extraction and processing can increase supply efficiency and reduce production costs. For example, advancements in direct lithium extraction (DLE) techniques can make it easier and more cost-effective to extract lithium from brine resources, positively impacting prices.

Disentangling Environmental Regulations

Environmental considerations are increasingly shaping the lithium market today. 

Stricter environmental regulations on mining practices can limit lithium supply and drive up prices. Mining operations must comply with environmental standards to mitigate their impact on ecosystems and water resources, which can increase operational costs.

Furthermore, the growing emphasis on reducing the environmental footprint of lithium extraction is prompting the industry to adopt greener practices. These sustainable techniques, such as using renewable energy in mining operations and recycling water, may initially increase costs. However, they are expected to lead to long-term sustainability and potentially stabilize prices.

There is also rising pressure from consumers and investors for companies to adhere to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria. Companies that prioritize sustainable and ethical practices may gain a competitive edge, influencing market dynamics and prices.

Quality Challenges in Battery-Grade Lithium Production

As lithium increasingly powers rechargeable batteries, ensuring high-quality lithium products for battery use becomes paramount. Producing battery-grade lithium involves intricate refining processes to meet stringent quality and purity standards. 

New refineries typically start with lower-quality technical-grade lithium, necessitating refining improvements to achieve battery-grade purity. Consequently, despite an overall supply surplus, the battery-grade lithium market may face short-term constraints until refining operations are optimized.

What are the Top Lithium Producing Countries?

In 2023, three countries – Australia, Chile, and China – dominated global lithium production, collectively accounting for 88% of the total output.

top lithium producing countries 2023

Australia: Leading the Charge

Australia stands as the world’s top lithium producer, sourcing the mineral directly from hard-rock mines, particularly spodumene. Over the past decade, Australia witnessed a remarkable surge in production. In 2013, output stood at 13,000 metric tons, soaring to an impressive 86,000 metric tons by 2023.

Chile: Brine Extraction Expert

Chile follows closely behind Australia in lithium production, albeit with more modest growth. The South American nation primarily extracts lithium from brine sources, with production climbing from 13,500 tonnes in 2013 to 44,000 metric tons in 2023.

China: Closing the Gap

China, also harnessing lithium from brine, has been steadily approaching Chile’s production levels. From a modest 4,000 metric tons in 2013, China ramped up domestic production to 33,000 metric tons in 2023. 

Additionally, Chinese companies have expanded their influence in the global lithium market, with three of them ranking among the top lithium mining entities. Tianqi Lithium, the largest among them, holds a significant stake in Greenbushes, the world’s largest hard-rock lithium mine in Australia.

Argentina: A Rising Contender

Argentina emerges as the fourth-largest lithium producer, tripling its output over the past decade. With increased investments from international players, Argentina aims to further enhance its lithium production capacity.

With major producers scaling up to meet the surging demand, particularly from the clean energy sector like electric vehicle batteries, the lithium market recently experienced a surplus. This oversupply led to a significant price collapse of over 80% from the record highs witnessed in late 2022.

How to Invest in Lithium? Stocks, ETFs, and Derivatives

Due to the nascent stage of the lithium market, the range of investment products available is relatively limited compared to other commodities. Nevertheless, investors can still tap into this dynamic market through two primary avenues: lithium stocks and lithium ETFs.

Lithium Stocks:

Investing in individual stocks remains one of the most direct ways to gain exposure to the lithium industry. However, it’s crucial to recognize that stocks serve as proxies for the market’s performance.

The soaring costs of lithium don’t always translate into corresponding increases in lithium stock prices. Establishing new mining operations can be capital-intensive, and ultimately, a stock’s valuation hinges on the company’s financial health. Despite this caveat, lithium stocks have demonstrated robust performance over the past five years. 

Investing in lithium stocks offers several benefits. Firstly, individual lithium stocks provide significant earning potential if the company performs well. Additionally, many lithium stocks pay dividends, offering investors regular income that can be reinvested to bolster portfolio growth. 

Moreover, some lithium producers have alternative revenue streams, which can help mitigate the volatility associated with lithium prices. However, investing in lithium stocks also entails certain risks. For instance, putting all investments into one or two lithium stocks can result in a lack of diversification in the portfolio. 

Furthermore, the return on lithium stocks is heavily dependent on the financial health of the company, necessitating regular updates on the company’s fundamentals and thorough research.

Lithium ETFs

For investors seeking exposure to the lithium market without the time-intensive task of researching individual stocks, lithium exchange-traded funds (ETFs) offer a convenient option. These ETFs track an index composed of a diversified collection of lithium stocks, providing you with instant access to a broad portfolio that includes both lithium producers and manufacturers.

