US Awards $3 Billion To Boost Domestic Battery Production (msn.com)
- Reference: 0175092915
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/09/20/1723225/us-awards-3-billion-to-boost-domestic-battery-production
- Source link: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/biden-awards-3-billion-to-boost-domestic-battery-production/ar-AA1qTzmh
> The funding -- part of a broader White House goal of creating an American battery supply chain -- is going to projects that are building, expanding or retrofitting facilities to process critical minerals, build components and batteries and recycle materials, the Energy Department said Friday.
>
> American Battery Technology received $150 million to build a commercial-scale lithium-ion battery recycling facility in South Carolina. Albemarle is getting $67 million to retrofit a facility to manufacture commercial anode material for next-generation lithium-ion batteries around Charlotte, North Carolina. Other projects included $50 million for Cabot and $225 million for SWA Lithium, a joint venture of Standard Lithium and Equinor. Batteries -- which are used for electric vehicles as well as storing renewable energy for use on the electric grid -- are considered critical to reaching the administration's goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 and for boosting electric vehicles to half of all new light-duty vehicle sales by 2030.
[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/other/biden-awards-3-billion-to-boost-domestic-battery-production/ar-AA1qTzmh
Autarky for the USA (Score:2)
These new mass subsidies for industry are fundamentally different from the Obama era ones, they are matched by tariffs ... as much as necessary. Autarky in essential industries will happen, come hell or high water.
Autarky for essential industries, mercantilism for everything else, that's how you run a major nation in an adversarial world. The mirage Davos tried to trap the west in (China was never fooled) is well and truly gone, globalism is dead ... and Trump killed it. It would have been very hard for the
Is that you Peter Zeihan? (Score:2)
"after Trump destroyed the essentials they gladly ran with it." gave you away.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately not, had to look him up ... I'm just a random old man slightly aligned it seems, should have made a career out of grousing too :/
Re: (Score:2)
"Autarky for essential industries, mercantilism for everything else, that's how you run a major nation in an adversarial world. "
Not a new idea, not even an interesting insight. And it's always been an "adversarial world".
"globalism is dead..."
Globalism, by your absurdly infantile definition, never existed.
"...and Trump killed it."
Trump is a moron who cannot even begin to understand any of these things. His only policy is personal benefit. Any perceived benefit he caused, based on your reductionist view o
Re: (Score:2)
Davos still believes in globalist peace, with powerless nations shackled by ISDS/WTO/etc for them to rule by capital for their greater good. It never really worked, but it did shackle the US. It especially didn't work with China, but weakening the west's ability to affect them was their priority and China would somehow work out.
The Davos crowd has little allegiance to any country or ethnicity. A not literal but metaphorical lizard people.
Re: (Score:2)
Globalism, capitalism and open markets pulled more people out of poverty last century than any other human development. Ever. China and India alone account for most of that poverty reduction, and it happened because they decided to engage in (limited) competitive capitalism and open markets with the rest of the world, rather than stay isolated.
That movement has shifted into reverse now, and the entire planet is going to be poorer as a result.
I understand why people hate the Davos crowd. A bunch of f
Re: (Score:2)
It pulled Chinese people out of poverty, into the most sophisticated totalitarianism in history. A dictatorship with territorial conflicts with most of its neighbors.
Globalism's economic development is meaningless if it can't deliver on globalist peace. The Davos crowd are so desperate for a world where capital rules the world, where they can be neofeudal rulers, that they simply close their eyes to security concerns. As long as the current greatest sovereign powers grow more impotent they are satisfied, th
battery technologies (Score:2)
[1]https://arstechnica.com/scienc... [arstechnica.com]
[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/09/grid-scale-batteries-theyre-not-just-lithium/
Ah, capitalism. (Score:2)
Ah, capitalism. How do I get me some of that sweet Solyndra money?
I think we'd better off taxing the negatives of civilization instead of "gambling" on what sound like good ideas to non-engineers.
Re: (Score:1)
You don't because you're not an Ivy League graduate and our betters are more capable of "efficient spending" than any one of us.
Lithium not needed for the grid (Score:2)
" SWA Lithium, a joint venture of Standard Lithium and Equinor. Batteries -- which are used for electric vehicles as well as storing renewable energy for use on the electric grid"
You don't need Lithium batteries for grid storage. Weight is not an issue, use something cheaper. Even Lead acid batteries would work. You could recycle the lead from old (ICE) car batteries.
Re:Lithium not needed for the grid (Score:4, Informative)
Lead acid batteries are not cheaper. For four times the money, lithium batteries last twice as long and store twice as much power — they literally have the same lifetime cost or less because lithium batteries keep getting cheaper and lead acid batteries don't, they've been optimized about as far as they are going to go. Fewer batteries means smaller enclosures and fewer interconnections, which makes the installation cost less overall.
Re: (Score:2)
"Lead acid batteries are not cheaper."
Depends on what you consider costs and what the demand is. When you maximize demand for lithium, you maximize its cost. You haven't considered that.
"Fewer batteries means smaller enclosures and fewer interconnections, which makes the installation cost less overall."
It also increases energy density and safety concerns caused by the density. You can't claim less overall cost when you are not considering all the comparable installation costs.
Re: (Score:2)
Lead mining and production are filthy processes, so there are also environmental costs.
Lead isn't used for starting cars because it's cheap but because it can provide a very large current. Lead is not a good choice for applications requiring deep discharge.
But lead and lithium aren't the only options. Sodium is a good choice for stationary storage.
Re: (Score:2)
> "Lead acid batteries are not cheaper. For four times the money, lithium batteries last twice as long and store twice as much power"
Until the demand for lithium outstrips supply and the prices start to climb. And lithium has inherent environmental and safety issues, for sure. I am not arguing for using lead-acid for "grid storage". When space and weight are not an issue, there are lots of other options that are much safer, much easier to scale, and simpler. Thermal options, pumped gas/liquid, far les
Re: (Score:2)
> "You don't need Lithium batteries for grid storage."
What you are saying is absolutely true. Grid storage has LOTS of options, few of which (if any) should include lithium.
> "You could recycle the lead from old (ICE) car batteries."
Almost 100% of lead acid batteries are already recycled :) This is mostly due to core charges when buying new car batteries. Annoying, but effective.
Re: (Score:2)
"This is mostly due to core charges when buying new car batteries. Annoying, but effective."
Ah, the essence of MAGA. Simply cannot think straight.
Re: (Score:1)
"Just don't be poor!"
Ah, the essence of progressive elitism. Simply zero self-awareness.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that lithium batteries are not necessary, but you're wrong about the cost. Lead acid is more expensive in the long run because they generally don't last as long (lithium generally having a cycle life more than ten times that of lead), and also generally require maintenance that most other chemistries do not. Combine that with the Lithium-Iron Phosphate cells now hitting the market at under $60/kwh and the total cost of ownership for lithium storage systems is a fraction of lead-acid.
Then there is ec
Re: (Score:2)
The downsides of lead acid other than energy density are likely not fundamental. A truly modern lead acid battery might be able to have much better cycle life without requiring electrolyte replacement, ArcActive thinks so.
Re: (Score:2)
The chemistry is only part of the cost, everything else is better optimized for lithium ion and they can earn back non recurring costs on higher volume. It's not easy to compete unless you take a lot of risk, go big or go home.