Benchmark Mineral Intelligence is the world’s leading provider of independent prices, data, analysis, and advisory services for the lithium ion battery and electric vehicle (EV) supply chains
Benchmark’s prices and data empowers clients: from critical mineral contracts to EV battery supply chain investments and government policy
At 0:01 -- criticizes Swedish labor laws and "lack of skills" possessed by locals. 2:45 -- talks production, scaling and runway at the gigafactories, yet does not give specifics about current production. Also, ducks question about decision to produce cathodes rather than concentrate on cell production (even Tesla did not produce its own cathode material until lare 2022 after acquiring IP from a Canadian company)
15:10 -- a three to four year delay once battery cell construction is requested from a customer due to validation steps 17:04 -- dependence on China for graphite in anode construction, costing Chinese companies "billions" (Euros?) to establish themselves in Sweden (then admits probably not cost competitive in the end) 18:30 -- inviting Chinese (and S. Korea and Japan) innovation into the production process? (20 years of experience and expertise) 21:35 -- Will Northvolt customers actually pay for a greener battery??? 23:00 -- talking about EV-subsidies to car owners without acknowledging that they have already been eliminated in Sweden.
at 1:44 -- locked into unfavorable supply contracts, some operations could go "bust" at 4:29 -- need to source and even refine raw mareials from sources outside Europe, admits the process is not environmentally friendly or "green" at 7:55 -- nickel sourced from Russia
Appears China has the wrong type of lithium… Hence their search for supply outside China…. Fantastic insight into this “Elephant in the room discussion of energy”
Unfortunately it’s the Chinese who manage the bourse (Lithium) I think the CCP as it fights to get into the US it will aim to generate consumers from within China to buy EVs…. Interesting times and some good opportunities to get into us miners such as Ioneer (Australian company in the US)
We are at the bottom of the s curve with lithium in primary provision of battery storage…. Way more being used in this area than that of EV potential…. Combined, lithiums future is massive
Ucore and ABx Group alliance for Rare Earth exports from Australia to North America is interesting. Northern Minerals Ltd (NTU) is in a similar spot, but CCP entities are invested along with JP Morgan before the company even exports Rare Earths to either country. ABx only has a market cap of $11m AUD, small business with minimal debt and minimal state funding. NTU is around $138m AUD, but large expenditure often leading negative figures for growth and profit. One is ready to go in about 1-2 years, one is really cheap and probably needs at least 3-5 years. The biggest hindrance to both is CapEx and OpEx increased costs due to high CPI in the past few years in Australia. When a mine takes several years to start, the increased costs for those several years make exploration, evaluation, leasing, mining, processing and refining companies have to take out more debt than ever just to maintain investors. That's also why, our largest are most successful resource producers are companies that have already spent years to decades just getting out of the hole of debt they put themselves in.
For those who like this interview there's a recent interview of Robin Zeng (by a Norwegian investment banker) that's even more telling just how far along CATL is. Not just in chemistry, packaging, or pricing but in manufacturing yield and quality, and in non automotive applications.
This stock should be delisted from NYSE. Stock price goes down from 7 in Jan to 2 in September. No buy back. No dividend. No news. Just it doesnt stop going down. Never stop surprising me what kinda fuxxing shxx stock this is. Will be either delisted or becoming a penny stock. Practically worthless shit
Why listen to this man...his company is getting SUNK by chinese EV manufacturers. He isnt an industry giant...he (should be) working hard to catch up and produce cheap EV's
My second review of this interview my assessment goes up from excellent. This CEO is superb. So open and honest, building a worldwide business. I am vey happy Pilbara has a good working relationship with Ganfen, a great business partner.
