Sustainable Mobility: Lithium, Rare

Earth Elements, and Electric Vehicles

Timothy J. Wallington, Elisa Alonso, Mark P. Everson,

Frank R. Field, Paul W. Gruber, Gregory A. Keoleian,
Stephen E. Kesler, Randolph E. Kirchain, Pablo A. Medina,
Emily K. Kolinski Morris, Rich Roth and Andrew M Sherman

Abstract Recognition of the importance of climate change and energy security

has led to interest in electrified vehicles. Electrified vehicles contain substantial
amounts of lithium and rare earth elements. There has been concern that the
supplies of lithium may not be sufficient to support the development of a large
scale global fleet of electric vehicles. We conducted a comprehensive analysis of
the global lithium resources and compared it to an assessment of global lithium

F2012–B01-026

T. J. Wallington (&)  M. P. Everson  R. E. Kirchain  E. K. Kolinski Morris

Systems Analytics and Environmental Sciences Department, Ford Motor Company,
Mail Drop RIC-2122, Dearborn, MI 48121-2053, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
M. P. Everson
e-mail: [email protected]
R. E. Kirchain
e-mail: [email protected]
E. K. Kolinski Morris
e-mail: [email protected]
E. Alonso  F. R. Field  R. Roth  A. M. Sherman
Materials Systems Laboratory, Engineering Systems Division,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge,
MA 02139, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
F. R. Field
e-mail: [email protected]
R. Roth
e-mail: [email protected]

SAE-China and FISITA (eds.), Proceedings of the FISITA 2012 World 155
Automotive Congress, Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering 191,
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-33777-2_12,  Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013
156 T. J. Wallington et al.

demand from 2010 to 2100 that assumes rapid and widespread adoption of
electrified vehicles. We show that that even with rapid and widespread adoption of
electric vehicles powered by lithium-ion batteries lithium resources are sufficient
to support demand until at least 2100. The future availability of rare earth elements
(REEs) is of concern due to monopolistic supply conditions, environmentally
unsustainable mining practices, and rapid demand growth. We evaluated potential
future demand scenarios for REEs with a focus on the issue of co-mining. In the
absence of efficient reuse and recycling or the development of technologies which
use lower amounts of Dy and Nd, following a path consistent with stabilization of
atmospheric CO2 at 450 ppm may lead to an increase in demand of more than 700
and 2,600 % for Nd and Dy, respectively, over the next 25 years.

Keywords Sustainability  Lithium  Rare earth elements

1 Introduction

Increasing concerns about the environmental impacts and reliability of supply of

fossil fuels are motivating a global drive towards introduction of sustainable
mobility technologies. The availability of materials such as lithium and rare earth
elements required for these new technologies needs to be considered.
The current generation of hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) such as the Toyota
Prius and Ford Fusion Hybrid are powered by internal combustion engines with
relatively small, nickel-metal hydride (Ni-MH) batteries. Lithium-ion batteries are
used in plug-in hybrids (PHEVs) such as the Chevrolet Volt and the Ford C-Max
Energy and battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) such as the Nissan Leaf and Ford
Focus Electric. Lithium-ion (Li-ion) batteries are lighter, less bulky, more energy
efficient, and are projected to be less expensive than Ni-MH batteries [1]. The use

P. W. Gruber
University of California Davis, 2028 Academic Surge, One Shields Ave, Davis,
CA 95616, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
G. A. Keoleian  P. A. Medina
School of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Michigan, 3504 Dana,
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1041, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
P. A. Medina
e-mail: [email protected]
S. E. Kesler
Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Michigan, 2534 C.C. Little Building,
1100 North University Ave, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1005, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
Sustainable Mobility: Lithium, Rare Earth Elements 157

of lithium-ion batteries in vehicles is expected to increase substantially and this