Here are two prominent lithium ETFs:

  • Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF (LIT): LIT comprises 39 different lithium and battery stocks. With $4.5 billion in assets under management, this ETF charges an annual fee of 0.75%.
  • Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF (BATT): BATT is solely focused on lithium battery providers. Holding $194 million in assets, this ETF charges an annual fee of 0.59%.

Investing in lithium ETFs presents its own set of benefits. ETFs provide instant diversification across a broad range of lithium-focused stocks, thereby reducing the risk associated with individual stock selection. Also, ETFs spread investment risk across a large portfolio of stocks, making them less risky than individual stocks. 

Furthermore, similar to individual stocks, some lithium ETFs offer dividend schemes, providing investors with the opportunity for positive cash flow. Nevertheless, there are risks associated with investing in lithium ETFs as well. 

For example, during upward trends in the lithium market, returns from ETFs may not be as substantial as those from individual stocks. And take note, ETFs are not free products; providers charge investors a percentage fee for operating and maintaining the ETF.

Direct Investment Through Commodities Market

For those interested in direct investment, lithium can be traded in the commodities market through futures and options. These derivatives allow you to buy and sell access to lithium as a material, though they come with significant risk and volatility, making them unsuitable for inexperienced investors.

Futures Contracts

A futures contract is an agreement to buy or sell a commodity at a future date for a specified price. There are two types:

Standard Futures Contracts: You commit to buying the actual commodity. If you hold the contract until expiration, you must purchase the physical lithium.

Cash Settlement Futures Contracts: Instead of exchanging the physical commodity, the parties settle the contract’s value in cash.

Options Contracts

Options contracts allow you to trade the value of an asset, with the added flexibility of choosing whether to execute the contract at expiration. This differs from futures contracts, which must be executed regardless of market conditions. When buying an options contract, you pay an upfront fee known as a “premium.”

Investing in lithium offers several pathways, including stocks of lithium producers or users, funds that aggregate lithium-related equities, and direct commodity trading through futures and options. Each method carries different levels of risk and complexity, catering to various investor preferences and experience levels.

Who are the Major Lithium Companies? 

1. ALBEMARLE: Market cap: US$14 billion

Albemarle, based in North Carolina, stands as the largest lithium company by market cap and the world’s leading lithium producer, boasting over 7,000 global employees. Following a 2022 realignment, Albemarle now operates two primary business units, with a particular focus on lithium-ion battery and energy transition markets under its Albemarle Energy Storage unit. This division oversees lithium carbonate, hydroxide, and metal production.

With operations spanning Chile, Australia, and the US, Albemarle holds a diverse portfolio of lithium mines and facilities. In Chile, the company produces lithium carbonate at its La Negra conversion plants, leveraging brine from the Salar de Atacama. 

In the US, Albemarle aims to bolster domestic production in line with the Inflation Reduction Act. It owns the Silver Peak lithium brine operations in Nevada’s Clayton Valley, set to double lithium production by 2025. Albemarle received a $90 million critical materials award from the US Department of Defense in September 2023 to enhance domestic lithium production and support the EV battery supply chain. 

Additionally, the company plans to revive the Kings Mountain lithium mine in North Carolina, backed by US government funding. Albemarle also plans to develop the Albemarle Technology Park in North Carolina for advanced R&D in lithium innovation.

2. SQM: Market cap: US$12.07 billion

SQM, a chemicals giant operates in over 20 countries, serving customers across 110 nations. The company’s diverse business areas span lithium, potassium, and specialty plant nutrition.

Primarily operating in Chile, SQM extracts brine from the Salar de Atacama and processes lithium chloride into lithium carbonate and hydroxide at its Salar del Carmen lithium plants near Antofagasta. The company is expanding production at Salar del Carmen from 180,000 MT to 210,000 MT, initiating this year. 

To mitigate environmental impact, SQM announced a $1.5 billion investment in the Salar Futuro project, focusing on advanced evaporation technologies, direct lithium extraction, and a seawater desalination plant.

Despite uncertainty stemming from Chile’s National Lithium Strategy, SQM’s existing contracts, extending through 2030, are expected to be respected by the government. In early 2024, a partnership formed between SQM and state-owned mining company CODELCO, with CODELCO holding a majority control stake.

In Australia, SQM is developing the Mount Holland lithium project, recognized as one of the world’s largest hard-rock deposits, in partnership with Wesfarmers. Anticipating lithium hydroxide production to commence by H1 2025, SQM’s lithium carbonate capacity was projected to reach 210,000 tons by the beginning of 2024.

