Direct lithium extraction in Europe: insights from European BRM 2025

Direct lithium extraction in Europe is being positioned as a sustainable alternative to traditional methods, but its success will depend on overcoming hurdles in cost, regulation and scalability. Industry experts highlight that community acceptance and investment will be equally critical to its future.

Key takeaways:

  • Direct lithium extraction in Europe is emerging as a potential solution for a resilient and sustainable supply chain
  • European lithium extraction faces challenges around cost, scalability, regulation and community acceptance
  • The future of direct lithium extraction in Europe will depend on balancing technology, investment and environmental priorities

Direct lithium extraction (DLE) could be the key to developing a supply chain in Europe. However, cost, scalability, regulations and public acceptance will determine whether the technology succeeds. Delegates were told this in a panel discussion at Fastmarkets’ European Battery Raw Materials conference in Portugal. The discussion brought together representatives from energy companies, producers and industry associations. They discussed whether DLE can live up to expectations as a more sustainable and efficient alternative to conventional lithium production.

The future of direct lithium extraction in Europe

For Europe, DLE offers clear advantages over the traditional brine evaporation methods used in South America and elsewhere. This is according to Axel Wenke, director of new energies & business development at Neptune Energy Holding Germany.

Unlike brine evaporation, DLE uses adsorbent materials, ion exchange or solvent extraction to physically or chemically bind the lithium.

direct lithium extraction in Europe

“[DLE is] absolutely the right technology for Europe,” Wenke said at the event in Lisbon on September 16-18. “We do not have deserts or landscapes where you can operate far away from people, villages, towns [or] cities. So, for us, the [DLE process, combined] with renewable energy [is] the right way to go.”

Astrid Karamira, sustainability and governance manager at the International Lithium Association, agreed that DLE holds promise for Europe. However, she warned that it should not be seen as the only pathway.

“DLE is definitely the right technology, or a very good technology, for some deposits,” she said. “However, I would like to remind everybody here, especially being in Portugal, there is not only DLE, there is also lithium from other sources [such as] hard rock.”

Karamira also rejected the notion that DLE is an untested idea. Additionally, she stressed the fact that the technology has been used in Latin America for many years.

That view was backed by Francis Wedin, managing director of Vulcan Energy Resources. He also emphasized that DLE should not be seen as experimental.

“DLE has been used commercially since 1996, so nearly 30 years. It’s not new,” Wedin said. “The projects do take longer to build, [so] hard rock has captured a bit of market share recently when prices popped up. But I think if you look at the investment now going to lithium, a lot [is going into the DLE] space.”

The competitive landscape remains intense, according to Stefan Debruyne, director of external affairs at SQM Lithium. He said that hard rock lithium was now the leading route to production. However, Europe faces deeper structural challenges.

“When I started with SQM, brine was a dominant source of lithium, but I think today, hard rock is very firmly ahead,” Debruyne said. “[But] specifically in Europe, we see a bit of a disconnect. We see a lot of talk about resilient value chains, supply chains and domestic lithium. But if you look at the real sales of lithium chemicals in Europe last year, it was 26,000 tonnes – [just] 2% of the world’s lithium demand. The reality is that all of Europe’s lithium is imported as batteries.”

Debruyne argued that Europe’s push for domestic lithium supplies must be matched by investment across the value chain, including cathode production.

“It’s like a cart without the horse,” he said. “We need a horse first, otherwise the cart will just stand still.”

Key challenges for European lithium extraction projects

Asked what single factor could determine whether DLE can succeed at scale in Europe over the next five years, panelists offered a range of perspectives.

According to Neil Elliot, business development manager at Cornish Lithium in the UK, cost competitiveness will be decisive.

“The biggest one for me is going to be, fundamentally, the cost and whether you can actually produce at an economic level,” Elliot said.

Karamina added that permitting and regulation will be equally important, given the current lengthy approval processes.

And, according to Wenke, community acceptance will also have a vital role to play.

“You have to show people you are there for the long term, and that they are happy [for you to be] there,” Wenke said.

But the scaling-up of production would continue to be a technical challenge, Debruyne said. He noted the difference between pilot projects and operational 20,000 tonnes per year industrial facilities.

And Wedin stressed the fact that DLE projects are massively capital-intensive and can rely on adsorbents. These adsorbents are often sourced from geopolitically sensitive regions, so ensuring supply chains are onshore will be critical.

Scaling opportunities in Europe

Despite their differing views, the panelists agreed that DLE will be an important part of Europe’s future supply mix. This is because the technology’s smaller footprint, compatibility with renewables and potential for lower water use make it a natural fit for Europe’s geography and environmental priorities.

And they said its success will depend on whether developers can overcome the hurdles of cost, investment, regulation and scaling in time to meet Europe’s fast-growing demand for battery materials.

In wrapping up the discussion, Wenke concluded that Europe needs to ensure that projects are not only technically feasible. They should also be welcomed by the surrounding communities.

“You must not vanish,” he said. “You need to be there for the long term.”

What to read next
Fastmarkets has corrected the rationale for its MB-LI-0033 Lithium hydroxide monohydrate LiOH.H2O 56.5% LiOH min, battery grade, spot price cif China, Japan & Korea, which was published incorrectly on Thursday April 9 due to a typo. The published rationale for MB-LI-0033 Lithium hydroxide monohydrate LiOH.H2O 56.5% LiOH min, battery grade, spot price cif China, Japan […]
The EU-Mercosur trade agreement, set to take provisional effect in 2026, aims to reduce trade barriers between the two regions. However, the deal faces significant opposition from environmental groups and EU agricultural sectors. For the pulp and paper industry, the effects will be phased in over several years, with an analysis by Cepi showing that tariff reductions will be gradual, eventually benefiting about 85% of EU pulp exports and 90% of paper and board exports.
Crop-based biodiesel became cheaper than fossil diesel in the EU for the first time on Thursday April 2, when premiums for core crop grades FAME 0 (fatty acid methyl ester 0) and RME (rapeseed methyl ester) over ICE gasoil fell into negative territory.
Fastmarkets is proposing to launch new price series for its benchmark European PIX Pulp gross prices and North American effective list pulp prices from June 1, 2026. The new prices would run concurrently alongside existing prices for one year before the existing prices with higher discount levels are discontinued on June 1, 2027.
The publication of Fastmarkets’ European low-carbon aluminium differential assessments for Thursday April 2 were delayed because of a procedural error. Fastmarkets’ pricing database has been updated.
Fastmarkets has corrected its MB-AL-0379 Aluminium 6063 extrusion billet premium, ddp Italy (Brescia region), inferred low-carbon, and Aluminium 6063 extrusion billet premium, ddp North Germany (Ruhr region), inferred low-carbon midpoint assessments, which were published incorrectly on Friday April 2, due to a procedural error.