BYD launches sodium-ion grid-scale BESS product
energy-storage.news
energy-storage.news
Edit: I'm talking about for both onboard batteries (for the safety profile) and the BESS container mentioned in the video. Not to mention trains wouldn't have to compete with the lithium ion battery supply that is taken over by EV cars and trucks.
What I always found weird is that a power rail system isn't used. One could do it even without a third rail...
The problem is gaps in electrification. So you might have electrified two parts, but with a big gap without wires
This lets the train cross those (and mind you this would have to be something a larger gap, if it's a smaller gap without stops, let's say 1km, then the train just doesn't care)
There's a big difference however between a train with a short term battery backup and one that rides on pure battery power for an extended range.
There are regions where the grid and the plants powering that are separate from the maingrid. (West-)Germany was like that, still is. For historical reasons, like different frequency of 16 2/3Hz. It's called 'Bahnstrom'.
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahnstrom
Same applies to Austria and the Swiss. (D-A-CH)
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_Bahnstromanlagen_in_...
The former (East-)Germany did it different, while needing the same frequency.
They used something like this, decentrally https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bahnstrom#/media/Datei:DR_Umfo... to convert from the 50Hz maingrid to 16 2/3Hz, where they had no coverage from the 'Bahnstrom-'grid.
If your'e wondering wtf!? 16 2/3Hz at all, that was because at the time of early electrification with AC (less transmission loss over longer distances), that frequency produced less sparks/arcing with the then available electro-motors for that single phase of AC, RPM, lack of advanced (mobile(power))electronics, and so on. Legacy...
DC had different trade-offs.
Since you wrote freight-trains, which isn't light-rail, which also had its own power-plants and grids, and mostly still has?
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/DB-Baureihe_ETA_176
Much, much later somewhere in the 'Ruhrpott', around 199x, feeling rather surreal because of switching back and forth slowly through the apocalyptic yards of abandoned industrial ruins, with brand new Nokia regional HQ in the midst. Shiny new glass buildings with multiple large satellite dishes on the roof. And a soon to be opened S-Bahn track to there.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/17r9q6s/co...
Sure, in theory, sodium-ion batteries are made of inexpensive materials and are easy to build. You don't need any nickel, copper or cobalt at all and sodium is dirt cheap. But if you look into it, you'll find many thousands of similar examples across countless fields, where something uses advanced materials or parts when there is a simpler and cheaper alternative. If you ever design for manufacturing, you quickly realize that the key is often not simplicity, the key is identifying and using existing high-volume processes. In other words, don't find the cleanest way to solve your problem; instead, kludge together a solution using off-the-shelf solutions already produced at incredible scale.
The problem is that low-cost manufacturing is an art form and is far more complex than anyone realizes. Scale is important, sure, but what you really need is scale+time+intense cost competition. In that environment, it is very hard to start on a significantly different chemistry to compete with lithium-ion. (LiFePO4 is similar enough in manufacturing.) IMO the only place you could start this is China, which would leave BYD and CATL as the only two that could pull it off.
China has a large amount of mega cities. Think tens of millions of people. There are a lot of cars driving around in those cities that rarely leave those cities. 200-300km range is all they need and a typical range for a sodium ion battery equipped car. The primary feature of sodium ion in this market is cost per kwh. It keeps the vehicles affordable.
People that need more have access to still cheap BYDs priced priced between 10 and 20K with better ranges. Once you hit 30-40K you are looking at the high end of the market with proper long ranges with proper LFP batteries.
At the same time we saw Northvolt going to Ch 11 due to costs and lack of expertise.
A lot of what comes from China might be low quality (especially for internal consumption) but it's cheap and they're specializing
> Sodium-ion cells are however much less energy dense, as illustrated by BYD’s new product only packing 2.3MWh per 20-foot container, much less than the 5MWh and more than is now standard in the lithium-ion BESS space.
Which really doesn't matter if you're on a stationary application, especially if the cost/longevity is competitive.
