Comments by "tooltalk" (@tooltalk) on "PolyMatter" channel.

  1. 20
  2. 2
  3. 2
  4. 2
  5. 2
  6. 2
  7. 2
  8. 2
  9. 1
  10. 1
  11. 1
  12. 1
  13. 1
  14. 1
  15. 1
  16. 1
  17.  @yerri5567  >> The rest simple dont have the infrastructure ready to produce EVs at mass scale, at least not within the next 5 years << In the US, there will be at least 400+GWh new battery production capacity coming online by 2025-2026. Also consider that China's EV sales look greater b/c their EVs are much smaller in battery capacity and range. >> even if they made a decision today, China would have another 5 years to mass produce their cars to further bring down their costs, which is another advantage.<< The decisions have already been made the past 18 months. It usually takes between 30 to 36 months from a EV OEM signing a contract with EV battery makers (and other supply-chain) to mass-production. As I said, by 2025-2026, expect 500+GWh in total production capacity when batteries at much lower price and steady supply become available in the US and another 300-400GWh in the EU. Some forecast even potential oversupply by 2027 or so. >> Other advantages being another 5 years of R&D. R&D is crucial when it comes to battery tech. While others are focused on Lithium batteries, China is now focused on Sodium batteries << Japan and South Korea have been at this for the past 30 years -- and are far ahead of China in technology. China's strength is in mass-manufacturing in, not in the underlying tech. The development and testing cycles for any new battery tech are much longer; anything fresh out of lab now isn't going to be available for mass-adoption for at least 5-7 years, if and only if they are truely meritorious and backed by enough industry players. I do hope mass-volume sodium for low-end EVs takes off, so it could free up lithium for high-energy batteries.
    1
  18. 1
  19. 1
  20.  @CheesyMez >> In terms of mass producing affordable EVs, China was the first to do that, << I'm a bit confused: first you claim the term "race" is a stupid term, but continue to frame China's NEV policy as a success b/c of being "first." So which is it? >> China was the first to do that, due to a combination of factors. << Yes, that "combinating of factors" included making sure that no foreign EV battery competitors had access to China's EV market since 2015 -- ie, outright ban (no permit) from entering their NEV market and no tax credit/subsidy to EVs with foreign batteries, even if they were made in China to protect China's own champions, eg CATL/BYD, in a market where as much as 40% of initial EV cost was subsidized. >> this includes americans having a very limited pool of options when it comes to EVs, << Contrary to China's EV market whose choice of the EV battery tech was largely limited by the CCP, the US doesn't dictate what to make or buy. The US consumers likewise have access to the best tech determined by the market. >>and that the large tax credits are only available for cars with domestic made batteries.<< See my above comment about re: subsidies/tax credit. You seem to be ok when China does it, but all upset when it's done elsewhere, why double-standard? Now, the irony here is that, the US policy makers are imitating China's "success," by making sure that no Chinese battery company set their foot in the door or their battery receive tax credits. This would ensure that they develop their own self-reliant domestic battery industry/supply-chain with superior battery tech chosen by the market, not by the gov't. The EU's recent probe of China's anti-dumping/subsidies is likewise trying to correct the market distortion created by China's misguided quest for market domination.
    1
  21. 1
  22. 1
  23. 1
  24. 1
  25. 1
  26. 1
  27. 1
  28. 1
  29. 1