nano one materials\' ceo: we are \'future-proof\' to changes in lithium and non-lithium battery technology

The previous version of this article was first released in July 27, 2017, only as a market article for my subscribers.
In this article, I am pleased to interview Dan Bronda, CEO of nano materials. (OTCPK:NNOMF)
Talk about the company\'s technology and their future commercial plans.
I am very grateful to John Lando, president of that company, for making this interview possible.
This interview is very different from other interviews, this is the first time, the CEO of a most famous company dedicated to developing new lithium cathode materials in North America, explain why Nano One\'s new lithium cathode material has great value for the production of lithium by salt water producers;
Inherent limitations of new extraction methods for producing lithium hydroxide (LiOH)
Direct from salt water;
How can their technology adapt to these two advanced Li-
Ion battery technology and all-solid-
National lithium batteries and other ion batteries;
Why does he think lithium
Sulfur and lithium
The air of the future is too far away to worry in the present time.
He then suggested the use of lithium iron phosphate and cobalt-
Free battery technology may be the development direction in the next few years, especially for fixed energy storage applications.
The interview is divided into five questions,
Two of them relate to the current situation and the rest are related to the future and are supplemented to 49-
Minutes interview with Skype.
In the following content, I share with my readers a complete record of interviews with Dan Bronda, CEO of one of the most innovative companies in the lithium energy space today.
Juan Carlos zulita (JCZ)
Thank you for accepting my invitation to interview you.
I have known John for a long time and I thank him for letting this happen. Dan Blondal (DB)
Well, it\'s nice to see you by phone.
John is very supportive of you online, and I have read a bunch of your stuff, certainly in lithium space.
I have read a lot of your posts over the years.
So it\'s nice to hear your voice and have a chance to talk to you.
Thank you for your comments.
Okay, let\'s get started.
I divided the interview into two parts.
It can be said that the first involves the current situation, and the second, I also want to talk about the future. Ok? DB: Ok.
So I have five questions in total.
Two of them were related to the first part of the interview, and three were related to the second part.
About the first part of our interview
First of all, I would like to ask some questions about the cost of the battery.
A few weeks ago, you said in a presentation to investor Intel that cathode materials account for 25% of the cost of the battery, right?
Yes, that\'s roughly the case.
JCZ: In this regard, could you please let me know how Nano One intends to reduce the cost of lithium
In dollars per kWh, 50% more ion batteries?
Yes, I can tell you.
This is at the cathode level, not at the battery level.
Just to be clear. JCZ: Ok.
Yes, because I have the following questions. I mean.
I wanted to ask you.
Are you talking about the cost of the whole battery here, or is it just cathode material?
So you\'re talking about the cathode.
Yes, yes.
This is more meaningful in mathematics.
JCZ: Yes, you know, I\'m a little confused because if you say in the first place that the cathode material is only 25%, you\'re going to reduce the cost of the battery by 50%, which sounds a little unreasonable, right?
DB: of course, it is important to understand that cathode material is part of the cost of the battery, and that the cost of the battery is part of the entire battery pack.
Nano One is an upstream development technology for manufacturing cathode powder using raw materials such as lithium (Li), nickel (NI), manganese (MN), cobalt (CO).
Four kinds of materials go in, and a black composite cathode material comes out.
This cathode powder is only one of the materials and components that enter the battery, and it is also the highest cost.
JCZ: Great, now in this regard, I would like to know which specific projects are more important in terms of reducing costs and improving performance, because you said that this cost reduction, in terms of cost reduction, that is, in terms of raw materials, processing and scale, right?
Performance improvements in technology, formulation and crystal structure.
That\'s what you said in your speech.
So my question is: which projects are more important in terms of reducing costs or improving performance? DB: Ok.
It depends on who you talk to and which part of the value proposition they are interested in.
It is helpful to understand what we are doing from a processing point of view.
Let me walk with you for a few minutes to clarify?
Therefore, we bring value to all aspects of the supply chain.
