CATL M3P // Is the Hype Legit & Will Tesla Use it?

Welcome back everyone, I'm Jordan Geisigee, and this is The Limiting Factor. For over a year now, there's been ongoing rumors that the Tesla Model 3 would soon be using a new battery chemistry from CATL called M3P. According to the rumors, the M3P chemistry would increase the range of the Model 3 by around 10%.

大家好，欢迎回来。我是乔丹·盖斯吉，欢迎收看《制约因素》。近一年来一直有传言称特斯拉Model 3很快将采用宁德时代（CATL）的一种名为M3P的新电池化学品。根据这些传言，M3P化学品将使Model 3的续航里程增加约10%。

In the past few months, the expectation of a battery pack upgrade has only become more intense since Tesla stated in their Q2 earnings call that they expect to have downtime this quarter for factory upgrades. So what exactly is the M3P chemistry, and will it be used in Tesla vehicles? Today I'll walk you through the sparse and often conflicting information that we have about M3P, its potential strengths and drawbacks, and based on that, if and when, it'll be used in Tesla vehicles.

在过去的几个月里，由于特斯拉在第二季度盈利电话会议中表示他们预计本季度会停工进行工厂升级，对于电池组升级的期望只变得更加强烈。那么什么是M3P的化学成分，它将会被用于特斯拉的车辆吗？今天我将为大家介绍我们所了解的关于M3P的少量且常常相互矛盾的信息，以及它的潜在优势和缺点，并根据这些信息来判断是否以及何时会在特斯拉的车辆中使用。

Before we begin, a special thanks to my Patreon supporters, YouTube members and Twitter subscribers, as well as RebellionAir.com. They specialize in helping investors manage concentrated positions. RebellionAir can help with covered calls, risk management, and creating a money master planned from your financial first principles.

在我们开始之前，特别感谢我的Patreon支持者、YouTube会员和Twitter订阅者，以及RebellionAir.com。他们专门帮助投资者管理集中头寸。RebellionAir可以帮助处理期权买卖、风险管理，并从您的金融首要原则中制定一个资产管理计划。

To understand the full story with CATL M3P, let's start from when it first entered public awareness. Last year, rumors started bubbling up that CATL was commercializing LMFP batteries with 15-20% higher energy density than LFP batteries. CATL immediately addressed the rumors, saying that the battery chemistry is actually called M3P, which is a different chemistry from LMFP.

为了理解关于CATL M3P的完整故事，让我们从它首次进入公众视野的时候开始说起。去年，有传言开始传出，称CATL正在商业化具有比LFP电池高15-20%能量密度的LMFP电池。CATL立即针对这些传言进行了回应，称这种电池化学实际上被称为 M3P，与LMFP是不同的化学体系。

Within a couple of weeks, more information cropped up, and according to Chinese media, an investigation report confirmed that the new chemistry isn't exactly an LMFP chemistry, but contains other elements. If my read of that is correct and the media report is correct, then M3P is LMFP with some additional dopants.

过了几周，出现了更多的信息，根据中国媒体的报道，一份调查报告确认这种新的化学物质并非纯粹是LMFP（某种化学物质）的化学物质，而是包含了其他元素。如果我的理解正确，并且媒体的报道是准确的，那么M3P就是在LMFP基础上加入了一些其他杂质成分。

Let's work through the alphabet soup of acronyms to understand what all that means. First, what's the difference between an LFP chemistry and an LMFP chemistry? LMFP stands for Lithium Ferro-Fosfate, with Ferro of course being the Latin for iron, so lithium-iron phosphate. It's a high cycle life, moderate energy density chemistry that's often used for short to mid-range vehicles. LMFP uses the same crystal structure as LFP, but swaps out about half the iron atoms for M, or manganese atoms. Depending on how much manganese is added, it can increase the nominal voltage of the crystal structure by 15-20%.

