Half of Tesla's New Cars Produced Use Cobalt-Free LFP Batteries (electrek.co) 70
Tesla confirmed that nearly half of all its vehicles produced last quarter are already using cobalt-free iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries. Electrek reports: Over the last few years, CEO Elon Musk has said multiple times that Tesla plans to shift more electric cars to LFP batteries in order to overcome nickel and cobalt supply concerns. Iron phosphate (LFP) batteries, which don't use nickel or cobalt, are traditionally cheaper and safer, but they offer less energy density, which means less efficient and shorter range for electric vehicles. However, they have improved enough recently that it now makes sense to use cobalt-free batteries in lower-end and shorter-range vehicles. It also frees up the production of battery cells with other, more energy-dense chemistries to produce more longer-range vehicles.
Tesla already moved its Standard Range Model 3 and Model Y produced in China to LFP cells. Last year, Tesla also announced it is "shifting to Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry globally" for "standard range vehicles." It confirmed that the automaker planned to switch the Model 3 Standard Range, also known as Model 3 Rear-Wheel-Drive, being produced in the Fremont factory to LFP cells, too.
Now with the release of Tesla's Q1 2022 financial results, Tesla confirmed that nearly half of all vehicles produced are now using LFP batteries: "Diversification of battery chemistries is critical for long-term capacity growth, to better optimize our products for their various use cases and expand our supplier base. This is why nearly half of Tesla vehicles produced in Q1 were equipped with a lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery, containing no nickel or cobalt. Currently, LFP batteries are used in most of our standard range vehicle products, as well as commercial energy storage applications. As a result of our energy efficient motors, a Model 3 with an LFP battery pack can still achieve a 267-mile EPA range." This would mean that roughly half of Tesla's volume comes from Model 3 Rear-Wheel-Drive, the cheapest Tesla vehicle, and the Model Y Standard Range, which is only offered in China.
Tesla already moved its Standard Range Model 3 and Model Y produced in China to LFP cells. Last year, Tesla also announced it is "shifting to Lithium Iron Phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry globally" for "standard range vehicles." It confirmed that the automaker planned to switch the Model 3 Standard Range, also known as Model 3 Rear-Wheel-Drive, being produced in the Fremont factory to LFP cells, too.
Now with the release of Tesla's Q1 2022 financial results, Tesla confirmed that nearly half of all vehicles produced are now using LFP batteries: "Diversification of battery chemistries is critical for long-term capacity growth, to better optimize our products for their various use cases and expand our supplier base. This is why nearly half of Tesla vehicles produced in Q1 were equipped with a lithium iron phosphate (LFP) battery, containing no nickel or cobalt. Currently, LFP batteries are used in most of our standard range vehicle products, as well as commercial energy storage applications. As a result of our energy efficient motors, a Model 3 with an LFP battery pack can still achieve a 267-mile EPA range." This would mean that roughly half of Tesla's volume comes from Model 3 Rear-Wheel-Drive, the cheapest Tesla vehicle, and the Model Y Standard Range, which is only offered in China.
Re: We need to thank all the progressives ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Shouldn't we also thank all the PayPal users for making it possible for Musk to buy Tesla in the first place?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If Tesla owners were just a bunch of progressives, I would expect Tesla to just be as large as Toyota's Prius unit. There are conservatives, and moderates who get Tesla's as well. Because, they are cars that people actually like. Fast Cars, Decent Size, Great Safety, Lot of utility, strong charging network, cool tech, and you don't have to pay high gas prices.
Progressives have a lot to point out for reasons not to get Tesla's if they were so politically inclined. Musk's libertarian rants, fights with Bid
How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:2)
Re:How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:5, Informative)
In comparison to Li-Ion?
LFPs last longer.
LFP ageing and cycle-life [wikipedia.org]
Re:How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:4, Informative)
3000 to 10000 cycles. So in a EV doing 2 full charge-discharge cycles a week, the battery will last at least 30 years. 3000 cycles of 200 miles each = 600k miles. Or up to 3 times more if you take care of it and only use-it between 20% and 80% SoC.
Acceptable.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I hope the next step is to make the rest of the car sufficiently robust to last 30 years. I am looking at you, plastic parts that go brittle in 10 years.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
We recently discovered (And discussed here on Slashdot) that we just found a way to increase lithium cycle life by charging as slowly as possible to 100%, then fast discharging to 90%. This reattaches islanded lithium to the cathode, restoring capacity. So we can expect even more cycles out of the same batteries in future EVs...
