CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 61Environmental Impact and SustainabilityExtraction and Separation ProcessesWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies

Life cycle assessment and water use impacts of lithium production from salar deposits: Challenges and opportunities

Open access
Halkes, Rowan T., Hughes, Andrew, Wall, Frances, Petavratzi, Evi, Pell, Robert, Lindsay, Jordan J.·2024·Resources, Conservation and Recycling
DOI 10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107554
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Lithium is a critical raw material for the energy transition and the salar brine deposits of South America host ∼70% of global resources. However, there are concerns regarding water use, and the associated impacts, of lithium production from these deposits. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is becoming increasingly prevalent in the analysis of raw materials sustainability, but current methods are regarded as unsatisfactory for assessing water use impacts related to lithium production from salar deposits. This work explores the challenges and opportunities for improvement in this context. We outline how the classification and assessment of water types could be improved and identify Water Availability Assessments, groundwater specific CFs, salar-specific methodologies and multiple mid-point indicators as areas for further investigation. This will aid the development of LCA methodology and enable an improved assessment of the sustainability of lithium production from salar deposits in South America and by extension help decouple decarbonisation efforts from negative impacts.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This review examines why current LCA methods are unsatisfactory for assessing water-use impacts of lithium production from South American salar brine deposits, and it identifies methodological improvements. It argues for better water-type classification, salar-specific and groundwater-specific characterisation factors, Water Availability Footprints, and multiple midpoint indicators.

Key findings

  • Salar deposits host ~70% of global lithium resources; lithium demand tripled from 2017 to 2022 and is predicted to increase >40x by 2040 compared with 2020. Evaporation processes recover 30–50% of lithium and lose 85–95% of brine water to evaporation, while DLE can extract up to 90% but has uncertain fresh water use, with >500 m³ per tonne Li₂CO₃ in a quarter of articles reviewed by Vera et al., an order of magnitude greater than EP.
  • LCA water results vary widely by method and allocation: Kelly et al. (2021) reported 15.5–32.8 m³/t Li₂CO₃ and 31–50 m³/t LiOH·H₂O depending on allocation; Chordia et al. (2022) reported AWARE-based results of 4,199.59–18,176.96 m³/t Li₂CO₃ across listed salars; Schenker et al. (2022) reported 1.36–4.77 m³ world eq/kg Li₂CO₃ for four salars and 35.25 m³ world eq/kg for Chaerhan.
  • At Salar de Atacama, Schenker et al. found 81% of impacts originate from direct fresh water use at the processing plant, while Moran et al. found lithium production corresponds to only 8% of total fresh water abstraction in the basin and that total water storage increased significantly over the past decade, disputing the claim that lithium production affects surface water ecosystems.
  • The paper identifies priority improvements: resolving unavailable or overlapping AWARE scarcity factors, developing groundwater-specific characterisation factors, exploring Water Availability Footprints under ISO 14046, and developing salar-specific methodologies and multiple midpoint indicators for fresh water, brine, and water contained in brine.

Methods

  • Critical review/perspective synthesizing literature on salar hydrogeology, lithium production pathways (evaporation ponds, direct lithium extraction, reinjection), and LCA water-use impact assessment methods.
  • Draws on existing LCA studies (Kelly et al. 2021; Schomberg et al. 2021; Chordia et al. 2022; Schenker et al. 2022) and compares their functional units, system boundaries, brine classification, and allocation approaches.
  • No new primary LCA or field data are generated; supporting data are presented in the paper’s tables and figures.

Limitations

  • Paper-stated: salar complexity and variability, multiple water types, variable extraction technologies, lack of publicly available data on brine and fresh water consumption and reinjection, and hydrogeological uncertainty make impacts difficult to determine and generalise.
  • Paper-stated: AWARE has limited local resolution; human demand data are from 2010; mining and other consumption are omitted, potentially underestimating scarcity factors by up to 100% in some basins; it is not designed for groundwater depletion; fossil groundwater is omitted; terrestrial and groundwater-dependent ecosystem demands are not included; scarcity factors are unavailable or overlapping; brine classification lacks consensus; and allocation choices strongly affect results.
  • Evident from the text: this is a review and recommendation paper rather than a new empirical LCA; proposed improvements such as WAFs, salar-specific characterisation factors, and multiple midpoint indicators require further methodological development and validation, and regionalisation may reduce comparability.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107554

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 133 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Premisecitation

    Current water use assessment methods in LCA have problems with application to mining projects.

    “problems with application to mining projects (Northey et al., 2016)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Northey et al., 2016 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Premisecitation

    Production from salars typically has a lower carbon footprint than pegmatite deposits.

