CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)
catl.com@dang, not only this heading is editorialized in a blatantly fanboyish manner, but there is absolutely no need to do so as CATL is literally the largest battery manufacturer and is supplier to almost everyone.
At least people start to recognize that Tesla batteries actually are sourced from third parties, e.g. Panasonic and CATL. Baby steps.
Why the "(Tesla Supplier)" remark, which is not in the original article?
CATL is the largest battery manufacturing company, supplying battery for almost every high-end devices.
>> CATL is the largest battery manufacturing company, supplying battery for almost every high-end devices.<<
CATL's primary product is NCM and followed by LFP. Their NCM development is more or less stalled at NCM811 while other leaders NCMs like LG (NCMA), SKI (NMCA) have moved out further. Also BYD's LFPs are known to be superior to CATL's for higher C-rates, faster charging, and safety.
Founded in 2011. It’s mind-bending how they grew so fast..
Limitless government subsidies can do wonders.
Definitely not limitless. Subsidies are only provided to get an industry to grow up. As they grow up and can increasingly fend for themselves, subsidies become progressively smaller.
There are a ton of other sectors where subsidies don't help nearly as much as the govt hopes. Until the US sanctions hit, subsidies for the semiconductor industry only had very limited effect.
>There are a ton of other sectors where subsidies don't help nearly as much as the govt hopes. Until the US sanctions hit, subsidies for the semiconductor industry only had very limited effect.
Probably some sectors are easier to grow if it only involves copying something that already exists, and outscaling/outpricing everyone else. Then this is (in most cases) is a purely money+organization problem.
But if it isn’t just copying/outscaling/outpricing issue, like replicating ASML’s EUV lithography, then yes, we have a problem.
70% of the profits are generated by older processes, not sub-14nm, and so are perfectly well serviceable using mature DUV litography which is much easier to "copy". But even there, subsidies did not yield much progress.
On the other hand, new energy vechicles are... well... new. There is no mature ecosystem to copy, a lot of things have to be newly developed. In this sector, subsidies have been massively successful.
The problem is mainly one of market pressure, not one of technical ability. Chinese semiconductor companies wanted the best suppliers, so they chose international suppliers rather than domestic suppliers. Domestic customers didn't buy from domestic chip designers. Domestic chip designers didn't manufacture with domestic fabs. Domestic fabs didn't use domestic equipment. As a result, domestic suppliers never got enough customers to practice and improve their processes, which is why they remained low-quality. It was a vicious circle which the Chinese govt tried to solve for years without much success. Then US sanctions came and all of a sudden, Chinese semiconductor companies had no choice but to work together with domestic suppliers: it was either shitty domestic suppliers or die. Nowadays you see domestic semiconductor equipment companies have something like 150-200% growth YoY, something which they previously could only have dreamt of. Domestic DUV litography was at 65+nm for a long time but now 24nm DUV litography (still good for ~60+% of market demand) is around the corner because they finally get enough practice.
People ascribe too much to this simplistic view of China only being able to copy or that copying is easy, and totally underestimate economic pressures.
>> 70% of the profits are generated by older processes, not sub-14nm, ...<<
Not sure which chip segment you are talking about. The legacy chip manufacturing in general operate at much lower margin and much of revenue and profit comes from the cutting edge nodes: for instance, 2/3 of TSMC revenue and profit come from sub-10nm; likewise for SMIC in China, their biggest money maker is 14nm, their most cutting edge nodes.
>> There is no mature ecosystem to copy, ...<<
In the EV battery market, the established competitors/leaders in the market were LG Chem and Panasonic. But as explained earlier, they were excluded from participating/competing in China EV market which would have given them opportunity to further improve their process/yield and accelerated commodification of their tech.
