Outstanding as always. Tesla’s focus is or should be focusing on cost and supply. Increasing range is not important anymore except for bragging rights.
And on charging network. The main reason that range has been an anxiety, is the areas with few or slow chargers, making road trips through them harder, or even unfeasible. And there are such areas in America, especially away from the interstates, or certain "charging deserts". A four hour trip that I took recently along a major US highway (non interstate), had no Superchargers, and quite slow other chargers, despite being a popular tourist corridor with world famous sites. The cars don't need more range, just more fast chargers.
More range for same weight means lower cost for same range. 320 mile rating is is more like 240 at 80 mph road trip. Which is stopping pretty often.. range is not solved for general purpose but it is close enough for the long range models.
We are managing well. But in -20 C snowy windy + winter tires range is affected ( it is for all cars ). In our area there are no Tesla chargers till we leave the Manitoulin on far end from us and drive to Espanola. So yes, range is important.
Very cool analysis Jordan, replacing nmc would be really big for Tesla and the energy transition. No kobalt issues either. I think you are the first to bring this idea to the public discourse, so awesome job. This would be a great application for modern pack architectures, using that leverage to be able to use cheaper LMFP.
You called it buddy! The battery in the new model 3 has not changed according to CarWow's expose. I think that Tesla is waiting for this battery to debut before they announce the new model 3 performance variation.
Thanks Jordan. We'll have to wait for more details from CATL in order to be sure about your estimates, but you're usually in the right ballpark. Battery durability / cumulative battery range is probably the most important figure for an end user, especially if range between recharges is enough for normal vehicle use. For example, our EV has a range per cycle of at least 250 miles / 400 kilometres, in Summer and Winter, which is plenty for us, in England, so durability and possible cost of battery replacement become more interesting: The question, 'Will the battery outlast the useful life of the rest of the car?' is more relevant than vehicle range per cycle. Given our use case, it probably will. Being a senior citizen already, I'll likely stop driving before the car needs to be scrapped and recycled.
I'm always incredibly impressed with your videos Jordan. You cut through the hype and say it like it is. Excited more than ever for an affordable, long range EV future!
Excellent work as usual Jordan. It is funny how various media seems to assume newer is better. Your data driven presentation methodology is what helps your channel to rise above the rest. Keep up the great work.
LMFP with higher nominal voltage of 3.7V would also benefit from less risk of serie cell failure. ( higher voltage cell = less serie cells for the same voltage) = less failure probability due to a lower serie cell number.
For these chemistries that are CATL-specific, I wonder how much any automaker would want to rely on them given that they wouldn't be able to diversify their suppliers unless CATL was willing to license them to others.
Agree, but any OTHER automaker. If one makes an analogy with chips Tesla is willing to do the extra engineering required to maintain flexibility other lazier automakers may paint themselves into a corner. Tesla committed at battery day to buy to buy as many cost competitive batteries as they can so likely they have committed the engineering resources required.
Hello from France and thanks for another excellent and well researched video. As an owner from new of a 2019 Kia e-Niro (Niro EV in the USA) I am interested in the questions of cycle life. The Niro has an NMC622 battery and I have read that cycle life is somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 before >20% degradation sets in with this type of chemistry. But this is assuming charging to 100% every time from a low SOC which I certainly never do and I suspect most car owners never do either. My typical week is a 30% to 80% charge, only going to 100% occasionally as recommended in the owners manual, if not needing to do so for my use case. After 88,000 km and 4.5 years I am not seeing any range loss at all. Then again, perceptible loss of range and battery degradation are not the same thing, thanks to the (in this case) 3.5 kWh of buffer where the BMS never allows cell voltages to reach their theoretical maximum. I would appreciate your investigation of cycle life at different charging bands though I think the math on this is complex as there are so many variables.
It sounds like you understand this really well! I will try to do a video on the effect of charge depth I won't be able to give specific cycle life figures but I will be able to say what is best practice
Very nice video. I do believe Tesla should increase the range of their vehicles across the board just to satisfy consumer hunger, especially in harshers conditions, but for the vehicles that sell the most, keeping the range the same(or better in harsher conditions) would be best while lowering the price. On the topic of LMFP, there are 3 ways that have likely been used to improve cycle life and conductivity of the hybrid cathode material: hierarchical structures(where multiple sizes of cathode particles are produced), very high conductivity carbon coatings and most importantly, core shell composites(where the carbon coated LFP material encapsulates the LMP core). The two last innovations is what have likely allowed the manufacturing of high cycle life low resistance LMFP cathode material because as it turns out, LMP by itself has abysmal surface polarization(which ties itself in electrolyte dissolution and poor cycle life in high temp applications), but once that is a taken care of, a lot of the downsides of LMP just... dissapear :)
You're speaking my language here! I still need to produce the LMFP science video. That's already been reviewed by somebody who is developing the technology 🤠
What a timely video! And thanks for clearing up the differences, especially between LMFP and M3P, which I had assumed were the same thing. Ouick question- if using Zinc and Aluminum can stabilze the use of Magnesium in the M3P battery, could it be used in an NMC battery to stabilize the use of that chemistry?
