By: Lorenzo Blanco
Volume IX – Issue II – Spring 2024
I. BACKGROUND: ELECTRIC VEHICLE CONTEXT
For the average American, the idea of the electric car is nothing new. Once a novelty almost entirely monopolized by the Tesla brand, electric vehicles have quickly become a sizable market for every major automaker in the United States. With a wealth of new options from more mainstream car manufacturers like Toyota, Chevrolet, Hyundai, and Ford, the electric vehicle (EV) market is more diverse and expansive than ever before. With all of these new options, switching to electric or alternative fuel vehicles has become a ubiquitous practice amongst those searching for a swift yet introductory transition towards a more sustainable lifestyle. Hailed as a cost and energy efficient solution to the mobility problem in the midst of the climate crisis, EVs have taken the country and the world by storm. However, this wave of green transportation has left behind those in most need of clean, safe, dependable, and affordable transportation.
Certain states have enacted enticing incentive programs to ease the financial burden that transitioning to fuel efficient and electric vehicles brings their citizens. While these programs have had varying levels of success and actual demonstrated commitment from consumers, one state initiative aims to revolutionize the scene: the California Driving Clean Assistance Program (DCAP). Passed just this year in 2024, DCAP is California’s most recent attempt towards addressing the shortcomings of its previous EV rebate programs. DCAP’s need-based award system for incentivized funding, as well as the availability of funds for both drivers and non-drivers alike, makes this program an exceptional new catalyst for opening access to cleaner, safer transportation that should become national law.
II. CALIFORNIA CONTEXT
The State of California is the country’s undisputed leader in clean vehicle incentivization. In response to the passage of the Global Warming Solutions Act in 2006. [1, 2] California was the first state to implement EV rebates fully beginning in 2010 to meet emissions reduction standards outlined in the act. [3] However, the state’s commitment to increasing fuel efficiency on its roads dates back further. In 1990, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) took the first critical step by mandating that all brands selling vehicles within the state develop fuel efficient hybrids or alternative fuel vehicles for customers to purchase through the Zero Emissions Mandate. [4] In 1998, CARB began extending select partial credits to consumers purchasing hybrid vehicles. [5] With a population of just under 30 million, California was—and remains today—the most populous state in the union. [6] Naturally, a clean vehicle mandate in the country’s biggest market sparked unprecedented innovation in the automotive industry from manufacturers anxious to maintain their positions in the overall United States economy. In less than a decade, iconic vehicles like the Toyota Prius and Honda Insight—the world’s first plug-in-hybrid EV—hit showrooms across the state of California for the first time. [7] Even 40 years later, models like the Toyota Mirai, Honda Clarity Electric, and Honda CRV Fuel Cell specifically designed for California consumers are a clear reminder of the state’s importance to automakers’ profitability in the country. [8] California has also wisely positioned itself as a leading exporter of clean energy vehicles, meaning its citizens not only benefit from the widest availability of clean energy vehicles to purchase, but also the profits of the industry expanding across the country. [9] With the California legislature prodding the automotive industry to truly accelerate the clean vehicle space, any automotive brand that sought to remain meaningfully competitive in California needed to bring a fuel efficient model to market. In order to not only foster the development but expansion of the clean vehicle sector, California began adopting formal incentive and rebate programs statewide.
