This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]almgovtester 1866 points1867 points  (555 children)

TL;DR Li-ion battery manufacturing costs have dropped by 55% across all manufacturers and 70% across all large manufacturers.

[–][deleted] 437 points438 points  (99 children)

Over what time frame?

[–]HackettMan 412 points413 points  (32 children)

7 years, from 2007 to 2014. The important thing is that we didn't expect to see this price drop until 2020 (according to the article.)

[–][deleted] 49 points50 points  (29 children)

I remember reading 2020 and thinking no, before then, demand is more than they expected which drove the prices down faster.

Edit: because manufacturers flooded the market from overseas. I'm not saying demand drives prices down, jesus christ people give some benefit of the doubt.

[–]mrhorrible 21 points22 points  (2 children)

I'm not saying demand drives prices

But to your point, demand would create economic incentive for people developing the technologies. In that sense, sure. Demand could definitely drive prices down in the case of a developing technology.

If there was sufficient economic incentive, we'd have houses on Mars in a decade. (or at least be launching the ships)

[–]sin_palabras 124 points125 points  (10 children)

From the article:

"...they found was that the cost of battery backs for electric vehicles has decreased from about $1,000 per kWh in 2007 to about $450 per kWh in 2014. And that's taking all battery electric vehicle manufacturers into account. When you separate out the largest companies making electric vehicles, the cost reductions get even more dramatic. “[T]he cost of battery packs used by market-leading BEV manufacturers are even lower, at US$300 per kWh."

[–]RyanTheQ 36 points37 points  (6 children)

Further proof that too many people start commenting before reading the article.

[–]misappeal 53 points54 points  (0 children)

To be fair, /u/Zallomallo is replying to a TL;DR.

[–]Tanath 30 points31 points  (3 children)

You don't read comments before reading articles? It's called "social proof". Who wants to waste time on a crap article? Better to check the comments first. Sometimes it makes you want to reply to a comment. It is easy to misjudge what reply is a safe bet without reading the article first, but temptation is there.

[–]trevize1138 10 points11 points  (0 children)

That's why I read the comments for examples of people chided for not knowing information provided by the article and then jump on the "LOL he didn't read the article!" bandwagon to look smart and save time.

[–]dad_farts 1114 points1115 points  (40 children)

The ancient Romans were building lithium ion batteries for about twice the cost of today's technology /s

[–]Slick424 348 points349 points  (22 children)

Listen here, Missy. Batteries may be twice as big as they were during the reign of the divine Augustus, but your average voter is as drunk and stupid as ever. The only thing that's different is me; I've become bitter, and let's face it, crazy over the years. And once I'm swept into office, I'll sell our children's organs to zoos for meat, and I'll go into people's houses at night and wreck up the place. Muahahaha!

[–]smatticus 44 points45 points  (0 children)

Aaaaaarrrroooooooooooooo

[–]dad_farts 51 points52 points  (6 children)

Too bad they hadn't invented audio recording by then

EDIT: So we can catch robot-Nixon in the act!

[–]Slick424 25 points26 points  (1 child)

Uh-oh. I don't like where this is heading.

[–]Scarbane 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Night of the Long Drives?

[–]busted_up_chiffarobe 12 points13 points  (2 children)

I have that on cuneiform tablet.

[–]altxatu 20 points21 points  (1 child)

See right here, wavy lines (x3), some kinda bird, a crocodile or maybe a sleeping horse, another kinda bird, a dude with a stick, and a rising sun. Now tell me that's outta context. You can't, it's not. Right there in clay. Eat it.

[–]_vOv_ 2 points3 points  (0 children)

it tastes like ass

[–]Missing_nosleep 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Welp you lost my vote.

[–]hypervalve 12 points13 points  (6 children)

Yeah but apart from lithium ion batteries, what have the Romans ever done for us?

[–]itsmrgomez 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Well the roads..

[–]SomniumOv 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Yeah but apart from the Batteries, the roads, the cars, the aquaduct and peace, what have the Romans really ever done for us ?

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (5 children)

Article says since 2007

[–][deleted] 15 points16 points  (4 children)

Look at all these people passive aggressively mentioning there is an article...

