VIN “number” when he said that, my mind went off an a tangent. VIN = Vehicle Identification Number. My pet peeve: technically the word “number” is being repeated back-to-back. Thank you all the content you produce. I love how informative this channel is
I think the cells in this pack are unlike the structural packs using 4680 cells. In the latter, cells are glued together and themselves bear structural loads. Blade prismatic cells are dropped into a strong tray. It's the tray that bears loads. The takeaway for me is that Tesla is truly agnostic about battery tech. They will take any cell that meets their standards and engineer a pack for it to get cars produced and into the hands of consumers.
For those saying "they can't (fully) solve the DBE process". . You've been given a clue by Tesla when they mention various iterations (upgrades) to the DBE machines. Do you think they simply install the "Mark 2" machine and throw the "mark 1" away? . They get the Mk 2 to speed, then UPGRADE the Mk 1, they then feed the "Canning process" plant with both machines. . I think they're up to version 6(?) . There's no reason they couldn't say "DBE Cathode production is slow, install 15 units, run them (reliably!) at 7% maximum while we develop the process" . It will take up some extra space, but you get the "cans" leaving the factory at the desired rate. As the process is refined, add (for arguments sake) a "30% production" machine, test it, modify 3 of the 15 old machines, test them, then move the others to a second and third canning line, modifying as required. Repeat until full potential is reached. In other words the machines don't have to go from zero to 100% in one step. . Now A BIGGER problem would be issues with the tab folding process. THAT could really slow development.
Isn't the 4680 battery production costs already equal to Panasonic 2170? If this is the case, then it's already a win. Scaling production further is simply further cost differentiation from the competition.
I try to think in terms of "cost of kWh (GWh/TWh) leaving *the factory* The form factor of the cell and cell chemistry is only part of the equation. . Tesla (Maxwell) asked:- 1) What makes the factory large? How can we remove steps that make it so? (DBE) . 2) What's the "sweet spot" in cell form factor considering speed of *capacity* production, material packaging? NOT cell quantity! (4680) . 3) Can we overcome previously unsolved challenges encountered when attempting to achieve that sweet spot? (Resistive heating/ Tabless) . As usual, they attempt to and eventually succeed in building an improved *system* rather than a slight modification. . Panasonic, etc, seem to have gone half way, retaining wet electrode production, not going "full tabless". They may achieve good interim results, but the full prize remains a small dry process factory producing higher efficiency high contact, low resistance tabless cells. . Once the crack the problems and reproduce "the system" it's a licence to print money.
FWIW, my recollection is that recently I read/heard a report that in house 4680 production was currently running a 150% the end of year number. As digging out the source is difficult at best, would appreciate a fact check.
Panasonic announced earlier today that the 4680 delivery window has been pushed to Q3 2024. Hard to see how Cybertruck gets to volume before 2025 if that's the case.
So your prediction is that Tesla doesn't figure DBE process on their 4680 for few years? I would say Tesla is on around 10-15 Gwh annual run rate on their 4680 by the end of this year. If cybertruck has about 150kwh battery Tesla would be able to make 70-100k CT:s from their own 4680 production without even ramping.
@@malax4013 Points taken. In my mind "volume" is 250K CTs/yr and I was also thinking that Model Y AWD would also be at volume, requiring between the two a total of ~55 Gwh/yr of 4680 cells. Although Texas' design goal is 100 Gwh/yr, the last update from cleanerwatt ~2 weeks ago based on Q1 earnings call info was that 1 of 4 lines in the Austin battery factory is commissioned and that line isn't running anywhere near 25 Gwh/yr. Best guess for current total Tesla combined run rate of 4680 between Fremont and Austin is ~6 Gwh/yr, so your numbers for end of year seem quite sober, given that Tesla could in theory get there by commissioning the second line.
@@omm5960 You mention "commissioning the (a) second line"..... They don't need a second COMPLETE line. They can break the process down to. Cathode material production. Anode material production . "Jellyroll" production. "Canning" process (including tab folding) Cell closing (cap/ welding) Testing. . If one part of the process is slow, double up on that section. . Slightly cumbersome, but gets the job done. As that process is refined, the spare capy can be transferred to another line. Organic growth.
@@rogerstarkey5390 I used the definite article when referring to the second line for the same reason that Drew Baglino used it during the Q1 earnings call.