Think he missed the language around Pre consumer & post consumer recycling. How long before the manufacturers start creating chemistries that are suited to their recycling flowsheet and not so Suited to the competitions recycling Flow sheets? Suited to the competitions recycling Flow sheets competitors
LMFP. Safe and cost competitive with LFP with higher energy density, almost equal to NMC. In the nutshell, when you add M to the LFP and make LMFP you get a 20-25% increase in energy density, none of the risks of NMC and only 3/4% extra cost
Interesting that he thought Tesla comming to China is what made their elec vehickes so competitive. Yet USA feels it cannot compete with China and the usa federal goverment treats Teska as the enem and the elec market in usa is seen by the usa media as faultering 😂
In relative terms, raw material nations like Russia and Australia are weak because it takes far longer to develop technology and produce useful things at scale than it does to substitute a raw material. Germany produced petrol and diesel from coal in WW2. The US has the luxury that it can produce ICE vehicles if China stopped cell supply. However, China would take export markets which it is doing. Lawfare is the US and West's great problem. Environmental law is the lawfare battleground as arts graduates become our politicians, but they don't understand service and the community does not get choice of government services. Environmental impact processes have become the place to complain about service. The cost in money and time of environmental analysis makes it vulnerable to hijacking. Because a society only needs about 10% of people with technical skills, the West will never get sufficient politicians with technical skills to develop service consultation, and thereby reduce lawfare over the environment to manageable levels. In the US, you must stop burdening public infrastructure with social programs. Far more public infrastructure gets produced if not burdened with social programs and far more people benefit. California is a failing state that loses population as a result. Software (keyboard work) is the only industry doing well in California as a result. It is no longer a place to make things.
To develop technology does need a certain number of highly skilled persons in several disciplines. Raw material nations usually concentrate on technologies for raw material exploration and neither Australia nor Russia has the top advanced technology/universities/experts for many other products. Lawfare is only a problem in how far it is made possible/accepted (usually easier and more strong in democracies). Not environmental laws are the problem, but the fact that many products do not charge the cost they cause as environmental damage immediately or in future/in other parts of the globe. For the sake of low cost/fine life environmental issues were disregarded completely when industrialization started, yet they got stronger year by year first in the industrialized nations suffering their negative effects like poisened water or polluted air. Recently THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEM is the CO2 exhaust obviously changing the climate to become much much worse (heat waves, fire, draught and flooding by sea or rainfall and much more worse already fixed to come). From a European point of view the social programs in US are a desaster. But you are also right, because the social cost in Europe is such high that it doesn't allow any more sufficient investment into infrastructure. However, if I would be american I would also ask the question, is it really necessary for US to spent 800 billion into military. To me this is clearly exaggerated. Scale of size brought a loft of advantages. I would consider also software being an industry making things (but you are right in a more rigid view understanding under things phyiscal products). And you should consider that California is doing software for a large chunk of the world (scale of size). And last but not least, salaries for software have a higher level than salaries for producing physical things which can mostly be done in the poorest country.
@petetegan3862 "California is a failing state"? . *USA* is a failing state....... With a big Red Button and a dearth of high calibre ("Statesperson level") Politicians. . A dangerous situation. . Edit "The USA can produce ICE vehicles".... But those will increasingly be for the "home market" as others WILL be buying those Chinese (and other) EVs. . It's not a winning strategy.
The guy debunks the Chinese-can’t innovate myth. All humans can innovate, given the circumstances. Even great Ideas are a dime a dozen. It takes incentives to actually carry out those ideas. Incentives breed innovations.
I think Japan first showed that not only Europeans living in Europe and US do innovate. It may be that all humans can innovate, yet there are societies that have an internal power/strive that is not easy to keep down by the European protection sword patents/intellectual rights as can be seen on South Korea and Taiwan. Yet a friendship to US (this means democracy) seems to be mandatory, otherwise .....
@@friedhelmschroter8124 "This means Democracy"? 🤔 I think the boundaries of "Democracy" are going to become blurred. . Also "Capitalism" Whichever way you slice it, we're witnessing a system wide(?) example of the "Capitalists" being "Out-Capitalised" but the "Communists".....?
@@rogerstarkey5390 If you mean by "the boundaries of "Democracy" are going to become blurred" that we have different levels of democracy I fully agree. Switzerland which quite often asks all people to decide on important questions is for me the most democratic country, UK and all countries having a parliamentary democracy are 2nd, US and all countries having a presidential democracy are 3rd, .... (and some countries calling themselves democratic or doing elections are barely or not at all a democracy. As "democratic" I would consider all countries who do have a functioning separation between executive, legislation and judical matters including several kind of internal control avoiding excessively wrong decisions. Communism targets to distrubute the wealth quite evenly over its population. Its largest realisation, USSR ultimately failed, because it was unable to generate/let run excessive actity/creativity of the rather few really strong and none of the other countries trying similar kind of communism did much better. China is an exception in the sense, that politically it is communist, but economically beside some communist organise state companies China let quite free run a capitalist economy and this was up to now quite a success. Yet not an exception in Asia, as Japan/South Korea and Taiwan show. What we are witnessing currently is a China so strong, that it looks communist China is capable to replace the West based on lower cost(/better performance). This is similar to the situation US faced with Japan I think in the 70's, when all US car manufacturers faced such strong pressure that they were not able to prevent bancruptcy. Such situation must be mutually understand and some agreement must be found allowing both sides a convenient life/advant. US succeeded to find such agreement with democratic Japan, yet I am not sure US is at all willing to find some agreement with communist China, because overwhelming geostrategy is involved and here US sees China as an enemy, wants to and is acting hostile. Not good and in my view both sides have to change, yet this is extremely difficult as FEAR is an extremely strong force as is the will to keep advantages once they were achieved.