Although, you know, we are developing techniques for assembling Ni, Li, Mn, Co into NMC cathode materials, our processes enable us to use lithium carbonate (Li2CO3).
We can do the same with lithium iron phosphate (LFP)
Almost all cathode materials.
This includes high-
The nickel materials needed to consume electric vehicles.
This is a different place we are today from the whole industry.
More and more cathode materials need LiOH today, as you know, LiOH has an advantage in the market, mainly demand --driven.
It is foreseeable that the process of LiOH and Nano One can use li2co 3, which is wider and significantly lower in cost, with a premium of 40%.
So there is value in mining.
We are also consolidating the lithium upgrade stream with Ni, Mn, Co flow or iron (FE)and Phosphate (PO4)stream.
We are integrating these chemical reactions into one, and we believe that we can reduce production costs and reduce the complexity of the whole process of manufacturing cathode materials, thus increasing production costs.
So this is at the operational level.
Then, because we mixed everything in the solution in the chemical reaction, we got the atoms of the elements, Li, Ni, Mn, Co, before we got to the furnace, the crystal structure is mixed very evenly.
These materials are subsequently burned or cooked in the furnace to produce crystal oxides as battery materials.
Our process produces an intimate mixture of atoms that takes less time in the furnace, producing very pure crystal structures.
There are fewer defects in the crystal structure, which improves lithium ion storage, but more importantly, the material is longerlasting.
When you charge or discharge, it doesn\'t break down as quickly as you think.
Therefore, from the perspective of kwh, this is the benefit, because it can store more energy during the lifetime of a material with a pure crystal structure and last longer.
JCZ: as far as the mining part of the equation is concerned, it can be said that, in my opinion, this technology will be more beneficial for the salt water producers than the lithium salt producers, right?
DB: That\'s right.
It has a greater impact on salt water producers as their first viable product will be carbonated.
JCZ: Yes, although there are some revolutionary technologies, you know, also designed to produce LiOH directly from the brine. DB: Yes.
But, of course, many salt water producers are still skeptical about the use of these technologies because they do not think they are sufficiently validated.
But my feeling is that this will change somewhere in this line.
What do you think?
DB: Well, I think there are several kinds of films and electricity
The chemical technology that can complete this work, the direct conversion of salt water into hydroxide.
However, this is an additional cost due to the demand for EV-grade hydroxide.
Before putting the mixture into the furnace for firing, the cathode industry is currently grinding and grinding lithium hydroxide with Ni, Mn and Co.
The powder particles still have thousands of atomic widths before firing, and the furnace softens them so that the lithium atoms begin to migrate and mix with Ni, Mn and Co.
The melting point of LiOH is lower than that of li2co2, making it easier to mix with Ni, Mn and Co, which prevents nickel-rich EV-grade materials from forming the wrong structure.
In our case, before we reach the melting pot, we already have the atomic mixing of lithium atoms, so we don\'t want to move atoms at a long distance, it is also not necessary for the lithium source to have a lower melting point;
That\'s why we can get rid of the carbonate.
This is a subtle point, but lithium hydroxide is not needed for electric vehicle batteries.
What needs LiOH today is the process of making cathode materials.
Ultimately, that\'s why the technology needs to drive chemical upgrades and other brine sources.
We believe that in order to meet the needs of LiOH, capital is unnecessarily deployed into the resource space.
So we can change that.
Our technology can provide pipes for the li2co2 of electric vehicles.
For some mining companies worth tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars.
JCZ: That\'s right, but some analysts also claim that using these new technologies can reduce some capital expenditures because they can save the cost of solar ponds, which are very expensive in some cases, right?
DB: Look, I\'m not an expert in extracting lithium, but the solar pond has been a low-cost source of lithium for a while, and I think for the new project, it comes down to the cost of electricity compared to solar evaporation.
Now, maybe that makes sense if you\'re in the right place.
