Item — HN Reader

I don't think "material math" applies to things that are huge luxury/status symbol purchases. Otherwise we'd all be driving 2005 corollas.

And as status-symbol or identity statement, being anti-oil (or anti beholden on America, Russia, Iran, etc) seems like a pretty good one.

1 comments

I am not making any political statements, it's all basic physics & material science: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEkIh2PcSYE

I've watched plenty of youtube videos, I'm not gonna watch a 10 minute video from somebody I've never heard of and treat is as a good source. It's bad form to post that here multiple times instead of just citing whatever actual published sources.

Especially when EV vehicles are already working and taking over the market.

The man in the video has a history of questionable claims, for some fairly obvious reasons:

https://www.desmog.com/mark-p-mills/

> Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and a Strategic Partner at Cottonwood Venture Partners, an investment firm focused on technological advancements in oil and gas production

Edit: Just checked the guidelines so: Man, what a terrible person. I hope he steps on a lego block.

There was no physics in that. It was 10 minutes of incoherent rambling.

How do people find this convincing? Is it a new fashion?

Global copper reserves are about 980 million tonnes, with 1.5 billion tonnes of identified resources and 2024 mine production of about 23 million tonnes.

A conventional car uses about 23 kg of copper and a battery-electric car about 83 kg, a difference of roughly 60 kg per vehicle.

With more than 17 million EVs sold in 2024, that implies about 1.4 million tonnes of copper embodied in those vehicles, or about 1.0 million tonnes more copper than comparable conventional cars would have used; applying the same assumptions to the current global passenger-car fleet implies roughly 120 million tonnes total or 87 million tonnes incremental copper for an all-BEV fleet.

Separately, the IEA says that under today’s policy settings and announced projects, copper faces an implied 30% mined-supply shortfall in 2035, while expanded recycling could reduce new mine needs for copper by about 35% by 2050.

USGS copper reserves / resources / mine production https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2025/mcs2025-copper.pdf

USGS Mineral Commodity Summaries 2025 landing page https://pubs.usgs.gov/publication/mcs2025

IEA Global EV Outlook 2025 – trends in electric car markets https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025/trends-in...

IEA Global EV Outlook 2025 – full report page https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2025

IEA Global EV Outlook 2025 – PDF https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/7ea38b60-3033-42a6-...

IEA Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2025 – overview for copper shortfall / recycling https://www.iea.org/reports/global-critical-minerals-outlook...

IEA Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2025 – executive summary https://www.iea.org/reports/global-critical-minerals-outlook...

IEA Global Critical Minerals Outlook 2025 – PDF https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/ef5e9b70-3374-4caa-...

International Copper Association – copper intensity in electrification of transport https://internationalcopper.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/2...

Great, do these reports include all the other materials that go into BEV b/c copper is only one single component w/ a shortfall.

And the goalposts go flying!

You know what's a shortfall today around the world? Gasoline.

Peak oil production was in 1970 so I don't know what to tell you other than it's basic physics. You should look into something called EROEI (energy return on energy invested). You might find it useful for your next argument about the viability of EVs.

I don't know what to tell you. ICE cars are doomed, it's basic physics. They depend on something that is a finite resource that you agree peaked a long while ago. They're well along their way to complete failure. And yet while we'll still have the copper to recycle into new motors we won't have more oil. But here you are telling me we're going to run out of copper despite lots of sources telling you that's absolutely nonsense, but you'll believe it because some guy in a YouTube video told you "that's just basic physics, there's only so much copper, gotcha!"

> You should look into something called EROEI (energy return on energy invested).

I'm very familiar with it. As easy supplies of oil are getting used up the EROEI of oil is falling. It takes a lot of energy to transport and refine all those tar sands after all. It takes a lot of energy to cryogenically transport LNG around the world. And once you burn it, you need yet another shipment of it around the world. Meanwhile the EROEI of modern renewables is often even exceeding natural gas plants. I don't know what to tell you other than it's basic physics.

You might find actually reading sources other than the oil and gas industry lobbyists enlightening on the topic. Quit asking the Altria group if you should quit that smoking habit and go talk to an actual doctor. And before you brush that off, it's exactly what you're doing. You're asking an oil industry insider if you should bother looking into buying less oil. Of course he's going to tell you nothing else makes sense, keep buying oil.

You should look at actual facts with real figures for your next argument about EVs instead of claiming there's not enough copper. I'm sorry you've swallowed so many obvious lies by these guys.

In any event, this discussion has run its course so good luck in your EV evangelism efforts.