GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

3 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Despite concerns about a possible Biden-induced recession and weak Chinese demand, the expectations for strong oil prices remain largely intact.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Barclays-Slashes-Oil-Price-Forecast-To-103-Per-Barrel.html

"The recent sell-off in oil was the result of still resilient Russian oil supply and elevated market concerns that an economic slowdown, or a recession, is coming, Barclays said now in a note carried by Reuters.

Once the EU embargo enters in full force in early 2023, Russian oil supply is expected to drop by 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) compared to the levels before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the UK bank said.  

Still, the downside to oil prices could be limited because the OPEC+ group could decide next year to withhold some supply from the market if global oil demand slows down in a mild recession, according to Barclays. Several banks have recently downgraded their oil price forecasts in view of still resilient Russian supply and an expected downturn in economies and potentially weaker oil demand. 

Earlier this month, Goldman Sachs also revised its Brent price forecast for this quarter to $110 a barrel, down from a previous projection of $140 per barrel, but the investment bank still believes the case for higher oil prices remains strong. Goldman Sachs also revised its fourth-quarter Brent price forecast to $125 a barrel, down from $130 per barrel previously expected. The 2023 projection, however, was left unchanged at $125 per barrel. "

Tween you an me, Barclays and Goldman suck at forcasting. More oil is coming to market whether OPEC cuts back some or not. Russia will not be cutting back crude, there is always a buyer. So in reality same or more oil produced will dampen the prices. Watch how fast Guyana's production increases. Africa will be next frontier to actually becoming producing continent. I forcast steady very slow drop to 68-70 WTI probably by end of year or by March 2023.

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

Oil, gasoline, and diesel demand is still robust, in spite of the expectations of recessionary headwinds.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/WTI-Stops-Slide-As-API-Figures-Show-Major-Gasoline-Draw.html

"The API also reported a draw in gasoline inventories this week of 4.480 million barrels for the week ending Aug 12, compared to the previous week's 627,000-barrel draw.

Distillate stocks saw a draw of 759,000 barrels for the week, compared to last week's 1.376-million-barrel increase."

Edited August 16, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

2 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Tween you an me, Barclays and Goldman suck at forcasting. More oil is coming to market whether OPEC cuts back some or not. Russia will not be cutting back crude, there is always a buyer. So in reality same or more oil produced will dampen the prices. Watch how fast Guyana's production increases. Africa will be next frontier to actually becoming producing continent. I forcast steady very slow drop to 68-70 WTI probably by end of year or by March 2023.

Inventories are still razor thin. Quoting the above,

"U.S. crude inventories have shed some 61 million barrels since the start of 2021..."

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

43 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Oil, gasoline, and diesel demand is still robust, in spite of the expectations of recessionary headwinds.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/WTI-Stops-Slide-As-API-Figures-Show-Major-Gasoline-Draw.html

"The API also reported a draw in gasoline inventories this week of 4.480 million barrels for the week ending Aug 12, compared to the previous week's 627,000-barrel draw.

Distillate stocks saw a draw of 759,000 barrels for the week, compared to last week's 1.376-million-barrel increase."

This is the usual "maintenance" time heading into fall. I wouldn't let those numbers bother me too much. What was the refinery average utilization for the past week? If below 93% that would tell me they're starting the fall maintenance. But I am just and old-ruffneck and can't remember what I ate yesterday 😉

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

48 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Inventories are still razor thin. Quoting the above,

"U.S. crude inventories have shed some 61 million barrels since the start of 2021..."

You should remember we are shipping "crude, diesel, jet-fuel, gasoline" out from our reserve stock of crude. Last count I saw was somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5mmbd. So some numbers are really askew and just commodities players run numbers up and down to make a buck. The local gas stations here in central Illinois never even got close to running out. 

[Boat + 1,323]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Inventories are still razor thin. Quoting the above,

"U.S. crude inventories have shed some 61 million barrels since the start of 2021..."

You mean the foreigners? We need a law that shows sales by company and country. That might clean up some price manipulation, eh?

Edited August 17, 2022 by Boat

[Boat + 1,323]

15 minutes ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

You should remember we are shipping "crude, diesel, jet-fuel, gasoline" out from our reserve stock of crude. Last count I saw was somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5mmbd. So some numbers are really askew and just commodities players run numbers up and down to make a buck. The local gas stations here in central Illinois never even got close to running out. 

How do you know that. Every day the US exports petroleum products from US oil that is produced beyond consumption. Now nobody likes talking about it because the lie Biden is in charge of high prices. Trump recently was lying on the stump saying the US was no longer fossile fuel independant. Of course that’s wrong. There is over a million in crude and petroleum products beyond US consumption produced every day. The lack of truth about oil in the press shows the levels of corruption that have existed for decades. There called typical Republican talking points. I call it the home of no chart reading fools. 

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,217]

7 minutes ago, Boat said:

How do you know that. Every day the US exports petroleum products from US oil that is produced beyond consumption. Now nobody likes talking about it because the lie Biden is in charge of high prices. Trump recently was lying on the stump saying the US was no longer fossile fuel independant. Of course that’s wrong. There is over a million in crude and petroleum products beyond US consumption produced every day. The lack of truth about oil in the press shows the levels of corruption that have existed for decades. There called typical Republican talking points. I call it the home of no chart reading fools. 

Damn, getting political an all even.......wow. You do understand that both the Left and the Right for the last 90 years been making money on the black gold, Texas Tea...... Political greed is on both sides.  You are incorrect on the fact we "pump more that we use". That is why we import so much crude from all over the globe. And no small amounts, about 6.11 million b/d. 

[Boat + 1,323]

2 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Damn, getting political an all even.......wow. You do understand that both the Left and the Right for the last 90 years been making money on the black gold, Texas Tea...... Political greed is on both sides.  You are incorrect on the fact we "pump more that we use". That is why we import so much crude from all over the globe. And no small amounts, about 6.11 million b/d. 

We export more than we import. I have posted EIA data numerous times as has Jay. Just show me some data showing otherwise. You call it political when your the one with no data. Per usual for years. 

