Lithium Dreams
The authors of a new book on California's 'Lithium Valley' talk about the potential for equitable growth in a region badly in need of a second chance.
Welcome to the fourth issue of State of Change, a monthly newsletter from the Climate Equity Reporting Project.
The Overview
California’s transition to all electric vehicles has been at the center of the national news cycle this week. The Washington Post reported that the U.S. EPA granted the state a long-awaited waiver that will allow it to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035, but it’s tough to say how much that will do to protect the state from legal challenges come January 20, when President Trump resumes office.
Under the Clean Air Act—which passed at a time when California faced terrible air pollution—the agency may grant the state a waiver that allows it to set tougher vehicle emissions rules than those at the federal level. Over a dozen other states have also adopted California’s rules, helping grow the demand for EVs.
President Trump has said he plans to do away with the Clean Air Act and the waiver itself, but in the shorter term the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to preside over a case that would have allowed industry groups such as the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers alongside 17 conservative states to sue California over the rules. Then, three days later, the court announced it would narrow its purview, saying it would not rule on the broader question of whether the state has the legal authority to impose auto pollution standards—or not just yet.
In a show of confidence—or bravado?—the California Energy Commission (CEC) also just approved a $1.4 billion plan to install 17,000 new EV chargers statewide.
And in case anyone needs a refresher as to why the shift to EVs matters from a climate perspective, the nonprofit Next 10’s new report found that total emissions in the state fell by 2.4% from 2021 to 2022 (half of the reduction required to meet the state’s 2030 goal) and most of that decrease came from the transportation sector, which fell by 3.6% during that time period.
In Other News
Transportation
Should the state be investing in imported biofuels while cannibalizing its cap-and-trade fund to keep the California EV tax credits alive? Danny Cullenward of the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy argues that doing so makes little sense. The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), he adds, primarily subsidizes out-of-state biofuel producers. In 2021, he writes, “California drivers paid about $2.9 billion for out-of-state biofuels. With that money, [they] could have funded 390,000 rebates for electric vehicles at $7,500 each—just in 2021 alone.”
Last week, the Department of Energy (DOE) released a 150-page Rail Action Plan that would, among other things, “conduct feasibility studies for electrification infrastructure on a national low- and net-zero-emission freight rail corridor network” and “prioritize locations with the largest public health impacts.” DOE has also shared overviews of similar action plans for vehicles and ships.
The state announced a $2,000 voucher program for e-bikes aimed at low-income California residents. It plans to give away 1,500 vouchers in its initial round.
When it comes to cargo trucks, swapping out existing vehicles for new ones doesn’t always make sense. Some companies, like the southern-California-based Evolectric, turn diesel trucks into zero-emissions electric vehicles instead, giving them at least 10 more years of use before they hit the scrapyard.
The Energy Transition
On a national scale, more low- and moderate-income households are investing in rooftop solar panels, according to a recent report from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The median income for a household that installed solar arrays of their own in 2023 was $115,000, down from $141,000 in 2010. California has been at the head of the pack since 2021, say the report’s authors, as “solar-adopter incomes have shifted downward more rapidly than in other states likely due to new building codes requiring PV on all new homes.”
Earlier this week, in an effort to keep the money flowing toward climate adaptation before the end of the year, the Biden administration offered PG&E a $15 billion low-interest loan designed to help it expand hydropower generation and battery storage and upgrade its transmission lines. These kinds of costs are typically passed to PG&E’s customers—who are paying through the nose for wildfire safety measures—so the loan begs the question: Will Californians get a break from further price hikes in the coming years?
The California Climate Credit is designed to offset rising electricity costs, for all households across the state. But experts at Stanford have argued that the state should shift the credit to help low-income residents of the areas hardest hit by extreme heat. As Dean Florez of the California Air Resources Board wrote in a recent op-ed: “A recent study by Stanford’s Climate & Energy Policy Program revealed a simple but powerful solution: shift the Climate Credit to target low-income households in hot climate zones, like the Central Valley. This change could reduce annual energy bills for these families by over 20%, providing meaningful relief when they need it most.”
Building Electrification
SoCalGas has refused to close its massive natural gas storage facility in Aliso Canyon, despite pressure from activists and community leaders after a massive, ongoing spill that impacted multiple surrounding neighborhoods in 2015. Now, those activists have shifted tactics, and they’ve worked to ensure that more than half of the funds from a $71-million settlement between SoCalGas and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) will go toward $10,000 rebates for households replacing their gas appliances with electric ones—therefore reducing the needs for the Aliso Canyon facility. The $40 million fund will enable 40,000 people to go electric at a radically reduced price.