3. Tianqi Lithium: Market cap: US$10.43 billion

Tianqi Lithium is a subsidiary of Chengdu Tianqi Industry Group based in China. As the world’s largest hard-rock lithium producer, Tianqi Lithium operates assets in Australia, Chile, and China. The company holds a notable stake in SQM, having acquired a 2.1% share in 2016, later increasing it to 23.77%.

In Australia, Tianqi owns the Greenbushes mine, acquired in 2012 through the purchase of Talison Lithium. The company also developed a lithium hydroxide plant in Western Australia’s Kwinana Industrial Area, commencing production in Q3 2019. Subsequent output began in mid-2021. 

Rising lithium prices and its Hong Kong listing in 2022, which raised approximately US$1.7 billion, contributed to Tianqi’s buoyancy. Commercial production at Kwinana’s Train 1 commenced in December 2022, with Train 2 anticipated to start in 2024. Once operational, the hydroxide plant is projected to produce 48,000 MT per year, utilizing lithium from Greenbushes.

In February of the current year, Tianqi Lithium updated its total mineral reserves at Greenbushes to 447 million tonnes, with an average lithium oxide grade of 1.5%, equivalent to about 16 million tonnes of lithium carbonate.

Li producer performance 2019 to 2024

What is In Store for Lithium?

Forecasting lithium supply beyond the end of the decade presents challenges due to limited visibility into existing, planned, and potential projects. While projections until 2030 can be reasonably accurate, the landscape becomes murkier. 

On the demand side, projections suggest that it will tremendously to almost 4 million tonnes, as shown below. But of course, as discussed earlier, various trends impact this demand trajectory. 

lithium demand growth through 2035

Incentive pricing becomes a critical factor in determining the attractiveness of new projects. With an estimated 1.5 million tonnes of supply, the fully allocated cost of lithium would be around $15,000 per tonne, suggesting market pricing would exceed this threshold.

Navigating the Immaturity of the Lithium Market

Forecasting the future of the lithium market is hindered by its relative immaturity. Lack of globally accepted specifications and pricing anchors complicates pricing dynamics. 

Lithium products, akin to specialty chemicals, require precise specifications, yet the industry’s growth trajectory impedes standardization efforts. While greater standardization is anticipated in the future, it will evolve gradually.

According to Bloomberg estimates, demand for lithium-ion batteries will increase tenfold over the next decade. This surge in demand is largely driven by the global commitment of over 100 countries to achieve net zero emissions within the coming decades. 

global li battery demand

As part of this commitment, many nations are turning to the electrification of transportation as a crucial solution to reduce GHG emissions and combat climate change. This shift towards electrification underscores the growing importance of lithium-ion batteries in powering EVs and other clean energy technologies. 

The Role of Partnerships in Shaping the Lithium Industry

In 2022, a significant portion of lithium supply was dominated by a handful of companies. However, future industry dynamics are expected to witness a decline in their market share, as smaller firms expand and new ventures emerge. 

While horizontal integration may not be a prevailing trend, vertical integration is poised to play a pivotal role. Partnerships between miners and refiners offer mutual benefits, enabling risk-sharing and capital investment in new projects. 

Collaborative efforts between upstream and downstream operations enhance expertise, improve margins, and capture a larger market share. Such partnerships, exemplified by ventures like Pilbara Minerals and POSCO in South Korea and SQM and Wesfarmers in Western Australia, are anticipated to become increasingly common in the industry’s future landscape.

Conclusion 

The evolution of lithium, from its discovery over two centuries ago to its pivotal role in powering modern technology, underscores its significance in shaping our present and future. As the world accelerates towards a sustainable energy paradigm, lithium emerges as the linchpin of this transition, fueling advancements in battery technology and driving the proliferation of electric vehicles and renewable energy storage solutions.

The post The Ultimate Guide to Lithium and Lithium Prices appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Apple, Amazon Lead 60+ Firms to Ease Global Carbon Reporting Rules

Published

on

Apple, Amazon Lead 60+ Firms to Ease Global Carbon Reporting Rules

More than 60 global companies, including Apple, Amazon, BYD, Salesforce, Mars, and Schneider Electric, are pushing back against proposed changes to global emissions reporting rules. The group is calling for more flexibility under the Greenhouse Gas Protocol (GHG Protocol), the most widely used framework for measuring corporate carbon footprints.

The companies submitted a joint statement asking that new requirements, especially those affecting Scope 2 emissions, remain optional rather than mandatory. Their letter stated:

“To drive critical climate progress, it’s imperative that we get this revision right. We strongly urge the GHGP to improve upon the existing guidance, but not stymie critical electricity decarbonization investments by mandating a change that fundamentally threatens participation in this voluntary market, which acts as the linchpin in decarbonization across nearly all sectors of the economy. The revised guidance must encourage more clean energy procurement and enable more impactful corporate action, not unintentionally discourage it.”

