Welcome back everyone, I'm Jordan Geisigee and this is The Limiting Factor. At Tesla's 2023 annual meeting, Elon Musk said that lithium refining is the bottleneck for lithium-ion battery production and he doesn't expect there to be a bottleneck with lithium mining. In other words, he disagrees with lithium industry experts, which are all saying that mining will be the bottleneck.
But he also said that he could be wrong, so is Elon wrong or is the lithium industry wrong? Answering that question actually requires a full walkthrough of the global lithium supply chain and so this video is an excerpt from a larger video that covers the topic in full. The full video is already available for Patreon supporters, Twitter subscribers and YouTube members. I'll be releasing one section of the video every two weeks before releasing the full video at the end of the series.
In this video, we'll look at why lithium will likely be the bottleneck for lithium-ion battery production, the margins of mining versus refining, the forecast for lithium refining capacity and utilization, why Tesla may be pushing for more refining capacity, and why Tesla's vertical integration into lithium refining is a smart move.
Before we begin, a raft of credits and thanks are in order. I encourage watching this part of the video rather than skipping it because it's not just a thanks. It also lets you know the quality of my sources and peer review.
First, Vivaas Kumar reviewed the draft script. Vivaas was directly involved with Tesla's battery supply chain for nearly three years, where he negotiated billions of dollars of material spend and also did strategic analysis and forecasting for battery materials. After that, he worked for benchmark mineral intelligence for nearly three years. He's now co-founder and CEO of Mitra-Kim. If you'd like to know more about that, check out my interview with Vivaas Anchiro.
首先,Vivaas Kumar审查了这份初稿剧本。Vivaas在特斯拉的电池供应链工作了近三年,期间他参与了数十亿美元的物资支出谈判,并对电池材料进行战略分析和预测。之后,他在Benchmark Mineral Intelligence工作了将近三年。他现在是Mitra-Kim的联合创始人和首席执行官。如果您想了解更多信息,请去看看与Vivaas Anchiro的我的采访。
Next, my sources. Rodney and Howard of Arc Equity, a Lithium Analysis and Advisory Firm, spent several hours and long email threads answering detailed questions about mine development. If you're interested in their work, you can connect with them on Twitter with the details on screen or follow the Rockstock channel on YouTube.
接下来是我的资源。Rodney和Howard来自Lithium Analysis and Advisory Firm的Arc Equity,在矿山开发方面耗费了几个小时的时间,并通过长电子邮件线程回答了详细的问题。如果你对他们的工作感兴趣,可以通过屏幕上的详细信息在Twitter上与他们联系,或者关注Rockstock频道的YouTube。
Cameron Perks of benchmark mineral intelligence walked me through how lithium supply and demand is evolving over time. I recommend following benchmark mineral intelligence and their CEO Simon Moore's on Twitter to keep up to date with the Lithium industry. Lars Lee's doll provided key data for this video around lithium refining capacity versus production, and beyond that, I've used a number of graphs from Ristad Energy over the years. You can also follow Lars on Twitter.
Cameron Perks从Benchmark Mineral Intelligence向我解释了锂供应和需求随时间的演变。我建议在Twitter上关注Benchmark Mineral Intelligence及其首席执行官Simon Moore,以了解锂行业的最新信息。Lars Lee提供了关于锂提炼能力与产量的关键数据,此外,我多年来还使用了来自Ristad Energy的许多图表。你也可以在Twitter上关注Lars。
Austin Devaney helped me put a finer point on a few topics around hard rock lithium mining. Ryan was an executive at Alba Marl and Rockwood Lithium for nearly 10 years, which is one of Tesla's largest lithium suppliers, and now has been at Piedmont Lithium for the past three years, which has an agreement for future supply to Tesla.
Bradford Ferguson and Matt Smith of RebellionAir.com reviewed the final release candidate of the video from an investor lens. RebellionAir specializes in helping investors manage concentrated positions. They can help with covered calls, risk management, and creating a financial master plan from your first principles. Bear in mind, this video is not investment advice, and always do your own research.