III. ANALYSIS OF PREVIOUS CALIFORNIA REBATE PROGRAMS
Previous California clean vehicle rebate programs laid the foundation for DCAP’s successful design. DCAP is certainly not the first California EV rebate program to be need-based. The California Clean Vehicle Rebate Project (CVRP), first launched in 2010 to compensate new owners of plug-in- hybrid, electric, and fuel-cell battery vehicles, [10] originally offered anywhere between $1,500-$5,000 in rebates for the purchase of any of these alternative fuel vehicles. [11] It was not until 2016 that an “income cap” of $150,000 after which rebates no longer applied was instituted on California consumers and families looking to take advantage of the deals. [12] The CVRP income cap was an absolute necessity; it is an undisputed fact that the majority of environmental burdens, especially the burden of poor air quality in urban centers, disproportionately falls on the shoulders of socioeconomically disadvantaged citizens in communities of color. In Los Angeles, California’s largest city, fifteen percent of white Angelenos live in neighborhoods with dangerously high pollution compared to over a third of Black Angelenos, twenty- eight percent of Latino Angelenos, and twenty-seven percent of all Angelenos of color. [13] Clean vehicle rebates serve to entice more customers to purchase lower emitting vehicles with the ultimate goal of alleviating air pollution burdens for the state. Unfortunately data collected from CVRP’s start in 2010 to its end in 2023 proves that the program did not adequately address these inequalities. In a study conducted by researchers from the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs, out of the $1.6 billion in total rebates allocated to consumers from CVRP for the purchase of new electric or alternative fuel vehicles, just $314 million was awarded within designated Disadvantaged Communities in California as defined by the California Environmental Protection Agency. [14] Disadvantaged Communities are communities residing in areas within the top twenty-five percent of air pollution per the CalEnviroScreen scale as well as communities within federally recognized Indigenous tribal jurisdiction. [15] Though CVRP’s income cap approach alone was a step in the right direction towards protecting available rebate funds to award consumers under Disadvantaged Community classification in theory, UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs’ data shows that the execution fell short.
California’s second main clean vehicle rebate program—called the Enhanced Fleet Modernization Program (EFMP)— took effect in 2015 as the state government’s solution to addressing the issues of equity in their rebating process. [16] EFMP formally widened the parameters for vehicles that qualified for rebates, “setting stricter income caps for participation” and offering “higher rebate amounts for lower-income consumers and disadvantaged communities.” [17] Potential EFMP rebates for the purchase of new, fully electric cars reached a new peak at $9000. Core to EFMP’s structure was its “Retire and Replace” clause that offered customers additional “Plus Up” rebates on top of their base rates were they to have an internal combustion engine car eight years or older and live within the designated Disadvantaged Community bounds. [18] Also revolutionary in EFMP was that it offered incentives and rebates for first time purchases of not only new clean energy vehicles, but used vehicles in this category as well. Offering incentives for used vehicles addresses equity concerns in the rebate process in a targeted approach unseen in previous rebate programs. Rebates offered through EFMP after CVRP’s discontinuation for select used vehicles range today from $2,000-$7,500 for zero emission battery EVs, $4,500-$7,500 for hydrogen fuel cell battery vehicles, $1,000-$6,500 for plug-in-hybrid vehicles, and $750 for zero emission motorcycles. From 2015 through November of 2023, low-income consumers could take advantage of CVRP and EFMP rebates simultaneously, meaning they could earn a maximum—though rare—total rebate of $14,000. [19] Despite these seemingly attractive offers, all rebates from EFMP as well as CVRP came with one major caveat: all rebates for the purchase of a clean energy vehicle were offered on the contingency that consumers could amass the capital needed to purchase the car in the first place. [20] This major weakness in EMFP and CVRP meant that it was up to the consumer to be able to pay for the full price of the clean energy vehicle upfront and a rebate would be issued afterward. It is a market fact that every alternative fuel vehicle comes with a higher manufacturer suggested retail price (MSRP); the higher cost of lithium batteries and eventual savings on fuel costs are enough justification for brands to feel entitled to price their alternative fuel model offerings well over their gasoline powered counterparts.
The example of the 2024 Nissan Leaf illustrates the problem. As the cheapest EV for sale in the United States, the four-door hatchback Nissan Leaf has an MSRP of $29,280 to start excluding taxes, registration, and dealer-specific additional fees. [21] The 2024 Nissan Sentra, a similarly seized, internal combustion engine four door sedan in the company’s lineup with highly comparable standard features to its electric sibling, has a base MSRP of $21,590. [22[ For the electric option in Nissan’s lineup, consumers must pay a $7,690 premium—a considerable obstacle to purchasing a vehicle. To make matters worse, consumers looking to purchase their vehicle through APR financing cannot be absolutely certain of the exact amount they will receive from the State of California on the date of purchase. Furthermore, for consumers living within disadvantaged communities with statistically lower credit scores, a rebate issued by the state after purchase does nothing at the dealership negotiating table when their payment soars to hundreds of dollars more than those with higher credit scores. In California under the current EFMP program, the only way to guarantee the clean vehicle rebate is factored into an auto deal is to lease that vehicle, since dealers take into account a standard rebate estimate of $7,500 when constructing monthly payments. This degree of uncertainty leaves many consumers, especially lower income consumers, trapped in lease deals with the manufacturer that limit mileage and impose arbitrary standards for maintenance and even damage penalties. At the end of the lease, customers who did not want to lease their vehicle in the first place are left without transportation and searching for another vehicle if they can afford one at all.
