The purpose of my post was to add gravitas to my earlier posts whereby I stated that “there will be an ever-widening range of battery chemistries suited for different market segments/customer preferences in years to come”.
I find it amusing that you are now trying to defend LFP chem against sodium-ion using the same argument (lower energy density) that I used during our extensive exchange in February (unfortunately located in the CYM thread).
It is ironic that you made so many bold statements back in February (all of which I thoroughly dismantled) - yet here you are defending LFP batteries, when I am not suggesting they will be displaced (unlike your bold and erroneous statement re: nickel chemistries that include cobalt). In case you have forgotten, FFNZ: “Cobalt is getting slowly phased out” (10/02/23) (Ref: 66188099).
Just as LFP won’t displace NCM, sodium-ion batteries won’t displace LFP. The market is large enough to accommodate multiple battery chemistries. You really need to accept this point. You are seemingly still of the belief that it is pretty much LFP or bust - dismissing every other battery chemistry out there as basically being irrelevant. And the reason for this is that you have a lithium bias. A point I made back in February.
To wit (cut & paste of my comments):
(Deme) “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? 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.
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.
And unlike you with lithium, at least I acknowledge that innovation will eventually win out”.
(FFNZ): “So the company CATL, who make no mistake has done everything it can over the last 6 months to push the Lithium price down, has said that a sodium battery they made in 2021 (one with low energy density) will be improved and put in a car. Makes sense, I'd want lithium prices to fall too if I was one of the largest buyers”.
Quite funny that you were lauding the Chinese and CATL for developing outstanding batteries back in February and are now having a crack at them for pushing the lithium price down and criticising this latest announcement as CATL’s attempt to add more pressure on the lithium price because they are one of the largest buyers.
(FFNZ) “There have been many very bold claims by cell makers and auto makers over new chemistries”.
Also, FFNZ: “LFP will be the dominant battery by 2030” (10/02/23) (Ref: #66188099).
And again, FFNZ: “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”. (10/02/23) (Ref: #66185380).
Sounds familiar to my comment at the time:
(Deme): “What is technically possible isn’t always easy to commercially scale. Some smart cookie will eventually figure out a way to eliminate cobalt and commercially scale batteries, but I think cobalt is safe for the rest of this decade. And everyone I have spoken with from engineers, industry participants, analysts, large investors/funds, etc agree with this.
And if it was easy to do, it would have been done. So, again - it isn’t a question of which battery chemistry will become the most popular. EV growth is linear - just surpassing 10 million vehicles per year. As these numbers continue to grow, the size of the entire pie grows larger, so even with competing battery chemistries, the total demand for all battery metals will increase.
Again, I am not going to be drawn into a binary debate over nickel vs lithium. I will leave that for the zealots. My point is that demand for ALL battery metals is going to significantly increase in the coming decade and beyond. And if you are invested in copper and nickel, then you almost certainly have some exposure to cobalt - as a large part of cobalt is a by-product of copper and nickel mining”.
And remember this doozy you stated, FFNZ? “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”.
And my reply (Deme): “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”. (13/02/23) (Ref: #66207007).
You also erroneously linked the fall in the cobalt price in 2022 to the rise of LFP. Again, I dismantled that argument by pointing out that the price fall was related to a drop in industrial demand (mainly electronics) linked to Chinese lockdowns (along with the size of EV demand as a % of total cobalt demand in that year).
Look, I know we all like to talk our own books. It is pretty natural. You won’t, however, find me trawling lithium threads, though, dissing lithium because (and to restate) “Exposure to a variety of battery metals is IMO a wisestrategyfor those seeking to capitalise on the EV thematic - the greatest industrial change in our lifetime”. I have cobalt, nickel and copper in my portfolio. I will be adding graphite. And I want greater lithium exposure - but have been waiting for the ridiculously high lithium carbonate prices to come off (which they have - down 60% from a year ago). There is still a lag in SPs - with many lithium hopefuls still carrying extremely overvalued market caps. Once they fall back, I will be adding a few names to my portfolio.
(20min delay)
