24

The Lithium-Ion Battery Value

Chain—Status, Trends

and Implications

Wolfgang Bernhart

R O L A N D B E R G E R S T RA T E G Y C O N S U LT AN T S G MB H , S T U T T G AR T , G E RM A N Y

W O L F G A N G . BE R NH A R T @ R O L A N D B E R G E R . C O M

CHAPTER OUTLINE

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 553

2. The LIB Market............................................................................................................................... 554

3. Cell and Material Manufacturing Process................................................................................... 555

3.1. Current Cost Structure........................................................................................................... 556

3.2. Midterm Cost Structure and Pro

fitability Levels (2015)..................................................... 558

3.3. Long-Term Cost Structure (2015

–2020) ............................................................................... 561

4. Structure of the Value Chain and Expected Changes ............................................................... 562

4.1. Cathode and Other Materials............................................................................................... 562

4.1.1. NCM.............................................................................................................................. 563
4.1.2. NCA............................................................................................................................... 563
4.1.3. LFP................................................................................................................................. 564
4.1.4. LMO .............................................................................................................................. 564

4.2. Cell Manufacturing................................................................................................................ 564

References........................................................................................................................................... 565

1.

Introduction

Lithium-ion batteries (“LIBs”) are the key cost drivers in hybrid, plug-in hybrid and
electric vehicles. Significant improvements in the last few years with respect to perfor-
mance, safety and lifecycle now make it possible to produce these technologies at a
reasonable cost. As a result, the automotive industry has become a major potential
customer for the LIB industry. At the same time, the door has been opened for new
players to enter the market.

Lithium-Ion Batteries: Advances and Applications.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-59513-3.00024-8

553

Ó 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

This chapter first provides an overview of the LIB market—a market that will face

overcapacity in the next couple of years. Next, we describe the economics behind the cell
and material manufacturing process. Although costs will continue to decrease signifi-
cantly, price pressure will remain high and margins low. Finally, we look at the structure
of the value chain and the changes that are expected here, likely to include further
consolidation by cell manufacturers and an increasing integration of upstream precursor
manufacturers by cathode producers.

2.

The LIB Market

Despite uncertainty, the market for high-end LIBs is predicted to double every five years.
Growth is driven by the high-tech consumer sector—cell phones, smartphones,
notebook, tablets—and also by mobility applications, primarily plug-in hybrid-electric
vehicles (PHEVs) (

Figure 24.1

).

Eight Asian cell manufacturers currently dominate the market. Together, they account

for more than 90% of market share (

Figure 24.2

).

The automotive industry is becoming a significant consumer of LiB cells. A number of

companies have emerged in this market, including:

• A123 (USA), a spinoff from MIT
• AESC (Japan), a joint venture between NEC and Nissan (NEC supplying the coated

electrodes)

• Lithium Energy Japan, a joint venture between GS Yuasa Corporation, Mitsubishi

Corporation and Mitsubishi Motors Corporation

2011

2015

2020

High-end LIB market by segment [GWh]

Automotive vs. non-automotive [GWh]

Avi-

cenne

25

4

27

0

Roland

Berger

18

23

29

10

Avi-

cenne

9

19

Roland

Berger

14

19

Avi-

cenne

11

Roland

Berger

111

11

142

0

61

71

0

31

31

EV

PHEV

Notebooks

Mobile phones

ESS

Tablets

HEV

Power tools

E-bikes

Other

2011

2015

2020

33

Avi-

cenne

111

71

Roland

Berger

142

85

49

Avi-

cenne

61

43

12

Roland

Berger

71

45

21

Avi-

cenne

31

24

Roland

Berger

31

23

4

4

6

6

7

7

Non-auto

Auto

Other non-auto

FIGURE 24.1 Forecasts for high-end lithium-ion battery market segments 2011

–2020

[1,2]

. (For color version, refer to

the plate section.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012); Avicenne, Market studies on Lithium-Ion
battery segments (2012).)

