BIG Tesla 4680 Battery Update | This Changes EVERYTHING!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- Lars Moravy just dropped some of the biggest and best 4680 battery updates in a long time and I am really pumped with the progress that Tesla has recently made with their battery program. Follow along as I share these new exciting developments.
Support Cleanerwatt:
1. Join the Patreon Community: / cleanerwatt
2. Purchase Cleanerwatt Apparel: cleanerwatt.cr...
** All video and pictures are used with permission or in accordance with the copyright owner's stated policies and use allowance, or applicable fair use laws. **
Image & Video Clip Sources:
1. Tesla video clips/images used in the video courtesy of Tesla, Inc. (where noted in the video).
Data Sources:
iopscience.iop...
www.fool.com/e...
www.latepost.c...
NOTE: The content found in this video should NOT be regarded as financial advice. I am not a financial advisor, and this is NOT in any way a recommendation or offer to buy or sell securities. While the information in this video is believed to be accurate at the time of recording, no guarantees are being made about the accuracy of the information presented in the video. As of the recording of this video, I am NOT invested in Tesla stock or securities, nor any other company mentioned in this video.
What a clarity this overview offers.
This is great news. I want to see more USA made batteries go into USA manufactured EVS.
Excellent report. The battery benchmark has now been set. Hopefully now we go forward with the semi. Cheers.
🤗🙋♂️THANKS JON ,FOR SHARING THE GOOD NEWS AS IT CONTINUES 🤗💚💚💚
Tesla’s success is still for me about DBE.
FSD, Optimus, Energy and Car stuff all depend on its success. Very exciting news regarding the cathode production achievements.
That's all the stuff I dislike 😂 and it's the whole point of the company.
It's important because the reality is Robotaxis and Optimus are still several years away.
Fsd and optimus do not depend on DBE at all
Can dry cathode techniques be applied to other chemistries, such as LFP?
Yes, as far as I know it should work with LFP cathodes.
@@CleanerwattThat is awesome!
@@justforyoutube8672 and Tesla holds ALL patents!
Great discussion and Tesla being able to compete with battery companies keeps them honest for additional supply.
This is a big leap forward for Tesla. Thanks Jon. 🙂👍
4680 that s great news😊
Now it will be interesting to see whether they can do the same thing with LFP 4680 cells.
CATL rules. Love their 60kwh pack in my m3.
Are those the ones with new technology with 16+ year lifespan?
Great news…. Under rated at earnings call
Very exciting news! If they can get the price per kWh down below suppliers they’ll be able to negotiate with a lot of leverage on top of the fact that they’re already these suppliers best customers.
Margins are going to be so butter in a year or two from now
Is it just about cost or are there other benefits?i remember hearing about greater range and longer lifetime.
Is there energy density disparity between wet and dry cathode technology? Sorry if I missed that...
Generally, the dry process leads to lower energy density... however a recent Tesla patent app detailed a way to adjust for that and bring the dry process to energy density parity with wet processed ones. There shouldn't be a big difference.
@@CleanerwattI wonder what would happen if after the rolling and winding they squished the roll to hexagonal shape and fitted it into a hexagonal can instead of cylindrical? If the gentle squish wouldn't damage the roll, the hexagonal shape would be ideal for the honeycomb battery pack structure and would eliminate the empty spaces and increase the rigidity.
@@Cleanerwatt No, the dry process leads to higher energy density. There is more active material for unit of volume. Not going to be a massive difference though.
@@Alarix246
"hotspots"
@@Alarix246 awkward canning. Battery cell filling is modeled after beer cans, soup cans, etc... Cylinders facilitate hi-speed production...
Jon, this is great news on several fronts. The US government is insisting that manufactures produce batteries here. Tesla should be able to do that at reduced costs. A win for all concerned. Further since they no how to scale the process it means great news for future products as well. As you already pointed out their next goal will be to build faster charging,longer range batteries to match and better CATL and BVDs technology. Since two other companies have done this, surely Tesla can do the same at a lower cost. Competition at its finest.