You may have to consider the net present value (NPV)
Keep the product in the pond for a long time before it goes public, instead of handling it directly.
With so many variables from salar to salar, the chemical reactions within salar may vary, so there may not be one-size-fits-
Replace all the techniques of the solar pool. JCZ: Right.
DB: it may not be practical to customize each installation and deliver power to the high altitude salt fields in South America.
But it may work in some cases.
Although it is clear that the total cost and demand for lithium hydroxide worldwide will push the premium higher than lithium carbonate, at least until productivity catches up.
We believe that we can solve this gap, which is an opportunity for Nano One to disrupt the market. JCZ: Ok.
Let\'s discuss the second question.
How does your technology license work?
As you may know, over time, more and more lithium producers are increasingly interested in the value of development --
Many global companies are also interested in helping them increase their lithium projects.
One example is Chile\'s recent launch of a tender for this purpose and the submission of letters of intent by 12 such companies.
So are you willing to work with these countries or are you only going to work with developed countries?
In this case, what is the marketing strategy of your technology?
This is a great question, Juan Carlos.
Our basic strategy has always been to package and license our technology, and we have never specifically said whether we work with developed countries or with them.
I would like to say that our interest lies in countries that have friendly jurisdiction over batteries, including of course China.
Including Japan, South Korea.
This is the obvious choice.
There is a very friendly jurisdiction in Quebec, Canada, and in addition to that, there are jurisdictions in South America, which are Chile and Argentina.
We have no reason not to consider working with one of our countries on preferential trading terms.
At the end of the day, any discussion about licensing, joint ventures or partnerships will come down to terms.
I know this is a very broad answer, but we are open to all kinds of opportunities.
JCZ: in terms of this license, do you plan to include training in it so that lithium-producing countries are accustomed to using this technology in cathode material projects in Chile, China or elsewhere?
So you will include the training section, right?
DB: we have developed a pilot plant designed to expand the test volume and demonstrate the technology on a large scale, but it also teaches us how to build a comprehensive plant.
We are working on operating conditions, costs, energy, etc.
Manufacturing these materials on a large scale, which enables us to assemble an engineering and intellectual property package that includes design details and operational knowledge for full construction and operationscale facility.
Patents protect the producers of these materials and our knowledge.
As you said, the training or new guidance on how to run the facility will be carried out.
Our pilot project has been completed and we are identifying operational and design parameters for the commercial scale.
JCZ: How long does this take?
When are you planning to have a full package available to interested people?
We are lucky.
Our pilot plant was launched as planned and we shortened the development cycle of some upcoming cathode materials.
Before we prepare the necessary elements for the complete package, this may allow us to enter the beginning of 2018, perhaps 6 to 8 months.
JCZ: Well, now what are your plans for scaling up, I mean, are you going to stay in the pilot phase of the process or are you planning to develop a larger plant?
DB: It depends on who we work with, Juan Carlos.
In a joint venture, we will be involved in the construction and service of the facility.
Partners of the joint venture will bring expertise in operations and supply chain.
Cooperation or joint venture is meaningful to us and licensing is an integral part of it.
In pure licensing games, we will provide engineering, technology and knowledge
How to build the facility with the licensee.
We need to protect our technology, we need to pay attention to the website and jurisdiction, but it depends on who we deal.
JCZ: That\'s right.
Now, as far as the operators of the lithium battery producers you\'re talking about here are concerned, right?
DB: this may be the case.
But often, lithium battery producers do not produce their own cathode materials.
JCZ: That\'s right.
DB: this is usually done upstream.
So, in Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA)
A large part of Tesla\'s cathode material comes from Sumitomo Metal Mining.
Sumitomo produces their NCA products and offers them to Panasonic, which is packaged into cylindrical batteries before Tesla assembles 7,000 of its products into larger battery packs.
JCZ: That\'s right.
DB: There are many other cathode producers in Asia and Europe, such as Umicore, Toda Kogyo, Nichia, shan, Ecopro, Pulead. . .
