From the April 1984 issue of the World Socialist
From the April 1984 issue of the World Socialist
The push for cleaner energy is causing demand for lithium to spiral – the International Energy Agency has projected that global demand will grow by over 40 times by 2040 if countries stick to their Paris agreement targets to reduce planet-heating emissions – and will likely spark several new mining operations. The bulk of production happens in Australia and Chile.
Across Nevada, there are more than 17,000 prospecting claims for lithium, a soft metal dubbed “white gold” by investors due to its scarcity and increasing value as clean energy components, with several new major projects now planned. Nevada can be to lithium “what Wall Street is to finance, or what Silicon Valley is to technology”, Steve Sisolak, the state’s governor, has envisioned.
Three-quarters of all known deposits of lithium in America are found near tribal land, igniting fears that a decline in destructive fossil-fuel mining could simply be replaced by a new form of harmful extraction.
Plans for a major new lithium mine in northern Nevada will “will turn what is left of my ancestral homelands into a sacrifice zone for electric car batteries”, Shelley Harjo, a member of the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe, has warned.
Lithium is produced by network of enormous ponds that hold briny liquid that has been pumped in from underground. The brine evaporates out vast expanses of salt as it bakes under the piercing Nevada sunshine, eventually separating the lithium within. The salt accretes to 10ft deep in places as the brine is cycled around through the ponds, becoming denser the further it goes. It can take up to two years for the brine to be “heavy” enough for processing. The brine is taken to an on-site plant, where lime and soda ash is added to further the transformation; it is then filtered, pressed and dried into lithium carbonate, a powdery substance that looks a little like flour.
Another method is rock extraction, where an ore called spodumene, that contains high levels of lithium, is dug up in open pits. Some farmers in Australia have complained of possible pollution of waterways from the runoff from this sort of mining.
5,000 tons of lithium is enough to make batteries for 80,000 electric cars. Even doubling this output will make a relatively small dent in the amount of lithium required – half of all cars sold in the US will be electric by 2030, according to some forecasts, with about 26m EVs on the road by this time.
If demand for electric cars takes off as expected – California and New York, for example, have both mandated no new diesel or gasoline cars can be sold after 2035 – then the likes of Ford, Tesla and General Motors will need around 900,000 tons of lithium from the US and Canada to if production is to be fulfilled domestically, according to Rystad Energy. Production in North America is only likely to reach 600,000 tons by 2030, the research firm estimates.
The push for cleaner energy is causing demand for lithium to spiral – the International Energy Agency has projected that global demand will grow by over 40 times by 2040 if countries stick to their Paris agreement targets to reduce planet-heating emissions – and will likely spark several new mining operations. The bulk of production happens in Australia and Chile.
Across Nevada, there are more than 17,000 prospecting claims for lithium, a soft metal dubbed “white gold” by investors due to its scarcity and increasing value as clean energy components, with several new major projects now planned. Nevada can be to lithium “what Wall Street is to finance, or what Silicon Valley is to technology”, Steve Sisolak, the state’s governor, has envisioned.
Three-quarters of all known deposits of lithium in America are found near tribal land, igniting fears that a decline in destructive fossil-fuel mining could simply be replaced by a new form of harmful extraction.
Plans for a major new lithium mine in northern Nevada will “will turn what is left of my ancestral homelands into a sacrifice zone for electric car batteries”, Shelley Harjo, a member of the Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe, has warned.
Lithium is produced by network of enormous ponds that hold briny liquid that has been pumped in from underground. The brine evaporates out vast expanses of salt as it bakes under the piercing Nevada sunshine, eventually separating the lithium within. The salt accretes to 10ft deep in places as the brine is cycled around through the ponds, becoming denser the further it goes. It can take up to two years for the brine to be “heavy” enough for processing. The brine is taken to an on-site plant, where lime and soda ash is added to further the transformation; it is then filtered, pressed and dried into lithium carbonate, a powdery substance that looks a little like flour.
Another method is rock extraction, where an ore called spodumene, that contains high levels of lithium, is dug up in open pits. Some farmers in Australia have complained of possible pollution of waterways from the runoff from this sort of mining.
5,000 tons of lithium is enough to make batteries for 80,000 electric cars. Even doubling this output will make a relatively small dent in the amount of lithium required – half of all cars sold in the US will be electric by 2030, according to some forecasts, with about 26m EVs on the road by this time.
