Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Power Technology

LG Hopes To Make New Battery Cells For Tesla In 2023 In US or Europe (reuters.com) 82

Posted by BeauHD from the supply-and-demand dept.
LG's battery division is planning to build advanced battery cells for Tesla's electric vehicles in 2023 and is considering potential production sites in the U.S. and Europe, according to Reuters. From the report: Tesla has not yet agreed to a deal that would expand LG's role in its supply chain beyond China, one of the sources said. Last week, the Korean battery maker told Korean reporters it plans to build a U.S. factory where it would make battery cells for EVs and energy storage systems, to cater to U.S. and global customers as well as startups. It did not identify potential customers then, but one of the sources said it was hoping Tesla would buy the batteries.

In September, Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk announced an ambitious plan to develop new cells in-house, prompting suppliers like LG and Panasonic to embrace the unproven technology or face risks of losing a major customer for the longer term. The Korean supplier, a unit of LG Chem, has made samples for the so-called 4680 large-format cylindrical cells, said the sources, who asked not to be identified. It faces technological hurdles and the challenge of scaling up production, people familiar with the matter said.

"LG plans to produce 4680 cells at its new U.S. factory. They plan to build a new 4680 cell line to supply Tesla's Giga Berlin in Europe," one of the sources said, adding Spain is one of candidate for the European plant. One of the sources said LG has never mass produced such large-format cylindrical cells, although increasing battery capacity is the correct call. "Tesla is a major customer, and LG can take risks," another source said. He said LG has not yet secured orders from Tesla for the 4680 cells, still under development. For now, Tesla is sharply boosting orders for 2170 cells used in the Model 3 and Model Y vehicles made in China, the source said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LG Hopes To Make New Battery Cells For Tesla In 2023 In US or Europe More

LG Hopes To Make New Battery Cells For Tesla In 2023 In US or Europe

Comments Filter:

  • QuantumScape

    • Quantum Leap

    • I'm a tad confused now. I thought I'd seen people here on Slashdot say that Tesla had much advanced battery tech and that's one of their big assets, something that will help them win now that the big car companies have decided to go electric.

      Now I'm reading they just order batteries from Panasonic and LG. Their secret battery tech is Alibaba?

      • Tesla did a lot of R&D on the 4680 cell and maintains a "proof of concept" internal manufacturing line, now they'll work with manufacturing partners to produce those cells in high volumes. Just like TSMC manufactures chips that are designed elsewhere, and Foxconn assembles iPhones that are designed elsewhere.

        But, you know, feel free to invest your life savings in shorting TSLA stock. That always works out.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by rtb61 ( 674572 )

          Probably a little early to short but make no mistake the other manufacturers with their greater reliability and long term resale as a result, and going to give Tesla quite the whooping. Just the way it is, people will try the others, those that can afford Tesla's can afford to experiment and they will. Add to this and the other manufacturers will undercut Tesla prices at the low end by quite a lot, and at the low end, that means Chinese electric car manufacturers and they will kick Tesla's ass.

          Tesla was co

          • Your signature line describes what you posted perfectly. None of it makes sense in the slightest.

          • People have been predicting that Tesla will get stomped by competition for years. However, the competition only produces pathetic EVs. My six year old Tesla is better in every way than any of the current competition. Tesla is ten years ahead and accelerating away.
            Batteries, Superchargers, performance, range, self driving, etc. ICE manufacturing is asleep at the wheel. They are the walking dead.

            • ICE manufacturing is asleep at the wheel. They are the walking dead.

              I'll be buying a new, non-electric BMW shortly, and it won't be my last. Rumors of their death are greatly exaggerated.

            • That means a lot from americans who havent a clue what a nice european car looks like because they buy those crappy other american cars.

              • I've bought European cars for the past 30 years. My Tesla is the best car I have ever owned in every way. Much better than any other car. I'm sticking with Tesla. No more European cars. They are expensive, noisy, and don't last.

                • > I've bought European cars for the past 30 years. My Tesla is the best car I have ever owned in every way. Much better than any other car. I'm sticking with Tesla. No more European cars. They are expensive, noisy, and don't last.

                  Yeh and your opinion is so objective, and you couldnt give a single reason why its better. Strange how you skipped the part about terrible finish, like gaps between panels that would make a 70s car cry.

