Yes !
Likewise, total real battery cost, both production and retail, is an issue.
As I have mentioned, older lion batteries, marine app/packaging, tend to retail == 700$/kWh.
Current technologies in AGM /whatever tend to retail about the same 700$ / kWh, for equivalnt usable power, but with 30-50-70% less total lifetime.
So AGM nameplate x 130-150 %, or lead x 150-190% nameplate , vs lion tech, is approx the same usable power as lion.
But the best lion technologies last 5-10-15-20 years, arguably, in heavy use.
Tesla / pana is the only one with data/apps/proof on this, so far, but they do have a vast amount of users/data supporting this.
And, perhaps, good-to-excellent lion may last even more, in seldom-used state.
In theory, by spec, by chemistry, lion NMC should not degrade over time, in any significant manner, if left at 80-90%,soc, +/-5%, in good stable thermal conditions.
This is what 90-95% of recreational boats/yachts use, or actually do, in the real world.
There is no real data, yet, on this.
We don´t know, no-one knows, how the best lion cells degrade over time in non-use conditions.
We do know that low-moderate-heavy use, with thermal conditioning, over 3-4-5 years, has 3-4-5% degradation, under moderately common heavy demand (much more than typical boat use for a big pack).
Usable battery capacity/life tends to be 93-96%, trending to the middle, over 3-4 years.
! Critically, the loss of capacity clearly lessens over time.
For some reason .. and no-one has any reason why-
Current trends point to Tsla batteries lasting 15-25 years to 80% capacity, which has/had traditionally been seen as the end-of-commercial life level.
! Critically, the few Tesla batteries extremely heavily used (Tesloop), extremely heavily charged, upto 300.000 miles use in == 2 years have suffered no major degradation, around the 4-6%, and vastly less than the expected 20% / 300.000 miles / 500.000 km lifetime limit expectation.
Tech development is a critical issue.
Lion batteries improved == 9% y/y for 16 years, in capacity/cost/size/longevity.
This is approx 50% better every 5 years.
About 2 years ago, Tesla made headlines, and more significantly, lots and lots and lots of money, for Panasonic, in their lion-cell division with a Tesla-special "secret-sauce" 18650-c cell.
History.
Pana bought some big assets from others in japan / et al to make lion cells, with a major market oversupply, about 4-5 years ago.
Along came Tesla, offered to buy multiples of the capacity, given a "good deal" - and a good deal was struck.
Much to the surprise of Pana, the deal was honoured, the deal was expanded, the deal became important, Tsla became imprtant, the lion division became important, and..
the lion division is now arguably the most important asset in Pana.
- for current sales/market value/income and for near-term future cash sales.
The near-defunct Pana lion division became a major profit center for pana, 2015 +/-1 y, with a stratospheric growth curve, happening right now.
At 100 $ /kWh (my 2018 projection/E), for 1 GW, = 100 M$ in sales, to Pana.
2016, Tsla did 6 GWh, likely == 140$ or so.
=> 840 M$.
Almost certainly this number will double, on average, 2017, 2018, 2019, and very likely 2020, 2021.
And that is if tesla does not succeed in their ambitions plans, nut only delivers half to a third, on time.
This means 1.6 B$ 2017 for Pana,
3.2 B$ - 2018
6.4 B$ - 2019
12.8 B$ - 2020.
Those numbers mean the pana lion business is almost-certainly the most valuable *single* vertical integrated process-production-tech line in the world.
Nothing else comes even close.
Compare to any refinery, chip fab, cargo terminal, steel mill, PV plant, anything, and the non-polluting, non-hazardous, high-margin pana/tsla line is vastly more profitable by gross margin, % margin, ROIC, ROE, market recognition, anything.
Who anywhere makes potential 12-20B$ turnover (2-3 years from now), 1.6B$+ this year, from one plant, anywhere, with real (10%) margins (vs a few % on fabs, refineries, etc) with a non-toxic asset growing 50-100% y/y, with almost-certain market dominance for 4-8 years ?
It is highly likely the pana/tsla cell stuff will grow to == 100B$ turnover for pana, by 2023-2024, +/- 1 y, 62 times.
It is very unlikely anyone else will be anywhere near in terms of capacity.
It is quite likely some new tech/chemistry/physics revolution will greatly increase the ramp up.
The customer who will buy/license any major new stuff is pana/tsla, almost certainly.
JJust my opinion..
but I grew up with this...
And it is very profitable for Pana.
And it is very profitable for Tsla.
Those characteristics are best met these days by lithium batteries. If the pure-lead batteries were the best option for longevity, energy density and cost, the EV car manufacturers would use them. And yet they don't use them despite their claims of high power, fast recharge and high cycle life. I wonder why that is.
-MT
-- -hanermo (cnc designs)
Posted by: Hannu Venermo <gcode.fi@gmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (23) |
No comments:
Post a Comment