Yes, I thought this was excellent news indeed about the dry process for cathodes. Looks like the major difficulty has been mechanical and related to materials science and technology, rather than chemical or electrical.
Amazing how much progress happened after Elon gave the ultimatum to the team earlier this year
@@daveinpublic That "ultimatum" wasn't really a threat, as much as Elon believed that the problem was solved and it was just a matter of getting the production line up and running. They didn't just solve the problem last month. They stated that they are now making cells on production equipment, no longer on a prototype line. It would have taken months just to build the production equipment.
Spacley Sprockets for fun... vapor deposition
When you hear executive or a head of govt. come out publically with specific goal, many times they already have good idea that it will easily be attained. I believe in the case of 4680, the only significant hurdle left is dry cell cathode, and the rest of it is just tweaking production to ramp, scale, and produce better yields. All of course lead to cost savings. Once the Tesla dry cathode is part of the puzzle they will significantly be below any non LFP battery and will compete better with BYD who has been taking advantage for some time with in house battery production, though it is limited to LFPs and therefore fits well with the lower range and typically smaller vehicles they sell.
Well done for catching up with what we've all known for a long time.
.
As for LiFePO4 cells.
Lower density cells are NOT necessarily suited to smaller vehicles.
Think it through.
Lower density equals a heavier pack or less range for a given volume.
Smaller vehicles are space restricted AND pack weight is a greater percentage of the total vehicle weight, so impacts economy.
The logical choice might well be a SMALLER volume, HIGHER density, LIGHTER weight pack .... IF the cost per kWh is low enough.... Which is the aim of the Tesla SYSTEM (The Factory, not the form factor)
Seems like other battery form factors are coming onto the scene. How about a vid comparing cylindrical to pouch?
There's no 'one best' form factor. Instead, what you want is to match the form factor with the chemistry you plan to stuff inside it. For example, cylindrical is easier to cool and maintains structural integrity better so it works well when you're generating a lot of heat and need really good and even cooling. It's good for high nickel packs. Prismatic works well with LFP since it's a robust chemistry that can tolerate much higher heat and is less prone to expansion issues. The prismatic design allows you to stuff as much active material into a given space as possible to compensate for the lower energy density of LFP. Pouch is very similar to prismatic, except prismatic has a little bit of structure to help control expansion. Pouch can't exist on it's own without a strong enclosure to keep the pouches at the proper compression.
Of course these are all generalizations, other considerations may over-ride general rules of thumb, for example the manufacturing efficiency of stuffing LFP into cylindrical so a single manufacturing line can do everything may pencil out better overall in some cases so you may end up with some 'strange' choices. ...Basically, it just depends.
Tesla chose the cylindrical process because it is the fastest. It is a continuous process, not start and stop as sections are produced and laminated on top of each other in a pouch. Other battery forms have been around for years.
@@royh6526
Agreed.
Except, to be accurate, I would say "Volume" rather than "Speed". It's about Factory footprint and GWH (TWH) "Out the door"
Gee how many of those cells is Optimus handling each day 😊?
Honestly, we only care that the battery is affordable, has a long life, good energy density, charges fast and is safe. At this point in time, I'd rather have a CATL LFP Shenxing Plus pack than 4680. Hope Tesla moves in that direction.
U like heavy batteries?
@@xlargetophat Less energy density is okay if the battery charges 4x faster... just use a smaller battery pack. I currently have a RWD M3 with 60KWh LFP battery. On a trip, it can charge from 15% - 80% in about 20 minutes... if it could do that in under 10 minutes, it would be awesome! In general, I'd prefer a smaller pack that charges fast over a large pack that takes 40 minutes to charge to 80%. The current 4680s don't charge very fast. Hopefully the next generation will improve.
This is a bit short term view.
The only reason CATL is innovating as hard as they do, is because of competitors like Tesla who push the boundaries in areas like cost.
It’s a great bet.
And now that Tesla is now a legit battery company… they will continue to innovate and may have a few massive breakthroughs of their own in the future.