In the batteries CATL and BYD are leaders in terms of cost, quality and innovation.
This is also Western boomer mentality and it's alarming that people haven't realized it.
I work in manufacturing in NA and America is rapidly falling behind China on the ability to manufacture quality high-tech goods. It's not something that's on the horizon, it's something that's already happened. We still have an edge in semiconductors but even that is eroding (just look at the hollowing out of Intel in the last half decade).
Most people I talk to have this mentality of "China is making cheap copies of stuff", but in what I see (e.g. drones) China is way ahead and we don't manage to "just copy".
Our entire energy future in the US could be held back severely if we are kept from adopting the best technology by politicians trying to prop up oil. The market must be allowed to choose the most efficient technology on its own. (And even the oil companies know that their future is limited, the only question is how long they can delay that future and how much money they can extract from consumers through higher prices than the alternatives.)
Recently (a year-18 months ago?) there were big headlines in the UK when no-one bid for a batch of offshore farms because the guaranteed electricity price offered by the government was too low for investors.
That has to change.
Tariffs are one way to enforce fairness (similar labor/environment/subsidy conditions).
Also, cars being more expensive will increase demand for public transit, not all of which needs federal funding.
If you're aware of David Ricardo and the concept of "comparative advantage" then you'd know banning foreign companies only hurts the country in question
From [0]:
> He has promised 10% to 20% duties on all goods coming into the United States, and 60% on Chinese imports.
I simply don't understand how some Americans developed this wishful thinking projection on what Trump will do based on what they want to believe he will do.
He's been pretty clear about introducing tariffs unto big allies because he doesn't comprehend that trade deficit doesn't mean Americans are losing money...
[0] https://www.japantimes.co.jp/business/2024/11/11/economy/tru...
Tariffs don't discourage adoption of the best technologies, they discourage importing products from other countries.
If solar/wind/batteries/nuclear/hydro/whatever is better than oil, and there are high tariffs, the result will be onshore production of those technologies.
What gets in the way of that is subsidies, not tariffs.
Unless there is an underlying assumption that the US is incapable of producing these better technologies itself, in which case the US is probably fucked regardless.
That seems to be a safe assumption these days: I just don't see the US producing these better technologies itself at all. It's still pretty good at making cutting-edge software, but that's about it.
Chinese software engineering seems to be catching up extremely fast in this regard too. I'm surprised how often I find an interesting new open source tool or library on GitHub and the comments in the code are all in Mandarin.
Better along what metric? In a market, the axis is going to be cost which tariffs impact
If solar panels in general are a better tech (by whatever metric), then tariffing chinese solar panels and not subsidizing oil should result in more American solar panels being produced and beating out oil.
The extremely tough competition in Chinese market meant they worked extremely hard. First Solar would not have survived if they are in the same competition in China.
And did the Chinese stole IP from Americans that Americans don't even have? What does it take for people to understand Chinese people are people too, they are just like you, living and breathing human beings. No one is inferior, no one is dumber. People can be as just as capable.
I can also say industrial policy will fail. The primary reason Chinese companies, like solar and EVs, are where they are now is because extreme hard work and competition. The best thing happened to Chinese EV industry is inviting Tesla into the market, and everyone tried to create a more competitive product and leapfrog Tesla. Westerners say Chinese ppl don't like foreign companies and are nationalist is brainwashed by western media. Domestic brands are considered inferior, Tesla hold the prestige. But as companies are coming up with more leapfrogging products they are changing people's perceptions and mindshare. The biggest thing for domestic car companies they seem to successfully transformed Chinese people's perceptions of Chinese brands. People are no longer mindless envy international brands. If you seen how hard they worked, you will appreciate. They make Elon musk's hard work look easy. They won it fair and square. And they are not against just Tesla, in luxury segment, they are against BWM, Mercedes, Porsche. In mainstream, Ford, GM, Toyota. Decades of brand prestige and reputations.
and first solar is definitely being propped up by the US government. Longi's products can be more expensive than first solar's and there is still no reason to choose them. It just a better product
oh sweet summer child
Preventing cars from being imported from China is still a problem too. American companies are going to innovate slower without the competition. We may see a day when Chinese cars are just miles ahead of American cars in terms of technology, efficiency, comfort, and price. At that point, people are going to be asking “why am I paying so much for this shitty car when much better alternatives are available? Whatever happened to capitalism in this country?” And once those protections are lifted, the car industry would face rapid, destabilizing collapse.