raises the question of whether global lithium resources will be sufficient to supply
a large global fleet of electric vehicles.
Rare earth elements (REEs) are critical to clean energy technologies and have
recently received much attention regarding the reliability of their supply. The
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) defines the rare earth
metals as a group of 17 elements consisting of the 15 lanthanides [La, Ce, Pr, Nd,
Pm, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy, Ho, Er, Tm, Yb, Lu] plus Sc and Y. Data are mainly
available for only 10 of the 17 elements, and therefore our analysis focuses on
these: La, Ce, Pr, Nd, Sm, Eu, Gd, Tb, Dy and Y. REEs are important because they
provide critical functionality in a wide variety of applications and are used in
relatively large amounts in key technologies being developed to provide sustain-
able mobility and energy supply.
The availability of REEs appears to be at risk based on a number of factors, not
least of which is that one country (China) controls approximately 98 % of current
supply (production). Another contributor to supply risk for REEs is the fact that they
are co-mined; individual REEs are not mined separately. REEs are found together in
geological deposits, rendering mining of individual elements economically ineffi-
cient. The supply of any individual REE depends on the geology of the deposits, the
costs of the extraction technology employed, and the price of the basket of rare earths.
In the present chapter we provide an overview of work we have performed to:
(1) compare geological reserves of lithium with estimates for future global
demand, and (2) evaluate future potential demand scenarios for REEs with a focus
on the issue of co-mining. The supporting literature upon which we base our
assumptions and details of the methods used are given elsewhere [1, 2] and not
discussed here.

2 Lithium Resources

There are three types of lithium deposits: brines, pegmatite’s, and sedimentary
rocks. Brines are saline waters with high contents of dissolved salts. They are
found naturally in the pores of rocks where lake or ocean water has undergone
extreme evaporation. The most common such environment for lithium-bearing
brines are playas (salt flats). Lithium is a minor but locally important constituent of
these brines and is thought to have been derived from erosion of rocks surrounding
the playas, and from hot springs that feed water into the playas. The brine is
pumped into shallow evaporation ponds where it is evaporated under controlled
conditions. Brine salt flats containing the highest concentrations of lithium are in
Chile, Argentina, China, and Tibet. Brines in these deposits contain large amounts
of other useful elements, including potassium and boron, which offset some of the
costs of pumping and processing brines.
The average concentration of lithium in major brine resources varies from about
0.14 % at the Salar de Atacama to 0.02 % at Silver Peak, Nevada. The 3,000 km2
158 T. J. Wallington et al.

Table 1 World lithium resource, top 15 deposits [1]

Deposit Country Type Resource (Mt Li) Avg. concentration (% Li)
Uyuni Bolivia Brine 10.2 0.05
Atacama Chile Brine 6.3 0.14
Kings mountain belt USA Pegmatite 5.5 0.68
Qaidam China Brine 2.0 0.03
Kings valley, NV USA Sedimentary rock 2.0 0.27
Zabuye China Brine 1.5 0.07

Salar de Atacama, in northern Chile, is the largest producing deposit and the
world’s largest producer of lithium carbonate (Li2CO3), with 40,000 and
25,000 tonnes of Li2CO3 in 2008 from operations owned by Sociedad Quimica y
Minera (SQM) and Rockwood Holdings Inc., respectively. This is more than half
of the world’s total production of 22,800–25,400 tonnes of lithium in 2008. We
estimate that Atacama has an in situ lithium resource of at least 6.3 Mt. Zabuye, in
China, is the next largest producing brine deposit with an estimated lithium
resource of 1.53 Mt and a production capacity of 7,500 tonnes of Li2CO3 (2004).
Bolivia’s Salar de Uyuni contains a possible total resource of 10.2 Mt of lithium,
or 27 % of the world’s in situ lithium resource [1].
Pegmatite deposits are coarse-grained intrusive igneous rocks that formed from
the crystallization of magma at depth in the crust. Pegmatite’s can contain recov-
erable amounts of lithium, tin, tantalum, niobium, beryllium and other elements.
Lithium in pegmatite’s is usually present in the mineral spodumene (LiAlSi2O6). To
produce lithium carbonate from most pegmatite’s, a concentrate containing the
lithium-bearing mineral is obtained from the pegmatite ore, usually by flotation. The
mineral concentrate is then pulverized and leached in hot solutions to release the
lithium into solution, from which it is usually precipitated as lithium carbonate. The
grinding, heating and dissolution steps in this process are expensive and are the
reason that many pegmatite’s are at a disadvantage compared to brines. Lithium is
currently being extracted from at least 13 pegmatite deposits, and more deposits are
under development. The largest producing spodumene pegmatite operation, in
Greenbushes, Australia, has an estimated resource of 560,000 tonnes of lithium in
ore with an average concentration of about 1.6 % lithium.
Lithium is also found in several different sedimentary rocks, including clay and
lacustrine evaporites. In the clay deposits, lithium is a constituent of clay minerals
such as smectite, from which it must be separated by processing. Hectorite
[(Mg,Li)3Si4O10(OH)2] is a type of smectite that is rich in magnesium and lithium.
The best known hectorite deposit, containing 0.7 % lithium, is in Hector, California.
We estimated lithium resources from brine deposits using the relation:
Lithium resource ¼ A  T  P  D  C, where A = area of aquifer,
T = thickness of aquifer, P = porosity of aquifer, D = density of brine, and C =
concentration of Li in brine. Lithium resources from rock and mineral deposits
were estimated using the relation: Lithium resource ¼ T  C; where T = tonnes
of ore and C = concentration of Li in ore. We estimated that the total lithium
Sustainable Mobility: Lithium, Rare Earth Elements 159