It seems that the battery competition is about to finish and China will be the winner. 4680s will survive just for the Teslas sold in USA to avoid taxes. China is producing millions batteries for the last 30 years. They have the technology, they have the support of the government, they control the supply chain....
I think we might be reading too much into the conference call announcement, no doubt as they intended. I had already heard in the last few weeks that they were acquiring dry process material from an external vendor. The announcement could easily be interpreted as updating the process to utilize the 3rd party material, not an actual breakthrough on their internal dry manufacture material process. Still an improvement, but not what people are claiming has been accomplished. It would be nice to get clarification on which is true in this particular case.
So, you're reading what Lars said (ability to produce it on the mass production equipment), and don't believe it means what it means? You don't suggest he lies, but how could it be otherwise then?
@@Alarix246 I believe it may be integration with 3rd party into their process using mass production equipment which is great, but not the original goal or what has held them back. This is (potentially) plan B. Again still great. But not the breakthrough they were trying to achieve and recently gave up on. Then suddenly achieved it? Doesn’t make a lot of sense. 3rd party integration makes sense and matches recent rumblings. Awesome to be wrong though.
Wrong, they were purchasing wet cathodes not dry cathodes from suppliers.
@@boostav that doesn’t conflict with what I said.
@@spleck615 Uhm yes it does... there is no third party option to purchase dry cathodes from.
What the specs on the new battery vs the existing?
Aside from production footprint reduction / potential cost savings, are the parameters / specs better than wet? Do they have better degradation metrics?
good job
Hmm the hype around this battery was huge but the energy density just never lived up to the promises.
What matters to me is range and charging time. I think Lucid has a car that goes 500 miles on a single charge. Tesla hasn't progress much on their batteries, while China and others seem to be leaping ahead of Tesla. If charging time was 5 minutes, then I could settle with less range. If these 4680 batteries are out, why are they not in the new model 3 2024 models?
What does mean „dry“ does it means 30,50,80% moisture ?
I believe it means close to 0% moisture not needing any drying kiln after deposition. As opposed to typical 'wet' that is applied as a water based solution needing substantial kiln drying.
It eliminates the need for all the drying ovens that come after wet coating.
I wonder how they solved dry coat cathode. Did they need to remove manganese? If so would this impact energy density of the cell? I wonder if those limitations might hinder development of optimizing chemistry to improve charge rate and energy density.
Removing manganese will actually improve energy density because manganese is a stabilizer. But removing manganese makes the cathode more expensive. Although it seems like they are not removing manganese entirely only decreasing the proportion and then increasing the aluminum which is a softer material and an alternative to manganese in the cathode chemistry.
Jonathan.. there is a word: accumulate.. a related word that derives from it is cumulative.. it is not accumulative.. that’s not a thing. Thanks for the content and keeep going!
If Tesla produces a “dry” cathode will the battery then be considered a “sold state” battery?
All Solid Battery uses solid electrolyte instead of liqud one.
Yes, but Tesla already have a “dry” anode. That is why I asked the question, “Dry Anode and now Dry Cathode”, what part of the battery construction would still be “wet”?
@@briangalton7068 the dry electrode production processes really have nothing to do with whether the electrolyte is wet, gel, or dry, I.e. solid state.
Isn't the main issue that the cells are collapsing on themselves? That's a much bigger problem if true as it could be a safety issue.
I heard that Tesla gave up on trying to fix the dry battery cathode manufacturing equipment and replace it with new battery manufacturing equipment to solve the problems producing the dry battery cathode. Apparently the holdup was the desperate attempts to fix or tweak the existing manufacturing equipment rather than suffering the loss inflicted by replacing the equipment.
makes sense - why waste time on 4680 otherwise
maybe they will roll out something new for more useful cells
Dry electrode has the potential of above 400 wh/kg cell level energy density,because it increases the amount of active materials in both cathode and anode in the battery cell therefore without changing the volume and weight of the cell you will have much higher mili AH per gram in your cells,i think dry electrode and all solid or semi solid electrolyte is the real key for above 450 wh/kg energy densities,and remember that there is cobalt free LNM cathode chemistery cells on the horizon with cycle life and safety(thermal runaway)of an LFP and 60% higher energy density compared with traditional NCM cells,just imagine dry electrode LNM solid state with 6000 cycle life and energy density of 700 wh/kg cell level which is totaly on the horizon with these new technologies,dry electrode LNM (lithium-nickel-manganese oxide) is the battery of the future
What does that mean to the end user in terms of cost, range, charge time?