554

LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES: ADVANCES AND APPLICATIONS

• Primeearth EV Energy (PEVE, Japan), the remains of the former Panasonic/Toyota

joint venture

Investments announced in 2010 were expected to result in significant overcapacity, with
200% of 2016 demand already covered in 2015. This overcapacity would mainly affect
the United States and Japan

[4]

. Costs—and the prices for original equipment manu-

facturers (OEMs)—were estimated to be

w500 USD/kWh on the cell level

[5,6]

.

Since 2010, however, a number of other major players have entered the market,

including SK Innovation Co. (Korea) and Johnson Controls (USA). Not all of the capacity
announced in 2010 has been realized, but expected demand has also dropped signifi-
cantly. Subsidies in the United States have led to a large increase in capacity, resulting in
overcapacity of between 50% and 100%

[7]

. At the same time, prices have fallen due to

competition between cell manufacturers and lower costs resulting from technological
advances. The price of PHEV cells for OEMs is now forecast to be just 250 USD/kWh in
2014/2015

[8]

.

3.

Cell and Material Manufacturing Process

Let us now take a closer look at the economics behind the cell and material
manufacturing process. This will allow us to assess the profitability of the industry and
identify any areas for future cost reductions.

337

297

350

365

+43%

2011

4,498

4,133

2010

3,900

3,550

2009

3,079

2,782

2008

3,142

2,805

Production by major
manufacturers

Total volume of cell production 2008-11 [million cells]

Major manufacturers

Others

91.9%

7.1%

3.3%

4.5%

16.7%

22.0%

3.9%

11.2%

23.1%

CAGR

08-11

2.7%

13.8%

• Hitachi

• Sony

• Panasonic

/Sanyo

• Samsung

• LG Chem

By company

• BAK
• BYD
• Lishen

Japan

Korea

China

FIGURE 24.2 Global total cell production volume (2008

–2011) and share of largest suppliers 2011

[3]

. (For color version

of this

figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: IIT LIB-related Study Program 11–12,

February 2012.)

Chapter 24 • The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain 555

To calculate the current and future cost of cells, we can take the example of a PHEV2

cell with a hard case according to VDA (Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller [German
Association of Automobile Manufacturers]) dimensions—a standardization proposal
regarding cell dimensions for EV and PHEV applications (

Figure 24.3 [1]

).

A typical lithium-ion PHEV2 cell with 26 Ah and 3.7 V weighs 716 g

[1,3]

. To calculate

the required amount of cathode, anode, electrolyte and separator materials, we
approximate the values for a ternary mixture nickel cobalt manganese (NCM). The exact
material split depends on the cathode/anode material type and the cell chemistry. For
our calculation, we use the following proportions:

• Cathode: 31%
• Anode: 30%
• Electrolyte: 16%
• Separator: 4%
• Housing and feed-throughs: 19%

The weight of the cathode and anode includes the Cu/Al foil, binder and carbon black.
For the cost forecast, we assume a constant energy capacity of 96 Wh. Future production
processes will use higher-density cathode materials (CAM) materials. This will result in a
reduction in total weight to 680 g in 2016 (using higher-density NCM) and 667 g in 2018
(using high-capacity materials).

3.1.

Current Cost Structure

To calculate the costs of the cathode, anode, separator and electrolyte, we analyzed the
manufacturing processes for these materials, including process steps, investments, util-
ities, electricity and direct manpower.

Figure 24.4

shows the continuous manufacturing

process used for NCM and nickel cobalt aluminium (NCA)

[1]

. The main steps in a

continuous process for mixed metal cathodes are precipitation, blending, heat treatment
and milling.