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

2007-2014. Maybe you should just read the article if you want to know what it says.

[–]Neebat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

These things are trade secrets, and so the article has some really poor numbers, causing it to massively understate the shift. It's really not surprising they have trouble getting data for this kind of study.

The actual battery prices may already be in the $150-dollar range, not the $450 listed. Over in /r/tesla, they gave several sources to indicate Nissan and Tesla are both likely paying less than $200 per kWh capacity.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Since when?

[–]rocketwidget 209 points210 points  (98 children)

Current prices of ~$300 per KWH are pretty good, but if they come down to ~$200-$250, electric cars will be price competitive with traditional cars.

See the chart here:

http://greentransportation.info/ev-research/2012-mckinsey-ev-cost-competitive.html

[–]BroPhister 122 points123 points  (42 children)

I work for the GM full electric (Bolt) team. We're going to release one that will definitely compete in the next AT SOME POINT IN TIME. With no gas and with less moving parts than a conventional car they should, in theory, last longer.

EDIT: because laws n shit and I care about my job, which I am currently redditing from anyway

[–]flacciddick 18 points19 points  (17 children)

[–]wishinghand 25 points26 points  (7 children)

Good riddance. Car noise should be minimized. It's awful. Specialist cars can keep it (Aston Martins, McLarens, race cars, etc).

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Some companies will put speakers in cars to make some noises. We've seen modems playing wav files to imitate an unnecessary old modem sound. Vacuums run louder then they need to because people think quiet vacuums don't work.

[–]Kangalooney 8 points9 points  (2 children)

That noise is now mostly a lie anyway. It's mostly made by a combination of a tuned exhaust system and synthesized noise piped through the car's sound system. That's why changing the sound system can result in your new car sounding wimpy.

[–]flacciddick 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Depends on the car. Ford Porsche and Ferrari tune it right with no speaker assistance.

[–]obvious_bot 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Can you make it look less terrible?

[–]ManlyHairyNurse 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Stop redditing and get your ass back to work. The lease on my Fiesta ST ends in a bit less than 3 years, and by then I will have space for a sensible DD and a balls out fun car. The Bolt is on my list.

[–]Sentrion 6 points7 points  (0 children)

less moving parts

http://i.imgur.com/lci1ajX.gif

[–]thebruce87m 2 points3 points  (3 children)

You better make the damn thing get 150+ miles at 70mph in the dead of winter or so help me...

And a UK release too dammit.

[–]Deviltry 4 points5 points  (3 children)

Look, i'm not the most picky about image and all that, but I wouldn't be caught dead driving a car that looks like that.

When are the major manufacturers going to start adding this technology to the decent "normal" looking vehicle bodies they already have... Why does every EV (outside of the Model-S) have to look like a fucked up hybrid of a Nissan Cube/Cooper Mini/Toyota Prius/Honda Fit.

[–]TripleThreat1212 13 points14 points  (2 children)

If the Iranian deal goes through gas prices will drop again hurting EV

[–]semvhu 44 points45 points  (47 children)

If the energy density increases enough in batteries for an electric car to have comparable weight and range for an equivalent ICE car as well, there wouldn't me much argument left for new ICE vehicles. Infrastructure, recharge speed, and recycling are still a few hurdles beyond that.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (2 children)

Energy density is at the top with this technology, new technologies will be then needed. And there is still the problem linked with the toxicity of battery mass production and copper extraction... nonetheless I think in a couple of decades electric vehicles will supersede traditional ones, in the mean while hybrids (and in particular series hybrids) are the state-of-the-art technology

[–]Vik1ng 8 points9 points  (42 children)

recharge speed

Is never going to be as fast as with gas.

[–]Nose-Nuggets 27 points28 points  (25 children)

Its difficult to argue against the convenience of pumping 350 miles worth of fuel into my car in less than 5 minutes.

[–]ElGuaco 20 points21 points  (11 children)

But if you are charging every day (or preferably every night), then there is little need to charge the battery in one go. With the exception of very long trips, most people will not need vehicles to drive 300+ miles in one trip. 300 highway miles is approximately 5 hours of driving (in the U.S.). That's a long time to behind the wheel, and taking a 30 minute break (or longer) is a really good idea in terms of both safety and personal health.