Finally, despite all the input I received from some of the leading experts and information sources in the Lithium industry, all the opinions in this video are my own. There are differing views and forecasts within the Lithium industry that I had to reconcile and combine with my own insights and expectations. With regards to the peer review, it was for factual accuracy and a sanity check, rather than for crafting the tone and conclusions of the video.
Overall, my goal was to create the most comprehensive resource out there on how global lithium supply and battery supply will evolve this decade and how that relates to Tesla. So if you feel like I've hit the mark and get value from the video or my content in general, toss a coin to your witcher. Using a video like this takes months and generally, analysis like this would be packaged up by an analyst house and put in a report that costs thousands or even tens of thousands of dollars.
Generally, I make about $2 to $600 per video in YouTube ad revenues. That is, it's the direct support that I get from less than 1% of subscribers through Patreon, YouTube, and Twitter that makes the channel possible. The details for support are in the description.
A good place to start with the lithium supply chain is Elon's comment from the Q1 2022 earnings call, where he said that mining and refining will be a limiting factor for Tesla. Why is that?
The image on screen shows how much of each metal is produced each year on a global level. I've labeled lithium in pink. As you can see, global lithium production is between one and four orders of magnitude smaller than the iron, copper, aluminum, and nickel industries. I mention those four metals because they're the other metals used in lithium ion batteries. The next closest bottleneck behind lithium is nickel, which is produced at 27 times greater volumes than lithium.
While it's true that lithium only makes up about 2 to 3% of the weight of a nickel-based lithium ion battery cell compared to 15% for nickel, that nickel can be substituted for iron, which is hugely abundant. That's as opposed to lithium, which can't be substituted in a lithium ion battery. For those already eager to bring up sodium ion batteries, which will face fewer resource constraints than lithium ion batteries, I'll cover those later in the video.
So just on the face of it, to transition the world to sustainable energy, lithium's going to be a bottleneck because it has to grow from a much smaller base than the other materials used in a battery cell. On an absolute basis, it's easier to scale an industry that's already large than it is to scale an industry that's small. That's not to say metals like copper and aluminum or chemicals like phosphate won't also pose a challenge, just that lithium will pose the greatest challenge.
Let's move on to Elon's comment from the Q2 2022 earnings call, which is that mining is easy and lithium refining is harder. While it's true that lithium refining requires a high caliber technical skill set, it's easier than mining in other ways. For example, getting a mining permit is notoriously difficult in some jurisdictions like the US, where it can take 7 to 10 years. That is, both mining and refining are each hard in their own ways.
Furthermore, in my view, it doesn't actually matter which industry is harder. That's because the technical skills and knowledge to do each are out there, it's just a matter of propagating them with investment. That means the relevant question for Tesla shouldn't be which industry is harder, it should be, how quickly can each mining and refining scale to meet Tesla's needs, and is Tesla paying higher margins to miners or refiners? The answers to those questions will let us know where Tesla should focus their resources, because if Tesla wants to accelerate the world's transition to sustainable energy, what they need is large volumes of lithium at a low price.
Let's start with margins. In the Q2 2022 earnings call, Elon said that at that time, lithium refining had software like margins. Is that true? And how do the margins for lithium refining compare to lithium mining? The image on screen shows the margin split for producing lithium from SC or spodumene concentrate from Australia that's been bought at spot prices on the open market and refined in China by an independent refiner into lithium hydroxide. Let's take a look at what that means.
First, spot market pricing means buying a material on the open market rather than on contract. There's spot market pricing available for a number of materials that go into batteries and at different stages of the manufacturing process. This image shows the cost breakdown for producing lithium hydroxide, where all the transactions are done at spot market pricing. As a side note, spot market prices for lithium vary by country, the quality of the lithium and the type of lithium.