The debate comes at a critical time. Corporate climate disclosures now influence trillions of dollars in capital flows, while stricter reporting rules are being introduced across major economies.

The Rulebook for Carbon: What the GHG Protocol Is and Why It’s Being Updated

The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is the world’s most widely used system for measuring corporate emissions. It is used by over 90% of companies that report greenhouse gas data globally, making it the foundation of most climate disclosures.

It divides emissions into three categories:

  • Scope 1: Direct emissions from operations
  • Scope 2: Emissions from purchased electricity
  • Scope 3: Emissions across the value chain
scope emissions sources overview
Source: GHG Protocol

The current Scope 2 rules were introduced in 2015, but energy markets have changed since then. Renewable energy has expanded, and companies now play a major role in funding clean power.

Corporate buyers have already supported more than 100 gigawatts (GW) of renewable energy capacity globally through voluntary purchases. This shows how influential the current system has been.

The GHG Protocol is now updating its rules to improve accuracy and transparency. The revision process includes input from more than 45 experts across industry, government, and academia, reflecting its global importance.

Scope 2 Shake-Up: The Battle Over Real-Time Carbon Tracking

The proposed update would shift how companies report electricity emissions. Instead of using flexible systems like renewable energy certificates (RECs), companies would need to match their electricity use with clean energy that is:

  • Generated at the same time, and
  • Located in the same grid region.

This is known as “24/7” or hourly or real-time matching. It aims to reflect the actual impact of electricity use on the grid. Companies, including Apple and Amazon, say this shift could create challenges.

GHG accounting from the sale and purchase of electricity
Source: GHG Protocol

According to industry feedback, stricter rules could raise energy costs and limit access to renewable energy in some regions. It can also slow corporate investment in new clean energy projects.

The concern is that many markets do not yet have enough renewable supply for real-time matching. Infrastructure for tracking hourly emissions is also still developing.

This creates a key tension. The new rules could improve accuracy and reduce greenwashing. But they may also make it harder for companies to scale clean energy quickly.

The outcome will shape how companies measure emissions, invest in renewables, and meet net-zero targets in the years ahead.

Why More Than 60 Companies Oppose the Changes

The companies argue that stricter rules could slow climate progress rather than accelerate it. Their main concern is cost and feasibility. Many regions still lack enough renewable energy to support real-time matching. For global companies, aligning energy use across different grids is complex.

In their joint statement, the group warned that mandatory changes could:

  • Increase electricity prices,
  • Reduce participation in voluntary clean energy markets, and
  • Slow investment in renewable energy projects.

They argue that current market-based systems, such as RECs, have helped scale clean energy quickly over the past decade. Removing flexibility could weaken that momentum.

This reflects a broader tension between accuracy and scalability in climate reporting.

Big Tech Pushback: Apple and Amazon’s Climate Progress

Despite their push for flexibility, both companies have made measurable progress on emissions reduction.

Apple reports that it has reduced its total greenhouse gas emissions by more than 60% compared to 2015 levels, even as revenue grew significantly. The company is targeting carbon neutrality across its entire value chain by 2030. It also reported that supplier renewable energy use helped avoid over 26 million metric tons of CO₂ emissions in 2025 alone.

In addition, about 30% of materials used in Apple products in 2025 were recycled, showing a shift toward circular manufacturing.

Amazon has also set a net-zero target for 2040 under its Climate Pledge. The company is one of the world’s largest corporate buyers of renewable energy and continues to invest heavily in clean power, logistics electrification, and low-carbon infrastructure.

Both companies argue that flexible accounting frameworks have supported these investments at scale.

The Bigger Challenge: Scope 3 and Digital Emissions

The debate over Scope 2 reporting is only part of a larger issue. For most large companies, Scope 3 emissions account for more than 70% of total emissions. These include supply chains, product use, and outsourced services.

In the technology sector, emissions are rising due to:

  • Data centers,
  • Cloud computing, and
  • Artificial intelligence workloads.

Global data centers already consume about 415–460 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity per year, equal to roughly 1.5%–2% of global power demand. This figure is expected to increase sharply. The International Energy Agency estimates that data center electricity demand could double by 2030, driven largely by AI.

This creates a major reporting challenge. Even with cleaner electricity, total emissions can rise as digital demand grows.

Climate Reporting Rules Are Tightening Globally

The pushback comes as climate disclosure requirements are expanding and becoming more standardized across major economies. What was once voluntary ESG reporting is steadily shifting toward mandatory, audit-ready climate transparency.

