In a word from Tesla, why did the two major sectors evaporate by 94.3 billion and surge by 373 billion

In a word from Tesla, why did the two major sectors evaporate by 94.3 billion and surge by 373 billion

China Times ( reporter Sun Bin Yu Jianping reported in Beijing

This week, after Tesla responded to the new battery technology, both cobalt stocks and lithium battery stocks in A-shares plummeted. In the early trading of the 24th, the previously soaring lithium iron phosphate sector, from battery companies to material companies, was green. On February 24, the Wind data lithium battery index fell by more than 1.4%, and the value of 95 stocks in the sector evaporated nearly 70 billion yuan; the cobalt ore index fell 3.9%, and the value of 13 stocks in the sector evaporated nearly 24.3 billion yuan.

Tesla’s voice in the battery field

In a word from Tesla, why did the two major sectors evaporate by 94.3 billion and surge by 373 billion

In fact, all symptoms have long been traced. As early as June 2018, Tesla CEO Musk expressed his personal opinion on Twitter, wanting to continue to reduce the amount of cobalt from the existing high-nickel system, and finally remove cobalt from the list of raw materials completely. Lose. “The current Tesla battery contains 3% cobalt, and the next-generation battery contains zero cobalt,” Musk said at the time.

On February 18, a person close to Tesla responded to the media that Tesla will independently develop new batteries, and is expected to announce specific components and other information at the battery investor meeting in April 2020. Since then, cobalt stocks have fallen across the board.

Subsequently, the industry’s speculation began to turn, will Tesla use lithium iron phosphate? Previously, Tesla has agreed to purchase lithium iron phosphate batteries from CATL to supply the domestic version of Model 3 with standard battery life. The supply period is from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022. However, CATL’s announcement was also very cautious: “Tesla has no responsibility or obligation to purchase the company’s products, and does not guarantee the amount of product purchases. Tesla will propose purchase requirements based on subsequent specific orders.”

On the evening of Friday, February 21, when Tesla responded to a user on the official Douyin account, he said: “Please pay attention to Tesla’s battery conference in April. No cobalt does not mean it must be lithium iron phosphate.” Soon Later, Tesla deleted this comment, but the news still triggered a chain reaction of subsequent market declines. In the eyes of most battery industry people, Tesla does not currently have, and it is impossible to use lithium iron phosphate as a Necessary items for the global market are considered.

In an interview with the China Times, Zhu Yulong, a battery expert in the industry, said: “In maintaining the existing volumetric energy density and reducing the amount of cobalt, Tesla is ahead in this technical path, and three German auto companies (Volkswagen, Dai Müller and BMW) are also researching and exploring in the same way, hoping to reduce the amount of cobalt. In essence, this means that auto companies hope that electric vehicles are not only lower in cost, but also in terms of volumetric energy density and scalability. It’s worth the huge investment, and it’s sustainable.”

Reflected in the technical direction, Zhu Yulong believes that at present, including Panasonic, Hive under the Great Wall system, and most Korean companies are strengthening the concept of cobalt-free on the basis of insisting on the high capacity brought by high nickel. As for Tesla’s use of iron phosphate in CATL In Zhu Yulong’s view, the reason for the feasibility of lithium batteries is that Tesla is also making a trade-off between cost reduction and brand maintenance.

Due to the double-edged sword effect of cost control and bottom-up brand, it is still unknown how Tesla’s standard version Model 3 in the Chinese market will balance the use of lithium iron phosphate batteries, but it is likely to walk on two legs. Quick, considering the price of cobalt materials, Tesla may consider more Chinese suppliers.

The upgrade battle of lithium iron phosphate

It is worth noting that before Tesla announced the direction of cobalt-free batteries, domestic new energy vehicle companies and battery suppliers are also making their own considerations to reduce battery costs.

According to industry insiders, compared with the lithium iron phosphate battery compromise solution provided by Ningde to Tesla, BYD’s upgraded “blade battery”, once mass-produced, may be provided to Tesla, including Tesla, in a new competitive dimension. A whole new supply reference system for competitors.

Wang Chuanfu, chairman of BYD, previously stated that the newly developed “blade battery” has a 50% higher energy density per unit volume than traditional lithium iron phosphate batteries, and also enables the battery life of the vehicle to reach more than 1.2 million kilometers in 8 years. BYD plans to increase the individual energy density to 180Wh/kg and the system energy density to 160Wh/kg in the next two years, thereby reducing the unit production cost by 30%. At the same time, the BYD Han, the first model equipped with a “blade battery”, will also be unveiled in June this year.

Although the “blade battery” has narrowed the difference in energy density with the ternary battery, for car companies, the more practical effect is reflected in cost control. According to Zhao Changjiang, general manager of BYD Sales Company, the blade battery adopts The GCTP technology can improve the inheritance efficiency, and the technology saves the process of multiple software and hardware, so the cost savings can be more optimistic.

The opinion of some battery experts in the industry is that before BYD’s “blade battery” was put in place, CATL once took the lead in shipments due to the choice of lithium iron phosphate and ternary battery routes, but with the gradual landing of “blade battery” , the future layout of domestic battery suppliers may be subdivided again.

Another layout of Tesla

Leaving BYD and returning to Tesla, in terms of options for lithium iron phosphate, this new energy vehicle company, which is still favored by hot money, will most likely target a specific market, and consider it as appropriate based on capacity ramping/cost considerations The use ratio of lithium iron phosphate batteries, but on the technical route, Musk is not willing to consume troops in the upgrade battle of lithium iron phosphate.

Instead, Musk’s focus on supercapacitors has a long history. Back in 2006, Musk wrote in a blog post that he actually came to Silicon Valley to study supercapacitors during his Ph.D. at Stanford. In 2019, Tesla acquired supercapacitors, battery manufacturing company Maxwell and Canadian battery manufacturing company Hibar.

On February 18, according to a person close to Tesla, “the new battery is a combination of dry electrode technology + supercapacitor, and the specific components are expected to be explained at the Tesla battery conference in April.” Combined with the previous Tesla In terms of cobalt-free batteries, the new technology route of “dry electrode technology plus supercapacitor” should not come out of nowhere.

In the early days of China’s new energy vehicle development, there was a wave of application of supercapacitors in hybrid systems, but due to the inclination of state subsidies to the pure electric route, the development of supercapacitor applications slowed down. If the batteries of Tesla’s domestic cars really use the new technology route of “dry electrode technology plus super capacitors”, it is bound to drive the application and development of super capacitors in China.

Bloomberg analyst Frith believes that if the cost becomes competitive, supercapacitors may find their own niche market, “Heavy-duty transportation applications may be the best use case for supercapacitors, and in many areas of the automotive market, they can certainly Find the app.”

A domestic battery industry insider also believes that the so-called super capacitors are more likely to be applied in the direction of electric pickups, but at the moment, the stock market’s overheated response to the Tesla theme still lacks real support from the technical application market level.

Editor: Yu Jianping Editor-in-chief: Zhao Yun

The Links:   NL8060BC26-27 LM215WF3-SLA1

Related Posts