Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

catl.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#51

Post by prisoner3986 »

Uzza wrote: post #48
prisoner3986 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

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…

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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#52

Post by tooltalk »

j16sdiz wrote: post #11

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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#53

Post by tooltalk »

kcb wrote: post #36
prisoner3986 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#54

Post by tooltalk »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #23
donny2018 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>> 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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#55

Post by tooltalk »

hliyan wrote: post #4

"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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#56

Post by FooBarWidget »

tooltalk wrote: post #54
FooBarWidget wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>> 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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#57

Post by [deleted] »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #23
donny2018 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#58

Post by tooltalk »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #56
tooltalk wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> 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...

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#59

Post by tooltalk »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #44
donny2018 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

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.…

>> 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.

Re: CATL (Tesla Supplier) Launches Superfast Charging Battery (10 min)

#60

Post by FooBarWidget »

tooltalk wrote: post #59
FooBarWidget wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

>> 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.…

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?
Post reply on HN