    “Production from salars typically has a lower carbon footprint than pegmatite deposits (Jiang et al., 2020;Grant et al., 2020;Kelly et al., 2021;Manjong et al., 2021;Chordia et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Jiang et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Grant et al., 2020

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kelly et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Premisecitation

    Each salar differs in type and amount of fresh water inflow.

    “Each salar differs in type and the amount of fresh water inflow (Risacher and Fritz, 1991;Godfrey et al., 2013;Boutt et al., 2016;Moran et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Risacher and Fritz, 1991

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Godfrey et al., 2013 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Boutt et al., 2016 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Premisecitation

    Current water use assessment methods in LCA have problems with groundwater impacts.

    “and groundwater impacts (Northey et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Northey et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Premisecitation

    Current water use assessment methods in LCA are considered flawed.

    “In general, current water use assessment methods in LCA are considered flawed for various reasons.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 49
  • May combine two claims. 48

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Around 70% of global lithium resources are located in the salar deposits of the high Andes of South America.

    “Around 70 % of global resources are located in the salar deposits of the high Andes of South America (Flexer et al., 2018;Garcés and Alvarez, 2020;Bowell et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Flexer et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Garcés and Alvarez, 2020

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bowell et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The Lithium Triangle, which includes parts of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, will be key in providing the lithium required to decarbonise.

    “This area, referred to as the “Lithium Triangle”, includes parts of Argentina, Bolivia and Chile (Fig. 1), and will be key in providing the lithium required to decarbonise”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    There are sustainability issues associated with lithium production.

    “However, akin to production of any battery-grade products, there are sustainability issues associated with lithium production (Ambrose and Kendall, 2020;Alessia et al., 2021).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ambrose and Kendall, 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Alessia et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Water use is the most significant sustainability concern of lithium production from salars, potentially reducing water availability to local indigenous communities and sensitive ecosystems.

    “This is the most significant sustainability concern of lithium production from salars, which potentially reduces water availability to local indigenous communities and sensitive ecosystems (Babidge and Bolados, 2018;Marazuela et al., 2019b;Liu and Agusdinata, 2021;Gutiérrez et al., 2022;Lorca et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Babidge and Bolados, 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Liu and Agusdinata, 2021

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The main fresh water input to salars is surface and ground waters, which can be significant for the salar's water balance and for maintaining fresh/brackish surface water systems.

    “The main fresh water input is surface and ground waters, which whilst small, can be significant for the salar's water balance (Garcés and Alvarez, 2020) and for maintaining the fresh/brackish surface water systems (Fig. 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Garcés and Alvarez, 2020

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Salars often host indigenous communities and precious ecosystems, including microbes.

    “They often host indigenous communities and precious ecosystems (Babidge and Bolados, 2018;Gutiérrez et al., 2022;Liu and Agusdinata, 2021;Lorca et al., 2022;Marazuela et al., 2019b), including microbes (Bonelli and Dorador, 2021)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Babidge and Bolados, 2018

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Gutiérrez et al., 2022

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bonelli and Dorador, 2021

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Water is the most prevalent component of brine, while lithium comprises only a small fraction (<1%) of brine mass.

    “The relative mass means water is the most prevalent component, lithium comprises only a small fraction of brine mass (<1 %) (Risacher and Fritz, 1991).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Risacher and Fritz, 1991

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Salars are typically located in arid/semi-arid basins with water inputs from precipitation, surface, ground and geothermal waters and evaporation as the main natural outflow.

    “Salars are typically located in arid/semi-arid basins with water inputs from precipitation, surface, ground and geothermal waters and evaporation as the main natural outflow (Rosen, 1994b;Marazuela et al., 2019a) (Fig. 2).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Rosen, 1994b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019a

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Salars are highly dynamic with temporal aspects ranging from hourly to millions of years.

    “Salars are also highly dynamic with temporal aspects ranging from hourly (rain events) to millions of years (brine and halite formation) (Marazuela et al., 2019b;Petavratzi et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Petavratzi et al., 2022

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Fresh water consumption is one of the most important factors in resource sustainability assessments.

    “However, fresh water consumption is also a common LCA impact category and one of the most important factors in resource sustainability assessments (Boulay et al., 2018;Zipper et al., 2020).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Boulay et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Zipper et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Salars are some of the most complex groundwater systems in the world, influenced by geology, climate, geochemistry, hydrology and hydrogeology.