@@omm5960 I think the problem with 4680 is that there is still problems with using the dry process for anode and cathode. I would see faster ramp in future when they figure all the chokepoints and problems. Then you can just build more lines that can ramp quite fast. But I don't know how many more problematic things there is figure out before you can really start ramping. I think it's end of this year or maybe first half 2024. Then we can see the real ramp of 4680. About CT production. I think it's going to be: 2023:5-10k 2024: 50-100k 2025: 250-300k Maybe max out somwhere between 300-400k
interesting how the unit production of battery wattage capacity can be broken down into a per worker formula. It allows for interesting competitive comparison. Which formula of battery cell is more producible per worker hour; can become a gambler's paradise? This would, no doubt, produce rapid innovation.
Funny to think back a couple of years when Tesla first unveiled their 4680 batt., how most everyone thought that was the silver bullet of batteries and would be in EVERY Tesla at this point.
Any manufacturer could easily start producing larger cells like the 46-80. I'm pretty sure that what's holding up the ramp is getting all the kinks out of the DBE process for the cathode. Once they get that sorted out, they'll start installing 46-80 lines as fast as they can get there hands on the equipment.
Blade batteries are not “structural” in the same way Tesla has defined. Elon has repeatedly spoken out against blade batteries as a form factor appropriate for vehicles. I’m skeptical these are blade batteries for those reasons. Blade batteries can twist. They are simply too long to be structural. Think: honeycomb for a weight-efficient structural design. Blades are the opposite of structural being long and thin.
@@rogerstarkey5390 you must think I’m brand new. The blade battery is a prismatic structural LFP battery, 3 years BYD has had them in cars and many more years in their Busses. They got the idea from their busses because they were so reliable and last for hundreds of thousands of miles. Byd has had heat pumps in every EV for years as well because they’ve seen the benefits for many years. Now their 8 in 1 transmission is being copied by VW and soon many more I guess. They are miles ahead that’s why Elon copies what they do and then fanboys claim it’s a Tesla idea
Very disappointing info released by Pana's earnings call "[Commercialization of 4680 cells] Mass production rescheduled to begin during 1H FY3/25 to introduce performance improvement measures that will further enhance competitiveness".
I strongly disagree with Teslas success not being tied to their battery ramp: While in the short time they may be able to continue with suppliers, it is not their automotive business that determines unltimate success. As discussed on battery day: For them and their mission to succeed, battery costs have to come down and battery production needs to ramp to whole new levels. Teslas 4680 project was the key innovation for that. If they succeed with this one, they will transform the world and it doesnt even matter if they build 30mio cars themself or other manufacturers build them with Teslas batteries as the whole world will become electric. Making a 4680 (with dry electrode and using continious production process) should be much faster and even cheaper than producing the smaller formats and for any given capacitiy you need fewer (of the larger) cells. Placing ~800 cells in a pack is much easier and cheaper than to place ~4000 in a pack... and so on. Also for energy storage the world requires TWhs of capacity which only seems feasible by using a larger format, reducing part count. Reliable and cost effcient energy storage is key for mass adoption of renewables, so also key for solar business. However, until now its dissapointing. Ramp is slow, cell performance below expectations and the few vehicles so far equipped with the new cells are neither cheaper nor lighter and have even less range.
2 problems I see in this news. No 1, byd itself is a car maker and competitor to Tesla, and other Chinese car makers don't buy battery from byd. No 2, byd cars caught fire vidoes are not few even with heavy censor around chinese social media, will byd provides Tesla better quality batteries than their own cars?
Thanks for the detailed info and careful predictions. I would like to see Tesla reach it’s goals for 4680 production, and reliability (which won’t be known right away). It would be interesting to hear more about 4680 R&D efforts at Tesla, Panasonic, and LG Energy.
Cybertruck is at least a full year away from any significant ramp and will likely never pass 150k/yr, and definitely not before 2026. So if Tesla this has issues supplying enough 4680 cells for that slow ramp only instead of the Truck, Semi, Berlin + TX Model Y (as well as the upcoming robotaxi), they might be in trouble, overcommitting and all. Good idea to diversify tho, Panasonic just announced their 4680 delay and considering Tesla might be working on theirs for over 5 years with few packs per day to show for might lead to significant delay to the next gen vehicle that takes structural and simple made father. I mean the fact that Berlin isn't doing 4680 perhaps just to stockpile pack or ever send back to the US is concerning. They've spent billions on that part of that factory + equipment.
@@surferdude4487 Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries don't need Cobalt, Manganese or Nickel, like Lithium-Ion. They also don't catch on fire. They can also handle up to twice as many recharge cycles.
Drew really dropped the ball on 4680. Two years behind schedule. Probably time to find new leadership. Glad they found a way to work around it anyways.
Tesla is the "big dog" among customers. They'll get the best price out there. Tesla is also a great "foot in the door" for CATL etc to get first sales, then factories in the US, bypassing tariffs. Its mutually beneficial.