Based on a Tesla patent app, the exact opposite is true. The dry process actually naturally leads to lower energy density than the wet process. Tesla had to tweak some things to bring it to parity.
@@Cleanerwatt i dont think so,the whole purpose of developing dry electrode cathode and anode is to lower the production cost and increase energy density,even LG energy solution stated that they are working on dry electrode NCM battery cells with 40% higher energy density for 2028,
@@jeffpicken5057 you will be amazed if i tell you most expensive battery pack which is tesla model s's panasonic 18650 NCA(800cycle life) cell costs 12000$ for 100 kwh pack compared with 9000$ for LFP(3000 cycle life and cheapest battery)100 kwh battery pack meaning there is not much of a difference between the cheapest and most expensive battery pack out there, it will not make the evs that much cheaper, the difference is in longevity and safety of the packs,that is why CATL will move to LFP instead of NCM in it's qilin 2.0 battery pack which will be interduced later 2024.
You will be amazed if i tell you most expensive battery pack which is tesla model s's panasonic 18650 NCA(800cycle life) cell costs 12000$ for 100 kwh pack compared with 9000$ for LFP(3000 cycle life and cheapest battery)100 kwh battery pack meaning there is not much of a difference between the cheapest and most expensive battery pack out there, it will not make the evs that much cheaper, the difference is in longevity and safety of the packs,that is why CATL will move to LFP instead of NCM in it's qilin 2.0 battery pack which will be interduced later 2024.
Wish they were ramping faster, but they are certainly producing more cells than Ford or GM.....
Or Northvolt in production hell - VWG, BMW, Scania and Volvo battery 'producer'.
Tesla always accomplishes just enough to keep the stock from crashing. Tesla has a lot in the hopper for the next 18 months. It's going to get really interesting
Tesla stock price has "Outside interests" attempting to control it.
We need 20% more power density
Can I install this magic battery on my '17 Model S? No? Then this doesn't change anything. It's the same 'ol existing owners getting screwed over for going in early.
Interesting good math
Just waiting for the 1 million mile battery from Tesla.
Tesla uses CATL and BYD batteries in its budget cars which already meet that criterion.
Their Nicket based performance cells will also do a million miles when charged to similar voltages as LFP cells, as in daily typical use.
ua-cam.com/video/rOAYjcO6kao/v-deo.html
So has Tesla been buying "wet" cathodes from other battery suppliers?
damp - some are soggy. Need a bigger dehumidifier 😂
Yes, they have been buying cathodes from companies like LG.
@@Cleanerwatt So this is a MAJOR manufacturing change... ( and money savings ) and now Tesla can fully optimize the 4680s moving forward.
@@FrunkensteinVonZipperneck Yes... I thought this was more of a "moist" cathode... but also, doesn't the DB system accomplish major reduction in explosive / flammability for punctures as well?
The holy grail of batteries is finally done! ✅ 😊
i guess cybertruck is a new unit of measurement for batteries
A mega pack requires 8 Cybertruck point 5 bananas worth of batteries.
And 8 ct pack's are about equal to 1 tesla semi lr pack. 👍🏻😀
Was this Maxwell IP? Still no mention that this is the case.
"Still no mention"?
You never took the trouble to read the Maxwell patents?
@@rogerstarkey5390 Hi Roger. Is it a given they used patented processes belonging to Maxwell? They didn't really affirm that in their commentary. I may have missed and if so, be happy to be corrected.