    “Salars are some of the most complex groundwater systems in the world (Petavratzi et al., 2022), with influences from geology, climate, geochemistry, hydrology and hydrogeology (Munk et al., 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Petavratzi et al., 2022

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Munk et al., 2016

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Brines are formed and concentrated in the nucleus, which typically has the greatest lithium concentrations and extraction.

    “Brines are formed and concentrated in the nucleus, and typically, this is where the greatest lithium concentrations and extraction is located (Rossi et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rossi et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Lithium battery chemical production causes a net reduction of lithium within the salar, meaning lithium is not sustainably produced per the true definition.

    “Lithium battery chemical production causes a net reduction of Table 2.It is important to note that EP and DLE can be used in conjunction in a variety of orders as well as separately.The number of drops is representative of the quantity that is thought to be used, it is not quantitative.lithium within the salar.”
    • Also stated in: § 2.3. Sustainability of fresh water, brine and lithium in salars · plain
      “Whilst this may represent a small percentage year-on-year, nonetheless a reduction occurs meaning lithium is not sustainably produced per the true definition.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    While the region is arid/semi-arid, salars receive significant fresh water inflows, meaning sustainable fresh water abstraction is theoretically possible depending on the contemporary recharge vs. withdrawal rate.

    “Whilst the region is arid/semi-arid, salars do receive significant fresh water inflows (Rossi et al., 2022), meaning sustainable fresh water abstraction is theoretically possible depending on the contemporary recharge vs. withdrawal rate.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Rossi et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Similar or lower fresh water consumptions for EP were found in ~40% of reports, with the remaining articles not reporting fresh water consumption values.

    “Though similar or lower fresh water consumptions for EP were found in ~40 % of reports with the remaining articles not reporting fresh water consumption values (Fuentealba et al., 2023).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fuentealba et al., 2023 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The transitional zone (TZ) is the most sensitive part of salar systems, hosting precious and delicate ecosystems.

    “The TZ, comprised of surface water bodies (lagunas), vegas and peatlands, is the most sensitive part of salar systems, hosting precious and delicate ecosystems (Marazuela et al., 2018;Garcés and Alvarez, 2020;Munk et al., 2021).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Marazuela et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Garcés and Alvarez, 2020

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Munk et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The evaporation rate increases as brine concentration decreases, and has an exponentially decreasing relationship with depth; once the water table is ≥0.5 m below the surface, evaporation reduces significantly.

    “The evaporation rate increases as brine concentration decreases, and has an exponentially decreasing relationship with depth, once the water table is ≥0.5 m below the surface evaporation reduces significantly (Houston, 2006;Marazuela et al., 2020b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Houston, 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Marazuela et al., 2020b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    At Hombre Muerto, overall water use for a hybrid EP and DLE scheme is reported as 71 m3 per tonne of Li2CO3, 200% and 50% higher than volumes used at Salar de Atacama and Salar de Olaroz, respectively.

    “Furthermore, at Hombre Muerto the overall water use, for a hybrid EP and DLE scheme, is reported as 71 m 3 per tonne of Li 2 CO 3 , 200 % and 50 % higher than volumes used at Salar de Atacama and Salar de Olaroz, respectively (Vera et al., 2023).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Vera et al., 2023 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Overall, DLE techniques are considered to require more fresh water, while EP consume more brine.

    “Overall, DLE techniques are considered to require more fresh water, while EP consume more brine (Fig. 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Reinjection may alter the geochemistry of the salar system, and there are concerns it could cause dilution and/or disruption to the stratigraphic structure.

    “This may alter the geochemistry of the salar system; there are also concerns reinjection could cause dilution and/or disruption to the stratigraphic structure (Flexer et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Flexer et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Direct lithium extraction (DLE) processes have higher lithium extraction efficiency, potentially up to 90%, and a significantly reduced surface footprint compared to EP.

    “DLE processes have higher lithium extraction efficiency, potentially up to 90 %, and a significantly reduced surface footprint compared to EP (Fuentealba et al., 2023).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Fuentealba et al., 2023 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Typically, evaporation is greater than recharge in salars, and the natural trend is for the water table to gradually decline.

    “Typically, evaporation is greater than recharge, and the natural trend is for the water table to gradually decline (Marazuela et al., 2019b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Brine abstraction affects the inflow of fresh water from salar margins and/or depth, and therefore potentially fresh water availability in the wider system, but there is no linear relationship between brine abstraction and decreases in water storage.

