Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#31

Post by antoniuschan99 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:58 PM UTC

SigmundA wrote: post #9

Would be interesting to know whats going on in the industry with LFP. Pre-built lead acid replacement LFP battery prices have been dropping almost daily and are down to high end AGM prices [1] and quality has been going up [2], these batteries were twice the price a year ago. Will be replacing the lead acid in my RV soon with LFP's, it really a no brainer. 1. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FMTRYPT 2. https://www.youtub…

LFP/LifePo4 is definitely top of the line now.

I just bought a GoLabs Portable Power Station https://gotrax.com/products/golabs-r300-portable-powerstatio...

Pretty much all the good Solar Panel/Wind Power Stations use LifePo4.

Check out the bestsellers in outdoor generators:

https://www.amazon.ca/gp/bestsellers/lawn-garden/6257187011/...

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#32

Post by brianwawok » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:58 PM UTC

MrDunham wrote: post #15

cma wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is still no Tesla Semi after 4 years, so maybe the factory could be devoted to that, but even the gigafactory's battery cells don't make sense for a long range semi as originally shown. Bill Gates was right about the physics of it not making sense with those cells (too heavy for bridges with any decent payload), and they will need to turn it instead into a low range around-town Pepsi delivery tuck, as already a…

Even though I own a Tesla and love it I can’t see a fully electric, long-haul semi making sense for quite some time. For consumers (at least in my own experience) there is a range threshold that, once surpassed, means I almost never have to worry about fill ups again. So the Every day convenience outweighs the once or twice a year inconvenience of longer “fill ups“ vs gas for extended drives. I bought mine because I…

Many trucks return home daily. Why not get those 100% first?

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#33

Post by stevespang » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:59 PM UTC

bserge wrote: post #27

> The lithium iron phosphate cells are less energy-dense but much longer-lived. And apparently much less explodey.

It's a legal and therefore a cost driven move - - less lawsuits from batteries catching on fire - - less performance from the iron phosphate version too, less range, cobalt in pyro lithium batteries is expensive . . .

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#34

Post by woeirua » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:59 PM UTC

The potential for a massive jump in battery chemistry is why I personally have not purchased a BEV yet. I'm leasing a LEAF, which has been great overall, but I'm not going to buy until the battery chemistry is settled here in a few years. There's a high probability that every BEV on the road today will be considered antiquated (and potentially unsafe) in 5 years.

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#35

Post by bserge » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:59 PM UTC

I've been looking into this lately. Seems like it would not be that hard to set up a factory in Eastern Europe somewhere to produce cells.

They won't be top of the line, but still useful and profitable, given that the best cells will be taken up by megacorps for the foreseeable future.

You don't need the highest capacity stuff for power tools and home solar/wind storage, for example.

The machinery is quite expensive, however.

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#36

Post by baybal2 » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:59 PM UTC

bserge wrote: post #27

> The lithium iron phosphate cells are less energy-dense but much longer-lived. And apparently much less explodey.

Most of cell energy density comparison don't remove cell casings mass from comparison.

This way pouch cells outperform hard cased ones so much on capacity, but in reality it's a big delusion as you still have to put structure to hold cells in place — and you can't do it with flimsy, paper thin casings.

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#37

Post by onethought » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 1:59 PM UTC

MrDunham wrote: post #15

cma wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is still no Tesla Semi after 4 years, so maybe the factory could be devoted to that, but even the gigafactory's battery cells don't make sense for a long range semi as originally shown. Bill Gates was right about the physics of it not making sense with those cells (too heavy for bridges with any decent payload), and they will need to turn it instead into a low range around-town Pepsi delivery tuck, as already a…

Even though I own a Tesla and love it I can’t see a fully electric, long-haul semi making sense for quite some time. For consumers (at least in my own experience) there is a range threshold that, once surpassed, means I almost never have to worry about fill ups again. So the Every day convenience outweighs the once or twice a year inconvenience of longer “fill ups“ vs gas for extended drives. I bought mine because I…

The power train on an electric vehicle is leagues more efficient than gas. With fast charging: 300kw+ I think it makes complete sense.

Perhaps in super cold climates it starts getting silly though

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#38

Post by __Joker » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 2:00 PM UTC

MrDunham wrote: post #15

cma wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is still no Tesla Semi after 4 years, so maybe the factory could be devoted to that, but even the gigafactory's battery cells don't make sense for a long range semi as originally shown. Bill Gates was right about the physics of it not making sense with those cells (too heavy for bridges with any decent payload), and they will need to turn it instead into a low range around-town Pepsi delivery tuck, as already a…

Even though I own a Tesla and love it I can’t see a fully electric, long-haul semi making sense for quite some time. For consumers (at least in my own experience) there is a range threshold that, once surpassed, means I almost never have to worry about fill ups again. So the Every day convenience outweighs the once or twice a year inconvenience of longer “fill ups“ vs gas for extended drives. I bought mine because I…

Semi and industrials where hydrogen fuel cell makes sense.

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#39

Post by brianwawok » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 2:00 PM UTC

headgasket wrote: post #10

wffurr wrote: post #3

I found the point about the safer qualities of LFP battery chemistry reducing the overhead in the battery pack construction and thus preserving range despite lower capacity very interesting. Better range on a lower capacity means much better range per hour charging time.

That is not necessarily true, check out the max C rate in of LFP. Still, LFP is the way to go for sure; longer overall life is a clear net positive, lower degradation and secondary market uses once the véhicule is junk without expensive and heavy recycling. I bet the cyber and truck were waiting on these patents to lapse.

I don’t think you can do 500 mile cybertruck without adding a TON of weight. I highly doubt it touches LFP

Re: Tesla made $1.6 billion in Q3, is switching to LFP batteries globally

#40

Post by jtbayly » Thu, Oct 21, 2021, 2:02 PM UTC

SigmundA wrote: post #9

Would be interesting to know whats going on in the industry with LFP. Pre-built lead acid replacement LFP battery prices have been dropping almost daily and are down to high end AGM prices [1] and quality has been going up [2], these batteries were twice the price a year ago. Will be replacing the lead acid in my RV soon with LFP's, it really a no brainer. 1. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08FMTRYPT 2. https://www.youtub…

Can you help me understand why you wouldn't just stay with the old Lead-Acid batteries? You can get a 150Ah for $110, for example, whereas this 100Ah you linked to is $376.

I'm sure there are benefits, but I don't know much about batteries to understand why you'd make that tradeoff.