10 ms·

Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

35 points by wffurr 5y ago

baybal2 5y ago
Good business for CATL...
wffurr 5y ago
I found the point about the safer qualities of LFP battery chemistry reducing the overhead in the battery pack construction and thus preserving range despite lower capacity very interesting. Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time.
- headgasket 5y ago
  That is not necessarily true, check out the max C rate in of LFP. Still, LFP is the way to go for sure; longer overall life is a clear net positive, lower degradation and secondary market uses once the véhicule is junk without expensive and heavy recycling. I bet the cyber and truck were waiting on these patents to lapse.
  - brianwawok 5y ago
    I don’t think you can do 500 mile cybertruck without adding a TON of weight. I highly doubt it touches LFP
- MrDunham 5y ago
  Completely agree. I had a thermodynamics teacher in college say “in the history of transportation we’ve never switched to something powered by lower energy density [than the previous mode of transportation]" in other words “energy density wins the day".* That was running through my head when I read they were switching to technology with lower energy density but, to your point and to the article's point, it’s really about systems level energy density and not cell level energy density. * with Tesla we have now seen that there is another factor, convenience, that my professor did not account for. I own a Tesla and the primary selling point… OK it was acceleration… But the secondary selling point was never having to go to a gas station again when I am just barely going to make the meeting and forgot to fill my gas tank the night before.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - cinntaile 5y ago
    He said that before we had EVs I presume.
    - MrDunham 5y ago
      Before we had good EVs (If I remember right electric vehicles at the time had something like 60 miles of range... I might be off, though. That was about 14 years ago)
  - dnautics 5y ago
    Exactly how many data points did he have in this thesis? Running, horse, bike, car, train (coal, electric, diesel), plane? There's lots of places which have flip flopped, e.g. Italy going from train -> Alitalia -> high speed rail
    - onion2k 5y ago
      Wouldn't it be more like running, horse, better horse because of improved diet, better horse because of improved medicine, bike, better bike because of gears, better bike because of better gears, car, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel...
      - fullstop 5y ago
        At some point economical aspects are also important. If fuel was available for gas engines but it was rare, it doesn't matter how energy-dense it is if it's expensive.
        dnautics 5y ago
        yep. The Soyuz was supposed to run on Syntin but then they reverted back because the added energy density and payload capacity (something like 30%) was not worth the manufacturing cost. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntin Edit: Soyuz U2 (Syntin version) launched 72!! rockets. Then they reverted back.
- IshKebab 5y ago
  > Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time. It doesn't work like that unfortunately. Unless you're using a low power charger charging time is limited by the C rating of the battery and that is independent of how big your battery is.
- rkangel 5y ago
  > Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time. That's not what they're saying, this is about space required to get the same capacity. The relevant quote is "meaning that energy density at the pack level should compensate". What's going on is that the chemistry energy density is lower, so you need bigger batteries to get the same capacity (i.e. range). Normally this means you would need more space in your vehicle to get the same range, however you need less cooling so you save some space there so the overall space usage of the battery system ends up about the same.
axus 5y ago
What will the Gigafactory be doing? Does this mean Tesla's battery-supply advantage is gone?
- cma 5y ago
  There is still no Tesla Semi after 4 years, so maybe the factory could be devoted to that, but even the gigafactory's battery cells don't make sense for a long range semi as originally shown. Bill Gates was right about the physics of it not making sense with those cells (too heavy for bridges with any decent payload), and they will need to turn it instead into a low range around-town Pepsi delivery tuck, as already announced.
  - MrDunham 5y ago
    Even though I own a Tesla and love it I can’t see a fully electric, long-haul semi making sense for quite some time. For consumers (at least in my own experience) there is a range threshold that, once surpassed, means I almost never have to worry about fill ups again. So the Every day convenience outweighs the once or twice a year inconvenience of longer “fill ups“ vs gas for extended drives. I bought mine because I hate little annoyances like having to remember/go to the gas station and fill up periodically. For long-haul trucking though Tesla's benefits would be in automation/assisted driving, not in electrification. Short of some sort of carbon credits/regulations it’s difficult to imagine widespread adoption of a technology that has more downtime and higher initial costs than a previous technology. The stop/start of small truck deliveries (and subsequent energy recapture) makes sense but for long-haul I can’t see it feasible until the battery energy densities jump by a sizable margin without a corresponding increase in price. And at that point there's still few financial advantages of electrification I can think of... what am I missing there?
    - brianwawok 5y ago
      Many trucks return home daily. Why not get those 100% first?
      - 5y ago
MrDunham 5y ago
The linked article's title is "Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally" and it's a little more appropriate as it split about 50-50 between discussing earnings and discussing battery technology. I say this because there’s another article from the New York Times about Tesla‘s earnings on HN's front page and this one from Ars is more technical, more straightforwardly written, and much less hyperbolic than the NYT version. (This one focuses on earnings and potential major changes that could impact the bottom line versus New York Times spends 50% of their article discussing government inquiries into autopilot.) I can't update the title but would recommend this article over the New York Times one.
- wffurr 5y ago
  Done. The title has changed since I posted.
cmurf 5y ago
Article notes worse cold weather range with LFP vs NCA. What's the approximate range hit at 0C for each type? -17C?