Cell Design

Main Specifications

• 26 Ah/3.7 V

• Energy capacity: >96 Wh

• Specific energy: 135 Wh/kg

• Cell dimensions: 85 x 173 x 21 mm

• Active materials

– Cathode: NCM ternary mix
– Anode: Graphite mixture
– Electrolyte: EC/DMC/EMC 1 m LiPF6
– Separator: Entek (20 µm)

• Prismatic Al-housing (0.8 mm) including

lid and feed-throughs (Al, Cu posts)

• Major area of application: PHEVs

FIGURE 24.3 Typical 96 Wh PHEV cell. Cell speci

fications used in cost estimates

[1]

. (For color version of this

figure, the

reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

556

LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES: ADVANCES AND APPLICATIONS

Typically, production equipment is designed in-house by material makers. The

equipment is partly produced in-house, and partly standard (e.g. mixer, dryer).

For continuous cathode production, every 1000 tons of capacity require approxi-

mately USD 25–30 million in investment each year (

Figure 24.5

)

[1]

. This figure includes

20% engineering costs. The largest share of the investment goes to the continuous reactor
for precursor materials.

By comparison, the batch process requires only about USD 15–20 million

investment per 1000 tons. However, this process is not appropriate where high quality is
required.

For the purposes of cost calculation, we have added about 30% of total depreciation as

maintenance costs. We depreciate equipment over 7 years, and land and buildings over
30 years.

Labor costs typically account for 1–1.5 USD/kg of cathode material, assuming an

average cost per full-time employee of USD 27,700 per year. Around 11 workers in a
continuous process and 23 workers in a batch process are needed per 1000 tons/year of
cathode material. Labor costs are similar for other cathode materials, as automation
levels are usually high.

Per kg cathode material, 30–50 kWh energy is required to create process heat for

cogeneration, milling, pumps, dryers and furnaces. For lithium iron phosphate (LFP),
50–100% more energy is needed. The ideal energy input mix consists of one-third elec-
tricity, one-third natural gas (for heat treatment) and one-third steam (medium/high
pressure). Utility and auxiliary materials for cathode production include ammonia, water
(condensate), caustic and hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid. These materials typically
account for 1 USD/kg of cathode material.

Process

Input

• Sulfates

(Mn, Co,
Ni + salt)

M(OH)

2

• Lithium

hydroxide

Precipitation/
synthesis

Filtration,
washing & drying

Dry blending &
mixing

Heat treatment

Sieving (milling)

Classification,
packaging

Description

• Precipitation with caustic, filtration

and washing in reactor

• Dissolution of raw materials – mixed

hydroxide M(OH)

2

, optional coating

• Heat treatment at 700–900 °C, controlled

atmosphere

• Sieving and milling of active material

• Packaging in protective atmosphere
• Environmental processes (e.g. bio-

wastewater treatment, precipitation of
metal)

FIGURE 24.4 Manufacturing process for cathodes

—continuous process (NCM/NCA)

[1]

. (For color version of this

figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

Chapter 24 • The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain 557

We have also included environmental costs in the calculation, such as wastewater

treatment, exhaust gas treatment, and disposing of off-spec material (after allowing for
metal credit). These costs add up to 0.5–1 USD/kg of final product. In addition,
0.5–1 USD/kg in quality costs are typically required for automotive standards. We have
not included R&D costs in the calculation.

Compared to NCM and NCA, the production process for lithium manganese oxide

(LMO) (Manganese spinel) does not require a reactor for precursor materials, band filters
or dryers. Moreover, a low level of investment is necessary in wastewater management
and utility equipment.

In addition, we have evaluated the input material costs (

Figure 24.6 [1]

). Here, it

should be noted that battery-grade materials often require additional manufacturing
steps (as in the case of manganese). This adds further costs to the raw material price.

We have made similar cost calculations for anodes, separators, electrolytes and

electrolyte salts.

Figure 24.7 [1]

shows our results, using 2011 cost figures. The calculations assume full

capacity utilization and a 95–98% yield; labor, energy and environmental costs are included,
based on production in United States; depreciation on equipment, land and buildings is
taken into consideration; R&D, other SG&A costs and profit margins are excluded.

3.2.