Fig. 1 Global annual vehicle

Annual Vehicle Production (millions)

production estimated for
600 3% GDP Growth
2010–2100 for 2 and 3 %
GDP scenarios: total vehicles
are shown in solid lines,
electric vehicles (HEVs, 400
PHEVs, and BEVs) are
shown by dashed lines
200

2% GDP Growth

0
2020 2040 2060 2080 2100
Year

resource in all of the 103 deposits studied as part of this work is at least 38.3 Mt
[1]. The top 6 lithium resources globally [1] are listed in Table 1.

3 Lithium Demand

The lithium demand for vehicle batteries was estimated in four steps. First,
we conducted a linear regression analysis using light-duty global vehicle pro-
duction for the period 1995–2008 from the Ward’s 2009 Automotive Yearbook
and global GDP data; a 97 % linear correlation was found. Second, vehicle
manufacturing was estimated for 2010–2100 using two GDP growth scenarios (2
and 3 %). In the 3 % GDP growth scenario the annual production of light-duty
vehicles increases to approximately 630 million units in 2100. This equates to the
production of 42 new vehicles per-thousand-persons per year in 2100; comparable
to the current level in the US and probably an upper limit for future global
production. Third, we used Credit Suisse’s projection of electric vehicle pene-
tration from 2010 to 2030. Beyond 2030 we assumed that year-over-year electric
vehicle growth remained constant in the 2 % GDP scenario and increased 0.5 %
every 10 years in the 3 % GDP scenario. The projected global annual light-duty
vehicle production is shown in Fig. 1. These growth projections result in 100 %
EV penetration in 2083 and 2087, for 2 and 3 % GDP scenarios respectively.
Fourth, battery life, vehicle life, and battery recycling were accounted for and the
accumulated lithium use was estimated.
To calculate the number of batteries needed we assumed that all vehicle batteries
have 10 years of useful life. The amount of lithium required per battery was calcu-
lated according to the electric range of each type of vehicle. We assumed HEVs have
2 km of electric range; PHEVs, 65 km; and BEVs, 200 km. We assumed that electric
vehicles consume approximately 0.17 kWh/km and we considered a ± 20 % range
around this value. Recognizing the need to avoid deep discharge and seeking to be
conservative in our estimations, we added a 100 % buffer for HEV and 50 % buffer
160 T. J. Wallington et al.

Table 2 2010–2100 maximum expected lithium demand (in Mt, 1 Mt = one million tonnes) for
electric vehicle batteries for 2 and 3 % GDP growth scenarios and recycling participation at 90
and 100 %
Recycling = 90 (%) Recycling = 100 (%)
HEV PHEV BEV Total HEV PHEV BEV Total
2% Demanded 0.20 3.18 10.51 13.88 0.20 3.18 10.51 13.88
Recycled 0.12 1.85 6.60 8.57 0.13 2.05 7.33 9.52
Mined 0.08 1.33 3.92 5.32 0.06 1.12 3.18 4.37
3% Demanded 0.32 5.43 17.07 22.82 0.32 5.43 17.07 22.82
Recycled 0.17 2.73 9.38 12.28 0.19 3.04 10.42 13.65
Mined 0.15 2.70 7.69 10.54 0.13 2.40 6.65 9.18
A recovery efficiency of 90 % during the recycling process was assumed. Values differ slightly
from those published previously [1] reflecting small rounding errors in the previous work

