4 ms·

Elon Musk has said that he believes a significant portion of the industry will move to LFP (Lithium iron phosphate) chemistry due to its lower cost, fewer suppl

Elon Musk has said that he believes a significant portion of the industry will move to LFP (Lithium iron phosphate) chemistry due to its lower cost, fewer supply constraints, and better safety and stability properties. It was recently reported that Ford is working on LFP packs for their Mustang and F-150 Lightning EVs.

moffkalast 4y ago
So they say, but the main gripe of switching to EVs has always been their too small range. Your average Li-ion 21700 cell has a capacity of 4-5Ah, whereas one with an LFP chemistry only gets 2-3Ah. That's almost a 50 % reduction in spatial density, not to mention their abysmal C rating. Perhaps they would fit for PHEV usage, but for pure EVs they would be rather shite imo.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Reason077 4y ago
  The standard range Tesla Model 3 says otherwise. They’ve been using LFP for a while now and it actually has longer range than it’s non-LFP predecessor, albeit with somewhat increased weight. Charge rate on modern, well-managed LFP cells is not abysmal. The LFP Model 3 SR gets excellent charging speeds.
  - cogman10 4y ago
    The cycle life is also insanely good which is why I'm so excited about LFPs. Pretty good density (not quiet nickel levels, but close), insane cycle life, and far cheaper materials. It'll be a great solution for grid energy storage. I'd be shocked if most short range EVs don't end up with LFPs.
  - moffkalast 4y ago
    Hmm, so instead of filling the bay with 50% Li-ions, they fill it up to 100% with LFPs? I guess that sort of works but with the added mass you must get even less range than you'd have with the partial capacity setup, not to mention worse handling. Doesn't seem like too good of an option unless they're really like a quarter of the price, which I'm not exactly seeing. They seem rather on par, with maybe a 10% reduction in price. > gets excellent charging speeds Since the battery is larger, yes. But per unit, no.
    - margalabargala 4y ago
      > with the added mass you must get even less range than you'd have with the partial capacity setup, not to mention worse handling. This is incorrect. Range increases due to added capacity faster than it decreases due to added weight here. It's approximately the same range, even with all the extra weight. > Since the battery is larger, yes. But per unit, no. Not sure I see the problem here? As a (non-Tesla) EV owner, I have never once cared about what my per-unit charging speed is over the charging speed of the battery pack as a whole.
- _ph_ 4y ago
  It works well for the Model 3. The standard range version now mostly uses LFP batteries. They have about the same size and weight as the long range batteries. And of course, there is constant progress in battery density. The move to 4680 cells supposedly gives 16% more capacity due to the different geometry. That would make LFP batteries competitive for more configurations.
  - Reason077 4y ago
    For LFP they (Tesla) are actually using prismatic cells which have even better density. An advantage of cylindrical cells is that they allow for more effective cooling, but that’s not so necessary with LFP.
- mkr-hn 4y ago
  Those modest yearly increases in battery capacity and drops in production costs add up. After a while, a use case that needed the batteries with all the downsides can get by with a safer, more affordable battery that wouldn't have enough juice 20 years before. It's a much slower version of the phenomenon we see in computing power. Eventually, even a slow CPU can do what only a top end desktop CPU could do 20 years ago. The phrase "range anxiety" has been with us for almost 25 years, so it's about time.
  - heavenlyblue 4y ago
    With CPUs the growth was approximately 2x each 2 years which means that in 20 years it was approximately 1024 more powerful. This is not happening with batteries ;)