让我们一起读懂缩略语的字母汤，了解所有这些的含义。首先，LFP化学和LMFP化学有什么区别呢？LMFP代表磷酸锂铁，其中"ferro"是指拉丁语中的铁，所以是指磷酸铁锂。它是一种循环寿命高、能量密度适中的化学体系，通常用于短至中程的车辆。LMFP使用与LFP相同的晶体结构，但是将约一半的铁原子替换为M（锰）原子。根据添加的锰量，它可以将晶体结构的名义电压提高15-20%。

LFP typically has a nominal voltage of about 3.2 volts, and with manganese added, it hits around 3.7 volts. That means an increase in maximum energy density from around 200Wh per kilogram to around 230 Wh per kilogram. The catch is that manganese has a tendency to dissolve in the electrolyte and react with the anode, and it also creates yawn-teller effects that distort the crystal structure. You don't need to know what a yawn-teller effect is today, I'll cover that in a future video. The key takeaway here is that manganese can increase energy density, but it can also severely handicap cycle life.

锂铁磷酸盐电池（LFP）通常具有约3.2伏的名义电压，添加锰后，电压可达到约3.7伏。这意味着能量密度的最大增加从每公斤约200瓦时增加到约230瓦时。然而，问题在于锰有溶解于电解质并与阳极反应的倾向，并且还会产生扭曲晶体结构的效果（即所谓的"打哈欠效应"）。今天你不需要知道"打哈欠效应"是什么，我将在将来的视频中讲解。重点是锰可以增加能量密度，但也可能严重损害循环寿命。

This brings us to CATL's M3P chemistry. As I said a moment ago, according to Chinese media, a CATL report stated that the M3P battery isn't exactly an LMFP chemistry, but contains other elements. What are those other elements? According to Shang-Gong Securities, they're magnesium, zinc, and aluminum. I don't know how reliable Shang-Gong's information is, but let's explore their claim. Magnesium, zinc, and aluminum are typically used as dopants in lithium-ion battery cathodes to increase cycling stability rather than to increase energy density. That is, CATL could be using those elements to help solve the cycle life issues created by adding manganese to the LFP crystal structure.

这使我们引入了CATL的M3P化学组成。正如我刚才所说，根据中国媒体的报道，CATL的一份报告指出，M3P电池并非完全是LMFP化学组成，而包含其他元素。那些其他元素是什么？根据上工证券的消息，它们是镁、锌和铝。我不知道上工证券的信息可靠性如何，但让我们来探讨一下他们的说法。镁、锌和铝通常被用作锂离子电池正极的掺杂剂，以提高循环稳定性，而不是增加能量密度。也就是说，CATL可能正在利用这些元素来解决将锰添加到LFP晶体结构中带来的循环寿命问题。

As a side note, based on this two-year-old slide from a CATL presentation, it appears they used to call their M3P chemistry LXFP. I say that because adding manganese is the most straightforward way to fill the X and LXFP to increase energy density to 210 to 230Wh per kilogram and 450 to 500Wh per liter. Notice that the volumetric energy density increase is only about 10% as opposed to the 15% increase for gravimetric. If that's correct and the current LFP packs are constrained by volumetric energy density, then M3P might only offer 10% more pack energy rather than the 15% suggested by the gravimetric energy density figure.

顺便一提，根据一个CATL演示中两年前的幻灯片，他们过去称他们的M3P化学元素为LXFP。我这么说是因为添加锰是增加X和LXFP能量密度最直接的方法，使之达到210至230Wh每公斤和450至500Wh每升。需要注意的是，体积能量密度的增加仅为约10%，而重量能量密度的增加为15%。如果这是正确的，并且当前的LFP电池受到体积能量密度的限制，那么M3P电池可能只能提供比重量能量密度指数所暗示的15%更多的10%电池能量。

Interestingly, the M3P pack rumored for the Model 3 is said to offer a 10% increase in total energy. That may just be coincidence, but I thought it was worth noting because it may add credibility to the rumor.