for PHEV and BEV batteries to provide adequate cycle life [1]. Lithium-ion batteries
have approximately 0.114 kg Li per kWh (average for LiCoO2, LiNiO2, and
LiMn2O4 cathode materials) so the lithium content of batteries in HEVs, PHEVs, and
BEVs would be 0.062–0.093, 1.51–2.27, and 4.65–6.98 kg.
To account for future improvements in vehicle efficiency (e.g., weight reduc-
tion, aerodynamic and rolling resistance improvements) we assumed the per
vehicle per km vehicle energy demand will decrease by a factor of two by 2100.
Hence, by 2100, HEVs, PHEVs, and BEVs would contain between 0.031–0.046,
0.76–1.13, and 2.33–3.49 kg of lithium, respectively. Seeking to calculate maxi-
mum expected lithium demand, we used the upper bound of these ranges (i.e.,
0.046, 1.13, and 3.49 kg) in our calculations.
Recycling of lithium from Li-ion batteries may be a critical factor in balancing
the supply of lithium with future demand. The US EPA has reported that ‘‘nearly
90 % of all lead-acid batteries are recycled’’ and with regard to lead-acid batteries,
the International Lead Association has stated that ‘‘some countries boast 100 %
recycling and most others share the possibility of 100 % recyclability’’ [1]. We
calculated total lithium demand and recycling volumes assuming two recycling
participation rates (90 and 100 %) with 90 % recovery of lithium during the
recycling process. The results are shown in Table 2.
An upper limit for total lithium demand for vehicle use over the period 2010–
2100 of 10.5 Mt can be taken from the 3 % GDP growth case with 90 % recycling
participation. This value can be combined with estimates of lithium use of 3.6 Mt
in portable batteries and 3.2 Mt in non-battery uses globally through 2100 [1] to
provide a total upper limit estimate of approximately 17.3 Mt. This is substantially
lower than the estimate of the total global resources of 38.3 Mt [1] and we con-
clude that lithium availability is unlikely to constrain the electrification of the
automobile industry over this century.
Sustainable Mobility: Lithium, Rare Earth Elements 161

Table 3 Future REE demand projection scenarios [2]

Demand scenarios Assumptions
A Aggregated evolutionary demand: overall All RE production markets experience uniform
historical production (supply) rate of growth demand growth at historical rates
projected into future
B Disaggregated evolutionary demand: individual Each RE consumption market experiences
demand industry sector-level historical demand growth at its historical rate
growth rates projected into the future
C Implicit revolutionary demand: market reported Each RE consumption markets grows at rates
expectations for industry sector-level growth predicted by industry experts
rates are projected into the future
D Aggressive revolutionary demand: growth rate Aggressive automotive electrification, all wind
scenario B is supplemented with IEA blue uses permanent magnets, other RE market
map scenario for wind and automotive demand grows at historical rates
electrification
E Moderate revolutionary demand: growth rate Moderate automotive electrification, wind does
scenario B supplemented with 2–3 % GDP not use permanent magnets, other RE market
growth automotive electrification scenario demand grows at historical rates

4 Rare Earth Element Demand

As with estimating future lithium demand, assessing the future global demand of
rare earth elements is inherently challenging given the evolution of the underlying
technological and contextual conditions. We applied two methods to project
potential future demand for rare earth elements over the next 25 years [2]. The first
method, evolutionary demand growth, projects commodity demand based on
historic patterns of commodity use. The second method, revolutionary technology
demand growth, projects demand for products within a specific market sector then
maps that to commodity demand based on expected commodity use per product
within that sector. For each of these methods, multiple approaches were taken to
identify a range of scenarios for future rates of rare earth element demand. The
different scenario assumptions examined are given in Table 3.
For Scenarios A, B, C, the demand for REEs in industry k in year T is calcu-
lated as:
    