    “Brine abstraction affects the inflow of fresh water from salar margins and/or depth, and therefore potentially fresh water availability in the wider system (Fig. 2); but there is no linear relationship between brine abstraction and decreases in water storage (Marazuela et al., 2019b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019b

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    WaterGAP is calibrated to estimate discharge from major river systems, meaning that while renewable groundwater is considered, fossil groundwater is omitted.

    “Furthermore, WaterGAP is calibrated to estimate discharge from major river systems (Alcamo et al., 2003;Müller Schmied et al., 2014).This means that while the renewable part of groundwater is considered, fossil groundwater is omitted.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Alcamo et al., 2003 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Müller Schmied et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    AWARE is the most common method for water use impact assessment in LCA, producing a water scarcity footprint.

    “The most common method is the Available WAter REmaining (AWARE) method, which produces a water scarcity footprint (WSF).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    AWARE aims to assess the extent to which fresh water users are at risk of fresh water scarcity or deprivation due to operational fresh water consumption.

    “It aims to assess the extent to which fresh water users (humans and ecosystems) are at risk of fresh water scarcity or deprivation due to operational fresh water consumption (Boulay et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Boulay et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    With AWARE, water scarcity footprint results are determined by fresh water scarcity and consumption, not solely the fresh water scarcity of the operational area.

    “It is also important to note that with AWARE the WSF results are determined by fresh water scarcity and consumption, not solely the fresh water scarcity of the operational area.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Uncertainty with AWARE data varies significantly and tends to be more substantial in regions of higher scarcity, common in the Lithium Triangle.

    “Uncertainty with AWARE data varies significantly and tends to be more substantial in regions of higher scarcity (Boulay et al., 2021), common in the Lithium Triangle (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Boulay et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    AWARE is not designed to assess potential impacts of groundwater depletion and is underdeveloped regarding this.

    “AWARE is not designed to assess potential impacts of groundwater depletion and is underdeveloped regarding this (Northey et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Northey et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Without SFs it is not possible to calculate a WSF, meaning the important context of fresh water scarcity is omitted.

    “Without SFs it is not possible to calculate a WSF, meaning the important context of fresh water scarcity is omitted.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    While there are similarities between salars in the Lithium Triangle, there are also significant differences.

    “While there are similarities between salars in the Lithium Triangle, there are also significant differences (Al-Jawad et al., 2024), as displayed in Table 1.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Al-Jawad et al., 2024 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The fresh water demands of ecosystems in AWARE were proxied using the requirements of fresh water ecosystems, and the demands of terrestrial and groundwater-dependent ecosystems such as those in salars were not included.

    “Furthermore, fresh water demands of ecosystems were proxied using the requirements of fresh water ecosystems.The demands of terrestrial and groundwater-dependant ecosystems, such as those found in salars, were not included.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Not all kinds of human consumption (e.g. mining) are considered in the AWARE hydrological model, which may lead to AWARE SFs being underestimated by up to 100% in some basins.

    “Also, not all kinds of human consumption (e.g.mining) are considered in the hydrological model, this may lead to AWARE SFs being underestimated by up to 100 % in some basins (Schomberg et al., 2021).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schomberg et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    AWARE is a midpoint indicator, assessing the potential to deprive humans and ecosystems of fresh water rather than materialised end-point impacts.

    “AWARE is a midpoint indicator, assessing the potential of a project or operation to deprive humans and ecosystems of fresh water, rather than an assessment of 'materialised' (i.e.end-point) impacts.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    AWARE quantifies the relative amount of fresh water remaining after the demands of aquatic ecosystems and anthropogenic activities are met.

    “AWARE, based on the WaterGap 2.2 global hydrological model (Müller Schmied et al., 2014), quantifies the relative amount of fresh water remaining after the demands of aquatic ecosystems and anthropogenic activities are met.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Müller Schmied et al., 2014 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    AWARE is valuable for assessing and comparing projects in a global context, but its underlying models have limited resolution so may not accurately reflect local fresh water scarcity and impacts.

    “AWARE is valuable for assessing and comparing projects in a global context, but underlying models have a limited resolution so may not accurately reflect local fresh water scarcity and impacts (Northey et al., 2018;Kaewmai et al., 2019;Andrade et al., 2020;Sanchez-Matos et al., 2023).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Northey et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kaewmai et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Andrade et al., 2020 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisenone given

    There are areas containing salars of economic interest where AWARE SFs are unavailable and/or salars overlap differing SFs.

    “There are areas, containing salars of economic interest, where AWARE SFs are unavailable and/or salars overlap differing SFs (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    At the Salar de Atacama, the nature and extent of impacts is debated.