Together, CVRP and EFMP pioneered the clean vehicle rebate practice. However, as disadvantaged communities and communities of color continue to bear the majority of air pollution costs while reaping the least of the benefits these programs offer, CVRP and EFMP can no longer be ignored. In the words of Dr. Steven Cliff, Executive Officer of CARB, “a clean air future is only possible if every Californian can access clean transportation options.” [23] That is exactly what DCAP will, if implemented to the most complete extent, ensure.
IV. DCAP SPECIFICS AND CRITICAL BENEFITS AT A GLANCE
DCAP maximizes the potential of California's previous CVRP and EFMP alternative fuel vehicle rebate programs by essentially combining the two programs while greatly increasing the standard of and access to incentives offered for consumers, opening the doors to rebates for non-vehicle owners looking for sustainable mobility. Passed in early 2024 and set to take effect by December of this year, DCAP aims to solve the problems presented by CVRP's unequal distribution of rebate benefits and EFMP’s rebate accessibility issues. DCAP prioritizes the effort to help low income consumers switch to clean transportation at its foundation, with consumer and family annual income thresholds outlined as qualification for the benefits of the program. According to the parameters of DCAP, consumers are eligible for its benefits if they earn up to 300 percent of the United States government’s Federal Poverty Level, with annual updates to adjust specific income thresholds as described. [24] DCAP gives consumers the opportunity to trade in their internal combustion engine vehicles from 2009 or older for a new or used alternative fuel vehicle in exchange for a $12,000 stipend. [25] For consumers with a car that falls outside the program’s specified model year range or without a vehicle at all, DCAP offers a mobility incentive up to $7,500 upfront as well, meaning even more can take advantage of this program’s benefits. Consumers can use this $7,500 toward bus passes, ride share subscriptions, e-bike purchases, and other modes of clean public or private transportation.
Some may be quick to point out that during the time of CVRP and EFMP, those same low income consumers could maximize their rebate benefits at up to $14,000. However, besides the fact that CVRP’s termination brings down that total significantly, the $14,000 in rebates was issued after purchase or leasing a vehicle. DCAP instead offers $12,000 up front for consumers to take to the dealership negotiating table. In addition, where CVRP and EFMP beneficiaries were awarded less money based on the model and condition of the vehicle they purchase, DCAP breaks that precedent. The incentive rate for DCAP is a tiered system of awarding based on demonstrated financial need. Instead of arbitrarily deciding what to award consumers based on the condition and model of the vehicle they purchase like under previous programs, DCAP prioritizes consumers with the most financial need. [26] Even better, DCAP allows low income consumers to qualify for loan rates at dealerships capped at eight percent. [27] For many Californians with lower credit scores or a lack of established credit living in disadvantaged communities across the state, auto loan approvals and interest rates are often the difference between driving off the dealer lot with a new car or leaving the dealership empty-handed. DCAP’s benefits are evident, but its one drawback is less so: its geographic limitation. Finally, DCAP will not bring an immediate end to EFMP, but instead initiate a gradual phase-out operation of the old program that will allow California to adopt newer, better rebate programs in conjunction with other smaller rebate programs the state already has in place.