As always, very insightful and very useful info. You are fantastic at explaining difficult topics. Do you think the Bloomberg pack price of USD128 per kWH is correct. I would have thought with Lithium prices subsiding that it would already be substantially lower. Perhaps even closing in on USD100 per kWH at pack level for Tesla ?
On the base of your information about the M3P Battery i don't thing Tesla is going to replace LFP battery with M3P. It could be offered as a long range model instead of MCA battery chemistry.
Great presentation as usual, but so i can understand a few fundamental things: 1. About how many pounds of lithium are in say a LFP battery for the Tesla model 3 standard range? 2 About how much does a pound of lithium cost on a commercial scale today? 3 If a batteries cell chemistry has a higher voltage than another type, I'd think generally if would have more watt hours per pound, but are the watt hours per pound generally linear to voltage while comparing different cell chemistries such as LFP, NCA etc?
Very exciting stuff. I thoroughly enjoyed your video and appreciate the amount of time you put into all of your videos. LMFP and High Lithium Manganese batteries hopefully will start to fill some gaps in the EV market as we transition to lower cost materials. I will be very interested to see what kind of market share we see in the future. Analysts predictions are all over the place. Probably because CATL has kept all the M3P info under wraps. I agree with you 100% about the chemistry because that's all the info we have, but would love it if CATL surprised us. I have seen some papers on blended LMFP and NCA cathode material and that might be the ticket, the best of both worlds. We will see when we see. Thanks Man.
Amazing as always, Jordan, we appreciate the work you do! I have a few questions that I think we kind of know, but only vaguely. What does it mean for an element to be “unstable” in a battery chemistry? Those elements don’t like being in a battery chemistry, but why? What causes “degradation,” and what physically happens to the chemical structure during degradation? Of course the structure decomposes, but what causes it, and where do the elements go? Does all the iron clump together instead of staying in the crystal structure? I can’t remember if you answer these questions in your battery basics videos, but it would at least help me to understand those terms a bit better.
Thanks! I'll cover that in the LMFP science video 😀 Super nerd stuff, lol. As for the last point: Degradation happens along a number of vectors, but the main one is that lithium ions react with stuff and can no longer cycle back and forth.
What Donald Sadoway comments it's serious stuff, like Shirley, and the fact they are in the Labatory always underscores the information, which then gives us some gauging background to these presentations, thank you Jordan. I'm kind of anxious about the Vanadium mining industry and the liquid metal batteries that would make remote industrial complexes more viable and effective as places to live comfortably decentralised, instead of Fly In Fly Out from congested cities.
Fantastic and super interesting analysis Jordan! Excited to see what vehicles this pack makes it into. Considering a M3 Hyland if this has it! Hope you are well and congrats on 100k!
It's a good point, but I looked at it and it only made about a 1% difference in range. That's because most of the battery cells and packs are non-lithium materials.
Thanks! I was wondering if 66kWh (smaller battery) and higher energy density seems like a 4000lbs car could be reduced to 3500lbs car. But 1% isn’t enough to move that line.
This is what Im talking about. If high-nickel cells go bye-bye and sodium-ion comes to replace LFP at the lower end of the market, we could see huge wins for both manufacturers and customers. Metals speculators wont like it, but there are plenty of other casinos open. Im honestly hoping lithium metal batteries wont catch on... Their prices will just be too volatile to really be worth pursuing.
Excellent explanation, Jordan. thanks! One question, though. What about charge rate and cold weather performance? LFP seems to be "worse" than NCA in these categories....would LMFP (or M3P) be somewhere inbetween?
I wonder if the new M3P chemistry does any better charging, and has less range effect in very cold weather than the current LFP chemistry? If it does that may be a bigger benefit than a 10% hypothetical range increase as a result of the higher volumetric energy density.
@@thelimitingfactor Thats fair, although it might be worthwhile to list off stuff like this in passing. Just to round out the discussion, and in case they are (very?)minor contributing factors.
Totally agree the Testing of the 4680 battery,s in the model Y I'm not sure if they are making any cars with them at the moment maybe they are just making 100 model Y cars a day with the updated cyber cell or if they all are being installed in the truck.
Don't confuse the developing internal technology (Cathode/ chemistry) with the Form factor ("4680") and tab technology. . Once the cathode manufacture is sorted (now?), then the "chemistry" is tweaked Up to and beyond the current 2170 (CT) configuration, we could see multiple double digit percentage improvement. . Remember, the concept of the 4680 is to:- 1) Reduce factory size by removing a huge amount of process. . 2) Introduce a new design ("tabless") which overcomes the main drawback of the larger 4680 cell (resistance) 3) Combine the above to provide "more bang per can", then produce the "can" (cell) at high speed. . Result? More "jellyroll" rapidly produced, packed into fewer cans. If the rate of "cans" leaving the factory remains as before you still get.... A *Huge* increase in GWH (TWH!) from a small factory. . It's the (so far) "ultimate expression of "pile them high and sell them cheap" . As usual, Tesla concentrates as much on the "System" as the "components". . You ain't seen nothing yet.
