4 ms·

For the last part, my guess is that the advantages are much more valuable in an EV than they are in a phone (where batteries are mostly fine. While longer life

For the last part, my guess is that the advantages are much more valuable in an EV than they are in a phone (where batteries are mostly fine. While longer life and faster charging are always nice to have:they are just that: nice to have), so if you are A) production limited and B) they are still more expensive (the article states they expect them to be price-comparable by the end of the decade), then they probably aren't worth it in a phone (yet). When price comes down and production comes up (assuming those things happen), then I would expect them to start appearing in phones as well.

Dylan16807 1y ago
That logic seems crazy to me. Extra hundreds of miles are also just nice to have, and with the same material that goes into a 500kg car pack you could make 10000 double life phone batteries and sell them for $100 each. There's more per-cell overhead in the phone batteries but is it worth a million dollar drop in revenue?
- MostlyStable 1y ago
  Consumers seem to disagree with you on the first part. I personally think that current battery tech is fine for EVs (I have an EV with a 260 mile range, and only a 77kW max charge rate, and I think it's fine even for 10+ hour road trips), but a segment of the consumer space wants more than that. I personally thought that the more interesting part of the article was where they claimed to be able to add 800 miles of range in 12 minutes. At those kinds of charge rates, my ideal EV would probably have a 300ish mile range that I could charge from 10-80 in <10 minutes (although I believe that part of the way they get those charge rates is with large battery packs, so a smaller pack would probably not charge as fast). Additionally, while the specs for EV sedans are currently fine, batteries are only barely good enough for larger, less efficient vehicles. Maybe the killer app here isn't a sedan that goes 1000 miles, but a truck or SUV that can go 500. The point is, whatever your and my opinions on the adequacy of current EV charging, the market seems to value improved battery specs more highly in the EV space than it does in the phone space (or maybe it doesn't and BYD is making a mistake by keeping their batteries for their cars instead of selling them to phone manufacturers).
  - ikt 1y ago
    don’t know why you’re being downvoted, seems reasonable to me
  - actsasbuffoon 1y ago
    EV batteries degrade more quickly when charged too far above half-way. As a result, your ideal EV might actually have 600 miles of range and you’d just leave it half-charged most of the time.
    - MostlyStable 1y ago
      From everything I've heard/read you can pretty safely go to 80-90% of listed state of charge (manufacturers often also include a hidden buffer for exactly this reason). My car, which like I said has a 260 mile range, I only charge to 80% unless I'm going on a long road trip. So for 90%+ of the time, it's never charged more than 80% (and I very rarely discharge it to less than 15%). For most people, a 300 mile range like I describe would be plenty to be able to not need 100% charge except on rare occasions. But even if it's not for you, or for some people, I very specifically said "my ideal EV". A 600 mile range that I almost never use is just extra weight that I'm carrying around and decreasing efficiency, and isn't actually providing much real battery protection. I am absolutely not someone who drives 360 miles a day (which is what you could do if you were doing an 80% to 20% discharge on a 600 mile battery every day. I'm pretty confident that stats suggest that very few people drive that much on a regular basis. The 150 miles I get from the the 80% to 20% range on my current battery is already more than enough.
- harry8 1y ago
  I’m out for 2-3 days. Better take an external battery for the phone. Done. Doesn’t work with a car. Really easy to work around Apple’s utterly crap battery life. If it were better that would be nice to have. Going a certain distance so can’t take an ev at all. It’d be nice if you could, if your usage is mostly very urban, sure that’s just nice. Gotta visit Dad on the farm a dozen times a year or whatever? That’s not your life so you don’t see it as essential even if the rest of the driving is much shorter range.
  - nicoburns 1y ago
    It really should work with a car (there's no reason why they couldn't support additional external battery packs in the trunk or as a trailer, etc).
    - harry8 1y ago
      for $10, right?
      - mitthrowaway2 1y ago
        Renting a U-Haul starts at $19.95 per day...
        harry8 1y ago
        Uh. How much do car batteries cost again?
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        A hell of a lot less than entire trucks.
        harry8 1y ago
        I think maybe there’s some cross thread confusion. The comparison I’m making is an external phone battery is $10. Replacing an ev battery is, hell i dunno, $10.000? Not needing an external phone battery would be nice. Needing external ev batteries is far more likely to be cost prohibitive. Adjacent to this thread people have raised size and weight issues as well. I didn’t even bother going that far because the straight up price puts it in a different ball park to an external phone battery. Hope we’re all on the same page again!
cherioo 1y ago
Battery life is fine but phone company are always after thinner and lighter. I can’t imagine no company will jump on this. Just look at rumored iphone air
- harry8 1y ago
  I’d take a phone double the thickness to get double the battery life between charges. Options on that front are limited. Had an ulefone for a while which was better than most until the screen started getting constant phantom presses making it unusable.
  - ggm-at-algebras 1y ago
    My hand does not shrink. Try holding and using a phone as thick as a credit card compared to one 5mm thick and ask yourself which feels better. Ie, I agree totally with your sentiment

Dylan16807 1y ago

That logic seems crazy to me. Extra hundreds of miles are also just nice to have, and with the same material that goes into a 500kg car pack you could make 10000 double life phone batteries and sell them for $100 each. There's more per-cell overhead in the phone batteries but is it worth a million dollar drop in revenue?