Lithium carbonate spot prices in China often attract media attention because it's the largest and most liquid spot market for lithium. However, there's two reasons why the price on the Chinese spot market for lithium carbonate can sometimes lead people astray. First, the Chinese spot market makes up less than 10% of the total lithium market because most lithium is bought on contract at lower prices. Second, as you can see, under the same shipping terms, battery grade lithium carbonate costs about $10,000 less than lithium hydroxide. Both lithium carbonate and hydroxide are used in EV batteries and each chemical has its own market dynamics. Because lithium hydroxide will cost more than lithium carbonate and sometimes lithium carbonate will cost more than lithium hydroxide. That is, the single variable market pricing that often attracts people's attention is a blunt instrument. It doesn't take into account the country quality or type of lithium, let alone whether an EV maker is buying lithium on the spot market or through contract, which we'll get into later.
During the long, spodumine is a type of rock that contains about 1% lithium. Part of the mining process for spodumine involves concentrating the raw material to about 6% lithium, which is called spodumine concentrate. The spodumine concentrate is sent to a refinery in China where it's refined to greater than 99% pure lithium carbonate or hydroxide. The Australian spodumine with Chinese refining pathway for lithium hydroxide is one of the major production pathways that Tesla relies on for their lithium. It probably makes up about a third of the lithium that goes into their batteries from all sources and three-quarters of the lithium Tesla uses to produce cells with Panasonic and for their own 4680 production.
That's because lithium hydroxide is used for high nickel batteries, which is about half of Tesla cell consumption. The other half of Tesla cell consumption is LFP batteries from Chinese companies like CATO, which use lithium carbonate. Although Tesla uses the Australian spodumine with Chinese refining pathway heavily, they buy most of their lithium through private contracts rather than through the spot market. More on that in a moment. With all that background about lithium markets and pricing out of the way, as you can see, for lithium hydroxide production, most of the margin is actually going to lithium miners, shown in orange, as opposed to lithium refiners, shown in green.
Though this graph provides a good visualization, it doesn't provide as much detail as we need. That's because mining and refining production costs are lumped together as cost of production in blue. Let's dig deeper to tease out the production costs for each mining and refining to work out the profit margin percentages for each. The production cost of spodumine concentrate for lithium miners is about $600 per ton. Around December of last year, they were able to turn around and sell that spodumine concentrate on the spot market for $7,000 per ton. It takes 7 tons of spodumine concentrate to make one ton of lithium hydroxide. That means in December, the mined material that went into one ton of lithium hydroxide had a production cost of $4,200 and a market price of $49,000. That led to a profit margin of about 91% for lithium miners.
How about on the refining end? Mining and transport to the refinery costs about $5,000 per ton. In December, the refiners were adding about $10,000 per ton of refining fees. That led to a profit margin of 67% at a sale price of $64,000. That is, on the spot market, both mining and refining offer software like margins. But in December, mining was offering margins 24 percentage points higher than refining. So Elon was correct in saying that refiners are getting huge margins, but at least on the spot market, miners are getting even larger margins.
However, both are currently getting large margins because lithium demand is growing faster than both lithium refining and mining capacity. That is, a shortage. But as I said a moment ago, Tesla buys their lithium hydroxide through private contracts rather than on the spot market. Unfortunately, because Tesla has a number of lithium contracts in place with different suppliers and the contracts are private, we don't know what Tesla's paying on average across all suppliers. With that said, we do know that around December, Tesla's all-in contract price was probably around $30,000 per ton for the Australian mine, Chinese refined pathway for lithium hydroxide. At the same time, of course, it was around $60,000 to $70,000 on the spot market. So Tesla was getting more than a $30,000 discount thanks to contract pricing. As a side note, most lithium contracts are partially indexed against the spot market with a 3-6 month rolling average. So movements in contract pricing typically lag 3-6 months behind the spot market.
Taking into account the rolling average, Tesla was still probably seeing contract prices well above $30,000 per ton in the first and second quarter despite falling prices on the spot market. That's because prices didn't start coming back to earth until the first quarter, which was 3-6 months ago.