Everything is just perfect in this video. You're the best 👍 Because M3P battery voltage (3,7 V) is higher than LFP battery voltage (3,2 V), does it mean Tesla will recommend charging them up to only 80% on a daily basis like NMC batteries ?
We don't have enough information to know at this point NMC is limited to 80% because the crystal structure starts cracking because it's a layered oxide So it's more to do with the crystal structure than the voltage
I wonder what's going to be coming out of the new CATL factory just down the road from Giga Shanghai? (Tesla and CATL do seem to be increasingly symbiotic?)
Jordan I have a question regarding your previous video "Next Gen Showdown" I'm curious how would you rate 1 to 10 the energy density of M3P with these next gen battery packs? Shenxing M3P might be a 10... Why?! Because it's electrolyte works so well in cold temperatures that it could work without any cooling whatsoever (and save on weight and volume) just like Mercedes EQXX which had 100kWh of LFP battery without cooling. Shenxing M3P could be a 10 battery in Rigidity, Energy Density, Cooling, Safety and Cost. A straight up the best battery pack combo to date. Maybe even the optimal solution in terms of thermodynamics?
If the CATL M3P battery is used in Tesla vehicles, it could lead to longer range EVs. The higher energy density of the battery could allow Tesla to increase the range of its vehicles without increasing the size or weight of the battery pack. This could make Tesla vehicles more appealing to consumers who are looking for long-range EVs.
The mission. Transition the world. The method (with respect to this) Build/ sell as many vehicles as possible, to fit the needs of the majority, as affordably as can be done, as quickly as possible. . Method. 1) Maintain an "Average driver miles per bladder" range. (Plus a percentage?) . 2) Provide ubiquitous, reliable charging. . 3) Provide as flat a charge rate as possible (not "peak then bomb") to enable the vehicle to repeat the exercise of charging sufficiently during the "driver empty/ fill" stop to repeat the same again. . (Rather than "peak 220+" for 5 minutes then bomb to 140... A steady 190kW) . Didn't Elon confirm recently that ±300 was a nice range? . "The higher density of the battery" will simply allow for more packs, in lighter, more efficient vehicles.... And more of those vehicles. . One day your prostate will thank you!!
3000-4000 charge cycle isn't a joke. for a normal person that is basically a lifetime right? even if he drives 300 miles daily 300 days a year. Basically transportation sector is about to get cheaper suddenly by atleast a factor of 10 with electric switch and 10 more when self driving will be made possible. Soon owning a vehicle will be outright stupid.
It depends if you factor in a calendar life. Calendar life can be much shorter. Yes, owning a vehicle will be stupid for most people, but owning several vehicles for a robotaxi fleet could be very profitable for the few 🤠
All long term investors needs to know is that there is continued progression with battery chemistry and it doesn't appear to be slowing down anytime soon. RIP ICE.
I don’t get why volumetric density is such a big deal. I’d rather lose an inch of headroom than be limited in range due to volume… I’d rather have a car that’s 2 inches taller. I’d rather have a hump going down the center of the car like most ICE vehicles. I’d rather loose the frunk. There’s literally so many options
You don't need to refer to me in the third person. No, because that's not how most auto companies choose which chem they'll use. And, only a fraction of customers care (it's a niche want to a passionate minority)
@@thelimitingfactor Well, I didn't mean any disrespect as I was addressing the other viewers the question. But thanks for replying in person. I guess it's a concern for ppl living in cold places :-)
excellent. no wonder I'm getting confused between CATL's M3P and LMFP back then. From these numbers, in my opinion, it is not worth it over LFP which also the reason they delayed this until now which supposed to be out Q4 2022 and I don't know of any Chinese EV that use these chemistries yet. The Model Y has a low lying fruit of using more cells by stuffing it under the front seats, increasing the range through LFP. A Long range Model Y with LFP is nice to have to use the nickel based batteries for increasing the production of the Semi and Cybertruck.
'.. with LFP is nice to have to use the nickel based batteries for increasing the production of the Semi and Cybertruck.' I don't agree. The durable austenite steel design of the Cybertruck would also require a durable battery even for house electricity buffering. I see good opportunities even for the cybertruck. Also it seems more safe re fire etc.
@@klauszinser agreed. I'd like LFP for almost everything except devices or hand held power tools. However, Tesla has never dropped a clue of using LFP ever on the Cybertruck, even Master Plan 3 indicates high nickel battery on the CT.
@@zodiacfml tesla investors day chart shows the base 300 mile range semi moving to lfp cells, so there's that! If the semi can use it, teslas 2 highest volume model's use it, the ct will also LIKELY use it in the base rwd trims whenever those get made?👍🏻
Law of unintended consequences... WHY do people buy NEW cars. For MANY (most?) people it is because they CAN, and they are BORED with their existing car - or they don't TRUST it anymore. I won't get into the reasons (think about it) but if you are in the second group - you will keep that M3 for a LOOOOOONG time.