LA Times columnist Sammy Roth wondered aloud in his latest column about how little attention Governor Newsom has given electric appliances in recent years compared to electric cars, despite their potential to reduce a significant portion of the greenhouse gas emissions in the state. In addition to the culture wars surrounding gas vs electric appliances, Roth pointed to the politics, writing:
“Automakers have invested hundreds of billions of dollars in electric vehicles — and they want those investments to pay off. Newsom, with a presidential run always in mind, knows supporting EVs is a smart move politically. By contrast, there’s no powerful, consolidated group of electric appliance companies. There’s no Big Heat Pump, no Big Induction. The marketplace is growing but much more dispersed. The campaign funds are minimal.”
The Q&A: ‘Charging Forward’ Examines the Pitfalls and Possibilities of Lithium Valley
By Twilight Greenaway
Chris Benner and Manuel Pastor have had front row seats to the changes taking place in the so-called Lithium Valley, the region around the Salton Sea, where a network of companies have hatched a plan local and state government entities to mine vast quantities of lithium to use in the batteries that power electric vehicles. In their new book Charging Forward: Lithium Valley, Electric Vehicles, and a Just Future they take a close look at the burgeoning new industry and what it would take for it to bring about an equitable transition in one of the poorest regions in the state.
Benner is a professor of environmental studies and sociology at UC Santa Cruz and Pastor is a professor of sociology and American studies and ethnicity at University of Southern California—but they aren’t your typical ivory tower academics. Since 2007, Benner and Pastor have written five previous books together, always in response to existing questions that arise in the marginalized communities with whom they work.
In the case of the Lithium Valley, three companies are planning to use a method called direct lithium extraction, a high-heat process that extracts the mineral from the brine created during geothermal power production. This approach is less environmentally destructive than open-pit mining and uses less water than mining that relies on large evaporation ponds. And at a time when a vast percentage of the world’s lithium is mined outside the U.S., it could also be a game changer for domestic sourcing; the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory found that there’s enough lithium deep down below the Salton Sea to support over 375 million batteries for electric vehicles.
We spoke with Benner and Pastor about the book, the way the auto industry is changing, and the historic opportunity for expanded equity in the region.
Why motivated you to write about the past, present, and future of the Lithium Valley?
Chris Benner: We got introduced to this work in the Salton Sea region by Sylvia Paz from Alianza Coachella Valley. She has been leading an effort to create a vision for an inclusive economy in the broader Salton Sea region—Imperial County and the Eastern Coachella Valley—that is linking environmental regeneration with community economic development. [Paz] knew about our previous work around solidarity economics, and about four years ago, she invited us to help do some work with Alianza Coachella Valley. Subsequently, she got appointed to head the Blue Ribbon Commission on Lithium Extraction, or the so-called Lithium Valley Commission. And of course, lithium is a huge opportunity for the region, and so that got us interested in trying to better understand and support that work.
Manuel Pastor: Quite often, universal themes are illustrated best in particular circumstances—and there are big questions about [the potential for] a just transition, the movement to a clean energy economy, and whether or not equity will be a fully realized part of that vision in the Salton Sea region. There you have an environmental disaster, environmental injustice with asthma rates two to three times the national average, and a long history of labor exploitation and political marginalization of the super majority Latino community, which has been kept close to poverty and very far from power. And now the region is sitting on enough lithium to [electrify] the entire American auto fleet and have 100 million batteries left over. It’s a microcosm of the dynamics going on in the EV industry generally, with labor struggling for its fair share, with legacy automakers as they shift to electric vehicles, the contradictions of a market made by public policy and public subsidy, with its most prominent producer, Elon Musk, insisting that it's all because of his individual libertarian excellence, even though he's been essentially feeding at the trough of public dollars for years. So what happens in lithium Valley will not stay in lithium Valley.
You write about how the U.S. auto industry—in a constant dance with the labor movement—shaped many of our ideas and norms around work, class, and who deserved a piece of the pie. Can you saymore about what this transition to electric vehicles can show us about those very same things in 2025?
Pastor: The auto industry set the contours for the relationship between capital and labor in the post-war period: strong union presence, corporate control over investments, and the sharing of the benefits. Between 1945 and 1970 basically at all points along the income scale, income went up by about the same percentage. That [negotiation] formed the Social Compact. It also set in place our reliance on cars and the climate crisis that we're experiencing today, [wherein] so many greenhouse gas emissions are transportation-related. It also set in place our racial relations because automobiles fueled suburbanization and sprawl and separation of suburbs from cities and made possible separate schooling systems. Few of the jobs went to people of color, but lots of the pollution did.
The auto industry is illustrative of a strategy of sitting down in two senses: Sitting down to take the means of production, which is what workers did in the 1930s, and then sitting down to negotiate. And that's an important lesson now, because to get out of the climate crisis [in time], we're going to need to amass capital and technology at a huge scale. That's going to require companies on the scale of those that are trying to operate in lithium Valley. And activists need to learn the skills of both power-building to force the companies to the table and then negotiating, which means learning about the supply chain. It means understanding what will pencil out; it means knowing the parameters of the industry.
