“…, by extrinsic doping or in situ from lithiation) whereas carrier doping of titanium(IV) oxides typically results in lower mobility materials, possibly due to the tendency to form polarons. , From the perspective of availability, the average concentration of niobium in the upper continental crust is 10–26 ppm, comparable to cobalt (10–18 ppm), nickel (19–60 ppm), copper (14–32 ppm), molybdenum (0.6–1.5 ppm), tungsten (0.9–3.3 ppm), tin (1.7–5.5 ppm), lithium (20–41 ppm), vanadium (53–107 ppm), and zinc (52–75 ppm) but far less than Mn (600–735 ppm), Ti (0.45%), and Fe (4.1–4.7%) . In terms of the impact of the readiness of the niobium industry for battery materials, an estimated 74 000 tons of niobium was produced in 2019, but the reserves ( i.e ., economic resources, not total resources) were more than 13 000 000 tons. , According to the U.S. Geological Survey, “[w]orld resources of niobium are more than adequate to supply projected needs.” However, niobium is considered a critical element owing to its concentrated production, which is estimated at 88% from Brazil, primarily from one company, and 10% from Canada, also primarily from one company. − The U.S. Geological Survey also reports that the Elk Creek deposit in Nebraska, United States, is expected to produce niobium after 2020…”