A slower, controlled collapse (not saying that would definitely happen) of the US car industry would mean those resources (the capital and labor) would be able to be put to more productive uses in this country. There’s a lot of stuff we want to build, like modular nuclear power plants, wind turbines, geothermal plants, AI data centers, prefab new housing, humanoid robots, or some other stuff I can’t even imagine. I personally think robotaxis/AV are going to put the entire worldwide car industry into near terminal decline anyway. We should try to pivot away from that industry as gracefully as we can.
If we are incapable of producing good cars, what in the world makes you think we would be capable of producing any of the other things you mention? The "don't worry we can make high technology for export to others" shtick is exactly how the USA ended up in a $300B trade deficit to China. It's a lazy mentality and the result is inevitable atrophy of much more than just the industries you think we don't need.
A country the size of the US can and should be producing at least some (but probably most) of all modern necessities it requires, and motor vehicles will continue to be a necessity for the foreseeable future.
It doesn't look like the USA in 2024 has the capacity to build the whole supply chain for these. Solar's supply chain depends a lot on China, batteries are Chinese/Japanese/Korean tech; even nuclear might depend on a supply chain from Canada. Hydro are huge infrastructure projects, when was the last successful and on budget big infrastructure project the USA rolled out?
There's an underlying assumption the US is incapable, at the moment, to roll out supply chains for all of these better technologies.
Do you want to light a fire under domestic asses? Create incentives for it without having to hurt common people, your corporations and finance markets are incentivised to exploit your nation for profit, no matter the consequences, try to fix that issue instead.
A large number of red states have foreign car company factories. If those scale back or shut down, people are going to be pissed. Dollars to donuts all those car companies have plant idling and layoff plans all drawn up and ready to go the second tariffs come in.
I half want to see it for the /r/leopardsatetheirfaces moment. Who would have thought it'd be unwise to have a man who bankrupted multiple casinos (by shuffling personal debts into them), an entire sports league, an airline, and failed to sell alcohol and beef to Americans...be put in charge of a national economy.
He'll make a lot of bluster, Big Three will tell him to knock it the fuck off, he'll find someone to blame for his base (probably the auto company execs), and go back to eating Hamberders while staring at a national security brief written at a 3rd grade English level.
Probably much harder if tariffs on Canada/Mexico happen but if those don't materialise (which is quite likely because, well, it's going to fuck with American food prices, energy, etc.) then BYD's factory in Mexico will probably be there, ready to start exporting.
It's very simple: the EV market is growing at around 20% globally this year. That's despite all the whining from some manufacturers that there's no demand for EVs. Which is true but only for their EVs. Because they simply aren't good enough. Too expensive to make. Not comparing well to cheaper competitors, etc. Take your pick. They aren't selling well and that's a problem for the manufacturers that are making them. But it's not true for other manufacturers that are growing. Even in the US the EV market is expanding.
Either way, that EV market growth is in the context of an overall car market that isn't growing anywhere near 20%. So, EVs are growing at the expense of legacy car makers. Their market share is effectively shrinking. By about 1/5th a year. They have cost related to that for downsizing production capacity, getting rid of staff (and the associated compensation packages), dealing with related strikes, etc. Many of these companies won't make it. It would take many billions in $s of investment in R&D, new products, new production facilities, etc. And with many of these companies slowing down those investments, it's not going to magically improve for them. It's a death spiral.
There are also no signs of EV market growth slowing down much further. With price parity effectively there if you have access to BYDs (which much of the world does), it's game over for ICE.