Re: (Score:2)
then fast discharging to 90%
I wonder if they could practically do that on a cell by cell basis. Then it could be done online slowly cycling through the cells without the user noticing.
On the other hand, fast discharging an entire EV battery to 90% is going to be impressive, depending on where they put the power.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if they could practically do that on a cell by cell basis. Then it could be done online slowly cycling through the cells without the user noticing.
In packs which have per-cell BMS it is completely practical. If you designed the system with effectively two packs, you could easily discharge one to the other as part of the charging process. Just alternate which half is charged first.
On the other hand, fast discharging an entire EV battery to 90% is going to be impressive, depending on where they put the power.
If you did it at quick charging stations with their own battery banks, it would make it more practical. Or maybe even using a flywheel. It doesn't even have to be in a vacuum chamber ala Beacon Power's offerings, because it only has to hold the energy a short time (like a sta
Re:How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, LFPs are lithium-ion subcategory, just like NMCs that most non-Chinese automotive implementations use. I.e. they're both lithium-ion.
Recyclability of LFPs is about as awful as NMCs, that is you get no lithium out of them with current wide spread method of pyrolysis, where you burn most of the battery to recycle a few specific more valuable metals. You'll probably hear green brainlets tell you that we have other means of recycling lithium batteries that allow us to extract lithium. As usual, they're fundamentally wrong. We have a few small scale experimental plants using hydrolysis to extract more materials, including at least some lithium, but that is an upcoming experimental process with little meaningful capacity online and most up to scale projects that have any chance of competing with large capacity of installed pyrolysis plants aren't going to be getting online this decade. Brainlets will point you to the current two or three major pilots that are being built and that are hoped to get online this decade. What they're missing is that total capacity even if everything goes perfect is just a tiny portion of massive total installed capacity of pyrolysis plants, which are overloaded with work already as stream of used up batteries coming in is growing rapidly and therefore we're adding way more pyrolysis plants than hydrolysis plants because pyrolysis is a proven method that works and recycling lithium-ion batteries is not a problem for 2030s. It's a problem now.
Energy density per weight is also awful in LFPs compared to NMCs. This is why Tesla mainly uses them in China, where people are used to getting worse products than Westerners, and most of non-Chinese automotive implementations are based on NMCs, as high energy density is of critical importance in automotive batteries.
Points where LFPs are better than NMCs include a bit better life span, notably better safety (much less risk of that fuck you fire two days after the crash that NMCs are infamous for due to higher thermal runaway point).
LFPs are about the same in terms of performance that you can extract out of them and cost compared to NMCs.
Re:How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:4, Interesting)
Funnily enough, ads for used Teslas in Denmark prominently display "MiC" to signify that it is the more desirable China model and not the less desirable American one.
How does that square with your diatribe about China getting worse products?
Re: (Score:2)
Not made in China. Chinese. As in aimed at Chinese market.
Re: How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:3)
The Shanghai factory are where all non-North American Model 3/Ys are sourced from. So thatâ(TM)s South-east Asia, Australia, New Zealand, Middle East and Europe. The Berlin factory will gradually take on Model Y for Europe, thought the Model 3 will continue to come from Shanghai.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't know that Chinese standards for internal market are different from standards for external even for the same factory production?
Because that was well documented decades ago. To the point where Chinese routinely avoid domestic market products if they can afford it, because they know it's subpar products.
Re: (Score:1)
Sure. But realities of Chinese culture and Chinese market in general have remained the same. So while quality on Chinese markets has gone up alongside everyone else's markets, their markets are about as much behind everyone else for the exact same reason.
Re:How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I get it from reality. I've no idea what company you mention runs, but my guess is that you're citing one of the hydrolysis candidates. Great. They'll have that at scale in 2030s.
Like I noted, we need a scaled up solution now. Not in a decade.
Re: How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:2)
But we donâ(TM)t have a pile of dead batteries now. We wonâ(TM)t need such a process at scale for a decade.
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose one concern is that it's hard for us to know that a projected timeline to 'at scale' is actually going to be achieved. Plenty of small-scale proof of concepts that express great confidence when soliciting investment end up failing to achieve scale.
Re: (Score:2)
I see you have no idea of the state of lithium battery recycling issues of today, and don't want to do even a cursory google search to dispel your ignorance.
Re: (Score:2)
Address the parent's concluding point, rather than conveniently defining scale as "something more than we have now, regardless of whether there's a supply of batteries which require pyrolysis or hydrolysis processing."
Also, the barrier to scale is not as hard as you th [volkswagenag.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Baseless assumption that is required for your statement to make sense: BEVs are the only/main source of trashed lithium ion batteries.