>> Chinese semiconductor companies wanted the best suppliers, so they chose international suppliers rather than domestic suppliers. <<
There is little/no such "domestic" supplier in China's chip manufacturing -- over 90% of chip manufacturing equipment/suppliers are in the US, or Japan, or the EU. Even Taiwan and South Korea import 90+% of their equipments from those named countries and have very small domestic supply-chain of their own. And let's not forget that China has very little chip manufacturing talents of their own -- it's not surprising that former TSMC engineers were behind SMIC's 14nm/7nm. SMEE's first 28nm lithos, which is apparently still not ready for mass-production after having made release announcement two years ago -- likewise heavily depends on Japanese parts/engineering expertise. You can't just shortcut to 50-60 years of accumulative knowledge in making precision equipments by copying.
Okay. Sub-10nm don't make much money, and China can't produce sub-10nm (or any node invented in the past 20 years) anyway without western help, and they won't catch up because all they're good at is copying. You guys have won. So why is the US still throwing more semiconductor sanctions at China, including sanctions designed at hindering China to manufacture at older process nodes, going as far as coercing allies? Don't these guys have better things to worry about now that they've won and China have lost, like domestic issues such as violence and income inequality?
>> Sub-10nm don't make much money <<
sigh the cutting edge nodes get the vast majority of chip making revenue/profit.
>> China can't produce sub-10nm (or any node invented in the past 20 years) anyway without western help <<
China's SMIC already has 7nm, though efficiency, cost-effectiveness and yield are still unknown. As late as 2022, the US dept of commerce granted over $100B worth of licenses to China! so they got all tooling and lithos they need to make 7nm, or even 5nm, though they would be very expensive and poor yield.
>> and they won't catch up because all they're good at is copying <<
China could catch up organically, just probably not this decade, or next. The Japanese equipment makers such as TEL and the Dutch DUV/EUV maker, ASML, can still sell their equipments to China no problem; just not the most cutting edge stuff.
>> Subsidies are only provided to get an industry to grow up.<<
Those subsidies only applied to domestic companies -- remember that the South Korean battery makers such as LG had about 50% of the Chinese market share and 9 out of top 10 local EV makers as customers until in 2015, the CCP more or less forced them out to protect BYD/CATL.
Yes subsidies are meant to help domestic companies until they can compete with the incumbent. This strategy has been used by other countries as well.
Those who protest such subsidies are usually the incumbent, who would like to see no subsidies so that they can easily crush startup competitors.
>> This strategy has been used by other countries as well. <<
which "other countries" are you talking about? This practice is illegal under China's 2001 WTO access protocol, which prohibits any subsidy contingent upon "... or on the use of domestic over imported goods." I don't know any country that openly discriminated and excluded the use of foreign competitors' EV batteries -- especially in a market where as much as 40% of the EV inital purchase cost is subsidized.
It wasn't just the EV subsidies though. From 2015-2019, there was a slew of anticompetitive, discriminatory NEV policies that were blatantly illegal to eliminate competition and help domestic weakling, CATL/BYD. (see the EU's WTO complaint WT/DS549 filed in Jun 2018).
>> Those who protest such subsidies are usually the incumbent, who would like to see no subsidies so that they can easily crush startup competitors.<<
Biden/Mancine's IRA enacted last year in 2022 is partly modeled on this to counter China's unfairly gained market dominance. Quite interesting that China threatened action against ‘Discriminatory’ US EV Tax Break[1].
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-22/china-thr...
Same as for Tesla then. One of Elons' many labels is being a "subsidy truffle hound".
Because there is still the myth that Tesla has a secret sauce in their battery chemistry, and edge, and is not just using Pana, CATL and perhaps other vendor's cells?
Isn't just using other vendors cells an understatement? Tesla and Panasonic jointly develop and manufacturer cells.
> Tesla and Panasonic jointly develop and manufacturer cells <<
It's mostly Panasonic.
The secret sauce isn't in the batteries themselves but the engineering of the entire drivetrain, the battery management system and so on. Tesla is consistently in the top of EV drivetrain efficiency for their models, allowing them to go farther with less batteries, with the IONIQ being one of the few EVs that have been able to fight Tesla for the top spots.
https://ev-database.org/cheatsheet/energy-consumption-electr...