- l30n4da5 5y ago
  when I read the article this was what stood out to me, as well. Last winter it got _really_ cold where I live. Does that mean that if I got a Tesla with an LFP battery it would be drastically less useful in the winter? Seems problematic.
  - lini 5y ago
    The battery can be heated, so you can reduce the cold weather range problems by preconditioning the battery before a drive. Naturally this uses some power, so Tesla recommends keeping the car plugged in when it's cold so it can keep everything nice and warm.
    - fy20 5y ago
      No different than using a block heater or diesel coolant heater then. ICE vehicles use a lot more fuel in winter too, and take a long time to get up to temperature.
      - sliken 5y ago
        Indeed. Telsa's will keep batteries at reasonable temperatures when plugged in, but not optimal. There is a departure setting available so you can make sure your battery is full and at the ideal temperature for any scheduled departures.
- rpmisms 5y ago
  I'm willing to bet this is why the Models 3/Y have the octovalve heat pump: to offset LFP cold weather performance.
SigmundA 5y ago
Would be interesting to know whats going on in the industry with LFP. Pre-built lead acid replacement LFP battery prices have been dropping almost daily and are down to high end AGM prices [1] and quality has been going up [2], these batteries were twice the price a year ago. Will be replacing the lead acid in my RV soon with LFP's, it really a no brainer. 1. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FMTRYPT https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FMTRYPT 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBonGQe363g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBonGQe363g
- diggernet 5y ago
  Last I heard, LFP had some significant temperature restrictions compared to lead acid, making them unsuitable for use in cold temperatures. Has that changed?
- Tade0 5y ago
  Basically people figured out how to make them energy dense: https://pushevs.com/2021/01/10/guoxuan-unveils-a-cobalt-free-lfp-pouch-battery-cell-with-212-wh-kg/ https://pushevs.com/2021/01/10/guoxuan-unveils-a-cobalt-free... Without compromising on cost.
- antoniuschan99 5y ago
  LFP/LifePo4 is definitely top of the line now. I just bought a GoLabs Portable Power Station https://gotrax.com/products/golabs-r300-portable-powerstation https://gotrax.com/products/golabs-r300-portable-powerstatio... Pretty much all the good Solar Panel/Wind Power Stations use LifePo4. Check out the bestsellers in outdoor generators: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/bestsellers/lawn-garden/6257187011/ref=zg_b_bs_6257187011_1 https://www.amazon.ca/gp/bestsellers/lawn-garden/6257187011/...
- jtbayly 5y ago
  Can you help me understand why you wouldn't just stay with the old Lead-Acid batteries? You can get a 150Ah for $110, for example, whereas this 100Ah you linked to is $376. I'm sure there are benefits, but I don't know much about batteries to understand why you'd make that tradeoff.
rkangel 5y ago
What is the situation these days with infringement of major IP by Chinese companies? If they've had a battery chemistry to themselves for a while it sounds like they're having their cake and eating. I have first hand knowledge where at the small and medium scale, Chinese manufacturers will happily knock off major brands and steal technology to make products, and as a non-Chinese IP owner you have very little recourse. Is this situation still how it works for key IP from major companies or if you're (e.g.) Tesla and you had a patent on battery technology, could you realistically enforce it in China? There are some old quotes from Elon Musk about Space X just keeping stuff secret rather than patenting it because otherwise he'd be just giving it away to his major competitor in China: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-patents-2012-11?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-patents-2012-11?r=...
- baybal2 5y ago
  They buy locally made batteries from CATL.
- onethought 5y ago
  Tesla opened all their patents… so not sure what you are referring to?
Leader2light 5y ago
Does anyone know if 20 years from now these batteries start to burn down homes will Tesla be required to fix the problem similar to how traditional auto companies fix bad air bags or whatever issue that could kill people even decades later?
bserge 5y ago
> The lithium iron phosphate cells are less energy-dense but much longer-lived. And apparently much less explodey.
- stevespang 5y ago
  It's a legal and therefore a cost driven move - - less lawsuits from batteries catching on fire - - less performance from the iron phosphate version too, less range, cobalt in pyro lithium batteries is expensive . . .
- baybal2 5y ago
  Most of cell energy density comparison don't remove cell casings mass from comparison. This way pouch cells outperform hard cased ones so much on capacity, but in reality it's a big delusion as you still have to put structure to hold cells in place — and you can't do it with flimsy, paper thin casings.
woeirua 5y ago
The potential for a massive jump in battery chemistry is why I personally have not purchased a BEV yet. I'm leasing a LEAF, which has been great overall, but I'm not going to buy until the battery chemistry is settled here in a few years. There's a high probability that every BEV on the road today will be considered antiquated (and potentially unsafe) in 5 years.
- 01100011 5y ago
  Yep. I feel like buying an EV now is like buying a $50,000 PC that will be obsolete the minute I take it home. EVs are insanely awesome though. I'm leasing a 2019 Bolt and after a month or so it's the best car I've ever driven. EV torque is a blast. With the type of driving I do I'm able to get by on a Type I charger at my apartment and a rare visit to a public charging station. I think one-pedal mode helps because I'm barely ever using the brakes.
  - bryanlarsen 5y ago
    Yes, if you can wait it's probably best to do so. But if you can't wait I imagine an EV bought today will hold its value a lot better than an ICE vehicle.
    - woeirua 5y ago
      Not clear that’s the case. BEV will become more common as production ramps up. Unit costs will come down. No way BEV are the dominant form of transportation at a sales price >$40k.
bserge 5y ago
I've been looking into this lately. Seems like it would not be that hard to set up a factory in Eastern Europe somewhere to produce cells. They won't be top of the line, but still useful and profitable, given that the best cells will be taken up by megacorps for the foreseeable future. You don't need the highest capacity stuff for power tools and home solar/wind storage, for example. The machinery is quite expensive, however.

