How LMFP and Sodium Ion Batteries will Change the Battery Market // 2023, 2025, and 2030
发布时间 2023-09-27 13:59:54 来源
Welcome back everyone. I'm Jordan Geesege and this is The Limiting Factor. In the last few weeks several slides have showed up on X that provide roadmaps for LMFP and sodium ion battery chemistries. If we combine those slides with the research that I've gathered in the last few years on LFP and high nickel battery chemistries, we now have enough information to speculate about how the cost and specs for each major battery chemistry will evolve this decade. So today I'll walk you through the slides that were shared on X, build roadmaps for 2023, 25, and 2030 for what I expect to be the five dominant battery chemistries this decade, and then using those roadmaps look at how the competitive landscape for batteries will evolve from now until 2030.
大家好，欢迎回来。我是乔丹·吉瑟奇（Jordan Geesege），这里是《限制因素》（The Limiting Factor）。在过去几周里，X上出现了几张幻灯片，提供了LMFP和钠离子电池化学的路线图。如果我们将这些幻灯片与我在过去几年中收集的关于LFP和高镍电池化学的研究相结合，我们就有足够的信息来推测本十年各种主要电池化学的成本和规格如何演变。所以今天我将为大家介绍在X上分享的幻灯片，构建2023年、2025年和2030年的路线图，展望本十年内我预计的五种主导电池化学，并且利用这些路线图来研究从现在到2030年间电池市场竞争格局的演变。
That is, which chemistries will come to dominate product segments such as EVs and grid storage. 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 plan from your financial first principles.
也就是说，哪些化学品将主宰电动汽车和电网储能等产品领域。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。他们专注于帮助投资者管理集中持仓。Rebellionair可以提供看涨期权、风险管理以及从财务第一原则创建一个资金管理计划。
Let's start with this image from Electrios. Electrios brands itself as Asia's only dedicated lithium ion and electric vehicle consulting firm, but they aren't very active on X and the image was actually shared by battery bulletin. I've used several slides from battery bulletin in the past, so if you're on X, I recommend following that account. The Electrios image shows three screen grabs from a BYD presentation on sodium ion batteries. The top slide is information on their technology. The middle slide shows cycle life and energy density figures, and the bottom slide shows the bill of materials for sodium ion versus LFP batteries.
让我们从Electrios这张图片开始。Electrios自称是亚洲唯一一家专注于锂离子电池和电动汽车咨询的公司，但他们在X上的活动并不是很活跃，而这张图片实际上是由battery bulletin分享的。我以前使用过battery bulletin的几张幻灯片，所以如果你在X上，我建议关注那个账号。Electrios的图片显示了来自比亚迪(BYD)关于钠离子电池的演示中的三张截图。顶部幻灯片是关于他们的技术的信息。中间幻灯片显示了循环寿命和能量密度的数据，底部幻灯片显示了钠离子电池和LFP电池的材料清单。
With regards to the top slide, for today's discussion, it's not relevant. That's because it's mostly a bunch of technical jargon, whereas today I'm focusing on specs and cost, which are shown in the middle and bottom slides. If we take a closer look at those slides, we can see that they provide specs for two separate variants of sodium ion batteries, those with layered oxide and poly anion crystal structures. People often speak of sodium ion batteries as if there's one sodium ion chemistry, but reality's more complex.
关于顶部幻灯片，对于今天的讨论而言，它并不相关。那是因为它主要是一堆技术术语，而今天我关注的是规格和成本，这些都显示在中间和底部幻灯片上。如果我们仔细看这些幻灯片，我们可以看到它们提供了两种不同类型的钠离子电池的规格，一种是层状氧化物，另一种是聚合阴离子晶体结构。人们通常把钠离子电池说成只有一种钠离子化学反应，但实际情况更为复杂。
As I covered in my first video on sodium ion batteries, there are three general types, layered oxides, poly anions, and PBA or Prussian blue analogs. Generally, layered oxides have high energy density and lower cycle life. That's in part because they devote more space in the crystal structure to sodium ions, which means more energy stored but less structural stability. That's as opposed to poly anions and PBA's, which have low energy density and higher cycle life. That's because they devote less space to storing sodium ions and more to structural stability.
正如我在关于钠离子电池的第一个视频中所介绍的，它们一般分为三种类型：层状氧化物、多元阴离子和PBA或普鲁士蓝类似物。一般来说，层状氧化物具有较高的能量密度和较低的循环寿命。部分原因是因为它们在晶体结构中为钠离子提供了更多的空间，这意味着存储的能量更多，但结构稳定性较低。这与多元阴离子和PBA不同，它们具有较低的能量密度和较高的循环寿命。因为它们为储存钠离子提供了较少的空间，更多地用于结构稳定性。
Beyond energy density and cycle life, in past videos I also covered the potential price floor for sodium ion batteries based on the materials costs. However, in reality, battery technology often takes years of scaling and manufacturing improvements to approach the materials costs. That is, sodium ion batteries aren't going to be hitting $40 per kilowatt hour price points when they're first produced. The question is, how long will it take sodium ion batteries to fulfill their potential in terms of energy density, cycle life, and cost? And what'll that evolution look like? That's where these two slides from BYD help out.
在过去的视频中，我还涵盖了基于材料成本的钠离子电池潜在价格底部。然而，事实上，电池技术通常需要多年的规模化和制造改进来接近材料成本。也就是说，当钠离子电池首次生产时，并不会达到40美元每千瓦时的价格水平。问题是，钠离子电池要多久才能在能量密度、循环寿命和成本等方面发挥其潜力？这个演变将会是什么样子？这就是来自比亚迪公司的这两张幻灯片能够帮助解答的地方。
For their layered oxide batteries, between now and 2025, BYD expects energy density to increase from 140 to 180Wh per kilogram. Cycle life to increase from 3,600 to 6,000 cycles, and the bill of materials to drop to 83% of the cost of an LFP battery. For their poly anion batteries, between now and 2025, they expect energy density to increase from 110 to 150Wh per kilogram. Cycle life to increase from 6,000 to 10,000 cycles, and the bill of materials to drop to 69% of the cost of LFP batteries.
在2025年之前，比亚迪（BYD）预计他们的层状氧化物电池的能量密度将从每公斤140Wh增加到180Wh。循环寿命将从3600个循环增加到6000个循环，而材料费用将降低到锂铁磷酸（LFP）电池费用的83%。而对于他们的多聚阴离子电池来说，在现在和2025年之间，他们预计其能量密度将从每公斤110Wh增加到150Wh。循环寿命将从6000个循环增加到10000个循环，而材料费用将降低到锂铁磷酸（LFP）电池费用的69%。
Nice. How reliable are BYD's numbers here? As far as I'm aware, although BYD is building factories to produce sodium ion batteries, there's no evidence that BYD has actually started mass production. So in my view, the specs and cost on BYD's slide are aspirational. With that said, the information is still useful. That's because it tells us the specs and cost that BYD hopes to hit in order to be competitive, which gives us an idea of what we might expect from the broader sodium ion battery market.