[Boat + 1,323]

Before Obama won the White House there was drill baby drill. That’s when I started researching. Causally at first but over 3 years I learned about everything the Republicans have claimed then and since has been a lie. Why? Your gullible. A serious lack of fact checking. Probably paid fake news just the public like me didn’t know. Your prob Putin paid so why be nice anymore. I have stats, you got a collection of bobble head dictators. 

[notsonice + 1,243]

12 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Blundering along again? Like your goofy call-out on the relationship between CO2 and earth temperature? 

Your pal Jay actually merits a blue ribbon for citing that paper which alerted me to the data relationship. Jay is now one of the key debunkers of the current climate bafflegab. Congratulations, Jay!

You believe Goldman Sachs ( GS Sucks)??? you should go long on oil....rent a super tanker and fill it up ....you will be rich on the $130 call by GS

PS you still have a problem understanding science and the CO2/Earth Temp??? Guess the world will always have low IQ lovers of coal that live in the world of denial...

Please go long with the GS forecast....the market today loves suckers . How is WTI doing today.............creamed again ...too much oil....too little demand................No new peak in oil in sight  all because of demand destruction........ Enjoy 

Edited August 17, 2022 by notsonice

[notsonice + 1,243]

7 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

Tween you an me, Barclays and Goldman suck at forcasting. More oil is coming to market whether OPEC cuts back some or not. Russia will not be cutting back crude, there is always a buyer. So in reality same or more oil produced will dampen the prices. Watch how fast Guyana's production increases. Africa will be next frontier to actually becoming producing continent. I forcast steady very slow drop to 68-70 WTI probably by end of year or by March 2023.

wow even the old redneck understands where oil is headed.....into the dumpster due to lack of demand (Chinas economy is toast for the next 3 years with their collapsing real estate bubble) coupled with increasing supply. US shale (800,000 BOD more by the Jan 1 2023)  along with Guyanas 200,000 BPD increase in the next year.....plus throw in the Iranians rolling over so they can flood the market with oil....2 million BPD increase in their production hitting the market if sanctions are wiped out????? (they would love to screw over the Saudis and take away Saudis buyers)

80 Brent by xmas....WTI $72-$75 

The trend is set ..........and the FED will bring it all home.....Anyone out there betting the FED will stop raising interest rates for the rest of 2022????

the only thing that can stop the downward trend is a full stop by the FEDS current tightening or WW3

 

Goldman is looking to sell some bridges to nowhere........

Edited August 17, 2022 by notsonice

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

1 hour ago, notsonice said:

 

PS you still have a problem understanding science and the CO2/Earth Temp??? Guess the world will always have low IQ lovers of coal that live in the world of denial...

 

I posted some of the work the other day, but you failed to respond to it. I will give you another chance to see if your reading skills extend to climate science. Perhaps all this is above your head. If you have trouble with anything below let me know, we will discuss it.

"The paper with the data was first introduced here in a link by Jay. I pointed out that there was a lag in the data set between earth temperature and CO2 levels, and that CO2 appeared to be the dependent variable, with earth temperature the independent variable. That is, the direction of causation was from earth temperature to CO2 levels, the reverse of the standard climate change mantra.

Now I see that there was actually a paper published in 2012 along the same lines, supporting the indications in the work cited by Jay, showing that CO2 changes are apparently caused by changes in earth temperature.

"The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature

Abstract

Using data series on atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperatures we investigate the phase relation (leads/lags) between these for the period January 1980 to December 2011. Ice cores show atmospheric CO2 variations to lag behind atmospheric temperature changes on a century to millennium scale, but modern temperature is expected to lag changes in atmospheric CO2, as the atmospheric temperature increase since about 1975 generally is assumed to be caused by the modern increase in CO2. In our analysis we use eight well-known datasets: 1) globally averaged well-mixed marine boundary layer CO2 data, 2) HadCRUT3 surface air temperature data, 3) GISS surface air temperature data, 4) NCDC surface air temperature data, 5) HadSST2 sea surface data, 6) UAH lower troposphere temperature data series, 7) CDIAC data on release of anthropogene CO2, and 😎 GWP data on volcanic eruptions. Annual cycles are present in all datasets except 7) and 8), and to remove the influence of these we analyze 12-month averaged data. We find a high degree of co-variation between all data series except 7) and 8), but with changes in CO2 always lagging changes in temperature. The maximum positive correlation between CO2 and temperature is found for CO2 lagging 11-12 months in relation to global sea surface temperature, 9.5-10 months to global surface air temperature, and about 9 months to global lower troposphere temperature. The correlation between changes in ocean temperatures and atmospheric CO2 is high, but do not explain all observed changes.

 

Publication: Global and Planetary Change, Volume 100, p. 51-69.

Pub Date: January 2013

DOI: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.08.008 

Bibcode: 2013GPC...100...51H "

Edited Monday at 01:25 AM by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

Here is Jay's post which introduced the controversial data on CO2 and earth temperature.

"No, the opposite.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-how-the-rise-and-fall-of-co2-levels-influenced-the-ice-ages#:~:text=While there is a clear,temperatures increased by around 4C."

And here was my response,

"Well, Jay, here is the title of one of the studies linked in the PR release you gave us,

"Antarctic temperature and CO₂: near-synchrony yet variable phasing during the last deglaciation"

"Yet Variable Phasing", so the phasing is an issue as in the other studies I linked for you.

And another of your links states,

"The values of a temperature proxy, the hydrogen isotopic composition (δD), in the Antarctic EDC ice core1,2 have varied in parallel with CO2 concentrations over the past 800 thousand years (kyr; r2 = 0.82)3. However, δD apparently leads CO2 variations. For example, during the last termination (TI), the start of Antarctic warming has been estimated to be synchronous with CO2 increase4 or to lead CO2 increases by 800 ± 600 years5 on the East Antarctic Plateau. The lead is ca. 2000 years at a West Antarctic site6. Over the past 420 kyr, the Vostok ice core shows that the Antarctic δD temperatures lead the CO2 variations by 1.3 ± 1.0 kyr7. During the lukewarm interglacials (430–650 kyr BP), Antarctic δD leads CO2 by 1900 years, and the correlation between CO2 and δD is weaker (r2 = 0.57), as determined from the EDC core8."

So this complicates finding the direction of causation in these models."