Midterm Cost Structure and Pro

fitability Levels (2015)

Changes are likely in a number of areas by 2015. According to the latest analyst reports,
the prices of nickel, cobalt and manganese will decline through 2015. Falling cobalt prices

Investment per

1,000 t/year [USD m]

25–30

Item

Total

Land and buildings

Utility equipment

Wastewater management

Off-gas treatment

Reactor for precursor materials

Band filters
Dryer

Blender

Rotary kiln (burner)

Jet mill and classifier

Piping

Electric control

Tank farm

Loading/packaging

Quality related equipment

3–4

2
1

0.5

4–5

1.5

1

1–1.5

2–3

2–3

3

1.5

0.5–1

1

1

FIGURE 24.5 Estimated investments for the continuous cathode production process

[1]

. (For color version of this

figure,

the reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

558

LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES: ADVANCES AND APPLICATIONS

(1) Includes also C (8%), Si (2%), P (0.3) and S (0.03%) (2) Oxygen blow

Production of battery grade material –
Example: Manganese

Furnace

1 MT HCFeMn
(75% Mn)

(1)

Calcination, washing,
extraction

(2)

Sulfatization

Electricity
2200–

2600
KWh

Sulfur dioxide
(SO

2

)

1.8 MT ore (48% Mn)

0.4 MT reductant
0.01 MT flux

Metal

Raw mate-
rial price
[USD/kg]

Battery grade
material
[USD/kg]

Nickel (>99.8%)

Cobalt (>99.3%)

Manganese

Lithium carbonate
(19% Li)

Ferric phosphate

Aluminum

23.6

29.6

42.5

52.0

8.8

14.3

6.0

6.0

2.4

2.4

5.4 5.4

FIGURE 24.6 Cost of precursor materials used in calculation

—values added of USD 4–9 per kg to bring metals up to

battery-grade

[1]

. (For color version of this

figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source:

Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

(1) In USD per m

2

(2) Raw material cost in separators include subcontracting

22%

9%

25%

26%

15%

3%

Hard

carbon

18%

11%

23%

28%

16%

4%

Gra-
phite

Dry

24%

26%

6%

32%

6%

5%

Wet

20%

20%

6%

40%

8%

7%

LiFP6

40%

5%

16%

30%

4%

5%

Electro-

lyte

solution

71%

3%

7%

14%

2%

3%

Anode

Separator

(2)

Electrolyte

Cathode

16

14

1.3

(1)

1.0

(1)

14.5

27

6%

7%

7%

LFP -

FePO4

39%

22%

11%

15%

61%

22%

LMO

NCM

111

10%

10%

72%

4%

3%

72%

10%

10%

3%

LCO

NCA

7%

7%

3%

3%

2%
2%

80%

42

30

30

17

16

Raw materials

Labor

Energy/utilities

D&A – equipment

D&A – other

Quality/environment

Maintenance

Total manufacturing
costs [USD/kg]

FIGURE 24.7 Cost structure (total manufacturing costs) of different materials [USD/kg], 2011

[1]

. (For color version,

refer to the plate section.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

Chapter 24 • The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain 559

will favor cobalt-intensive materials. At the same time, LFP manufacturing costs are set to
increase as energy costs go up. Largely as a result of this, CAM material costs will fall by
between 7% and 22% from 2011 to 2015. The costs of LFP will increase largely as a
function of higher energy and utility costs, which account for 30% of total cost.

Importantly, high-capacity materials such as those licensed to BASF and others will

become available in the second half of the decade. These materials will offer a significant
cost advantage over other cathode materials due to their higher energy density and lower
material costs.

Figure 24.8

shows the results of our calculations for manufacturing costs in 2015 for

different cathode materials

[1]

. Lithium cobalt oxide (LCO) is the most expensive material

due to its high cobalt content. The material costs of NCA and all NCM chemistries ma-
terials are largely driven by the price of cobalt. However, these materials also have higher
energy densities. The low material costs of LFP are partly balanced out by its higher
energy costs (50–100% more than for NCM or NCA), bigger investment requirement
(

þ15%) and higher quality costs. NCM and NCA each require similar investments in

equipment, while LMO has significantly lower material costs and investment re-
quirements but is typically only used in blends with NCM or NCA. Due to subsidies,
variations in labor costs and other factors, cathode material costs in 2015 may vary by as
much as 15% either way.