很好。BYD的数据可靠性如何？据我所知，尽管BYD正在建设工厂生产钠离子电池，但没有证据表明BYD实际上已经开始大规模生产。因此，在我看来，BYD幻灯片上的规格和成本是理想化的。尽管如此，这些信息仍然是有用的。这是因为它告诉我们BYD希望达到的规格和成本，以提高竞争力，从而让我们对更广泛的钠离子电池市场有所期待。
Let's take a quick look at each spec for due diligence. First, the energy density specs are a good approximation of what I've seen claimed by other manufacturers. Maybe a little high, but a good approximation for the purposes of this video. As for the cycle life specs, they're aggressive compared to other claims I've seen. So when I transfer all this information to the summary table, I'll nerf the cycle life specs.
让我们简要了解一下每个尽职调查参数。首先，能量密度规格是我见过其他制造商声称的很好的近似值。也许稍微高了一点，但对于这个视频的目的来说是一个不错的近似值。至于循环寿命规格，与我见过的其他声称相比，它们是比较激进的。因此，当我将所有这些信息转移到总结表中时，我会缩减循环寿命规格。
As for the bill of materials cost comparison of the two sodium ion chemistries versus LFP, overall it looks good, but I think a brief explanation of the cost differential between the two cathodes would be helpful. The reason why layered oxide sodium ion cathodes are projected to cost more is that they tend to use more metals like nickel to increase voltage, which capitalizes on their key strength, which is energy density. That's as opposed to poly anion type sodium ion cathodes that tend to use elements like iron for their crystal structure to reduce the bill of materials, which maximizes their key strength, which is cost per kilowatt hour per cycle.
关于两种钠离子化学电池与LFP的物料成本比较，总体看起来不错，但我认为简要解释一下两种正极材料成本差异会很有帮助。分层氧化物钠离子正极材料预计成本更高的原因是它们倾向于使用更多如镍等金属来提高电压，以充分发挥其主要优势，即能量密度。与此相反，聚氧阴离子型钠离子正极材料倾向于利用铁等元素的晶体结构来降低物料成本，最大化其主要优势，即每千瓦时循环成本。
Finally, before we look at the summary table, it's worth noting that BYD only provided specs and cost information to 2025. So I've had to take some educated guesses as to how the specs and cost would evolve over time. Let's take a look at the table and I'll explain my thinking.
最后，在我们查看总结表格之前，值得注意的是，比亚迪（BYD）只提供了到2025年的规格和成本信息。因此，我不得不做一些根据实际情况猜测这些规格和成本在未来如何演变的工作。让我们来看看表格，我会解释我的思考过程。
On screen is a summary of sodium ion batteries for 2023, 25, and 2030. I've added two additional rows beyond what was covered in the BYD slides. First, a row for volumetric energy density that was extrapolated from other sources. While sodium ion batteries tend to have reasonable gravimetric energy density, they have poor volumetric energy density. That matters in use cases like EVs, where range can be limited by poor volumetric energy density. But it's less important for applications like grid storage. Second, I added a row for safety, which is a big selling point for sodium ion batteries. That's because thermal runaway for sodium ion batteries happens at a higher temperature. And even when it does happen, it's less violent.
屏幕上显示了2023年、2025年和2030年钠离子电池的摘要。我在比亚迪幻灯片所涵盖的内容之外添加了两行额外的信息。首先，是从其他来源推断出来的体积能量密度行。尽管钠离子电池倾向于具有合理的质量能量密度，但其体积能量密度较低。这在电动汽车等使用场景中很重要，因为体积能量密度较低可能导致续航里程受限。但对于像电网储能这样的应用来说，体积能量密度就不那么重要了。其次，我添加了一个关于安全性的行，这是钠离子电池的一个重要卖点。因为钠离子电池的热失控温度较高，而且即使发生热失控，也不会像其他电池那样剧烈。
Moving along to grab a metric energy density, for 2023 and 2025, I used BYD specs. And for 2030, I had to fill in the blank. For layered oxides, I chose 200 watt hours per kilogram. That number should be doable because some sodium ion battery manufacturers, like Farradion, are already getting close to hitting that energy density today. With that said, Farradion seems to be several years ahead of the rest of the sodium ion battery market. So in my view, 200 watt hours per kilogram is a fair guess for what most sodium ion battery manufacturers could achieve with a layered oxide in 2030. As for PBA and polyanion sodium ion batteries in 2030, I'm assuming they'll follow a similar trajectory as layered oxide cathodes, with most of the energy density gains occurring between 2023 and 2025, and lesser gains from 2025 to 2030.
继续推断能源密度，对于2023年和2025年，我使用了比亚迪（BYD）的技术规格。而对于2030年，我不得不填写空白。对于层状氧化物，我选择了每公斤200瓦时的能量密度。这个数字应该是可行的，因为像Farradion这样的一些钠离子电池制造商，已经接近达到这个能量密度了。话虽如此，Farradion似乎在钠离子电池市场上领先了其他几年。因此在我看来，每公斤200瓦时的能量密度是大多数钠离子电池制造商在2030年能够实现的合理预测。至于2030年的PBA和聚阴离子钠离子电池，我假设它们的发展轨迹将与层状氧化物阳极类似，能量密度的大部分增益将发生在2023年至2025年之间，而从2025年至2030年的增益会较少。
That raises the question, why do I assume rapid energy density gains earlier in the decade and slower gains later in the decade? It's because I expect that sodium ion batteries will benefit from the knowledge that's been accumulated from the development of lithium ion batteries, which means they'll see more improvements more quickly, but also approach their theoretical limits more quickly. Regardless, energy density is a secondary concern for PBA and polyanion batteries because they'll be targeting high cycle life use cases like grid storage, where energy density isn't even in the top three priorities.
这引出一个问题，为什么我认为在这十年的前期能量密度会快速增长，而后期增长会较慢？这是因为我预计钠离子电池将从锂离子电池的发展中积累的知识中获益，这意味着它们将更快地实现更多的改进，但也更快地接近它们的理论极限。无论如何，对于PBA和聚阴离子电池而言，能量密度是次要的关注点，因为它们将针对像电网储能这样高循环寿命的使用场景，而能量密度甚至不是前三个优先考虑的因素之一。
Moving along to cycle life. As I said earlier, BYD's cycle life estimates seemed aggressive, so in my table I knocked them back considerably. For example, BYD estimated 10,000 cycles for polyanion in 2025, whereas I'm showing 8,000 cycles. As for 2030, I assumed a similar improvement in cycle life from 2023 to 2025 as 2025 to 2030, which light energy density means decreasing annual improvements over time. The end result is that my 2030 cycle life figures are roughly comparable to BYD's 2025 figures.
接下来谈一下循环寿命。如前所述，比亚迪对循环寿命的估计似乎过于激进，所以在我的表格中我将其大幅降低。例如，比亚迪在2025年对聚酸酯的循环寿命估计为10,000次，而我显示为8,000次。至于2030年，我假设循环寿命的改进与2023年到2025年的类似，这意味着能量密度逐年下降的改进速度。最终结果是，我对2030年的循环寿命数据与比亚迪对2025年的数据相当。
Finally, cost. For 2023 in 2025, I used BYD's cost reduction estimates versus LFP and assumed a current cost of $75 per kilowatt hour at the PAC level for LFP batteries. That resulted in over $160 per kilowatt hour in 2023 and $52 to $62 per kilowatt hour in 2025.
