Ann: Cinovec Definitive Feasibility Study to be Completed Q1 2024, page-62

@tsibis I'd be happy with the 2012 levels of SP peak, the 2017 peaks or 2021 peaks. At this point anything is better than EMH's current SP.

What puzzles me is that there is a lot of sentiment in the CZ media about the use of Na-ion (sodium) batteries, however there seems to be lack of understanding of basic chemistry and energy density differences between the competing technologies. The second limitation that rises out of the Na-ion usage are the limitations associated with the use frequency of charger infrastructure in the urban areas (targeted audience/market).

The fact is, if those smaller/affordable EVs gain significant market share whilst their effective range is around ~140-200kms, then you'd see major congestion at the chargers, as the users will likely charge every day. Now if you compare it to the current and next gen EVs with the effective range in the 600-1000kms, charging becomes a weekly, or even fortnightly activity. The studies have shown that the 'range anxiety in the EV users' is starting around 100km mark, so ... with the Na-ion batteries the users are basically living in that range, at full charge!

The other point is that the current breed of PHEV (plugin hybrids) have the samish range to those Na-ion cars (when the PHEV uses its pure EV capability), however, has the ability to use its Atkinson cycle tech to use fuel when needed.

At this point the only advantages that I see are all stacked in favour of the car companies selling 'EV's to gullible consumers that do not understand the nuances of battery technologies, besides the Li is so cheap right now that it does not make any sense to even use Na-ion tech anyways. That same Na-ion base car if fitted with the LFP-based battery occupying the same area near triples the available range and maybe 10-20% cost increase passed to the consumer - a no brainer.