I find this disappointing... if I order a model Y, how do I know what I'm getting? Some 3rd party junk batteries with slower charging, capacity, higher weight?
If you don’t trust Tesla to provide you with a good battery in its cars, then don’t buy one; I suspect someone else will, and they will be perfectly happy with the battery they get.
VIN “number” when he said that, my mind went off an a tangent.
VIN = Vehicle Identification Number.
My pet peeve: technically the word “number” is being repeated back-to-back.
Thank you all the content you produce. I love how informative this channel is
I think the cells in this pack are unlike the structural packs using 4680 cells. In the latter, cells are glued together and themselves bear structural loads. Blade prismatic cells are dropped into a strong tray. It's the tray that bears loads.
The takeaway for me is that Tesla is truly agnostic about battery tech. They will take any cell that meets their standards and engineer a pack for it to get cars produced and into the hands of consumers.
You really have no clue.
@@rogerstarkey5390 you really have no specificity.
Well, watching Serpentza on RUclips, I have some reservations about BYD battery quality.
Cylindrical batteries in EVs are obsolete , I wish to see Tesla Model Y LR+ with 90kWh LMFP battery from BYD or CATL
LFP is a good chemistry
Assuming this is right (BYD) Imagine the conversation at Toyota? 😂😂
Very well done! I think your assumptions are all right on the money and very well laid out.
Thanks!
The other 4680 manufacturers will be using wet process cathodes (and anodes?)
For those saying "they can't (fully) solve the DBE process".
.
You've been given a clue by Tesla when they mention various iterations (upgrades) to the DBE machines.
Do you think they simply install the "Mark 2" machine and throw the "mark 1" away?
.
They get the Mk 2 to speed, then UPGRADE the Mk 1, they then feed the "Canning process" plant with both machines.
.
I think they're up to version 6(?)
.
There's no reason they couldn't say "DBE Cathode production is slow, install 15 units, run them (reliably!) at 7% maximum while we develop the process"
.
It will take up some extra space, but you get the "cans" leaving the factory at the desired rate.
As the process is refined, add (for arguments sake) a "30% production" machine, test it, modify 3 of the 15 old machines, test them, then move the others to a second and third canning line, modifying as required.
Repeat until full potential is reached.
In other words the machines don't have to go from zero to 100% in one step.
.
Now
A BIGGER problem would be issues with the tab folding process.
THAT could really slow development.
I believe Panasonic have significantly delayed their 4680 plans, by a full year.
How do i determine which battery my 2023 long range 1:45 model Y has
lges nmca 21700 (china and germany). same or 4680 if from US.
Your predictions while sounding well thought out, never come to fruition.
Now it did
Isn't the 4680 battery production costs already equal to Panasonic 2170?
If this is the case, then it's already a win. Scaling production further is simply further cost differentiation from the competition.
I try to think in terms of "cost of kWh (GWh/TWh) leaving *the factory*
The form factor of the cell and cell chemistry is only part of the equation.
.
Tesla (Maxwell) asked:-
1) What makes the factory large? How can we remove steps that make it so? (DBE)
.
2) What's the "sweet spot" in cell form factor considering speed of *capacity* production, material packaging? NOT cell quantity! (4680)
.
3) Can we overcome previously unsolved challenges encountered when attempting to achieve that sweet spot? (Resistive heating/ Tabless)
.
As usual, they attempt to and eventually succeed in building an improved *system* rather than a slight modification.
.
Panasonic, etc, seem to have gone half way, retaining wet electrode production, not going "full tabless".
They may achieve good interim results, but the full prize remains a small dry process factory producing higher efficiency high contact, low resistance tabless cells.
.
Once the crack the problems and reproduce "the system" it's a licence to print money.
FWIW, my recollection is that recently I read/heard a report that in house 4680 production was currently running a 150% the end of year number. As digging out the source is difficult at best, would appreciate a fact check.
Addendum: Cleanerwatt estimates current production at 1.092M versus 1.302M estimated at 150% of eoy.
What ever happened to Panasonic 4680 battery production. Any updates?
Watch the video (about 8 minutes in).
Thanks you for your wisdem and vision 🙏🙏🏆🏆🏆
Panasonic announced earlier today that the 4680 delivery window has been pushed to Q3 2024. Hard to see how Cybertruck gets to volume before 2025 if that's the case.
So your prediction is that Tesla doesn't figure DBE process on their 4680 for few years?
I would say Tesla is on around 10-15 Gwh annual run rate on their 4680 by the end of this year. If cybertruck has about 150kwh battery Tesla would be able to make 70-100k CT:s from their own 4680 production without even ramping.