In the European Union, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) is now active. It requires large companies and, later, listed SMEs, to share detailed sustainability data. This data must match the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). This includes granular reporting on emissions across Scope 1, 2, and increasingly Scope 3 value chains.

In the United States, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) aims for mandatory climate-related disclosures for public companies. This includes governance, risk exposure, and emissions reporting. However, some parts of the rule face legal and political scrutiny.

The United Kingdom has included climate disclosure through TCFD requirements. Now, it is moving toward ISSB-based global standards to make comparisons easier. Similarly, Canada is progressing with ISSB-aligned mandatory reporting frameworks for large public issuers.

In Asia, momentum is also accelerating. Japan is introducing the Sustainability Standards Board of Japan (SSBJ) rules that match ISSB standards. Meanwhile, China is tightening ESG disclosure rules for listed companies through updates from its securities regulators. Singapore has also mandated climate reporting for listed companies, with phased Scope 3 expansion.

A clear trend is forming across jurisdictions: climate disclosure is aligning with ISSB global standards. There’s a growing focus on assurance, comparability, and transparency in value-chain emissions.

This regulatory tightening raises the bar significantly for corporations. The challenge is clear. Companies must:

  • Align with multiple evolving disclosure regimes,
  • Ensure emissions data is verifiable and auditable, and
  • Expand reporting across complex global supply chains.

Balancing operational growth with compliance is becoming increasingly complex as climate regulation converges and intensifies worldwide.

A Turning Point for Global Carbon Accounting 

The outcome of this debate could shape global carbon accounting standards for years.

If stricter rules are adopted, emissions reporting will become more precise. This could improve transparency and reduce greenwashing risks. However, it may also increase compliance costs and limit flexibility.

If the proposed changes remain optional, companies may continue using current accounting methods. This could support faster clean energy investment, but may leave gaps in reporting accuracy.

The new rules could take effect as early as next year, making this a near-term decision for global companies.

The push by Apple, Amazon, and other companies highlights a key tension in climate strategy. On one side is the need for accurate, real-time emissions reporting. On the other is the need for flexible systems that support large-scale clean energy investment.

As digital infrastructure expands and energy demand rises, how emissions are measured will matter as much as how they are reduced. The next phase of climate action will depend not just on targets—but on the systems used to track them.

The post Apple, Amazon Lead 60+ Firms to Ease Global Carbon Reporting Rules appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

Mastercard Beats 2025 Emissions Targets as Revenue Rises 16%, Breaking the Growth vs Carbon Trade-Off

Published

on

Mastercard Beats 2025 Emissions Targets as Revenue Rises 16% and Net-Zero Plan Gains Momentum Toward 2040

Mastercard says it has exceeded its 2025 emissions reduction targets while continuing to grow its global business. The company reduced emissions across its operations even as revenue increased strongly in 2025.

The update comes from Mastercard’s official sustainability and technology disclosure published in 2026. It confirms progress toward its long-term goal of net-zero emissions by 2040, covering its full value chain.

The results are important for the financial technology sector. Digital payments depend heavily on data centers and cloud systems, which are energy-intensive and linked to rising global emissions.

Breaking the Pattern: Emissions Fall While Revenue Rises

In 2025, Mastercard surpassed its interim climate targets compared with a 2016 baseline. The company reported a 44% reduction in Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions, beating its target of 38%. It also achieved a 46% reduction in Scope 3 emissions, far exceeding its 20% target.

At the same time, Mastercard recorded 16% revenue growth in 2025. This shows that emissions reductions continued even as the business expanded. Mastercard Chief Sustainability Officer Ellen Jackowski and Senior Vice President of Data and Governance Adam Tenzer wrote:

“These results reflect a comprehensive approach built on renewable energy investment and procurement, supply chain engagement, and embedding environmental sustainability into everyday business decisions.”

The company also reported a 1% year-on-year decline in total emissions, marking the third consecutive year of emissions reduction. This is important because digital payment networks usually grow with higher computing demand.

Mastercard says this trend reflects improved efficiency across its operations, better infrastructure use, and increased reliance on cleaner energy sources.

Mastercard 2024 GHG emissions
Source: Mastercard

The Hidden Footprint: Why Data Centers Drive Mastercard’s Emissions

A large share of Mastercard’s emissions comes from its digital infrastructure. According to the company’s sustainability report, data centers account for about 60% of Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions. Technology-related goods and services make up roughly one-third of Scope 3 emissions.

This reflects how modern financial systems operate. Digital payments, fraud detection, and AI-based analytics require a large-scale computing infrastructure.

Global data centers already consume about 415–460 TWh of electricity per year, equal to roughly 1.5%–2% of global electricity demand. This number is expected to rise as AI usage expands.

