Thanks! The kWh pricing seems pretty close to the research report that Steve was referring to so I think it's safe to say its way lower than the $100/kWh threshold that BNEF uses as a reference point.
Agreed, from what I've heard from battery engineers BNEF's numbers are more of a average of what all automakers pay. Tesla definitely pays less for example.
Also, Nicholas at Intercalation is a reliable source so the proximity to quoted research report makes sense.
Just some context. Farley was referring to car ASSEMBLY labor falling by 40% in the event of the EV shift. This was overwhelmingly because of shifting ICE powertrain manufacture off the OEM (Ford, BMW, etc.) books... but it would be replaced by SUPPLIER (e.g. LG, CATL) labor at the battery plants. See the BCG report "Shifting Gears in Auto Manufacturing," which saw virtually ZERO change in TOTAL labor, between OEM and supplier combined. Think about it: in a modern car plant most of the labor is in the final trim lines (headlights, dashboards, seats, etc.), virtually none of which is impacted by the EV transition. If one needs further evidence that we can't really conclude much about total employment, look at Tesla, which integrates some battery production as well as car production: Tesla made 1,850,000 cars in 2023 with 140,000 workers, more or less. In 2023 Toyota made about 10 million cars with about 400,000 employees. Tesla made 13 EV cars per head, Toyota 25 mostly ICE cars. Yes, a lot of the difference is due to lower vertical integration at Toyota, but my broader point is we have no clear data yet that the overall industry would lose employment due to the EV transition. People tend to say "Hey an electric motor has only one moving part!" and conclude that means minimal labor... but hey, silicon chips have NO moving parts and yet chip fabs require lots of expensive labor. Details matter, people!
A good resource for keeping monthly tabs on cell pricing is the Intercalation substack. Their last report showed LFPs @ $51/kWh. https://intercalationstation.substack.com/p/battery-component-price-report-april
Thanks! The kWh pricing seems pretty close to the research report that Steve was referring to so I think it's safe to say its way lower than the $100/kWh threshold that BNEF uses as a reference point.
Agreed, from what I've heard from battery engineers BNEF's numbers are more of a average of what all automakers pay. Tesla definitely pays less for example.
Also, Nicholas at Intercalation is a reliable source so the proximity to quoted research report makes sense.
Just some context. Farley was referring to car ASSEMBLY labor falling by 40% in the event of the EV shift. This was overwhelmingly because of shifting ICE powertrain manufacture off the OEM (Ford, BMW, etc.) books... but it would be replaced by SUPPLIER (e.g. LG, CATL) labor at the battery plants. See the BCG report "Shifting Gears in Auto Manufacturing," which saw virtually ZERO change in TOTAL labor, between OEM and supplier combined. Think about it: in a modern car plant most of the labor is in the final trim lines (headlights, dashboards, seats, etc.), virtually none of which is impacted by the EV transition. If one needs further evidence that we can't really conclude much about total employment, look at Tesla, which integrates some battery production as well as car production: Tesla made 1,850,000 cars in 2023 with 140,000 workers, more or less. In 2023 Toyota made about 10 million cars with about 400,000 employees. Tesla made 13 EV cars per head, Toyota 25 mostly ICE cars. Yes, a lot of the difference is due to lower vertical integration at Toyota, but my broader point is we have no clear data yet that the overall industry would lose employment due to the EV transition. People tend to say "Hey an electric motor has only one moving part!" and conclude that means minimal labor... but hey, silicon chips have NO moving parts and yet chip fabs require lots of expensive labor. Details matter, people!