    “At the Salar de Atacama, the most studied, the nature and extent of impacts is debated.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Moran et al. (2022) stated that the claim lithium production in the Salar de Atacama affects surface water ecosystems is not scientifically supported.

    “However, Moran et al. (2022) established lithium production corresponds to only 8 % of total fresh water abstraction in the basin and that total water storage has increased significantly over the past decade; going on to state that the claim lithium production in the Salar de Atacama affects surface water ecosystems is not scientifically supported.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Moran et al. (2022) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Moran et al. (2022) established that lithium production corresponds to only 8% of total fresh water abstraction in the Salar de Atacama basin and that total water storage has increased significantly over the past decade.

    “However, Moran et al. (2022) established lithium production corresponds to only 8 % of total fresh water abstraction in the basin and that total water storage has increased significantly over the past decade; going on to state that the claim lithium production in the Salar de Atacama affects surface water ecosystems is not scientifically supported.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Moran et al. (2022) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Kelly et al. (2021) did not treat the water component of brine as fresh water consumption because it cannot be used directly for human activities and is differentiated from fresh water consumption in water resource analysis.

    “The water component of brine was not treated as fresh water consumption because “it cannot be used directly for human activities and is differentiated from fresh water consumption in water resource analysis”.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kelly et al. (2021) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Chordia et al. (2022) utilised the AWARE method as well as the ReCiPe method.

    “Chordia et al. (2022) utilised the AWARE method as well as the ReCiPe method (Table 3).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chordia et al. (2022) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Salar variability means it is difficult to generalise one salar's behaviour from another, with Atacama existing as an end-member of complex and variable systems.

    “Salar variability (Table 1) means it is difficult to generalise one salar's behaviour from another with Atacama existing as an end-member of complex and variable systems (Al-Jawad et al., 2024).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Al-Jawad et al., 2024 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Some studies agree with accounting for brine evaporation within WF methods (AWARE), while others state that brine should not be counted as water consumption.

    “Some studies agree with accounting for brine evaporation within WF methods (AWARE) (Schomberg et al., 2021;Chordia et al., 2022;Schomberg and Bringezu, 2023), while others state that brine should not be counted as water consumption (Kelly et al., 2021;Schenker et al., 2022), akin to indstry approaches (Albermarle 2022).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Schomberg et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Chordia et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Kelly et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Schomberg et al. (2021) created a new spatially explicit WSF methodology for LIBs based on the AWARE method and compared the change in fresh water availability using the safe operating space outlined by the Sustainable Development Goals.

    “Schomberg et al. (2021) created a new spatially explicit WSF methodology for LIBs, based on the AWARE method, and compared the change in fresh water availability using the safe operating space outlined by the Sustainable Development Goals.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schomberg et al. (2021) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Schomberg et al. (2021) found that a 2 MWh LIB resulted in a 33.155 regionally weighted m3 WSF, with highest contributions from Chilean lithium.

    “They found that a 2 MWh LIB resulted in a 33.155 regionally weighted m 3 WSF, with highest contributions from Chilean lithium, but WSF results at a lithium battery chemical scale were not presented and as such are not present in Table 3.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schomberg et al. (2021) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Some studies have linked lithium production to changes in the dynamics of the water table, groundwater depletion and impacts on ecosystems.

    “Some studies have linked lithium production to changes in the dynamics of the water table, groundwater depletion and as impacting ecosystems (Marazuela et al., 2019b(Marazuela et al., , 2020b;;Garcés and Alvarez, 2020;Liu and Agusdinata, 2021).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019b

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Garcés and Alvarez, 2020

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Liu and Agusdinata, 2021

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Schomberg et al. (2021) treated the evaporation of water molecules within brine as fresh water consumption.

    “The evaporation of water molecules within brine was treated as fresh water consumption.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schomberg et al. (2021) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Chordia et al. (2022) used the water content of brine to estimate the amount of water contained within brine extracted per tonne of LiOH·H2O.

    “They also used the water content of brine to estimate the amount of water (contained within brine) extracted per tonne of LiOH⋅H2O.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Chordia et al. (2022) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Brine is in hydrodynamic relation with the salar system and its abstraction is thought to influence fresh water availability.

    “As brine is in hydrodynamic relation with the salar system (Marazuela et al., 2019a) and its abstraction is thought to influence fresh water availability (Garcés and Alvarez, 2020;Marazuela et al., 2020b;Liu and Agusdinata, 2021) its abstraction, and associated impacts should be assessed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Marazuela et al., 2019a

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Garcés and Alvarez, 2020

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Liu and Agusdinata, 2021

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The water contained within brine is not available for anthropogenic uses, though it may support other organisms and ecosystems.