But getting back on topic with margins, based on a $30,000 per ton lithium contract price in December, what would the margins look like for the miner and the refiner? Again, it's difficult to say because they're private contracts. However, let's assume that the refining margins remain the same as they were on the spot market and we only adjust the margin for the mined material. That is, like the previous scenario, we'll assume that the refiner still charges $15,000 per ton for refining and pockets $10,000 in profit. But for the mined material, instead of getting $7,000 per ton, the miner only gets around $2,100 per ton. The result is the same 67% margin for the refiner, but the miner still comes out ahead with a 72% margin. So even at contract pricing and giving the refiner the benefit of the doubt, the mining companies are still currently getting higher margins than the refiners. That's not always the case and there have been times in the past when refiners saw larger margins than refiners, like in 2020. But currently, mining margins are higher because mining is the larger bottleneck.
As a side note, some lithium miners integrate lithium refining into the mining operation, which is expected to become more commonplace over time as the industry matures. It's because it increases the end-to-end efficiency of lithium production and allows the miner to capture more profit. It also means whether mining or refining experience an over or under-supplied market in the future, integrated operations can generate a good profit margin in most scenarios. Furthermore, it means that the differentiation Elon highlighted between mining and refining may become less relevant over time because the miner and refiner will be the same company.
Other way, currently, lithium miners are holding all the chips. Whether they sell their lithium on the open market at a high spot price to an independent refiner or sell it on contract and refine it themselves, they're scooping up a huge profit margin. And that'll continue as long as the demand for mined lithium continues to exceed supply, which will likely be the case for most of the decade.
While we're on the topic of lithium margins and pricing, as per Tesla's Q1 earnings call, in the past, they were able to take advantage of low lithium pricing and lock it in with fixed price contracts. Now that prices are coming back down to Earth, they again intend to lock in lithium prices into the latter half of the decade. The question is, will those again be fixed price contracts and how long are the contracts expected to last? There really isn't a clear answer because it depends on the lithium supplier. But we do know that Tesla's negotiating position isn't going to be as strong in this round of negotiations. That's because even though lithium prices have dropped, there's more competition in the lithium market now than there was at any time between 2018 and 2021, which would have been the last time many of these contracts were negotiated.
With all that said, we can take some guidance from this slide from Alba-Marl, which is one of Tesla's largest suppliers. By the end of this year, Alba-Marl intends to sell more of their lithium on the spot market and completely eliminate long-term fixed price contracts in favor of long-term variable contracts, long-term meaning two to five years, which would carry these contracts into the latter half of the decade. Within those long-term variable contracts, companies like Alba-Marl and Tesla will build price floors and ceilings into the contract to protect both parties from large price swings. However, the fact that Alba-Marl is moving away from fixed price contracts gives us an indication of where they think lithium prices had it in the longer term, which is up. That is, Alba-Marl also expects lithium to remain in short supply for the rest of the decade and variable pricing gives them a chance to maximize their profits. They can negotiate that because their bargaining power is increasing. So yes, although Tesla might be able to lock in some fixed price contracts with some suppliers to reduce their exposure to higher prices, an increasing portion of their lithium contracts will be exposed to spot market index pricing. That means even with contract pricing, they'll be paying a higher margin penalty for lithium than they ever have in the past.
Now that we've covered the margins for lithium refining versus mining, let's look at the potential for scaling. Rather than doing a deep dive on the players in the lithium refining industry and the technical challenges of lithium refining, all provide aggregate data and the timeframes involved.
As with other topics in the video, if more depth is needed, I can follow up with a specific video on refining that walks through the gritty engineering details and scaling plans of each refiner. Onscreen is a forecast for global lithium processing capacity complements of rice-dad energy.
The dark blue bars are announced nameplate capacity and the light blue bars are anticipated demand based on the 1.6 degree UN climate scenario. The UN scenarios are a topic for another day, but as shown by this graph, based on that climate scenario, rice-dad is forecasting 6.4 terawatt hours of total battery demand by 2030, which is much more aggressive than most analyst houses.