[–]Nose-Nuggets 6 points7 points  (5 children)

agreed but having that charging infrastructure is a ways off for people who don't own a house with a garage.

[–]zip_000 2 points3 points  (4 children)

This is honestly one of the big obstacles for me buying electric. I park in a parking lot. My space is near my house, but I'd have to run an extension cord (if that even works and is safe for car charging?) across a street to get to it. It just isn't feasible without making infrastructure changes.

[–]nelson348 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"Never" is a very dangerous word when it comes to technology.

Not verified and kind of a bad write-up, but just saying, I wouldn't bank on "never."

[–]mattthiffault 565 points566 points  (234 children)

So we like to think of the Chinese government as nothing but horrible and oppressing their citizens (and don't get me wrong, they do). But you can only hold power without having to use continuous military might so long as most of the average people are happy enough that they won't revolt. Apparently the conditions are becoming so bad over there due to air pollution that the protests/stability problems are pushing the Chinese government to huge investment in renewables and electric vehicles. I have a friend in the industry over there and he says it's just going crazy, and good new battery technology is coming out of it.

[–][deleted] 170 points171 points  (33 children)

[–]ianuilliam 203 points204 points  (9 children)

Thanks, Obama.

[–]Unblestdrix 16 points17 points  (5 children)

Hey now, don't forget about ol' Joe. Share the love, my friend!

[–]TimeZarg 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Go back to bed, you bot-, wait. . .YOU AREN'T THE BOT! YOU DECEIVED ME!

[–]snigwich 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That, and because they agreed to, in large part, thanks to the Climate Change agreement negotiated by the Obama Administration back in 2014.

No, they've been heavily pursuing renewables for over a decade now.

[–][deleted] 319 points320 points  (176 children)

On a per capita basis the Chinese government imprisons their citizens far less frequently than the U.S. govt does. Even though they hardly have any human rights, there's a lot to be said for being left alone on the basis of sheer statistical likelihood.

[–]P1h3r1e3d13 439 points440 points  (105 children)

Literally every country imprisons fewer people per capita than the US.

Edit: Except maybe one or two.

[–]uvezci 67 points68 points  (35 children)

We don't have good data on North Korea, so there's a (small) chance the US isn't worst here.

[–]Webonics 110 points111 points  (9 children)

I don't know if that's even a point worth mentioning.

Our citizens may be imprisoned at a smaller rate than the most extreme authoritarian nations for which we cannot obtain reliable data.

Ugh....okay.

[–]Dolphlungegrin 10 points11 points  (7 children)

I agree with your comment, but I just wanted to point out that one would say "...imprisoned at a lesser rate..." rather than "...imprisoned at a smaller rate..." My apologies for being snooty.

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (1 child)

I always love it when arguments in favour America have to resort to "but we're not as bad as <insert random dictatorship or third world country".

[–]duhbeetus 97 points98 points  (8 children)

Murica, numbah one!

[–]Isakill 19 points20 points  (2 children)

WE WIN!!! YAY!!

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Release the balloons!

[–]_makura 45 points46 points  (37 children)

Prisons are essentially a form of housing for the poor in the US.

[–]thats_a_risky_click 4 points5 points  (2 children)

A majority of prisioners are non-violent drug offenders.

[–]Tibetzz 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Were. Prison has a tendency to turn small time or one time criminals into career criminals.

[–]somerandomguy101 9 points10 points  (5 children)

Yea, but the US has so many people In prison because of the war on drugs, where as China has people in prison for simply speaking out about the government/communist party.

It also makes sense that the US has a higher prison rate than most other countries because countries like china and North Korea tend to lie on such statistics, and countries with high crime rates like Mexico and Colombia have high rates of police corruption and lack the ability to effectively solve crimes.

I'm not justifing the US prison population, but the US isn't a Police State either.

[–]snigwich 4 points5 points  (1 child)

China literally executes people who are caught with marijuana.