Even if there is no mandate to have them at the apartment buildings, the customers will naturally prefer those dwellings that do have them. Which in turn will create pressure on the building owners to have them installed.
I live in Europe and own an electric car. There are fast chargers everywhere and also some slow chargers near my house. I mostly drive in the Netherlands and Germany. Charging infrastructure is not a problem at all!
If there is a problem though, it’s German electricity prices. Charging is almost as expensive as refueling a car per km.
If you drive tons that would be another story. Most trips are shorter so EVs are more viable.
I also could have asked to charge from the wall in our building but haven’t had to due to other charging options.
Europe is a continent, maybe the issue you allude to is more localised? Where exactly in Europe do you see an issue with lack of charging spots?
If you can't charge over night for cheap and maybe even combine it with your own solar installation, then EVs are losing a good part of their value proposition.
Charging overnight as far as I understand is a bonus proposition of EVs but given I could charge the car in about 10 minutes in a fast charger and have more than enough for a day staying in some cities I don't see much difference from ICEs stopping to fill up gas. It's a tad slower but not that much that bothered me and would make me choose an ICE car instead.
Even with paying fast chargers' fees it was still much cheaper than paying for petrol.
I would disagree with it being just a bonus proposition, since it imo is part of the inherent advantages.
And while i do agree with you that in many cases it will still be an overall favorable comparison for EVs vs ICE cars, i think there is no denying that between being able to charge at home for cheap and having to rely on public chargers there's a value (and convenience) difference.
I am not really up to date with how pricing looks (so feel free to correct me), but i think in Germany electricity at home is on average like 27ct/kWh, and on public chargers you pay between 40ct on the low end (possibly with some monthly base cost) up to 80ct on the high end for some DC fast chargers.
My parents actually have an EV and rely on neighborhood chargers because their apartment block doesn't have a charger yet. It's fine. A bit of chore to park the car 500m from where they live once a week or so and then unplug it and drive it back to its regular parking spot. They are still saving loads of cash on fuel using only public chargers. Beats having to spend 60-70 euros on petrol. And it's not like they sit around waiting for the thing to charge.
Also, you can charge most cars of a regular wall socket. It will be slow. But it works. Or you can use one of the hundreds of thousands of slow chargers in Europe. There are around 0.5M currently. Projected to double to 1M next year and grow to 3M by 2030. Lots of fast chargers too. You can drive all over Europe with an EV.
It's petrol car owners that need to start worrying. Who is still supplying petrol? How far to the next working petrol station? The market for petrol and diesel is shrinking as rapidly as the EV market is growing. More, probably, because early adopters tend to be the ones that drive the most. You can't get petrol at home. And if your local petrol station closes, you'll need to drive a bit further.
With commercial fleets, lease cars, delivery vans, etc. all going electric in a hurry, there are simply going to be less petrol stations. It's like finding hay or water for your horse when cars became a thing. Not going to be a thing on every street corner.
That's meaningless if the chargers are not at your home or close to where you live. And the public chargers available half are broken or have some issue or terrible UX on payment. Plus long charring time so you need to take time out of your day to go back to the charger and bring your car back home. Terrible UX versus a 3 minute refuel at a gas station and you're done for the week.
EVs make the most sense when you have your charger at home, or at least at work. Otherwise UX sucks balls. Imagine not being able to charge your phone at home and always be looking to charge it in public. That would suck, wouldn't it?
>It's petrol car owners that need to start worrying.
Do you see gas stations closing en-masse yet? I haven't.
>delivery vans, etc. all going electric in a hurry
They are not in any hurry. Only the national post where I live has some EV delivery vans for virtue signaling and green washing. All the other smaller delivery companies and contractors use diesel vans almost exclusively because they need to actually care about range, saving money and turning a profit.
My point was you don't have to loiter for hours or leave your car at the gas station to fill it up then come back to get it like with EV chargers. It's a 3 minute in and out quickie situation so smell or not is not an issue.
I wrote that argument in my previous comment as well but I guess you didn't read it.