35 points by wffurr 5y ago

Good business for CATL...

I found the point about the safer qualities of LFP battery chemistry reducing the overhead in the battery pack construction and thus preserving range despite lower capacity very interesting. Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time.

headgasket 5y ago
That is not necessarily true, check out the max C rate in of LFP. Still, LFP is the way to go for sure; longer overall life is a clear net positive, lower degradation and secondary market uses once the véhicule is junk without expensive and heavy recycling. I bet the cyber and truck were waiting on these patents to lapse.
- brianwawok 5y ago
  I don’t think you can do 500 mile cybertruck without adding a TON of weight. I highly doubt it touches LFP
MrDunham 5y ago
Completely agree. I had a thermodynamics teacher in college say “in the history of transportation we’ve never switched to something powered by lower energy density [than the previous mode of transportation]" in other words “energy density wins the day".* That was running through my head when I read they were switching to technology with lower energy density but, to your point and to the article's point, it’s really about systems level energy density and not cell level energy density. * with Tesla we have now seen that there is another factor, convenience, that my professor did not account for. I own a Tesla and the primary selling point… OK it was acceleration… But the secondary selling point was never having to go to a gas station again when I am just barely going to make the meeting and forgot to fill my gas tank the night before.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- cinntaile 5y ago
  He said that before we had EVs I presume.
  - MrDunham 5y ago
    Before we had good EVs (If I remember right electric vehicles at the time had something like 60 miles of range... I might be off, though. That was about 14 years ago)
- dnautics 5y ago
  Exactly how many data points did he have in this thesis? Running, horse, bike, car, train (coal, electric, diesel), plane? There's lots of places which have flip flopped, e.g. Italy going from train -> Alitalia -> high speed rail
  - onion2k 5y ago
    Wouldn't it be more like running, horse, better horse because of improved diet, better horse because of improved medicine, bike, better bike because of gears, better bike because of better gears, car, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel, better car because of better fuel...
    - fullstop 5y ago
      At some point economical aspects are also important. If fuel was available for gas engines but it was rare, it doesn't matter how energy-dense it is if it's expensive.
      - dnautics 5y ago
        yep. The Soyuz was supposed to run on Syntin but then they reverted back because the added energy density and payload capacity (something like 30%) was not worth the manufacturing cost. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntin Edit: Soyuz U2 (Syntin version) launched 72!! rockets. Then they reverted back.
IshKebab 5y ago
> Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time. It doesn't work like that unfortunately. Unless you're using a low power charger charging time is limited by the C rating of the battery and that is independent of how big your battery is.
rkangel 5y ago
> Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time. That's not what they're saying, this is about space required to get the same capacity. The relevant quote is "meaning that energy density at the pack level should compensate". What's going on is that the chemistry energy density is lower, so you need bigger batteries to get the same capacity (i.e. range). Normally this means you would need more space in your vehicle to get the same range, however you need less cooling so you save some space there so the overall space usage of the battery system ends up about the same.