Re: How do LFP batteries degrade (Score:3)
Baseless [energybrainpool.com] you say (Fig. 1). Now how about providing an actual response rather than running away from your own claims?
Re: (Score:3)
We only started making Li-Ion batteries at giga scale a couple of years ago. They last about 10 years in the car, and then about another 15 as stationary storage. So we'll need scaled up recycling in about 23 years.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you looked at that magical device in your pocket yet? Or that magical device with a screen and a keyboard that folds into a flat shape that you can put in your bag? You know, two things that billions of people have?
Try opening one and seeing what's powering it when it's not connected to mains.
Keep digging those holes Luckyo (Score:1)
Keep digging those holes Luckyo, maybe you'll find some lithium...
Have you noticed how tiny that device is compared to a car...
Learn where most of the lithium is actually used [statista.com]
And how much more dominant it will be in the future than it already is now.
Re: (Score:3)
Most batteries in circulation right now should not be recycled, they should be re-used. Just because they only have 80% or 70% capacity remaining doesn't meant they aren't useful, and many have much more than that left in them.
As for Made in China Teslas, they are better than the Made in America ones. Bjorn Nyland tested them:
https://youtu.be/by_e1CSqz70 [youtu.be]
https://youtu.be/zE0bxyPuEno [youtu.be]
If you check Tesla ads in Europe you will see "MiC" (Made in China) on some of them. It's a selling point.
Re: (Score:2)
> Energy density per weight is also awful in LFPs compared to NMCs
The Chinese-made Model 3 is only about 120kg heavier than the US-made version... range and acceleration are the same.
+7% weight for better battery life, lower cost, more ethical/environmentally conscious materials, and improved safety, without sacrificing performance? Not entirely sure your "[Chinese] people are used to getting worse products than Westerners" argument is holding up here.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine being so fundamentally ignorant of basics of automobiles as to think that a consumer sedan adding 120 kilos without strenthening the chassis, adjusting the wheels and brakes... has no impact on performance because "acceleration is the same".
That round thing that you use when you drive. Have you tried turning it yet? Are you aware of the concepts of "inertia" and interaction between "mass" and "gravity"? Or are you one of the idiots who genuinely believed that Tesla's truck is going to happen, becaus
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine being so fundamentally ignorant of basics of automobiles as to think that a consumer sedan adding 120 kilos without strenthening the chassis, adjusting the wheels and brakes... has no impact on performance because "acceleration is the same".
You think 120kg (265lbs) is enough to require those changes? Please think again. That like adding 1 more largish person to the car, that's already designed to seat 5 people plus weight in the trunk. If the car can't handle that extra weight, then there are some real problems with the engineering. I really doubt performance is affected all that much. Besides, if you really care about performance, would you really be driving a sedan? Yeah, I wouldn't either because that's what sports cars are for.
Re: (Score:2)
>You think 120kg (265lbs) is enough to require those changes?
I don't think. I know. I maintain my own car and have done so since youth and I was a car enthusiast since I was about six and went under a car to help my dad fix ours for the first time. The problem between "adding better components" and "compensating for weight from better components" is eternal in automotive world.
120 extra kilos always sitting on the drive train means that your standard loading of the same amount of people is [as designed +
Re: (Score:2)
> I maintain my own car
Stopped reading there. Anyone who thinks bragging about how they do their own car repairs makes them more credible to talk about automotive engineering is dangerously unqualified to discuss automotive engineering. That's like saying you know better than a distinguished dental surgeon because you remove your own teeth.
Just consider that +/- 120kg is well within normal variation just for different trim levels of most models, and no manufacturer needs to make significant modification
Re: (Score:2)
>Stopped reading there.
And therefore missed the arguments that fully pre-empted the stupidity you ejaculated on your keyboard after that line.
Re: (Score:2)
You didn't actually make any arguments, just spouted nonsense.
The Model 3 curb weight ranges from 1660kg to 1930kg. That's 270kg difference just in spec options, and none of the mods you claim are essential are provided.
The idea that the vehicle is designed so close to the breaking point that adding what is essentially one moderately fat person to it would ruin the performance is fucking moronic.
Sorry you can't maintain your obvious irrational-hate-boner for Tesla, I guess.
=Smidge=
Re: (Score:2)
>And Tesla has a very long and well documented record on royally fucking up when it comes to correctly speccing critical car parts to the correct vehicle weight. Down to the massive embarrassment that was Tesla Semi, the vapourware semi truck tractor unit that cannot be made to work because it's too far overweight for the purpose. Something that should not have passed the first engineering cycle, because provisioning weight is among the first things automotive engineers do with designing a new vehicle.
