Meridian International Research released "The Lithium Report – The Next 10 Years: 2025-2035" covering every world lithium project across 850 pages, 145 chapters, 11 regional overviews, and 82 charts [S4]. The scope – all operating mines, all development projects, worldwide – sets the data ceiling for any 2026 strategic-planning exercise across the lithium battery upstream and downstream chain, starting from conveyor chain systems at the mine face.
A 2020 resilience study of the Chinese lithium chain (Shao, Jin) remains the most cited baseline for quantifying NEV demand shock plus supply-interruption risk on Chinese converters [S3]. The paper frames lithium brine and hard-rock converters in China as the system to be stress-tested, with policy levers mapped against demand scenarios for new energy vehicles.
Upstream project coverage and what 145 chapters actually track
Meridian's 850-page report breaks the upstream pool into 11 regional overviews – South America brine, Australian hard-rock spodumene, African pegmatite, Chinese Tibetan brine, Chinese lepidolite, North American sedimentary, and European geothermal among them [S4]. The 82 charts inside the overview section compare 2025 nameplate versus 2035 modeled output on a per-asset basis, the resolution procurement teams need when they pivot between spodumene, lepidolite, and brine feedstock contracts, and when roller chain drives on the receiving dock become the binding throughput constraint.
Strategic planners buying the report get per-asset detail on reserve life, carbonate-versus-hydroxide flowsheet choice, and DSO capex bands; the public summary does not disclose per-asset numbers, so downstream users should treat Meridian as a paid reference rather than an open dataset [S4]. Cross-checking against Chinese converter disclosure is still required for any spot-price forecast in mid-2026.
Demand pressure from new energy vehicles and storage
Shao and Jin's 2020 framework modeled lithium demand as a function of NEV penetration plus grid-storage roll-out, and concluded the Chinese chain had coping headroom under most interruption scenarios but thin buffer under combined NEV-and-supply-shock conditions [S3]. The same paper mapped interruption risks against five policy levers including strategic stockpile expansion and converter dual-feed capability.
Six years on, the variables are the same: NEV mix in China, hard-rock versus brine ratios, and the resilience of lepidolite converters under spodumene price spikes. Any 2026 planning exercise should rerun the Shao-Jin stress matrix with current NEV penetration and current Australian spodumene CIF prices, rather than treating the 2020 paper as a finished verdict.
Planning software stack for Chinese lithium converters
SourceForge's July 2026 review of supply-chain planning software in China lists tools focused on demand forecasting, production planning, and inventory optimization for both SMEs and large enterprises, with a free optimization analysis that benchmarks a buyer's own chain against peers [S2]. For lithium converters specifically, the relevant modules are demand sensing (NEV cathode plants), production sequencing (carbonate line versus hydroxide line), and inventory buffers (carbonate spot stock).
The SourceForge comparison is a buyer's shortlist starting point, not a lithium-specific dataset, so the value is in narrowing the vendor list down to three or four candidates that expose the BOM and routing logic a converter actually needs. Treat the free optimization snapshot as a benchmark generator, not as a substitute for an internal demand-sensing model.
Supply chain analyst pay as a planning-budget signal
Coursera's 2026 supply chain analyst salary guide frames the role around data analytics, data cleansing, data visualization, and data ethics, with a Google Data Analytics Professional Certificate at beginner level running roughly six months [S1]. Salary bands for the role are not disclosed in the public page text, so procurement teams benchmarking a 2026 planning-team headcount should pull the figure from the guide rather than estimate.
The relevant signal is the skill stack: data storytelling, visualization, and cleansing are the three competencies Coursera flags for 2026, and they map directly onto the inputs a lithium planning team needs from its ERP, its converter SCADA (where dc power supply uptime sets the data-refresh floor), and its LME spot feed. A team missing any of the three will underperform on the demand-sensing layer that SourceForge's planning software depends on [S2].
Selection criteria for 2026 lithium planning tools and partners
Four criteria separate a usable 2026 planning stack from a shelf-license: (1) demand-sensing resolution down to cathode chemistry and cell form-factor; (2) routing logic that handles brine concentrate, spodumene, and lepidolite as distinct feed BOMs; (3) inventory module that models strategic stockpile behaviour and DSO/buffer-cost trade-offs; (4) integration to LME spot and to converter SCADA without manual CSV lift. The Shao-Jin policy-lever set is the test list for the resilience layer on top of those four [S3].
For upstream coverage, Meridian's 145-chapter scope is the only public-facing reference that lists every world project in one document [S4]. For execution, SourceForge's 2026 China shortlist is the buyer's filter [S2]. For the demand scenario, the Shao-Jin matrix is the baseline to rerun, not the final answer [S3].
Failure modes and constraints to plan around
The 2020 Chinese-chain paper flagged interruption-risk scenarios that have not been retired: export-restriction shocks, spodumene price spikes, and a sudden NEV demand jump that exhausts converter buffer in a single quarter [S3]. The same paper also flagged a constraint that still binds – strategic stockpile coverage in months of demand – and the data behind that number is dated, so a 2026 planner should refresh it with current DSO data rather than carry it forward as gospel.
Meridian's report does not publicly disclose per-asset capex or per-tonne operating cost, so a planning team cannot build a defensible landed-cost model from the report summary alone [S4]. SourceForge's optimization snapshot is a benchmark generator, not a replacement for an internal demand-sensing build, and any CIO buying on that snapshot alone should price in a separate integration sprint.
Sourcing and standards discipline for 2026 buyers
Public datasets for lithium 2026 are uneven: Meridian (paid, asset-level) is the deepest upstream cut, SourceForge (free, vendor-comparison) is the shallowest, Shao-Jin (open, 2020) is the academic baseline, and Coursera (free, salary-guide) is the HR-side reference [S1][S2][S3][S4]. A defensible 2026 plan layers all four: Meridian for project pipeline, SourceForge for software shortlist, Shao-Jin for stress matrix, Coursera for analyst headcount budget.
Trackable next nodes: Meridian's 2025-2035 dataset release cadence, SourceForge's quarterly China-vendor rerank, and any 2026 update to the Shao-Jin stress matrix with current NEV penetration data. A buyer who treats those three refresh points as the planning calendar will catch upstream and software shifts before they show up in spot-price moves.