And on May 17 above I wrote,

"...the direction of causation is apparently out of phase, suggesting that CO2 is a dependent variable in relation to earth temperature change. It looks like CO2 levels change in response to the changes in earth temperature, not the other way around."

Edited August 17, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

Biden & Co. have not been able to disguise the current robust oil and gasoline demand.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Oil-Jumps-On-Massive-Crude-Inventory-Draw.html

"...the Energy Information Administration estimated a draw in oil inventories of 7.1 million barrels for the week to August 12.

This compared with a build of 5.5 million barrels reported for the previous week. A day earlier, the American Petroleum Institute estimated a modest crude draw of 448,000 barrels for the week to August 12.

In gasoline, the EIA estimated an inventory draw of 4.6 million barrels for last week, which compared with a 5-million-barrel decline for the previous week.

Gasoline production averaged 10 million bpd last week, which compared with 10.2 million bpd during the previous week."

Edited August 17, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Ron Wagner + 702]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/electric-cars-batteries-lithium-triangle-latin-america-11660141017?mod=world_major_3_pos2

 

The Place With the Most Lithium Is Blowing the Electric-Car Revolution

A California-sized piece of South America is stifling production of the metal at a time when battery makers desperately need it

 

Evaporation ponds at an Albemarle Corp. lithium mine in Chile.

 

By Ryan Dube

Follow

 

 / Photographs by Tamara Merino for The Wall Street Journal

Aug. 10, 2022 10:41 am ET

SAVE

SHARE

TEXT

647 RESPONSES

Listen to article

Length(12 minutes)

Queue

SALAR DE ATACAMA, Chile—Hailed as the Saudi Arabia of lithium, this California-sized chunk of terrain accounts for some 55% of the world’s known deposits of the metal, a key component in electric-vehicle batteries.

As the Chinese EV giant BYD Co. recently learned, tapping into that resource can be a challenge. Earlier this year, after BYD won a government contract to mine lithium, indigenous residents took to the streets, demanding the tender be canceled over concerns about the impact on local water supplies. In June, the Chilean Supreme Court threw out the award, saying the government failed to consult with indigenous people first.

 

TECH NEWS BRIEFING

Lithium Bottlenecks Risk Future of EVs

 

 

00:00

1x

SUBSCRIBE

“They want to produce more and more lithium, but we’re the ones who pay the price,” said Lady Sandón, president of one of two Atacameño indigenous hamlets that filed a lawsuit against the auction. A BYD spokeswoman declined to comment.

Similar setbacks are occurring around the so-called Lithium Triangle, which overlaps parts of Chile, Bolivia and Argentina. Production has suffered at the hands of leftist governments angling for greater control over the mineral and a bigger share of profits, as well as from environmental concerns and greater activism by local Andean communities who fear being left out while outsiders get rich.

 

At a time of exploding demand that has sent lithium prices up 750% since the start of 2021, industry analysts worry that South America could become a major bottleneck for growth in electric vehicles.

---

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

The 10-Point.

A personal, guided tour to the best scoops and stories every day in The Wall Street Journal.

PREVIEW

 

SUBSCRIBED

---

“All the major car makers are completely on board with electric vehicles now,” said Brian Jaskula, a lithium expert at the U.S. Geological Survey. “But the lithium may just not be enough.”

In Bolivia, the government nationalized its lithium industry years ago and has yet to produce meaningful amounts of the metal. Mexico, a smaller player, also recently nationalized lithium. In Argentina, output is only starting to take off.

Here in Chile, where lithium is already tightly controlled, President Gabriel Boric’s new leftist government plans to create a state lithium company after criticizing past privatizations of raw commodities as a mistake. A new constitution, if approved in a September referendum, would strengthen environmental rules and indigenous rights over mining.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

“This is a strategic resource for the energy transition,” said Chile Mines Minister Marcela Hernando. Ms. Hernando recently told Chile’s congress that while the government didn’t have the know-how to mine lithium on its own, it would insist on majority control of any joint venture with private firms.

Evaporation ponds at an Albemarle Corp. lithium mine in Chile.

A brine reservoir, a step in the lithium-extraction process.

A few years ago, Chile was the world’s largest lithium producer, turning out slightly more than Australia. While Chile has expanded output at its existing operations by 80% since 2016 to about 140,000 tons annually, it hasn’t opened a new mine in about 30 years. It now produces about half as much as Australia, which has quadrupled its output in the past five years, according to the USGS.

Unlike oil, which is produced all over the globe, lithium is less common. South America, Australia and China are the key locations. Outside South America, it’s extracted from hard-rock. In the region, lithium is found in salty, underground water that is evaporated by the sun after being pumped into large man-made ponds. South America’s lithium is less expensive to produce, but miners say the drawback is it takes far longer to build a mine—about eight years.

Chilean officials and environmentalists worry about the impact on water supplies. Willy Kracht, Chile’s undersecretary of mining, said recently that up to 2,800 cubic meters of water are needed to produce one ton of lithium in Chile, versus 70 cubic meters for a ton of copper.

Environmentalists believe that mining has caused some nearby lagoons to dry up, harming the population of wild flamingos that rely on them to feed on shrimp and build nests. “The damage is irreversible,” said Cristina Dorador, a biologist who was a member of a special assembly that wrote the draft for Chile’s new constitution.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Lithium miners deny their operations have affected lagoons, which they monitor with local communities.

In 2017, Tim Fernback was upbeat about his lithium project in Chile, a free-market leader in the region that has usually welcomed foreign miners digging up copper and other metals. His Vancouver-based firm, LiCo Energy Metals, acquired property in the Salar de Atacama, a vast salt flat surrounded by snow-capped volcanoes.

 

Mr. Fernback, who was LiCo’s chief operating officer, said he met with locals to explain the firm’s plans and offered to build a plant to provide clean drinking water. He thought the meetings went well. When it came time to drill through the salt-crusted surface, residents blocked roads in protest, citing environmental concerns. Believing the project was hopeless, LiCo abandoned Chile in 2019.

“It felt like back stabbing,” said Mr. Fernback. “We went in there, we spent a lot of money on the property, which we had to exit. Who else is going to want to do that?”

