Batteries remain a key focus for meeting the growing demands of electric vehicles (EVs). These critical components significantly influence vehicle range, performance, and cost. As EV production scales, ensuring safety, sourcing sustainable materials, and addressing supply chain constraints will remain essential priorities.
Joe Adiletta, VP of Battery Commercialization, Sylvatex.
We at EV Engineering & Infrastructure had the fortunate opportunity to discuss these topics with Joe Adiletta, VP of Battery Commercialization with Sylvatex (SVX). SVX is an advanced materials technology company working with the battery value chain to tackle the largest cost and carbon footprint driver in EV batteries (hint: it’s the cathode).
Adiletta has spent over two decades in the battery manufacturing industry, contributing to technological developments, operations, and commercialization.
In this Q&A, he shares his perspectives on the future of EV batteries and explores the challenges affecting battery manufacturers. Topics include scaling new chemistries from lab to gigafactory production, balancing cost and performance in cathode materials, and overcoming the obstacles to ultra-fast EV charging.
Adiletta also offers insights into emerging trends, such as the shift to high-voltage systems, advancements in anode and cathode materials, alternative chemistries like sodium-ion and lithium-sulfur, and sustainable manufacturing practices, including the integration of recycled materials. His extensive knowledge offers valuable insights into the future of EV battery technology.
Here’s what he has to say…
What are the biggest bottlenecks in scaling new battery chemistries from lab to gigafactory production, and how can they be addressed?
Joe Adiletta (JA): Currently, the biggest bottleneck to scaling new battery chemistries and technologies from lab to gigafactory production is access to capital. Specifically and historically, any new technology can and should only be scaled by roughly an order of magnitude in scale at a time, which implies several stops along the way from producing perhaps as little as 1kg in the lab to 10s of thousands of tons (that’s seven orders of magnitude) in production.
Inevitably, this implies the construction of a pre-production, commercial demonstration asset on the order of 100-1,000 tons of annual production, costing 10s to 100s of millions of dollars. A commercial demonstration asset is likely unprofitable at this scale, requiring an onerous fundraising task for an early-stage startup.
Government grants in the US, such as those from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), and DOE’s Loan Programs Office (LPO) have provided critical funding to de-risk capital access for new technologies, supporting domestic production and innovation. However, the country continues to lag behind China in our efforts to spin up new technologies and compete globally.
How do you see the future of cathode materials evolving in terms of balancing performance, cost, and supply chain constraints?
JA: Just as there are any number of globally competitive automotive manufacturers selling a range of vehicle classes and styles to consumers, battery chemistries will also provide a range of solutions to the OEMs. The emergence of LFP has largely been driven by the need for lower-cost solutions to increase adoption rates and broaden the vehicle product portfolio into sub-$30k models.
Conversely, high-nickel NMC offers a valuable solution where high performance is required, and higher costs can be tolerated. As the industry advances, chemistries will change to continue to address different values on the cathode and the anode side. Optionality for the automotive OEM will allow for various trim levels while minimizing battery SKU count.
For example, not every consumer necessarily requires fast-charge capabilities and a 300-plus mile range. Chemistry selection and pack sizing will allow for the accommodation of these multiple consumer needs.
Did you know the cathode active materials are by far the largest part of the EV battery cost? They’re also constitutes the largest carbon footprint of the lithium-ion battery. New technology is working to change that.
With increasing interest in silicon anodes (to mitigate swelling and degradation), what are the biggest challenges for incorporating the material into EV batteries?
JA: The biggest challenges in scaling silicon-based technologies are primarily performance-based rather than scale-based. To first order, this is driven by the overall silicon content of the anode.
For instance, several of today’s consumer electronics devices use up to five percent silicon, but moving past this amount into > 10% silicon for automotive applications presents problems. Some developers solve these problems using exotic solutions (such as nanowires) that will likely never cost-effectively scale into automotive applications.
In short, several technologies purport to meet performance requirements but are unlikely to be scalable. Others offer lower-cost solutions starting at lower silicon percentages that, with broader system development (binders, electrolytes, substrates, etc.), will improve that number to 20%, then 30%, etc.
What key challenges in EV batteries are engineers and manufacturers seeking to better understand and address?
JA: As the industry scales, specific areas of focus for solutions change, but the primary drivers tend to be the same: cost, energy density, safety, and scalability.
Fifteen years ago, there was little focus on manufacturing process improvement, as the expectation was that scale would bring down overall expenses, at least in terms of bill of materials and conversion costs. This has proven accurate. However, now that scale improvements are primarily obtained, new manufacturing and process improvement opportunities are available in the offing, such as dry electrode processing and dry cathode active material synthesis.
More recently, due to the massive concentration of the supply chain in China, regionalization of both the supply chain and production has become a prominent issue. Given current geopolitical uncertainty, the security of supply is critical.