Anyway, apparently Shell is planning to close a 1000 stations. About half of the petrol stations in the Netherlands are projected to disappear over the next 5-10 years. Not surprising considering the massive shift to EVs. Some countries this will go quicker than others of course. But even countries like Germany are starting to see a shift.
You can deny all you want but the numbers are there if you care to look at them. I don't know many businesses that can deal with double digit percentages drops in demand. That's exactly what petrol stations have been facing for a while now and will continue to face. All the obvious things are happening. By the 2030s most commercial traffic will be electric. Because it's simply cheaper. It's not virtue signalling but economics that's driving this.
All the small businesses, contractors, etc. that convince themselves they need to buy diesel at a premium in large quantities will be competing against others that simply don't. More every year. The rest is just Darwinism and market inertia.
Well d'uh, that's why they bought EVs in the fist place, but that's not the point. The point is to convince the people who don't have EVs to get EVs. You need to make them happy too, otherwise they're not gonna buy EVs. Why don't people get this fact?
>You can deny all you want but the numbers are there if you care to look at them.
Care to share them? Also, the NL isn't representative for all of Europe, not by a long shot. Most new cars I see in my neighborhood are diesel, lots of new diesel SUVs, and EVs are only in the suburbs where the richer people live in their single family homes, while poor and middle class drive ICEs because they don't have chargers at home or at work. What happens in the NL has no impact where I live and vice versa.
>All the small businesses, contractors, etc. that convince themselves they need to buy diesel
They didn't "convince themselves" as if it's some cult/religion, they actually did the math on the economics and decided that diesel is better for their businesses' bottom line. You'd also know that if you'd get out of your bubble.
No they didn't. Approximately 0% of small business owners have time to sit down and do math. They keep buying diesel because that's what they've always bought. They've learned the hard won lesson that change is hard and change is costly. Few small business owners are going to be on the bleeding edge.
They'll switch when EV's are the default choice.
The National Association of Convenience Stores is paying attention and watching Norway to be ahead of the game:
https://www.nacsmagazine.com/Issues/October-2024/The-Latest-...
> Unfortunately, this also means that many locations that are good as gas locations today in Norway will lose their relevance in the future. Even with the high EV penetration in Norway, few gas stations have been closed so far. Although some of the players aim to be “the last man standing,” there is little doubt that many sites will be closed in the years to come. This may be unfortunate for smaller communities that rely on having one or two gas stations.
Your conclusion is this but your justification proves the opposite.
He's not even President yet and Europe is already offering concessions to avoid tariffs, for instance.
It works because people think he is fully willing to deliver on his threats.
I am not saying that he is all talk. I am saying that he is a master of hyperbolic threats followed by a more nuanced reality.
I can't understand the level of aggressivity and panic (from some) over Trump's reelection. "Keep calm and carry on" as we say in the UK...
I don’t know if you’ve noticed the panic Trump has caused with xenophobia the past 20+ years but none of those voters believe in the phrase “Keep calm and carry on”.
Just because you were not directly affected by Trump’s first term does not mean you can wave away other people’s concerns as not problems.
The guy tried to overturn the results of the 2020 election by any means possible. Trump called up the Georgia Secretary of State and demanded that he just add 11,000 votes to Trump's total. It's on tape. Trump's team set up slates of fake electors from states that Trump lost. The Trump team drew up a detailed legal argument for how Mike Pence could reject the real electors and let the fake electors vote, throwing the election to Trump. When Pence refused to go along with that blatantly illegal scheme, Trump riled up a crowd and sicced them on the Capitol, in order to physically disrupt and prevent the certification of the presidential election.
Trump has shown that he fundamentally rejects the American political system, and is willing to trash the entire system of elected government if he loses. Many people rightly view that as a threat to the continuation of democracy in the US.
Just as American neocon think tanks had plans to invade Iraq and used 9/11 as justification to squander Trillions of dollars and millions of lives for no good reason.