@@rogerstarkey5390 you are clearly the resident expert. I am a complete novice. Clearly. However, I support @spleck615 narrative re "acquiring dry process material from an external vendor". More specifically Nano One Materials - Canada. I will await your correction when/if proven wrong. Cheers
I wonder if the dry process will significantly reduce the CO2 emissions of battery production compared to wet process battery production?
As an investor I wish Tesla would be more realistic in their timelines. Ultimately, if Tesla can begin ramping these battery lines and copy/paste them this will be a massive step towards their goals. I think Tesla should keep their ties to CATL strong as they have proven to be the industry leader in production and tech. I am excited for the recent buy opportunity I will be buying in heavily. I am excited for Trump to actually work with Tesla rather than thwart them like the crooked dems.
Tesla will ALWAYS buy from the likes of CATL
If Tesla experimenting with cathodes on production Cybertrucks leads to any kind of recall, it won't be solved over-the-air this time.
You mean like ANY new cell type?
smh
😊😊😊😊😊
100 gwh by 2031
SOLUTION.
TWO Cathode lines, running at 50% speed to equal the output of ONE Anode line at full speed.
DONE!
.
IF a solution is found... Build ONE more cathode line, and ONE more "Cell assembly plant" and you DOUBLE the output.
50percent ramp up is after using cathode electron set supplied by LG . so there is no point of reducing cost less than suppliers. You are using supplier's crtical parts. The only way to accomplish Elon musks goal is using dry cathode electron set and scale up to reduce cost less than suppliers's wet processed 4680 cell ,and You dont have that much time if you have just developed a prototype. Great lab work but not for scales yet
Only the anode uses a dry process. An increase in production is less significant if the cathode is wet or if they’re buying it from the outside. Knowing Musk’s personality he would have been yelling to the world had the problem been solved. I don’t share your confidence at all.
Zoom in a little and cut out the light switches... just an idea ;)
Our govt is short-sighted, in the pocket of fossil industry. Instead of spending billions$ & 5 years on 4680, Tesla should've been partnered with CATL to let them develop the best 🔋 tech while Tesla focus on new platforms. We'd have the $25k M2 AND a 7-person EV van by now. Basic EV from BYD would've cost Americans $19k and ⛽ would be on the last breath.
So you suggest tesla to be 100% dependent on Chinese company. And when china start the war with Taiwan what would happen to Tesla?
But Tesla can work on batteries and platforms at the same time.
So they get the best of both worlds by continuing their 4680 project. The age of 4680 is now here, you’ll see some major advancements to it now that they have a viable product that they control the future of.
The whole success of Tesla is that it is vertically integrated and does rely solely on external suppliers. See how other companies like Vw that are doing what you suggest are doing. They make very expensive cars
The next administration could easily throw a 200% tariff on Chinese batteries. Tesla needs to be able to onshore battery production in the US.
@@ekkalchev
WHY do you think China will "start a war with Taiwan"?
They are "Winning".
USA is "Pushing their buttons" to try and provoke them, because China is "eating your lunch".
PESSIMISTIC HAT ON
What is not said is whether the mass production equipment was run at mass production speed or at mass production failure rate.
But still great news.
Think it through.
You have what is essentially a rolling press which suffers at high speed... so you add TWO units to that section running at half speed.... "Slightly more expensive" , slightly less space efficient, but reliable and doesn't lag the rest of the process.
Basically 2 Cathode lines per Anode line.
IF a solution is found, you simply add another Anode line to match the capability.
Tesla goal :
"Beat supplier cost nickel cells year end"
A moving target. CATL BYD will have leapfroged by then, in addition of cheapo iron batteries.
Tesla should get over theire failure in batteries now, not year end
Cope harder
It's not a "Failure", it's a "Development" and the reason other cell prices dropped was market conditions.
.
The cell manufacturers were producing to supply an increasing volume of vehicles, then numerous manufacturers famously (Infamously?) "Pulled back" causing a glut of cells.
I suspect you know this.