@@malax4013 Points taken. In my mind "volume" is 250K CTs/yr and I was also thinking that Model Y AWD would also be at volume, requiring between the two a total of ~55 Gwh/yr of 4680 cells.
Although Texas' design goal is 100 Gwh/yr, the last update from cleanerwatt ~2 weeks ago based on Q1 earnings call info was that 1 of 4 lines in the Austin battery factory is commissioned and that line isn't running anywhere near 25 Gwh/yr. Best guess for current total Tesla combined run rate of 4680 between Fremont and Austin is ~6 Gwh/yr, so your numbers for end of year seem quite sober, given that Tesla could in theory get there by commissioning the second line.
@@omm5960
You mention "commissioning the (a) second line".....
They don't need a second COMPLETE line.
They can break the process down to.
Cathode material production.
Anode material production .
"Jellyroll" production.
"Canning" process (including tab folding)
Cell closing (cap/ welding)
Testing.
.
If one part of the process is slow, double up on that section.
.
Slightly cumbersome, but gets the job done.
As that process is refined, the spare capy can be transferred to another line.
Organic growth.
@@rogerstarkey5390 I used the definite article when referring to the second line for the same reason that Drew Baglino used it during the Q1 earnings call.
@@omm5960 I think the problem with 4680 is that there is still problems with using the dry process for anode and cathode. I would see faster ramp in future when they figure all the chokepoints and problems.
Then you can just build more lines that can ramp quite fast. But I don't know how many more problematic things there is figure out before you can really start ramping. I think it's end of this year or maybe first half 2024. Then we can see the real ramp of 4680.
About CT production. I think it's going to be:
2023:5-10k
2024: 50-100k
2025: 250-300k
Maybe max out somwhere between 300-400k
If the Geman MY body in white have NO floors in them, Then the blade battery is indeed structural.
I don't yet know if that is the case, or how "structural" these battery packs are, but I hope so.
@@Cleanerwatt If they are throwing carpet and bolting seats directly to the battery, Then it is a structural one.
Nope it’s not structural lol!!! How strong is the housing of those cells to be even but together!? I’ve seen the cells testing at BYD
@@dclpgh not necessarily
Be careful John, not the first time that TeslaMag reports “invented” news
interesting how the unit production of battery wattage capacity can be broken down into a per worker formula. It allows for interesting competitive comparison. Which formula of battery cell is more producible per worker hour; can become a gambler's paradise? This would, no doubt, produce rapid innovation.
Funny to think back a couple of years when Tesla first unveiled their 4680 batt., how most everyone thought that was the silver bullet of batteries and would be in EVERY Tesla at this point.
Any manufacturer could easily start producing larger cells like the 46-80. I'm pretty sure that what's holding up the ramp is getting all the kinks out of the DBE process for the cathode. Once they get that sorted out, they'll start installing 46-80 lines as fast as they can get there hands on the equipment.
Not really "most everyone". I remember a lot of sceptical comments back then after battery day but the hype was much louder.
Funny to think you still don't understand either the concept or the requirement.
Makes much more sense for Tesla to concentrate 4680 production in the US due to the tax credit there. Berlin is not a priority for that.
Is not the production, it's the PROCESS that's being refined.
.
There's also the fact(?) that the machines are produced in Germany.
I hope we'll figure out cheap SSB mass production to 2030
Blade batteries are not “structural” in the same way Tesla has defined. Elon has repeatedly spoken out against blade batteries as a form factor appropriate for vehicles. I’m skeptical these are blade batteries for those reasons. Blade batteries can twist. They are simply too long to be structural. Think: honeycomb for a weight-efficient structural design. Blades are the opposite of structural being long and thin.
That makes sense. I guess we will see.
Blade battery is only the best battery on the planet
@@bydman5320 Indeed!
@@bydman5320
"Blade" is a form factor.
As for chemistry, I'm sure numerous companies might hold other opinion.
@@rogerstarkey5390 you must think I’m brand new. The blade battery is a prismatic structural LFP battery, 3 years BYD has had them in cars and many more years in their Busses. They got the idea from their busses because they were so reliable and last for hundreds of thousands of miles. Byd has had heat pumps in every EV for years as well because they’ve seen the benefits for many years. Now their 8 in 1 transmission is being copied by VW and soon many more I guess.
They are miles ahead that’s why Elon copies what they do and then fanboys claim it’s a Tesla idea
Very disappointing info released by Pana's earnings call "[Commercialization of 4680 cells]
Mass production rescheduled to begin during 1H FY3/25 to introduce performance improvement measures that will further enhance competitiveness".
