Pure Lithium and E3 Lithium Report Results From Phase 1 of the Lithium Metal Battery Joint Development Agreement
BOSTON, May 22, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Pure Lithium Corporation, a disruptive vertically integrated lithium metal battery technology company, is pleased to announce initial results from the battery cells manufactured under the Joint Development Agreement with E3 Lithium, using E3 Lithium's brines and DLE technology and Pure Lithium's innovative extraction and battery technology.
Several variations of E3's lithium chloride concentrate were used to make lithium metal anodes at Pure Lithium's Boston facility. The lithium from the E3 concentrated lithium chloride was electrodeposited as pure lithium metal onto a copper substrate, creating a complete, battery ready anode. These anodes were then assembled by Pure Lithium into batteries, and their electrochemical performance was evaluated in full cells. Notable results include:
Lithium Metal Purity: The various E3 brine streams all achieved a very high purity level, > 99.9% pure lithium metal as tested by ICP-OES analysis.
Cell Performance (Life Cycle): This tests for the number of charge and discharge cycles the battery achieves while retaining 80% of its capacity. All cells achieved over 500 cycles to date.
Charge and Discharge Rates: This tests for the duration of a charge and discharge. These tests were conducted at a 1C:1D ratio, one hour charge time and one hour discharge time.
The results of this study concluded that an easily producible version of E3's lithium concentrate provided the most cost-effective feedstock for use in Pure Lithium's batteries. It also demonstrated the robustness of Pure Lithium's process, showing no performance differences between batteries made using lithium chloride from E3's Leduc Brines, and those made from Pure Lithium's standard sources. The two companies continue to collaborate on the development and planning of an integrated process that can deliver the highest purity lithium metal anodes at the lowest possible cost.
"I am delighted to reinvent the lithium supply chain with E3 Lithium. We not only produced pure lithium metal anodes from unconventional sources of lithium using a newly invented technology but also validated their performance by cycling them in over 100 batteries. Rigorous electrochemical testing of battery materials is imperative, and to get such great results consistently, using a technology that was specifically developed to be cost effective, is truly exciting," said Emilie Bodoin, Founder, Chairman & CEO of Pure Lithium.
"These results confirm that E3's lithium concentrate can produce battery-ready lithium metal anodes using Pure Lithium's technology," said Chris Doornbos, President and CEO of E3 Lithium. "The Pure Lithium team has worked very hard in making these batteries and confirming the performance of our lithium. We are very encouraged by the results, and I am excited by the prospect of developing a local lithium battery supply chain in collaboration with Pure Lithium."
About Pure Lithium
Pure Lithium is a disruptive Boston-based lithium metal battery technology company led by inventor and lithium expert, CEO Emilie Bodoin, and world-renowned battery and metallurgical expert, MIT Emeritus Professor Donald R. Sadoway, as full-time CSO. The Company's novel Brine to Battery™ technology combines metal extraction and anode production, unlocking unconventional sources of lithium. The resulting pure lithium metal anode is the core component of our lithium metal vanadium oxide battery, a step-change improvement over today's lithium-ion technology in cell performance, cost, and safety. Additionally, the battery is free of graphite, cobalt, nickel, and manganese. For more information, visit www.purelithium.io or email news@purelithium.io.
About E3 Lithium
E3 Lithium is a development company with a total of 16.2 million tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE) Measured and Indicated 1 as well as 0.9 million tonnes LCE Inferred mineral resources2 in Alberta and 2.5 million tonnes LCE Inferred mineral resources3 in Saskatchewan. The Clearwater Pre-Feasibility Study outlined a 1.13 Mt LCE proven and probable mineral reserve with a pre-tax NPV8% of USD 5.2 Billion with a 29.2% IRR and an after-tax NPV8% of USD 3.7 Billion with a 24.6% IRR1. E3 Lithium's goal is to produce high purity, battery grade lithium products to power the growing electrical revolution. With a significant lithium resource and innovative technology solutions, E3 Lithium has the potential to deliver lithium to market from one of the best jurisdictions in the world.
1: The Clearwater Project NI 43-101 Pre-Feasibility Study, effective June 20, 2024, is available on the E3 Lithium's website (https://e3lithium.ca/our-assets/technical-reports/) and SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca).
2: The mineral resource NI 43-101 Technical Report for the North Rocky Property, effective October 27, 2017, identified 0.9 Mt LCE (inferred) and is available on the E3 Lithium's website (e3lithium.ca/technical-reports) and SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca).
3: The mineral resource NI 43-101 Technical Report for the Estevan Lithium District, effective May 23, 2024, identified 2.5 Mt LCE (inferred) and is available on the E3 Lithium's website (e3lithium.ca/technical-reports) and SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca).
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250522582010/en/
Contacts
Ross LarsenHead of Editorial, 33 CommunicationsPurelithium@thirtythreecomms.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Car and Driver
28 minutes ago
- Car and Driver
View Photos of the 1990 Toyota 4Runner
read the full review While you might miss the removable roof panel, you won't miss it once you realize how much better the new 4Runner is without it.