Project 2025 talks about how Mexico doesn't actually have sovereignty because it's run by cartels supplying fentanyl. Is it coincidence that Trump announced the same reasons to impose 25% tariffs?
Hopefully calmer heads prevail, but again, Republicans did Iraq just a couple of decades ago. The Republican voters loved it. The corporate media loved it. Trump supported it. And now they all pretend they didn't.
Mass demonstrations and allies saying not to do that couldn't help, and it got Bush reelected.
Maybe if Robert F. Kennedy goes with his threat to ban cancerous chemicals from food in the US, then Europe won't need to block the imports of American food.
The problem is that we can't build anything in this country, with a handful of very expensive exceptions. If the US wants to change that, we have to send a planeload of senators to Shenzhen and copy fucking everything. Take detailed notes and copy JLCPCB, LCSC, Alibaba, Foxconn, all the raw material suppliers, all the chemical suppliers. Build a new EEZ near NYC or SF and invest $1 trillion over 10 years (5% of discretionary spending.) Write up a few laws: every business must have fast turnaround, thin margins, and instant quotes. In a decade every product in the world would be made in America.
It wouldn't even be hard; that number is ~10% of military spending and all of those companies will voluntarily give you a detailed tour. It's not like we don't understand any of this stuff. Etching a PCB or running a warehouse or spot-welding some crap is relatively simple.
Everyone thinks China leads the world in manufacturing because of labor costs. Ha, no. China's far richer now. It started out as the labor costs, but now it's the vertical integration. You can go from prototype to product in a month in China. Try doing that in the US; it'll take a month just to get your calls returned, and you'll find that we don't and we can't make shit. At scale, we can't make foam, we can't mold plastic, and we can't make PCBs. More to the original subject, at scale we can't coat electrodes, we can't process chemicals, and we can't work metal; put that all together and we sure as shit can't make batteries.
US is a second largest battery maker
LG should be mass-producing 4680's by now (and dry battery electrode by 2027). Panasonic is still working on 4680. Maybe soon, but dunno when.
"Third, between Poland and Hungary" would be fine if we were talking about production of goulash, or words with too many consonants, but we are talking about batteries, which are now a critical part of energy infrastructure and daily life.
Also, the US battery production is almost exclusively Tesla, which is actually Panasonic, using a process that has still not been Americanized, using Japanese equipment, the most critical of which "in an area not accessible to non-Panasonic employees." It is also behind China on cost. Oh, and did I mention it is government-subsidized to a hilarious degree? In other words, it's a joke.
The subsidies aren't the problem here. The problem is that they are uncompetitive islands of foreign technology that lead nowhere, and they are _more expensive even after being heavily subsidized_.
The cognitive dissonance between these threads and the ones where local law and taxes are an insult to their right to free trade is amazing.
I’m also not sure what you found derogatory in my comment, and I don’t understand what you’re getting at about local laws and taxes and how that would be relevant here.
But I believe the US surpassed the EU this year with the GM/LG's Ultium 2 factory. I have no doubt in my mind that the US battery manufacturing will become more competitive as they scale up and commoditize: GM for instance reported a 45% decline in battery cell cost YoY in 3Q 2023; followed by a sequential quarterly drop of $30/cell from the 1st 2024. With AMPC ($35/KWh), GM's per cell costs drops close to $80/KWh and is expected to fall further -- below $70/KWh in a couple of years.
Panasonic (NV): 40 GWh
Tesla (4680) : 9+?? GWh
GM/LG Ultium 1: 45 GWh (2022)
GM/LG Ultium 2: 45 GWh (2024)
SK Georgia : 21 GWh (2021)Places that used to do this in the U.S. have left major scars and real human impact. The lack of regulation and enforcement mean they are causing the same (or worse thanks to scale + neglect) in China.
None of the things I listed have to have a large environmental impact. We have huge warehouses and same-day logistics in the US, they're just for consumer goods. Making PCBs or coating electrodes or working metal can all be very low-impact processes. Shenzhen isn't Bhutan but it certainly isn't a chemical waste pit. Most Chinese pollution comes from coal or resource extraction, not manufacturing.