Chile lost its global lead on lithium in part because the state has maintained tight control since the 1970s, when Gen. Augusto Pinochet’s military dictatorship declared it a strategic resource because it is a component in nuclear bombs.

The two lithium miners that operate here rent their land from a state agency, which limits how much they can produce. Export also requires a special permit from the government’s nuclear agency.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Albemarle officials examine the brine reservoir.

Mario Tapia, Albermarle’s operations supervisor, holds a piece of salt from the lithium mine.

To expand its output, U.S.-based Albemarle Corp. signed a new contract in 2016 that requires it to pay royalties of up to 40%, an industry high. Hoping to add value domestically rather than just export raw material, the government required Albemarle to provide up to 25% of its lithium production at a low market price to companies processing it locally. The company also gives part of its sales to indigenous communities.

“If lithium regulation in Chile was like copper regulation, I can assure you there would be a lot more mines,” said Albemarle’s country manager in Chile, Ignacio Mehech. “We have to be able to produce the lithium that the world needs.”

The operating environment for lithium miners is set to get even more complicated given the rise of a new group of left-wing leaders in Latin America, a region whose history is marked by battles over the state’s role in the development of its natural riches.

With economies battered by the pandemic and people grappling with soaring inflation, officials in some Latin American nations say robust state control over lithium will help boost local development and pad public coffers.

It’s a gamble, however, that risks derailing lithium production if government demands make it too costly and difficult for overseas investors with the expertise and capital to build mines, say industry analysts. Public enterprises, meanwhile, risk mismanaging the resource in a region where state-run firms have long been mired in corruption and nepotism.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

“Latin America specializes in killing golden geese and one of the quickest ways to do so is through resource nationalism,” said Benjamin Gedan, a Latin America expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center who closely tracks the region’s lithium industry. “This boom could very quickly turn to bust if bad policies are brought forward.”

Mr. Gedan calls Bolivia the ultimate cautionary tale. One of the world’s poorest nations, Bolivia nationalized lithium in 2008 under ex-President Evo Morales, who promised to turn the country into a mining power that builds batteries and electric vehicles. The government created a state lithium company, Yacimiento de Litio Bolivianos, or YLB. Bolivia spent about $900 million on a factory and other infrastructure to extract lithium from the windswept Uyuni salt flat in Potosi, Bolivia’s poorest state and where the Spanish Empire once pillaged for silver.

Years after the factory’s 2013 opening, production is virtually nonexistent. In 2021, Bolivia produced just 540 tons of lithium carbonate, according to YLB, or what Chile produces in a day and a half.

Juan Carlos Zuleta, an economist who briefly ran YLB in 2020, said that because of a lack of know-how and technology, the company was able to recover only about 9% of the lithium it extracted from brines, making it commercially unviable. Chile’s two big existing lithium mines have a recovery rate of about 50% or higher.

“The government has spent almost 14 years trying to develop lithium in the country and it’s failed,” said Mr. Zuleta. “I’m certain that we are missing a golden opportunity.”

Juana Gutierrez, shown with her husband, Gerardo Cruz, at the Catarpe indigenous community, says Albemarle funded a new town hall and solar panels for homes.

Guadalupe Martinez, says she received electricity for the first time a few years ago.

In Rio Grande, a town on the edge of the salt flat, residents expected lithium to bring jobs and modernity. But the village’s roads remain unpaved. The nearest hospital is an hour and a half away. There are no police, banks or Wi-Fi. Young people, unable to find work, migrate to Chile.

Donny Ali, a Rio Grande native, built the Hotel Lithium, anticipating an influx of business people. Today, the hotel’s eight rooms are empty. “This place remains forgotten,” said Mr. Ali.

Like others in Potosi, Mr. Ali was suspicious of outsiders wanting to develop Bolivia’s lithium, believing locals wouldn’t benefit. Now, he believes foreign companies are needed.

“The nationalization policy hasn’t taken us down a good path,” he said. “They’ve used the state’s resources but there’s nothing to show for it.”

Bolivia’s Energy Ministry and YLB didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The brightest spot for lithium output in South America has been Argentina, which so far has been more open to private investment, a source of much-needed foreign currency for the cash-strapped government. Officials provide companies with tax stability agreements and have eased some currency controls that suffocate other sectors, according to firms that operate there.

As a result, the country has received an influx of investors, such as Anglo-Australian miner Rio Tinto PLC, Chinese battery maker Ganfeng Lithium Co. and French multinational Eramet SA. Global auto giants are increasingly betting on Argentina too, with Toyota holding a stake in a local mine. Ford and BMW have deals to receive Argentine lithium.

Argentina could have 19 lithium mines by 2031, up from two now, said Lukasz Bednarski, a lithium analyst at IHS Markit, a London-based consulting firm. Annual production could hit 230,000 tons by the end of the decade, about a sixfold increase from now, according to the government.

“We’re seeing a boom in mining investments and that is going to continue,” said Matías Kulfas, who was production minister until June.

Chile’s Atacama desert.

Some observers note Argentina’s failure to develop other promising resources, including a massive shale gas deposit in the far south that elicited a similar rush of excitement a decade ago. The country’s ruling Peronists have a history of intervening in key economic sectors and reneging on agreements. And, some lawmakers are already calling for a greater state role over lithium.

The country, which is grappling with fuel shortages, is far behind in building the energy infrastructure needed to power its new lithium projects, said Emily Hersh, chief executive of Luna Lithium, an exploration company.

Ms. Hersh, an economist, noted that the country’s long-running economic volatility will also undermine lithium development. “I’d hope that anyone operating in Argentina has adequately priced in and prepared for economic catastrophe at any given time,” she said.

Write to Ryan Dube at ryan.dube@dowjones.com

Appeared in the August 11, 2022, print edition as 'A Lithium Colossus Fails Its Big Test'.

HIDE CONVERSATION

647

Conversation647 Comments

 

 

Commenting on this article has ended

2

 

 

Sort by 

Newest

 

• TV

  Thomas Villa

  13 August, 2022

  To the author: Please write a follow-up article to examine how and when the peoples of Chile, Argentina, Bolivia, etc. were consulted and involved in meaningful ways to develop the global master plan to force urgent transition to EVs and other "renewables" that require devouring large portions of their countries. If they weren't involved, their cooperation cannot be assumed. Ditto here in the US where progressive environmentalists push the transition but block all mining and drilling. Buckle up and remain seated. Turbulence ahead!