最后，成本。在2023年至2025年，我使用比亚迪（BYD）对LFP电池的成本削减估计，并假设LFP电池在PAC（电芯组件总成）水平的当前成本为每千瓦时75美元。这导致2023年每千瓦时超过160美元，而2025年每千瓦时为52至62美元。
As for 2030, I used cost advice from Farradion and CATL. Farradion expects their sodium ion battery cells, which use a layered oxide cathode, will eventually cost about 28% less than LFP batteries. Let's assume that 28% cost reduction carries over to the PAC level, because sodium ion batteries may need less PAC material to keep them safe.
就2030年而言，我使用了Farradion和CATL的成本建议。Farradion预计，他们使用层状氧化物阴极的钠离子电池单元的成本最终将比钴酸锂电池降低约28%。让我们假设这28%的成本降低可以延续到电池组级别，因为钠离子电池可能需要较少的电池组保护辅助材料，以确保其安全性。
LFP battery packs currently cost about $75 per kilowatt hour to produce, so 28% less means roughly $54 per kilowatt hour. However, I went a bit lower and entered $50 per kilowatt hour for 2030. That's because I expect companies like BYD and CATL to use less nickel in their layered oxide formulations than Farradion. That may mean a sacrifice in energy density, but it would also mean slightly lower cost.
LFP电池组当前的生产成本约为每千瓦时75美元，所以减少28%意味着每千瓦时大约为54美元。然而，我稍微降低了预期，将2030年的每千瓦时定为50美元。这是因为我预计像比亚迪和宁德时代这样的公司在他们的层积氧化物配方中使用的镍量比法拉尼昂少。这可能意味着能量密度的牺牲，但也会导致稍微降低的成本。
As for PBA and polyanion cathodes in 2030, CATL expects their PBA based sodium ion batteries will eventually cost about $40 per kilowatt hour to produce. Although CATL is using a PBA based cathode and BYD is using polyanion, if they're using the same materials like iron and manganese, they'll likely end up at a similar cost point.
至于2030年的PBA和聚阴离子阴极，CATL预计他们基于PBA的钠离子电池生产成本最终每千瓦时将达到约40美元。尽管CATL使用的是基于PBA的阴极，而BYD使用的是聚阴离子，但如果它们使用相同的材料，如铁和锰，它们最终可能会达到类似的成本点。
Now that we've covered sodium ion batteries, let's move on to the Su-Chow security slides on LMP batteries. I sourced these Su-Chow slides from active material, which is another account worth following on X if you're into batteries. It appears that active materials used a translation app to convert the original document from Chinese characters to English, so you may notice some wording on the pages that doesn't make sense. Despite those errors, the information here is likely well researched and sourced. The specs that I can check are fairly accurate, and it comes from an analyst house that likely has contacts within the industry, as most analysts' houses do.
现在，我们已经介绍了钠离子电池，让我们继续关注苏州(或其他)介绍关于锂金属聚合物电池的安全幻灯片。我从活性材料获取了这些幻灯片，如果你对电池感兴趣，这也是一个值得关注的账号。看起来，活性材料使用了一个翻译应用程序将原始文件从中文字符转换成了英文，所以你可能会注意到页面上有一些用词不通顺的地方。尽管有这些错误，这里的信息很可能经过了深入的研究和来源检查。我可以核对的规格相当精确，并且这些信息来自一家分析公司，该公司可能在业内有联系，就像大多数分析公司一样。
With that said, no one has a crystal ball, so it's best to view the information as indicative rather than gospel truth. Luckily, despite some of the information-suffering translation errors, the key specs appear to have translated well. Let's walk through each. In my M3P video, I said that M3P and LMF-B chemistries should reach a maximum energy density of about 230Wh per kilogram, achieve about 2000 cycles, cost about 5% more than LFP batteries, and have a good safety profile thanks to a high thermal runaway temperature. That roughly aligns with Su-Chow's estimate of up to 240Wh per kilogram, 2 to 2500 cycles, good safety that's comparable to an LFP battery chemistry, and a 5.1% cost premium compared to LFP battery packs.
话虽如此，没有人能预测未来，所以最好将这些信息视为指示性的，而不是百分之百的真实。幸运的是，尽管部分信息存在翻译错误，关键规格似乎翻译得很好。让我们逐一介绍一下。在我的M3P视频中，我说M3P和LMF-B的化学特性应该能够达到每公斤约230Wh的最大能量密度，达到约2000个循环次数，比LFP电池多出约5%的成本，并且由于高热失控温度而具有良好的安全性。这大致与苏州的估计吻合，即每公斤最高可达240Wh，2至2500个循环次数，具有与LFP电池化学相当的良好安全性，并且与LFP电池组相比有5.1%的成本溢价。
However, beyond current state, the Su-Chow slides also give a time progression on several of those specs from now to 2030. First, between now and 2027, it shows the progression of the specific capacity of the cathode from 145 to 155Mp per gram. That could be as a result of either improvements to the manufacturing process or the chemistry itself, but it is something we'd expect as part of the learning curve for the commercialization of LMFP. That's because the real world-specific capacity of battery chemistries always move toward their theoretical-specific capacity as the technology evolves.
然而，除了现有状态之外，苏州滑坡还显示了一些规格在现在到2030年之间的时间进展。首先，在现在到2027年之间，它显示了正极的具体容量从每克145到155兆帕斯升级的进展。这可能是由于制造工艺或化学本身的改进，但这是我们预期的LMFP商业化学习曲线的一部分。这是因为电池化学的真实世界容量总是随着技术的发展而趋向其理论容量。
Second, from 2025 to 2029, it shows the progression of voltage from 3.9V to 4V. In my view, 3.9 to 4V seems high, but my guess is that they're just using primary operating voltage rather than average voltage. Regardless, what matters is that the voltage slightly increases over time. Once again, that's something we'd expect, but this time because increasing the voltage by increasing the manganese content of the cathode is an obvious way to increase the energy density of LMFP batteries. But just because it's obvious doesn't mean it's easy. As I showed in my M3P video, using manganese generates degradation issues, and more manganese would mean more degradation. But it's certainly a challenge that could be solved throughout the course of the decade by battery manufacturers.
其次，在2025年到2029年期间，电压从3.9V逐渐增加到4V。在我看来，3.9到4V似乎很高，但我猜他们只是使用了主要工作电压而不是平均电压。不管怎样，重要的是电压随着时间略微增加。再次强调，这是我们预期的，因为通过增加正极的锰含量来增加LMFP电池的能量密度是一种明显的方式。但仅仅因为很明显并不意味着容易实现。正如我在我的M3P视频中展示的那样，使用锰会导致降解问题，而增加锰含量会意味着更多的降解问题。但这绝对是一个可以在这个十年里由电池制造商解决的挑战。
Overall, after taking into account the improvements to both specific capacity and voltage, Souchau shows that the energy density of LMFP increases from 8% greater than LFP in 2023 to 18% greater in 2030. That in turn would be responsible for most of the cost improvements we see at the bottom of the table. Souchau expects LMFP batteries to cost 5.1% more than LFP in 2023, roughly break even in 2025, and then 8.7% cheaper in 2030. I'm assuming they're referring to pack level battery cost here because LFP battery packs currently cost about $75 to produce, which aligns with the.56 yuan per watt hour we see here.