GREAT for Tesla since they are the customer that not only maintained vehicle production but expanded the STORAGE business over the period.
That's going to reap rewards in future when negotiating and when the manufactures decide which customer is first in line for new developments.
As for "Cheapo Iron cells", it depends on the application.
This is a BIG deal!!!
guess tesla is no longer in competition with catl and eve
thats just sad
Eve?
Not in the same league as CATL.
This is as big as Apples M1 chip.
The new batteries will continue to drop in price in the next years.
It will become cheap enough that Elon will have to have them in the Model Y. There will be no other option if it’s cheaper.
This will make increased range cheaper.
This will make EVs as long range as ICE, and soon far cheaper than ICE.
EV adoption will skyrocket when it is so much cheaper that the consumer has no choice but to consider them.
Get ready for $10k base model EVs in 15 years.
True solid state will be needed to fix the battery problem. They'll be a high priced option in 3-4 years and mainstream a few years after that. Most EV sales are driven by the taxpayer funded battery.
Read between the lines of the Toyota "predictions".
They expect Solid state to be expensive, which is why they will only commit to low percentage volume.
In the near term - perhaps CATL's Compressed battery will offer a good alternative.
vw and china both claim to have ssb right now. scratch under the surface and it's catholyte goo, not solid state. toyota''s new ceo is trying to save face after the mirai debacle.
Tesla 100 GW goal?? Really?
Just CATL makes 200 GW, 2023
for the miniscule EV market share vs ICE
Tesla goal short term should be 1,000 GW
like in 2 years, by then CATL will have leapfroged
100GW FROM THAT PLANT.
WHEN this is understood by the technicians, it's "Modular". They can replicate the SMALLER, plant elsewhere. THAT'S the whole point.
Or you could’ve just said over 95% of their batteries are not 4680
The future if evs and energy is first the integrated software , tesla cant give up on batteries. They must have battery tech and volume better than catl
Isn't it interesting that I am following this channel and all Tesla info about their batteries but until about two weeks ago I had no clue that the cathode was still not made by the dry method and was purchased? It's like, wow, they're struggling but have this wonderful dry process which will be much cheaper than the competition - and then boom!, we find they're only starting producing the first few dry method cathodes ever? 🤣 And like, there wasn't a word of it on this channel, or at least I cannot remember, and nobody in comments has had the balls to admit we were all mistaken? 😁 I mean I'm of course glad they are over another snag, but come on, dear fan club, shouldn't we know about this all this time? Nobody ever asked at the quarterly earnings calls "how's the dry cathode production method going?! I admit that we know less than Tesla employees, and it's good that some things are kept secret, but this lapse right here is downright ridiculous!
It's been common knowledge for a very long time, it you were paying attention.... and there have been numerous updates from Tesla
@@rogerstarkey5390 i failed to note then. Can you point me out to some in the past where it was explained? I think I follow these things more than I should, so thinking that I missed it males me nervous. 🤠
Blah blah blah. Bfd
Repetitive and boring
There will not be a substantial quantity produced of 4680 for another couple of years, as Tesla talks big but produces little and externally late
Compared to who? GM?
Guessing, assuming & the 4680´s made today are still VERY far from what was told on that super hyped battery day 4 years ago. Pure stocks-pleasing and/or guessing if you are just a bit into the tech side and not just the average blindfolded fanboy.
4680 battery program not viable against other newer battery forms.
true
so my bet is tesla has something comparable with 46120 on the shelf to roll out
Pay more attention.
You don't seem to understand Over There.. That This is not a sustainable solution..Na the batteries are the only way.. No precious metals.. Which destroy the environment.. The only advantage is Better return on the profit and the stock.. Nah..Think About .. before you advertise mammon!!
YOU don't understand that Sodium currently requires VOLUME to produce the required output?
It's "TOO BIG TO FIT"
Then there's your assumption regarding "Precious metals". Which are not "precious", Or what you mean to say, "Rare Earth".
4680 is a big failure. CATL offers much better performance and price.
You haven't REALLY researched the CATL cells, have you?