What advances are likely to improve EV battery cell stability and longevity, particularly under high-voltage or extreme conditions?
JA: The safety of electric propulsion systems is critically important to OEMs and consumers. The goal of any OEM is to provide an inherently safe system, which includes the vehicle, pack, and cell-based solutions. Ultimately, the goal is an inherently safe cell, which minimizes pack and vehicle level redundancies, reducing cost and complexity.
Meeting an “inherent safety” requirement is a challenging task, but one that solid-state battery developers purport to address. The most likely avenue for inherent safety should be removing the most volatile component of a lithium-ion cell, the liquid electrolyte.
Alternatively, new chemistry developments — such as sodium-ion that may use much lower volatility electrolytes and aqueous (water-based) solutions — offer promise. However, these batteries do not meet all performance requirements for automotive EV use, even if they promise a low-cost, safe solution.
What are the primary hurdles to ultra-fast EV charging without compromising battery health or lifespan?
JA: From a battery perspective, enabling ultra-fast charging involves compromise across various battery performance metrics. However, ultra-fast charging is possible today with a compromise in energy density and cost, which is ultimately unpalatable to OEMs and consumers.
Technically, the biggest hurdle to ultra-fast charging is anode development. This is one area where silicon-dominant anodes and lithium-metal anodes may offer a promising alternative to conventional graphite anodes.
Unfortunately, the charging infrastructure in the US dramatically lags battery development for true ultra-fast charging, especially as battery costs are driven down and range increases — thereby increasing battery pack capacity. For example, a Level 2 fast charger today outputs 250 kW. A large battery pack might be 100 kWh. This means that at its peak, the supercharger could only charge that pack in 24 minutes.
To charge a large pack “ultra fast,” might require a charge as large as 1 MW! This entirely different infrastructure problem requires local transformers and battery packs to cut peak power demand.
What steps can the US take to reduce its reliance on imported lithium and cobalt while still meeting the growing demand for EV batteries?
JA: America is making good progress toward reducing reliance on imported materials via different strategies. First, recycling companies in the country have been well funded, and the capacity exists to handle all US recycling needs today. Continued focus on matching capacity with demand for these materials is expected over time.
Second, the US has several innovative Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) companies working with low-to-medium concentration brines (e.g., Salton Sea). In contrast, traditional energy companies increasingly look into using existing assets, technologies, and production streams to access lithium supplies (e.g., ExxonMobil).
Third, recognizing the need for an independent supply chain has driven upstream funding and extraction of critical minerals for batteries and broader industries. Under the incoming administration, this is expected to continue.
Finally, chemistry selection will ebb and flow to account for these externalities. For instance, cobalt-free chemistries (e.g., LFP) have become more prominent. Additionally, the development of sodium-based chemistries holds the potential to leverage vast US sodium reserves, which are currently the largest in the world.
What are some of the most promising approaches to sustainable battery manufacturing?
JA: The most promising approaches to sustainable battery manufacturing are those that simplify processes, reduce waste, and reuse critical resources or components. If we start at the beginning of the supply chain, this includes recycling critical materials to reduce the need for direct extraction of minerals. Material processing innovations that move away from solutions-based methods (such as dry CAM processing) carry lower costs and reduced environmental footprint (water use, solid waste, energy consumption, etc.).
As we examine battery construction, dry electrode processing (another example of moving on from solution-based methods) offers massive savings in energy consumption and use of toxic solvents. Innovative techniques like ultrasonic qualification and quality control at the end of the production line can save energy and time and produce higher-quality end-products, minimizing scrap and waste.
Finally, end-of-life methods of battery second-life deployment have begun to be investigated. This includes funding innovative methods for pack deconstruction, cell qualification, and redeployment, all to take advantage of cells that may have another decade of life in them despite being at the end of their life for EV use.
What about integrating recycled materials into the battery supply chain — is this possible without compromising quality or performance?
JA: Numerous studies have shown that recycled materials can offer potentially superior quality and performance than virgin materials. There’s little to no industry concern that recycled materials will not meet specifications and performance metrics.
Do you think alternative battery chemistries, like sodium-ion or lithium-sulfur, will impact the EV market?
JA: Alternative battery chemistries have massive potential in the marketplace. Both sodium and sulfur offer potential pathways to substantially lower cost and domestically sourced products — again, key metrics for broader EV adoption and energy security. The unfortunate reality today, however, is that neither chemistry can meet the performance demands required of electric vehicles.
Over time, this will likely change. And as these chemistries become more developed, they will find niches in the broader marketplace. The EV market is so massive, and the electrification of everything so transformative, even “niche” markets, has the potential to be billions and billions of dollars in size. It’s only a matter of time!
You may also like:
Filed Under: Batteries, FAQs