V. EXPANDING DCAP BEYOND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Dr. Steven Cliff’s words ring true not only for the state of California, but for the country as a whole. To see a clean air future, everyone in the country needs equal access to clean transportation. Thanks to its aggressive clean vehicle mandates, incentives, and rebates, California now has 1.5 million clean fuel vehicles on the road as of 2023—two years ahead of its 2025 goal. [28] CVRP and EFMP are estimated by CARB to have prevented the emission of 9.9 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide. [29] Impressively, California and 11 other states in the Union pledge to phase out the sale of internal combustion engine vehicles entirely by 2035. [30] It is proven that when consumers have economic incentive backed by the government, they will make the switch to alternative fuels when they have the means to. The unfortunate reality of California’s CVRP and EFMP programs is that the keys to these exciting clean energy vehicles mostly ended up in the hands of a wealthy, predominantly white minority at the exclusion of the socioeconomically disadvantaged and people of color. Researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles and the University of California, Berkeley found that clean energy vehicle ownership levels even in the years of CVRP and EFMP decreases as neighborhood income levels decrease. [31] Clean energy vehicle ownership also decreases by neighborhood as percentages of Hispanic and Black residents increase. [32] Benefits and emissions reductions resulting from the mass adoption of an incentive program like DCAP across the country would be unprecedented and would break down countless barriers to clean, safe, and dependable transportation especially in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities of color. Currently, an estimated 14 million Americans live without access to reliable transportation, a statistic directly correlated and in a feedback loop with income inequality. When millions lack dependable transportation in their lives, job security and quality of life sharply decreases. [33] Incentive programs highlight the fact that the problem in getting more people across the country to make the switch to alternative fuels in transportation therefore does not lie in the widely publicized critiques of EVs like range anxiety, but rather in economic barriers. Even as California and other states make strides to break down these economic barriers, others like Wyoming have taken a combative approach to the wave of electrification and alternative fuels in transportation that stems from a sense of insecurity in a changing global industry. Wyoming Senate Joint Resolution 4, a resolution to entirely end EV sales in the state by 2035, is just one example of the oil and gas industry’s documented fears of the clean vehicle market’s rise. [34] To the Wyoming legislature, public, and many Americans in general, electrification and other alternative fuels signals a massive decline in economic activity, particularly in the fossil fuel extraction industry. The voices of coal miners often come to mind in the debate between large fossil fuel corporations and environmentalists, raising the alarm that energy transition has and will continue to come at the expense of their jobs. While the United States and the world must move away from fossil fuel dependency, the opinions and realistic needs of mining and refinery employees who rely on fossil fuel for their livelihoods are often callously dismissed. However, the energy transition does not have to continue with this trend. The Salton Basin of California is an example of how the renewable energy transition holds the potential for new, innovative, and cleaner jobs for these workers to turn to while the country as a whole follows suit.
VI. THE SALTON BASIN AND LITHIUM MINING
Naturally, a rise in incentivized consumption of clean vehicles will necessitate a rise in production of those vehicles and therefore a rise in the need of lithium. Lithium ion batteries are criticized by many for what they see as a mining process almost equally as harmful as fossil fuels in terms of environmental degradation and emissions, yet the unique circumstances of California’s Salton Basin give the country— and the world—a unique opportunity. The result of a sudden breach of an irrigation channel diverted from the Colorado River in the early 20th century, the Salton Sea became an inland haven for human and non-human life alike. [35] Thriving tourism and hospitality industries grew exponentially in the beginning of the Salton Sea’s life. However, when the lake’s water levels began to rapidly shrink in the 1960s and 1970s, decades of agricultural runoff into the water became a grave problem. Today, the hypersalinity of the water has left the lake almost destitute and has for many residents entirely eliminated any hope of rekindling the same prosperous lives they once knew along its banks. [36] That sense of hopelessness changed abruptly when scientists discovered immense lithium deposits underground in the Salton Basin, enough lithium to make the entirety of the United States lithium-independent [37] and to meet nearly forty percent of the globe’s demand for the ore. [38] The Salton Basin has the potential to supply the world with what experts call the “greenest lithium,” since mining techniques planned from companies like EnergySource, Berkshire Hathaway Renewables, and Controlled Thermal Resources plan to mine for lithium using expanded infrastructure of the already existing electrical generation technique of brine extraction. [39] With multiple competitive companies emerging and investing within a currently impoverished community, job insecurity would be a problem of the past for the residents of the Salton Basin while auto manufacturers would have more than enough lithium to increase production of their alternative fuel vehicles. DCAP as national law, clearly then, is a viable and realistic goal toward curbing emissions in the midst of the global climate crisis.