总的来说，考虑到具体容量和电压的改进，Souchau显示，在2023年，LMFP的能量密度比LFP大8%，到2030年，则增加到18%。这将成为我们在表格底部看到的大部分成本改进的原因。Souchau预计，到2023年，LMFP电池的成本将比LFP多5.1%，到2025年大致持平，然后到2030年降低8.7%。我猜他们在这里提到的是电池包的成本，因为目前LFP电池包的生产成本约为75美元，这与我们在这里看到的0.56元/瓦时相符。
Can we trust Souchau's estimates for energy density and cost? In my view, there are three factors to consider here. First, the 10% energy density improvement they're expecting seems reasonable, but I'd caution that battery chemistry can present unpredictable challenges that make predicting future increases in energy density inherently fraught. Overall, I'm happy with Souchau's assumptions here for energy density, but keep in mind that if energy density increases didn't pan out, it would have a knock-on effect to cost. That's because increasing the energy density of a battery tends to reduce cost through more efficient material use. So if the 10% energy density increase turned out to be lower, the cost reduction estimates could be overestimated.
我们能相信Souchau关于能量密度和成本的估计吗？在我看来，这里有三个因素需要考虑。首先，他们预计的10%能量密度提升似乎是合理的，但我要提醒的是，电池化学反应可能会带来难以预测的挑战，这使得预测未来能量密度增加存在困难。总体而言，我对Souchau在能量密度方面的假设感到满意，但请记住，如果能量密度的增加未能实现，将会对成本产生连锁影响。这是因为电池能量密度的增加通常通过更高效的材料使用来降低成本。所以如果10%的能量密度增加被低估了，成本减少的估计可能会被高估。
Second, however, on the flip side, they expect the price of lithium to drop by 60% throughout the decade, whereas I expect it to remain relatively flat or increase. The decreasing lithium price that Souchau's forecasting actually works to the disadvantage of LMFP battery cost in relation to LFP battery cost. That's because, as I explained in the M3P video, LMFP batteries have higher voltage than LFP batteries, which means each lithium ion packs more of a punch, and therefore less lithium is required per kilowatt hour of batteries. So when lithium prices are higher, LMFP batteries will get cheaper in relation to LFP batteries, which need about 15% more lithium per kilowatt hour due to their lower voltage.
然而，另一方面，他们预计锂价格在这十年中将下降60%，而我预计它将保持相对平稳或增长。苏超预测的锂价格下降实际上对于LMFP电池成本与LFP电池成本之间的关系是不利的。这是因为，正如我在M3P视频中解释的那样，LMFP电池的电压比LFP电池高，这意味着每个锂离子的能量更强劲，因此每千瓦时电池所需的锂较少。因此，当锂价格较高时，相对于LFP电池而言，LMFP电池将变得更便宜，因为LFP电池由于其较低的电压，每千瓦时电池需要多约15%的锂。
The third note on cost is that due to economies of scale and learning, increases in production capacity naturally lead to reductions in cost. The faster the scale of a product grows, the faster the cost reductions. I expect the growth rate of LMFP batteries, that is, the percentage growth rather than absolute volume, to exceed the growth rate of LFP batteries. So it's reasonable to assume that if they started a similar price point, LMFP batteries will see greater cost reductions by 2030. That is, on balance, taking into account the energy density improvements, the effect of lithium prices and relative scaling effects, Souchao's cost estimates for LMFP battery packs seem reasonable.
关于成本的第三点是，由于规模经济和学习效应，产能增加自然会导致成本降低。产品规模增长得越快，成本降低的速度就越快。我预计LMFP电池的增长率，即相对增长率而非绝对量的增长率，将超过LFP电池的增长率。因此，合理地假设如果它们从相似的价格点开始，到2030年，LMFP电池的成本降低将更大。综合考虑能量密度改进、锂价格和相对规模效应，Souchao对LMFP电池组的成本估算似乎是合理的。
With that in mind, as with sodium ion batteries, I've made this table to summarize the evolution of LMFP batteries for 2023, 25, and 2030. Once again, bear in mind that I've had to fill in some blanks here, and due to that, some of the information is educated guesses. Let's walk through the table and I'll explain my thinking. For energy density, Souchao didn't give exact numbers, so I had to extrapolate from their percentages using 195Wh per kilogram as the LFP benchmark, and added 8, 13, and 18% for 2023, 25, and 2030. That provided 210, 220, and 230Wh per kilogram. For volumetric energy density, I used a leaked roadmap from CATL, which suggested LMFP should be capable of 450 to 500Wh per liter, so that's the range I used for 2023, 25, and 2030. For cost, I used Souchao's figures, which appeared to be a pack level estimate. They were listed in U1 per watt hour, so I converted them to US dollars per kilowatt hour for my table. As for safety, LMFP should have a similar safety profile to LFP, which is better than high nickel or high cobalt batteries, but worse than sodium ion batteries. So I've given it a rating of great in the final table as opposed to the excellent I gave sodium ion. Finally, I've kept cycle life steady for the rest of the decade because I expect LMFP battery manufacturers to focus on energy density at the cost of cycle life. That's because I don't think LMFP will be able to compete with LFP or sodium ion in cycle life. So it would make more sense for manufacturers to increase the energy density of LMFP to take market share from costlier high energy density nickel based batteries.
考虑到这一点，我制作了这个表格，总结了2023年、2025年和2030年LMFP电池的发展情况。再次提醒大家，由于我不得不填补某些空白，所以一些信息是根据自己的猜测得出的。让我们一起来看看表格，我会解释一下我的思路。对于能量密度，Souchao没有给出准确的数字，所以我不得不根据他们的百分比从195Wh/千克作为LFP基准进行推算，并在2023年、2025年和2030年分别增加了8%、13%和18%。这样得出的结果是210Wh/千克、220Wh/千克和230Wh/千克。对于体积能量密度，我使用了一份来自CATL的泄露的路线图，建议LMFP应该能够达到450至500Wh/升，所以我在2023年、2025年和2030年使用了这个范围。对于成本，我使用了Souchao的数字，它们似乎是一个整体水平的估计。它们以每瓦时为单位列出，所以我将它们转换为每千瓦时的美元，用于我的表格。至于安全性，LMFP的安全性应该与LFP相似，比高镍或高钴电池要好，但比钠离子电池要差。所以在最终的表格中，我给了它一个很好的评级，而不是我给钠离子电池的出色评级。最后，我在未来十年将循环寿命保持稳定，因为我预计LMFP电池制造商将会把重点放在能量密度上，而不是循环寿命上。这是因为我认为LMFP电池将无法在循环寿命上与LFP或钠离子电池竞争。因此，对于制造商来说，增加LMFP的能量密度从昂贵的高能量密度镍基电池中夺取市场份额更有意义。
With the LMFP table complete, the next step is to review the tables I've created for LFP batteries and high nickel batteries. After that, we can combine the information from all five chemistries to get a comprehensive view of how the competitive landscape for batteries will evolve in 2023, 2025, and 2030. Along the way, I'll give my view on which chemistries will come to dominate product segments such as EVs and grid storage as the decade progresses.