Wo
Re: (Score:2)
I thought you were some kind of self-proclaimed expert in automotive engineering because you change your own oil or whatever - yet you can't seem to tell the difference between a car and a truck.
I've never heard of an issue with the Tesla Semi's weight. Provide a source for that claim so I can review it.
Also you might be thinking of Nikola's failed battery-electric semi truck. While the Tesla Semi has been delayed - mostly because they've been trying to meet demand for their cars, rather than expanding into
Re: (Score:2)
Re-reading that, I realize maybe the snark doesn't quite come across...
To clarify, the snark is that Nikola, who famously paid $125 million to the SEC to settle charges of fraud and (rightfully) caught a LOT of shit after some poorly conceived publicity production, has actually been producing and selling electric trucks; barely beating Tesla to market. I think they've delivered 30 vehicles to date?
Anyway, poorly executed attempt at snark/sarcasm on my part. mea culpa.
=Smidge=
Recycle Li [Re:How do LFP batteries degrade] (Score:3)
True, but not completely relevant.
Once again: there isn't much of an industry to recycle Li out of electric car batteries because there simply haven't yet been enough Li batteries reaching end of life to justify recycling, and lithium has not been a bottleneck in the supply chain for electric cars at the production rates so far.
https://usafacts.org/articles/... [usafacts.org]
This may change in the future, but when lithium becomes economically attractive to recycle, past experience shows that processes to do so will be de
Re: (Score:2)
Baseless assumption that is required for your statement to make sense (notably you're the second person with this strange view): BEVs are the only/main source of trashed lithium ion batteries.
Re: (Score:2)
Lithium weight in a 2 A-hr cell phone battery: 0.6 grams
Lithium weight in a Tesla Model S battery: 63 kg
number of cell phone batteries you'd have to recycle to make the lithium in one Tesla battery: 105,000
Questions?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. How many thousands Tesla cars are there that already need recycling their batteries vs how many billions of mobile phones and hundreds of millions of laptops that have about 10-20 times the size of the battery?
Because you see, my dear product of shitty math education, when you multiply numbers, it's not just zeroes at the end of one of the numbers that matter. Zeroes on the end of the other number are equally relevant.
Re: (Score:2)
It's all about economics.
How easy is it to gather a hundred thousand cell phone batteries to recycle? Say, for example, it costs maybe ten cents of manpower to gather each one. Lithium price last year averaged $10 per kilogram. What is your profit margin recycling lithium batteries, at 0.6 grams each?
Show your work.
(ten cents each is probably ridiculously low, but it's an easy number to multiply).
Patent expiration (Score:5, Informative)
The last patent for LFP technology expired this month. Good riddance.
Advancing production battery tech (Score:1)
One of the things I like about Tesla, it seems like over time they have actually advanced production battery technology - vs. so many other awesome promises you hear about batteries that will be around in ten years, but then never seem to get produced. I'm sure some aspects of them gradually get folded into newer batteries but it just feels like Tesla is applying newer battery tech faster than other companies (in part I'm sure because it matters a lot more to them).
CALB, Winston (Score:5, Interesting)
We use LiFePO4 (LFP) in most of our products because of the low fire risk compared to other chemistries.
They have around 2000 cycles to 80% DOD. You still need to make sure you don't over charge (>3.7v) or over discharge (2.8v)
CALB and Winston have been making the prismatic cells for a long time and they are very robust. We have had very few failures.
I remember when I was researching them 8 years ago, I came across a Chinese promo video, and when it comes to the 'nail test' he pulls out a 44 and shoots the cell! Hah, what a shock!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same. As long as they aren't horribly abused by people not properly setting up the BMS (Which ones do you use? We've been using Orion) they work great. Though it's kind of a pain to plan or retrofit some systems because of the absurd discharge/charge acceptance rate these have compared to AGM or lead acid. And those class T fuses aren't cheap.
Re: (Score:3)
They are surprisingly robust. Here's a video of some LiFePO4 cells being abused: https://youtu.be/KrYkQ5vnV9s?t... [youtu.be]
Even when they fail they don't go up like fireworks, like some other chemistries.
And lithium does not have supply problems? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
0.1% of the Earth's crust is Lithium. That's as close to infinite as you can get until you start shooting significant quantities of it out into space.
Re: (Score:2)
And you can recycle lithium, because even once a battery has reached end of life the lithium inside is still there.
Recycling burnt dinosaur squeezings is significantly harder...
=Smidge=