有趣的是，传闻中Model 3的M3P包装据说可以提供总能量增加了10%。这可能只是巧合，但我认为这值得注意，因为这可能为传闻增添了可信度。

Getting back on track, although we don't have definitive information from CATL on what M3P is, everything is pointing to an LFP crystal structure that makes use of manganese to increase voltage and that's doped with some other elements like magnesium, zinc, and aluminum to extend cycle life.

重新找回正确的轨道，尽管我们没有来自CATL的确切信息说明M3P是什么，但一切都指向一种使用锰来提高电压的LFP晶体结构，并且通过掺杂其他元素如镁、锌和铝来延长循环寿命。

The question is, does that doping solve all the cycle life issues inherent in LMFP and what will it cost? We won't have the answer to those questions until CATL releases more information on the M3P battery, but I can offer some educated guesses.

这个问题是，这种掺杂能否解决所有固有于低镁铁磷酸锂（LMFP）电池中的循环寿命问题，而且将会耗费多少？在CATL发布更多关于M3P电池的信息之前，我们无法回答这些问题，但我可以提供一些有根据的猜测。

With regards to cycle life, my view is that M3P will have a shorter cycle life than an LFP chemistry. The logic here is straightforward. As I said earlier, manganese is fundamentally unstable in battery cathodes. That is, even with doping agents added to increased stability, any amount of manganese added to the cathode will likely cause degradation that reduces battery life compared to a pure LFP cathode. I could be wrong here, but even if I'm right, an M3P has reduced cycle life compared to LFP, interestingly, it may not have a large effect on the commercial viability of the CATL M3P chemistry for vehicles. Let's take a closer look.

关于循环寿命，我的观点是M3P的循环寿命比LFP化学的循环寿命短。这里的逻辑很简单。正如我之前所说，锰在电池阴极中从根本上是不稳定的。也就是说，即使添加了稳定剂增加稳定性，任何添加到阴极的锰都有可能导致降解，与纯LFP阴极相比缩短电池寿命。我可能在这里说错了，但即使我是对的，M3P相比LFP的循环寿命减少，有趣的是，这可能对CATL的M3P化学品在车辆上的商业可行性没有太大影响。让我们仔细看一下。

The key metric for battery cells for electric vehicles is volumetric energy density, whereas cycle life is usually the third most important metric. LFP is actually an overachiever here and is usually rated from 3,000 to 4,000 cycles as compared to the 1,200 or so cycles of a high nickel battery cell.

电动汽车电池单元的关键指标是体积能量密度，而循环寿命通常是第三重要的指标。LFP（磷酸铁锂）在这方面实际上是个“高手”，通常被评为3,000到4,000个循环，而高镍电池单元约为1,200个循环左右。

However, what's that in terms of the lifetime vehicle mileage after also taking into account the range differences between battery chemistries? Starting with LFP, a standard range Tesla Model 3 with an LFP battery pack starts with 272 miles of range. Let's say 270 to keep things simple. If that battery pack has good thermal management and software control, it could last over 800,000 miles. That's as compared to a nickel battery pack with 3 to 400 miles of range, which can last over 360,000 miles.

然而，考虑到不同电池化学成分之间的续航差异，以终身车辆里程来看，那又是什么情况呢？以LFP为例，一辆标准续航特斯拉Model 3搭配LFP电池组的车辆，初始续航里程为272英里。为了简单起见，我们假设续航里程为270英里。如果该电池组具有良好的热管理和软件控制，它的寿命可以超过80万英里。相比之下，镍电池组的续航里程为3至400英里，其寿命可超过36万英里。

If M3P battery packs have 10% greater total energy than LFP battery packs, they'll be good for around 300 miles of range. If they can hit 2,000 cycles, that would mean around 600,000 miles of range over the life of the vehicle. Is that achievable? According to Taiko Run Energy, a Chinese battery supplier, it is. They estimate that emerging LMP-based chemistries are expected to last 2,000 cycles, which I take to include CATOM3P. I don't know where Taiko Run sourced that information because the report didn't include references, but I scrubbed through their 2022 LMP industry report and all the other information seemed to check out. In fact, in several instances, I found that the information used in the Taiko Run report sourced information from research papers that I had also bookmarked in my own research. If that 2,000 cycle figure is correct, M3P will be well suited to EVs.