That is, they aren't softballing it on production demand for lithium refining on their lithium supply and demand graph. Despite that, as you can see, announced nameplate capacity far exceeds demand. For example, in 2023, the announced nameplate capacity is equivalent to 2.1 million tons of lithium carbonate. That's against 880,000 tons of demand for an implicit utilization of 42%.
Implicit utilization is simply calculated by dividing production demand by capacity. The actual utilization will be higher. What do I mean by that? Nameplate capacity is the maximum potential output of a factory, but due to downtime, production ramps and yield losses, the actual utilization is much higher.
Additionally, sometimes low quality lithium needs to be reprocessed to reach battery grade or converted from lithium carbonate to lithium hydroxide. So even though implicit utilization is around 42%, my understanding is that actual utilization is probably around 80-90%.
With that said, it still leaves spare lithium refining capacity of about 10-20% this year and in the next several years. What about later in the decade? The implicit utilization does creep upwards to the 50-60% range, but that likely won't be an issue for two reasons.
First, it only takes about two years to build a lithium refinery and about four years to get from planning to volume production. That is, if refining capacity does look like it'll come up short later in the decade due to an unexpected volume of mined lithium, there's still plenty of time for more refining capacity to be announced and built.
Second, implicit utilization already reached 65% last year, so we already saw a worse lithium refining crunch last year than we're expecting to see later in the decade. So if there appears to be plenty of refining capacity coming online at a global level, and there's still plenty of time to build more refining capacity before the end of the decade, why is Tesla pushing for more refining capacity?
There are several potential reasons, but for me, three stick out as the most likely. First, Tesla has specific requirements that the market may not be able to meet at the supply levels and price that Tesla needs it.
What do I mean by that? The rice stack graph shows aggregate demand for all lithium chemicals. As I said earlier, there are actually several spot markets for the different types and grades of lithium.
High purity lithium hydroxide is the only chemical that can be used to produce the high nickel cathodes that are used in Tesla's 2170 and 4680 battery cells. Lithium hydroxide is more difficult to produce than lithium carbonate, so it tends to be more expensive and more difficult to source.
So Tesla could be seeing a bottleneck in their specific supply mix that might not show up in the aggregate data. That bottleneck likely wouldn't affect their LFP battery supply, but could affect the roughly 50% of their vehicles that do use nickel-based battery cells.
In fact, this may be one of the many reasons why Tesla is increasingly shifting to LFP battery cells. The second reason why Tesla may be pushing for lithium refining is that there's expected to be a large amount of mined lithium coming online around 2024 that could overwhelm refiners.
However, that would require two things to happen. First, all of those lithium mines would have to come online on time, which is unlikely. Just like any production ramp, it's more likely that some of the project timelines slip, and they don't hit volume production until 2025 or even 2026.
Second, at the same time, lithium refiners would have to experience huge setbacks to the 50% growth rate they expect to hit not just this year, but in 2024 and 2025 as well. That is, a sustained shortage of lithium refining capacity could happen, but it's unlikely.
With that said, it is possible that refining sees occasional bottlenecks. That's because it's rare for everything in a supply chain to ramp perfectly in unison. With so many mines ramping production, there could be times where it catches the refiners off guard.
The third reason why Tesla is pushing for more lithium refining may be related to regionalization. Besides aggregating lithium carbonate and hydroxide, the rice that graph doesn't break down refining capacity by region. Lithium chemicals can be shipped around the world for processing, but it's not ideal. At the groundbreaking for Tesla's new lithium refinery in Texas, Turner Caldwell said that the major focus of the refinery was regionalizing the lithium supply chain.
Before that event, Ellie in space contacted me and we worked shop some questions for Drew Baglino. Ellie did get a chance to speak with Drew and she posted the interview for her Twitter subscribers and gave me permission to share part of the interview here. For the rest, subscribe to Ellie on Twitter.