                  • Well, my car doesn't have any odd panel gaps or finish problems. (Odd that this would be your main criteria in selecting a car.)
                    I did mention economy, low fuel cost, no maintenance, and incredible performance (much better acceleration and handling than my Porsche).

                    • > (Odd that this would be your main criteria in selecting a car.)

                      When did i say it was my main criteria, please quote where i said main and criteria or any variants.
                      I guess the fact you would say such an outrageous lie shows the lack of integrity that you have, a bit like Elons complete and utter exaggerations aka autopilot etc.

                      > I did mention economy, low fuel cost, no maintenance,
                      Money money money - people like you give whores a bad name.

                      and incredible performance (much better accelera

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by mspohr ( 589790 )

                      Have you considered professional help to sort out your confusion?

                    • Bravo, ad hom. Is life too hard for you. Was that your answer for everything in school ?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Rei ( 128717 )

          This is not correct. Tesla plans to produce its own cells in high volume, with no manufacturing partners. They also plan to purchase all the cells they can get their hands on from third parties, for years to come, as they expect to continue to be cell-limited for years to come. This was all made abundantly clear at Battery Day.

          Cell suppliers have to provide cells in Tesla's 4680 format - although said cells can use any chemistry or manufacturing process that the supplier chooses. In general, one can expect

      • The thing is, it's not as simple as you seem to think.

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]

        Even with their own current battery factories and their future ones, they still can't manufacture enough cells for their cars. The fact that they switched to a new cell size and a new production method means other companies have to build new lines for this special Tesla-only cell.

        They could also gamble and continue producing only the current cells that Tesla use right in some of their cars

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Rei ( 128717 )

          Or for those who can't be bothered to watch the Battery Day video or your videos, there's also tweets.

          Link [twitter.com] - "We intend to increase, not reduce battery cell purchases from Panasonic, LG & CATL (possibly other partners too). However, even with our cell suppliers going at maximum speed, we still foresee significant shortages in 2022 & beyond unless we also take action ourselves."

          Link [twitter.com] - "Suppliers. We’re only doing high energy nickel ourselves, at least for now. Also, maybe the presentation wasn

          • Simple: anti-Tesla haters will never bother checking up on facts so they assume the most simple and stupid reasons to bash them.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        That is just the cells. You need quite a bit more to make it a well-functioning, reliable battery pack. Loading control, discharge control, temperature monitoring, cell modelling, cell balancing come to mind and there will probably me bore things that have a significant impact on battery life, available capacity, behavior at different temperatures and battery levels, etc.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Rei ( 128717 )

        I'm a tad confused now. I thought I'd seen people here on Slashdot say that Tesla had much advanced battery tech and that's one of their big assets, something that will help them win now that the big car companies have decided to go electric.

        Now I'm reading they just order batteries from Panasonic and LG. Their secret battery tech is Alibaba?

        If you had watched battery day, you would have learned that for the next several years, Tesla plans to continue buying everything it can get its hands on from third par

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by SpiceWare ( 3438 )

          Also, I guess it's inevitable that most people (including the press) won't understand this, but: 4680 is not "a specific cell", or even "a specific chemistry". It's a format.

          I find it strange that people have such a hard time comprehending this. For those who don't, just think of the 4680 as a large AA battery. The size of the AA is predefined so you can interchangeably use them in your devices, but the chemistry varies with different tradeoffs: shelf-life, capacity, rechargeable or not, cost, etc.

      • Its always been that way or did you buy the musk sauce ?

  • An inconenvient truth about LiON (Score:3)

    by RemindMeLater ( 7146661 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2021 @06:48PM (#61142376)
    From what I've read no recycled lithium from a battery has ever reached the purity necessary to be reused in a new lithium battery. Instead the reclaimed lithium is used for things like grease. In contrast the lead in lead-acid batteries is 100% recyclable. They'll need to close the loop on the lithium side too.

    • If they let them out of their cages, they're really dangerous.

    • Re:An inconenvient truth about LiON (Score:4, Informative)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2021 @07:58PM (#61142534)
      According to this article a lot of recycling companies are popping up but they are limited by the availability of batteries, since mass adoption is just ramping up and the batteries last a long time.

      https://spectrum.ieee.org/ener... [ieee.org]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      They will if it becomes necessary. It is a question of cost. Also, lithium grease is needed and an item that gets used up, so this may not actually be a problem as it is.

