this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2026
237 points (98.8% liked)

Futurology

4112 readers
387 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
voidx@futurology.today
Lugh@futurology.today
Espiritdescali@futurology.today
AwesomeLowlander@futurology.today
237
As the US sabotages the globe's fossil fuel infrastructure, in China BYD's latest Blade batteries charge from 10–97% in nine minutes, and have a range of 1,000 km (640 miles). (www.electrive.com)
submitted 11 hours ago by Lugh@futurology.today to c/futurology@futurology.today
35 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

"BYD also claims to have addressed the well-known issue of lithium iron phosphate cells losing performance in cold temperatures. After the cells were stored for 24 hours at –30 degrees Celsius and therefore completely frozen, charging from 20 to 97 per cent reportedly took just twelve minutes."

As the US sabotages the globe's fossil fuel infrastructure at the behest of Israel, China continues to build the future that will replace it. One by one, the naysayers' objections to EVs melt away. Can't do cold climates, they said - fixed. Can't cope with long journeys, they said - fixed.

As Napoleon once famously observed, 'never interrupt your enemy while they're making a mistake'. China must be thinking that, as the US helps hand it total dominance of the 21st century energy infrastructure.

10–97% in nine minutes: BYD presents second generation of Blade Battery

all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Wander@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 minutes ago* (last edited 5 minutes ago)

This takes a real hit out of the new sodium batteries that CATL are bringing online right now.

So cool that we have two batteries that basically fit all the needed requirements for most applications. Cheap, safe, made from abundant materials, fast charging, long lasting, recyclable, work in the cold.

I get they are not the complete most energy dense batteries you would want to use in your phone or a super high end car where you can brag about having the longest range on the market.

But for renewables and grid storage, for cars for everyday driving or even exceptional once in a year road trips. The problem has been solved with two difference battery techs, it's amazing.

[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 10 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The title is editorialized, doesn't reflect the article actual headline.

I'm not saying it's innacurate. I'm saying it's better to provide commentary in a comment, rather than altering the title.

[–] criticon@lemmy.ca 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

One by one, the naysayers' objections to EVs melt away. Can't do cold climates, they said - fixed. Can't cope with long journeys, they said - fixed.

They also said that if everybody installed a charger in their house the grid would collapse, but suddenly there's excess capacity for all those data centers

[–] Jarix@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Privately funded capacity. See Microsoft buying a god damned nuclear power plant just to pay for their own data center usage. I hate this timeline

[–] aim_at_me@lemmy.nz 5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Batteries don’t have ranges? The title is a bit annoying lol.

[–] pricklypearbear@lemmy.world 24 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (5 children)

Nice. Now the real question is how fast does the battery deteriorate. There is always a balance between speed, capacity, and durability.

Seems like these batteries push more toward the speed and capacity side.

[–] justlemmyin@lemmy.world 11 points 6 hours ago

And if you have the time, watch the latest technology connections video. Its long but worth it. Especially if you are from NA.

All the fear mongering about renewables and batteries is insane.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=KtQ9nt2ZeGM

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 7 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

This is from improved tech, not from (un)balancing speed, capacity and durability. That idea doesn't hold to improved technology.

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 15 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

Seems like these batteries push more toward the speed and capacity side.

Why? What makes you say this? This skepticism seems unfounded.

BYD offers an industry-leading 8 year, 250,000km warranty. They are obviously confident about durability, and the proven durability of the gen1 battery is testament to their engineering prowess. The gen1 batteries are rated for 3000 to 4000 cycles. There's a reason both Tesla and Caterpillar are starting to use BYD (finDreams) batteries.

[–] JPAKx4@piefed.blahaj.zone 6 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I would not be surprised if BYD is the industry leader and has the best battery technology, I just also wouldn't be surprised if they are doing a showcase of the potential of the batteries if they sacrificed longevity. It is a claim by a company and isn't verified by independent consumers.

Battery technology especially has a long history of performance with big astricks, so it's good to be skeptical, even with industry leaders.

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Being skeptical is well and good. Never did I say we should suspend our skepticism.

Seems like these batteries push more toward the speed and capacity side.

What evidence is there to support the idea that BYD intentionally designs more towards performance than durability? The fact that OP claims that the world's champion of LFP designs more towards performance just shows how they're talking straight out their ass, and have very little understanding of battery chemistry or engineering.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Never did I say we should suspend our skepticism.

This skepticism seems unfounded

Not explicitly, no, but you certainly implied it.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world -1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Why? What makes you say this? This skepticism seems unfounded

Basic physics knowledge? Why would we disregard that based on the word of a corporation whose entire goal is to convince us to buy their products?

Warranties are a great way to build trust, but it's still based on a promise, not the reality if the physical world. When a resource rich company wants to dominate a market, and push out competition, they will often promise these sorts of things to capture a market.

I won't say that the technology isnt possible, or that they're not providing... but going all in all at once based entirely on promises seems premature. And trying to shut down any potential criticism because of it seems suspect at best.

If you want people to trust in this, maybe engage with them instead of trying to shout them down.

[–] Ferrous@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

If you want people to trust in this,

My point is not to run PR for BYD. I'm not trying to get people to trust a corporation. I'm just shutting down FUD (that is most likely rooted in sinophobia).