56.49

34.49

37.8

36.54

35.27

34.12

27.3

20.4

27.46

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

2%

16%

17%

5%

5%

High

capacity

materials

(2)

16%

15%

2%

5%

57%

2%

4%

14%

14%

12%

4%

LCO

73%

10%

10%

2%

62%

NCM

424

7%
7%

21%

22%

40%

LFP -

FePO4

8%
5%

15%

20%

LMO

49%

HV

spinel

(3)

5%

54%

NCM

523

63%

13%

13%

NCM

111

64%

2%

13%

13%

4%

NCA

66%

12%

Raw materials

Labor

Energy/utilities

D&A – equipment

D&A – other

Maintenance

Quality/environment

2%

16%

17%

5%

5%

54%

32.5

25.5

24.5

23.7

22.8

17.5

12.8

20.2

19

(1) High quality differences (2) Not available until 2015 (3) Not available until 2020

(1)

Total manufacturing
costs [USD/kg]

Total manufacturing
costs [USD/KWh]

FIGURE 24.8 Total manufacturing costs of cathode material [USD/kg]

—expected cost structure 2015

[1]

. (For color

version, refer to the plate section.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

560

LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES: ADVANCES AND APPLICATIONS

In a typical 96 Wh PHEV cell, cathode material (NCM) accounts for up to 39% of the

cell material costs. Total cell costs are USD 23.30, or approximately 250 USD/kWh,
assuming a 5% EBIT margin (see

Figure 24.9

)

[1]

.

According to our calculations, declining cell prices will put pressure on margins for

both cell manufacturers and cathode material manufacturers in the medium term (see

Figure 24.10

)

[1]

. With market prices for these type of cells expected to be around USD 22,

both types of company will see low profits while needed to invest heavily:

• Cell manufacturers must invest in faster and more efficient production technology

and processes, especially for coating and cell assembly

• Material producers need to research new materials and material combinations

3.3.

Long-Term Cost Structure (2015

–2020)

In 2016, higher-density NCM cathode material is likely to appear on the market. This will
push specific cell energy up to 141 Wh/kg and at the same time cut NCM usage to 113 g.
In 2018, high-density high-capacity material is expected to come onto the market, leading
to a further decrease in cathode material costs and a reduction of usage to 100 g.

For applications using NCM cathode materials, the cost of cathode material is

expected to fall by 6% by 2020 compared to its 2015 level, reaching a level of 25 USD/kWh.
Of this, 4% will be attributable to higher energy density and 2% to improvements in
manufacturing processes.

For anode, separator and electrolyte costs, we foresee additional potential of

10–20 USD/kWh. The additional potential of improvements to the cell manufacturing

Cell cost breakdown, 2015

Cell material cost split, 2015

6%

5%

10%

18%

Labor

Energy/utilities

0%

1%

Margin

Overheads

D&A – building

58%

Raw material

D&A – equipment

SG&A

0%

2%

Quality/evironmental

Total cost: USD 23.3/cell (250 USD/kWh)

Housing and feed-throughs

Separator

Electrolyte

Anode

Cathode

(1)

11%

19%

13%

18%

39%

Material cost

breakdown

USD 13.4/cell

Around 24%

of total cell

costs

(1) Including carbon black content, foil and binder cost (2) Including foil, etc.

(2)

FIGURE 24.9 Expected cost structure for cells 2015

—Typical 96 Wh PHEV cell

[1]

. (For color version of this

figure, the

reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value Chain (2012).)

Chapter 24 • The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain 561

process is an estimated 20–25 USD/kWh at least. Thus, with slightly improved margins,
we may well see a cell price of 180–200 USD/kWh in 2018–2020.

4.