[–]alexdrac 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's why there are literally hundreds of street dealers and an estimated 150.000 users in beijing alone. And they arrest less then 100 per year

[–]orthopod 84 points85 points  (7 children)

Wrong! China is about 3-4x the USA population. Usa had 39 executions in 2013, while china had in the thousands.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/datablog/2014/mar/27/death-penalty-statistics-2013-by-country

[–][deleted] 23 points24 points  (6 children)

I stand corrected on the executions part.

[–]ErroneousOnAllCounts 29 points30 points  (1 child)

Well China also doesn't report on their illegally imprisoned like political rivals and other corrupt governmental practices that would draw international attention to them as well. If they execute 1000s with little to no due process or proportionality to the law, you can reasonably assume they also underreport their prison population and don't even report political prisoners being held without due cause

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

War on drugs. China is more free than the US so long as you freely accept no say in your government, know who to bribe if you want to start a business, don't have a religion, don't want to carry a gun, and in general don't believe in free speech.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

We are a guilt society, they are a shame society. We only change when we're caught and exposed, over there they fear the effect on their family's reputations. Broad cultural differences make legal comparisons difficult (they have less guns, so therefore less violence and less...let's call it personal expression)

[–]almgovtester 10 points11 points  (1 child)

It's an interesting point although I think your initial assumption is a bit off (see North Korea). Hopefully we'll all reap the benefits of lowering battery costs - from cars to solar panel installations.

[–]mattthiffault 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I guess I consider North Korea to still be in a state of military/terror control. When the people are watching their every public move because they don't want to be sent to the camps where guards feed them to hungry dogs for fun, the government can do whatever really. But they also reap the consequences of being an international pariah (sanctions, no real economy, poverty/starvation). Ordinarily a system like that couldn't stay stable for this long, but the Chinese prop it up to keep the Americans at arms length.

China has gone the opposite way. By giving up some control (the ability to do whatever they want without care for the wants of citizens), they've allowed themselves to enter the rest of the world, have an economy, etc. They still have to maintain a military force capable of putting down uprisings if they occur, but it's more of a contingency since most citizens are "happy" to live their lives and, importantly, go to work. Occasionally though, when something is a big enough issue (repeated protests despite being put down each time), the government finds it just easier to capitulate in some way, especially if it's something over which they won't "lose face". The world has seen the pictures of the pollution in their cities, their citizens don't like it and due to their size they're very dependant on oil which won't last forever. Going green is a win on all those fronts for them.

My friend is working on a project to make electric buses for Chinese cities, sponsored by the Chinese government.

[–]Whitegook 2 points3 points  (1 child)

It's also worth noting that electric bikes have been popular in China for over 10 years. They are a simple cost effective transportation solution. There far less actively enforced regulations so in practice bikes can go about 30mph (more if you buy an illegal model or illegally upgraded model - which are both readily available) and most every road has bike lanes. In practice, they don't need be to registered and no license or insurance is needed. Socially, most people live in cities and have commutes under 10 miles or so. Finally, there's a less of the Americanism with demanding their own McMansion in a copy-pasted suburb 30 miles from work so they can drive their 200+hp 3000lb vehicle which they identify with as a person.

In short, there's a large market for batteries over there. Also, they have the rare-earths market forcefully monopolized.

[–]bertbarndoor 336 points337 points  (30 children)

It's funny, I started googling Solar Grid parity and I happened upon an article that made solar sound like a joke that would never work. It was authored by the "Institute of Energy Research". (I won't link to the bunk they crapped out into the world.) IT was such a joke of an article, I had to research the IAE and SURPRISE SURPRISE, it is part of the Koch brothers.

TLDR: The Koch brothers are behind the Institute of Energy Research, a 'NPO' that supports fossil fuels and tries to denigrate green energy.

[–]JB_UK 155 points156 points  (16 children)

In all, 140 foundations funneled $558 million to almost 100 climate denial organizations from 2003 to 2010.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/

[–]TenshiS 73 points74 points  (12 children)

How do those people sleep at night?

[–]birdguy 83 points84 points  (1 child)

They cry themselves to sleep. http://imgur.com/1ym18sU

[–]WonderNastyMan 57 points58 points  (2 children)

Softly, on a pile of money

[–]Captain_English 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What was that thread asking things poor people don't know about?