Dk;t¼T;historical=expert ¼ exp ðyT  y0 Þ  ln 1 þ gk;historical=expert þ ln Dk;t¼0

where y = year and gk is the annual growth rate for industry k. Scenarios A and B
use historical trends as a predictor of future trends in RE markets and may be
described as estimates for evolutionary demand growth. For Scenario C, the
contribution of new technologies to growth projections is not explicitly given;
rather, it is implicit in the projection which is based on expert input. We assume
that industry experts consulted to define gk for Scenario C have, to some degree,
considered the evolution of individual market sectors and the technologies used by
those sectors including revolutionary sectors like those explored explicitly herein.
We characterize Scenario C as a form of a revolutionary demand growth based
162 T. J. Wallington et al.

projection. In Scenarios D and E revolutionary demand was limited to two widely

discussed REE applications: automotive and renewable wind electricity genera-
tion. Other emerging clean energy applications that rely on REEs such as high
efficiency lighting, solid oxide fuel cell systems, maglev trains and electric
scooters could also be considered in an analogous manner, but were outside the
scope of this study, in part due to lack of data.
The International Energy Agency’s Blue Map/450 Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
scenario was used to evaluate aggressive RE requirements for future vehicle sales
and wind energy. This scenario sets out an energy pathway consistent with the goal
of limiting increase in average global temperature to 2 C. In the Blue Map
scenario 80 % of new vehicles are electrified (i.e., including hybrid electric
vehicles (HEV), plug-in hybrids (PHEV) and battery electric vehicles (BEV)) by
2035. In the Blue Map scenario, the wind turbine capacity additions are provided
over 5 year periods; we assumed that installation occurs at a constant annual rate.
Scenario E used the vehicle production values shown in Fig. 1 to evaluate
moderate revolutionary REE requirements for electric vehicles. These scenarios
assume electrified vehicles increase from 6 % of total vehicle sales in 2015, to
27–35 % in 2035, and 35–48 % in 2050.
REE demand by new technology, n, was calculated as:
XX
Demand for REE ¼ DREE ¼ Nnj
n j

where the nth technology is either one of the different auto technologies (gasoline,
diesel, BEV, HEV…) or wind and Nnj = jth is the unit content of REEs per new car
sold or wind turbine built in kilograms. The RE content per vehicle or wind turbine
were assumed to be static. This is clearly a simplification. While it is expected that
future technologies will likely improve their REE content performance, it is also
expected that the number of applications that require RE will also increase.
The REE content of a wind turbine using a synchronous motor with a perma-
nent magnet has been reported to be 600 kg per average 3.5 MW turbine [2].
Based on this figure, we assume an average of 171 kg of REEs per MW of built
wind capacity. The portfolio of REEs in the wind turbine was assumed to follow
the average magnet REE portfolio. It has been reported that wind energy capacity
can also be built without permanent magnet technology, if it is too costly. The use
of REEs for wind turbines could therefore also be reduced or zero. In designing the
Scenario E as a moderate scenario, it was assumed that wind energy would use
non-permanent magnet technology.
Our recent estimate of RE content in representative sedan vehicles with dif-
ferent electrification technologies [2] was used in addition to the US Department of
Energy estimates for the RE content of nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries.
NiMH batteries were assumed for HEVs up to 2020 and all other electric vehicles
were assumed to contain lithium batteries (HEVs after 2020, all BEVs, PHEVs).
For Scenarios D and E, total projected demand was calculated as a sum of revo-
lutionary and evolutionary demand. The annual growth rates used for Scenarios A,
B and C are presented in Table 4.
Sustainable Mobility: Lithium, Rare Earth Elements 163

Table 4 Estimated industry-level growth rates (per annum) of key RE demand categories
Growth rates (%) Magnets Metal Catalysts Polishing Glass Phosphors Ceramics
alloys
Scenario A: Historical 3.7
overall growth for
2006–2010
Scenario B: Historical by 6.1 6.7 3.3 7.9 -4.1 0 6.2
industry for 2006–010
kings north 2010)
Scenario C: Projections 12.5 10 4 8.5 0 8 7
used for 2010–2015
Scenario C: Projections 12.5 6 4 10 0 4.5 6
used for 2015–2035
Annual REE Demand (thousands tonnes)

