Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries • Hacker News Board

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#311

Post by AtlasBarfed » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 2:47 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #4

This is huge. To date, Tesla has been the only non-Chinese manufacturer talking iron. LFP is often touted for being cheaper than NMC, but given growing insecurity around battery-grade nickel supplies, using the far-more-prevalent iron and phosphate isn’t just about cheaper cars. It’s about having cars to sell in the first place. With respect to range anxiety, pretty much every EV in the 200 to 300-mile range is sold…

Gotion is supposedly going to release 200+ wh/kg LFP this year, which since LFP needs less thermals can do 90% cell-to-pack, the numbers I saw they may get 200 wh/kg at PACK level.

CATL is releasing some LMFP chemistry that will do 200+ wh/kg into production soon.

200 wh/kg with Tesla efficiencies should enable cheap scalable 400+ mile cars (I believe that current cobalt chemistry Tesla batteries can't break 200 wh/kg at the pack level due to thermals, but don't quote me).

And IF the stories about 140 wh/kg sodium ion are true, that may go into production next year, which means a lithium free 200-300 mile car, although I don't know as much about the endurance and thermals of sodium ion chemistries.

Charging infrastructure is now in "ball is rolling" phase. Demand for EVs is high thanks to the gasoline price spike, and LFP/Sodium Ion should in theory enable the cheaper-than-ICE car (not TCO, retail price).

We really need a new volume-independent subsidy. I'm thinking 10,000$ straight rebate (not tax credit) for two years and then it drops 1,000$ per year.

Solid state batteries should be able to take over in 5-10 years, but the new LFP/sodium ion means that big auto should not be as constrained as they were.

Tesla needs to double down on quality, software, and scaling, but I think they'll be fine. Current stock price fine? Eh.

What American auto makers need to concern themselves with is scaling their operations before the Chinese automakers invade the US like they are in Europe.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#312

Post by sudosysgen » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 3:15 PM UTC

Cupertino95014 wrote: post #272

sudosysgen wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an extrapolation. There hasn't ever been in a country that decided to sanction themselves within wartime from most of the world economy, and leaked documents show that one of the reason China wants Taiwan to begin with is to make their trade more secure.

I don't even know what the first sentence is supposed to mean. Germany knew they would be blockaded by the Brits in WW I and II and proceeded to go to war anyway, so didn't they "decided [sic] to sanction themselves within wartime from most of the world economy"? Japan continued with their China war in the 1930s, despite sanctions from the US and the West, so didn't they? As for the "leaked documents", the claim on T…

You lost the plot of the original comment. The original point was that somehow China would stop trading with any country that didn't agree Taiwan was Chinese by their own volition. This never happened is in no way analogous to to Japan or Germany being blockaded.

And no, the leaked documents don't just claim that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China, that's the public position. The leaked documents detail how control over Taiwan is necessary to be able to project sufficient naval power to break any attempted blockade especially by submarine due to the low depth of waters within the first island chain.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#313

Post by 93po » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 3:49 PM UTC

martin_bech wrote: post #304

93po wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fueling stations are a solved problem. There are compact, modular, on-site hydrogen generators designed for installation in places like gas stations. I recently met the founder of this company: https://genh2hydrogen.com/ that is doing exactly this - they're currently taking pre-orders and looking for final funding, but they have the engineering and prototyping in place. The Department of Energy even offers interest-f…

That looks promising, but the costs are still way higher then putting in EV chargers, and you can set up EV charging at home, for almost no cost. Again the scale of hydrogen fueling stations needed would be massive

A quick Google shows that a Tesla supercharger installation is about $250k including the power grid infrastructure upgrades needed. The self contained hydrogen generator and fueling pump from H2 is about $2 million, but it's also interest free and can be paid over 30 years and the profits of it go to the operator, which isn't true of the Tesla superchargers.

Larger and more popular gas stations can do about half a million in revenue per month selling gas, which they only have about 2% margin on. Hydrogen has the electric cost eating into margins, but even then it should be pretty profitable and much much higher than 2%.

