Back in August of 2021, we compared NCA (lithium nickel cobalt aluminum oxide) batteries with LFP (lithium iron phosphate) batteries - "Tesla's LFP (iron) batteries compared. Which one should you buy?". NCA batteries had been the standard for all Tesla models in the USA, but Tesla’s plans to switch to LFP in Model 3s and Model Ys prompted that article. Tesla even offered more rapid delivery to customers waiting for the cars they had on order if they decided to get their car with LFP batteries.
A nickel mine in Indonesia
There are trade-offs between these two battery types in terms of weight, range, consequences of carrying a full charge, regenerative braking, and cold weather behavior which are all discussed in the column mentioned above. These are all valid considerations, but working from the assumption that a prime motivation of most people buying an electric car is to promote a healthy environment and a healthier planet (by cutting CO2 emissions), it should also be mentioned that these two battery chemistries have vastly different implications for the environment. Crucially, NCA batteries are built with a lot of nickel (about 18 kg in a Tesla) whereas LFP batteries have none. But high demand for nickel for Teslas (and many other electric vehicle models) is accelerating strip-mining in Indonesia and the Philippines. Mining is one thing, but strip mining is more problematic.
Strip mining on tropical islands in Southeast Asia is especially harmful because these are centers of biodiversity with large numbers of unique species of plants and animals, many of which are endangered - some critically so. Unlike forest clearing, where the land retains some value for agricultural production, strip mining obliterates what is there and it will likely be decades, if not centuries, before such areas are productive again. When not rainforests, this strip mining is destroying agricultural land. Plus, Southeast Asia has high rainfall, so once the land is laid bare, erosion carries large amounts of sediment onto nearby coral reefs.
Details matter, however, and in this case it should be pointed out that nickel is mined from two sources - laterite and sulfide. Laterite deposits (as in Indonesia and the Philippines) are formed by the weathering of ultramafic bedrock in areas of high seasonal rainfall, along ridges and mountain shoulders. Through leaching, nickel accumulates 10-25 m below the surface and the only way to get at it is to clear off the top 10 m and everything living there.
In contrast, sulfide deposits are in the bedrock and nickel is extracted by hard-rock mining, sometimes near the surface, but often far underground. This distinction is important for electric vehicles because sulfide deposits are smelted into the highly pure nickel which is required for batteries. When laterite nickel is smelted, the lower purity nickel primarily goes to other uses, such as stainless steel. However, if laterite nickel is processed by High Pressure Acid Leaching (HPAL), nickel of sufficient purity for batteries is produced, but at present not very much is produced this way. Of the other uses of nickel besides for batteries, some processes also need high purity nickel, but some can use either high or lower purity nickel. Another important point is that there are not likely prospects for increased production of sulfide nickel, whereas there are extensive areas available for mining laterite nickel.
This may all seem convoluted, but what this all means is 1) as consumption of sulfide nickel for batteries grows with the expansion of the electric vehicle market, this will take up more and more of available sulfide supplies; 2) processes which can use either will hence shift to laterite nickel. Thus, while some may point out that electric vehicle batteries, for the most part, do not use laterite nickel and hence are not the cause of the expanding strip-mining occurring in Indonesia and the Philippines (and in a few other places such as Venezuela and Brazil), it is nevertheless true that additional demand for laterite nickel is a consequence of vehicle batteries taking an increasingly large portion of the available sulfide nickel.
Despite much press coverage last year, Tesla's transition to LFP batteries has only made it to the Model 3 Rear Wheel Drive model (in the USA). Other models may get LFP batteries in the future, as they have in Europe. So, buying a Tesla is a great way to contribute to the decarbonization of your personal transportation, but to avoid the harmful impacts of high-nickel battery chemistries, lithium iron phosphate (LFP) is the best, even if you have to be selective as to which model you get.
Subscribe
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay up to date on the latest Tesla news, upcoming features and software updates.
There has been extensive reporting on what the long-anticipated affordable EV option would become, and we’ve seen numerous news stories mentioning that it was delayed or even arriving on time. The executive team revealed the near-term and long-term plans for Tesla’s upcoming vehicles, and there’s definitely good news to share here.
Updated Timeline
The most important piece of news is that despite all the talk of delays from supposed inside sources, Tesla has confirmed that the plan for its more affordable model remains on schedule for production to begin in the first half of 2025. Tesla’s executive team narrowed that timeline down further - and said that they expect production to kick off as soon as June and that the new model will be in the market shortly thereafter.
While the production timeline itself is on track, Tesla did note that the subsequent ramping process will likely be slower than initially hoped, citing global tariff and financial impacts as challenges to overcome to prepare its production lines.