Benner: The United Auto Workers (UAW) was successful in gaining some benefits from the industry through organizing and sit-down strikes. And they made a compromise as part of the Treaty of Detroit. They had to leave production decisions to management. And that set the stage for the outsourcing and offshoring once the auto industry started hitting profitability crises in the ‘70s and ‘80s and subsequent rounds that led to growth in non-unionized production facilities in the southern U.S. and in Mexico. Now we have the cleanest, greenest lithium on the planet in a state that [is home to] a strong environmental movement and a strong labor and community organizing and environmental justice movement. There’s a chance to set a different tone for the EV industry of the 21st century.
[Last week] there were major negotiations going on between the three companies planning to extract lithium—Berkshire Hathaway, Energy Source Minerals, and Controlled Thermal Resources—and this new coalition; Valle Unido, which is bringing together some long standing labor organizations in the valley. Comite Civico Del Valle has been in the Imperial Valley for 40 years now, and it’s one of the strongest environmental justice organizations, certainly in the state, if not the country. And some new coalitions are coming together to ensure that the community benefits: good paying jobs, [the right to join a] union, and protection against environmental concerns. But a bigger question is whether or not the existence of lithium in the region will lead to the manufacturing of battery components and ultimately, electric vehicles. Is it just going to be an extraction zone? Or can the poorest county in California by some metrics, and certainly near the bottom on all metrics, benefit economically more significantly than just being the site of extraction of lithium? And [it’s key for organizers] to see across the whole supply chain, so that socially conscious consumers—California is still the largest EV market in the country—can play a role in helping to support companies that are sourcing lithium from this cleanest source, and ideally supporting unionized manufacturing. And why we point to the work of Lead the Charge and the European battery passport initiative. Those are really promising ways of all of us being able to see more clearly the environmental, human rights, and labor conditions across the entire supply chain.
We’re excited about the possibility of value-added manufacturing in the area, because resource rich communities all around the world experience boom and bust cycles. They get a bit of an economic boom when the material is being extracted, and then they get nothing after that. And we have a case where there are lots of economic arguments, given the road infrastructure, the railroad infrastructure— which goes right by that facility and connects to the ports of LA and Long Beach and New Orleans—and a large enough workforce, and especially the Coachella Valley, which is the most rapidly growing part of California. And then you have a large workforce in Mexicali. Around 50,000 people cross the border to work every day. And if we could get manufacturing facilities in this corner of California, it would provide a model for the country, but also for other parts of the world.
Can you speak to the new tax on lithium extraction, which is designed to help improve the communities around the Salton Sea and the environment? The industry wanted a revenue-based tax but the community pushed for a tiered volume-based tax, meaning that all the lithium would be accounted for regardless of how much it sold for and to whom. How did the negotiation play out?
Benner: Community organizations in the region really wanted a volume-based tax because they didn't have confidence that the companies wouldn't cook the books and they also know the price of commodities is pretty volatile. [The debate over the tax] was the first real skirmish about these differing visions between the company and local community organizations. But I don't think that tax is going to be definitive in one way or another about the future of the industry. There are some real questions about the challenges of building out these large scale, high volume, direct lithium extraction plants on very hot, salty geothermal brine. It's never been done commercially. It is certainly going to require lots of maintenance because it's corrosive material. The basic chemistry is pretty simple, and it's been done on a pilot scale. But once you get up to production scale, there are open questions about the costs and complications. [In 2022 a bill passed that included a tiered volume-based tax.]
You quote Luis Olmedo, executive director of Comite Civico del Valle as saying, “What’s happening right here in the Imperial Valley is the new norm of accountability and inclusion for the EJ community in the face of industry.” Do you think that norm has indeed been created?
Pastor: The new norm is still to be won, and it's going to require power building ideas like the community benefits agreements that Valle Unido is putting forward. It's also going to require a narrative shift, which is to understand that the reason this market is being created is not because of the brilliance of particular entrepreneurs, but because of public policy and the social movements that make that policy happen. As much as we are supporters of community benefits, we've often thought that the language could be shifted to "community dividends," because the community is helping to create this wealth and the return on it.
Will the second Trump administration slow down the development of Lithium Valley?
Pastor: It is easy to think that the EV industry is dead, but that's probably not true. First, Elon Musk is definitively in the mix, and he will want policy change in a way that favors Tesla but doesn't reduce the demand for lithium. Auto manufacturers are too far down this road to turn back. There has been significant investment in batteries and EV assembly in red states whose governors are skeptical about climate change but enthusiastic about jobs and investment. And while you can keep the Chinese automakers out of the U.S. for a while with tariffs, they're going to be nipping at the heels of every producer by competing in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. The momentum for EVs is there. The question is, will there be a momentum for equity?
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