axus 5y ago

What will the Gigafactory be doing? Does this mean Tesla's battery-supply advantage is gone?

cma 5y ago
There is still no Tesla Semi after 4 years, so maybe the factory could be devoted to that, but even the gigafactory's battery cells don't make sense for a long range semi as originally shown. Bill Gates was right about the physics of it not making sense with those cells (too heavy for bridges with any decent payload), and they will need to turn it instead into a low range around-town Pepsi delivery tuck, as already announced.
- MrDunham 5y ago
  Even though I own a Tesla and love it I can’t see a fully electric, long-haul semi making sense for quite some time. For consumers (at least in my own experience) there is a range threshold that, once surpassed, means I almost never have to worry about fill ups again. So the Every day convenience outweighs the once or twice a year inconvenience of longer “fill ups“ vs gas for extended drives. I bought mine because I hate little annoyances like having to remember/go to the gas station and fill up periodically. For long-haul trucking though Tesla's benefits would be in automation/assisted driving, not in electrification. Short of some sort of carbon credits/regulations it’s difficult to imagine widespread adoption of a technology that has more downtime and higher initial costs than a previous technology. The stop/start of small truck deliveries (and subsequent energy recapture) makes sense but for long-haul I can’t see it feasible until the battery energy densities jump by a sizable margin without a corresponding increase in price. And at that point there's still few financial advantages of electrification I can think of... what am I missing there?
  - brianwawok 5y ago
    Many trucks return home daily. Why not get those 100% first?
    - 5y ago

MrDunham 5y ago

The linked article's title is "Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally" and it's a little more appropriate as it split about 50-50 between discussing earnings and discussing battery technology. I say this because there’s another article from the New York Times about Tesla‘s earnings on HN's front page and this one from Ars is more technical, more straightforwardly written, and much less hyperbolic than the NYT version. (This one focuses on earnings and potential major changes that could impact the bottom line versus New York Times spends 50% of their article discussing government inquiries into autopilot.) I can't update the title but would recommend this article over the New York Times one.

wffurr 5y ago
Done. The title has changed since I posted.

cmurf 5y ago

Article notes worse cold weather range with LFP vs NCA. What's the approximate range hit at 0C for each type? -17C?

l30n4da5 5y ago
when I read the article this was what stood out to me, as well. Last winter it got _really_ cold where I live. Does that mean that if I got a Tesla with an LFP battery it would be drastically less useful in the winter? Seems problematic.
- lini 5y ago
  The battery can be heated, so you can reduce the cold weather range problems by preconditioning the battery before a drive. Naturally this uses some power, so Tesla recommends keeping the car plugged in when it's cold so it can keep everything nice and warm.
  - fy20 5y ago
    No different than using a block heater or diesel coolant heater then. ICE vehicles use a lot more fuel in winter too, and take a long time to get up to temperature.
    - sliken 5y ago
      Indeed. Telsa's will keep batteries at reasonable temperatures when plugged in, but not optimal. There is a departure setting available so you can make sure your battery is full and at the ideal temperature for any scheduled departures.
rpmisms 5y ago
I'm willing to bet this is why the Models 3/Y have the octovalve heat pump: to offset LFP cold weather performance.