完成了LMFP表格之后，下一步是要审查我为LFP电池和高镍电池创建的表格。然后，我们可以将这五种化学体系的信息结合起来，全面了解2023年、2025年和2030年电池市场的竞争格局将如何演变。在此过程中，我将对哪种化学体系将在EV和储能等产品领域逐渐占据主导地位提出我的观点。
On screen is the table for LFP batteries. For the energy density figures, I've used the CATL roadmap as a guide but made some adjustments based on my own assumptions. For gravimetric energy density, I've entered 195Wh per kilogram, which is generous for the average LFP battery cell in 2023. The primary reason I used this number was to create consistency across the video.
屏幕上是LFP电池的表格。对于能量密度数据，我参考了CATL的路线图，但根据自己的假设进行了一些调整。对于比能量密度，我输入了每千克195瓦时的数值，这对于2023年普通LFP电池电池单元来说是非常慷慨的。我选择这个数据的主要原因是为了保持视频的一致性。
195Wh per kilogram was the baseline I used for LMFP batteries. That in turn was necessary because it appears to me that most sources are comparing LMFP battery cells to the best LFP battery cells rather than the average LFP battery cell. As for 2025 and 2030, I've entered 205Wh per kilogram, which I view as more realistic estimates for the average LFP battery cell in those years.
每公斤的能量密度195瓦时是我在评估LMFP电池时使用的基准。这是因为我观察到大多数资料都是将LMFP电池单元与最优秀的LFP电池单元进行比较，而不是平均水平的LFP电池单元。至于2025年和2030年，我已经设定了每公斤205瓦时的能量密度，我认为这对于那些年份平均水平的LFP电池单元来说更加现实。
Why so little improvement to energy density? It's because 200Wh per kilogram is approaching the limits of what LFP battery cells are capable of with a graphite anode. Furthermore, from here forward, I expect that LMFP battery cells will carry the torch on energy density for lower cost batteries.
为什么能量密度的改进如此之少？这是因为每公斤的能量密度达到了LFP电池单元配备石墨阳极所能达到的极限，即每公斤200瓦时。此外，从现在开始，我预计LMFP电池单元将为低成本电池在能量密度上做出更大突破。
For cost, I've once again used SuChau's pack level cost estimates and converted them to dollars per kilowatt hour. Although many people are going to say that SuChau's cost estimates for LFP batteries appear conservative and that they should be more like $50 per kilowatt hour or less in 2030, I don't necessarily agree and there are a few reasons why. Let's take a look.
对于成本，我再次使用了苏州的包装级成本估计，并将其转换为每千瓦时的美元。尽管很多人将会说苏州对LFP电池的成本估计过于保守，2030年应该是每千瓦时50美元或更低，但我并不完全同意，并且有几个原因。让我们来看一下。
First, I'm assuming average costs for a tier one battery pack that a company like Tesla would use. I'm sure some companies will outperform and get into the low $50 range, but others will struggle to hit the average $63 per kilowatt hour cost for a high quality battery pack. Second, the introduction of LMFP and sodium ion batteries may shift scaling resources from older technologies like LFP and high nickel batteries. That could result in accelerated improvements to economies of scale for the newer chemistries and slower improvements to economies of scale for the older chemistries like LFP.
首先，我假设像特斯拉这样的公司使用的一级电池组的平均成本。我相信一些公司会表现出色，使成本降低到低于50美元的范围，但其他公司可能会难以达到高品质电池组的平均成本每千瓦时63美元。其次，LMFP和钠离子电池的引入可能会将资源从像LFP和高镍电池等旧技术转移到新技术上。这可能会加速新化学体系的规模经济改进，而对于LFP等旧化学体系的规模经济改进可能会较慢。
Third, battery material prices may remain elevated or increased later in the decade due to potential supply shortages. That's one of the primary reasons why inflation adjusted battery prices have remained flat for the past four years. Fourth, on that note, I'm assuming there's going to be at least some general inflation in the next seven years that eats into the cost decreases achieved by scale and manufacturing improvements.
第三，由于潜在的供应短缺，电池材料价格可能在未来几年仍然居高不下甚至上涨。这是过去四年中，电池价格在通胀调整后保持平稳的主要原因之一。第四，基于上述原因，我认为在接下来的七年里，至少会有一些普遍的通胀，这将侵蚀通过规模化和制造业改进所实现的成本降低。
Fifth, Wright's Law says that for every doubling of battery production, battery prices and costs are expected to drop by 18%. In the past, most people assumed that it would be lithium ion batteries that delivered the cost decreases throughout the 2020s. However, in my view, chemistries like LMFP and sodium ion will play a larger role in those 18% decreases than was expected in the past. As we saw earlier, sodium ion batteries will cost around $40 to $50 per kilowatt hour by the end of the decade. And as I've said in past videos, there's a chance they'll hit terawatt scaled by the end of the decade. If that's the case, sodium ion batteries will have a big impact on average global battery cost. That is, regardless of whether $63 per kilowatt hour for LFP batteries in 2030 turns out to be accurate.
根据Wright定律，每翻倍电池产量，电池价格和成本预计会下降18%。过去，大多数人认为在2020年代，锂离子电池将实现成本下降。然而，我认为像LMFP和钠离子这样的化学技术在这18%的成本降低中将发挥比过去预期更大的作用。正如我们之前看到的，到本十年末，钠离子电池的成本将在每千瓦小时40至50美元之间。正如我在之前的视频中所说的，有可能它们在本十年末达到太瓦级规模。如果是这样，钠离子电池将对全球平均电池成本产生重大影响。也就是说，不管2030年对于LFP电池每千瓦小时63美元的预测是否准确。
I'm not saying that Wright's Law is stalling out. Over the past 30 years, it's been a series of battery chemistries that have driven price decreases. Each has its moment in the sun and then is super seeded.
我并不是说莱特定律陷入停滞。在过去的30年里，是一系列电池化学品的发展推动了价格的下降。每种电池技术都有其兴盛时期，然后会被更先进的技术取代。
As a side note, the image on screen shows that the market share of LFP batteries continues to grow into the late 2020s. But it doesn't take into account the possibility of LMFP batteries. If LMFP batteries prove to be commercially viable, I think they'll take a slice of the market that's at least as large as sodium ion batteries. If that's the case, LFP batteries may be losing market share by the end of the decade, even if total LFP battery output is still increasing.