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  The answer is to regulate battery standards and internal input jacks. The overwhelming majority of people don't need more than 50 miles range the overwhelming majority of the time. The problem would be solved if you could just put your house battery or a rented one in the boot for that rare long trip. Additionally make all vehicles on the road slower, smaller, and lighter so you can safely drive something that more closely resembles a velomobile than an SUV and safely drive anywhere at 80km/h rather than having 100km/h as the minimum. 1C or 0.5C is completely fine, nothing needs to do 0-100km/h in under 20s, and as long as it can do around 15m/s up a 10% hill it has enough power.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Speaking as someone with 7.5 years daily driving a Nissan LEAF, it is rare that I drive more than 50 miles in a day, but driving 50 miles requires a car with more than 50 miles of range. Right now, I’d take a 50 mile drive in my car (without swapping to my spouse’s ICE car), but I’m not sure I’d do the same for a 60 and definitely not a 70 mile drive. Fully charged, my car guesses it has around 75 miles of range, but that quickly is proven wrong in operation and I can only count on 55 or so. This from a car with a published range of 84 miles on a new battery. A non-hybrid with an electric range of 50 miles when new would likely be a market flop. I love my LEAF, but I’d not buy a car with that little range again.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      But if you knew every service station had a charger that could give you 20 miles of range in 15 minutes, and a supply of charged 30kg batteries you could rent and swap into your boot for the day (returning to any other service station) that gave you another 50 miles plus you knew that every car park had a charger that would give you 30 miles an hour, how would that change?
      - sokoloff 4y ago
- coryrc 4y ago
  That's only because LFP isn't usually made in round cells like that, so whoever is making that cell hasn't optimized the process. LFP has the same amount of Ah per volume as li-ion, but at an average voltage of 3.2 instead of 3.7. That is the only forced source of reduced capacity and is about 20%.
SigmundA 4y ago
LFP is also a more stable chemistry which makes them safer but also it has more than double the cycle life and can be charged to 100% while still keeping that long cycle life. No need to choose to charge to 80-90% for daily use vs 100% for long distance, Tesla recommends charging the LFP to 100% all the time. LFP's where getting ridiculously cheap recently, you can get 19" rack mount batteries with built in BMS for less than $300 / kWh to your door. I think most UPS are going to move over to LFP, they will be 20 year batteries in controlled environments. I put some 12v replacements in my RV getting 4X the capacity of my lead acid at half the weight for about 3x the cost but the batteries will last 10+ years. The main downside is a lower energy density than NMC which seems to be getting better I believe its about 20% less kWh/kg at this point. No nickel or cobalt is another advantage, iron is plentiful.
- cogman10 4y ago
  > No nickel or cobalt is another advantage, iron in plentiful. Nickel is a problem but you might be surprised to know that cobalt is fairly plentiful. The issue is it doesn't have a whole lot of industry usage outside of batteries. That's why it's a human rights problem. Instead of mining it locally we use small time mining operations with cheap (often child) labor. In other words, the amounts needed to meet global demand are below the demand needed to setup industrial cobalt mining operations. This is why iron phosphate are both great key materials. Both are highly plentiful AND highly useful outside of battery production (thus, already have industrial mining/recycling systems setup) There was recently discussion about opening old cobalt mines in idaho (my home state). [1] [1] https://www.mining-technology.com/projects/idaho-cobalt-project/ https://www.mining-technology.com/projects/idaho-cobalt-proj...
  - SigmundA 4y ago
    Nickel is more abundant than cobalt in the earths crust and most cobalt comes as a byproduct of nickel or copper mining: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth%27s_crust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth... https://www.globalenergymetals.com/cobalt/cobalt-supply/ https://www.globalenergymetals.com/cobalt/cobalt-supply/