Although it's a big up front cost commitment, the economics definitely seem feasible if hydrogen fuel cell cars start getting more popular over the next decade or more.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#314

Post by carapace » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 4:09 PM UTC

freemint wrote: post #285

carapace wrote: post #246

To me it seems that batteries in EVs make less sense than e.g. alcohol fuel ICE or hybrids. The main consideration is energy density, but alcohol is easy to make and handle, carbon-neutral, and the exhaust is non-toxic. This wouldn't make sense for the whole of car traffic because we use way too much fossil fuel to replace it all with e.g. industrial ethanol. But it could work as part of a transitional strategy. Fuel…

Alcohol is not really carbon neutral. Plants don't produce alcohol. They produce sugar. The farming and transport also produces emissions and you lose a ton of energy on the way. C6H12O6 (Sugar) -(Enzymes)-> 2C2H5OH (Alcohol) + 2CO2 (Carbon Dioxide)

Plants build sugar and starch molecules out of air and water, the carbon atoms come from the atmosphere, not underground, that's the crucial difference.

> The farming and transport also produces emissions and you lose a ton of energy on the way.

Yeah, you have to do it as part of a system that makes sense overall. E.g. small-scale local integrated CSA that also provides N gallons (or liters) per member of fuel per month as well as groceries. Something like that.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#315

Post by b112 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 4:50 PM UTC

smaudet wrote: post #165

b112 wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://news.hydroquebec.com/en/press-releases/1667/hydro-que... This is just a start, Hydro Quebec will expand production if demand comes.

I would buy one for my next vehicle (it will be a ways off), except my area will take a while to be covered, with the amount of driving I do I would not need to refill for several months, and I could still take it on cross country road trips without worrying too much about even stopping at a charge/gas station. As it stands, I will not be buying any EV, you will have a very hard time convincing me otherwise, too many…

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#316

Post by bonestamp2 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 8:32 PM UTC

freemint wrote: post #281

kortex wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? Rail at least provides a direct conductive path. Electrified highways would require inductive charging at 65mph (not feasible) or building overhead pantograph systems (expensive but at least vaguely tractable). Either requires specialized vehicles. Europe could pull it off due to its density, but the stretches of American highway which would benefit the most from it, would be a huge challenge.

You do not conduct your electricity over the rails you drive on. Even with trains it's overhead wires. The same principle has been demonstrated to work on (small parts of) the Autobahn. All it requires is a dedicated lane where trucks could tap into overhead wires. https://youtu.be/UB298IXBvtU https://youtu.be/m6x9Y5YElxk

Stellantis (Fiat Chrysler Peugeot) recently built a test track with inductive power for vehicles:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFyJg6f9v84

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#317

Post by jacquesm » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 9:28 PM UTC

vishnugupta wrote: post #300

yetihehe wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that this documentary is about McDonell Douglas, not MacDonald.

haha yes yes. I just assumed the MacDonald was a typo and the GP meant "McDonell Douglas".

And I figured that people that don't know the difference between McDonnell and McDonald can be ignored when it comes to their views on that particular merger.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#318

Post by Cupertino95014 » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 10:22 PM UTC

sudosysgen wrote: post #312

Cupertino95014 wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even know what the first sentence is supposed to mean. Germany knew they would be blockaded by the Brits in WW I and II and proceeded to go to war anyway, so didn't they "decided [sic] to sanction themselves within wartime from most of the world economy"? Japan continued with their China war in the 1930s, despite sanctions from the US and the West, so didn't they? As for the "leaked documents", the claim on T…

You lost the plot of the original comment. The original point was that somehow China would stop trading with any country that didn't agree Taiwan was Chinese by their own volition. This never happened is in no way analogous to to Japan or Germany being blockaded. And no, the leaked documents don't just claim that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China, that's the public position. The leaked documents detail how contr…

So they tell their population and the whole world that Taiwan is an inseparable part of China, and have been doing so since Nixon and Kissinger went to China, but the real reason is to break an attempted blockade?

OK, if that's what you want to believe. Seems kinda implausible, though.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#319

Post by namlem » Mon, Jul 25, 2022, 11:52 PM UTC

AngryData wrote: post #292

justapassenger wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offshore outsourcing of everything is as bad of an idea as vertical integration of every single aspect of your business.

Vertical integration builds up a resiliency against supply chain issues. You have a guarenteed supply of materials and components for a reasonable price no matter how crazy world markets get.

It's often too expensive to be worth it though. Just look at Intel.

Re: Ford's answer to EV supply chain hell: Cheaper batteries

#320

Post by MerelyMortal » Tue, Jul 26, 2022, 5:28 AM UTC

freemint wrote: post #283

MerelyMortal wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electrolysis powered by nuclear energy seems very clean and green to me. With the added benefit of not requiring an overhaul of the electrical grid to be able to handle everyone charging their cars.

It might be green jut it is super expensive and not very green for the decade it takes to build a plant.

As opposed to how green it is to build a solar or wind farm?