顺便提一下，屏幕上的图像显示，至2020年代末，LFP电池的市场份额还在继续增长。但它没有考虑到LMFP电池的可能性。如果LMFP电池被证明在商业上可行，我认为它们将夺取至少与钠离子电池一样大的市场份额。如果是这样的话，即使总体LFP电池产量仍在增加，到本十年末，LFP电池的市场份额可能也会下降。
So yes, Su-Chao's cost reduction estimates for LFP batteries may be conservative, but they are feasible if we consider all the factors at play. Next, cycle life. Although some LFP battery manufacturers are claiming that their cells can already hit 12,000 cycles, that's not most LFP batteries. 5,000 cycles is more realistic for the average cycle life of LFP batteries today, and I expect it'll increase dramatically by 2030, as LFP batteries are increasingly designed for energy storage use cases.
所以，苏超对于磷酸铁锂电池成本的降低估计可能是保守的，但是如果我们考虑到所有相关因素的话，这是可行的。接下来是循环寿命。虽然一些磷酸铁锂电池制造商声称他们的电池已经可以达到12000个循环，但这并不适用于大部分磷酸铁锂电池。如今，平均循环寿命一般为5000个循环，我预计到2030年，随着磷酸铁锂电池在能源储存领域的应用不断增加，其循环寿命将大幅提升。
Finally, as with LMFP batteries, I've rated LFP as having a great safety profile. Let's move on to the table for high nickel batteries. Thanks to this graph by about energy, we can see that the average high-end nickel battery cell for EVs is currently around 260Wh per kilogram. I expect that to increase to 280Wh per kilogram in 2025 and 310Wh per kilogram in 2030.
最后，就像钴酸锂铁磷酸锂电池一样，我评价锂铁磷酸锂电池的安全性能非常高。让我们继续来看一下高镍电池的表格。感谢about energy提供的这张图，我们可以看到目前电动车的平均高端镍电池电池容量约为每公斤260Wh。我预计到2025年会增加至每公斤280Wh，到2030年则会增加至每公斤310Wh。
Yes, there are nickel-based battery cells today using lithium metal anodes, silicon anodes, and solid-state electrolytes that can far exceed that. But they're expensive, and there aren't yet plans to scale those chemistries to the point where it would fundamentally change the average energy density of nickel-based battery cells produced globally.
是的，现在已经有使用锂金属阳极、硅阳极和固态电解质的基于镍的电池单元，它们的能量密度可以远远超过这一水平。但是它们非常昂贵，目前还没有计划将这些化学成分扩大到全球规模，从而根本改变全球生产的基于镍的电池单元的平均能量密度。
Beyond that, even if 310Wh per kilogram in 2030 is conservative for the average high nickel battery cell and reality ends up being higher, it wouldn't affect the conclusions of today's video. That's because no other mass-produced battery chemistry comes close to the energy density of nickel battery cells, and there's no realistic competitors on the horizon. That means cost and cycle life are going to be the primary determining factors for whether high-nickel battery cells are used in a product.
此外，即使到2030年，每公斤310Wh 对于平均高镍电池电池来说是保守的，而实际情况可能更高，但这也不会影响今天视频的结论。这是因为没有其他大规模生产的电池化学体系能够与镍电池电池的能量密度相媲美，而且在可预见的未来也没有现实可行的竞争对手。这意味着成本和循环寿命将是决定是否使用高镍电池电池的主要因素。
As for volumetric energy density, those figures are harder to come by. So what I've done is use Tesla's 2170 battery cell as a benchmark, which is around 270Wh per kilogram and 731Wh per liter, and extrapolated from there using the gravimetric energy density figures I estimated above. That resulted in 700Wh per liter for the average high-nickel cell in 2023, 750Wh per liter in 2025, and 830Wh per liter in 2030.
至于体积能量密度，这些数字不易得出。所以我的做法是以特斯拉的2170电池单元作为基准，其能量密度约为每千克270Wh和每升731Wh，并根据我上面估计的比能量密度数据进行推断。结果是，到2023年高镍电池的平均每升能量将达到700Wh，到2025年达到750Wh，到2030年达到830Wh。
As for cost, I've assumed a cost decrease of about 10% from 2023 to 2025, and then again from 2025 to 2030. The cost reduction estimates are again conservative for the same reasons as LFP batteries. The only thing I'd add here is that besides selecting cost estimates that made sense for each specific battery chemistry, I also had to make sure that the cost estimates made sense in relation to each other. For example, the bill of material estimates show that iron-based chemistries at scale should cost about half that of nickel-cobalt-based chemistries. That means if sodium ion batteries hit $40 per kilowatt hour in 2030 at the pack level, then it would stand to reason that a nickel-based chemistry should cost about $77 per kilowatt hour.
关于成本，我假设从2023年到2025年的成本下降大约10%，然后再从2025年到2030年再次下降。成本减少的估计同LFP电池一样保守，出于同样的原因。我要补充的是，除了选择每种特定电池化学物质的成本估计合理之外，我还必须确保这些成本估计与彼此之间的关系是合理的。例如，材料清单估计显示，规模化生产的以铁为基础的化学物质成本应约为镍钴基化学物质的一半。这意味着，如果钠离子电池在2030年达到每千瓦时40美元的组件水平，那么镍基化学物质的成本应约为77美元每千瓦时。
As for cycle life, currently, the average EV-grade high-nickel battery cell is good for about 1,200 cycles, and I expect that to improve gradually to 1,400 cycles by 2025. However, as the production of single-crystal cathodes increases throughout the decade and electrolyte designs improve, I wouldn't be surprised if the average cycle life of high-nickel battery cells at least doubles to 3,000 cycles by 2030. For example, Tesla's research partner, the Jeff Don Research Group, has a battery cell that's hitting about 20,000 cycles and it's still going. If that's the case, why is it my estimate more aggressive and more like 10 to 20,000 cycles? First, because it'll take time for the technology in a cell like that to go into mass production and raise the average cycle life across the industry. Second, because many products just don't need that much cycle life. At one cycle per day, 10,000 cycles is over 25 years and the battery would outlast most products that it would be used in. So with that in mind, although there will be high-nickel cells on the market in 2030 that can hit many thousands of cycles, 3,000 cycles seems like a reasonable guess.
至于循环寿命，目前高镍电池单元在EV级别上的平均寿命约为1,200个循环，我预计到2025年会逐渐提高到1,400个循环。然而，随着单晶阳极的生产在这十年逐步增加以及电解液设计的改进，如果高镍电池单元的平均循环寿命至少提高到3,000个循环，我并不感到意外。例如，特斯拉的研究合作伙伴杰夫·唐研究小组已经拥有一个电池单元，其寿命已经达到了约20,000个循环，并且仍然工作正常。如果是这样的情况，为什么我的估计更加激进，更接近于10至20,000个循环呢？首先，这样的电池技术需要时间才能进行大规模生产，并提高整个行业的平均循环寿命。其次，因为很多产品并不需要如此长的循环寿命。以每天一次循环为例，10,000次循环可以使用超过25年，并且该电池将超出大多数可能使用它的产品的寿命。因此，考虑到这一点，虽然在2030年市场上会有很多可以达到数千个循环的高镍电池，但3,000个循环似乎是一个合理的猜测。
Finally, I've given high-nickel batteries a safety rating of good. Although they can erupt violently when they go into thermal runaway, battery-packed technology keeps their volatile nature in check long enough for the driver and passengers to exit the vehicle. There are, of course, risks with parked vehicles and home energy storage, but that's a topic for another day. For now, a good rating will work for the purposes of this video. That's because the point is to show relative safety, which can influence which battery a company will use in a product. Now that we've covered all the major chemistries, let's run through comparison tables for 2023, 2025, and 2030.