VII. CONCLUSION
DCAP is the product of acknowledging, noting, and acting on the successes and failures of clean vehicle rebate programs by the state of California. While California continues to show its commitment, those that rely on exploiting the fear of job losses from fossil fuel workers to stave off the expansion of clean vehicle mandates and carbon emissions reduction goals can look to the Salton Sea as a critical epicenter of how industry and clean transportation can work in harmony together. Specifically engineered to help those most in need of clean and reliable transportation, DCAP is a true testament to the power of hybrid environmental governance in California and the state’s commitment to a clean air future.
Endnotes
[1] Yang Ju, Lara J. Cushing, and Rachel Morello-Frosch. “An Equity Analysis of Clean Vehicle Rebate Programs in California.” Climatic Change 162, no. 4 (September 5, 2020): 2087–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02836-w.
[2] Assem. Bill 32, 2005-2006 Reg. Sess., 2006 Cal. Stat.
[3] “Electric Car Incentives in California in 2024.” Coltura, October 14, 2024. https://coltura.org/electric-vehicle-rebate-california/#:~:text=The%20California%20EV%20Rebate%20Overview,-One%20of%20the&text=Since%202010%2C%20the%20Clean%20Vehicle,on%20the%20road%20in%20California.
[ 4] “Zero-Emission Vehicle Program” | California Air Resources Board. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/zero-emission-vehicle-program/about#:~:text=The%20Zero%2DEmission%20Vehicle%20(ZEV,of%20passenger%20vehicles%20in%20CCalifornia.
[5] Shaheen, Susan A., John Wright, and Daniel Sperling. “California’s Zero-Emission Vehicle Mandate: Linking Clean-Fuel Cars, Carsharing, and Station Car Strategies.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1791, no. 1 (January 2002): 113–20. https://doi.org/10.3141/1791-17.
[6] “California Population 1900-2023.” MacroTrends. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/states/california/population.
[7] Kurz, Joaquin. “Hybrid Electric Vehicles: A History of Technological Innovation - USC Viterbi School of Engineering.” USC Viterbi School of Engineering - USC Viterbi School of Engineering, October 27, 2017. https://illumin.usc.edu/hybrid-electric-vehicles-a-history-of-technological-innovation/.
[8] “What Credits, Subsidies, or Rebates Are Available for the CR-V E:FCEV?” Honda Automobiles. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://automobiles.honda.com/cr-v-fcev.
[9] “California’s clean vehicle rebate program will transition to helping low-income residents.” | California Air Resources Board, August 21, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/californias-clean-vehicle-rebate-program-will-transition-helping-low-income-residents.
[10] Yang Ju, Lara J. Cushing, and Rachel Morello-Frosch. “An Equity Analysis of Clean Vehicle Rebate Programs in California.” Climatic Change 162, no. 4 (September 5, 2020): 2087–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02836-w.
[11] Yang, Cushing, and Morello-Frosch, “Equity Analysis,” 2087-2105.
{12] Yang, Cushing, and Morello-Frosch, “Equity Analysis,” 2087-2105.
[13] Ashley Mackey and Grace Manthey. “Neighborhoods of Color East of Lax Have Some of the Highest Health Risks, Data Shows.” ABC7 Los Angeles, October 30, 2021. https://abc7.com/lax-air-pollution-respiratory-illness-inequities-los-angeles/11174361/#:~:text=Out%20of%20all%20white%20Angelenos,of%20all%20people%20of%20color.
[14] “What Is a Disadvantaged Community (DAC)?” CALeVIP. Accessed November 24, 2024. https://calevip.org/faq/what-disadvantaged-community-dac-11#:~:text=Log%20In-,What%20is%20a%20disadvantaged%20community%20(DAC)%3F,CalEnviroScreen%204.0%20(1%2C984%20tr%20acts).
[15] Rachel Connolly, Daniel Coffee, and Gregory Pierce. “An analysis of California electric vehicle incentive distribution and vehicle registration rates since 2015: Is California achieving an equitable clean vehicle transition?” June 2024. escholarship.org/uc/item/7ht4t1km.
[16] Yang Ju, Lara J. Cushing, and Rachel Morello-Frosch. “An Equity Analysis of Clean Vehicle Rebate Programs in California.” Climatic Change 162, no. 4 (September 5, 2020): 2087–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02836-w.