Fig. 2 REE demand in 500

scenarios A–E, see Table 3 A: Historical overall C
B: Historical by end-use D
C: Expert end-use projection
D: B + IEA Blue Map for wind and vehicles
400 E: B + vehicle scenario from Figure 1
B

E
300

A
200

100
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Year

In Scenario A, all industries would maintain the same market share over time
while growing at the rate of 3.7 %/year. In Scenario B, demand for REE grows at
an overall rate of 5.3 % between 2010 and 2035, which corresponds to an
approximate doubling of demand between 2010 and 2025 (see Fig. 2). The
modelled market shares of magnets and polishing compounds grow most, while
those of automotive catalysts, petroleum catalysts and glass additives shrink.

5 Rare Earth Availability

To evaluate the implications of the projected demand growth for the REE market,
we compared our projected demand with data on REE supply [2]. REE primary
production for 2010 was approximately 107,000 tonnes of RE metals. The
expected supply in 2015 from current mines and mines that are already being
164 T. J. Wallington et al.

developed is 157,000 tonnes rare earth metals, an average annual increase of

8.1 %. The portfolio of REEs mined is not expected to change significantly in the
next 5 years, with Ce and La accounting for over 55 % of supply for all mines.
The USGS estimates REO total reserves are approximately 110 million tonnes.
It has been reported that large amounts of RE are present in deep ocean sediments,
however, the commercial feasibility of exploiting such deposits is unclear. While
50 % of RE reserves are concentrated in China, significant quantities are also
found in the US and the Commonwealth of Independent States (former Soviet bloc
countries). The static depletion index of REO (reserves/present production) is
approximately 870 years. The known reserves for RE are therefore not expected to
be constraining in the next 25 years. Moreover, at present, although RE recycling
is limited to new scrap, this would be expected to change as prices rise and as
applications that use concentrated amounts of RE grow in importance. Any
increase in recycling would further increase the REE depletion index.
Belying their name, rare earth elements are not rare. The key concern with RE
availability is not their geophysical abundance, but rather whether the RE supply
base can expand at a sufficient pace to meet future demand particularly for
individual RE metals. In particular, we wish to identify (a) the conditions where
REEs may experience unprecedented demand growth, and (b) the implications of
co-mining on RE availability under rapid demand growth in specific industries.

6 Historical Production

Global total REE production has averaged 6.5 % annual growth, but ranged
between 21 and 34 % annual growth since 1970. The overall long term annual
growth rate (curve fit) was 5.4 %. These rates are indicative of the strong growth in
applications for REEs over the past 40 years and of the large historical fluctuations
experienced in the REE market as this growth has occurred. While no guarantee
can be made that future rare earth supply can grow at these historical rates, it is an
indicator that growth at these rates would not be unprecedented.
Scenario D would require relatively rapid growth in total rare earth supply,
5.9 %/year, yet this rate is within 1 % of the historical overall production growth
rate. Until lithium-ion batteries replace NiMH batteries in HEVs, rapid adoption of
HEVs results in fast demand growth for REEs. In particular, in Scenario D, REE
markets experience high growth rates relative to historical levels (8 %/year
between 2010 and 2020) followed by a significant slowdown in demand (2.4 %/
year between 2020 and 2025). Such changes may be accompanied by volatile
prices. Satisfying the demand projected by Scenario C would require 8.6 %/year
supply growth over the next 25 years, which is very challenging. While market
dynamics are expected to play a role in all scenarios, Scenario C is most likely to
lead to increased pressure on primary supply and, therefore, increased prices. The
growth rates for Scenario E result in a lower REE demand in 2035 than Scenario B
because some of the recent historical growth in rare earth demand may be
Sustainable Mobility: Lithium, Rare Earth Elements 165

Table 5 Ratio of demand to supply for scenarios A–E

REE T = 2010, base year= 2010 T = 2035, base year = 2010 T = 2015, base year = 2015
(%) D (%) A (%) B (%) C (%) D (%) E (%)
Ce 99 327 75 77 83 91 81
Dy 92 2630 99 111 148 332 175
Eu 95 78 86 68 97 68 68
Gd 90 145 87 71 107 83 71
La 81 249 66 68 75 82 71
Nd 106 724 87 97 124 156 105
Pr 140 669 114 128 160 170 128
Sm 99 47 83 62 92 61 61
Tb 167 249 133 116 157 125 116
Y 115 267 124 116 139 116 116
Total 98 402 80 82 96 106 87

attributed to the NiMH batteries in HEV. As projected, these batteries become

substituted with lithium-ion technology and future RE demand growth is expected
to slow correspondingly.