    “However, brine-related impacts should not be treated as equivalent to fresh water consumption as the water contained within brine is not available for anthropogenic uses, though it may support other organisms and ecosystems (Cubillos et al., 2018).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cubillos et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Classification and assessment of brine in LCA is one of the most controversial topics in the literature, with studies using different approaches.

    “Classification and assessment of brine in LCA is one of the most controversial topics in the literature, with studies using different approaches (Kelly et al., 2021;Schomberg et al., 2021;Chordia et al., 2022;Schenker et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Kelly et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Schomberg et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Chordia et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    WAFs include temporal and quality aspects and can assess pressure on other types of water in addition to fresh water, and can comprise one or several impact categories.

    “WAFs include temporal and quality aspects (which can influence the availability of water) as well as the potential to assess pressure on other types of water in addition to fresh water, they can also comprise one or several impact categories (ISO, 2014).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites ISO, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Andrade et al. (2020) found WaterGAP overestimated fresh water availability and underestimated demand in different basins, and the use of AWARE BR CFs led to improved, but often very different WSF results.

    “They found WaterGAP overestimated fresh water availability, and underestimated demand in different basins, and the use of AWARE BR CFs led to improved, but often very different WSF results.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Andrade et al. (2020) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Broadly, fresh water present around salars and/or in the TZ would be expected to meet the ISO 14046 definition of fresh water and therefore be treated as such in assessments.

    “Broadly, fresh water present around salars and/or in the TZwould be expected to meet this definition and therefore treated as such in assessments.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites ISO, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    There is scope for improvement of models and CFs regarding consideration of local and regional factors as well as those relating to salar complexity.

    “There is scope for improvement of models and CFs regarding the consideration of local, and regional factors as well as those relating to salar complexity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    AWARE is a WSF under ISO 14046, while ISO 14046 was not developed with salars in mind; rather than proposing specific methods, it defines criteria which must be fulfilled.

    “AWARE is a WSF under ISO 14046, while ISO 14046 was not developed with salars in mind, rather than proposing specific methods, it defines criteria which must be fulfilled (Berger et al., 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Berger et al., 2016 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Due to their salinity, brines are unsuitable for drinking or irrigation and are not directly used by aquatic ecosystems or humans as a water source.

    “Due to their salinity brines are unsuitable for drinking or irrigation (Flexer et al., 2018) and are not directly used by aquatic ecosystems or humans as a water source.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Flexer et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In the Salar de Atacama watershed, copper mining and agriculture are the largest fresh water consumers, with the greatest groundwater storage losses occurring where these users are concentrated.

    “In the Salar de Atacama watershed, copper mining and agriculture are the largest fresh water consumers, with the greatest groundwater storage losses occurring where these users are concentrated (Moran et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Moran et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Based on ISO 14046 definitions, brine abstraction and reinjection would be considered as water use impacts and water lost through brine evaporation and changes in evaporation rate considered as water consumption.

    “Based on these definitions brine abstraction and reinjection would be considered as water use impacts and water lost through brine evaporation and changes in evaporation rate considered as water consumption.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites ISO, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationcitation

    WAFs may allow the assessment of brine and fresh water as distinct water types, in addition to other features such as water quality, within one methodological framework.

    “This may allow the assessment of brine and fresh water as distinct water types, in addition to other features such as water quality, but within one methodolgical framework.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites ISO, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Despite higher TDS than seawater, under ISO 14046 definitions brine could be classified as brackish waters in assessments.

    “Despite higher TDS than seawater, under these definitions brine could be classified as brackish waters in assessments.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites ISO, 2014

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Consequently, brine would not be considered as fresh water and therefore not assessed by the AWARE method.

    “Consequently, brine would not be considered as fresh water and therefore not assessed by the AWARE method (Boulay et al., 2018;Schenker et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Boulay et al., 2018 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Schenker et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Schenker et al. (2022) reported an AWARE water scarcity footprint of 1.36 m3 world eq/kg for 1 kg Li2CO3 production from Salar del Hombre Muerto (North) (Argentina).

    “| | Salar del Hombre Muerto (North) (Argentina) | | | 1.36 m3 world eq/kg”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schenker et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Variable extraction technologies (Evaporative Processes and DLE) and associated water usages mean brine and fresh water consumption and reinjection can vary considerably.