如果M3P电池组总能量比LFP电池组多10％，它们的续航里程将达到约300英里。如果它们能够达到2,000个充放电循环，那将意味着整个车辆使用寿命内可行驶约600,000英里。这是可行的吗？根据中国电池供应商泰科朗能源的说法，这是可行的。他们估计，新兴的基于LMP的化学体系预计可达到2,000个充放电循环，我认为这也包括CATOM3P。我不知道泰科朗是从哪里获取这些信息，因为报告中没有包含参考资料，但我仔细查阅了他们2022年的LMP行业报告，发现其他信息似乎都是可靠的。事实上，在几个实例中，我发现泰科朗报告所使用的信息都是来源于我自己研究中也收藏了的研究论文。如果这个2,000个充放电循环的数据是正确的，那么M3P将非常适合电动汽车。

However, it would be poorly suited to grid storage as compared to its more robust sister chemistry LFP.

然而，与其更强大的姊妹化学物质LFP相比，它在电网储能方面的适用性较差。

What about cost? The cost information was also difficult to track down because as far as I'm aware, CATL hasn't provided detailed information yet and because in some cases, the Chinese news sources were misreported by Western media outlets. Let's use this article from Electric as an example.

成本方面又如何呢？从我所了解的情况来看，由于CATL尚未提供详细信息，且在某些情况下，中国新闻源被西方媒体错误报道，所以成本信息也很难追踪。让我们以Electric的这篇文章为例。

First, the subtitle in the article states that CATL's M3P batteries should cost less than LMFP. The only source they cite here is GASCO. If we look at the article from GASCO, it doesn't actually make any mention of the cost differential between M3P and LMFP chemistries. Instead, it mentions a cost differential between M3P and ternary lithium battery chemistries. Ternary means composed of three parts and ternary batteries refers to nickel-based batteries that use three metals. For example, nickel, manganese, and cobalt.

首先，这篇文章中的字幕指出，CATL的M3P电池应该比LMFP更便宜。他们唯一引用的来源是GASCO。如果我们看一下GASCO的文章，实际上并没有提及M3P和LMFP化学品之间的成本差异。相反，它提到了M3P和三元锂电池化学品之间的成本差异。三元意味着由三个部分组成，三元电池指的是使用三种金属（如镍、锰和钴）的基于镍的电池。

This brings us to the second thing that Electric's reporting gets wrong. The GASCO article states that the M3P chemistry will be lower cost compared to ternary batteries. If we flip back to the Electric article, it states that M3P batteries are supposed to be at cost parity with ternary lithium cells rather than lower cost. In short, GASCO reported that CATL appeared to suggest a cost hierarchy with LFP being the cheapest M3P slightly more expensive and NMC being the most expensive. That's as opposed to Electric's reporting that was so confusing that the cost hierarchy couldn't really be determined.

这让我们来到了电动车报告失误的第二个问题。GASCO文章中指出，与三元电池相比，M3P电池的化学性质将更低成本。如果我们回过头看电动车文章，它则指出M3P电池应与三元锂电池达到成本平衡，而不是更低成本。简而言之，GASCO报道称，CATL似乎暗示了成本层次结构，其中LFP是最便宜的，M3P略贵一些，NMC是最贵的。相比之下，电动车的报道则如此混乱，以至于无法真正确定成本层次结构。

So what ended up happening is that many people just read what they wish to be true, or they ended up confused. As a side note, CATL wants the M3P battery chemistry to be considered the ternary lithium battery of the phosphate system. I thought I'd mention it here just in case the language takes hope, but hopefully it doesn't. People are already confused enough with LMFP, LXFP, and M3P, let alone giving M3P another name.