    • From what I've read no recycled lithium from a battery has ever reached the purity necessary to be reused in a new lithium battery.

      Citation needed.

      Lithium recycled from a battery is vastly higher purity that the evaporite deposits you shovel out of the ground, which are typically 1-2% lithium carbonate.

      Lithium has little recycling because, until recently, there just wasn't the need for it. Even now it's ten dollars a kilogram, not very expensive,

      • and this is precisely why EV batteries will be an environmental disaster, because nobody will care enuff to recycle.

        • You think the 8 kg of lithium in the batteries of an electric car will be "an environmental disaster", and you ignore the other 1,500 kg of the car? What's so special about the Li?

          Everything that isn't recycled is a problem. There's nothing at all special about the lithium.

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by Rei ( 128717 )

            But, but... lithium chloride is a whopping 4-6 times [westliberty.edu] more toxic than sodium chloride [fishersci.com], so that must mean it's horrid, right? Best stick to good ol' nontoxic gasoline, started with your lead-acid battery, ignited by no-environmental-impact precious metal spark plugs and exhaust catalyzed by appeared-from-thin-air platinum catalytic converters, in a car body made of steel from China, the mining and smelting of which I'm assured is zero impact to the environment or human health. ;)

            Amazing how people knee-jerk

            • > But, but... lithium chloride is a whopping 4-6 times [westliberty.edu] more toxic than sodium chloride [fishersci.com], so that must mean it's horrid, right?
              Of course its toxic, best be avoided.

              > Best stick to good ol' nontoxic gasoline,
              Gasoline is bad as well, but all things compared battery components are many times worse. Both are bad one just happens to be worse than the other, and saying EV cars are great and green is completely dishonest, because all things compared its actually worse t

      • Lithium can also be recycled an unlimited number of times, but no recycling technology exists today that is capable of producing pure enough lithium for a second use in batteries.

        Source [batteryuniversity.com]

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The standard for when a battery is "end of life" is when it only holds 80% of its rated capacity. In fact a lot of people are happily driving older cars with less capacity left than that.

      Batteries are made up of multiple cells. Each cell degrades slightly differently due to manufacturing differences. Often a battery can be renewed by replacing the worst cells in the pack.

      Even the worse cells can still hold some energy, so can be re-used in less critical applications like home battery packs that supplement r

    • In ten years Lithium and the other components probably wont be wanted anyway as there will be a new type of battery. Batteries dont stay the same over ten years.
      Its intersting that big mouth Musk himself has never said EV cars are green, it would be interesting if any manuf made this statement so they could be tested and sued in court for false advertising.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Whibla ( 210729 )

        In ten years Lithium and the other components probably wont be wanted anyway as there will be a new type of battery. Batteries dont (sic) stay the same over ten years.

        Still flogging that dead horse, I see.

        Why don't you take a look at these projected future battery chemistries [batteryuniversity.com] and, other than the one sodium battery which I mentioned as a possible in a previous article, tell us what they all have in common.

        As to this, "EV batteries will be an environmental disaster, because nobody will care enuff (sic) to recycle", from one of you other posts in this thread, no doubt that explains why a number of global companies are gearing up to do exactly this (source: conversation with

        • > Why don't you take a look at these projected future battery chemistries [batteryuniversity.com] and, other than the one sodium battery which I mentioned as a possible in a previous article, tell us what they all have in common.

          Thanks for supporting the very point iVE BEEn making . What will happen in ten years time when nobody wants lithium because sodium or something else is the big thing ?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Whibla ( 210729 )

            Thanks for supporting the very point iVE BEEn making

            Good grief, is that what you took from my post?

            Let's break this down shall we:

            Your original statement: "In ten years Lithium and the other components probably wont be wanted anyway as there will be a new type of battery"

            From the page, entitled "Future Batteries", I linked to: "Battery development typically takes 10 years" and "Here are some of the most promising experimental batteries: <snip>description of 1 sodium and 6 lithium battery chemistries<snip>." In other words in ten years time these

            • > From the page, entitled "Future Batteries", I linked to: "Battery development typically takes 10 years" and "Here are some of the most promising experimental batteries: description of 1 sodium and 6 lithium battery chemistries." In other words in ten years time these types of battery are those that we'll be seeing in commercial use.