Like how people don't get married because divorce is such a big risk. Or people don't drive too fast because it's not speed that kills but the sudden stop.
Posting this from Europe by the way, which also has fallen behind on quite some elements of the modern economy, but I likewise wouldn't write off the entire manufacturing sector of Europe in one single post either.
Made-in-America cars are not competitive abroad and would hardly be competitive in the US if it weren't for a series of strange legislative moats. They are also massively subsidized in many ways.
Furthermore, Teslas are not really made in the US in the same way that things are made in China. Your average widget off the shelves is one hundred percent made in China using almost entirely Chinese materials. Teslas, on the other hand, are "made in the US of foreign and domestic components." Shut down the ports and you couldn't make a single damned Tesla.
If you haven't manufactured anything before you may expect that I'm talking about things like the screen or the cameras. No. I'm talking about nearly every part of the car. Where do you think the tools to make the car parts come from? The thousands of chemicals involved? The myriad plastic clips? Shut down the ports tomorrow and pretty much the only significant car part you could make from scratch is some pretty sheet metal.
>You can't mold plastic at scale?
Next time you speak to someone who makes plastic products, get an idea of how much it would cost to make new molds and produce XXX items for a random widget, in China vs Europe vs the US. When you get the answer you can drown your tears in a nice bottle of baijiu.
In general I find European "manufacturing" to be an even thinner layer of duct tape between Chinese components than its American counterpart. The few things we do well in the US (sheet metal, fancy semiconductors, fancy tooling) are either nonexistent in Europe or American-controlled (see ASML.)
Current form of capitalism coupled with constant inflation universally penalize work: it makes less work at higher charges under the guise of better value a local individual optimum. This isn't a problem according to some justifications, or less work is less work if you ask some others.
China hasn't gotten to that point of constant output reduction and price hikes. Their manufacturing is still working in that sense.
........? North America and China are about equal in terms of steel and aluminum working expertise. Really not sure where you're getting that idea...
We have a few companies that make a decent effort, it's true, and indeed the US sheet metal industry is one of the few industries that could be entirely self-sustaining if the ports closed tomorrow. But most of the metalworking in the US is just heavily subsidized six ways to Sunday and still uncompetitive.
The US is behind China on key manufacturing sectors, but over the last few years this is changing in a big way. And I agree that China no longer has the labor cost advantage, but that also means that the US has a good chance to catch up now.
The last few years have seen an absolutely unprecedented boom in factory construction in the US. A lot of those are for green energy, but because green energy somewhat politically incorrect in the rural red areas where these go, there's not much local news about them.
https://www.volts.wtf/p/how-is-new-clean-energy-manufacturin...
So sure for plastic and PCBs, the US is not competitive and hasn't cared to be for a long time. But for emerging technologies like green energy, we have it in us to recapture the sector.
And maybe the needs of these other sectors will push local suppliers to want to be competitive, if the volumes are large enough. Because if there is a big enough customer, they can be competitive. But if a persons new project is not big enough to move the needle for a company in the US, why would they change their practice for PCB production?
At the end of the day, having one or two highly specific sectors with growth is basically nothing. It’s one or two drops in one or two buckets and there are thousands of buckets and modern manufacturing relies on those buckets being literally right next to each other. US lawmakers will throw a few bucks to the sexiest and trendiest buckets but what we really need is the least sexy parts; the business logistics and the suppliers, the raw materials, the moldmakers, etc. In 2024, the cheapest way to get aluminum stock or untold many other essential supplies quickly delivered to your business is to pay consumer prices for a million individually wrapped units at Amazon and then pay an employee to unbox them. What we need is broad and large scale vertical manufacturing if we want to be competitive and that is obvious to anyone who manufactures in the US.
This is like people saying for the past decade that solar will never be anything because it was <1% of energy production.
Predicting the future based on position only works if the velocity growth is the same for all points. I don't think that will be the case. Unless we just give up, and actively choose not to compete.