结果就是很多人只阅读他们想要真实的信息，或者他们最终变得困惑不解。值得一提的是，CATL希望将M3P电池化学体系视为磷酸盐系统中的三元锂电池。我在这里提一下，以防语言的希望被打破，但希望不是这样。人们已经对LMFP、LXFP和M3P感到足够困惑了，更别提给M3P起另外一个名字了。

But is there any reliable information on the cost of CATL M3P or LMFP, not that I've found so far? However, we may be able to synthesize a reasonable guess from Chinese websites and hints from reporting on CATL. First, as I said a moment ago, CATL appeared to suggest a basic cost hierarchy where the cost of M3P falls between LFP and NMC type batteries. Second, TICO runs suggest that LMFP is 5-10% more expensive at the cathode active materials level than LFP. My understanding is that cost premium is due to the complex manufacturing processes which are required for LFP cathodes that incorporate manganese.

目前我还没有找到关于CATL M3P或LMFP的可靠信息。然而，我们可以从中国的网站和对CATL报道的提示中综合推测一个合理的价格。首先，正如我刚才说的，CATL似乎暗示了一个基本成本层次结构，其中M3P的成本介于LFP和NMC型电池之间。其次，TICO的研究表明，在正极活性材料水平上，LMFP比LFP贵5-10%。我的理解是，这种成本溢价是由于制造LFP正极材料时需要复杂的工艺过程，其中包含锰。

Those processes would be needed not just for LMFP cathode materials, but also likely M3P cathode materials. I'll talk more about that in a future video. Unfortunately, TICO run didn't specify whether the 5-10% more expensive number was in dollars per kilogram of material or dollars per kilowatt hour for material. I'm assuming it's dollars per kilowatt hour because it's a common apples-to-apples metric that takes into account both the cost of the materials and the energy density of the materials.

这些过程不仅适用于LMFP阴极材料，还可能适用于M3P阴极材料。我将在未来的视频中详细讨论这个问题。不幸的是，TICO试车并没有明确说明这个价格比较多出来的5-10%是以材料每千克美元还是以材料每千瓦时美元为单位。我假设是以每千瓦时美元为单位，因为这是一种常见的可比较指标，可以同时考虑材料成本和能量密度。

A 5-10% cost increase at the cathode active materials level for LMFP over LFP would mean that at the cell level LMFP cells would cost less than 5% more than LFP cells per kilowatt hour at scale. This is because the cathode is less than 40% of the total cell cost. TICO runs 5-10% cost increase estimate at the materials level is backed up by Chinese battery supplier Gobel, our third source for cost information. Gobel states that LMFP batteries are only about 5% more expensive than LFP batteries. Given the context, I'm assuming that means at the cell level, so it's roughly in line with the other sources.

如果锂磷酸铁锂（LFP）相比于锂镍锰铁磷酸（LMFP）在正极活性材料方面的成本增加为5-10％，那么在电池单元级别上，LMFP电池每千瓦时的成本将比LFP电池增加不到5％。这是因为正极材料只占总电池成本的不到40％。根据我们的第三方成本信息来自中国电池供应商Gobel的说法，Gobel对这种5-10％的成本增加估计在材料级别上得到了支持。Gobel称LMFP电池只比LFP电池贵约5％。考虑到上下文，我推测这是指在电池单元级别上，因此与其他信息大致相符。

Let's do a quick recap of the specs before moving on. LMFP-based chemistries like M3P will offer about 15-20% greater gravimetric and 10% greater volume energy density than LFP, but will have shorter cycle life by up to half and will cost about 5% more per kilowatt hour. Would those specs entice Tesla to use the M3P battery in a Model 3 or Model Y? The table on screen compares the different battery options for a mid-sized vehicle like the Model 3. As you can see, in terms of range, lifetime mileage and total pack cost, the M3P battery is a nice middle of the road option. It could provide 300 miles of range with 600,000 miles over the life of the vehicle at a packed price of about $8,700. That's less than the roughly $12,400 of a nickel pack, but more than the $7,600 of an LFP pack.

