4680 General discussion - Range & $/kWh

[Buckminster]

Tesla supplier LG Chem to boost battery capacity
LG Chem also said it was developing “new form-factor” cylindrical batteries which will boost energy density five-fold and power by six-fold, without elaborating.

These are similar to targets that Tesla announced last month for its new batteries to be made in-house, called 4680 cells, to enable a 16% increase in range for Tesla vehicles.

Maybe it will come online for Berlin Model Y. I assume that Tesla has told CATL, Panasonic and LG Chem to switch to 4680 asap and as they have capacity Tesla will start to switch more and more of their lineup to 4680.

 

[uujjj2]

I really liked this exchange from the earnings conference call.

Rod Lache

Okay. And just secondly, if solid-state lithium metal were to become viable, could you just maybe just pass along your perspective on that? And would you be able to repurpose most of what you're putting into place for changes in technology?

Elon Musk

Yes. I mean, answering the first part, the cell production system is fairly agnostic on anode, cathode, electrolyte subary that kind of thing. It's -- we could change, and we will change and upgrade the -- all aspects of the cell. So -- and we could, for example, make ion phosphate or nickel manganese or something like that. It's quite adaptable. So I wouldn't say it's just too much more about. But the lithium, like a pure lithium anode is not as great as it may sound. Yes. Volumetrically, you're not gaining all that much, because if you got nothing on the -- say on the anode side and you got -- and just play out lithium, it's got to go somewhere, so you could have room for it.


Drew Baglino

Yes, lithium is less volumetrically dense in the pure metal form than it is intercolated into silicon. So it's kind of hard to understand, but that's the truth. And then, as we showed in our presentation, the total anode cost that we're talking about is only $1 or $2 per kilowatt hour. So the value of, like, removing the anode material isn’t super high either. So, yes, I fully agree, Elon.

Elon Musk

Yes, exactly. But if it were to announce that a pure lithium anode is the right move, that would simply -- that would be no problem.

Drew Baglino

Right. Agreed.

Drew's comment about the density of lithium metal versus lithium intercalated into silicon is especially interesting. The takeaway is that Tesla's future cells will be competitive with the solid-state lithium-metal cells coming from companies like QuantumScape.

 

[Buckminster]

I know everyone is excited about the numbers (I am too), but for forward looking, I think this was the most important slide in the ER. It summarizes battery day nicely, and reading the details in it, there is a lot of clarification and detail. And when digesting this slide, we can see not just end goals, but clear steps along the way in the next 3 years.

I'm most excited about this slide, more-so than all others. We should expect marked battery cost reductions each quarter, probably beginning in 6-9 months time, which will have DRASTIC effects on the bottom line and gross margins.

View attachment 600931

 

[Buckminster]

https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/...ion=inline;filename="TSLA-Q3-2020-Update.pdf"
Page 12, first box.
These dimensions maximize vehicle range (pack level energy density)

Energy density seems to be a debatable term. Some say Wh/l whilst others Wh/kg.

 

[Buckminster]

https://tesla-cdn.thron.com/static/4E7BR9_TSLA_Q3_2020_Update_P0Q85U.pdf?xseo=&response-content-disposition=inline;filename="TSLA-Q3-2020-Update.pdf"
Page 12, first box.
These dimensions maximize vehicle range (pack level energy density)

Energy density seems to be a debatable term. Some say Wh/l whilst others Wh/kg.

My guess is that it’s gravimetric energy density at the pack level. I.e. 160 Wh / kg -> 250 Wh / kg.

I believe at some point in the presentation true specified it was an energy density increase when it comes to energy storage. It sounds like they were using range for vehicles to simplify for the audience.

I don’t think volumetric energy density improved that much. They quoted 5X Energy increase, but the cell is 5.5X larger.

Thanks kbM3 - you are clearly correct. Makes sense to me now.

 

[kbM3]

Thanks kbM3 - you are clearly correct. Makes sense to me now.

Thanks. However I’m not sure about my conclusion on volumetric energy density not increasing because of the 5.5X larger cell only containing 5X more energy. Because of the way the presentation was broken down, it’s possible the 5X energy increase to which they were referring was from the form factor alone, and that the subsequent anode/cathode improvements would need to be added so the new cell with all improvements combined would have more than 5X the energy.

 

[Buckminster]

10 mins in, discussion on why you can't double count cost and range benefits:

 

[Buckminster]

I have been looking at the Battery Day slides to try and estimate the improvements that the 4680 would bring to the made in Berlin (and Texas) model Y. The relevant graphic is below:
View attachment 636898

From what we have been told the Berlin Y should have the improvements due to cell design and cell vehicle integration. Together these would provide a range increase of 30% which would imply for packs of a similar capacity a model Y SR would probably be around 300 miles range and the long range over 400 miles.

I'm wondering if Tesla will decide to downsize the pack capacity a bit so that the Berlin Y has a range that is broadly equivalent to the existing Fremont model Y Long range. This would avoid having a major range discrepancy between Berlin Y and Fremont Y (probably more important for when Austin starts producing model Y). A reduction in the number of 4680s per vehicle would also help whilst ramping 4680 production.

What do you think?