  6

  Share

   
• HG

  Helene Gadoury

  13 August, 2022

  This article seems to be grossly misleading in several ways. Australia is currently by far the biggest producer and dwarf South America. The Salton Sea is not mentioned and could produce up to 40% of world demand and all of US demand with the greenest technology, combining it with geothermal power plants that generate clean energy. Also, second life batteries can be used for storage and alternatives to lithium are being developed. Recycling can recover 90 to 95% of the resources used and could meet half the demand by 2040, eventually reaching a fully circular closed loop where mining will not be needed anymore. However, diversification from international sources could be beneficial if successful. We are currently behind Chinese diplomats and investment caused by neglect, giving them free reign to do as they please. We should take the initiative to change the narrative as the US will deliver higher business standards while providing local employment and stimulate their economy if done right. This will require convincing leftist government and the local population of the added value of our expertise and the potential of developing mutually beneficial long term relationships.

  1

  Share

[Andrei Moutchkine + 828]

1 hour ago, Ron Wagner said:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/electric-cars-batteries-lithium-triangle-latin-america-11660141017?mod=world_major_3_pos2

 

The Place With the Most Lithium Is Blowing the Electric-Car Revolution

A California-sized piece of South America is stifling production of the metal at a time when battery makers desperately need it

 

Evaporation ponds at an Albemarle Corp. lithium mine in Chile.

 

By Ryan Dube

Follow

 

 / Photographs by Tamara Merino for The Wall Street Journal

Aug. 10, 2022 10:41 am ET

 

SAVE

SHARE

TEXT

647 RESPONSES

Listen to article

Length(12 minutes)

Queue

SALAR DE ATACAMA, Chile—Hailed as the Saudi Arabia of lithium, this California-sized chunk of terrain accounts for some 55% of the world’s known deposits of the metal, a key component in electric-vehicle batteries.

As the Chinese EV giant BYD Co. recently learned, tapping into that resource can be a challenge. Earlier this year, after BYD won a government contract to mine lithium, indigenous residents took to the streets, demanding the tender be canceled over concerns about the impact on local water supplies. In June, the Chilean Supreme Court threw out the award, saying the government failed to consult with indigenous people first.

 

TECH NEWS BRIEFING

Lithium Bottlenecks Risk Future of EVs

 

 

00:00

1x

 

SUBSCRIBE

“They want to produce more and more lithium, but we’re the ones who pay the price,” said Lady Sandón, president of one of two Atacameño indigenous hamlets that filed a lawsuit against the auction. A BYD spokeswoman declined to comment.

Similar setbacks are occurring around the so-called Lithium Triangle, which overlaps parts of Chile, Bolivia and Argentina. Production has suffered at the hands of leftist governments angling for greater control over the mineral and a bigger share of profits, as well as from environmental concerns and greater activism by local Andean communities who fear being left out while outsiders get rich.

 

At a time of exploding demand that has sent lithium prices up 750% since the start of 2021, industry analysts worry that South America could become a major bottleneck for growth in electric vehicles.

---

NEWSLETTER SIGN-UP

The 10-Point.

A personal, guided tour to the best scoops and stories every day in The Wall Street Journal.

PREVIEW

 

SUBSCRIBED

---

“All the major car makers are completely on board with electric vehicles now,” said Brian Jaskula, a lithium expert at the U.S. Geological Survey. “But the lithium may just not be enough.”

In Bolivia, the government nationalized its lithium industry years ago and has yet to produce meaningful amounts of the metal. Mexico, a smaller player, also recently nationalized lithium. In Argentina, output is only starting to take off.

Here in Chile, where lithium is already tightly controlled, President Gabriel Boric’s new leftist government plans to create a state lithium company after criticizing past privatizations of raw commodities as a mistake. A new constitution, if approved in a September referendum, would strengthen environmental rules and indigenous rights over mining.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

“This is a strategic resource for the energy transition,” said Chile Mines Minister Marcela Hernando. Ms. Hernando recently told Chile’s congress that while the government didn’t have the know-how to mine lithium on its own, it would insist on majority control of any joint venture with private firms.

Evaporation ponds at an Albemarle Corp. lithium mine in Chile.

A brine reservoir, a step in the lithium-extraction process.

A few years ago, Chile was the world’s largest lithium producer, turning out slightly more than Australia. While Chile has expanded output at its existing operations by 80% since 2016 to about 140,000 tons annually, it hasn’t opened a new mine in about 30 years. It now produces about half as much as Australia, which has quadrupled its output in the past five years, according to the USGS.

Unlike oil, which is produced all over the globe, lithium is less common. South America, Australia and China are the key locations. Outside South America, it’s extracted from hard-rock. In the region, lithium is found in salty, underground water that is evaporated by the sun after being pumped into large man-made ponds. South America’s lithium is less expensive to produce, but miners say the drawback is it takes far longer to build a mine—about eight years.

Chilean officials and environmentalists worry about the impact on water supplies. Willy Kracht, Chile’s undersecretary of mining, said recently that up to 2,800 cubic meters of water are needed to produce one ton of lithium in Chile, versus 70 cubic meters for a ton of copper.

Environmentalists believe that mining has caused some nearby lagoons to dry up, harming the population of wild flamingos that rely on them to feed on shrimp and build nests. “The damage is irreversible,” said Cristina Dorador, a biologist who was a member of a special assembly that wrote the draft for Chile’s new constitution.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Lithium miners deny their operations have affected lagoons, which they monitor with local communities.

In 2017, Tim Fernback was upbeat about his lithium project in Chile, a free-market leader in the region that has usually welcomed foreign miners digging up copper and other metals. His Vancouver-based firm, LiCo Energy Metals, acquired property in the Salar de Atacama, a vast salt flat surrounded by snow-capped volcanoes.