Great breakdown as usual. Did you look into the claimed faster charging speeds, especially at lower temperatures? Supposedly an M3P pack would require less heating energy to charge at colder temperatures and should charge faster.
@@thelimitingfactor what chemistry do you think the latest catl pack is that can supposedly do 400kms back in 10mins? The one a few weeks ago raised all kinds of debate online. 🤔
IMO, most important thing of that is to have _safe_ battery that not burn your house down when you use it with 40% of initial capacity to about 25% (that is half of adequate capacity - from 30% to 80% of charge) so battery can still be used normally exceeding this life-cycle, that will make us real 10-20 years before actual need of recycling industry. Don't know what type will be better at this BUT it is theoretically available to refurbish batteries to renew it's cycle life. I don't have info about it (because nobody tested that before) but I think that should also renew cycle life 1-2 times before it become fully unusable because of shortings and will be teared to basic materials
I will not buy any Tesla model that sends profits to CCP. There are many other choices for EVs with non-Chinese content so that’s where my money is going for a new car every 3 years.
You crazy boi All of them are sending profits to China That's because China wasn't stupid enough to sit idly by on battery production They have a monopoly The proper people to take this up with are your politicians
@@nordic5490 Tesla is vertically integrated in USA and makes many of their own batteries and motors. There's always a Tesla model with minimal Chinese content. That's the one for me.
🤠 I think it's going to be a couple of years before they switch from nickel to something else for the 4680. No clue how long it's going to be before they switch to M3P or LMFP from CATL Anyhow, just wild guesses on my part for the most part.
Outstanding as always. Tesla’s focus is or should be focusing on cost and supply. Increasing range is not important anymore except for bragging rights.
Thanks man!
And Amen
And on charging network. The main reason that range has been an anxiety, is the areas with few or slow chargers, making road trips through them harder, or even unfeasible. And there are such areas in America, especially away from the interstates, or certain "charging deserts". A four hour trip that I took recently along a major US highway (non interstate), had no Superchargers, and quite slow other chargers, despite being a popular tourist corridor with world famous sites. The cars don't need more range, just more fast chargers.
I still want range.
More range for same weight means lower cost for same range. 320 mile rating is is more like 240 at 80 mph road trip. Which is stopping pretty often.. range is not solved for general purpose but it is close enough for the long range models.
We are managing well. But in -20 C snowy windy + winter tires range is affected ( it is for all cars ). In our area there are no Tesla chargers till we leave the Manitoulin on far end from us and drive to Espanola. So yes, range is important.
Very cool analysis Jordan, replacing nmc would be really big for Tesla and the energy transition. No kobalt issues either. I think you are the first to bring this idea to the public discourse, so awesome job. This would be a great application for modern pack architectures, using that leverage to be able to use cheaper LMFP.
Good point! I should have mentioned something about the cobalt, lol
@@thelimitingfactor
It's another example of chipping away at the myths.
You called it buddy! The battery in the new model 3 has not changed according to CarWow's expose. I think that Tesla is waiting for this battery to debut before they announce the new model 3 performance variation.
🤠🤜🤛
Once again, so useful and informational. Excellent job.
Thanks Jordan. We'll have to wait for more details from CATL in order to be sure about your estimates, but you're usually in the right ballpark. Battery durability / cumulative battery range is probably the most important figure for an end user, especially if range between recharges is enough for normal vehicle use.
For example, our EV has a range per cycle of at least 250 miles / 400 kilometres, in Summer and Winter, which is plenty for us, in England, so durability and possible cost of battery replacement become more interesting: The question, 'Will the battery outlast the useful life of the rest of the car?' is more relevant than vehicle range per cycle. Given our use case, it probably will. Being a senior citizen already, I'll likely stop driving before the car needs to be scrapped and recycled.
This is BY FAR the best channel for in-depth reporting on lithium batteries. So authoritative.
I'm always incredibly impressed with your videos Jordan. You cut through the hype and say it like it is. Excited more than ever for an affordable, long range EV future!
Me too and you're most welcome!
Excellent work as usual Jordan.
It is funny how various media seems to assume newer is better. Your data driven presentation methodology is what helps your channel to rise above the rest.
Keep up the great work.
LMFP with higher nominal voltage of 3.7V would also benefit from less risk of serie cell failure. ( higher voltage cell = less serie cells for the same voltage) = less failure probability due to a lower serie cell number.
I'm so lucky to have such smart viewers 💯
Yeah, but with that benefit comes a tradeoff: you gain lower electrolyte stability.
So.....invest in high purity Manganese?
@@crobinso2010 Not exactly going to help. Higher operating voltages usually come with lifetime tradeoffs, unless a SiC anode is involved.
Excellent analysis!! I always come away smarter!!!