If demand for electric cars takes off as expected – California and New York, for example, have both mandated no new diesel or gasoline cars can be sold after 2035 – then the likes of Ford, Tesla and General Motors will need around 900,000 tons of lithium from the US and Canada to if production is to be fulfilled domestically, according to Rystad Energy. Production in North America is only likely to reach 600,000 tons by 2030, the research firm estimates.
A key pledge to prevent a full-scale climate catastrophe was for developed nations to commit $100 billion per year to address the current climate crisis.
It isn’t happening.
The true value of climate finance is a third of what developed countries report says Oxfam. It reports international climate finance remains flawed and profoundly unfair.
Rich countries are using dishonest and misleading accounting to inflate their climate finance contributions to developing countries – in 2020 by as much as 225%, according to Oxfam.
Oxfam estimates between just $21-24.5 billion as the “true value” of climate finance provided in 2020, against a reported figure of $68.3 billion in public finance that rich countries said was provided (alongside mobilized private finance bringing the total to $83.3 billion).
“Rich country contributions not only continue to fall miserably below their promised goal but are also very misleading in often counting the wrong things in the wrong way. They’re overstating their own generosity by painting a rosy picture that obscures how much is really going to poor countries,” said Nafkote Dabi, Oxfam International Climate Policy Lead. “Our global climate finance is a broken train: drastically flawed and putting us at risk of reaching a catastrophic destination. There are too many loans indebting poor countries that are already struggling to cope with climatic shocks. There is too much dishonest and shady reporting. The result is the most vulnerable countries remaining ill-prepared to face the wrath of the climate crisis.”
Oxfam found that instruments such as loans are being reported at face value, ignoring repayments and other factors. Too often funded projects have less climate-focus than reported, making the net value of support specifically aiming at climate action significantly lower than actual reported climate finance figures.
Currently, loans are dominating over 70% provision ($48.6 billion) of public climate finance, adding to the debt crisis across developing countries.
“To force poor countries to repay a loan to cope with a climate crisis they hardly caused is profoundly unfair. Instead of supporting countries that are facing worsening droughts, cyclones and flooding, rich countries are crippling their ability to cope with the next shock and deepening their poverty,” said Dabi.
Least Developed Countries’ external debt repayments reached $31bn in 2020.
For example, Senegal, which sits in the bottom third of the world’s most vulnerable countries to climate change, received 85% of its climate finance in form of debt (29% being non-concessional loans), despite being at moderate risk of falling into debt distress and with its debt amounting to 62.4% of its Gross National Income.
“Manipulating the system will only mean poor nations, least responsible for the climate crisis, footing the climate bill,” explained Dabi. “A climate finance system that is primarily based on loans is only worsening the problem. Rich nations, especially the heaviest-polluting ones, have a moral responsibility to provide alternative forms of climate financing, above all grants, to help impacted countries cope and develop in a low-carbon way,” said Dabi.
Concerns about climate change is lessening across the world last year, with fewer than half of those questioned in a new survey believing it posed a “very serious threat” to their countries over the next 20 years.
Globally, the figure fell by 1.5 percent to 48.7% in 2021.
Regions facing the highest ecological threats are on average the least concerned about climate change, with only 27.4% of those in the Middle East and north Africa and 39.1% of those in south Asia concerned about the risks.
Only 20% of people in China said they believed that climate change was a very serious threat, down 3 percent from the last survey in 2019.
A study of 228 countries and territories by the Institute for Economics and Peace found that 750 million people globally are now affected by undernourishment and that climate change, rising inflation and Russia’s war in Ukraine will all exacerbate food insecurity in the future.
The study also showed that more than 1.4 billion people in 83 countries face extreme “water stress,” defined as more than 20% of the population not having access to clean drinking water.
Several European countries are expected to experience critical clean water shortages by 2040, including Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, and Portugal, the report found, while most of sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East and North Africa will be affected.
Seven million Venezuelans have left their homeland since 2015 amid an ongoing economic and political crisis, according to new UN data. More than half of them face challenges accessing food, housing, and stable employment. But despite the difficulties facing them abroad, the flow of Venezuelans fleeing turmoil in their homeland has not let up.
More than 80% of those who have left Venezuela are living in Latin America and the Caribbean, in countries which often already struggle to provide health and education to their own nationals. Colombia is hosting 2.48m Venezuelans.
The UN’s Special Representative for Refugees and Migrants from Venezuela, Eduardo Stein, has said that half of all Venezuelan refugees and migrants cannot afford three meals a day and lack access to safe and dignified housing.