SigmundA 5y ago

Would be interesting to know whats going on in the industry with LFP. Pre-built lead acid replacement LFP battery prices have been dropping almost daily and are down to high end AGM prices [1] and quality has been going up [2], these batteries were twice the price a year ago. Will be replacing the lead acid in my RV soon with LFP's, it really a no brainer. 1. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FMTRYPT https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FMTRYPT 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBonGQe363g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBonGQe363g

diggernet 5y ago
Last I heard, LFP had some significant temperature restrictions compared to lead acid, making them unsuitable for use in cold temperatures. Has that changed?
Tade0 5y ago
Basically people figured out how to make them energy dense: https://pushevs.com/2021/01/10/guoxuan-unveils-a-cobalt-free-lfp-pouch-battery-cell-with-212-wh-kg/ https://pushevs.com/2021/01/10/guoxuan-unveils-a-cobalt-free... Without compromising on cost.
antoniuschan99 5y ago
LFP/LifePo4 is definitely top of the line now. I just bought a GoLabs Portable Power Station https://gotrax.com/products/golabs-r300-portable-powerstation https://gotrax.com/products/golabs-r300-portable-powerstatio... Pretty much all the good Solar Panel/Wind Power Stations use LifePo4. Check out the bestsellers in outdoor generators: https://www.amazon.ca/gp/bestsellers/lawn-garden/6257187011/ref=zg_b_bs_6257187011_1 https://www.amazon.ca/gp/bestsellers/lawn-garden/6257187011/...
jtbayly 5y ago
Can you help me understand why you wouldn't just stay with the old Lead-Acid batteries? You can get a 150Ah for $110, for example, whereas this 100Ah you linked to is $376. I'm sure there are benefits, but I don't know much about batteries to understand why you'd make that tradeoff.

rkangel 5y ago

What is the situation these days with infringement of major IP by Chinese companies? If they've had a battery chemistry to themselves for a while it sounds like they're having their cake and eating. I have first hand knowledge where at the small and medium scale, Chinese manufacturers will happily knock off major brands and steal technology to make products, and as a non-Chinese IP owner you have very little recourse. Is this situation still how it works for key IP from major companies or if you're (e.g.) Tesla and you had a patent on battery technology, could you realistically enforce it in China? There are some old quotes from Elon Musk about Space X just keeping stuff secret rather than patenting it because otherwise he'd be just giving it away to his major competitor in China: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-patents-2012-11?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-patents-2012-11?r=...

baybal2 5y ago
They buy locally made batteries from CATL.
onethought 5y ago
Tesla opened all their patents… so not sure what you are referring to?

Leader2light 5y ago

Does anyone know if 20 years from now these batteries start to burn down homes will Tesla be required to fix the problem similar to how traditional auto companies fix bad air bags or whatever issue that could kill people even decades later?

bserge 5y ago

> The lithium iron phosphate cells are less energy-dense but much longer-lived. And apparently much less explodey.

stevespang 5y ago
It's a legal and therefore a cost driven move - - less lawsuits from batteries catching on fire - - less performance from the iron phosphate version too, less range, cobalt in pyro lithium batteries is expensive . . .
baybal2 5y ago
Most of cell energy density comparison don't remove cell casings mass from comparison. This way pouch cells outperform hard cased ones so much on capacity, but in reality it's a big delusion as you still have to put structure to hold cells in place — and you can't do it with flimsy, paper thin casings.

woeirua 5y ago

The potential for a massive jump in battery chemistry is why I personally have not purchased a BEV yet. I'm leasing a LEAF, which has been great overall, but I'm not going to buy until the battery chemistry is settled here in a few years. There's a high probability that every BEV on the road today will be considered antiquated (and potentially unsafe) in 5 years.

01100011 5y ago
Yep. I feel like buying an EV now is like buying a $50,000 PC that will be obsolete the minute I take it home. EVs are insanely awesome though. I'm leasing a 2019 Bolt and after a month or so it's the best car I've ever driven. EV torque is a blast. With the type of driving I do I'm able to get by on a Type I charger at my apartment and a rare visit to a public charging station. I think one-pedal mode helps because I'm barely ever using the brakes.
- bryanlarsen 5y ago
  Yes, if you can wait it's probably best to do so. But if you can't wait I imagine an EV bought today will hold its value a lot better than an ICE vehicle.
  - woeirua 5y ago
    Not clear that’s the case. BEV will become more common as production ramps up. Unit costs will come down. No way BEV are the dominant form of transportation at a sales price >$40k.

bserge 5y ago

I've been looking into this lately. Seems like it would not be that hard to set up a factory in Eastern Europe somewhere to produce cells. They won't be top of the line, but still useful and profitable, given that the best cells will be taken up by megacorps for the foreseeable future. You don't need the highest capacity stuff for power tools and home solar/wind storage, for example. The machinery is quite expensive, however.