I'm appreciating the hinesty of this interview. I have zero time for CEO who are just salesmen and getting a feel for his character here comes across reliable.
@@friedhelmschroter8124 BYD is now the biggest EV maker in the world by sales volume. In what specific area is Tesla leading? Google search is your friend.
@@HyperionLogic In my understanding BYD is biggest in terms of quantity of produced cars. Yet I assume (have not checked in detail) Tesla is still larger on their USD turnover because Tesla sell less cars, but the much higher price per car is overcompensating the lower volume to result in larger USD sales. A 3rd important, yet difficult to get number is the margin. The margin determines how much new development effort a company is able to do. Generally the first comer can charge higher margin, while the 2nd and 3rd comer have to offer some price advantage to overcome the first comer's reputation it was able to earn while producing just for itself. So when doing a real comparison you should best look into all 3 of these numbers or others like how many workers, how many engineers, ..... Also when making some comparison as Mercedes vs Volkswagen you do get the surprising result that the rather low volume producer Mercedes may produce more margin than the high volume producer Volkswagen and even on turnover you may get some surprise, as Mercedes does have a huge truck division, to my last knowledge (checked several years ago) Mercedes is the worldwide No.1 in truck production (not sure if any Chinese truck manufacturer succeeded to surpass Mercedes).
The first observation misses the fact of "a slowdown" in the *Vehicle* market". NOT just "EVs". The "EV" slowdown is due to that *General* slowdown, compounded by the decision of Legacy automaker's to "pull back". WHY did they pull back? . It's the endgame of a thread which began with them ignoring a "plan" published in 2006 (I'm sure you're aware of it?) They missed the chance to "get in early", develop plans and technology, then beat "the Chinese" and "Domestic competition" (you know who) BEFORE either of those became "too big to kill". . Now, rather than dealing with "small competition" they CAN'T compete with "BIG competition" on Price (Ref Ford build costs... At least they're being honest!), on material access (China), on production capacity, OR on technology. . It's not so much a requirement for "10 years to catch up" It's a *question* of "can they SURVIVE long enough to do so?" (Are they "Too big to fail".... Again?) . The IRA is (was) a *reactive* measure which gave them a chance. However, IT was too late and THEY (still!) weren't ready. . Add the "combative stance of Government (BOTH sides) towards the only US company which COULD compete.... Talk about shooting yourself in BOTH feet? .
@@rogerstarkey5390 NO, the EV slowdown in US is stronger than the slowdown in cumbustion engine market! And this is somehow normal as there was some hype on EV, after Tesla succeeded to achieve good driving distance etc., to save the climate, but now a certain number of people made some actual experience how different EVs are performing and as EV except of the point of saving the climate does rather have disadvantages more people invest again into lower cost/better performing/climate killing cumbustion instead of higher cost/less performing/climate saving EV. Please note, in contrast to US the EU has formally legislated combustion sales stop by 2035! You should also see the point, that ONLY the decision by Elon Musk to open up Tesla's patents to everybody for the sake of saving our climate allowed Chinese and others to become strong in EV. For me, there is no question, but the Western automotive industry is much too big to fail/to go bancrupt only because of price issue. THIS IS A MATTER OF EMPLOYMENT. The IRA subsidizes the US EV manufacturers and its full influence on the market is in my understanding not yet clear, yet it clearly targets Americans to change faster to EV than would happen without these subsidies. Please note again quite some difference to the EU where each country applies different stratatgies to support EV sales. In total the change to EV is driven by the need to reduce CO2 emissions which will kill ultimately most kind of life on this earth. Yet poeple just deciding on price/performance (this means disregarding/not getting ask to pay also the climate cost) tend to prefer combustion (one major point being the lower cost, but also ....) and therefore countries push by subsidizing EV and/or legislation to increase combustion cost up to completely forbidding it. China's large cost reduction efforts and success on EV/EV batteries are welcome to realize saving the climate, yet to lose larger employement will be avoided. Seeing 1.400 million Chinese I think it is quite normal to expect in some time in future a Chinese manufacturer who will overtake the global No.1 position from Toyota/Volkswagen and also the battery market is still in turmoil (like it was in the past 10/20 years and more - initial volume production on lithium was to my knowledge Sony some 40 years ago) which can result in larger changes.
