Satellite-Based Lithium Capacity Monitoring in Salt Lakes: The Atacama Case

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

In general terms the paper is well written and definitively contributes to current literature on the ecological assessments of Atacama salt flat as well as the environmental footprint of lithium production. I recommend its publication, but the authors should address in the paper the following minor issues:

• The first paper that deals with measuring through Remote Sensing the are of ponds at Salar de Atacama is Liu et al. (2019). The authors seem to be unfamiliar with this paper, which needs to be included in the references, as well as identifying any differences or consistencies among both studies.
• To explain why the data was only collected until 2019 and not until 2024 or some later date than 2019. Could results be altered by including this 5 additional years?
• Page 6, Line 160, Atacama salt lake is not jointly operated by SQM and ALB. They operate independently in the same reservoir.
• Page 11, Equation 1, replace “ ” by “ ”. In general this is the linear regression specification, recognizing that variables (or observations) are changing every year and that there is an “error” term associated with non-observe variables or disturbances.
• I think is quite possible that the term “ ” in Equation 1 is depending on time , i.e., . This because ore grades as well, technological change and operational learning are all dependent on time. If this is the case the recommendation would be to use a time varying coefficient regression and not assume that parameters are constant over time. At least this should be addressed by authors in terms of implications for results and whether this should be examine deeper in a future research.
• Page 12, Line 254-255, to replace “2000-2023” by “1985-2019”.
• Page 12, fourth point of Discussion, there is no clear connection between what authors did in the paper and

 

Additional references

Liu, W., & Agusdinata, D. B. (2020). Interdependencies of lithium mining and communities sustainability in Salar de Atacama, Chile. Journal of Cleaner Production, 260, 120838.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,
I believe that yours paper is quite interesting. 
However, there are some issues that should be resolved, remarks, and suggestions (please, see pdf for more details). 

-At several places, there should be more clarifications added. 
-Also, could you please present some more benefits of yours study. Namely, if the study area is increasing, it could be quite logical that lithium content also increase. However, how can it be useful for other monitoring in the future if we take into account that ponds are mutually different? 
-Finally, main issue could be lack of some referent samples. Namely, there is no any data given which can be used for comparison with the here presented data. It would be very good if you can provide similar study of some other deposit in the region, or from some reference. Other option could be if you can provide the results of the areas in the region which are known that are without lithium, and to compare these. 
At such manner, I believe that these will be valid confirmation of yours results. 
Best Regards 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Hello dear authors!

I've read your work. The work is devoted to the monitoring of extremely important minerals in the modern world. I would like to mention an excellent up-to-date overview of the global situation related to lithium production, as well as the nuances of extraction from brines. In my opinion, the English language in the publication is good, I did not encounter any problems with understanding the text. However, English is not my native language, so you should be skeptical about my opinion on this matter.

Single typos were found in the work (I will give them below).

I strongly recommend analyzing the reason for the increase in lithium prices in the period 2022-2024 and refer to some kind of review. For example, you write:
Line 55-57 This extreme volatility stems from supply-demand imbalances and market sentiment 55 fluctuations, underscoring the critical need for robust production capacity monitoring of 56 major lithium projects to stabilize the energy transition.
Line 290-292 Systematic monitoring of operational and planned projects, coupled with demand forecasting, could inform policy frameworks and corporate strategies, fostering sustainable lithium utilization and market stability.

- The increase in lithium prices in the period from 2022 to 2024 is due to a paradigm shift in military operations with the massive use of remotely controlled drones on lithium batteries. If a major conflict of this type re-emerges on the planet, price volatility will also re-emerge. Military actions always have a higher priority than the implementation of the energy transition. I assume that your proposed monitoring, unfortunately, will not be relevant in such geopolitical challenges. However, in peacetime, your method will definitely help in monitoring the production of more than half of the lithium extracted on the planet.

 

Line 39. You provide a link to the USGS review [3] and write in the text that this is an up-to-date review for the end of 2024. However, according to the link, the release date of the review is 2023.

Legend on figure4 – «Carbonite»

Good luck!

Author Response

Thank you for your comments and suggestions. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors, I believe that this version is quite better than previous. There are some minor errors remained.

Best Regards