7 Limitations of Co-Mining

Even in the most aggressive growth scenarios, total RE demand growth is pro-
jected to exceed historic norms by no more than 3 %/year. However, closer
examination of the results reveals significant deviation from historic norms for
individual elements. REEs are co-mined and are produced in a portfolio that is
determined based on the geology of RE reserves and the economics of recovery
and separation technologies. When examining the future of REs, concern arises
from emerging dislocations in relative demand among specific elements particu-
larly from the imbalance between demand and supply for Dy and Nd. Vehicles and
wind turbines rely very heavily on Dy, Pr and Nd. Presently exploited ores are over
70 % Ce, La and Nd.
To quantify this potential for supply constraint, we compared demand for each
element in the different scenarios and divided by supply for that element (see
Table 5). The percentages shown in Table 5 represent calculated demand in year
T compared to current (2010) or projected (2015) supply in a base (comparison)
year for the jth REE, calculated as:
Dj;y¼T
Ratio for jth element = Rj;T:base ¼ x 100%
Sj;y¼base
In the second column of Table 5, we verify our assumptions by comparing the
2010 demand estimate with the reported 2010 supply. The fact that our demand
estimates for the individual elements are generally within 20 % of the reported
166 T. J. Wallington et al.

supply in 2010 provides confidence in the methods used. The larger discrepancies
(e.g., for Pr and Tb) presumably reflect either the impact of stockpiling, or
uncertainties in the literature data used in our analysis, or both.
The applications that will be most negatively affected by constraints in these
REEs (i.e. increased costs) will be those dependent upon high power magnets, such
as electrified vehicles and wind turbines. Applications such as petroleum refining,
which depend on elements whose supply is projected to exceed demand, may be
positively affected if primary producers increase overall production to meet the
higher demand for specific elements. If a secondary market emerges to meet the
higher demand for specific elements (i.e. recycling of magnets, but not catalysts),
then, given that the portfolio of recycled REEs would be significantly different
from the portfolio of primary supply, the overall supply portfolio of REEs could
change significantly.

8 Conclusions

Increased electrification of the global vehicle fleet will lead to increased use of
lithium and rare earth elements. We estimate the global lithium resource to be
38.3 Mt while the largest demand scenario we considered would consume
approximately 17.3 Mt over the period 2010–2100. We conclude that lithium
availability is unlikely to constrain the electrification of the automobile industry
this century. In all scenarios of rare earth element demand that we considered, the
total rare earth element demand in 2015 was within 20 % of the projected total
supply. However, for some specific elements (especially Dy, Nd, and Pr) the rate
of demand growth in some scenarios is challenging. In scenario D the demands for
Dy and Nd exceed the projected supply by factors of approximately 3 and 2,
respectively. As demand for Dy and Nd increases disproportionately relative to
demands for other REE the prices of individual REE will change encouraging
decreased use of Dy and Nd. This could be achieved by reduced use (e.g.,
materials substitution or increased efficiency), reuse, and recycling.

Acknowledgments We thank Renata Arsenault, Mike Degner, Kelly Keller, Ted Miller, and
Bing Xu for helpful discussions.

References

1. Gruber PW, Medina PA, Keoleian GA, Kesler SE, Everson MP, Wallington TJ (2011) Global
lithium availability: a constraint for electric vehicles? J Ind Ecol 15(5):760–775
2. Alonso E, Sherman AM, Wallington TJ, Everson MP, Field FR, Roth R, Kirchain RE (2012)
Evaluating rare earth element availability: a case with revolutionary demand from clean
technologies. Environ Sci Technol 46:3406–3414