# $1.2 trillion in electric vehicles and batteries through 2030 - **URL:** \ **Category:** Macro Economic Trends and Risks\ **Created:** [February 9, 2023, 9:36am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135 "2023-02-09T09:36:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![captainccs](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/captainccs/32/3775_2.png) [@captainccs](https://discussion.fool.com/u/captainccs)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2023, 9:36am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/1 "2023-02-09T09:36:44Z")
> **[EV investments](https://www.reuters.com/graphics/AUTOS-INVESTMENT/ELECTRIC/akpeqgzqypr/)** > > A Reuters analysis of 37 global automakers found that they plan to invest nearly $1.2 trillion in electric vehicles and batteries through 2030 and the elephant on the room is Tesla putting up 30% and it seems from internal cash flow Advantage over startups, 20 years Advantage over legacy automakers, no debt o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o I found this link in the comments section of an article by professor Aswath Damodaran at Seeking Alpha where @Pablo6sigma said: > I also believe that it [automobile TAM] will be limited by the size of the automotive market space which will likely continue to be driven by the same old metrics of population growth and per capita GDP. [Disagreements And First Principles: The Pushback On My Tesla Valuation | Seeking Alpha](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4575314-disagreements-and-first-principles-the-pushback-on-my-tesla-valuation#comment-94434098) Makes sense @Russell’s Decalogue replied > The EV market is growing mainly because people don’t want to burn gasoline if they don’t have to. [Disagreements And First Principles: The Pushback On My Tesla Valuation | Seeking Alpha](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4575314-disagreements-and-first-principles-the-pushback-on-my-tesla-valuation#comment-94436427) Nonsense - follow the money o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o BTW, I disagree with professor Aswath Damodaran > **[Disagreements And First Principles: The Pushback On My Tesla Valuation](https://seekingalpha.com/article/4575314-disagreements-and-first-principles-the-pushback-on-my-tesla-valuation#comment-94400342)** > > In short, my value of $130/share reflects the confluence of these assumptions, and as I conceded, I can and will be wrong on each of them. The Captain ---
**Author:** ![MarkR](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/markr/32/2011_2.png) [@MarkR](https://discussion.fool.com/u/MarkR)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2023, 3:29pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/2 "2023-02-09T15:29:58Z")
Ron Baron says perhaps $1500/share in 2030. That’s a $5T market cap. I just want to know what earnings he is estimating to support that market cap? The car part of the company will have almost no growth at that point. > ---
**Author:** ![bjurasz](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/bjurasz/32/7233_2.png) [@bjurasz](https://discussion.fool.com/u/bjurasz)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2023, 3:54pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/3 "2023-02-09T15:54:05Z")
> [@MarkR](#): > > Ron Baron says perhaps $1500/share in 2030. A 30% CAGR between today and 2030? Yeah, no way. ---
**Author:** ![pauleckler](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/pauleckler/32/2906_2.png) [@pauleckler](https://discussion.fool.com/u/pauleckler)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2023, 5:40pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/4 "2023-02-09T17:40:01Z")
The industry is investing heavily and clearly plans to have EVs available. Whether buyers will buy them is still the big unknown. More recharging infrastructure will help. Costs of fuel and batteries rebates subsidies all matter. If 50% of vehicles sold in 2030 are EVs, the program is a success. And significant growth is required. And California may refuse to license new ICE vehicles. We will see if that all happens. ---
**Author:** ![WilliB](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/willib/32/6136_2.png) [@WilliB](https://discussion.fool.com/u/WilliB)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2023, 6:41pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/5 "2023-02-09T18:41:39Z")
In related news, looks like DOE is backing Redwood Materials with a $2B loan for battery material production: > **[Redwood receives conditional commitment for $2B Department of Energy loan for...](https://www.redwoodmaterials.com/news/redwood-department-of-energy-loan/)** > > Redwood Materials has received conditional commitment for a $2 billion loan from the Department of Energy’s Loan Program Office as part of the Advanced Technology Vehicle Manufacturing Loan Program (ATVM) ---
**Author:** ![ItsGoingUp](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/itsgoingup/32/3596_2.png) [@ItsGoingUp](https://discussion.fool.com/u/ItsGoingUp)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2023, 7:41am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/6 "2023-02-10T07:41:03Z")
> [@bjurasz](#): > > A 30% CAGR between today and 2030? Yeah, no way. I think you’re right. Since 2013, Tesla’s vehicle delivery CAGR has been about double that (22,400 → 1,313,851, ~57%). I’m leaving out 2012 since the number of deliveries was so low it distorts the CAGR high. > **[Infographic: Tesla's 2022 Deliveries Nearly Match Its 2012-2020 Total](https://www.statista.com/chart/8547/teslas-vehicle-deliveries-since-2012/)** > > This chart shows Tesla's annual vehicle deliveries since 2012. No way it will be only 30%. Plus, of course, Tesla’s energy business will grow much faster. And that’s ignoring the Inflation Reduction Act, which will shower more money on Tesla than anybody else, by far. Damodaran is a smart guy who has been consistently wrong about Tesla. He has updated his model multiple times to correct his errors, but he gets it way wrong over and over. Ron Baron is a smart guy who has been consistently right. But he’s sandbagging big time. Now whether the stock price will reflect the actual business is unknown, as we have seen all too well over the past year or so. -IGU- ---