    “• Variable extraction technologies (Evaporative Processes and DLE) and associated water usages; meaning brine and fresh water consumption and reinjection can vary considerably”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Schenker et al. (2022) reported an AWARE water scarcity footprint of 1.62 m3 world eq/kg for 1 kg Li2CO3 production from Salar de Cauchari-Olaroz (Argentina).

    “| | Salar de Cauchari-Olaroz (Argentina) | | | 1.62 m3 world eq/kg”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schenker et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Impact uncertainty is derived from hydrogeological uncertainty.

    “• Impact uncertainty, derived from hydrogeological uncertainty”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Schenker et al. (2022) reported an AWARE water scarcity footprint of 1.73 m3 world eq/kg for 1 kg Li2CO3 production from Salar de Olaroz (Argentina).

    “| | Salar de Olaroz (Argentina) | | | 1.73 m3 world eq/kg”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schenker et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Social impacts are of particular concern and lithium production in the Lithium Triangle has been considered to constitute a form of green extractivism replicating historical inequalities between the Northern and Southern hemispheres.

    “Social impacts are of particular concern (Lorca et al., 2022) and lithium production in the Lithium Triangle has been considered to constitute a form of green extractivism replicating historical inequalities between the Northern and Southern hemispheres (Jerez et al., 2021).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lorca et al., 2022

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Jerez et al., 2021 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Sanchez-Matos et al. (2023) found significant differences between updated and original CFs, both geographically and temporally.

    “They found significant differences between the updated and original CFs, both geographically and temporally.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sanchez-Matos et al. (2023) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Community members' access to pumping wells may be restricted and their utilisation of ecological services and social values provided by water impacted.

    “Community members' access to pumping wells may be restricted and their utilisation of ecological services and social values (cultural attachment to water, recreation and aesthetic values) provided by water impacted (Liu and Agusdinata, 2021;Lorca et al., 2022).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Liu and Agusdinata, 2021

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Lorca et al., 2022

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Within the Lithium Triangle there are areas where AWARE SFs are unavailable and/or salars overlap different SFs.

    “Within the Lithium Triangle there are areas where AWARE SFs are unavailable and/or salars overlap different SFs (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Akin to the development of region specific SFs, this will impact the ability to compare results to lithium production from other deposit types.

    “Akin to the development of region specific SFs, this will impact the ability to compare results to lithium production from other deposit types.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    Prioritisation of users introduces subjectivity.

    “Additionally, prioritisation of users (Kaewmai et al., 2019), which could provide valuable insights, is not without issue as it introduces subjectivity.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kaewmai et al., 2019 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Decent comparability between projects within the Lithium Triangle would still be possible and WAF methods could be applied to other, i.e. 'hard rock', production routes to maintain a good degree of comparability.

    “However, decent comparability between projects within the Lithium Triangle would still be possible and WAF methods could be applied to other, i.e. 'hard rock', production routes to maintain a good degree of comparability.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Kaewmai et al. (2019) found the mean difference between AWARE CFs and their local CFs to be statistically significant.

    “They found the mean difference between AWARE CFs and their local CFs to be statistically significant.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Kaewmai et al. (2019) source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Schenker et al. (2022) reported an AWARE water scarcity footprint of 35.25 m3 world eq/kg for 1 kg Li2CO3 production from Chaerhan salt lake (China).

    “| | Chaerhan salt lake (China) | | | 35.25 m3 world eq/kg”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schenker et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Modification of AWARE could allow for valuable accuracy improvements while still potentially allowing a comparison between lithium production pathways within South America.

    “Ultimately, modification could allow for valuable accuracy improvements while still potentially allowing a comparison between lithium production pathways within South America.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    There is a lack of publicly available data on brine and fresh water consumption and reinjection.

    “• Lack of publicly available data on brine and fresh water consumption and reinjection”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Schenker et al. (2022) reported an AWARE water scarcity footprint of 4.77 m3 world eq/kg for 1 kg Li2CO3 production from Salar de Atacama (Chile).

    “Schenker et al., 2022 | 1 kg Li2CO3 | Salar de Atacama (Chile) | AWARE | Li2CO3 | 4.77 m3 world eq/kg”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Schenker et al., 2022 source

      Not checked in the free run.

80 of 80

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Evaporation processes have a lithium recovery rate of 30-50%.

    “EP have a lithium recovery rate of 30-50 %.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    On a mass balance scale, water constitutes the majority (~80%) of brine.

    “Despite its salinity, on a mass balance scale, water constitutes the majority (~80 %) of brine.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    LCA is an appropriate framework for assessing the sustainability of lithium production from salar deposits.

