We’ll be off this Monday for Indigenous Peoples Day but will be back in your inboxes on Tuesday.

With help from Blanca Begert and Wes Venteicher

CLIMATE NERDS ASSEMBLE: Welcome to the first installment of a semi-recurring feature we’re calling “What’s up with that?”

We’ll bring you up to speed on the technologies and projects that are getting a lot of buzz as climate solutions — or have gotten a lot of buzz in the past, but not enough follow-up reporting.

But first, we need your help. Take our poll and tell us what we should cover next!

WHERE’S THE LITHIUM? It’s in California, that much is certain. But extracting it, processing it and turning it into batteries to store renewable energy and power electric vehicles is another question entirely.

That’s especially hard in the U.S., where permitting challenges, local opposition and costs have mixed together to thwart new mining efforts. It’s an uncomfortable truth: Critical minerals like lithium are essential ingredients for clean technologies, lots of them are needed and China currently dominates the space.

California’s Salton Sea, a rich area of geothermal activity that also happens to produce abundant lithium resources, offers a potential way forward. Three companies have launched projects there to capitalize on what could be a win-win-win: a more environmentally friendly, domestic lithium industry to power the energy transition and create new jobs.

It’s a lot of promise. But where do things stand?

What have we said about it? Gov. Gavin Newsom called the region the “Saudi Arabia of lithium” when President Joe Biden visited last year to discuss critical minerals development.

Global demand for lithium batteries is set to jump five-fold by 2030, and the world could face a shortage of the “white gold” as soon as 2025.

The California Energy Commission calls it “Lithium Valley,” and projected in 2020 that it could supply an estimated 600,000 tons per year with a value of $7.2 billion.

What have we spent on it? The CEC gave a $6 million grant to Berkshire Hathaway Energy and a $1.46 million grant to Controlled Thermal Resources in 2020. The U.S. Energy Department gave BHE a nearly $15 million federal grant in 2021, but the company had to return it due to “material changes” to its project.

State Treasurer Fiona Ma announced tax breaks for the CTR and BHE projects to the tune of $10 million and $20 million, respectively, in July. And the Energy Department announced in August it would invest $3.5 billion to boost production of battery materials, commercial scale lithium separation, some of which could go to the valley.

Stellantis and GM have signed offtake agreements with CTR, while EnergySource Minerals and Ford announced their own contract earlier this year. BHE has not yet signed any such agreements.

On the income side, California passed a lithium extraction tax last year that could generate $400 to $800 per ton. The state Department of Tax and Fee Administration is conducting a yearlong study of how to structure the tax.

What’s going on with it? All three companies plan to produce lithium in a way that’s different from most other extraction around the world: through direct lithium extraction technology that extracts the hot brine and separates lithium from other metals.

It’s different from conventional extraction, which involves either a lengthy drilling and evaporation process that can take months to years to access the lithium or damaging open-pit mining.

Outside observers say the technology is still largely unproven as companies in Utah, Arkansas and Chile also race to produce commercial levels of lithium with the cleaner tech.

“It really just comes down to its economics and if they can do it at scale, and until they do that, it’s hard to know,” said Jordan Lee Calderon, a critical minerals and sustainability researcher at the Colorado School of Mines.

Some of the players are well-established in the Imperial Valley. BHE Renewables already owns 10 geothermal plants, while EnergySource Minerals opened its first geothermal plant in the region in 2012. CTR doesn’t currently have a footprint in the region beyond its current plans and is therefore trying to develop both lithium extraction and geothermal energy facilities.

CTR CEO Rod Colwell said in an interview that the project’s timing has “slipped a little” due to permitting delays. He now expects Stage 1 to break ground in December, with the aim of delivering 25,000 tons of lithium by October 2025, compared with the original 2024 timeline.

EnergySource Minerals was expected to begin producing lithium in the second quarter of 2024, according to an Energy Department report, but its website now lists 2025 for meeting that benchmark.

BHE has two demonstration projects and hopes to begin construction of a commercial plant in 2024, but it’s not clear if they are on track to meet that timeline. Company officials declined to comment. BHE also missed out on a Department of Energy grant late last year.