> Tesla is consistently in the top of EV drivetrain efficiency for their models
From your link this doesn't seem to be true. The short range, non awd model 3 has great efficiency. Other model 3s are also good but clearly not anything particularly far ahead as there are a bunch of other models from other manufacturers with similar or better efficiency.
Looking at other Tesla models makes it clearer that they aren't anything particularly special. Even the model y, which is basically model 3 with minor body tweaks is basically middle of the road, model s and x are even worse.
Oh, so because of their high efficency they consistently cheat on their customers?
Their EPA ranges were found to be overstated across models, then there was that recent thing with falsified dashboard data.
I wouldn't say Tesla has advantages in any field, quite the opposite and mostly because of the Elon factor, which basically is just another synonym for NIH.
"Tesla supplier" aka "world’s largest battery manufacturing company" with about 1/3rd of all battery production.
"Shenxing leverages the super electronic network cathode technology and fully nano-crystallized LFP cathode material to create a super-electronic network, which facilitates the extraction of lithium ions and the rapid response to charging signals."
Are these actual technical terms, or some sort of marketing speak?
Yeah, it's really nothing burger. I'm rather amused that they managed to sneak in Zeekr's 1000km range EV which ironically doesn't even use their LFP.
I suspect it is marketing speak that has been translated to english by a non-technical translator.
But this is different from the 500Wh/kg Battery that was announced around 3 month ago right [0]?
Has something happened in this regard?
Yes, different market segments. That one is aimed at the aviation industry where weight matters a lot and is worth a lot to customers.
LFP is technically a bit less energy dense than some other chemistries but it has cost as its big advantage which is why it is the go to choice for a lot of the mass produced mid range EVs. A cheap fast charging battery is going to be quite nice as it makes fast charging stops less disruptive. Which means the utility of EVs with smaller batteries increases. So what if you have to take a 10 minute break every few hundred miles? Not a big deal. You'd probably do that anyway if you value your health and sanity.
Usually on family road trips you don't get to decide when you're going to stop for a bio break. So with an EV you end up stopping twice (or more). With an ICE there is usually a gas station at the first stop.
I also saw that one being incredibly useful for EVs, as you could make the car weigh less and so wouldn’t need as high kWh storage
Nice for expensive sports cars where cost doesn't matter. But everything else competes on cost, not weight. These high density batteries are going to be very premium priced for quite some time to come. Plenty of customers willing to pay that premium. High volume production of that things is likely some time away.
Catl also produces some sodium ion batteries. They have even less density than LFP but contain no lithium or other valuable materials. For mass production, cost is king. And with faster charging speeds, range becomes less important.
I thought lithium wasn't especially valuable, especially compared to the other things that go into a battery. I'd buy that sodium is cheaper though, with the amount of sodium salts that are knocking around the economy.
The price of lithium fluctuates a bit. Currently around 37 dollars per kg. A kg of salt is a lot cheaper. Just check in your local supermarket.
I'd like to know why aircraft have batteries at all... When you have three huge jet engines, there should be no need for batteries on an aircraft where every kilogram saved is worth tens of thousands of dollars over the life of the plane.
> super electronic network cathode
> fully nano-crystallized LFP cathode material
> second-generation fast ion ring technology
> superconducting electrolyte formula
Can someone confirm those are proper names of some recent breakthroughs in LiFePO4 manufacturing or just some marketing technobabble?
Mostly marketing technobabble I'd say.
If CATL had a roomtemperature superconducting electrolyte you'd know ;)
Probably exacerbated by internal/non-common terminology and maybe questionable translation.
I found the concept of Grice's Maxims the other day, and it feels very relevant. Everyone is getting triggered because this fails the maxim of relation.
>Grice's four maxims of conversation, called the Gricean maxims—quantity, quality, relation, and manner.
>Be relevant — i.e., one should ensure that all the information they provide is relevant to the current exchange; therefore omitting any irrelevant information.
There seems to be no indication of the power demands of charging at this rate. I don't have the figures to do the maths but I suspect a normal household supply could not support this. Anyone?