moffkalast 4y ago

So they say, but the main gripe of switching to EVs has always been their too small range. Your average Li-ion 21700 cell has a capacity of 4-5Ah, whereas one with an LFP chemistry only gets 2-3Ah. That's almost a 50 % reduction in spatial density, not to mention their abysmal C rating. Perhaps they would fit for PHEV usage, but for pure EVs they would be rather shite imo.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Reason077 4y ago
The standard range Tesla Model 3 says otherwise. They’ve been using LFP for a while now and it actually has longer range than it’s non-LFP predecessor, albeit with somewhat increased weight. Charge rate on modern, well-managed LFP cells is not abysmal. The LFP Model 3 SR gets excellent charging speeds.
- cogman10 4y ago
  The cycle life is also insanely good which is why I'm so excited about LFPs. Pretty good density (not quiet nickel levels, but close), insane cycle life, and far cheaper materials. It'll be a great solution for grid energy storage. I'd be shocked if most short range EVs don't end up with LFPs.
- moffkalast 4y ago
  Hmm, so instead of filling the bay with 50% Li-ions, they fill it up to 100% with LFPs? I guess that sort of works but with the added mass you must get even less range than you'd have with the partial capacity setup, not to mention worse handling. Doesn't seem like too good of an option unless they're really like a quarter of the price, which I'm not exactly seeing. They seem rather on par, with maybe a 10% reduction in price. > gets excellent charging speeds Since the battery is larger, yes. But per unit, no.
  - margalabargala 4y ago
    > with the added mass you must get even less range than you'd have with the partial capacity setup, not to mention worse handling. This is incorrect. Range increases due to added capacity faster than it decreases due to added weight here. It's approximately the same range, even with all the extra weight. > Since the battery is larger, yes. But per unit, no. Not sure I see the problem here? As a (non-Tesla) EV owner, I have never once cared about what my per-unit charging speed is over the charging speed of the battery pack as a whole.
_ph_ 4y ago
It works well for the Model 3. The standard range version now mostly uses LFP batteries. They have about the same size and weight as the long range batteries. And of course, there is constant progress in battery density. The move to 4680 cells supposedly gives 16% more capacity due to the different geometry. That would make LFP batteries competitive for more configurations.
- Reason077 4y ago
  For LFP they (Tesla) are actually using prismatic cells which have even better density. An advantage of cylindrical cells is that they allow for more effective cooling, but that’s not so necessary with LFP.
mkr-hn 4y ago
Those modest yearly increases in battery capacity and drops in production costs add up. After a while, a use case that needed the batteries with all the downsides can get by with a safer, more affordable battery that wouldn't have enough juice 20 years before. It's a much slower version of the phenomenon we see in computing power. Eventually, even a slow CPU can do what only a top end desktop CPU could do 20 years ago. The phrase "range anxiety" has been with us for almost 25 years, so it's about time.
- heavenlyblue 4y ago
  With CPUs the growth was approximately 2x each 2 years which means that in 20 years it was approximately 1024 more powerful. This is not happening with batteries ;)
Schroedingersat 4y ago
The answer is to regulate battery standards and internal input jacks. The overwhelming majority of people don't need more than 50 miles range the overwhelming majority of the time. The problem would be solved if you could just put your house battery or a rented one in the boot for that rare long trip. Additionally make all vehicles on the road slower, smaller, and lighter so you can safely drive something that more closely resembles a velomobile than an SUV and safely drive anywhere at 80km/h rather than having 100km/h as the minimum. 1C or 0.5C is completely fine, nothing needs to do 0-100km/h in under 20s, and as long as it can do around 15m/s up a 10% hill it has enough power.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- sokoloff 4y ago
  Speaking as someone with 7.5 years daily driving a Nissan LEAF, it is rare that I drive more than 50 miles in a day, but driving 50 miles requires a car with more than 50 miles of range. Right now, I’d take a 50 mile drive in my car (without swapping to my spouse’s ICE car), but I’m not sure I’d do the same for a 60 and definitely not a 70 mile drive. Fully charged, my car guesses it has around 75 miles of range, but that quickly is proven wrong in operation and I can only count on 55 or so. This from a car with a published range of 84 miles on a new battery. A non-hybrid with an electric range of 50 miles when new would likely be a market flop. I love my LEAF, but I’d not buy a car with that little range again.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    But if you knew every service station had a charger that could give you 20 miles of range in 15 minutes, and a supply of charged 30kg batteries you could rent and swap into your boot for the day (returning to any other service station) that gave you another 50 miles plus you knew that every car park had a charger that would give you 30 miles an hour, how would that change?
    - sokoloff 4y ago
coryrc 4y ago
That's only because LFP isn't usually made in round cells like that, so whoever is making that cell hasn't optimized the process. LFP has the same amount of Ah per volume as li-ion, but at an average voltage of 3.2 instead of 3.7. That is the only forced source of reduced capacity and is about 20%.

SigmundA 4y ago

LFP is also a more stable chemistry which makes them safer but also it has more than double the cycle life and can be charged to 100% while still keeping that long cycle life. No need to choose to charge to 80-90% for daily use vs 100% for long distance, Tesla recommends charging the LFP to 100% all the time. LFP's where getting ridiculously cheap recently, you can get 19" rack mount batteries with built in BMS for less than $300 / kWh to your door. I think most UPS are going to move over to LFP, they will be 20 year batteries in controlled environments. I put some 12v replacements in my RV getting 4X the capacity of my lead acid at half the weight for about 3x the cost but the batteries will last 10+ years. The main downside is a lower energy density than NMC which seems to be getting better I believe its about 20% less kWh/kg at this point. No nickel or cobalt is another advantage, iron is plentiful.

cogman10 4y ago
> No nickel or cobalt is another advantage, iron in plentiful. Nickel is a problem but you might be surprised to know that cobalt is fairly plentiful. The issue is it doesn't have a whole lot of industry usage outside of batteries. That's why it's a human rights problem. Instead of mining it locally we use small time mining operations with cheap (often child) labor. In other words, the amounts needed to meet global demand are below the demand needed to setup industrial cobalt mining operations. This is why iron phosphate are both great key materials. Both are highly plentiful AND highly useful outside of battery production (thus, already have industrial mining/recycling systems setup) There was recently discussion about opening old cobalt mines in idaho (my home state). [1] [1] https://www.mining-technology.com/projects/idaho-cobalt-project/ https://www.mining-technology.com/projects/idaho-cobalt-proj...
- SigmundA 4y ago
  Nickel is more abundant than cobalt in the earths crust and most cobalt comes as a byproduct of nickel or copper mining: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth%27s_crust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_elements_in_Earth... https://www.globalenergymetals.com/cobalt/cobalt-supply/ https://www.globalenergymetals.com/cobalt/cobalt-supply/