[17] Yang, Cushing, and Morello-Frosch, “Equity Analysis,” 2087-2105.
[18] Yang, Cushing, and Morello-Frosch, “Equity Analysis,” 2087-2105.
[19] Yang Ju, Lara J. Cushing, and Rachel Morello-Frosch. “An Equity Analysis of Clean Vehicle Rebate Programs in California.” Climatic Change 162, no. 4 (September 5, 2020): 2087–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02836-w.
[20] Elkind, Ethan N., Ted Lamm, Katie Segal, and Gil Damon. Rep. Driving Equity: Policy Solutions to Accelerate Electric Vehicle Adoption in Lower-Income Communities. Climate Change and Business Research Initiative, n.d.
[21] “2025 Nissan Leaf Features: Range, Charging, Battery & More.” Nissan USA. Accessed November 8, 2024. https://www.nissanusa.com/vehicles/electric-cars/leaf/features.html.
[22] “Nissan Leaf Features.”
[23] “California’s clean vehicle rebate program will transition to helping low-income residents” | California Air Resources Board, August 21, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/californias-clean-vehicle-rebate-program-will-transition-helping-low-income-residents.
[24] “Driving Clean Assistance Program” | California Air Resources Board. Accessed November 8, 2024. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/driving-clean-assistance-program#:~:text=%E2%80%8BThe%20new%20Driving%20Clean,not%20scrapping%20an%20older%20vehicle.%20Accessed%204%20Oct.%202024.
[25] “California’s clean vehicle rebate program will transition to helping low-income residents” | California Air Resources Board, August 21, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/californias-clean-vehicle-rebate-program-will-transition-helping-low-income-residents.
[26] “Transition to helping low-income residents,” California Air Resources Board.
[27] “Transition to helping low-income residents,” California Air Resources Board.
[28] “California’s clean vehicle rebate program will transition to helping low-income residents” | California Air Resources Board, August 21, 2023. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/news/californias-clean-vehicle-rebate-program-will-transition-helping-low-income-residents
[29] Tyler Graham and Dan Avery. “12 US States Are Planning to Ban the Sale of Gas-Powered Cars.” CNET, June 12, 2024. https://www.cnet.com/home/electric-vehicles/states-banning-new-gas-powered-cars/.
[30] Graham and Avery, “12 US States.”
[31] Yang Ju, Lara J. Cushing, and Rachel Morello-Frosch. “An Equity Analysis of Clean Vehicle Rebate Programs in California.” Climatic Change 162, no. 4 (September 5, 2020): 2087–2105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-020-02836-w.
[32] Yang, Cushing, and Morello-Frosch, “Equity Analysis,” 2087-2105.
[33] Johnson, Steven Ross. “Millions of Americans Lack Reliable Transportation. It May Affect Their Health.” National Center for Mobility Management, January 12, 2024. https://nationalcenterformobilitymanagement.org/news/millions-of-americans-lack-reliable-transportation-it-may-affect-their-health/.
[34] Tyler Graham and Dan Avery. “12 US States Are Planning to Ban the Sale of Gas-Powered Cars.” CNET, June 12, 2024. https://www.cnet.com/home/electric-vehicles/states-banning-new-gas-powered-cars/.
[35] “History – Salton Sea Authority.” n.d. Salton Sea Authority. Accessed November 3, 2023. https://saltonsea.com/get-informed/history/.
[36] Emma Newburger. 2021. “California's Salton Sea spewing toxic fumes, creating ghost towns.” CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/06/californias-salton-sea-spewing-toxic-fumes-creating-ghost-towns-.html.
[37] Bill Owens, dir. 2023. 60 Minutes. Season 55, episode 33, “Lithium Valley.” CBS News. Aired May 4, 2023.
[38] Katie Brigham. 2022. “The Salton Sea could produce the world's greenest lithium, if new extraction technologies work.” CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/04/the-salton-sea-could-produce-the-worlds-greenest-lithium.html.
[39] Katie Brigham. 2022. “The Salton Sea could produce the world's greenest lithium, if new extraction technologies work.” CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/04/the-salton-sea-could-produce-the-worlds-greenest-lithium.html.