Yeah, a 10x capacity anode doesn't help if the rest of the cell is not sized for that.Actually, that’s one part I liked a lot. The hype around silicon anodes is that they have 10x theoretical energy density over graphite, which isn’t even true. Due to other constraints, the max achievable is more like 3x. But anyways, what Tesla announced wasn’t even close to that, They only said 20% improvement BUT also a huge reduction in cost from $10 to $1.2 for the anode.
So instead of reaching for the moon for a 3x energy density boost with a silicon anode, like Novonix is doing with silicon nanowire, Tesla recognized all those other solutions are too expensive (at least currently). So, recognizing that synthetic graphite isn’t cheap, they realized they could go with much cheaper silicon, but do it in such a way to not get much of a energy density boost BUT it would reduce costs
significantly. I think it’s brilliant.
The energy improvement of Silicon is for an equal mass
Lithium–silicon battery - WikipediaSilicon has a much larger specific capacity (3600 mAh/g) than graphite (372 mAh/g)
Tesla likely downsized the anode to get a 20% boost with much less material (cost and mass savings). Thinner layer probably also gives better utilization and leaves room for other components (densities are very similar).