BYD begins testing solid-state EV batteries in the Seal

Hear, Hear. We are seriously missing out over here in the US and continuing to be protectionist over the big 3 automakers is not going to improve our climate situation.

I consistently hear 2 main arguments against electric vehicles in the US. Range, and cost.

BYD & China is solving both. Range is important because we lack charging infrastructure still, and anyone who rents at an apartment complex, you are screwed and have to rely on public charging stations. Big batteries are important for these folks. People also still have range anxiety, so when a fuel efficient gas car will get ~400+ miles per full tank, only having more expensive cars with a ~250 mile range is a non starter for a lot of people in the US.

Cost is self explanatory. One of the better electric cars sold in the US, the Ioniq 6 STARTS at $38k, which is already more than a significant chunk of the population can afford - you're looking at close to an $800/month payment at current rates for entry level. BYD could sell in the US at around $20,000.

> If china wants to continue subsidizing their industry below costs of manufacture I see no reason why we shouldn't exploit their generosity to meet our climate goals as quickly as possible.

Are they even doing that? A few billion dollars a year is meaningful but it's not dumping for an industry this big.

If you are willing to take the risk that if China invades Taiwan your car will no longer work or be serviceable.

> If we want to address climate change

At least 40% of Americans do not give a crap about addressing climate change. Many Americans see EVs as a waste of time and a direct attack on the US.

Also, the only way to make your companies competitive is by having them face competition, not by protecting them by artificial and anti consumer duties.

The big 3 are not the ones asking for this. It actively hurts them. They aren’t delusional, they NEED government support to compete globally against Chinese EVs. Every big 3 CEO to a T has made it clear they know it’s if, not when ICE sales become a rounding error on their books.

Point your gun where it belongs which is the oil industry and its lobbyists.

> If china wants to continue subsidizing their industry below costs of manufacture I see no reason why we shouldn't exploit their generosity

Because the unfair advantage distorts the market leading to a potentially otherwise noncompetitive product destroying the competition at which point they can (and will) jack up prices, so not only do you get more expensive vehicles, but you've also destroyed an entire industry and several adjacent industries at the same time.

It's not like you can't just snap your fingers and re-establish a vehicle manufacturing supply chain once it disappears.

I get people just want cheap vehicles, but the short-term benefit simply isn't worth it.

> If we want to address climate change

Given our recent election results, it seems to me that we don't want to.

For the last part, my guess is that the advantages are much more valuable in an EV than they are in a phone (where batteries are mostly fine. While longer life and faster charging are always nice to have:they are just that: nice to have), so if you are A) production limited and B) they are still more expensive (the article states they expect them to be price-comparable by the end of the decade), then they probably aren't worth it in a phone (yet).

When price comes down and production comes up (assuming those things happen), then I would expect them to start appearing in phones as well.

> Is there some reason why solid state batteries seem to be being deployed in cars sooner than in phones?

Not quite energy density, but the energy density, cost, complexity when combined with the discharge profile generates a very "interesting" phase space.

There's a few promising technologies which have very, very good efficiencies but only like very slow predictable discharge cycles. These are excellent for say building giant GW batteries in the desert, but not so great for even car batteries.

Phones and tech have bursty power needs based on use, the cost of taking other tech down to the size of a phone is extremely high (especially if you're first to market unless you know you will sell millions of units). Not to mention the reliability of batteries typically decreasing as the size drops.

Cars tend to be in the middle with their discharge profiles being relatively smooth compared to say a laptop, but yes you still have economies of scale, complexity, reliability and supply chain and patents to contend with ;)

They already exist in Chinese phones, the new one plus has insane battery life because of its 6000mah battery, while still being as thin as a normal phone.

Other phones targeting the Chinese market have reached 8000.

But companies like Apple and Samsung like to just sit on their laurels and sell the same thing again.

The tech used to get such fast charging isn't revolutionary, it's just extremely (dangerous) high voltage DC charging that only exists in any capacity in China.

Also, what happens when an EV taxi runs out of battery power in China? They actually have stations setup all over that you simply drive into and it replaces the entire battery pack... in minutes.

I think people are working off of outdated information. I have a 2020 Model 3 and it's been fine in subzero temperatures. Yes, range goes down by about 20%, but if anything it's more convenient than a gas car in the cold because you don't have to wait for an engine to heat up before the cabin gets warm. Also you always wake up with a full tank (so to speak) because you don't need to go to a gas station to refill. And EVs tend to be AWD, so they're easy to drive in the winter. During one snowstorm I had to help dig out trucks that got stuck, but my car was fine.

Newer models have heat pumps that greatly improve efficiency in cold weather. They also have better battery chemistries that store more energy in the same form factor. Unless you live in a very remote, very cold location (eg: rural Alaska), an EV is a fine choice.

IMO “handle cold better” is a bit of a misnomer for EVs. ICE cars are inefficient all the time because they’re converting most of their energy into heat even when it’s warm - with an EV you’re effectively just getting bonus range when it’s warm.

If you developed a hyper-efficient ICE engine that didn’t generate a pile of waste heat, you’d have to actively make it less efficient in the cold, or install heating hardware and burn extra gas to power that hardware - but nobody would criticize that hyper-efficient engine for being “worse in the cold”.

I understand that Teslas sell [sold?] well, in Norway.

I’m in Wyoming. The Rivians do fine in the winter.

> and battery life, especially in winter, can be a life-or-death issue

How so? A full battery can run your seat heaters for about a month. That's a lot better than the hours of heat you'd get out of a full tank of gasoline.

Not to mention that you'll never get carbon monoxide poisoning from a gasoline engine with a tailpipe blocked with snow.

People in Nordic countries are fine with EVs.

Better density is one of the reasons solid state battery research has been pursued.

Maybe you are comparing the density of research batteries that weren't worth commercializing to highly developed lithium ion batteries?

It's a next generation Lithium battery, I've seen lithium chemistry power storage quoted as high as 600 in some prototypes so I'm guessing they cracked something in the lithium chemistry.

Given it's still lithium based I'd still think twice before chucking a bucket of water on one that's fizzing :p

As for how this battery is better I'm not an expert, but good to read if true.

Might be this if you've read something, this is still lithium based, it's just solid state vs LiPo

byd has a seagull model that's basically exactly that for $10k. Don't see why they wouldn't bring it to the US absent tarrifs.

I suspect most cars will still be in the 250-400mi range sweet spot, same reason that's where we're at with gas cars.