Still, it will almost certainly not be a car built in my subcontinent, and that's infuriating.
It almost seems like the right way to address energy transition was to buy cheap fossils to increase living standards, then let governement heavily subsidy R&D while the rest of the world plunged into post-Reaganism.
R&D works ! Who would have guessed ? It only ensured the domination of so many empires and only got a man on the moon. Such puny matters.
Thanks God the US and EU are never going to subsidy R&D ever again. That would be communism ! Better to spend money on ensuring our 1945 baby boom retirees have enough money to buy cheap Chinese stuff. Shareholder over engineer, always, all the time !
But pay "young" people to do, what, fundamental Chemistry ? Experimental Electronics ? Naaah. We have a board meeting tomorrow, we need results by 10:00.
All your "research" stuff will never pay out the 12% yearly interest that our shareholders asked. And old people depend on that for pension funds.
The kids understood that, and they stopped looking for engineering or research jobs. They're all consultants now. The smart ones will realize they have a bullshit job and leave to work on an organic farm. The less smart ones will burn down.
Anyway, we replaced pour R&D department with a new wing of the legal team that's finding more loopholes in the tax code, to ensure we never ever ever give a cent to anyone else than the pension funds. They're on the verge of finding a solution to that pesky "salary" problem, it's not the moment to bother them with your "ion" sci-fi stuff.
It's not like developing countries will do that, right ? Right ?
I save at least 5+ mins a week refuelling compared to my Diesel. That's half a day a year. The automated pre-heating saves me time defrosting in the winter. Probably another hour or more saved every year. All for around 1/4 of the running cost.
* allows doing 500 km of highway with a single 20m charge stop
* I can afford
I perused simulators from the various manufacturers. In highway conditions, the only vehicles with autonomy approaching that are using 60kWh batteries, which immediately gets them out of the "I can afford" category.
Assuming I'm lucky enough to find a used one with a 40kWh battery that the owner gets me a huge rebate on for some reason, and, again, using the simulators from the constructor (which are probably too optimistic for real life), the autonomy is around 150km.
From the https://fr.chargemap.com/mobile/planner, I would need 3 stops, and 2h30 hours of _charge_ for the specific trip I have in mind - which brings it from 4h20m to 7h.
To be clear: if I was looking for a "second car" to run errands and drive around home, I would rush for a second-hand small car with a 25-40 kWh battery, and I know that it would be plenty enough for 99% of my usage.
The few outlier trips that I have to be ready to take on the spot are still not a thing with an EV, though. And I'm not going to stockpile cars and choose the one that matches my outfit every morning ;)
I suppose it will get better when the Chinese have done their thing - my point is, I stopped counting on western car manufacturers a long time ago.
They could have gotten their act together 25 to 30 years ago. They'll go the way of the dinosaurs.
And sure the sticker price is higher, but sticker is only 1/3rd the cost of a vehicle. In TCO terms, an EV is cheaper.
Not a single 20 minutes stop, but a 16-minute stop and a 32-minute stop [2]
1. https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202411015855192
2. https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=2707aa8e-702e-4d2...
And looking at the ads, it seems like used ones would rather sell around 15k€ to 20k€ :/
The expectation for the average driver is that you're going to buy maybe one semi-new car in your life, and then sell it to buy other used cars, with maybe a small down payment, as your needs grow (family changes, need for bigger load, etc..)
The first-hand market is a fraction of the total market for cars. (In France, 6 out of 7 cars sold are second hand according to this source [1], I suspect it's similar in other countries.)
So, of course there is a chicken and egg issue for EVs, where used EVs can't have a decent range since even brand new EVs are barely going by.
Again, with some R&D, it will get better. But we needed that R&D to happen 30 years ago, and instead people where working on putting Bluetooth in the media center.
[1] https://www.automobile-sportive.com/reportages/voitures-occa...
Cars with Sodium-ion will have less range. This is about situations where battery size is not that big of a deal.
Though this might allow you to build a car with relative small range, but that you can quick charge.