West cant do the hardwork to be Cheaper, Better, Faster. So it attacks China with illegal sanctions, tariffs and provocations eg Taiwan. What we need is cooperation, not conflict.
Lithium battery has already strongly changed our life for good by allowing low weight smart phones having reasonable use time and the same for laptops, this means being able to use a PC seemless. A 3rd major market are the power tools, where battery powered ones are on same power level as 110/220V supplied tools. The electric car market is expected to need much much more batteries (this means materials) yet there is still ongoing the fight of people seeing the lower cost of combustion engine compared to only slowly rising environmental cost. The problem here is, the cost of buying a car is immediately clear, the environmental cost by exhausting more and more C02 will become only clear in the future (and if catastrophic/armegeddon may be difficult to reduce/impossible to correct).
We need to find and nurture more chemists, theoretical and experimental scientists. The capable minds out there could come from anywhere, but will they be recognized and given the opportunity to advance the technical fields of today and tomorrow?
Evidence? None. Answer - the evidence is that batteries are very sad and massively safer than ICE - Google it on the fully charged show and educate yourself. Plus we’re you not listening and world class expert…….,he knows more than you!
One reason US can never catch up to China in terms of battery tech boils down to the processing of the battery minerals and rare earths. It is a toxic and dirty enterprise. No American will tolerate such operation in their environment. Talk about driving down real estate prices in a hurry. Don't know how many of you remember Love Canal back in the early 70's. I guess China will win this round, unless another country is given sufficient incentive to host this nasty operation.
Exactly what I thought. The reality is both GM and Ford don't stand a chance against the EV makers in China. They's why the had to lobby for the 100% tariff on Chinese EVs coming into America. They can't admit defeat and instead, will try to reinvent the wheel.
China biz paradigm of increasing the size of the cake thru economic of scale so more can benefit from the bigger cake as opposed to Washington style of reducing the cake size to benefit a few is destined to prevail and thrive.
Very good interview. In my view a big issue is optimisation of traction battery configurations. The west is continuing to develop all sorts of configurations, prismatic, pouch, jelly roll more or less on whim. They are generally all overly complex and expensive. They cant all be optimal. CATL and BYD are paving the way towards battery optimisation.
CATL and BYD have mastered the transition from a simple blue collar producer to quite successful/large companies also doing all white collar work including the development of new batteries and battery packs. Seeing the fact that chinese engineers and workers still work for a fraction of what Western engineers and workers would demand there is no chance for Western companies to be competitive. Either the West is ready to accept this situation or some kind of control is applied on "free trade".
Great in depth interview. Learned tons of new facts. Truly appreciate the recognition of environmental damages and the need for electrification. Thanks
The battery factory scheme in US and EU is poorly thought out. Already several plants have been cancelled or cut back. Here's a creative thought: allow in Chinese vehicles by the millions. When their battery goes you have all the raw materials to make batteries. Let's become the ultimate recycler of materials for the energy transition. Let China deal with the pollution and environmental damages of mining and processing
"Cooperation must prevail...." . How can I put this "diplomatically"? We have a situation where the historically dominant "global power" is responding aggressively to the perceived threat of "demotion" while at the same time they face an apparently failing economy and a fragmenting political system. . I think the first task might be to ensure they don't become aggressive with the aim of removing what they paint as a "threat" to another region (while not admitting it's THEIR.... "Regeme" they are trying to preserve) ? . Top of the list? The need for a seasoned, reasonable Politician.... A "Statesman" ("person" 😉) . Available choices? . <Crickets> . Outcome? Painted into a corner, not playing the 'New Global game'.... I noticed Bill HR 8070.... (Essentially Automation of the requirement to register for service) Closing loopholes? Speeding the process if such data is "required"? Coincidence?
How do you know when an interviewer isn't actually *listening* ? 14:19 "Can you state what those 5 Golden Rules are?" Having been told 20 seconds earlier "These are the 5 Golden Rules"