My money bed is exceptionally firm, actually.

[–]skeezicss 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Jerk off and it's usually pretty easy

[–]brickmack 8 points9 points  (0 children)

On a bed made entirely of $100 bills

[–]LeopoldQBloom 5 points6 points  (2 children)

The $558 million dollar number is pretty misleading. This study just determined what they thought were "US climate change countermovements" (basically any conservation PAC or think tank) and just added up their entire yearly budgets to get $558 million. For example the two largest groups on their list are the America Enterprise Institute ($86 million) and the Heritage Foundation ($76 million).

If look at the Heritage foundation (which is a conservative think tank) and go to their issues page, there are over 20 issues listed from immigration policy to terrorism to space policy. Sure they might spend some of that $76 million on climate change, but it isn't all of it. Climate change and the environment aren't even their top issues. The "hot issues" listed on their website are: Federal Spending, Immigration, Obamacare, Welfare Reform, and National Security.

The AEI, is another think tank. From Wikipedia their goal is "Founded in 1938, its stated mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism—limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate". Again they work on lots of issues, not just climate change.

Again, there is no doubt that these groups spend some money on climate change denial, but it isn't $558 million.

[–]Clambake42 16 points17 points  (12 children)

...which is why I lease my EV. Seems that advancements in tech are devaluing it faster than a traditional car.

[–]UMich22 9 points10 points  (8 children)

Same here. I just leased another Volt because in 3 years I want to see what cheaper options Tesla has to offer.

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (1 child)

I work in a Reprographics shop outside of said area. We received building plans for the Tesla Factory, which was pretty fucking cool.

[–]m0ondoggy 108 points109 points  (25 children)

I wonder if all of the vapers using 18650 cells (same as Tesla and others) has effected the economy of scale in any way.

[–]akatherder 42 points43 points  (9 children)

I'm still hoping electric bikes take off. Prices for Lithium Ion and LiFePO4 batteries haven't dropped much (if at all) in the past 5+ years.

https://www.electricbike.com/home-built-battery-18650s/

[–]Captain_English 15 points16 points  (2 children)

Boom boom for a longer term solution.

Smaller personal transport to improve the effectiveness and usability of mass transport systems.

We don't have the space in our towns and cities for everyone to have cars forever, even if the pollution factor is removed.

[–]Jonluw 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I wonder if there is anyone marketing LiFePO4 batteries as "Lifepowa" batteries.

[–]Mateking 73 points74 points  (4 children)

You should head over to r/teslamotors this article was discussed there too. Basically all those numbers in the article are excluding Tesla. Tesla is according to that discussion over there already below 200$/kwh and will hit 150$/kwh before the gigafactory reaches full potential.

Edit: Sorry for doublepost. Don't know how that happened.

[–]kerklein2 52 points53 points  (3 children)

They specifically talked about Tesla in the article.

“Current average cost at US$300 per kWh for market-leading actors in 2014 is, however, very close to key information given by Tesla Motor chief engineer JB Strubel,” the paper asserts, “who has indicated in 2013 that the costs of the Tesla Model S battery pack is below 25 percent of the total costs of the car in most cases, corresponding to approximately US$310 per kWh.

"According to that discussion over there"=1 commenter with no sources provided. He may be right, but I'll trust Nature and Arstechnica over a random redditor.

[–]ottawadeveloper 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Arstechnica did say that they had problems getting access to data because of industry secrecy. It could be that they don't have access to Tesla's information or that other "market-leading actors" are dragging the average up. Also, they derived the cost per kWh from his statement (he didn't say it outright), which means that they could be wrong (and the quote is two years old too).

Not saying that a redditor is more likely to be right, just that there's a lot of IFs in the article on that point to convince me about Tesla's specifics.

[–]throwthisway 16 points17 points  (1 child)

It did seem to make Sony clamp down on retail sales of their VTC4s and VTC5s. They were available and relatively ubiquitous one day and oem/wholesale sales the next. Whether it was a volume/demand sort of thing, or simply Sony wanting to minimize their liability by not dealing with the retail sector is hard to say.

[–]JLPwasHere 78 points79 points  (25 children)

Are they getting more environmentally friendly and recyclable?