    “Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is becoming increasingly prevalent in the analysis of raw materials sustainability, but current methods are regarded as unsatisfactory for assessing water use impacts related to lithium production from salar deposits.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    AWARE is one of the most suitable methods for assessing the fresh water use impacts of lithium production.

    “The AWARE method is one of the most suitable for assessing the fresh water use impacts of lithium production, however utilising it to assess the water-related impacts of lithium production from salar deposits is challenging due to:”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    LCA's primary purpose is the objective comparison of production across supply chains, regions and life cycle stages.

    “LCA's primary purpose is the objective comparison of production across supply chains, regions and life cycle stages.”
5 of 5

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some salars have spatial overlaps with multiple characterization factors due to low watershed resolution, while for other salars no characterization factor is available.

    “As highlighted by Halkes et al.,80 some salars have spatial overlaps with multiple characterization factors due to the low watershed resolution of the WaterGAP model, while for other salars, no characterization factor is available at all.”

    From Current and Future Impacts of Lithium Carbonate from Brines: A Global Regionalized Life Cycle Assessment Model (2025) · cites this paper as [80]

    Section 4.1 (page unavailable) states that some salars overlap differing AWARE scarcity factors and that factors are unavailable for other salar areas. It also says the underlying models have limited resolution, while Section 3 identifies WaterGAP as an AWARE input. The paper does not specifically attribute the overlapping factors to low watershed resolution in WaterGAP. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Scientists still have not reached consensus about the way that groundwater interacts with brine.

    “Scientists still have not reached consensus about the way that groundwater interacts with brine”

    From Lithium and water: Hydrosocial impacts across the life cycle of energy storage (2024) · cites this paper as Halkes et al., 2024

    Section 5.1 says hydrogeological understanding of salars is limited, and Section 2.2 describes site-specific effects on fresh-water inflow and the brine–fresh-water interface. Those passages support uncertainty about the interactions, but the paper does not say scientists lack consensus on how groundwater interacts with brine. Its explicit statement about a lack of consensus, in Section 4.2.3, concerns methods for assessing brine in life-cycle assessments. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Extended life cycle assessments that include brine, as well as ore in the scope of analysis, may reveal a more comprehensive water scarcity footprint of lithium-ion batteries, particularly when integrated with local hydrological cycles and downstream processing pathways.

    “Extended LCAs that do include brine, as well as ore in the scope of analysis, may reveal a more comprehensive water scarcity footprint of lithium-ion batteries, particularly when integrated with local hydrological cycles and downstream processing pathways”

    From Lithium and water: Hydrosocial impacts across the life cycle of energy storage (2024) · cites this paper as Halkes et al., 2024

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • For brine sources, processing wastewater from lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide may be recovered for reuse or reinjection.

    “For brine sources, processing wastewater from lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide may be recovered for reuse or reinjection”

    From Lithium and water: Hydrosocial impacts across the life cycle of energy storage (2024) · cites this paper as Halkes et al., 2024

    Section 5.2 says water used in processing plants may be treated wastewater and partly recycled, while Section 2.1.3 says lithium-depleted brine may be reinjected. The paper does not establish that wastewater from lithium carbonate or lithium hydroxide processing is itself recovered for reinjection; its reinjection discussion concerns depleted brine. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. IEA, 2023. Critical minerals market review 2023 – analysis.
  2. Munk, L., Hynek, S., Bradley, D.C., Boutt, D., Labay, K.A., Jochens, H., 2016. Lithium brines: a global perspective 18, 339–365. 10.5382/Rev.18.14. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Salas, 2010, Hydrogeology of the lacustrine system of the eastern margin of the Salar the Atacama (Chile); Hidrogeologia del sistema lagunar del margen este del Salar de Atacama (Chile), Boletin Geologico y Minero, 121

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Halkes, R. T., Hughes, A., Wall, F., Petavratzi, E., Pell, R., & Lindsay, J. J.
Affiliations
  • British Geological Survey (GB)
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • Twentieth Century Society (GB)
Corresponding author
Halkes, Rowan T.
ORCID
Venue
Resources, Conservation and Recycling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-08
Volume
207
Pages
107554
ISSN
0921-3449 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107554
OpenAlex
W4396841114
Cited by
61
References
81
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 27 · 2024: 13
FWCI
7.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Resources Conservation and Recycling (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • NERC Open Research Archive (Natural Environment Research Council) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Natural Environment Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Environmental Impact and Sustainability
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Extraction and Separation Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Water-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Keywords
lithium production, water use impacts, water availability assessment, groundwater, water type classification, life cycle assessment methodology, critical raw materials, decarbonization, South America

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-10.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review