 

Mr. Fernback, who was LiCo’s chief operating officer, said he met with locals to explain the firm’s plans and offered to build a plant to provide clean drinking water. He thought the meetings went well. When it came time to drill through the salt-crusted surface, residents blocked roads in protest, citing environmental concerns. Believing the project was hopeless, LiCo abandoned Chile in 2019.

“It felt like back stabbing,” said Mr. Fernback. “We went in there, we spent a lot of money on the property, which we had to exit. Who else is going to want to do that?”

Chile lost its global lead on lithium in part because the state has maintained tight control since the 1970s, when Gen. Augusto Pinochet’s military dictatorship declared it a strategic resource because it is a component in nuclear bombs.

The two lithium miners that operate here rent their land from a state agency, which limits how much they can produce. Export also requires a special permit from the government’s nuclear agency.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

Albemarle officials examine the brine reservoir.

Mario Tapia, Albermarle’s operations supervisor, holds a piece of salt from the lithium mine.

To expand its output, U.S.-based Albemarle Corp. signed a new contract in 2016 that requires it to pay royalties of up to 40%, an industry high. Hoping to add value domestically rather than just export raw material, the government required Albemarle to provide up to 25% of its lithium production at a low market price to companies processing it locally. The company also gives part of its sales to indigenous communities.

“If lithium regulation in Chile was like copper regulation, I can assure you there would be a lot more mines,” said Albemarle’s country manager in Chile, Ignacio Mehech. “We have to be able to produce the lithium that the world needs.”

The operating environment for lithium miners is set to get even more complicated given the rise of a new group of left-wing leaders in Latin America, a region whose history is marked by battles over the state’s role in the development of its natural riches.

With economies battered by the pandemic and people grappling with soaring inflation, officials in some Latin American nations say robust state control over lithium will help boost local development and pad public coffers.

It’s a gamble, however, that risks derailing lithium production if government demands make it too costly and difficult for overseas investors with the expertise and capital to build mines, say industry analysts. Public enterprises, meanwhile, risk mismanaging the resource in a region where state-run firms have long been mired in corruption and nepotism.

ADVERTISEMENT

 

“Latin America specializes in killing golden geese and one of the quickest ways to do so is through resource nationalism,” said Benjamin Gedan, a Latin America expert at the Washington-based Woodrow Wilson Center who closely tracks the region’s lithium industry. “This boom could very quickly turn to bust if bad policies are brought forward.”

Mr. Gedan calls Bolivia the ultimate cautionary tale. One of the world’s poorest nations, Bolivia nationalized lithium in 2008 under ex-President Evo Morales, who promised to turn the country into a mining power that builds batteries and electric vehicles. The government created a state lithium company, Yacimiento de Litio Bolivianos, or YLB. Bolivia spent about $900 million on a factory and other infrastructure to extract lithium from the windswept Uyuni salt flat in Potosi, Bolivia’s poorest state and where the Spanish Empire once pillaged for silver.

Years after the factory’s 2013 opening, production is virtually nonexistent. In 2021, Bolivia produced just 540 tons of lithium carbonate, according to YLB, or what Chile produces in a day and a half.

Juan Carlos Zuleta, an economist who briefly ran YLB in 2020, said that because of a lack of know-how and technology, the company was able to recover only about 9% of the lithium it extracted from brines, making it commercially unviable. Chile’s two big existing lithium mines have a recovery rate of about 50% or higher.

“The government has spent almost 14 years trying to develop lithium in the country and it’s failed,” said Mr. Zuleta. “I’m certain that we are missing a golden opportunity.”

Juana Gutierrez, shown with her husband, Gerardo Cruz, at the Catarpe indigenous community, says Albemarle funded a new town hall and solar panels for homes.

Guadalupe Martinez, says she received electricity for the first time a few years ago.

In Rio Grande, a town on the edge of the salt flat, residents expected lithium to bring jobs and modernity. But the village’s roads remain unpaved. The nearest hospital is an hour and a half away. There are no police, banks or Wi-Fi. Young people, unable to find work, migrate to Chile.

Donny Ali, a Rio Grande native, built the Hotel Lithium, anticipating an influx of business people. Today, the hotel’s eight rooms are empty. “This place remains forgotten,” said Mr. Ali.

Like others in Potosi, Mr. Ali was suspicious of outsiders wanting to develop Bolivia’s lithium, believing locals wouldn’t benefit. Now, he believes foreign companies are needed.

“The nationalization policy hasn’t taken us down a good path,” he said. “They’ve used the state’s resources but there’s nothing to show for it.”

Bolivia’s Energy Ministry and YLB didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The brightest spot for lithium output in South America has been Argentina, which so far has been more open to private investment, a source of much-needed foreign currency for the cash-strapped government. Officials provide companies with tax stability agreements and have eased some currency controls that suffocate other sectors, according to firms that operate there.

As a result, the country has received an influx of investors, such as Anglo-Australian miner Rio Tinto PLC, Chinese battery maker Ganfeng Lithium Co. and French multinational Eramet SA. Global auto giants are increasingly betting on Argentina too, with Toyota holding a stake in a local mine. Ford and BMW have deals to receive Argentine lithium.

Argentina could have 19 lithium mines by 2031, up from two now, said Lukasz Bednarski, a lithium analyst at IHS Markit, a London-based consulting firm. Annual production could hit 230,000 tons by the end of the decade, about a sixfold increase from now, according to the government.

“We’re seeing a boom in mining investments and that is going to continue,” said Matías Kulfas, who was production minister until June.

Chile’s Atacama desert.

Some observers note Argentina’s failure to develop other promising resources, including a massive shale gas deposit in the far south that elicited a similar rush of excitement a decade ago. The country’s ruling Peronists have a history of intervening in key economic sectors and reneging on agreements. And, some lawmakers are already calling for a greater state role over lithium.

The country, which is grappling with fuel shortages, is far behind in building the energy infrastructure needed to power its new lithium projects, said Emily Hersh, chief executive of Luna Lithium, an exploration company.

Ms. Hersh, an economist, noted that the country’s long-running economic volatility will also undermine lithium development. “I’d hope that anyone operating in Argentina has adequately priced in and prepared for economic catastrophe at any given time,” she said.

Write to Ryan Dube at ryan.dube@dowjones.com

Appeared in the August 11, 2022, print edition as 'A Lithium Colossus Fails Its Big Test'.