What’s next? There are hurdles beyond the technology.

State officials have expressed concerns about the Imperial Valley’s lack of infrastructure, including roads and broadband internet. State and federal officials visited the region last month; a spokesperson for the federal Economic Development Administration said grants in “several key investment areas” should come out in the next few months.

“We’re missing sewage treatment plants, we’re missing housing,” said Cameron Sutherland, spokesperson for state Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista), who represents the Salton Sea region. “We’re missing what’s necessary to sustain a highly skilled workforce out there.”

CEC Chair Chair David Hochschild said in a statement that “additional federal resources can play a pivotal role” in both refining the DLE technology itself and supporting co-located battery manufacturing.

Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia (D-Coachella), who also represents the region, said he thought BHE would get funding in the next round of DOE grants. “We’re very optimistic that through the conversations we’ve had, California has sent a very loud message,” he said in an interview.

CLOCK’S TICKING: Newsom has until Oct. 14 to sign or veto hundreds of bills — including all the major ones we’ve been following. Here are some that we’re waiting on:

— SB 253, Sen. Scott Wiener’s (D-San Francisco) measure to require large corporations to report their greenhouse gas emissions, and its companion, SB 261, to require companies to disclose their climate-related risk. We’re hearing it could be any moment.

— AB 241 and AB 126, from Assemblymember Eloise Reyes (D-Colton) and Sen. Lena Gonzalez’s (D-Long Beach), which would reauthorize the Energy Commission’s Clean Transportation Program to fund zero-emission vehicle infrastructure.

— Two bills to crack down on greenwashing related to the voluntary carbon offset market: AB 1305, by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino), would require offset purchasers to disclose information about the projects they support and how offsets factor into their zero emission claims. SB 390, by Sen. Monique Limón (D-Santa Barbara), would make it illegal to sell offsets that are not quantifiable, real and representing additional carbon storage.

— AB 1373, by Assemblymember Eduardo Garcia (D-Coachella), would provide a new mechanism for the state to buy offshore wind and other renewable power on ratepayers’ behalf in order to encourage project development. It also includes a provision to speed up transmission permitting.

— SB 842, by Sen. Steven Bradford (D-Gardena), would tack new requirements onto the gasoline price-gouging legislation Newsom and the Legislature passed early this year.

—AB 579, from Assemblymember Phil Ting (D-San Francisco), would require most school districts to transition to electric bus fleets. The Finance Department opposed the bill due to costs, raising veto fears.

— SB 619, from Sen. Steve Padilla (D-Chula Vista), would give utilities an option when permitting new transmission projects to go to the Energy Commission, rather than the Public Utilities Commission, for CEQA reviews in an effort to build the lines faster.

FAST CAR CREDITS: The Treasury Department released new guidance today for how car dealers can give buyers immediate access to federal tax credits for electric vehicles.

Until now, qualifying buyers have had to wait until they file their annual federal taxes to claim credits of up to $7,500 for new vehicles and $4,000 for used vehicles.

Now, dealers will be able to offer the credit at point of sale (once they register with the IRS). Buyers must attest they will not exceed the tax credit’s income limit and can then receive cash or apply the credit toward the cost of the car or a down payment.

The new guidelines are supposed to make it easier to sell electric cars. President Joe Biden has a goal of lifting EVs to 50 percent of new car sales by 2030; California plans to phase out gas powered cars by 2035. But as POLITICO’s James Bikales reports, some dealers are worried about not receiving timely rebates when they have to front the cost of the incentives.

— Residents are reporting sightings of petroleum coke dust released from the Martinez Refinery Company this morning.

— Climate change is helping mosquitos thrive and a right-wing political activist who has warned about “flying syringes that will mass vaccinate the population” is now on the Shasta Mosquito and Vector Control District board.

— Chinese president Xi Jinping will meet with President Joe Biden at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in San Francisco next month.

— In a turnaround from his previous stance on the border wall, Biden is suspending 26 environmental laws to build it out in south Texas.