I strongly disagree with Teslas success not being tied to their battery ramp: While in the short time they may be able to continue with suppliers, it is not their automotive business that determines unltimate success. As discussed on battery day: For them and their mission to succeed, battery costs have to come down and battery production needs to ramp to whole new levels. Teslas 4680 project was the key innovation for that. If they succeed with this one, they will transform the world and it doesnt even matter if they build 30mio cars themself or other manufacturers build them with Teslas batteries as the whole world will become electric.
Making a 4680 (with dry electrode and using continious production process) should be much faster and even cheaper than producing the smaller formats and for any given capacitiy you need fewer (of the larger) cells. Placing ~800 cells in a pack is much easier and cheaper than to place ~4000 in a pack... and so on. Also for energy storage the world requires TWhs of capacity which only seems feasible by using a larger format, reducing part count. Reliable and cost effcient energy storage is key for mass adoption of renewables, so also key for solar business.
However, until now its dissapointing. Ramp is slow, cell performance below expectations and the few vehicles so far equipped with the new cells are neither cheaper nor lighter and have even less range.
4680 dbe is a boondoggle. I suspect they'll be quietly de emphasizing battery production as time goes by.
You realise that "4680" and "DBE" are neither the same thing, nor "joined at the hip"
.
Range?
How long is a piece of string?
@@rogerstarkey5390 6"
Structural battery pack also means they are using giga casting front & back so production is much cheaper and faster.
2 problems I see in this news. No 1, byd itself is a car maker and competitor to Tesla, and other Chinese car makers don't buy battery from byd. No 2, byd cars caught fire vidoes are not few even with heavy censor around chinese social media, will byd provides Tesla better quality batteries than their own cars?
Which model BYD cars?
How old were they?
Were blade cells fitted?
Thanks for the detailed info and careful predictions. I would like to see Tesla reach it’s goals for 4680 production, and reliability (which won’t be known right away). It would be interesting to hear more about 4680 R&D efforts at Tesla, Panasonic, and LG Energy.
Cybertruck is at least a full year away from any significant ramp and will likely never pass 150k/yr, and definitely not before 2026. So if Tesla this has issues supplying enough 4680 cells for that slow ramp only instead of the Truck, Semi, Berlin + TX Model Y (as well as the upcoming robotaxi), they might be in trouble, overcommitting and all.
Good idea to diversify tho, Panasonic just announced their 4680 delay and considering Tesla might be working on theirs for over 5 years with few packs per day to show for might lead to significant delay to the next gen vehicle that takes structural and simple made father. I mean the fact that Berlin isn't doing 4680 perhaps just to stockpile pack or ever send back to the US is concerning. They've spent billions on that part of that factory + equipment.
Didn't age well did it?
@@rogerstarkey5390 how many Cybertrucks in customer hands again?
Biggest problem with the 4680 is that Lithium-Ion is passe'.
Batteries are evolving so quickly, you're damned as soon as you commit to something.
Sodium batteries still have a way to go.
@@surferdude4487
Notice the switch to LFP?
@@3DThrills What do you think the "L" in LFP stands for?
@@surferdude4487
Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries don't need Cobalt, Manganese or Nickel, like Lithium-Ion. They also don't catch on fire. They can also handle up to twice as many recharge cycles.
@@3DThrills All true except that it is still a lithium ion battery.
no LG chem
... God... always... ...
I’m a little suspicious about your assumptions.
Drew really dropped the ball on 4680. Two years behind schedule. Probably time to find new leadership. Glad they found a way to work around it anyways.
So you mean replacing Musk? Or is Drew's fault that Elon made totally unrealistic promises at battery day?
Tesla margins will continue to drop if they have to buy other companies batteries.
Tesla is the "big dog" among customers.
They'll get the best price out there.
Tesla is also a great "foot in the door" for CATL etc to get first sales, then factories in the US, bypassing tariffs.
Its mutually beneficial.
They’ve always have used other companies batteries
Tesla has a long tradition of delivering the impossible late. We'll see the ramp of 46-80 just as soon as they iron out DBE for the cathode.
First?
I find this disappointing... if I order a model Y, how do I know what I'm getting? Some 3rd party junk batteries with slower charging, capacity, higher weight?
If you don’t trust Tesla to provide you with a good battery in its cars, then don’t buy one; I suspect someone else will, and they will be perfectly happy with the battery they get.
@altosack 😭😭😭😭 but please daddy 👶🍼
4680 is already obsolete
Nice joke paid hater.
I very .uch doubt you understand either the concept or the implications.
@@rogerstarkey5390 NMC 4680 Jeff Dahn century battery chemistry