Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

The Resource Angle

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
American Battery Metals Corporation (OTCQB:ABML) (the "Company"), an American-owned advanced extraction and battery recycling technology company with extensive mineral resources in Nevada, today announced that it has chosen northern Nevada for the Company's first-of-kind lithium-ion battery recycling facility. The acquisition of an industrial plant for the commercial pilot recycling facility is expected to be finalized within the next few weeks.
American Battery Metals Corporation Selects Northern Nevada for its Lithium-Ion Battery Commercial Pilot Recycling Plant
 
  • Informative
Reactions: RobStark
Tesla to buy cobalt from Glencore for new car plants

Subscribe to read | Financial Times


While Tesla uses less cobalt than rival electric carmakers, the deal with Glencore could involve up to 6,000 tonnes a year.

Tesla’s battery production capacity is expected to increase 570 per cent over the next decade to 248 gigawatt hours, according to consultancy Benchmark Mineral Intelligence. One GWh of battery capacity is enough for about 18,000 electric cars on average.(~4.5M vehicles)

Glencore, which is led by billionaire Ivan Glasenberg, is the world’s largest producer of cobalt from its two mines in the DRC and its nickel mines in Australia and Canada. Since a steep fall in cobalt prices ( to ~$30k/ton) in 2018, the miner has focused on signing long-term agreements with companies in the electric car supply chain.
 
Last edited:
View attachment 552160
Nickel country (its actually a salt lake, its usually bone dry)

View attachment 552143

re NCA and NMCs, add the nickel and cobalt together and the combination will be very close to 0.8kg/kWh (as the Al, and Mn do not directly add to storage capacity in these chemistries)
if we looking at x million . 100kWh cars with NMC/NCA then that is 80kg (Ni+Co) for a nominal 100kWh BEV, assume total vehicle market of 100million vehicles per year (last year annual production was 92 million)

so roughly 25 million vehicles is about 25% of market
so 25,000,000 x 80kg = 2,000,000,000 kg = 2mt
change figures are desired, obviously I chose very rounded figures

consider
global Ni production is about 2.4mt, that's a tough limit. If we need to duplicate current production (because we should assume current users will continue to purchase Ni and Co), then that's gravy for the miners Note well, LFP has nil Ni/Co so its an irrelevant limit for that tech...(which means oil can not avoid the outcome)

back to LMNO, its LiMn1.5Ni0.5O4, so that 25% Ni for similar capacity (less amps, more volts) which is why I would approximate that that chemistry uses 4-5x less Ni/Co than NMC/NCA, which gets us close to ability to BEV the entire fleet. share it with LFP and it can be locked in.

Some of this discussion came up in the Shorting Oil thread. @renim makes the case that existing nickel and cobalt resources are only sufficient for NMC and NCA batteries to replace a fraction of the auto market. This leaves two options develop other chemistries that use less of these minerals or develop more nickel and cobalt resources. @renim claims from personal experience as a miner in these metals that the latter is hard. My own view is that the industry will do both. Developing new chemistries to the point that they serve well the needs of EVs is hard and costly. Developing new mines can also be costly and hard. But both are worth doing, and the businesses that solve these challenges rightly stand to make money. For Tesla in particular, it is advantageous to have a whole portfolio of chemistries that they can put into production. These options give Tesla greater leverage when negotiating contracts with miners. A miner that thinks they can bottleneck Tesla into paying a long-term premium for some essential vibranium needs to understand that Tesla holds and will develop other options.

Another nuance about holding a broad chemistry portfolio is that there is plenty of room to specialize chemistries for particular applications. Finding the best tradeoff of dozens of performance attributes and price is at the core of bringing top tier products to market. We should not be thinking that batteries are just a commodity where a single chemistry pushes all competitors out of the market. So developing a broad portfolio of chemistries means battery choice can be highly specialized and optimized to the the product they power. So I would expect that the battery market becomes increasingly diverse and customized as EVs scale up. If this is correct, then it becomes very hard to forecast what mix of minerals will be required 10 or even 5 years out, but we can be sure that minerals that are too pricey will compete with technologies that minimize their use in battery chemistries.
 
My guess is the next gen Nickel based cells which we'll hear about on Battery Day blow away LFP for density. Tesla is focusing on nickel for a reason, I'm sure they've run the numbers. If they can reduce the amount of support structure at the pack level required for Ni based chemistry the way CATL did for LFP that alone would give a big boost to energy density.

Plus always remember that "500" mile range is in ideal conditions, bad conditions might reduce it to 350 or so.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Frank Einstein