There is no doubt that car manufacturer's including Tesla are trying to move away from cobalt, they are using it because right now they have no choice to get the performance they want.
You’ve gone from “cobalt is being phased out” (a definitive statement) to “Tesla are trying to move away from cobalt” (source?) to “they are using it because right now they have no choice to get the performance they want”. Could you contradict yourself any further?
Why would companies be working on new chemistries that are cobalt free if they were not trying to phaze it out or somewhat limit the use of it in their batteries?
Here is what I wrote: “Thrifting will occur, but cobalt is not being phased out in any way whatsoever at the moment”.
I also acknowledged “competing battery chemistries”.
There will be an ever-widening range of battery chemistries suited for different market segments/customer preferences. You really should accept this. And you seem to be confusing the development of new chemistries as automatically meaning that cobalt is being phased out, although you have now acknowledged “somewhat limiting its use”. Very different to the meaning of “phase out” (discontinue or stop production by phases).
I am not denying that NCM811 is the best battery going
And do you know why this is the case? It is because of NCM811 exceptional energy density.
SVOLT's NMX battery (cobalt free). the battery is 75% nickel. They have tested it thermally and it remains stable, ready for commercialization which you said isn't possible.
Here is what I wrote: “what is technically possible isn’t always easy to commercially scale”. Never said it wasn’t possible - just that it wasn’t easy. Factories don’t simply switch production to alternate chemistries overnight. It takes time and capital. Interestingly, you made the same point when you said that lithium wouldn’t be substituted out. Here it is:
Lithium won't be substituted by Sodium etc as it takes years, decades to develop and refine technology to a stage it can be reliably used.
So, cobalt will be phased out, but lithium won’t? New chemistries will be worked on to eliminate cobalt, but not lithium? You are playing both sides here of the “innovation never sleeps” line. And it is very clear why - you have a lithium bias. Innovation isn’t good enough for lithium - only cobalt. Um, OK.
Sodium-ion batteries are on the way as well, however, they are not expected to really hit the market in numbers until 2025. And look out LFP when these sodium-ion batteries manage to exceed an energy density of 200 Wh/kg. The basic industrial chain will commence this year. They might just eat into your LFP market share for putt-putt cars in China. FWIW, I doubt this chem will really make a huge impact, as again - energy density is simply too low - but it could match lower end LFP batteries at least. And will impact the energy storage market. As stated above, there will be an ever-widening range of battery chemistries in years to come.
Re: NMX. I am well aware of this new chem. Here is what I wrote: “Of course, you can eliminate cobalt if you ramp up manganese, but you need cobalt or manganese to stabilise the nickel”. So, you are trying to inform me about NMX batteries AFTER I have just said to you that nickel manganese batteries exist? And thanks for the Svolt ad screenshot pushing their own battery. At least, they have managed to apply it to Great Wall Motors Ora Cherry Cat vehicle (I note that SVOLT is a Great Wall Motors spin off). They are building a gigafactory in Germany - so I imagine they will pick up some customers over there as well. The space is large and getting larger year by year and can accommodate multiple chemistries.
It is a promising chemistry - for sure. Keep in mind that it WILL NOT displace NCM811, though, as once you drop the nickel - you compromise some energy density. And you need a 3:1 ratio of nickel to manganese (75%/25%). NCM811 still has a far superior energy density, so NMX are best suited for midrange cars.
And my point re: “Some smart cookie will eventually figure out a way to eliminate cobalt and commercially scale batteries” - is in reference to producing a battery with the highest energy density - while also eliminating cobalt. And unlike you with lithium, at least I acknowledge that innovation will eventually win out - just that it isn’t easy and takes time, “but I think cobalt is safe for the rest of this decade”.
Here is why industrial demand is not the only reason why cobalt is flat but will also remain relatively subdued.
EV demand comprises 1/3 of all cobalt demand at present. That demand is growing and will eclipse all other non-EV demand in the future. The recent drop in cobalt prices was mainly related to falling industrial demand when China was locked down last year. I’m just repeating myself here again. And it won’t remain subdued (thought you said phased out) as the base line grows. It is simple math. Even if you thrift cobalt or introduce different chemistries, the total number of cars being produced that use nickel chemistries containing cobalt is still rising - even if LFP is growing much faster. You can’t seem to work that out. In other words, if the total number of cars with nickel chemistries containing cobalt is larger in future years than today - it stands to reason that the total demand for cobalt will increase (not decrease). I’m not sure how I can provide greater clarity here. You are looking at market share, but neglecting to realise that the pie is infinitely larger.
The western world is gobbling up cobalt for NCM batteries because they don't have the same technology to develop LFP batteries the way China has.
Rubbish.
China with the like of BYD and CATL have developed outstanding LFP batteries that have really narrowed the gap for energy density between LFP and NCM.
You are being disingenuous now. You are talking 200 wh/kg (LFP) vs 350 wh/kg (NCM/NCA). And let’s not mention LFP’s susceptibility to cold environments. The overheating/fire issues in the past with nickel batteries is due to nickel. The higher the nickel content, the greater the thermal runaway (instability) hence the use of cobalt to stabilise the nickel. Again, why are you trying to drag me into this debate? We were discussing your statement that cobalt was being phased out and you have started plugging the superiority of LFP batteries. I recognise their place in the market - for low-end/entry-level cars.
Fail to realize ESG ramifications demanded by OEM's
Why I am then invested in the only viable company on the market who can provide non-DRC sourced cobalt to OEMs?
"The demand side will always remain a concern for cobalt"
"downward pressure on previous price expectations"
Nice cherrypick. Why did you exclude “fundamentals remain robust”.
CTM also in Brazil starts producing nickel sulphate from their OWN world class nickel deposit
I put the Jaguar project forward as a target years ago. You can check my Twitter account if you doubt me. I am a huge fan of this deposit. Multiple investors can back me up here as well (as I introduced it to them). But, that is all it is at this stage, a deposit. And if you think they are gunna be able to finance A$420m in capex on their own, you had better check yourself. Management have preciously indicated the desire to bring partners in to help them fund it, so a sell down in equity is on the cards. Vale might just grab it off them. First production isn’t slated until 2026 anyway.
JRV has to buy 3rd party feed.
For now, but I fully expect them to pick up a primary nickel asset in Brazil down the track and exploit vertical integration advantages of having both a mine and refinery. I think Jaguar would look great on JRV’s books. I will raise it once again with management the next time I speak with them.
JRV will be shipping cobalt all the way from the US to its refinery in Brazil and then again across the world.
Twice now that you have brought up another investment of mine. And you have no idea. Some cobalt will be sent to Brazil to be refined - but they will also be selling concentrate in the U.S. where their mine is located.
Judging by JRV's stock price falling more than 70% in about a year I'd say my research and investing in lithium has paid off and is more than adequate.
You are being infantile now. I have never dissed any of your lithium stocks. I simply made the point that most punters sharing the incorrect opinion that cobalt was being phased out happened to be lithium zealots pushing their own book.
Are not in any lithium stocks
Said who?
At least we can agree on the future of Copper.
I’m not sure that we do anymore. You were once one of the best posters in this thread (as I have previously noted). You then disappeared for quite some time - as Cyprium’s SP plummeted. You then returned and were noticeably pessimistic. I can recall mentioning in an investment group that I belong to how disappointing it was to see FFNZ turn so negative on Cyprium just because the SP had dropped. Hopefully, you will rediscover your passion for this stock and the broader copper narrative.
Appreciate the exchange, but will be keeping this thread focussed on copper price news from now on.
Expand
(20min delay)