Structure of the Value Chain and Expected Changes

The growing demand and the specific requirements for energy storage systems, especially
for automotive and grid applications, have opened up opportunities both for cell man-
ufacturers and material producers. As outlined above, investment was also encouraged by
heavy subsidies following the financial crisis in 2008/2009 (especially in the US). This
meant significant changes to the marketplace, with Korea playing a growing role.

4.1.

Cathode and Other Materials

Today the market for cathode (as well as anode, separator and electrolyte) materials is
dominated by Asian (mostly Japanese) players (

Figure 24.11 [1,3]

). With automotive ap-

plications gaining an increasing share of the overall LIB market (see

Figure 24.1

), AESC

(NEC-Nissan), Panasonic-Sanyo, LG Chemicals and Samsung SDI will become much
more important than they are today. South Korean manufacturers (especially L&F and
Ecopro) therefore stand to gain increasing market share. What’s more, companies such as
Toda Kogyo will improve their position, and chemical giants such as BASF are becoming
more important. They are likely to establish themselves as alternatives to the current
suppliers, investing huge amounts in licenses, acquisitions and their own R&D.

To increase value add and margins, cathode producers are trying to integrate pre-

cursor manufacturers. For the same reason, Korean cell manufacturers, which have

Cell

price

23.3

Cell

margin

1.2

Cell

cost

22.1

Market

price

22.0

Market

price

1.3

Cell

SG&A

2.3

Labor/

utilities/
energy/

quality/

environment

2.1

Cell D&A

4.3

Cell

material

cost

13.4

CAM

margin

0.3

CAM

SG&A

0.4

Cathode

material

cost

4.6

Other

8.2

(1) Anode, separator, electrolyte, housing (2) Expected market price, based on expert interviews

CAM

margin

CAM cost

Cell cost

Cell

margin

Other

materials

(1)

Cell

price

Market

price

(2)

Delta

7.5%

5%

FIGURE 24.10 Cost, price and margin breakdown along the value chain [USD/cell], based on 2015

figures

[1]

. (For color

version of this

figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: Roland Berger, The LIB Value

Chain (2012).)

562

LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES: ADVANCES AND APPLICATIONS

strong material capabilities, are trying to use their own resources. This is especially true
for LG Chemicals, but Samsung SDI is expected to take the same approach

[1,3]

.

Similarly, Bosch is cooperating closely with SGL, Wacker and BASF. They are designing

new materials to develop cells with a capacity of over 250 Wh/kg

[9]

.

While these cooperative ventures are becoming increasingly important, we still expect

that cathode manufacturing by cell manufacturers such as A123 will remain a niche
business. With the need to invest large amounts of money in R&D, and generally
increasing price pressure, the cathode material manufacturer market is bound to
consolidate in the course of this decade.

4.1.1. NCM

Strong market growth driven by automotive and high-end consumer goods applications
is attracting a large number of new entrants, thus putting margins under pressure. Until
2015, raw material prices will not fall fast enough to offset rising cost pressure, thus
worsening the margin pressure overall. By 2020, smaller players with insufficient scale are
likely to exit the market.

4.1.2. NCA

NCA chemistries are largely a high-end niche market (e.g. for military applications) with
few new entrants. Smaller specialists such as SAFT dominate the cell market, and cost
pressure is lower than in NCM markets. Margins are therefore strong today, but the
overall market volume is lower. One important reason is that NCA cannot be used in

+22%

2011

56,845

33,060

23,785

2010

49,055

28,300

20,755

2009

35,319

18,074

17,245

2008

31,530

22,931

8,599

Total output

Major manufacturers

Other

58%

2%

8%

3%

2%

1%

2%

3%

4%

19%

15%

CAGR

'08 - 11

40.1%

13.0%

•

Sumitomo MM

•

Nippon Denko

•

Nichia

•

Toda Kogyo

•

Umicore

By company

•

AGC Seimi

•

L&F

•

Ecopro

•

Nippon Chemical

•

Tanaka

Japan

Korea

FIGURE 24.11 Total volume of cathode material production in 2008-2011 [t], all materials

[1,3]

. (For color version of

this

figure, the reader is referred to the online version of this book.) (Source: IIT LIB-related Study Program 11–12

(February 2012).)