Mastercard’s challenge is similar to that of other digital companies. Higher transaction volume usually leads to greater computing needs. This can raise emissions unless we improve efficiency.

To manage this, the company is focusing on renewable energy procurement, hardware consolidation, and more efficient software systems.

Carbon-Aware Technology Becomes Core to Operations

Mastercard is integrating sustainability directly into its technology systems rather than treating it as a separate reporting function. Since 2023, the company has developed a patent-pending system that assigns a Sustainability Score to its technology infrastructure. This system measures environmental impact in real time.

It tracks factors such as:

  • Energy use in kilowatt-hours,
  • Regional carbon intensity of electricity,
  • Server utilization rates,
  • Hardware lifecycle efficiency, and
  • Data processing location.

This allows engineers to design systems with lower carbon impact.

The company also uses carbon-aware software design. This means computing workloads can be adjusted to reduce energy use when carbon intensity is high in certain regions.

This approach reflects a wider trend in the technology and financial sectors. More companies are now including carbon tracking in their main infrastructure choices. They no longer see it just as a reporting task.

Powering Payments: Mastercard’s Net-Zero Playbook

Mastercard has committed to reaching net-zero emissions by 2040, covering Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions across its value chain. The target is aligned with science-based climate pathways and includes operations, suppliers, and technology infrastructure.

To achieve this, the company is focusing on four main areas.

  • Increasing renewable energy use in operations

Mastercard already powers its global operations with 100% renewable electricity. This covers offices and data centers in multiple regions.

The company has also achieved a 46% reduction in total Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions compared to its 2016 baseline. It continues to use renewable energy purchasing to maintain this progress.

In 2024, Mastercard procured over 112,000 MWh of renewable electricity, supporting lower emissions from its global operations.

  • Improving energy efficiency in data centers

Data centers account for about 60% of Mastercard’s Scope 1 and 2 emissions. To reduce this, Mastercard is upgrading servers, cutting unused computing capacity, and improving workload efficiency. It also uses real-time monitoring to reduce energy waste.

These improvements helped keep operational emissions stable in 2024, even as computing demand increased. Efficiency gains combined with renewable energy use supported this outcome.

  • Working with suppliers to reduce emissions

Around 75%–76% of Mastercard’s total emissions come from its value chain. This includes cloud providers, technology partners, and hardware suppliers.

To address this, Mastercard works with suppliers to set emissions targets and improve reporting. More than 70% of its suppliers now have their own climate reduction goals.

  • Upgrading and consolidating hardware systems

Mastercard is reducing emissions by improving its hardware systems. It decommissions unused servers, consolidates infrastructure, and shifts to more efficient cloud platforms.

Technology goods and services account for about one-third of Scope 3 emissions. By reducing unnecessary hardware and extending equipment life, Mastercard lowers both energy use and manufacturing-related emissions while maintaining system performance.

Renewable energy procurement is central to its strategy. It’s crucial for powering data centers, as they account for most of their operational emissions.

Mastercard works with suppliers because a large part of emissions comes from the value chain. This includes technology manufacturing and cloud services. By 2025, the company exceeded several short-term climate goals. This shows early progress on its long-term net-zero path.

mastercard emissions vs growth

ESG Pressure Hits Fintech: The New Rules of Digital Finance

Mastercard’s results come during a period of rising ESG pressure across the financial sector. Banks, payment networks, and fintech companies must now disclose emissions. This is especially true for Scope 3 emissions, which cover supply chain and digital infrastructure impacts.

Several global trends are shaping the industry:

  • Growing regulatory focus on climate disclosure,
  • Rising investor demand for ESG transparency,
  • Expansion of digital payments and cloud computing, and
  • Increased energy use from AI and data processing.

Data centers are becoming a major focus area because they link financial services to energy consumption. In Mastercard’s case, they are the largest source of operational emissions.

At the same time, financial institutions are expected to align with net-zero targets between 2040 and 2050. This depends on regional regulations and climate frameworks. Mastercard’s early progress places it ahead of many peers in meeting short-term emissions goals.

Decoupling Growth From Emissions

One of the most important signals from Mastercard’s 2025 results is the separation of business growth from emissions.

The company achieved 16% revenue growth while reducing total emissions by 1% year-on-year. This marks a continued pattern of emissions decline alongside business expansion.

Mastercard attributes this to improved system efficiency, renewable energy use, and better infrastructure management. In simple terms, the company is processing more transactions without a matching rise in emissions.

This trend is important because digital payment systems normally scale with computing demand. Without efficiency gains, emissions would typically rise with business growth.