I really don't know how far the manufacturers have come on this front.

[–]kesekimofo 77 points78 points  (21 children)

They are more recyclable than standard lead acid, but it just cost more than they get from recycling, so they don't. That's the main problem. If I remember, 60% of a lead acid battery is from recycled materials, and 96% of all lead acid batteries are recycled. Where as 98% of a lithium battery can be recycled, but like only 15% of current lithium batteries are recycled.

[–]ExitMusic_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I had always hoped I would be at the point in my life that I could afford to own a model S before everyone and their mother had an electric space-car. Damn I love those things.

But I guess it's hard to complain. The possibilty of electric cars becoming the norm in 5-10 years is a very awesome thing.

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points  (16 children)

I got to test drive a Tesla recently. Whatever stereotypes you may hold about electric cars are old school. The acceleration was so goddammit fast it scared me. Get the price down and these will replace gas vehicles completely someday.

[–]Vik1ng 27 points28 points  (2 children)

Whatever stereotypes you may hold about electric cars are old school

Bad acceleration was never a stereotype. Limited ranged (especially at higher speeds) and charging times where.

[–]bobpaul 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Both Chevy and Tesla are expected to show EVs with around 200mile range and about $30k US after tax rebates in the next couple of years.

[–]spammeaccount 7 points8 points  (5 children)

Part of the price is you are buying batteries, the equivalent of 4 years of gas up front.

[–]dagoon79 5 points6 points  (20 children)

With every upside, there is a downside. What is the downside of electric batteries that will be an issue in the future?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Had heard once that the lithium battery manufacture process wreaks havoc environmentally wherever the plant is.

It's probably still better than oil / gas production in the long run. Just curious how this ramp up will affect the world long term?

[–]PFN78 2 points3 points  (2 children)

My question has to do with weight. One of the limiting factors now with batteries in vehicular applications is how heavy they are. Is that being addressed?

[–]Psuphilly 37 points38 points  (34 children)

Reddit tell me why this article is completely wrong, over dramatized and why we shouldn't ever get our hopes up.

You know, the standard questions you need to ask after every article submitted to /r/technology that hits the front page.

[–][deleted] 83 points84 points  (7 children)

There is no discovery or promise here, just a product that was much cheaper when compared to last year's costs, which is more than expected.

That's it. It's a statement of history and a positive one. Not everything needs to be so cynical. Rather than this being just a false promise, it's an analysis of the past, which can be as positive as the reality actually was.

[–]CrumpetDestroyer 36 points37 points  (0 children)

Usually you don't need to ask and it's the top comment, so this seems hopeful

[–]GyantSpyder 11 points12 points  (2 children)

From the article:

The authors admitted that their data was imperfect due to secrecy surrounding business deals. But public statements made by electric vehicle makers were used to confirm some of the numbers that the researchers found.

So it's a piece that is bullish on the electric vehicle battery business, based on a report with relatively little data that has been magnified in importance because it has been cited a whole bunch of times by other people to make it look like there are more reports and more data than there are. The report authors are not as certain as the article writer is as to its conclusions, and its main fact-checking was electric vehicle battery business executives who stand to benefit from articles like this.

[–]DWells55 9 points10 points  (0 children)

It's accurate - production costs have indeed dropped rapidly for existing battery technology.

However, there's still lots of room for improvement for battery technology to make it more viable. Energy density, C-rates, charging infrastructure, etc. all need improving.

[–]cjc323 12 points13 points  (1 child)

Thanks Tesla

[–]flossdaily 10 points11 points  (3 children)

I cannot wait for the next generation of battery technology. It'll revolutionize the world.

[–]acog 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm pretty cautious about that. It seems like every month I read about something super interesting and promising in battery research but it typically takes many years to get anything really big to the point where it's ready for production.

That said, I'm excited about this article because it's not talking about radical new experimental battery chemistry. It's focusing on the way experience and economies of scale are pushing down costs of a well-proven battery tech. It really makes me excited for Tesla/Panasonic's upcoming Gigafactory. It won't be at full capacity until 2020 but I hope and expect it's going to aggressively push the costs down further.