在继续之前，让我们快速复习一下规格。基于锂镍锰钴磷酸（LMFP）的化学成分，如M3P，将比锂铁磷酸（LFP）提供大约15-20%更高的质量能量密度和10%更高的体积能量密度，但循环寿命将缩短一半，而且每千瓦时的成本将增加约5%。这些规格是否能吸引特斯拉在Model 3或Model Y中使用M3P电池？屏幕上的表格对比了Model 3等中型车的不同电池选项。如您所见，在续航里程、寿命里程和总体包装成本方面，M3P电池是一个不错的中间选择。它可以在车辆使用寿命内提供300英里的续航里程，行驶60万英里，包装价格约为8,700美元。这比镍电池的大约12,400美元要少，但比LFP电池的7,600美元要多。

It's worth taking a moment to point out here that people seem to be assuming that because M3P batteries have higher energy density, which allows for higher energy battery packs, it automatically means we'll see vehicles with higher range. That logic fails to take into account that although yes, you can fit more kilowatt hours of cells under the vehicle, each of those kilowatt hours still have an incremental cost. So you can leverage that extra energy density for a pack that contains more energy, but it's not free. In the case of M3P, after taking into account the slight cost premium, it'll cost about 15% or almost $1,200 more than the LFP pack. However, there may be a loophole here that took me about 6 months to realize. More on that in a moment.

在这里值得指出的是，人们似乎认为因为M3P电池具有更高的能量密度，从而允许更高能量的电池组，这就自动意味着我们会看到续航里程更长的汽车。这种逻辑未能考虑到，虽然的确可以在车辆下方安装更多千瓦时的电池，但每个千瓦时仍然有一个递增的成本。因此，你可以利用这种额外的能量密度来制造一个容量更大的电池组，但这并不是免费的。在M3P的情况下，考虑到略高的成本溢价，其造价会比LFP电池组高出约15%，即将近1200美元。然而，可能会有一个我花了大约6个月才意识到的漏洞，稍后再详细阐述。

Now that we've covered energy density, cycle life and cost, let's look at one more aspect of M3P that's often neglected, but that Elon pointed out about 18 months ago on X. We have to take into account that because M3P batteries operate at a higher voltage than LFP batteries, they'll use less lithium. Higher voltage means each lithium ion packs more of a punch, so less lithium is required per kilowatt hour of batteries, roughly 15% less lithium. That means Tesla can produce 15% more vehicles with the same amount of lithium, which means about 15% more revenue per unit of lithium. That is, if Tesla used M3P batteries, they might be in a position where they sacrifice 5% profit at the battery level, which is about 2% at the vehicle level in favor of 15% higher revenues and 15% more vehicles on the road.

既然我们已经讨论了能量密度、循环寿命和成本，那么让我们来看一下M3P的另一个经常被忽视的方面，这是Elon大约18个月前在X上指出的。我们必须考虑到，因为M3P电池的工作电压比LFP电池高，所以它们将使用更少的锂。更高的电压意味着每个锂离子释放更多的能量，因此每千瓦时电池所需的锂更少，大约少约15%。这意味着特斯拉可以用相同量的锂生产多大约15%的汽车，这就意味着每单位锂大约多15%的收入。也就是说，如果特斯拉使用M3P电池，他们可能会在电池级别上牺牲5%的利润，即车辆级别上约2%，而换取15%更高的收入和15%更多的车辆上路。

Before we move on to CATL's production plans, it's worth mentioning two additional side notes on cost. If M3P batteries use about 15% less lithium, they'll have less sensitivity to lithium prices than LFP batteries. That means even though M3P has higher production costs, the materials cost could end up being lower than an LFP battery and become dominant. If that happened during those price spike events, M3P batteries would actually be cheaper on a per kilowatt hour basis than LFP batteries despite the higher production costs. This is similar to what happened during the last price spike when LFP batteries ended up costing more than high nickel batteries despite nickel costing significantly more than iron.