MostlyStable 1y ago
Consumers seem to disagree with you on the first part. I personally think that current battery tech is fine for EVs (I have an EV with a 260 mile range, and only a 77kW max charge rate, and I think it's fine even for 10+ hour road trips), but a segment of the consumer space wants more than that. I personally thought that the more interesting part of the article was where they claimed to be able to add 800 miles of range in 12 minutes. At those kinds of charge rates, my ideal EV would probably have a 300ish mile range that I could charge from 10-80 in <10 minutes (although I believe that part of the way they get those charge rates is with large battery packs, so a smaller pack would probably not charge as fast). Additionally, while the specs for EV sedans are currently fine, batteries are only barely good enough for larger, less efficient vehicles. Maybe the killer app here isn't a sedan that goes 1000 miles, but a truck or SUV that can go 500. The point is, whatever your and my opinions on the adequacy of current EV charging, the market seems to value improved battery specs more highly in the EV space than it does in the phone space (or maybe it doesn't and BYD is making a mistake by keeping their batteries for their cars instead of selling them to phone manufacturers).
- ikt 1y ago
  don’t know why you’re being downvoted, seems reasonable to me
- actsasbuffoon 1y ago
  EV batteries degrade more quickly when charged too far above half-way. As a result, your ideal EV might actually have 600 miles of range and you’d just leave it half-charged most of the time.
  - MostlyStable 1y ago
    From everything I've heard/read you can pretty safely go to 80-90% of listed state of charge (manufacturers often also include a hidden buffer for exactly this reason). My car, which like I said has a 260 mile range, I only charge to 80% unless I'm going on a long road trip. So for 90%+ of the time, it's never charged more than 80% (and I very rarely discharge it to less than 15%). For most people, a 300 mile range like I describe would be plenty to be able to not need 100% charge except on rare occasions. But even if it's not for you, or for some people, I very specifically said "my ideal EV". A 600 mile range that I almost never use is just extra weight that I'm carrying around and decreasing efficiency, and isn't actually providing much real battery protection. I am absolutely not someone who drives 360 miles a day (which is what you could do if you were doing an 80% to 20% discharge on a 600 mile battery every day. I'm pretty confident that stats suggest that very few people drive that much on a regular basis. The 150 miles I get from the the 80% to 20% range on my current battery is already more than enough.
harry8 1y ago
I’m out for 2-3 days. Better take an external battery for the phone. Done. Doesn’t work with a car. Really easy to work around Apple’s utterly crap battery life. If it were better that would be nice to have. Going a certain distance so can’t take an ev at all. It’d be nice if you could, if your usage is mostly very urban, sure that’s just nice. Gotta visit Dad on the farm a dozen times a year or whatever? That’s not your life so you don’t see it as essential even if the rest of the driving is much shorter range.
- nicoburns 1y ago
  It really should work with a car (there's no reason why they couldn't support additional external battery packs in the trunk or as a trailer, etc).
  - harry8 1y ago
    for $10, right?
    - mitthrowaway2 1y ago
      Renting a U-Haul starts at $19.95 per day...
      - harry8 1y ago
        Uh. How much do car batteries cost again?
        Dylan16807 1y ago
        A hell of a lot less than entire trucks.
        harry8 1y ago
        I think maybe there’s some cross thread confusion. The comparison I’m making is an external phone battery is $10. Replacing an ev battery is, hell i dunno, $10.000? Not needing an external phone battery would be nice. Needing external ev batteries is far more likely to be cost prohibitive. Adjacent to this thread people have raised size and weight issues as well. I didn’t even bother going that far because the straight up price puts it in a different ball park to an external phone battery. Hope we’re all on the same page again!

cherioo 1y ago

Battery life is fine but phone company are always after thinner and lighter. I can’t imagine no company will jump on this. Just look at rumored iphone air

harry8 1y ago
I’d take a phone double the thickness to get double the battery life between charges. Options on that front are limited. Had an ulefone for a while which was better than most until the screen started getting constant phantom presses making it unusable.
- ggm-at-algebras 1y ago
  My hand does not shrink. Try holding and using a phone as thick as a credit card compared to one 5mm thick and ask yourself which feels better. Ie, I agree totally with your sentiment