Looking ahead, demand will continue to grow. Global payments revenue is projected to reach around $3.1 trillion by 2028, according to McKinsey & Company, growing at close to 10% annually.

global payments revenue 2028 mckinsey
Source: McKinsey & Company

Global data center electricity demand might double by 2030. This rise is mainly due to AI workloads, says the International Energy Agency. Mastercard’s results show that tech upgrades can lower the carbon impact of digital finance. This is true even as global usage rises.

The Takeaway: Fintech’s Proof That Growth and Emissions Can Split

Mastercard’s 2025 sustainability performance shows measurable progress toward its net-zero goal. At the same time, major challenges remain. Data centers continue to be the largest emissions source, and global digital activity is still expanding rapidly due to AI and cloud computing.

Mastercard’s approach shows how financial technology companies are adapting. Sustainability is no longer a separate goal. It is becoming part of how digital systems are designed and operated.

The next test will be whether these efficiency gains can continue to outpace the rapid growth of global digital payments and AI-driven financial systems.

The post Mastercard Beats 2025 Emissions Targets as Revenue Rises 16%, Breaking the Growth vs Carbon Trade-Off appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Carbon Footprint

China’s $8.4B Orbital Data Center Push Sets Up Space-Based AI Showdown With SpaceX

Published

on

China’s $8.4B Orbital Data Center Push Sets Up Space-Based AI Showdown With SpaceX

China is backing a Beijing-based startup called Orbital Chenguang with about 57.7 billion yuan ($8.4 billion) in credit lines to build space-based data centers, according to media reports. The funding comes from major state-linked banks and signals one of the largest known investments in orbital computing infrastructure.

The move highlights a growing global race to build computing systems in space. It also puts China in direct competition with companies like SpaceX, which is exploring space-based data infrastructure, too.

Orbital Chenguang Builds State-Backed Space Computing System

Orbital Chenguang is a startup in Beijing supported by the Beijing Astro-future Institute of Space Technology. This institute works with the city’s science and technology authorities.

The company has received credit line support from major Chinese financial institutions, including:

  • Bank of China,
  • Agricultural Bank of China,
  • Bank of Communications,
  • Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, and
  • CITIC Bank.

These are credit lines, not fully deployed cash. But the scale shows strong institutional backing.

The project is part of a wider national strategy focused on commercial space, AI infrastructure, and advanced computing systems.

China’s state space contractor, CASC (China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation), has shared plans under its 15th Five-Year Plan. These include ideas for large-scale space computing systems, aiming for gigawatt power.

Space Data Center Plan Targets 2035 Gigawatt Capacity

According to Chinese media reports, Orbital Chenguang plans to build a constellation in a dawn-dusk sun-synchronous orbit at 700–800 km altitude. The long-term target is a gigawatt-scale space data center by 2035.

The development plan is divided into phases:

  • 2025–2027: Launch early computing satellites and solve technical barriers.
  • 2028–2030: Link space-based systems with Earth-based data centers.
  • 2030–2035: Scale toward large orbital computing infrastructure.

The design relies on continuous solar energy and natural cooling in space. These features could reduce reliance on land-based power grids and cooling systems.

China has proposed two satellite constellations to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). These plans include a total of 96,714 satellites. This shows China’s long-term goals for space infrastructure and spectrum control.

The AI Energy Crunch Pushing Computing Into Orbit

The push into orbital data centers is closely linked to rising AI demand. Global data centers consumed about 415–460 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in 2024, equal to roughly 1.5%–2% of global power use. This figure is rising quickly due to AI workloads.

Some industry projections show demand could exceed 1,000 TWh by 2026, nearly equal to Japan’s total electricity consumption.

data center power demand AI 2030 Goldman

AI systems require massive computing power, which increases energy use and cooling needs. In many regions, electricity supply—not hardware—is now the main constraint on AI expansion.

China’s strategy aims to address this by moving part of the computing load into space, where solar energy is more stable and continuous.

Carbon Impact: Earth vs Space Computing Trade-Off

Data centers already create a large carbon footprint. In 2024, they emitted about 182 million tonnes of CO₂, based on global electricity use of roughly 460 TWh and an average carbon intensity of 396 grams of CO₂ per kWh. This is according to the International Energy Agency report, as shown in the chart below.

global data centers emissions 2035 IEA
Source: IEA

Future projections show even faster growth. The sector could generate up to 2.5 billion tonnes of CO₂ emissions by 2030, driven by AI expansion. This is where orbital systems come in. They aim to reduce emissions during operation by using:

  • Continuous solar energy,
  • Passive cooling in vacuum conditions, and
  • Reduced dependence on fossil-fuel grids.