“There’s no question both that it is a major protracted crisis that is shaking the region [of Latin America],” David Miliband, president of the International Rescue Committee, told the BBC.“But it is also clear that the competing priorities for global attention – Ukraine, famine in East Africa, trauma in Afghanistan – are draining attention in a way that is quite dangerous.”
In contrast to the G-20, the world’s biggest economies, the V-20 is made up of the 20 vulnerable countries with a collective population of nearly 700 million and ranges from small Pacific nations, such as Vanuatu, to Bangladesh and the Philippines.
As the UK’s cost of living crisis deepened, nearly one in five low-income families experienced food insecurity in September, meaning more people went hungry than during the chaotic first weeks of the Covid lockdown, the Food Foundation charity said.
Hunger levels have more than doubled since January, according to the foundation’s latest tracker, with nearly 10 million adults and 4 million children unable to eat regular meals last month.
Public health expert Sir Michael Marmot called the rise in hunger “alarming”, and told the Guardian it would have damaging health consequences for society’s worst off, including increased occurrences of stress, mental illness, obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
Millions forced to skip meals as UK cost of living crisis deepens | Poverty | The Guardian
The media has drawn attention to ex-RAF personnel accepting contracts to work for China.
Yet in the USA at least 15 retired American generals and admirals have worked as paid consultants for Saudi Arabia’s ministry of defense since 2016.
“Saudi Arabia’s paid advisers have included retired Marine Gen. James L. Jones, a national security adviser to President Barack Obama, and retired Army Gen. Keith Alexander, who led the National Security Agency under Obama and President George W. Bush,” the Post reported. Other ex-servicemembers named in the Post story as paid consultants to the Saudi defense ministry include retired Air Force Brig. Gen. John Doucette and retired Army Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry. Some clearly support military operations, such as “battle trainer,” while others are far more general, including descriptions like ‘consultant’ or ‘advisor.'”
“Congress permits retired troops as well as reservists to work for foreign governments if they first obtain approval from their branch of the armed forces and the State Department,” the newspaper pointed out. “But the U.S. government has fought to keep the hirings secret. For years, it withheld virtually all information about the practice, including which countries employ the most retired U.S. service members and how much money is at stake.”
“More than 500 retired U.S. military personnel—including scores of generals and admirals—have taken lucrative jobs since 2015 working for foreign governments” such as Saudi Arabia, Libya, Turkey, and Kuwait, mostly with the official approval of U.S. military branches. “Records show they rarely reject a job request,” the Post found.
Retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, a Trump loyalist raked in nearly $450,000 in payments from Turkey and Russia in 2015 without receiving clearance from U.S. officials.
“Saudi planes literally couldn’t fly if it weren’t for American technicians,” U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna said in an interview last week.
Defying Pentagon Secrecy, Reporting Exposes Retired US Generals on Saudi Payroll (commondreams.org)
Around 1.3 million U.S. adults with diabetes have either skipped entire insulin doses, taken less than needed, or put off purchases of the medicine over the past year due to its high cost is a striking indictment of a healthcare system that allows profit-seeking pharmaceutical companies to determine prices at will. Pharmaceutical firms have increased insulin prices year after year, even for products that remain unchanged. Eli Lilly has raised the list price of the commonly used insulin product Humalog by an inflation-adjusted 680% since it started selling the drug in 1996.
The new study, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, analyzed data from the 2021 National Health Interview Survey, examining a sample representative of 1.4 million U.S. adults with type 1 diabetes and 5.8 million with type 2 diabetes.
The results indicate that 16.5% of all adult insulin users across the U.S. rationed insulin in some way in the past year, with rationing more common among those with type 1 diabetes than type 2.
“Universal access to insulin, without cost barriers, is urgently needed,” Adam Gaffney, an ICU doctor at the Cambridge Health Alliance and the lead author of the study, explained. “We have allowed pharmaceutical companies to set the agenda, and that is coming at the cost to our patients.” He had personally “cared for patients who have life-threatening complications of diabetes because they couldn’t afford this life-saving drug.”
Human Rights Watch (HRW) described insulin access in the U.S. as “a privilege that many cannot afford,” noting that “soaring medicine prices and inadequate health insurance coverage can result in unaffordable out-of-pocket costs that undermine the right to health, drive people into financial distress and debt, and disproportionately impact people who are socially and economically marginalized, reinforcing existing forms of structural discrimination.”