              You confirmed that batteries will be different in twenty years and that means the batteries of today will have significantly lower value in terms of recycling, a bit like

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by Whibla ( 210729 )

                You confirmed that batteries will be different in twenty years and that means the batteries of today will have significantly lower value in terms of recycling, a bit like plastic and recycling sounds good but basically doesnt happen thats why plastic is everywhere.

                I confirmed that batteries will still be using Lithium in 10 years time. Whatever else you think you can take away from my statement is totally on you.

                Nice attempt to move the timeline from the one you originally stated though. It doesn't make your original statement any less incorrect however.

                I just don't know how to answer this question any more clearly: This hypothetical situation you're asking about will not happen.

                Why is this so hard for you to understand?

                What utter bullshit, 20 years go LIPOS were unknown, rechargable (sic) batteries were very different and technology today is moving faster and faster. The batteries of 10 or 20 years in the future will be very different. There has been some talk of hydrogen for example. Sure H has many weaknesses but the point is H or Na could become big things or maybe they wont we dont (sic) know. Nobody can predict the future and to do so is extreme arrogance.

                Fair enough. So not only are you completely ignorant of the real world history of batteries (LiPo batteries were 'discovered' in the 1980's, over 30 years ago, and commercialised in the 1990's), seemingly unaware of t

                • > Nice attempt to move the timeline from the one you originally stated though. It doesn't make your original statement any less incorrect however.
                  Whether i use 10 or 20 years, the facts are there will be millions of toxic worthless batteries. Stop playing bullshit lawyer crap and understand that they will be pollutting your home planet aswell.
                  > So not only are you completely ignorant of the real world history of batteries (LiPo batteries were 'discovered' in the 1980's, over 30 years ago, and comm

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by clovis ( 4684 )

        Do these forthcoming battery chemistries come from new elements we're adding to the periodic table? Otherwise, I'm betting we will have more of the same batteries with minor tweaks.

        • > Do these forthcoming battery chemistries come from new elements we're adding to the periodic table? Otherwise, I'm betting we will have more of the same batteries with minor tweaks.
          And i supposed you knew that NIMH would appear, or LIPO, or LIFE ?

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by clovis ( 4684 )

            > Do these forthcoming battery chemistries come from new elements we're adding to the periodic table? Otherwise, I'm betting we will have more of the same batteries with minor tweaks.

            And i supposed you knew that NIMH would appear, or LIPO, or LIFE ?

            This is the assertion I objected to: "In ten years Lithium and the other components probably wont be wanted anyway as there will be a new type of battery. Batteries dont stay the same over ten years."

            Nope, I didn't know ahead of time that those specific technologies were coming out. But I do know these battery technologies are tweaks of what had already existed and have been around for decades. So yeah, the new batteries will be much like what we already have, Lithium isn't going away anymore than lead-acid

            • > Nope, I didn't know ahead of time that those specific technologies were coming out. But I do know these battery technologies are tweaks of what had already existed and have been around for decades. So yeah, the new batteries will be much like what we already have, Lithium isn't going away anymore than lead-acid has gone away.
              LIPO and LIFE are not tweaks of NIMH they are very different. Those differences at scale when there are zillions of em, is a real environmental impact. Tech moves very quickly wh

  • I just want to know when I can buy them for racing vehicles.

  • ever more batteries (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jodka ( 520060 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2021 @07:44PM (#61142486)

    Electric vehicles are about 3% of the market now, therefore, as they advance to 100%, battery production must grow by at least about 33 times. So the "building new battery factory" aspect of that report should be expected and, frankly, is not so interesting. The location news is no great surprise either, since putting the battery factory an ocean away from the electric car factory which it supplies would have some obvious downsides.

    On the other hand, new reports on the 4680 are more intriguing. Musk made a lot of spectacular claims about the 4680 in his battery day talk. Those about optimizing cell volume, moment of inertia, tab-less design, and the structural load-bearing role were clear and convincing. Then when he got to battery chemistry and improved anode and cathodes, which have always been the most complex and difficult part of battery design, that part was very brief, opaque and hand-wavy. Nothing was really explained. That left a question mark about how much of the improved performance was merely projected and depended on chemistry not yet proven or manufacturing methods yet to be developed.