Washington Post
29 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Direct pay to college athletes starts July 1. Some key dates tied to implementation of settlement
It took five years for the $2.8 billion antitrust lawsuit against the NCAA and five major conferences to reach a settlement. Now comes the process for implementing it. Following are significant dates: Settlement approved; settlement-related NCAA rules are effective, as adopted by the NCAA Division I Board on April 21, 2025. NIL Go portal launches. Opt-in deadline for non-defendant schools to fully commit to revenue sharing. First date for direct institutional revenue-sharing payments to student-athletes. Opt-in schools must 'designate' student-athletes permitted by the settlement to remain above roster limits. With the exception of the 'designated' student-athletes, fall sports must be at or below roster limits by their first day of competition. With the exception of 'designated' student-athletes, winter and spring sports must be at or below roster limits by their first day of competition or Dec. 1, whichever is earlier. ___ AP college sports:
Forbes
31 minutes ago
- Forbes
Musk Follows Harvard In Biting The Hand That Feeds
Elon Musk and Harvard Both Bite the Governmental Hand that Feeds Them From an early age, children are taught essential lessons: do not play with fire, do not pet strange dogs, and if one cannot swim, stay out of the deep end. Another timeless rule—often forgotten by those in positions of immense wealth and influence—is this: do not bite the hand that feeds you. This lesson, while simple, has profound implications in the real world. It applies just as readily to billionaires and institutions as it does to children on a playground. Yet recent actions by both Elon Musk and prominent academic institutions—most notably Harvard, but also Columbia, MIT, and others—suggest that even the most successful individuals and organizations are capable of ignoring foundational wisdom. Harvard set the tone. Amid growing political scrutiny and a shifting cultural landscape, the university has drawn intense criticism over its handling of campus protests, particularly those involving slogans such as 'from the river to the sea.' The administration's decision to defend even the most controversial speech—widely viewed by many as antisemitic—has triggered investigations and jeopardized billions in tax-exempt status and government research funding. This raises a critical question: is this truly the hill worth dying on? Is preserving the right to controversial protest slogans worth risking Harvard's institutional future? It is doubtful that most students and faculty would knowingly trade funding, grants, and prestige for this fight. Elon Musk, the world's richest man, has now followed suit—this time turning his attention toward President Donald Trump, with whom he has launched a high-profile and personal feud. What makes this move especially striking is that President Trump is not a distant figure or a fading influence. He is once again sitting in the White House, wielding executive authority over regulatory agencies, defense contracting, and infrastructure initiatives—all areas that directly affect Musk's companies. Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI have flourished in part because of government partnership. SpaceX alone holds multibillion-dollar contracts with NASA and the Department of Defense. Tesla has benefitted from years of energy subsidies and EV tax incentives. Picking a fight with the sitting president—regardless of personal conviction—puts this entire ecosystem at risk. And again the question must be asked: is this battle worth the damage? Whatever principle Musk may be defending, the consequences extend far beyond himself. Shareholders, employees, and retail investors—many of whom placed their trust and savings in his leadership—are the ones left exposed. The parallel between Harvard and Musk is striking: both have been immensely successful, aided in large part by government funding, favorable regulation, and public goodwill. And both have, for different reasons, chosen to confront the very institutions and leaders that have helped sustain their growth. There is precedent for how this ends. Jack Ma, once the most powerful entrepreneur in China, famously criticized the Chinese government. The backlash was immediate and absolute. His companies were dismantled. His IPO was cancelled. His wealth and influence evaporated almost overnight. Even in less authoritarian systems, the lesson holds: those who antagonize the systems that support them may not survive the consequences. While Musk's personal net worth has dropped from nearly $450 billion to approximately $300 billion, the impact is more symbolic than practical for him. But for millions of investors, employees, and stakeholders, these battles matter. Market volatility, regulatory backlash, and reputational risk all come with tangible financial costs—costs borne not just by Musk himself, but by those who have trusted and invested in his vision. The same applies to Harvard and peer institutions. Their leadership may believe they are standing on principle, but the price of alienating government agencies and key financial backers could reshape the long-term trajectory of these universities. The erosion of public trust, the loss of bipartisan support, and the potential withdrawal of federal funding pose existential threats. Leadership—whether in business or academia—requires more than conviction. It requires judgment, timing, and the discipline to separate personal ideology from institutional responsibility. Founder-led companies often outperform when leaders are focused, visionary, and measured. But when ego replaces strategy, the consequences can be swift and severe. No one is demanding absolute political alignment or silence in the face of controversy. No one is asking Elon Musk to wear a MAGA hat. But his recent actions have been so volatile, so self-destructive, that investors may soon be tempted to hand him something else entirely—a MEGA hat: Make Elon Great Again. In today's polarized environment, the margin for error has narrowed. And for those who owe much of their success to public support—whether in Silicon Valley or the Ivy League—biting the hand that feeds is not just unwise. It is unsustainable. ---------------------------------- Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please refer to the following link for additional disclosures: Additional Disclosure Note: The author has an affiliation with ERShares and the XOVR ETF. The intent of this article is to provide objective information; however, readers should be aware that the author may have a financial interest in the subject matter discussed. As with all equity investments, investors should carefully evaluate all options with a qualified investment professional before making any investment decision. Private equity investments, such as those held in XOVR, may carry additional risks—including limited liquidity—compared to traditional publicly traded securities. It is important to consider these factors and consult a trained professional when assessing suitability and risk tolerance.