However, space systems also introduce new emissions. Rocket launches used about 63,000 tonnes of propellant in 2022, producing CO₂ and atmospheric pollutants. Lifecycle studies suggest that over 70% of emissions from space systems typically come from manufacturing and launch activities.

In addition, hardware in orbit often has a lifespan of only 5–6 years, which increases replacement cycles and launch frequency. This creates a key trade-off:

  • Lower operational emissions in space, and
  • Higher lifecycle emissions from launches and manufacturing.

Research suggests that, in some scenarios, orbital computing could produce up to 10 times higher total carbon emissions than terrestrial systems when full lifecycle impacts are included.

Orbital data center infographic. Environmental impact of orbital and terrestrial data centers

China’s Expanding Space-Tech Ecosystem

Orbital Chenguang is not operating alone. Several Chinese companies are working on similar in-orbit computing systems, including ADA Space, Zhejiang Lab, Shanghai Bailing Aerospace, and Zhongke Tiansuan.

These firms are developing satellite-based computing and AI processing systems. This shows that orbital computing is not a single project. It is part of a broader national push across government, industry, and research institutions.

China’s space strategy combines commercial space growth with national technology planning. It aims to build integrated systems that connect satellites, cloud computing, and terrestrial networks.

The Space-AI Arms Race: China vs SpaceX vs Google

China is not alone in exploring space-based computing. Companies in the United States are also developing orbital data infrastructure concepts. These include early-stage research and private sector projects by firms such as SpaceX and Google.

SpaceX is building one of the largest satellite networks through its Starlink constellation, with thousands of satellites already in orbit. While its main goal is global internet coverage, the network also creates a foundation for future edge computing in space. The company’s reusable rockets, including Starship, are designed to lower launch costs, which is a key barrier to scaling orbital data infrastructure.

Google, through its cloud division, has been investing in space data and satellite analytics. It partners with Earth observation firms to process large volumes of data using cloud-based AI tools. This work could extend to hybrid systems where data is processed closer to where it is generated, including in orbit.

Other players are also entering the field. Amazon is developing Project Kuiper, a satellite internet network that could support future space-based computing layers. Microsoft has launched Azure Space, which connects satellites directly to cloud computing services and supports real-time data processing.

Government agencies are also involved. NASA and the U.S. Department of Defense are funding research into orbital computing, edge processing, and secure data transmission in space. These efforts aim to reduce latency, improve data security, and enable faster decision-making for both civilian and defense applications.

Together, these developments show that space-based computing is moving beyond theory. While still early-stage, both public and private sector efforts are building the foundation for future data centers and processing systems in orbit.

However, these systems face major challenges:

  • High launch costs,
  • Heat and thermal control issues,
  • Limited data transmission bandwidth, and
  • Hardware durability in space.

Despite these challenges, interest is growing because AI demand is rising faster than Earth-based infrastructure can scale. The competition is now moving toward who can solve energy and computing limits first—on Earth or in space.

Market Outlook: AI, Energy, and Space Infrastructure Converge

The global data center industry is entering a period of rapid expansion. Electricity demand from data centers could double by 2030, driven mainly by AI workloads and cloud computing growth. Power supply is becoming a limiting factor in many regions.

At the same time, the global space economy is expanding into a multi-hundred-billion-dollar industry, supported by satellites, communications, and emerging technologies like orbital computing.

  • Orbital data centers sit at the intersection of three major trends: rapid AI growth, rising energy constraints, and expansion of space infrastructure. 

China’s $8.4 billion credit-backed push through Orbital Chenguang signals confidence in this convergence. However, key barriers remain, such as high cost of launches, engineering complexity, short satellite lifespans (5-6 years), and regulatory uncertainty in orbital systems.

Because of these limits, orbital data centers are unlikely to replace Earth-based systems in the near term. Instead, they may form a hybrid system where some workloads move to space while most remain on Earth.

Space Is Becoming the Next Data Center Frontier

China’s investment in Orbital Chenguang marks one of the most significant moves yet in the emerging field of space-based computing. Backed by major Chinese banks, municipal science institutions, and national space contractors like CASC, the project shows how seriously China is treating orbital infrastructure.

The strategy connects AI growth, energy demand, and climate pressures into a single long-term vision. But the trade-offs are complex. Orbital data centers may reduce operational emissions, but they also introduce high lifecycle carbon costs and major technical challenges.

The global race is now underway. With companies like SpaceX, Google, and Chinese tech firms exploring similar ideas, space is becoming a new frontier for digital infrastructure. The outcome will depend on whether orbital systems can scale efficiently—and whether their carbon benefits can outweigh the emissions cost of building them.

The post China’s $8.4B Orbital Data Center Push Sets Up Space-Based AI Showdown With SpaceX appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com