Just in case it isn’t clear, I’m continuing to steer clear of battery companies like ELVA and EOSE, among others. While I’m sure the technology in most of these companies is actually sound, applications for batteries need to balance a number of differing attributes. Batteries that are good for one aspect might be poor at another aspect, and knowing these technical aspects is beyond my limited knowledge even though I’ve followed the space for over a decade.
As an example, Tesla introduced their 4680 NMC cells several years ago, started to build some Model Ys with them, then stopped that. The Cybertruck does use them, however. Yet, Tesla continues to use different battery chemistry for its different vehicles, partially due to cost of changing, but also because, for instance, while LFP batteries can be charged to 100% without the lifetime degradation seen with NCA batteries, Tesla continues to use NCA for its high performance variants, with LFP for its lower performance vehicles. In Europe and Germany, Tesla mostlly uses NCM battery chemistry.
While the LFPs can be regularly charged to 100%, they have less energy storage capacity than the NCAs, and can’t provide as much power upon demand. LFPs also need to be kept warm, which uses energy.
While none of this Tesla stuff matters for ELVA nor EOSE, I include it just to show that there are many factors affecting which battery chemistries different applications will choose. Cost, environmental requirements, safety, weight, efficiency, charge curves, maintenance, recyclability, power and energy curves, etc. all matter in different degrees. The video I linked above delves into part of this. EOSE itself describes that grid-scale batteries fall into 3 use cases: Short-term (0-3 hours), Intraday, and Interday. The power curve requirements are quite different, as seen in the charge at 5:45 in the video (from EOSE).
As outsiders, we have very little insight into what the businesses choosing batteries value, and how they’re evaluating these companies, which includes confidence in the companies themselves to still be around in 10 years.
Some may remember Fisker claiming a solid state “battery breakthrough” in 2017, only to completely abandon the tech 4 years later. This is emblematic of battery technology. There is much that is promising, but scaling to commercial projects is not straightforward and often exposes new issues that might now be addressable, at least in the near term.
Battery companies are all story stocks. Be sure you understand the specific market(s) these companies are targeting and what successes they have already had, if any. Personally, I don’t know how anyone can predict the future winners and losers, but if you can, please explain it to the rest of us.