Basic physics knowledge? Why would we disregard that based on the word of a corporation whose entire goal is to convince us to buy their products?

Yes, I understand the basic physics since I am an electrical engineer and work in the automotive space, and I integrate batteries into battery electric vehicles.

Regardless of your stance on warranties, corporate competition, or China..... the original claim was "Seems like these batteries push more toward the speed and capacity side."

Where is the evidence to support this claim? For what reason could anyone think that BYD's design philosophy caters to performance over durability? That is just pure fucken FUD.

This happens all too often:

  • An engineering feat is achieved
  • A layman hops into the discussion to inform everyone about the concept of engineering tradeoffs (as if that is groundbreaking)
  • The layman gives their uninformed opinion about why they think the tradeoff was ill considered

Here's the simple truth: BYD's entire battery design philosophy revolves around durability. If BYD was truly solely interested in battery density and charge speed, then why are they the primary champion of LFP batteries? If you were truly interested in performance and speed, LFP would be your last choice for battery chemistry. If anything, BYD leans more towards durability, safety, and longevity over performance - as is evidenced by their choice to make their entire design philosophy revolve around LFP. Teslas and Lucids lean towards Nickel Cobalt because Nickel Cobalt battery chemistry is fundamentally more performant than LFP batterys. THAT is "Basic Physics".

https://www.evlithium.com/Blog/lfp-vs-nmc-batteries-comparison.html

So, Who’s the Winner?

The answer isn’t black and white. Both LFP and NMC batteries have their strengths and weaknesses. LFP batteries trade off some performance for greater safety and longevity, while NMC batteries offer higher performance at the expense of some safety and lifespan.

The “winner” really depends on your specific needs. If you’re looking for high performance, especially in applications like EVs, NMC is likely your best bet. But if you prioritize longevity and safety—especially for DIY projects or energy storage—LFP batteries are the clear choice.

In the end, whether you go with LFP or NMC, it’s all about matching the battery to your needs. For most everyday uses, especially in energy storage, LFP batteries are hard to beat for their combination of durability and safety.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world -1 points 7 hours ago

So your refutation of skepticism is "you must be racist, so we should disregard this skepticism"?

You didn't refute the physics or the claim, only showed that the company super promised they'd fix it if it went wrong.

If your background is in engineering, why didn't you start from that instead of going into PR mode? It certainly seems more like damage control than alleviating actual concerns.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

This is just absolutely wrong lmao

[–] deacon@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Can you say more about this? You seem confident and I’m curious.

[–] zr0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 7 hours ago

It is quite simple. If you take the exact same technology, then it is some sort of a triangle between quality, speed and capacity. But saying that it always is like that is implying, that there are no technological advancements. Li-Ion, Li-Po, whatever materials you use, the products you use today are way better than 10 years ago.

[–] P00ptart@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Different technology. It's like saying a boat last longer than a plane because it's slower.

[–] pricklypearbear@lemmy.world 2 points 7 hours ago

Its lithium based battery. Not really a different technology. Its more of an improvement on the existing technology.

[–] heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Well, China has always been good at making impressive fireworks.

[–] Wander@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 minutes ago* (last edited 9 minutes ago)

Do you think LFP batteries are particularly fire prone?

Like more so than petrol?

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 5 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

As the US sabotages the globe’s fossil fuel infrastructure at the behest of Israel

Wait ... so maybe this war is actually based?

Yes! Let's attack every oil-producing country in the world, cause oil prices to skyrocket, and thus cause widespread adoption of EVs and renewable energy. It's the perfect plan!

[–] Hirom@beehaw.org 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

The USA produces lots of fossiel fuel, enough for its own consumption and then some for export.

It's not obvious, at least to me, that high oil prices would negatively affect (US) oil companies.

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 2 points 4 hours ago

Did I make an exception for the US? Obviously, the Trump regime will attack the US as well.

[–] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 8 hours ago

If you aren't being sarcastic, it's not based because over a thousand Iranian civilians have killed already

[–] eleitl@lemmy.zip 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (3 children)

And if the Hormuz blockage continues China will be unable to manufacture them. Nor deliver them.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 16 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Nations_Railway_Corridor

On May 9, 2023, the first trial run of cargo from Iran to Afghanistan via the Khaf-Herat railway was completed. This shipment included 17 wagons that transferred 655 tons of railway equipment that will be used in the further construction of the rail line. The Khaf-Herat railway is 225 kilometers long, with 140 km of the railway track traversing Afghanistan and the remaining 85 km running through Iran. The construction of the Khaf-Herat railway line, which links Khaf in eastern Iran with Herat in western Afghanistan, began back in 2007.

...

The railway is expected to especially benefit the landlocked Afghanistan, which would gain direct access to the Iranian seaports of Chabahar and Bandar Abbas. Through Iran, the line can connect to the Turkish railway network.

Incidentally, as the US goes to war with Iran, Pakistan is going to war with Afghanistan.

And everyone's continuing to freak out about the Chinese economy usurping the role once held by the NATO block. Crazy how all this happens at once.

[–] Carl@hexbear.net 6 points 9 hours ago

Iran has made exceptions to the blockade for Russia and China, and now India.

[–] ceiphas@piefed.social 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

The earth isnt flat