For these chemistries that are CATL-specific, I wonder how much any automaker would want to rely on them given that they wouldn't be able to diversify their suppliers unless CATL was willing to license them to others.
Agree, but any OTHER automaker. If one makes an analogy with chips Tesla is willing to do the extra engineering required to maintain flexibility other lazier automakers may paint themselves into a corner. Tesla committed at battery day to buy to buy as many cost competitive batteries as they can so likely they have committed the engineering resources required.
Tesla has relied on CATL for years - both have thrived.
Particularly the voltage bump with the m3 chemistry...it's those hidden nugget we're so used to you digging up for us!!!
You never disappoint
Dropping the Jahn-Teller Effect like a bored Postdoc. Love it.
🤣💯
Pointing out errors from Electrek is always satisfying! 😁
😁
Hello from France and thanks for another excellent and well researched video. As an owner from new of a 2019 Kia e-Niro (Niro EV in the USA) I am interested in the questions of cycle life. The Niro has an NMC622 battery and I have read that cycle life is somewhere between 1,000 and 1,500 before >20% degradation sets in with this type of chemistry. But this is assuming charging to 100% every time from a low SOC which I certainly never do and I suspect most car owners never do either. My typical week is a 30% to 80% charge, only going to 100% occasionally as recommended in the owners manual, if not needing to do so for my use case. After 88,000 km and 4.5 years I am not seeing any range loss at all. Then again, perceptible loss of range and battery degradation are not the same thing, thanks to the (in this case) 3.5 kWh of buffer where the BMS never allows cell voltages to reach their theoretical maximum. I would appreciate your investigation of cycle life at different charging bands though I think the math on this is complex as there are so many variables.
It sounds like you understand this really well!
I will try to do a video on the effect of charge depth
I won't be able to give specific cycle life figures but I will be able to say what is best practice
Very nice video. I do believe Tesla should increase the range of their vehicles across the board just to satisfy consumer hunger, especially in harshers conditions, but for the vehicles that sell the most, keeping the range the same(or better in harsher conditions) would be best while lowering the price.
On the topic of LMFP, there are 3 ways that have likely been used to improve cycle life and conductivity of the hybrid cathode material: hierarchical structures(where multiple sizes of cathode particles are produced), very high conductivity carbon coatings and most importantly, core shell composites(where the carbon coated LFP material encapsulates the LMP core).
The two last innovations is what have likely allowed the manufacturing of high cycle life low resistance LMFP cathode material because as it turns out, LMP by itself has abysmal surface polarization(which ties itself in electrolyte dissolution and poor cycle life in high temp applications), but once that is a taken care of, a lot of the downsides of LMP just... dissapear :)
You're speaking my language here!
I still need to produce the LMFP science video.
That's already been reviewed by somebody who is developing the technology 🤠
Great video, I was hoping you would explain why Shenxing is not M3P.
What a timely video! And thanks for clearing up the differences, especially between LMFP and M3P, which I had assumed were the same thing. Ouick question- if using Zinc and Aluminum can stabilze the use of Magnesium in the M3P battery, could it be used in an NMC battery to stabilize the use of that chemistry?
Yes, it can 🤠
As always, very insightful and very useful info. You are fantastic at explaining difficult topics. Do you think the Bloomberg pack price of USD128 per kWH is correct. I would have thought with Lithium prices subsiding that it would already be substantially lower. Perhaps even closing in on USD100 per kWH at pack level for Tesla ?
They put out their report yearly...hold fire until december to see updates
Excellent take on M3P for long range cars.
Excellent content. This is solid investigative journalism.
😊🤜🤛
I’ve criticized you in the past, but man… your battery reporting has gotten really top notch. Thank you for your content!
🤜🤛🤠
It always has been top notch.
@@rogerstarkey5390 I have ridiculous standards and expectations. This channel exceeds them now.
Nobody does it better than you. Absolutely incredible!
😊
I'm waiting for LMNOP chemistry so I can spell it out for you
On the base of your information about the M3P Battery i don't thing Tesla is going to replace LFP battery with M3P. It could be offered as a long range model instead of MCA battery chemistry.
Great presentation as usual, but so i can understand a few fundamental things:
1. About how many pounds of lithium are in say a LFP battery for the Tesla model 3 standard range?
2 About how much does a pound of lithium cost on a commercial scale today?
3 If a batteries cell chemistry has a higher voltage than another type, I'd think generally if would have more watt hours per pound, but are the watt hours per pound generally linear to voltage while comparing different cell chemistries such as LFP, NCA etc?
Very exciting stuff. I thoroughly enjoyed your video and appreciate the amount of time you put into all of your videos. LMFP and High Lithium Manganese batteries hopefully will start to fill some gaps in the EV market as we transition to lower cost materials. I will be very interested to see what kind of market share we see in the future. Analysts predictions are all over the place. Probably because CATL has kept all the M3P info under wraps. I agree with you 100% about the chemistry because that's all the info we have, but would love it if CATL surprised us. I have seen some papers on blended LMFP and NCA cathode material and that might be the ticket, the best of both worlds. We will see when we see. Thanks Man.