在我们进入CATL的生产计划之前，值得提到两个与成本相关的附加侧面问题。如果M3P电池使用的锂少约15%，那么它们对锂价格的敏感性将比LFP电池低。这意味着即使M3P电池的生产成本更高，但材料成本可能会低于LFP电池并占据主导地位。如果在那些价格剧增事件中发生了这种情况，每千瓦时基础上，M3P电池实际上将比LFP电池更便宜，尽管生产成本更高。这与上次价格剧增时的情况相似，镍的价格明显高于铁，但LFP电池的成本最终高于高镍电池。

Second, even though most of the rumors around M3P have been in relation to the standard range Model 3, M3P is actually a much better candidate for Tesla's vehicles that use high nickel battery packs. How would that be possible if M3P only appears to offer 10% greater volumetric energy density rather than the 20 to 30% required for longer range vehicles? If Tesla combines the M3P chemistry with new pack technologies that offer much higher packing density like the 4680 structural pack or CATL's cheelene pack, for an equivalent pack area they could not only match the pack energy of a high nickel battery pack but potentially exceed it by 29 to 50%. That would mean a range of up to around 500 miles. Bear in mind what we see on screen is mostly based on marketing material. So in reality, each of these figures would probably be about 100 miles less. But even with that 100 mile nerf, M3P should still be capable of delivering at least 400 miles of range with new pack technology. Regardless, the key takeaway here is that replacing nickel battery packs for most long range vehicles with an M3P battery pack should save 15% or almost $1,500 per vehicle.

其次，尽管M3P周围的大部分传言都与标准续航Model 3有关，但M3P实际上更适合使用高镍电池组的特斯拉车型。如果M3P只提供了10%的能量密度增量，而不是长续航车辆所需的20%至30%，那么这种可能性是如何实现的呢？如果特斯拉将M3P的化学性能与提供更高打包密度的新型电池组技术（例如4680结构电池组或CATL的cheelene电池组）结合起来，那么在相同的电池组面积下，它们不仅可以达到高镍电池组的能量水平，而且有可能超过29%至50%。这意味着续航里程可以达到大约500英里。请记住，屏幕上显示的大部分内容都是基于营销材料。因此，实际上，每个数字可能会减少约100英里。但即使有这个100英里的减少，新型电池技术下，M3P仍然能够提供至少400英里的续航里程。无论如何，在这里的关键是，用M3P电池组替换大多数长续航车辆的镍电池组可以节省15%，即每辆车近1500美元。

As the kicker, beyond the cost benefits of replacing a nickel battery pack with M3P, the battery pack would be safer and have longer cycle life because M3P is a more stable chemistry. That is, M3P could be a triple win vs nickel battery packs, cheaper, safer and longer lasting. To me, that makes more sense than replacing cheaper LFP battery packs in the 270 to 280 mile range category with a more expensive battery pack that has similar safety to LFP and likely shorter cycle life.

作为一个重要的亮点，用M3P电池组替换镍电池组不仅能带来成本效益，而且电池组的安全性和循环寿命会更长，因为M3P具有更稳定的化学性质。换句话说，M3P电池组可能是胜过镍电池组的三赢，更便宜、更安全且更持久。对我来说，这比用价格更高、与LFP相似安全性的电池组替换在270到280英里里程范围内更廉价的LFP电池组更合理，而且很可能循环寿命更短。