最后，我给高镍电池评定了一个良好的安全性等级。虽然它们在发生热失控时可能会猛烈爆炸，但是电池组技术可以让它们的易燃性得到有效控制，足够让驾驶员和乘客在发生事故时安全离开车辆。当然，停放的车辆和家庭储能中仍然存在风险，但这是另一个话题，暂且不谈。目前，良好的评级对于这个视频的目的已经足够了。因为重点是展示相对安全性，这可能会影响公司选择用哪种电池制造产品。现在我们已经介绍了所有主要的化学组成，让我们来看一下2023年、2025年和2030年的对比表。
Given that we already walk through each spec on each table, rather than compare each chemistry to every other chemistry, which you can do yourself, I'm going to give my view on what each comparison table means for the broader battery market. By that, I mean the chemistries that will be best suited to either EVs or grid storage, which are the largest markets, and why.
考虑到我们已经针对每种规范在每个表格上进行了比较，而不是将每种化学物质与其他每种化学物质进行比较，这是您自己可以做的，我将对每个比较表格对整个电池市场意味着什么给出我的观点。我指的是最适合电动汽车或电网储能的化学物质，它们是最大的市场，并解释为什么适合。
2023 is of course current state, and LMFP and sodium ion batteries are just beginning to scale. This year, sodium ion batteries are expected to take only 0.3% of the global battery market, and I expect the figures for LMFP batteries will be even lower. That means LFP and high nickel batteries are the only real options for grid storage and EVs.
2023年当然是当前的状态，而LMFP和钠离子电池只是开始扩大规模。今年，预计钠离子电池仅占全球电池市场的0.3%，而我预计LMFP电池的数字甚至会更低。这意味着LFP和高镍电池是唯一真正适用于电网储能和电动车的选择。
LFP is currently the best option for grid storage because it's cheap and offers high cycle life, and cost per kilowatt-hour per cycle is the name of the game for grid storage. LFP is also the best option for short to mid-range EVs because it has decent energy density and it's cheap. That leaves high nickel batteries with their higher energy density and cost as the best option for long-range and luxury EVs.
目前来说，锂铁磷酸(LFP)是电网储能的最佳选择，因为它价格便宜且具有较长的循环寿命。电网储能的核心是每兆瓦小时循环成本。而且，对于短至中程电动汽车来说，LFP也是最佳选择，因为它具有合适的能量密度和低廉的价格。这样一来，高镍电池则成为长程和豪华电动汽车的最佳选择，因为它们具有更高的能量密度和成本。
Let's move on to the table for 2025. For EV applications, sodium ion batteries will become a good option for ultra-compact budget vehicles in China. That's because they'll be cheaper than LFP and LMFP batteries, but will offer considerably less range. However, in 2025, at most, there'll only be about 10 gigawatt hours of sodium ion cells headed for the vehicle market, which is enough for maybe a few hundred thousand vehicles per year. That means LFP batteries will still be the go-to for most short to mid-range vehicles because they'll be available in much higher volumes. Furthermore, with their unique mix of high cycle life, good energy density, and reasonable cost, they'll be especially well-suited to robo-taxis. As for LMFP batteries, I expect that some manufacturers will start swapping out nickel battery packs for LMFP battery packs to save thousands of dollars per vehicle while also increasing safety and improving cycle life. LMFP could also, of course, be used for shorter-range vehicles for the same cost per kilowatt hour, but replacing nickel battery cells would offer a better opportunity to increase profit margins.
让我们为2025年的数据转向表格。对于EV应用来说，钠离子电池将成为中国超紧凑预算车辆的一个很好选择。这是因为它们比LFP和LMFP电池更便宜，但提供的续航里程要少得多。然而，在2025年，最多也只会有大约10千兆瓦时的钠离子电池进入车辆市场，这足够用于每年可能只有几十万辆汽车。这意味着LFP电池仍然是大多数中短程车辆的首选，因为它们的供应量会更大。此外，凭借其独特的高循环寿命、良好的能量密度和合理的成本，它们尤其适用于机器人出租车。至于LMFP电池，我预计一些制造商将开始将镍电池组换成LMFP电池组，以每辆车节省数千美元，并提高安全性和循环寿命。当然，LMFP也可以用于续航较短的车辆，成本每千瓦时相同，但替换镍电池单元将提供更好的增加利润率的机会。
Moving on to grid storage, in 2025, PBA and PolyAnion sodium ion batteries will offer similar cycle life to LFP batteries, but will cost considerably less. That means where possible I expect grid storage operators will increasingly begin exploring sodium ion batteries as an option. ICC Sino expects about 50 gigawatt hours of sodium ion batteries for grid storage in 2025. I consider that bullish, but if it does pan out, that could be around 20% of the grid storage market in 2025, which RICEAD expects to be around 230 gigawatt hours. That is, in 2025, both LMFP and sodium ion batteries will start taking market share from LFP and high nickel batteries. However, with the rate that I expect each of those chemistries to scale, the trickle of sodium ion and LMFP batteries will turn into a flood later in the decade.
在谈到电网储能方面，到2025年，PBA和PolyAnion钠离子电池的循环寿命将与LFP电池相当，但成本要低得多。这意味着在可能的情况下，我预计电网储能运营商将越来越多地开始探索钠离子电池作为一种选择。ICC Sino预计2025年的电网储能市场将需要大约50吉瓦时的钠离子电池。我认为这是一个积极的预测，但如果实现了，这可能占到2025年电网储能市场的约20%，而RICEAD预计2025年电网储能市场将达到约230吉瓦时。换句话说，在2025年，LMFP电池和钠离子电池将开始从LFP和高镍电池中攫取市场份额。然而，考虑到我预计这两种化学体系扩大规模的速度，钠离子和LMFP电池的涓涓细流将在本十年后发展成洪流。
That brings us to the comparison table for 2030. For budget EVs, layered oxide sodium ion batteries will be in a position to take the place in the market that LFP batteries take today. Despite their low volumetric energy density at the cell level, their high safety means they won't need as much material around the cells, meaning good volumetric energy density at the pack level. Couple that with their low cost, and they'll be the best option for a small vehicle with up to and possibly exceeding 250 miles of range. LFP batteries, for their part, will still likely be used for robo-taxis because they'll still offer a better combination of energy density, cycle life, and cost compared to sodium ion batteries. As for LMFP batteries, they'll have the best combination of energy density and cost to displace high nickel batteries in 3- to 400 mile range vehicles. And unlike 2025, they'll likely have scaled to the point where they're widely available. That'll leave the high-end and mass-sensitive segments of the battery market to high nickel batteries, which include semis, long-range pickup trucks, luxury vehicles, electric aircraft, and race cars.