HIDE CONVERSATION

647

Conversation647 Comments

 

 

Commenting on this article has ended

 

2

 

 

 

Sort by 

Newest

 

• TV

  Thomas Villa

  13 August, 2022

   

  To the author: Please write a follow-up article to examine how and when the peoples of Chile, Argentina, Bolivia, etc. were consulted and involved in meaningful ways to develop the global master plan to force urgent transition to EVs and other "renewables" that require devouring large portions of their countries. If they weren't involved, their cooperation cannot be assumed. Ditto here in the US where progressive environmentalists push the transition but block all mining and drilling. Buckle up and remain seated. Turbulence ahead!

   

  6

  Share

   
• HG

  Helene Gadoury

  13 August, 2022

   

  This article seems to be grossly misleading in several ways. Australia is currently by far the biggest producer and dwarf South America. The Salton Sea is not mentioned and could produce up to 40% of world demand and all of US demand with the greenest technology, combining it with geothermal power plants that generate clean energy. Also, second life batteries can be used for storage and alternatives to lithium are being developed. Recycling can recover 90 to 95% of the resources used and could meet half the demand by 2040, eventually reaching a fully circular closed loop where mining will not be needed anymore. However, diversification from international sources could be beneficial if successful. We are currently behind Chinese diplomats and investment caused by neglect, giving them free reign to do as they please. We should take the initiative to change the narrative as the US will deliver higher business standards while providing local employment and stimulate their economy if done right. This will require convincing leftist government and the local population of the added value of our expertise and the potential of developing mutually beneficial long term relationships.

   

  1

  Share

There are actually a lot of lithium-containing minerals which are not saltflat brines.

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

Oil prices appear to well supported by robust demand and tight inventories....Biden & Co. are barking up the wrong tree.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Oil-Prices/Oil-Prices-Rally-As-Traders-Focus-On-Tight-Supply-Outlook.htm

"WTI crude rallied almost 3.5% on Thursday morning.

Tight supply and falling U.S. crude oil inventories support prices.

U.S. crude oil inventories are now 6% below the 5-year average."

"Crude oil prices are still nearly $20 over where they were at the start of the year, and roughly $28 per barrel gain over the last 12 months.

While recession fears—and the possible demand destruction that could come with such a recession—has pulled down prices over the last month, market fundamentals continue to be tight, with crude oil inventories in the United States continuing to slide. On Wednesday, the EIA estimated that crude oil inventories had fallen by 7.1 million barrels, on top of millions of barrels of crude oil making its way out of the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserves. Gasoline inventories in the United States also fell by another 4.6 million barrels for the week ending August 12, the EIA reported on Wednesday.

U.S. crude oil inventories, excluding those in the SPR, are now just 425 million barrels,--6% below the five year average. Gasoline inventories are 8% below the five-year average, and distillates are 23% below the five-year average."

Edited August 18, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Boat + 1,323]

On 8/16/2022 at 6:15 PM, Ecocharger said:

Inventories are still razor thin. Quoting the above,

"U.S. crude inventories have shed some 61 million barrels since the start of 2021..."

You do realize that’s foreign imports that count as crude inventories. Like who cares. No meaningful impact on US consumption. The US is fossile fuel independant and needs little of the foreigners oil. Most traders have no clue about imports and exports. It’s the dirty little secret of foreign influences over US politicions at work. 

[Boat + 1,323]

You could take away 6 million barrel’s of oil and petroleum products every single day and it would have little to no impact on US demand or price. The US could easily get buy with far fewer refineries. Now you can’t find a Republican that knows this because they be crooked but that’s the way it is. This is the real America. Would the nation run better with less corruption. No clue, it’s never happened. I just get nervous when hundreds die and then they lie. You would think more accountability would kick in after hundreds of deaths. I’m probably just living in a dream world. 

[Boat + 1,323]

On 8/17/2022 at 12:43 PM, Ecocharger said:

Biden & Co. have not been able to disguise the current robust oil and gasoline demand.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Oil-Jumps-On-Massive-Crude-Inventory-Draw.html

"...the Energy Information Administration estimated a draw in oil inventories of 7.1 million barrels for the week to August 12.

This compared with a build of 5.5 million barrels reported for the previous week. A day earlier, the American Petroleum Institute estimated a modest crude draw of 448,000 barrels for the week to August 12.

In gasoline, the EIA estimated an inventory draw of 4.6 million barrels for last week, which compared with a 5-million-barrel decline for the previous week.

Gasoline production averaged 10 million bpd last week, which compared with 10.2 million bpd during the previous week."

Your mixing international demand with Biden? So a few extra tankers drop off oil one week and ship it out a couple of weeks later? Me thinks your a silly boy. Obviously a foreigner trained by tank commanders from Russia. Kinda misplaced reality going on. 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,490]

Gas-powered muscle cars drive into the sunset, turn electric

PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) — Thundering gas-powered muscle cars, for decades a fixture of American culture, will be closing in on their final Saturday-night cruises in the coming years as automakers begin replacing them with super-fast cars that run on batteries.

Stellantis’ Dodge brand, long the performance flag-bearer of the company formerly known as Fiat Chrysler, is officially moving toward electricity. On Wednesday night, Dodge unveiled a battery-powered Charger Daytona SRT concept car, which is close to one that will be produced in 2024 as the sun sets on some petroleum models.

Stellantis says it will stop making gasoline versions of the Dodge Challenger and Charger muscle cars and the Chrysler 300 large car by the end of next year. The Canadian factory that makes them will be converted to electric vehicles. Other automakers are moving — or have moved — in the same direction.

General Motors has said it will build an all-electric Chevrolet Corvette. Tesla says its Model S Plaid version is the fastest production vehicle made, able to go from zero to 60 mph (97 kilometers per hour) in under 2 seconds. Audi, Mercedes, Porsche and other European automakers already have high-performance electric models on sale. And Polestar, an electric-performance spinoff from Volvo, just announced a new Polestar 6 roadster for 2026.

[Ecocharger + 1,446]

2 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Gas-powered muscle cars drive into the sunset, turn electric

PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) — Thundering gas-powered muscle cars, for decades a fixture of American culture, will be closing in on their final Saturday-night cruises in the coming years as automakers begin replacing them with super-fast cars that run on batteries.