Finally, if Tesla does decide to use CATOM3P batteries, when could that happen? Every time CATOs launched a new battery pack or chemistry in the past, they've held a launch event to showcase its features. Let's look at three examples. First, they launched their sodium ion batteries in 2021, which they estimated would start production this year. So far, that hasn't happened. Second, they launched the Chilin battery pack last year, which started being used in the ZEAKER001 earlier this year. Third, just last week, they launched the new fast charging Shenxing battery, which is expected to start going into vehicles early next year. That is, CATL usually holds a launch event at least six months before the new battery or chemistry shows up in products. They have advised that the M3P batteries are expected to debut this year, but so far, there's been no launch event. That may mean we won't see M3P batteries in vehicles until sometime next year, even if it launched within the next few weeks.

最后，如果特斯拉决定使用CATOM3P电池，那么可能什么时候会发生呢？在过去，每当CATO推出新的电池包或化学品时，他们都会举办发布活动来展示其特点。我们来看三个例子。首先，他们于2021年推出了钠离子电池，他们估计今年开始生产。到目前为止，这还没有发生。其次，他们于去年推出了Chilin电池组，今年初开始在ZEAKER001上使用。第三，在上周，他们推出了新的快速充电神行电池，预计明年初开始装入车辆中。换句话说，CATL通常会在新电池或化学品出现在产品中至少六个月前举行发布活动。他们已经提到，预计M3P电池将于今年首次亮相，但到目前为止还没有发布活动。这可能意味着即使在接下来的几周内推出，我们也可能要等到明年才能在车辆中看到M3P电池。

In summary, to answer the question posed at the beginning of the video, will CATL's M3P chemistry be used in Tesla vehicles? In the short term, it looks like a low likelihood, because the chemistry hasn't officially launched yet, and there's no other indications that CATL has reached volume production with M3P. However, in the longer term, I expect Tesla to increasingly use M3P or some other variant of LMFP. M3P should have most of the benefits of an LFP chemistry, including a relatively low cost, high safety, and high cycle life, but will have higher energy density and use less lithium per kilowatt hour. That would be perfect for a mid to long range vehicle. I'm sure some other people are also curious about whether it could be used for robo-taxis. In my view, that comes down to whether it can match the ultra-long cycle life of LFP. If it can't, then I suspect LFP will be better suited to robo-taxis because cycle life will be more important than range. In the next video of the LFP series, which this video is part of, I will cover the science behind the M3P chemistry. But before that, I'll be releasing one or two more sections of the global lithium supply chain video. If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting the channel by using the links in the description. A special thanks to Darren Emmerich and Ted Wonderlook for your generous support of the channel, my YouTube members, ex-subscribers, and all the patrons listed in the credits. I appreciate all your support, and thanks for tuning in.

简而言之，回答视频一开始提出的问题，即CATL的M3P化学品是否会用于特斯拉汽车上？短期来看，这看起来可能性较低，因为该化学品尚未正式推出，也没有其他迹象表明CATL已经开始大规模生产M3P。然而，从长期来看，我预计特斯拉将越来越多地使用M3P或LMFP的其他变种。M3P应该具备LFP化学品的大部分优势，包括相对较低的成本、高度安全性和高素周期寿命，但它的能量密度会更高，每千瓦时使用的锂量也会更少。这非常适合中长程的汽车。我相信有些人也会好奇它是否适用于无人驾驶出租车。在我看来，这将取决于它是否能够与LFP的超长周期寿命相匹配。如果不能，那么我认为LFP将更适合无人驾驶出租车，因为寿命对于行驶里程来说更加重要。在接下来的LFP系列视频中，我将介绍M3P化学品背后的科学原理。但在那之前，我将发布全球锂供应链视频的一两个更多章节。如果你喜欢这个视频，请考虑通过描述中的链接支持本频道。特别感谢Darren Emmerich和Ted Wonderlook对本频道的慷慨支持，以及我的YouTube会员、前订阅者和所有列在致谢名单中的赞助者。感谢大家的支持，谢谢收看。