Amen and great points!
I wanna use the M3P's in my M3-P to play MP3's at 3PM.
LOL!~
Amazing as always, Jordan, we appreciate the work you do! I have a few questions that I think we kind of know, but only vaguely. What does it mean for an element to be “unstable” in a battery chemistry? Those elements don’t like being in a battery chemistry, but why? What causes “degradation,” and what physically happens to the chemical structure during degradation? Of course the structure decomposes, but what causes it, and where do the elements go? Does all the iron clump together instead of staying in the crystal structure? I can’t remember if you answer these questions in your battery basics videos, but it would at least help me to understand those terms a bit better.
Thanks! I'll cover that in the LMFP science video 😀
Super nerd stuff, lol.
As for the last point: Degradation happens along a number of vectors, but the main one is that lithium ions react with stuff and can no longer cycle back and forth.
@@thelimitingfactor
Is Shirley still using your material?
What Donald Sadoway comments it's serious stuff, like Shirley, and the fact they are in the Labatory always underscores the information, which then gives us some gauging background to these presentations, thank you Jordan.
I'm kind of anxious about the Vanadium mining industry and the liquid metal batteries that would make remote industrial complexes more viable and effective as places to live comfortably decentralised, instead of Fly In Fly Out from congested cities.
Amazing job as always, thanks Jordan!
Fantastic and super interesting analysis Jordan! Excited to see what vehicles this pack makes it into. Considering a M3 Hyland if this has it! Hope you are well and congrats on 100k!
Thanks man!
i hope usa and europe start learning from their past mistakes in battery tech
Mass should be considered as well. E=1/2mV^2 so if 5% less weight, 5% more range. Just something to consider as well.
It's a good point, but I looked at it and it only made about a 1% difference in range. That's because most of the battery cells and packs are non-lithium materials.
Thanks! I was wondering if 66kWh (smaller battery) and higher energy density seems like a 4000lbs car could be reduced to 3500lbs car. But 1% isn’t enough to move that line.
As expected, well researched and brilliantly presented. Thankyou.
God with all this lithium talk we should call your channel The Lithium Factor
CATL continues to amaze me. Do you have any insight that accounts for their rapid innovation?
They made an enormous investment into scientists!
Business plan,
Early adoption
Investment (skills)
Enthusiastic and fully committed Government (If only!!)
Brilliant analysis never gets boring.
This is what Im talking about. If high-nickel cells go bye-bye and sodium-ion comes to replace LFP at the lower end of the market, we could see huge wins for both manufacturers and customers. Metals speculators wont like it, but there are plenty of other casinos open. Im honestly hoping lithium metal batteries wont catch on... Their prices will just be too volatile to really be worth pursuing.
Excellent explanation, Jordan. thanks!
One question, though. What about charge rate and cold weather performance? LFP seems to be "worse" than NCA in these categories....would LMFP (or M3P) be somewhere inbetween?
I think so! I haven't seen solid information, but it should be better than LFP.
I wonder if the new M3P chemistry does any better charging, and has less range effect in very cold weather than the current LFP chemistry? If it does that may be a bigger benefit than a 10% hypothetical range increase as a result of the higher volumetric energy density.
Should be better than LFP for cold whether but maybe not as good as high nickel?
Once again, Jordan, I am amazed by your research, understanding, and presentation of it all.
I'm a little surprised you didn't mention other claimed advantages of the M3P over LFP, such as cold weather performance.
Thanks because it has no impact on whether Tesla will use it
@@thelimitingfactor Thats fair, although it might be worthwhile to list off stuff like this in passing. Just to round out the discussion, and in case they are (very?)minor contributing factors.
Totally agree the Testing of the 4680 battery,s in the model Y I'm not sure if they are making any cars with them at the moment maybe they are just making 100 model Y cars a day with the updated cyber cell or if they all are being installed in the truck.
Don't confuse the developing internal technology (Cathode/ chemistry) with the Form factor ("4680") and tab technology.
.
Once the cathode manufacture is sorted (now?), then the "chemistry" is tweaked Up to and beyond the current 2170 (CT) configuration, we could see multiple double digit percentage improvement.
.
Remember, the concept of the 4680 is to:-
1) Reduce factory size by removing a huge amount of process.
.
2) Introduce a new design ("tabless") which overcomes the main drawback of the larger 4680 cell (resistance)
3) Combine the above to provide "more bang per can", then produce the "can" (cell) at high speed.
.
Result?
More "jellyroll" rapidly produced, packed into fewer cans.
If the rate of "cans" leaving the factory remains as before you still get....
A *Huge* increase in GWH (TWH!) from a small factory.
.
It's the (so far) "ultimate expression of "pile them high and sell them cheap"
.
As usual, Tesla concentrates as much on the "System" as the "components".
.
You ain't seen nothing yet.
Have we confirmed the battery pack chemistry of the current Model 3 LR 333 miles yet??