I'm not an engineer but I attempted to do some napkin math in my comment in a previous topic about this CATL battery. I'll copy/paste:
Assuming 400km worth of charge needs maybe 60 kw/h of energy, to deliver that amount of energy in 10 minutes would require at least 360kw charger. Charging just a few cars simultaneously will require megawatts of power. I wonder what are the implications in terms of city infrastructure or investment costs to building charging stations for that.
V3 Superchargers are 250 kW per car with 1MW power cabinets.
The issue at the moment is that grids in a lot of places in the world can't keep up with the connection requests, and this is indeed mainly due to not being able to upgrade transmission capacity fast enough.
One of the boring ways to upgrade the grid is to raise the transmission limits set to prevent overheating in the summer when it's cold in the winter.
Reminds me of "the duck curve" where the worry was that gas plants couldn't ramp output fast enough. There were many exciting high tech solutions but one solution was just to ask the gas plants if they could ramp faster. Turns out they could, they'd just not needed to before.
Seems to be a recurring pattern: you can hyperventilate about how something is hard or impossible or you can ask some engineers if they can improve things. If you get really desperate you can pay people for coming up with solutions and create a market. Of course that all assumes you actually want to solve the problem.
edit: recent third example. Grid connection queues in England had zombie projects in them because you got fined if you left the queue. They had an amnesty and a bunch off them dropped out moving up dates for real projects.
Yup, this is because most things that are engineered have tolerances in them. But pushing the envelope will only get you so far, at some point you're going to run up against hard physical limits (in this case with grid transmission capacity).
The National Grid connection queue is still a huge bottleneck for renewable and battery developers. The amnesty helped but at the end of the day, the overhead lines, substations and transformers need to be upgraded.
At least in the UK there's quite some visibility into the queue and required and ongoing works. Here in Europe it's like a black box.
But you don’t need to have a 10 minute charger at home. At home overnight charging is completely fine.
Anyone in city apartments (millions/billions of people, half the world) can't do that.
Yes, and for these people the 10 minute charger will be needed, the parent comment spoke specifically about installing this at home.
Ah thanks
It could not.
However, a household supply could supply substantially more with smarter software. Specifically, currently we rate power supplies with a decent safety margin for worst-case conditions.
However, your '100 amp' power supply can probably supply 200 amps on a freezing cold day (which helps keep cables cool). It can probably supply more than rated if your neighbours aren't using much (since your and your neighbours power connections may share cables).
If you or your neighbours have rooftop solar, thats power going the other direction, which cancels out some power use - allowing you to charge even faster.
If software could take these factors into account, we could get a lot more power to where it needs to be. Currently rules don't allow such things though.
Probably not, but does it matter? When parking at home, your car usually is a few hours at rest anyway. This is interesting for charging at a service station.
They say 4C and a Model 3 battery pack is apparently 60kWh so that would be 240kW. That's ignoring inefficiency though, so we're talking significant fractions of a megawatt to charge one car.
250 to 350kW chargers are already in common use. And batteries that charge this fast too. What's news here is that they've done it on an LFP battery which is the cheaper kind of lithium chemistry.
What other batteries are in mass manufacture that charge this fast?
Lipo chemistries used in hobby applications are often rated at 5C charging for example versus 4C here.
To get a good comparison in a car we need a manufacturer to actually do the development work and release a car that can be tested in real world conditions. There are the temperature limitations the press release already mentions and also limits to avoid range loss from fast charging over the life of the car.
Great, but how large and heavy is the battery? The announcement doesn't say anything about the energy density.
Exactly what I was thinking. They mention 700km as some reference point, then 400km in 10 minutes, not sure what the density is.
Hyundai/Kia launched the EV6 with 10-80% charging in 17 minutes more than two years ago.
They then launched Hyundai IONIQ 6 with 10-80% at the 16 minute mark.
I guess we will be seeing 10-80% times get close to gas pump refill times in the near future.
I hereby officially launch a new verb: I'm short on charge, I'll shenx my car for 10 minutes and I'm coming.
You heard it first on HN.
What are the chances that the new Model 3 coming out is using this?
What does 'superconducting electrolyte' even mean?
more china dependence