 

[MC3OZ]

I'm wondering if Tesla will decide to downsize the pack capacity a bit so that the Berlin Y has a range that is broadly equivalent to the existing Fremont model Y Long range. This would avoid having a major range discrepancy between Berlin Y and Fremont Y (probably more important for when Austin starts producing model Y). A reduction in the number of 4680s per vehicle would also help whilst ramping 4680 production.

Where possible I think Tesla will use fewer cells to achieve the same range, resulting in lower weight and higher margins. the same amount of battery raw materials builds more cars.

However they may start out with a higher buffer in the pack because 4680 is a relatively new cell and they may want to play it super safe for the first year or so of production.

It is also likely Berlin and Austin Model Y are initially software locked to around the same performance as Fremont Model Ys.

 

[Buckminster]

From @kbM3 :

I did misspeak when I stated 4680’s 6X power and 5X energy implies a 1.2X Power density increase.

It really means a 4680 pack containing the same energy as a 2170 pack would have 1/5 as many cells each with 6X the power, so the pack would have a 1.2X power increase (Better C-Rate).

However Tesla said it will have a 54% (or 56% I can’t recall) range increase which I assume means roughly a 1.6X improvement in energy density.

Therefore the power density vs a 2170 pack would improve by 1.6 * 1.2 = 1.9X (not 1.2X).

Put another way: a 4680 pack of the same energy content as an old 2170 pack would have 20% more power. A 4680 pack of the same weight as a 2170 pack would contain 60% more energy capacity and provide 90% more power.

If everyone remembers the CYBRTK event mentioned a 250 kW+ charge rate with the PLUS to be revealed later. Also the Limiting Factor hypothesized Silicon anodes could drastically improve charging rates.

I’m hoping Thursday’s surprise is Tesla revealing the PLUS and a higher charge rate for S&X than expected. Even though the new S&X probably won’t have 4680’s, maybe they’ll have tabless and Silicon anodes and be able to accept 500 kW. Just the larger pack alone should enable 300 kW+ vs Model 3 which can take 250 kW.

I did similar calcs earlier in the thread but not by mass. Blows my mind whichever way Tesla obfuscated the reality of their step change.

 

[Buckminster]

I personally believe that the tabless 4680 battery offers significantly less internal resistance, less heat generation and heat soak, better cooling features and, therefore, will charge better than any battery yet. I also think Tesla would have these important features included as they clean-sheet their future battery design. My hunch is due to Osborne concerns, the superior charge capability of the 4680 is being excluded from conversations for now. I don't know that they'll charge as fast as ICE pumps gasoline, but I'm expecting higher regen rates, higher discharge rates, and higher charge rates (and/or longer sustainably at these rates). We'll know more when Tesla decides to tell us, but everything I've seen indicates that things will be better to much better with tabless 4680s

 

[Buckminster]

On the topic of keeping eyes off the ticker, did anyone else spot this Tweet from yesterday?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1513216523216818180

This depicts a cell that's 46 mm in diameter and 120 mm high, or a 46120. All of the research we saw on battery day talked about the optimal battery diameter, but as far as I know, Tesla didn't specify any limits on cell heights. Maybe a taller cell for Semi or Cybertruck, that would otherwise require stacking cells?

 

[willow_hiller]

I would be interested in discussing the possibility/implications of longer cells. I was thinking that taller cylinders will be a little less structurally rigid than shorter ones, but that is thinking of the cylinder shape in the abstract. Maybe within a pack, tightly packed cylinders, regardless of the height, will still offer the same stability?

 

[mongo]

I would be interested in discussing the possibility/implications of longer cells. I was thinking that taller cylinders will be a little less structurally rigid than shorter ones, but that is thinking of the cylinder shape in the abstract. Maybe within a pack, tightly packed cylinders, regardless of the height, will still offer the same stability?

Agreed. On its own a cylinder's fineness ratio matters, but with an array of packed cylinders surrounded by structural goo, I don't think it is as influential. Especially fairly strong sealed cylinders, akin to a flat of soda cans or 2 liter bottles. Tippy individually, rigid together.
Honeycomb door panels have almost no crossection between the veneer faces.

 

[Buckminster]

LG Energy Invests $451M to Mass-Produce Tesla 4680 Battery Cells

LG Energy is set to invest $451 million in the mass production of Tesla 4680 battery cells. The manufacturer plans to start mass production of the new cells next year.

www.tesmanian.com

 

[Buckminster]

Another supplier for 4680 cells:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1541830884084645888

Wasn´t there another battery make we heard about preparing 4680s, anyone remember who it was? Wonder if they have the same issues as Tesla or as it seems to be just pilot lines, probably not as problems only show up when increasing speed?

 

[Buckminster]

Tesla battery supplier Panasonic teases impressive increases in capacity

 

[ggies07]

Tesla battery supplier Panasonic teases impressive increases in capacity

what a title...leaving something out:

within the end of the decade

 

[Buckminster]

$70 per kwh cost target on 4680. First time we have heard a specific number.

Confirmed Corpus Christi lithium refinery.

1 twh manufacturing capacity in the US, vertically integrated.

 

[Buckminster]