RE:RE:Lithium stocks vs Silicon stocksYou are correct BM75, silicon anodes will hold up to 10 times more charge, not achieve 10X mileage. "Performance" was a poor choice of words in this instance. Thanks for that correction!
BlueMetal75 wrote: Yajne wrote: I have been trying to understand the differences between drivers of lithium stocks versus silicon stocks like HPQ and think I've boiled it down...at least for me. Lithium, used primarily in the cathode, is a commodity that is in perceived short supply, and therefore has a supply/demand driver...so pricing for lithium can move up if there is a supply shortage. Silicon has completely different market drivers. Silicon is derived from quartz, one of the most abundant minerals on the planet so no supply/demand driver for quartz prices. Quartz should always be one of the lowest cost feedstocks into the 'battery' making process for ANODES. But the process to convert quartz to silicon nano powders is KEY. Who can convert it most efficiently into nano-powders with the ideal battery anode specs? The answer, my friends, is HPQ with the help of PYR plasma torch technology. And the beauty of their process is that their feedstock of quartz will always be extremely cheap due to it's almost limitless supply. So HPQ should never be 'squeezed' on their supply costs....EVER! Lithium and silicon have their own unique market space, lithium for the cathode and silicon to replace graphite in the anode to improve battery performance 10 fold.
All if this is IMHO, please correct me where I might have slipped up on my assumptions
Yep, I'm happy to correct you where you've slipped on your assumptions.
The replacement of graphite with silicon in the anode will not lead to anywhere near a 10 fold increase in battery performance. (Tesla's batteries can go 400 miles on a charge now, do you really believe that just by swapping out the graphite in the anode with silicon, you'll get a 4,000 mile range? If so, please contact me...I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you).
As Bernard has stated many times, the increase in battery performance we're shooting for by replacing the graphite with nanosilicon is about 20 to 40 percent. Which would be, of course, HUGE!
(I think you got the "10 fold" figure from statements that nanosilicon would allow the anode to hold ten times more charge than currently. And it's that 10 fold higher charge capacity in the anode that should lead to the hoped-for 20 to 40% increase in battery performance)