    So, seems a hopeful sign now that LG made a trial batch and is interested in large-scale production. Still, not completely convinced about those 5x energy, 6x power and 16% increase in range values Musk gave until I see it in a production vehicle. That would push the range of the model 3 long range from 353 miles to about 409 miles. By the way, the 5x number is, apparently, per cell and not a volumetric comparison. It is a silly comparison; Of course a bigger battery would store more energy.

    • Re:ever more batteries (Score:4, Insightful)

      by earl pottinger ( 6399114 ) on Tuesday March 09, 2021 @08:22PM (#61142594)
      The thing is that not that many years ago, BEV were less then 1% of the market and the ICE fans were saying batteries were going nowhere. Then recently it was still at 2% of the market and still the ICE fans said the BEVs were reaching their limits. Now it is at 3% of the market and different battery companies are starting to spend big bucks to get into the BEV and energy storage markets. The more money there is to make, the more research and production we will see.

      • Indeed. The larger the potential profit the more money people will be willing to put into solutions. There's more than one way to carbon neutral transportation and so I expect money to go into those solutions as well. One promising solution is carbon neutral synthesized hydrocarbon fuels. Fuels that will work in existing vehicles unmodified, will close the carbon loop, free nations from the political problems of importing petroleum, and other benefits.

        I keep seeing people missing the point. The goal is

        • "The same goes for oceangoing ships."
          Oceangoing ships live almost all of their life unencumbered by land-based regulations (i.e. outside territorial waters). If countries will forbid usage of heavy fuel propulsion (in their territorial waters, i.e. 12 miles out - outside of that oceangoing ships already use crude oil), then tugboats will take over.
          I think ammonia is too toxic to be used for fuels - it was already eliminated from refrigeration units for just this reason.
          As for carbon neutral cars, the hydrog

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by jbengt ( 874751 )

            I think ammonia is too toxic to be used for fuels - it was already eliminated from refrigeration units for just this reason.

            Ammonia is all wrong for fuel because it contains nitrogen instead of carbon, so burning it creates nasty nitrogen oxides.
            Ammonia is still commonly used as a refrigerant in industrial systems, though not in air conditioning systems because of safety concerns should there be a leak. (There are always leaks) With the issues of ozone depletion and global warming, ammonia might become

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Whibla ( 210729 )

          I believe the BEV to be a fad, something that will fall out of fashion when (not if) someone comes up with a carbon neutral fuel that allows the ICE to compete with the TCO of the BEV.

          I broadly disagree with your conclusion, though I can see how you arrive at it. Certainly there is likely to be a role for a number of ICE vehicles into the foreseeable future - but only for those roles that BEV's cannot fulfil.

          There are three obvious advantages that BEV's have over ICE's, although current legislation has already limited one of those, that of noise. Engine noise pollution is an issue within residential areas, especially in cities, but could be significantly reduced with the phase-out of IC

    • It's more complicated than that...
      Will new vehicles be sold with more batteries than current ones? (i.e. small city-only cars with 100+ km of range versus Model S Extended Battery Pack or even Tesla pickup truck?)
      Will the longer longevity of electric cars reduce the number of new cars produced?
      Will the need to replace batteries in existing vehicles "make a dent" into this production number?
      Will car ownership decrease?
      Will other uses for batteries (electricity storage, ...) start to eat up batteries?
      Will ele

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      There is another reason to put the factory in Europe. Rules of Origin mean that if more than a certain percentage of a car is made of parts from outside the EU it has to pay import tariffs. Making a major component like the battery in the EU really helps.

      Cylindrical cells are not going to be the dominant type used in cars, they will be reserved for high price performance vehicles of the type that Tesla makes. Pouch cells are cheaper, more energy dense and easier to handle. They also weigh less and consume f

    • Then when he got to battery chemistry and improved anode and cathodes, which have always been the most complex and difficult part of battery design, that part was very brief, opaque and hand-wavy. Nothing was really explained. That left a question mark about how much of the improved performance was merely projected and depended on chemistry not yet proven or manufacturing methods yet to be developed.

      That stuff is the special sauce that differentiates one battery to another. I wouldn't give the hard details on that stuff out, either.

  • Spend the night with me and you just stay happy! I am waiting for you here ==>> gg.gg/oel32

Slashdot Top Deals

"If there isn't a population problem, why is the government putting cancer in the cigarettes?" -- the elder Steptoe, c. 1970

Close