It is the world’s biggest battery maker, it powers electric vehicles for Tesla, Volkswagen and BMW, and its EV technology is miles ahead of US offerings, say experts
The developing of “new things” is pretty international and not exclusive to any region. Universities around the world have been working on energy storage for decades, and lithium batteries are absolutely no different. US universities, European, Chinese, it doesn’t matter. They’re all hard at work in this area.
What you do see more of is marketing from Chinese companies of cells that make extremely bold claims and never make it into US or EU products for some reason. IMO that reason is the fact that these “cutting edge” cells are known to use chemistries and technologies that have not at all been proven even in lab settings. Solid state cells is one glaring example of claiming victory long before any reliable demonstration of overcoming massive hurdles has been demonstrated, but there are plenty others.
There’s also the huge question mark outstanding right now where CATL has claimed cell prices will be cut to less than half their current costs over the next year. It’s not at all likely that this is possible without a huge injection of cash from the government propping up the industry and driving costs lower intentionally. Which is a trade violation for WTO members. Whether it’s right or wrong is another question, but it’s against the trade treaty we all signed onto.
Curious to hear more about this. Are you saying subsidized products cannot be sold on the international market? Wouldn’t creative accounting solve this, e.g., buy saying that the subsidized portion is only available domestically, which reduces demand globally, thus lowering prices?
The developing of “new things” is pretty international and not exclusive to any region. Universities around the world have been working on energy storage for decades, and lithium batteries are absolutely no different. US universities, European, Chinese, it doesn’t matter. They’re all hard at work in this area.
What you do see more of is marketing from Chinese companies of cells that make extremely bold claims and never make it into US or EU products for some reason. IMO that reason is the fact that these “cutting edge” cells are known to use chemistries and technologies that have not at all been proven even in lab settings. Solid state cells is one glaring example of claiming victory long before any reliable demonstration of overcoming massive hurdles has been demonstrated, but there are plenty others.
There’s also the huge question mark outstanding right now where CATL has claimed cell prices will be cut to less than half their current costs over the next year. It’s not at all likely that this is possible without a huge injection of cash from the government propping up the industry and driving costs lower intentionally. Which is a trade violation for WTO members. Whether it’s right or wrong is another question, but it’s against the trade treaty we all signed onto.
The “marketing from companies that make extremely bold claims” is also pretty universal. It is not exclusive to any region.
Curious to hear more about this. Are you saying subsidized products cannot be sold on the international market? Wouldn’t creative accounting solve this, e.g., buy saying that the subsidized portion is only available domestically, which reduces demand globally, thus lowering prices?
Any nation receiving the products would obviously see through that and protest to wto
Okay, but how is it a trade violation?
Because of the rules established by wto members. They decided it was a violation, they all agreed to the terms, so it’s a violation.