Drew Baglino confirmed regionalization has several benefits for Tesla. First, it improves the feedback and learning loop for the lithium supply chain. Second, it reduces logistics costs. Lithium usually has to be shipped from Australia or South America to China and then back to other parts of the world for use in batteries, which is expensive and wasteful. Third, tax credits from the recently passed inflation reduction act will help drive down the cost of lithium production in the US.
However, there are two other things that Drew didn't mention. First, the bulk of lithium refining capacity is in China. So if Tesla wants to be the master of their own destiny, they need to break that monopoly. If Tesla can establish a lithium refining beachhead in the US and in doing so encourage others to do the same, it'll help accomplish that. Second, the talent pool for lithium refining in the US is small. Tesla's lithium refinery will incubate a US-based talent pool for lithium refining. If some of those engineers are ambitious, they can start their own lithium refining companies in the US and take some of the load off of Tesla.
With all that in mind, if Tesla wants more entrepreneurs to get into lithium refining, their words might have greater impact if they provided insights into which region that bottle neck is in and what type of lithium chemical. That's because there appears to be plenty of refining capacity in the pipeline and it can be brought online more quickly than lithium mines. More on that in a moment.
Although Tesla's comments do draw attention to lithium refining, and that's somewhat helpful in itself, money talks. So the one factor that's most likely to increase lithium production in the US is the Inflation Reduction Act tax credits for battery materials.
Either way, if lithium refining capacity is tighter than the forecasts indicate and Tesla's force to build more in-house refining capacity, I view that as a positive. That's because it'll dramatically reduce logistics costs, give them access to Inflation Reduction Act tax credits, and reduce the software-like margins that they're paying to lithium refiners, all of which will reduce the bill of materials for battery cell production.
That's important because the bill of materials for battery cell production has increased from 40% to 70 to 80% of the cost of a battery cell since 2015 due to improvements in battery cell manufacturing, which will continue. And within the bill of materials in the last three years, the price of lithium alone made up between 9 to 44% of the total bill of materials.
Telling that up, vertically integrating on lithium refining would save between 2 to 12% of the cost of a battery cell. Let's say 7% on average. Battery cells this year will probably cost on average around 110 to $120 per kilowatt hour. If Tesla gets their cells cheaper at around $100 per kilowatt hour, that would mean a savings of around $7 per kilowatt hour from refining alone, which would be costing Tesla over $1 billion per year.
Beyond that, Tesla's goal is to build at least one terawatt hour of in-house battery production in the US by 2030. At $7 a kilowatt hour, in-house lithium refining would be worth $7 billion per year, which at a PE ratio of 30 would be worth $210 billion of market cap or $70 per share. That is, vertically integrating on battery materials, even just lithium refining is a seriously worthwhile endeavor.
In summary, although margins are high for lithium refining, the margins for lithium mining are higher. Furthermore, there appears to be enough lithium refining capacity on the market to maintain healthy supply growth well into the second half of the decade.
Although there are several circumstances where there is a potential for lithium mining to outpace refining, it doesn't appear to be the fundamental bottleneck for the growth of lithium supply.
虽然在一些情况下锂矿开采可能超过了提炼的速度,但这似乎不是储量增长的根本瓶颈。
Finally, regardless of whether the fundamental bottleneck is or isn't lithium refining, the financial benefits of vertically integrating into lithium refining is worth Tesla's time to say the least.
最后,无论基本瓶颈是否是锂精炼,垂直整合锂精炼业务的财务收益对特斯拉来说都是值得一试的。
That's all for today, but before I close out the video, as I said at the beginning of the video, if you can, toss a coin to your witcher. The information I've provided today is, to my knowledge, the most comprehensive video on lithium supply out there.
Other reports that are available on the market can cost thousands of dollars, and by comparison, if this video does well, I expect it to make less than $1,000 from YouTube ad revenues. It's the supporters who contribute directly that make the channel possible.
A special thanks to Johnny Nye in house. For your generous support of the channel, my YouTube members, Twitter subscribers, and all the patrons listed in the credits.