这将引领我们来到2030年的比较表。对于预算电动汽车而言，层状氧化钠离子电池将能够在市场上取代现今的磷酸铁锂电池。尽管其单元电池的体积能量密度较低，但其高安全性意味着它们不需要在单元周围使用太多材料，从而在整组水平上达到了较好的体积能量密度。再加上其低成本，它们将成为小型车最佳选择，续航里程可达250英里，甚至可能超过。至于磷酸铁锂电池，它们仍然可能被用于无人驾驶出租车，因为相比钠离子电池，它们在能量密度、循环寿命和成本方面提供了更好的组合。至于锂镍锰钴氧化物电池，它们将具备能量密度和成本这两方面最佳的组合，可以取代3到400英里续航车辆的高镍电池。与2025年不同的是，它们可能已经扩展到足够大规模，广泛可用。而高镍电池将留给电池市场中的高端和质量敏感领域，包括半挂车、远程货车、豪华汽车、电动飞机和赛车。
Moving on to grid storage, PBA and polyanion sodium ion batteries look to be well positioned to dominate the market. That's because their cycle life and cost advantages will continue to grow versus LFP batteries, and because they may achieve the scale necessary to take more than 50% of the market for battery energy storage. Let's take a look at the assumptions necessary to make that happen.
转向电网储能方面，PBA和聚苯酰胺钠离子电池似乎已经处于占据市场主导地位的有利位置。这是因为它们在循环寿命和成本方面的优势将继续增长，相对锂铁磷酸钻石电池而言，并且它们可能实现所需规模，占据50%以上的电池储能市场份额。让我们来看看实现这一目标所需要的假设。
If 70% of sodium ion batteries continue to be used for grid storage, and if my bullish 1-terawatt-hour forecast for sodium ion in 2030 actually eventuates, then that would be 700 gigawatt-hours of sodium ion batteries for grid storage in 2030. Rice dad estimates that grid storage will be consuming about 1200 gigawatt-hours in 2030. If all those assumptions end up being in the right ballpark, sodium ion could take almost 60% of the grid storage market, and its market share would continue to increase from there.
如果70%的钠离子电池继续用于电网储能，而且如果我对2030年钠离子电池的乐观预测（1兆瓦时）真的实现，那么到2030年时，钠离子电池在电网储能中的容量将达到700千兆瓦时。Rice dad估计，到2030年，电网储能将消耗约1200千兆瓦时。如果所有这些假设都准确无误，钠离子电池的市场份额将达到电网储能市场的近60％，并且其市场份额将继续增长。
Onscreen is a summary of the best chemistry by use case in 2030. Note that although there is a best option for each use case, that there are secondary and tertiary options as well, which will come into play depending on availability.
Onscreen是2030年各种用途中最佳化学品的总结。请注意，虽然每种用途都有最佳选择，但也会根据可用性而确定次优和第三优选项。
Let's tie up a few loose ends before closing out the video. First, note that all the information related to LMFP and sodium ion batteries assumes there are no major production issues or hidden drawbacks for those chemistries. Second, as I said earlier, my cost estimates were based on an average cost, which means that some manufacturers will outperform the rest. The path forward there is to reduce material costs through vertical integration and reduce non-material costs through manufacturing improvements.
在结束视频之前，让我们先解决一些问题。首先，请注意，所有与LMFP和钠离子电池相关的信息都是基于假设这些化学品没有重大生产问题或隐藏的缺陷。其次，正如我之前所说，我的成本估算是基于平均成本，这意味着一些制造商将超越其他制造商。在这方面的发展途径是通过纵向整合降低材料成本，并通过制造改进来降低非材料成本。
For example, on the material side, Tesla is currently constructing a lithium refinery to reduce material costs. And on the manufacturing side, according to their last earnings call, they seem to be making good progress with their 4680 production line, which should increase line speed by about seven times compared to a typical battery line. At Battery Day, Tesla said those projects would contribute to a 56% cost decrease. Although I expect that 56% cost decrease to be achieved in the next few years, we also have to bear in mind that was three years ago. The rest of the industry isn't standing still, and by the time Tesla hits a 56% cost decrease, companies like CATL and BYD will have also made manufacturing improvements. That makes it difficult to determine what Tesla's cell costs will be in 2030. But it's safe to say the cost of Tesla's in-house cells will be quite a bit cheaper than the industry average.
举个例子，在物料方面，特斯拉正在建设一座锂矿，以降低物料成本。在制造方面，根据他们最近的财报电话会议来看，他们在4680生产线上似乎取得了很好的进展，这将使生产速度比普通电池生产线提高约七倍。特斯拉在电池日上表示，这些项目将使成本降低56%。虽然我预计这个56%的成本降低将在未来几年内实现，但我们也必须记住这是三年前的数据。其他行业并没有原地踏步，当特斯拉实现56%的成本降低时，诸如CATL和比亚迪等公司也会进行制造改进。这使得确定特斯拉2020年的电池成本变得困难。但可以肯定的是，特斯拉自己生产的电池成本将比行业平均水平便宜很多。
The third and final loose end is, what about Tesla's plans for alternative chemistries? We know from Battery Day that Tesla had plans for a chemistry that was roughly two-thirds nickel and one-third manganese. But I wouldn't be surprised if they instead shifted to an LMFP chemistry. Although LMFP would have a lower energy density than a nickel plus manganese cathode, it would be cheaper, safer, and likely have a longer cycle life. As for sodium ion batteries, Jeff Thon's lab is working on that. The Don Research Group is testing layered oxide sodium ion battery cells. They're also working on improving the manufacturing process for sodium-based cathode materials by adding calcium to limit moisture issues. That is, it's clear Tesla isn't standing still, and as more information comes out, I'll be sure to cover it.
第三个也是最后一个悬而未决的问题是，特斯拉对于替代化学元素的计划如何？我们从电池日活动中得知，特斯拉计划使用大约三分之二的镍和三分之一的锰作为化学元素。但是，如果他们改用LMFP化学元素，我也不会感到意外。虽然LMFP化学元素的能量密度比镍加锰阳极低，但它更便宜、更安全，而且可能寿命更长。至于钠离子电池，Jeff Thon的实验室正在进行相关研究。Don Research Group正在测试层状氧化物钠离子电池电池单元。他们还在改善钠基阴极材料的制造过程，通过添加钙来限制湿气问题。显然，特斯拉并没有停滞不前，随着更多信息的逐渐公开，我一定会对其进行报道。
If you enjoyed this video, please consider supporting the channel by using the links in the description. Also, consider following me on X. I often use X as a test bed for sharing ideas, and X subscribers like my Patreon supporters generally get access to my videos a week early. A special thanks to my YouTube members, X subscribers, and all the patrons listed in the credits. I appreciate all your support, and thanks for tuning in.
如果您喜欢这个视频，请考虑通过描述中的链接来支持本频道。此外，请考虑在X上关注我。我经常在X上分享想法，X的订阅者、像我的Patreon赞助者一样，通常可以提前一周看到我的视频。特别感谢我的YouTube会员、X的订阅者以及所有在片尾名单中列出的赞助者。我非常感谢您的支持，谢谢您的收看。