| Independently Powered Energy News

Elon Musk’s euphoric vision of a solar-powered future relying on a battery industry as large as today’s automotive complex, exhibits the can do spirit of the entrepreneur. It’s the kind of optimism California leaders bent on leading the fight against climate change love to revel in. But what about the potential unintended consequences? All technology has its downsides. The auto ended the days of the horse and buggy, brought greater mobility, and stoked the economy—from iron mining to used-car lots. But with it came air and water pollution, mountains of waste, time-wasting traffic jams, freeways that have destroyed communities, accidental deaths, global conflicts over oil, and climate change. California certainly experienced the downsides when it embraced the auto, particularly Los Angeles with its emblematic car culture. Indeed, soon after the dawn of the automotive age, the city and rest of the state found itself like the canary in the coal mine, dealing with problems Henry Ford never imagined. Even as these problems became increasingly apparent, they were not quickly addressed. Moreover, they never stopped the advance of the auto and the spread of the suburban car culture it fueled. That was true even in Los Angeles where at times civic leaders couldn’t see clearly through the growing haze as they approved subdivision after subdivision and freeway after freeway while wondering why they couldn’t clean up the air. Now as the state prepares to ramp up its reliance on renewable energy to make 50 percent of its power by 2030 and almost eliminate fossil fuel by 2050 California is likely to again unleash unintended consequences. Many of them likely will stem from the large volume of sizable batteries needed to maintain reliable power supplies between the set and rise of the sun and ebb and flow of the wind. Understandably, state leaders are first focused on how to make the renewable energy economy—backed by ample energy storage—a reality. Yet, somebody should be thinking about the potential unintended consequences of putting as many large battery packs as there are cars today in neighborhoods, shopping malls, warehouses, and office parks. Here are some of those potential consequences state leaders likely will have to deal with: The Mineral Supply Chain: Just like Mideast oil, minerals needed to make energy storage batteries often come from places overseas that are not always friendly to the U.S. Moreover, there’s growing geopolitical competition over access to stores of lithium, cobalt, vanadium, and other minerals needed for renewable energy, with China practicing soft diplomacy in Latin America, Africa, and other corners of the world while the U.S. sends in troops and weapons. While geopolitics is primarily a national responsibility, California leaders need to keep a close eye on the developing geopolitics of the growing renewable energy mineral economy in the coming years. Don’t think so? Just remember the gas lines during the Arab oil embargo in the 1970s and imagine a state with millions of battery packs in 20 years on homes and in cars, 5 to 10 percent of which need to be replaced each year to maintain reliable power service and transportation. Then imagine a mineral supply crimp due to an international political crisis or monopoly behavior. It could be lights out for the California economy. Market Issues : Just like assuring affordable telephone or broad band service requires either regulation or robust competition, Californians would best be served by competition in the battery industry. But in a world where antitrust laws are weakly enforced, how can California assure that a future merger of large battery makers does not result in market power that could bring unfair pricing? For that matter, just as Goldman Sachs kept oil tankers at sea to drive up the price of petroleum when it went for more than $100 a barrel not too long ago, how can a state dependent upon lithium for its lifeblood prevent rampant speculation that drives up the price of mineral? It will be incumbent upon the Attorney General to actively engage to ensure adequate competition. Quality Control: As power production increasingly lies in the hands of businesses and consumers instead of regulated utilities, what can the state do to regulate the quality and durability of batteries and solar panels. Musk’s battery pack, for instance, will cost more than $3,000, a substantial investment for a homeowner. Should it be subject to warranty requirements, say the same way as catalytic converters and other emissions control devices are on cars? Assuming zero net energy solar homes and businesses equipped with batteries become a major cornerstone of grid reliability, what will happen if substantial numbers of batteries don’t last as long as is claimed in sales pitches. Can home and business owners be compelled to replace them after grid reliability itself becomes reliant on battery storage? To head off, such a prospect, it seems likely the California Public Utilities Commission will have to develop and enforce quality and durability standards for grid connected battery storage systems. Safety: Just as the ubiquity of natural gas, electricity, and gasoline brought safety concerns that demanded government standards, the spread of large battery packs mounted on the walls of homes and businesses and in cars raises safety concerns. First and foremost is the potential for fires. Boeing grounded its 787s after two lithium-ion battery fires. The planes returned to service after being retrofitted with fire protection systems. Battery manufacturers like to talk about how their products meet safety standards. So did makers of automotive air bags, despite that today millions of faulty models recalled will take years to replace due to a supply shortage. Now imagine a safety problem developing after a manufacturer has distributed hundreds of thousands, or millions of batteries that are part and parcel to keeping the lights on and providing transportation to hundreds of thousands or millions of Californians. Could it raise a situation similar to today’s airbag problem in which it could take years to supply safe replacements? If it did, the problem will be as monumental, if not bigger, than the unexpected closure of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station due to its faulty steam generators. Pollution & Justice: Mining, processing, and transporting lithium, cobalt, and other toxic metals and minerals for battery manufacturing plant’s, like the one Musk is building in Nevada, is a dirty business. Right now it’s powered by burning fossil fuels. Transitioning these operations to renewable energy will be needed to prevent traditional pollution from fossil fuel. Also, tight regulations on air and water pollution stemming from the minerals themselves will be needed throughout the supply chain. However, in a drive to maximize profits we can reasonably expect that miners and communities abroad that serve as the source of the minerals will be polluted and economically exploited. This begs the question of whether, just like with today’s blood diamonds, we’ll soon have blood batteries on our hands here in California? Musk’s vision of as many battery packs as autos on the road also will require setting up a massive recycling system for worn out battery packs. That promises to be a dirty operation nobody wants in their backyard. The most recent precedent, speaking of the unintended consequences of the auto, is the shutdown of Exide’s lead acid automotive battery plant in Vernon after executives there admitted to criminal behavior that spread lead and arsenic throughout residential neighborhoods for decades. These issues are not insurmountable. Given California’s rapid drive toward building a clean energy economy they should become central to the debate over energy storage and not over-shadowed by growing euphoria. —William J. Kelly

No Result