Chapter 24 • The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain 563

pouch cells due to gassing issues. A key determinant of future NCA growth is whether
small cells will prove viable in automotive applications.

Prices are still expected to fall sharply over the next 2–3 years, with thinning margins.

But cost parity will be upheld, leading to further consolidation among the remaining
players in the second half of the decade.

4.1.3. LFP

The LFP market is highly segmented, with more than a 100 companies in China alone.
While the high-end segment is characterized by high markups and overall very good
margins, there will be a general convergence toward higher quality requirements between
now and 2015.

This will push down prices amid rising costs, resulting in increased margin pressure.

Until the end of the decade, strong innovation pressure driven by competition with other
chemistries will elbow smaller players out of the market. China, in particular, is likely to
see massive consolidation.

As for the NCM and NCA chemistries, we expect that most smaller players will be taken

over by the larger chemical companies. The oligopoly among the remaining players will
ensure relatively good margins, albeit with large discrepancies between players, and
overall lower margins than in the past.

4.1.4. LMO

The market for LMO is already an oligopoly with high entry barriers for new players. In the
short term (until 2015), the overall shrinking share of LMO will intensify competition,
again putting pressure on margins. As with other materials, further consolidation is
expected in the medium to long term. The remaining players will serve a very stable, but
small-scale market.

4.2.

Cell Manufacturing

Cell manufacturing is characterized by fierce competition and uncertainty about future
market developments. Consolidation in the LIB market is inevitable, driven by a number
of factors:

• The large-format lithium-ion cell market will face overcapacity and price wars

because
– Demand is lower than expected;

– Massive capacity is in place—but new equipment will be more efficient;
– Prices will be down to 250 USD/kWh in 2015 and are set to fall to 180–200 later in

the decade;

• New developments on the material side (mainly cathodes, but also anodes,

electrolytes and separators) and in production technology will drive costs down even
further. But these new developments will require more investments for their

564

LITHIUM-ION BATTERIES: ADVANCES AND APPLICATIONS

introduction and industrialization. With current profit margins, the early movers in
particular cannot generate enough cash to stay ahead in the game; and

• Only the large players that have parent companies with deep enough pockets to

finance a period of thin margins will therefore survive the shakeout.

References

[1] W. Bernhart, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants GmbH, The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain,

Study paper, Munich/Tokyo/Seoul/Shanghai, 2012.

[2] C. Pillot, Avicenne Energy, Battery Market Compilations, twenty first ed., March 2012.

[3] H. Takeshita, Institute of Information Technology Ltd., LIB-Related Study Program 11–12 February,

2012.

[4] W. Bernhart, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants GmbH, Powertrain 2020: Li-Ion Batteries – The

Next Bubble Ahead? Study paper, Munich/Shanghai/Detroit, February 2010.

[5] W. Bernhart, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants GmbH, Powertrain 2020: The Li-Ion Battery Value

Chain – Trends and Implications, Presentation at EV Battery Forum Asia, Shanghai, 7–9 November,
2011.

[6] W. Bernhart, Electromobility–The Only Way Forward? 22nd International AVL Conference “Engine &

Environment”, 9–10 September, 2010, Graz, Austria.

[7] Leidensweg in die elektrische Zukunft, Automobilwoche 02/2013.

[8] W. Bernhart, Roland Berger Strategy Consultants GmbH, Lithium-Ion Batteries – The Bubble Bursts;

Study paper, Stuttgart, October 2012.

[9] Robert

Bosch

GmbH,

Verbundprojekt

Alpha-Laion

zur

Entwicklung

von

Hochenergie-

Traktionsbatterien gestartet.

http://www.bosch-presse.de/presseforum/details.htm?txtID

¼5963

, 16

January, 2013.

Chapter 24 • The Lithium-Ion Battery Value Chain 565