Hybrid Production Approach
Tesla has once again confirmed that this will not be their next-generation vehicle, built using new production methods. Instead, they outlined a relatively more pragmatic approach for this new model.
Tesla will utilize aspects of both the next-generation platform as well as some parts of its current platforms (namely the Model 3 and Model Y). This means that Tesla will produce this new vehicle on the same manufacturing lines as the Model 3 and Model Y.
This strategy allows Tesla to bring the vehicle to the market more quickly, while also managing capital expenditures more efficiently by using existing infrastructure. However, Tesla’s executive team also noted that this approach, while faster, will result in fewer cost reductions than what might have been achieved with an entirely new platform and dedicated manufacturing process.
Vehicle Design
Using these existing production lines means that Tesla’s new vehicle will likely share some considerable similarities with either the existing Model 3 or Model Y. Rather than being a radically different and smaller vehicle, this new model will resemble the overall form factor and shape of Tesla’s current core offerings, while being optimized for a lower cost.
This doesn’t mean that Tesla is forgetting the overall goal here. Their ultimate goal is to reduce the initial cost of ownership and lower monthly payments for customers while maintaining a standard of excellence and safety.
Not Unboxed
Both at this Earnings Call and previous ones, Tesla has indicated that this new vehicle will not be using the innovative unboxed assembly method, at least for the time being. That relatively unique method will be developed and implemented specifically for the purpose-built Cybercab and for future vehicles on the next-generation platform.
We’re just a few days away from May, so it won’t be long before we see more about this upcoming vehicle. Stay tuned.
In a follow-up move to the current US administration’s goals to introduce a federal framework for autonomous vehicles, the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) is loosening autonomy restrictions following an announcement from Secretary Sean Duffy on X. This new initiative helps streamline complex regulatory processes and foster home-grown innovation.
From the Wright Brothers to the first astronauts on the moon, our nation has always been at the forefront of transportation technology.
That’s why today we're unveiling a new Automated Vehicle Framework from @USDOT’s Innovation Agenda ⬇️ ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/W3kbMUwQSn
As part of the broader upcoming USDOT Innovation Agenda, the newly unveiled AV Framework is designed to promote American innovation and strengthen domestic engineering while maintaining existing safety standards. The framework centers around three key principles:
Prioritize Safety
Unleash Innovation
Enable Commercial Deployment
To kickstart this AV framework, USDOT announced two initial steps focused on streamlining processes and expanding opportunities.
Crash Reporting Requirements
Under the first principle to Prioritize Safety, the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) will maintain its Standing General Order requiring crash reporting on Advanced and Automated Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS and ADS).
However, the reporting process will be streamlined following feedback from AV innovators, likely including Tesla. The goal here is to focus on collecting critical safety information while removing unnecessary or duplicative items from the reporting process, thereby reducing the burden without compromising safety.
Cutting Red Tape
Directly tied to the second principle of Unleash Innovation, the framework also seeks to slash red tape. The first step here is the expansion of the Automated Vehicle Exemption Program, or AVEP. This program allows manufacturers to petition for temporary exemptions from certain federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS) for testing or deployment purposes.
Previously, the standard excluded domestically produced vehicles. Now, domestically produced AVs will not need to meet FMVSS, which will broaden the scope for manufacturers to test more innovative and unique designs and technologies.
Single National Standard for AVs
Finally, tied to the third principle of Enable Commerical Development, USDOT intends to move the United States closer to a single national standard for autonomous vehicles. This aims to prevent a confusing and inefficient patchwork of state-level or city-level laws and regulations, which can create hurdles for companies attempting to innovate, deploy, and scale their technology.
A unified standard across the United States also means that Canada and Mexico will likely be able to follow, as they share homologization standards across North America, including for vehicle crash safety and some autonomy regulations.
What This Means for Tesla
These framework changes will likely have a substantial impact on Tesla. The move towards a national standard is potentially the most impactful change, as Tesla identified regulatory hurdles as one of the most significant challenges it will face with the deployment of both Unsupervised FSD and its Robotaxi network.
The reduction of FMVSS requirements and streamlined reporting will likely play a role in the future as well. The FMVSS requirements are probably already being worked on, if not already met, by the Cybercab and other vehicles in Tesla’s lineup.
Meanwhile, the streamlined reporting will be helpful once Tesla officially launches its Robotaxi network in June.
![Tesla's 2025 Q1 Earnings Call: How to Listen [Listen to Replay]](https://www.notateslaapp.com/img/containers/article_images/multiple-models/group_81.jpg/b2695a53b51e4c7927802deba2534b09/group_81.jpg)