No, likely just LG nmc with no silicon
@@thelimitingfactor that’s my assumption too. Just strange that range went down.
The USA should take the chemistry from CATL as corporate espionage was a foundation of china for over a decade. Turnabout is fair play.
Everything is just perfect in this video. You're the best 👍
Because M3P battery voltage (3,7 V) is higher than LFP battery voltage (3,2 V), does it mean Tesla will recommend charging them up to only 80% on a daily basis like NMC batteries ?
We don't have enough information to know at this point
NMC is limited to 80% because the crystal structure starts cracking because it's a layered oxide
So it's more to do with the crystal structure than the voltage
Very cool analysis Jordan,
good job
Is it possible that the 4680 ramp has been slow because Tesla is also experimenting with LFMP cathodes with their own cell format?
No, it's because they need to solve the manufacturing first
@@thelimitingfactorCheers. And do you think they are considering iron based chemistries for near-future (2024-25) 4680 cells?
🙋♂️THANKS JORDAN AND ALL YOUR SUPPORTERS 🤗FOR TACKLING THIS…POSSIBLE CHANGE FOR THE FUTURE 💚💚💚
🙏
Thanks!
🤜🤛
Jordan is the Limiting GOAT
🐐
I wonder what's going to be coming out of the new CATL factory just down the road from Giga Shanghai?
(Tesla and CATL do seem to be increasingly symbiotic?)
A lot of people have mentioned it may just LFP.
Jordan I have a question regarding your previous video "Next Gen Showdown" I'm curious how would you rate 1 to 10 the energy density of M3P with these next gen battery packs? Shenxing M3P might be a 10... Why?! Because it's electrolyte works so well in cold temperatures that it could work without any cooling whatsoever (and save on weight and volume) just like Mercedes EQXX which had 100kWh of LFP battery without cooling. Shenxing M3P could be a 10 battery in Rigidity, Energy Density, Cooling, Safety and Cost. A straight up the best battery pack combo to date. Maybe even the optimal solution in terms of thermodynamics?
I like the shorter more frequent releases.
As long as they need to be
If the CATL M3P battery is used in Tesla vehicles, it could lead to longer range EVs. The higher energy density of the battery could allow Tesla to increase the range of its vehicles without increasing the size or weight of the battery pack. This could make Tesla vehicles more appealing to consumers who are looking for long-range EVs.
The main thing is reducing the cost of long-range EVs, not the ability to make a long range EV...
Does look and make a 500 mile range model 3 today
The mission.
Transition the world.
The method (with respect to this)
Build/ sell as many vehicles as possible, to fit the needs of the majority, as affordably as can be done, as quickly as possible.
.
Method.
1) Maintain an "Average driver miles per bladder" range.
(Plus a percentage?)
.
2) Provide ubiquitous, reliable charging.
.
3) Provide as flat a charge rate as possible (not "peak then bomb") to enable the vehicle to repeat the exercise of charging sufficiently during the "driver empty/ fill" stop to repeat the same again.
.
(Rather than "peak 220+" for 5 minutes then bomb to 140... A steady 190kW)
.
Didn't Elon confirm recently that ±300 was a nice range?
.
"The higher density of the battery" will simply allow for more packs, in lighter, more efficient vehicles.... And more of those vehicles.
.
One day your prostate will thank you!!
Thank you!
3000-4000 charge cycle isn't a joke. for a normal person that is basically a lifetime right? even if he drives 300 miles daily 300 days a year. Basically transportation sector is about to get cheaper suddenly by atleast a factor of 10 with electric switch and 10 more when self driving will be made possible. Soon owning a vehicle will be outright stupid.
It depends if you factor in a calendar life.
Calendar life can be much shorter.
Yes, owning a vehicle will be stupid for most people, but owning several vehicles for a robotaxi fleet could be very profitable for the few 🤠
Hi Jordan...can I ask you a question please.
Are you still holding Novonix stock?
I sold all my non-Tesla stock before moving back to the US, and even some Tesla stock for the down payment on my house
All long term investors needs to know is that there is continued progression with battery chemistry and it doesn't appear to be slowing down anytime soon. RIP ICE.
I don’t get why volumetric density is such a big deal. I’d rather lose an inch of headroom than be limited in range due to volume…
I’d rather have a car that’s 2 inches taller. I’d rather have a hump going down the center of the car like most ICE vehicles. I’d rather loose the frunk. There’s literally so many options
It's because most cars are built for the average person, and you clearly aren't the average person
You’re narration reminds me of the old “How It’s Made” show on the Discovery Channel! Methodical
ha! 😁 Thanks
Jahn-Teller, my old nemesis from Crystallography 1 course...
Does this battery use graphite as an aide?
Are we going to see phosphorus-oxide-tricarbide batteries? C3PO
😁
4:52 for accuracy 500/450 is an 11.1% energy increase (volumetric) not 10%.
True, I'm just a wild shoot from the hip cowboy sometimes 🤠😁
Did Jordan mention anything about m3p being better at handling winter conditions than LFP ? Thanks.