**Author:** ![captainccs](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/captainccs/32/3775_2.png) [@captainccs](https://discussion.fool.com/u/captainccs)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2023, 11:19am UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/7 "2023-02-10T11:19:38Z")
> [@ItsGoingUp](#): > > Damodaran is a smart guy who has been consistently wrong about Tesla. He has updated his model multiple times to correct his errors, but he gets it way wrong over and over. I watched a video of Damodaran giving a lecture to his students, he is a wonderful teacher! The problem with his value analysis is that it’s basically 1934 Security Analysis and the world has moved on from cigar butts to complex systems. BTW, On March 1 Tesla is having their Investor Day and will be announcing Master Plan 3. I don’t want to speculate on specifics but I think it will be quite revolutionary mostly on the manufacturing side, The Machine that builds The Machine. About growth, the 50% growth target was for the numbers of cars sold and earnings per share should easily outpace that. The Captain ---
**Author:** ![DrBob2](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/drbob2/32/3456_2.png) [@DrBob2](https://discussion.fool.com/u/DrBob2)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2023, 2:20pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/8 "2023-02-10T14:20:02Z")
> [@captainccs](#): > > About growth, the 50% growth target was for the numbers of cars sold and earnings per share should easily outpace that. If there is going to be higher raw materials input cost and more completion, why would profit margins increase? DB2 ---
**Author:** ![captainccs](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/captainccs/32/3775_2.png) [@captainccs](https://discussion.fool.com/u/captainccs)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2023, 4:44pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/9 "2023-02-10T16:44:29Z")
> [@DrBob2](#): > > If there is going to be higher raw materials input cost and more completion, why would profit margins increase? Because cost of raw materials is not the only cost, because competition is meaningless when Tesla can sell all it makes. On the other side of the cost equation there is lower unit cost with increasing volume and most important, Tesla’s fanatical search for cost efficiencies. Tune in March 1 for the Platform 3 unweiling. Tesla is aiming to cut manufacturing costs by 50% and that can only be done with radical innovation. Redwood Materials is aiming to reduce the cost of battery materials through recycling. > The Nevada factory will produce [anode copper foil and cathode active materials](https://www.redwoodmaterials.com/news/manufacturing-anode-copper-foil-and-cathode-active-materials/), two key ingredients of lithium-ion batteries, from a combination of raw materials, scrap from sources including the nearby Tesla battery Gigafactory in Reno, and end-of-life batteries shipped in from across the country. At full capacity, Redwood plans to produce enough of these materials to supply battery production for more than 1 million EVs per year. > **[Redwood Materials wins $2B DOE loan to recycle EV batteries](https://news.yahoo.com/redwood-materials-wins-2b-doe-215600640.html)** > > The U.S. needs a robust domestic supply of recycled materials to get EVs on the road. Federal support will be a big help in kick-starting the nascent industry. Of course Moore’s Law and Wright’s Law are still in effect. The Captain ---
**Author:** ![bjurasz](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/bjurasz/32/7233_2.png) [@bjurasz](https://discussion.fool.com/u/bjurasz)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2023, 6:04pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/10 "2023-02-10T18:04:15Z")
> [@captainccs](#): > > Of course Moore’s Law … still in effect. Most of us in the industry have believed for a few years now that Moore’s Law is dead, unfortunately. ---
**Author:** ![captainccs](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/motleyfoolfree/user_avatar/discussion.fool.com/captainccs/32/3775_2.png) [@captainccs](https://discussion.fool.com/u/captainccs)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2023, 6:53pm UTC](https://discussion.fool.com/t/1-2-trillion-in-electric-vehicles-and-batteries-through-2030/88135/11 "2023-02-10T18:53:22Z")
> [@bjurasz](#): > > Most of us in the industry have believed for a few years now that Moore’s Law is dead, unfortunately. Did you know that Moore’s Law was in effect before he was even born? Before they invented transistors? In his book, _The Age of Spiritual Machines,_ Ray Kurzweil traces the evolution of computing machines from the earliest by Charles Babbage and shows their increasing computing power in line with Moore’s Law. But just as computing machines evolved from mechanical to electrical to electronic, maybe we are not at the end of the computer’s increasing efficiency shifting from transistor performance to coding performance with AI or something… The Captain is an eternal optimist > **[The Age of Spiritual Machines: When... by Kurzweil, Ray](https://www.amazon.com/Age-Spiritual-Machines-Computers-Intelligence/dp/0140282025)** > > The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence \[Kurzweil, Ray\] on Amazon.com. \*FREE\* shipping on qualifying offers. The Age of Spiritual Machines: When Computers Exceed Human Intelligence