Stellantis’ Dodge brand, long the performance flag-bearer of the company formerly known as Fiat Chrysler, is officially moving toward electricity. On Wednesday night, Dodge unveiled a battery-powered Charger Daytona SRT concept car, which is close to one that will be produced in 2024 as the sun sets on some petroleum models.

Stellantis says it will stop making gasoline versions of the Dodge Challenger and Charger muscle cars and the Chrysler 300 large car by the end of next year. The Canadian factory that makes them will be converted to electric vehicles. Other automakers are moving — or have moved — in the same direction.

General Motors has said it will build an all-electric Chevrolet Corvette. Tesla says its Model S Plaid version is the fastest production vehicle made, able to go from zero to 60 mph (97 kilometers per hour) in under 2 seconds. Audi, Mercedes, Porsche and other European automakers already have high-performance electric models on sale. And Polestar, an electric-performance spinoff from Volvo, just announced a new Polestar 6 roadster for 2026.

These spins on the trends are a passing curiosity. Fueled by public panic and a misguided science establishment.

There will be a return to sanity before long and a realization of what really makes the world function.

By the way, Jay, thanks for providing that link above to the new climate science showing that CO2 and earth temperature are related in an opposite way to the usual government climate bafflegab. You deserve a blue ribbon.

It looks like some governments are abandoning the Green Dream and the renewable madness that goes with it.

"According to an International Energy Agency (IEA) announcement last week, coal is once again king: Global coal demand this year will “match the annual record set in 2013, and coal demand is likely to increase further next year to a new all-time high.” The IEA’s assessment comports with a worldwide embrace of coal that includes the European Union, until recently the world’s most zealous climate scold. The EU is now walking back its Net Zero commitments.

In some countries, governments are not so much walking back climate policies as unabashedly kicking them out. Calling wind turbines “fans” that harm the environment and cause “visual pollution” without providing much energy,

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said the government will end the subsidies and stop issuing permits for new wind projects.

Israel is also set to pull the plug on the country’s wind industry, its environmental protection minister arguing that wind provides a “negligible contribution” to the country’s power system “compared to the potential for harm to nature, which is high.”

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Rob Plant + 2,747]

11 hours ago, Boat said:

You could take away 6 million barrel’s of oil and petroleum products every single day and it would have little to no impact on US demand or price.

Are you serious?

Taking out 6 million barrels of oil a day off the market and it wont affect the price??

I agree US demand wont be affected but the price will rocket because supply has been affected and people tend to sell to the highest bidder last time I checked.

[Polyphia + 82]

12 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

These spins on the trends are a passing curiosity. Fueled by public panic and a misguided science establishment.

There will be a return to sanity before long and a realization of what really makes the world function.

By the way, Jay, thanks for providing that link above to the new climate science showing that CO2 and earth temperature are related in an opposite way to the usual government climate bafflegab. You deserve a blue ribbon.

It looks like some governments are abandoning the Green Dream and the renewable madness that goes with it.

"According to an International Energy Agency (IEA) announcement last week, coal is once again king: Global coal demand this year will “match the annual record set in 2013, and coal demand is likely to increase further next year to a new all-time high.” The IEA’s assessment comports with a worldwide embrace of coal that includes the European Union, until recently the world’s most zealous climate scold. The EU is now walking back its Net Zero commitments.

In some countries, governments are not so much walking back climate policies as unabashedly kicking them out. Calling wind turbines “fans” that harm the environment and cause “visual pollution” without providing much energy,

Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador said the government will end the subsidies and stop issuing permits for new wind projects.

Israel is also set to pull the plug on the country’s wind industry, its environmental protection minister arguing that wind provides a “negligible contribution” to the country’s power system “compared to the potential for harm to nature, which is high.”

 

For the most direct debunking of your prized piece of research, give this a read:

https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/49680455/Comment_on_The_phase_relation_between_at20161017-6633-1aciwgf-libre.pdf?1476772821=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DComment_on_The_phase_relation_between_at.pdf&Expires=1660922678&Signature=X2ZOKv8VH8FVSoYHPXYjyl8tcJdnrGNE4Yeq5Vo1ojrgjt0WpBeJ6YFhyzSw1P9cO-gWO0iriOIipRSUiU9nAMDsfQWza-wews5LQ3ZxsOs07kH4nyKaOZBxHU5xsUIGxPeRyze7KlWxSQyyL4kH5XrmRWhMzXUqPKi2nf2RY9CpipIvbN5EhpUxh-1q1HWCKOb1z0tgB1OXucPHq5jyLWf6EFsc5a8Djw5l51dE4PwA28fXYN3MhJl6YZlKXmDMUf6vzzADGEknQa0IrqgFc-gwnV-7YGtDtX19ckSbirk4CckjJ0Gk1p3FY9y2DpSoHciBPK1HOth8GX3BGowYqw__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA

Comment on “The phase relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature” Humlum et al. [Glob. Planet. Change 100: 51–69.]: Isotopes ignored

Abstract

A recent study relying purely on statistical analysis of relatively short time series suggested substantial re-thinking of the traditional view about causality explaining the detected rising trend of atmospheric CO2 (atmCO2) concentrations. If these results are well-justified then they should surely compel a fundamental scientific shift in paradigms regarding both atmospheric greenhouse warming mechanism and global carbon cycle. However, the presented work suffers from serious logical deficiencies such as, 1) what could be the sink for fossil fuel CO2 emissions, if neither the atmosphere nor the ocean – as suggested by the authors – plays a role? 2) What is the alternative explanation for ocean acidification if the ocean is a net source of CO2 to the atmosphere? Probably the most provocative point of the commented study is that anthropogenic emissions have little influence on atmCO2 concentrations. The authors have obviously ignored the reconstructed and directly measured carbon isotopic trends of atmCO2 (both δ 13C, and radiocarbon dilution) and the declining O2/N2 ratio, although these parameters provide solid evidence that fossil fuel combustion is the major source of atmCO2 increase throughout the Industrial Era.

Other links to articles that criticize the research:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921818113000908

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921818113000891