A war is brewing over lithium mining at the edge of Death Valley
Area might hold the key to a carbon-free future
away in Clayton Valley, Nev. Most of the lithium used for batteries now comes from the so-called Lithium Triangle of South America – a region that includes the world’s largest salt flats.
For dyed-in-the-wool environmentalists, the brewing war over lithium mining poses a moral dilemma as it seemingly pits them against efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Constructed with the world’s lightest metal, rechargeable lithium-ion batteries allow vehicles to run on power generated by wind turbines, solar panels, hydroelectric dams and other clean-energy sources. In California alone, officials hope to see as many as 5 million such zero-emission vehicles on state highways by 2030.
Drilling opponents also acknowledge that the burden of producing lithium should not just fall on nations with less restrictive health and safety regulations and environmental safeguards.
“It’s a tricky question,” said Lisa Belenky, senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We shouldn’t export the sacrifices to Bolivia and Argentina, for example, which have massive lithium mines . ... We also think that Panamint Valley is not the right place for it.”
The Inyo County drilling sites are overseen by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, which, under federal law, is obligated to not only preserve public lands, but make them productive as well. The BLM must set aside some lands for mining and wilderness, for wildlife and off-road vehicle riders alike.
But environmentalists say the agency is tilting too far toward the needs of commercial interests and away from the long-term health of the public’s natural resources. They worry approval of the plan could trigger a “white gold rush” across the deserts of Southern California. Already, nearly 2,000 lithium claims have been staked across 30,000 acres of public land administered by the BLM in California.
In a formal response to the drilling proposal, a dozen environmental organizations expressed concerns about the effects on ground and surface water if exploration leads to an industrial-scale mine.
The environmental assessment “does not include mapping of floodplain boundaries, nor any hydrologic modeling or analysis,” the response read. “There is no discussion of the risks to cross contamination from the deep brines to the freshwater aquifer, and the drill site reclamation practices do not appear to have taken this risk into account.”
Among those who have spoken against the plan are officials at Death Valley National Park.
A large mining operation would have “significant water requirements,” Death Valley National Park Superintendent Mike Reynolds wrote in comments filed with the BLM. Reynolds said water in the area flows downhill from the park to the mine sites on the valley floor. “This water would normally help support wildlife within the local ecosystem,” he wrote.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management is expected to make a final decision on Battery Mineral Resources’ request later this year.
Battery Mineral Resources failed to respond to repeated requests for comment on the proposal. However, an environmental assessment of its exploratory project concluded it would be safe, prevent significant environmental harm and abide by state and federal regulations.