You don't need to refer to me in the third person.
No, because that's not how most auto companies choose which chem they'll use.
And, only a fraction of customers care (it's a niche want to a passionate minority)
@@thelimitingfactor Well, I didn't mean any disrespect as I was addressing the other viewers the question. But thanks for replying in person. I guess it's a concern for ppl living in cold places :-)
I finally understand the differences in chemistry and the nomenclature - thank you!
Should be as an anode
excellent. no wonder I'm getting confused between CATL's M3P and LMFP back then. From these numbers, in my opinion, it is not worth it over LFP which also the reason they delayed this until now which supposed to be out Q4 2022 and I don't know of any Chinese EV that use these chemistries yet. The Model Y has a low lying fruit of using more cells by stuffing it under the front seats, increasing the range through LFP. A Long range Model Y with LFP is nice to have to use the nickel based batteries for increasing the production of the Semi and Cybertruck.
'.. with LFP is nice to have to use the nickel based batteries for increasing the production of the Semi and Cybertruck.'
I don't agree. The durable austenite steel design of the Cybertruck would also require a durable battery even for house electricity buffering. I see good opportunities even for the cybertruck. Also it seems more safe re fire etc.
@@klauszinser agreed. I'd like LFP for almost everything except devices or hand held power tools. However, Tesla has never dropped a clue of using LFP ever on the Cybertruck, even Master Plan 3 indicates high nickel battery on the CT.
@@zodiacfml tesla investors day chart shows the base 300 mile range semi moving to lfp cells, so there's that!
If the semi can use it, teslas 2 highest volume model's use it, the ct will also LIKELY use it in the base rwd trims whenever those get made?👍🏻
👍👍
Law of unintended consequences... WHY do people buy NEW cars. For MANY (most?) people it is because they CAN, and they are BORED with their existing car - or they don't TRUST it anymore.
I won't get into the reasons (think about it) but if you are in the second group - you will keep that M3 for a LOOOOOONG time.
If no one bought new cars there would be no new used ones for the rest of us. 🙂
I've never considered becoming a patreon of any other account. If I win a lotto you're getting some of it.
🤣💯
Fantastic! Thank you!
Great breakdown as usual. Did you look into the claimed faster charging speeds, especially at lower temperatures? Supposedly an M3P pack would require less heating energy to charge at colder temperatures and should charge faster.
Should be better than LFP, but I'm not sure if it will be better than high nickel 🤠
@@thelimitingfactor
Hmmmm...
Now I need to re-read the CATL releases (not to be smug, but I wonder how many have? 😉)
Is the Shenxing battery an m3p battery?
LFP
@@thelimitingfactor Thank you very much indeed for clarifying that for me
Thanks!
You're most welcome!
I thought the main point of the M3P battery was the quick charging time?
No, it's not
The main challenge EV makers are facing is reducing costs.
@@thelimitingfactor what chemistry do you think the latest catl pack is that can supposedly do 400kms back in 10mins?
The one a few weeks ago raised all kinds of debate online. 🤔
@@4literv6 Likely a leading edge high energy LFP chemistry with a very high conductivity electrolyte.
@@neutronpcxt372 so not m3p based? More likely an lmfp derivative? Shame if they can't be combined imo.
@@4literv6 Likely neither. The possible electrolyte sharing depends on the voltagecathode interactions since it seems to be tuned for LFP use.
IMO, most important thing of that is to have _safe_ battery that not burn your house down when you use it with 40% of initial capacity to about 25% (that is half of adequate capacity - from 30% to 80% of charge)
so battery can still be used normally exceeding this life-cycle, that will make us real 10-20 years before actual need of recycling industry. Don't know what type will be better at this
BUT it is theoretically available to refurbish batteries to renew it's cycle life. I don't have info about it (because nobody tested that before) but I think that should also renew cycle life 1-2 times before it become fully unusable because of shortings and will be teared to basic materials
Excellent as usual. Thanks
I will not buy any Tesla model that sends profits to CCP. There are many other choices for EVs with non-Chinese content so that’s where my money is going for a new car every 3 years.
You crazy boi
All of them are sending profits to China
That's because China wasn't stupid enough to sit idly by on battery production
They have a monopoly
The proper people to take this up with are your politicians
@@nordic5490 Tesla is vertically integrated in USA and makes many of their own batteries and motors. There's always a Tesla model with minimal Chinese content. That's the one for me.
What about L M N O P . OMG
I had to reply it a few times. Thank you for your work.
😂🤜🤛
Shopping for my first Tesla, but now I feel compelled to wait for a M3 Long Range with M3P and 4680 structural pack. 🫤
🤠
I think it's going to be a couple of years before they switch from nickel to something else for the 4680.
No clue how long it's going to be before they switch to M3P or LMFP from CATL
Anyhow, just wild guesses on my part for the most part.
RWD 346 LW 423 miles carwow. wild to watch this at the same time!