"Curious though, why they are tossing away a two decade time to market advantage?" I think that the answer to that is relatively simple. Toyota ranks worldwide on second place right behind VW and that is an immensely huge output. All car companies were caught off-foot with the advent of Tesla especially the big two. Additionally, VW's millstone on their neck was diesel-gate and their sole hope for salvation was to follow the footsteps of Tesla. Toyota, in comparison to VW, had long ago switched to hybrids, so they were not under the same time pressure as VW. Despite the threatening time element, Toyota was not in the same forcing time element as VW. For both, the inevitable transition to EVs is a behemoth and costly task when considering their present manufacturing infrastructure. Toyota is counting on time that VW does not have.

Well, they have to get money from somewhere other than bank-robbery to pay the substantial fines for diesel-gate. A more refined method is to extort their customers.

What some "green H2 enthusiasts" don't understand and perhaps never will is that with all the effort that is made to produce renewable energy, it is far to precious to waste whilst producing green H2. The complete H2 process (well to wheels) for e. g. FCEVs amounts to ca. 20% or even less. Unless H2 is produced from engineered bacteria instead of electrolysis etc. it is best forgotten. Only a proponent of big oil or their employees could hold such a waste of energy for a good idea.

@ e-c-i: You're so right but your conclusions do not bode well for big oil and all their appendixes. They're fighting their battle of existence with all means at their disposal. I fervently hope they fail.

Why cling so desperately unto Lithium??? Magnesium (Mg) and Aluminum (Al) circumvent those problems posed by Lithium. Both alternatives are by far more abundant than Li. Mg has two valence electrons and Al has three but Li only one. Hence, the potential energy capacity of Mg and Al are twice and three times as high respectively as Li. These two alternatives pose other problems than those of Li but certainly none that cannot be solved. Besides being more abundant than Li, both alternatives are far cheaper. So why not stop fussing about with Li?

@ mahonj: It may be one aspect as you mentioned; another could be that the solid state electrolyte being employed enables higher efficiency than the commonly used organic electrolytes.

@ SJC: Either you underestimate - or you don't understand the situation as described.

These rare earths are only a trivial portion of their complete scheme; the Chinese are cunning and patient. Their proceedings in the past few decades were very methodical. E. g. when they had started to manufacture solar panels, their products were cheap, of poor quality and low efficiency. In time they managed to improve the quality of their products at low labor costs and slowly became a serious competitor on the world market. The missing know-how and expertise were gained through acquisitions of previous contenders in Europe and USA that were no longer able to cope with the changing market situation. Many companies in Germany were forced out of business and were bought up by the Chinese. The same methods are running parallel on the automobile market. If European and American car companies are not extremely careful, they will undoubtedly suffer the same fate as the a. m..

@ Thomas Lankester: Well, all other operators of wind and solar power generators in Germany - with rare exceptions - are obliged to pay the levy irregardless if they feed into the grid or make use of the power themselves. I see absolutely no reason to exempt BASF from this levy just because they may have "deeper pockets" than anyone else.

All of this sounds great and very impressive. But it does not sound very impressive that BASF is attempting to extort the German government. Subsidization of renewables is financed with a toll placed upon all those investing in renewables (solar, wind, water etc.). Everyone consuming electric energy is burdened with this toll which is regulated via the German EEG law. Now, if no one is above the law why should BASF be exempted from their legal contribution as defined by the EEG? Such hypocritical exceptions have been made in the past and if this keeps going on at the established rate, soon the exception will replace the rule.

Excellent progress! Keep up the good work and final achievement will be rewarded in due time. Three questions remain on my side. 1) How high can the final cell voltage be expected to be? 2) Can cell safety be endangered by overcharging? 3) Can the cell be discharged completely without damage?

Don't pick illusions, give your consideration to the complete cycle and you'll end up with at best ca. 30%.

I'd prefer to keep hands off from producing H2 via electrolysis because the whole process is far too inefficient and it's a pity to waste precious renewable energy. However, a viable method for production of H2 could be as described in the following link. https://lighthouse.mq.edu.au/article/september2/designer-bacteria-could-fuel-the-future-with-cheap-hydrogen

@: The Lurking Jerk Google for "HB11" and I have the faint hope that you may give up your quest for thorium.

I can't understand why the whole world is so hell-bent on Li-solutions. Magnesium (Mg) is far more abundant than Li and quite cheaper. Mg's potential energy capacity is at least twice as high as that of Li and is absolutely dendrite free (no cobalt). Mg presents other problems than Li but none that cannot be solved. It appears almost miraculously that the scientific crowd managed a getaway from lead.

"They call it "greener, low-carbon", but ......" What they probably meant to implicate is that a software programmed and controlled vehicle will respond more sensibly and more repetitively accurate than a human driver. "Green" energy can be used more or less effectively.

With accelerating demand for EVs, it's not really surprising that copper prices are surging to such high levels. Far to little is being done in research and investment of CNTs. A CNT-yarn composed of Graphene to replace copper wiring in electric motors and copper wiring in general would relieve the strain on copper pricing and improve the efficiency of electric drive trains.

A Fool Cell has no chance at high altitudes.

"If you want noise, wear earphones and pipe it into your own brain, not others. " In some instances that could prove to be a difficult task. To "pipe it" to the target you mentioned, it would have to be verified that it is there in the first place or else you just "pipe it" perhaps into a vacuum?

A H2 combustion engine! ?? BMW attempted that fervently in the seventies and failed miserably. H2 is highly inflammable and has its dangers. At any rate, BMW determined that a H2 combustion engine is craps. More than likely, the invested time is lost as well as money. Astonishing advancement has been achieved in battery technology since the seventies. At least half a dozen newest battery solutions to emerge in the market in the near future will wipe out any remaining fears / doubts presently hampering the switch to EVs.

"Power consumption of the ID.4 GTX is 19.8-18.1 kWh/km". 19.8-18.1 kWh/km??? GCC, you can't be serious! That would be miserable beyond description. You probably meant 19.8-18.1 kWh/100km. Even a "0" placed at the right location can make a world of difference.

Why not? I'd prefer a modest start to a boosted failure.

Jumping to conclusions has never paired with reliable and wise decisions. Looking beyond the visible horizon and reviewing possibilities has nothing to do with "God's eye view" rather with horse- or common sense which evidently not everyone possesses.

The question that arises in my mind is, what possible long term effect may the removal of Lithium from seawater have for all living creatures presently still thriving in the oceans worldwide?

Why keep on playing yo yo when there are two competitive and compelling solutions moving towards the pipeline? https://spatialald.com/SALD-batteries-for-electric-cars.html https://innovationorigins.com/australian-and-german-scientists-develop-lithium-sulfur-battery-thats-4-times-more-powerful/