How to Solve Battery Pain Points as the NEV Industrial Plan Takes Effect
Recently, the General Office of the State Council issued the New Energy Vehicle Industry Development Plan (2021‑2035), elevating new‑energy‑vehicle (NEV) development to a national strategy. The document offers guidance on high‑profile issues including battery safety, charging‑pile deployment and battery recycling, triggering across‑the‑board gains for NEV‑related stock sectors.
But has the boom for new‑energy vehicles truly arrived? According to production‑and‑sales statistics, from January to September 2020, China’s cumulative NEV output reached 738 400 units and sales hit 733 800 units, down 16.87 % and 15.88 % year‑on‑year respectively. Therefore, there remains ample room for NEVs to expand their market share.
Constrained by technical bottlenecks in battery safety and driving range, most consumers remain cautious about purchasing new‑energy vehicles.
The Battle for NEV Power Batteries: Which Technology Will Prevail?
Lithium‑ion batteries dominate power‑battery applications across most regions, while Japan advocates hydrogen fuel‑cell development.
Hydrogen represents an extremely eco‑friendly new‑energy source so far. Hydrogen refueling takes roughly the same short time as gasoline refueling. Despite strong backing in Japan, the high cost of hydrogen production hinders commercial roll‑out of Japanese hydrogen fuel cells.
A lithium‑ion battery mainly consists of four core components: cathode material, anode material, electrolyte and separator. The cathode is the most critical part of lithium‑ion batteries. Accounting for the largest share of both cost and weight, cathode materials directly determine battery energy density and safety performance.
| Cathode Material | Energy Density | Cost | Safety | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ternary Material | High | Low | Fairly Good | High energy density, large room for future improvement, good low‑temperature performance | Poor high‑temperature performance, safety performance inferior to lithium iron phosphate |
| Lithium Iron Phosphate | Relatively Low | Low | Good | Excellent safety performance, high‑temperature resistance, low cost | Moderate energy density, poor low‑temperature resistance |
| Lithium Cobalt Oxide | High | High | Fairly Poor | High energy density, easy preparation | High cost, poor cycle performance |
| Lithium Manganese Oxide | Relatively Low | Low | Fairly Good | Low cost, good safety performance | Poor high‑temperature resistance |
Lithium‑ion batteries are categorized by cathode chemistry: lithium cobalt oxide, lithium manganese oxide, ternary materials and lithium iron phosphate (LFP), among which ternary‑lithium and LFP systems are mainstream. LFP once ranked as China’s top cathode material for lithium‑ion batteries. Yet due to its relatively low energy density, higher‑performance ternary‑lithium batteries have become the mainstream for light passenger vehicles.
Battery technology keeps advancing. LFP batteries have seen gradual improvements in energy density, supported by new technologies such as CTP (Cell‑to‑Pack), which significantly boosts pack integration efficiency and extends driving range.
Research is underway for graphene batteries and blade batteries. Nevertheless, high‑cost graphene batteries are mostly limited to aerospace scenarios and cannot be widely deployed for mass‑market vehicles. If graphene batteries are successfully adopted in new‑energy vehicles, they would bring disruptive changes to the whole automotive industry.
Two Core Metrics for Evaluating Battery Performance
Safety
In October of that year, one electric‑vehicle model caught fire. The manufacturer subsequently recalled 1 282 vehicles, stating impurities introduced by a cell‑supplier during production triggered abnormal lithium plating inside power cells and created fire hazards.
Furthermore, statistics from the Defective Product Administrative Center under the State Administration for Market Regulation show that by the end of June that year, China had recorded 141 NEV recall campaigns covering 860 500 vehicles. NEV fire incidents stood out sharply, with 700 cases reported in the first three quarters of the year.
Battery thermal runaway constitutes the primary cause of EV spontaneous combustion. Battery safety risks stem from three aspects:
Defects in battery materials and design, which make accidents more likely to occur.
Lax enforcement of manufacturing processes and quality standards during battery production.
Poor management of battery testing under diverse real‑world operating conditions.
Driving Range
Another factor holding back full consumer acceptance of NEVs is “low‑temperature range degradation”. Battery energy capacity is a key parameter determining electric‑vehicle mileage.
Research indicates that batteries achieve optimal charge‑discharge performance at 25 °C. In cold weather, this ideal operating temperature cannot be maintained, resulting in the well‑known real‑world phenomenon of shortened driving range in winter.
Though EV nominal driving ranges have surged from 100 km to more than 400 km within a few years, with many models claiming 600‑700 km, range degradation under extreme low‑temperature conditions remains widespread.
To improve NEV driving‑range performance, one approach is to upgrade battery performance and develop more stable materials to mitigate temperature impacts. Another solution lies in building out nationwide charging infrastructure to enhance charging accessibility. Fast‑charging technology may prove more disruptive than pursuing ultra‑long nominal driving range.
Besides safety and range, battery service life, charge‑discharge power, high‑and‑low‑temperature performance, pack integration efficiency, environmental friendliness and cost are all critical criteria for qualifying batteries for new‑energy‑vehicle applications.
No matter what innovations emerge in new battery materials, safety remains the decisive metric for end‑products. To support rapid industrial growth and improve NEV safety, three mandatory national standards issued by MIIT came into force on January 1 2021: ‑ GB 18384‑2020: Safety Requirements for Electric Vehicles‑ GB 30381‑2020: Safety Requirements for Traction Batteries of Electric Vehicles‑ GB 38032‑2020: Safety Requirements for Electric Buses
Under the new national standards, battery testing, market‑access certification and review procedures become more stringent, imposing higher requirements on test laboratories and technical personnel. Resolving battery pain points calls for intensified scientific‑research investment, innovative products as well as rigorous, professional testing standards.
Disclaimer: This article is republished from other media for informational purposes only and does not represent the position of this website. The originality, statements and content of the original text have not been verified by this site. We make no warranty regarding the authenticity, completeness or timeliness of all or part of the content. Readers shall verify relevant information independently. This site assumes no direct or joint liability for copyright infringements by republished works. Copyright belongs to the original author. We pay tribute to original creators. Should any content infringe your rights, please contact us promptly and we will process your request within 24 hours.