And BASF (OTCQX:BASFY)
Johnson MattelOTCPK:JMPLF)
They are large chemical companies themselves, entering the field, looking for market share and manufacturing advantages.
These are the entities we want to work.
JCZ: Great.
Okay, let\'s talk about the future now.
As far as I know, your technology contains the so-called advanced lithium-
As far as the improved cathode is concerned, is the ion battery?
DB: Yes, as far as the crystal structure we\'re talking about is improving, yes.
JCZ: As you know, right? DB: Yes.
JCZ: What I\'m talking about here is replacing graphite with silicon, tin and even graphene as negative materials for these batteries. I have two-
There are related questions here.
First, how feasible do you think these technologies will be in the near future, and second, will your technology be able to adapt to these technological advances in the next few years?
DB: silicon and other additives in the graphite anode make sense, but in the foreseeable future, graphite may still be the main raw material in the anode.
The cost and scale are simply too much --
Performance issues of materials as graphite substitutes.
The only exception is the solid lithium anode, which will have great prospects if the industry can overcome the safety challenges.
In these cases, the cathode material does not change.
Sometimes the way lithium reacts with the anode affects the additives in the cathode, but the basic cathode material does not need to be changed.
JCZ: so there won\'t be much difference in making these products?
No, we are, in fact, an immunization and a future.
Proof of these changes.
We are developing a manufacturing platform that is flexible enough to manufacture a variety of lithium ion cathode materials, most likely next generation cathode materials.
We are agnostic about battery chemistry and we can adjust our process to make new cathode materials.
We are very flexible and can adjust according to the trend in the battery field.
We have shifted our attention more.
For example, with the development of electric vehicles, nickel materials can be moved.
JCZ: OK, but how feasible do you think these technologies will be in the future?
Do you think they will be ready for prime time like the next 2 or 3 years?
DB: I think the silicon in the graphite anode is ready.
You\'re asking about the anode, right? JCZ: Yes.
So it\'s already golden time.
I believe Tesla already has a small amount of silicon in its battery.
This is a question of how far it can be pushed and how it affects the structure of the entire battery.
In the case of graphene, there has been a lot of discussion about using it as an anode, but I think it might just be a technology to look for applications.
It seems that the cost structure and scalability have not yet appeared.
JCZ: Yes, but you are not going to enter the anode technology in the near future, are you?
DB: No, production of graphite-
The base anode material has no meaning for us.
Maybe we have a place to produce lithium titanium oxide anode material, but I think the production method is quite mature. JCZ: Ok. Great.
Now let\'s discuss the fourth question.
As you know, there are other lithium.
Ion technologies that are being studied and developed in depth such as solid state (
Polymer and ceramic electrolyte)
Lithium Sulfur and lithium-Air and lithiumoxygen.
One thing in common with these technologies, as you know, is that they all use lithium metals, not lithium carbonate or hydroxide.
So you have any ideas on how the Nano One plans to face these challenges, or you may feel that these disruptive innovations are too advanced to worry about them?
DB: So, in the case of solid electrolyte batteries, it can solve the safety problem and be able to use lithium anode, but it still needs the cathode material we use today, Ni, for example, Mn and Co.
We are discussing our high level with the manufacturer
What we call the volt of cobalt-free material.
This is a material that enables the battery to work in 4.
In the 8 V range, it is possible to match the solid electrolyte and solid lithium anode in the future. Lithium-
Air and lithium
Sulfur batteries, don\'t need the kind of cathode used today, but these technologies are far from the threat of lithium ion, so we really don\'t have to worry about it.
If you look back at the history and look at battery companies and battery producers, and even battery pack producers, there are only a few new stories of success other than China, any company that brings new battery chemistry to full production could take about half a billion dollars.
In addition, as the cost of lithium-ion batteries decreases, the barriers to entry are increasing.
How about sulfur?
DB: I don\'t pretend to be an expert in lithium.
Sulfur. But defeat Lee-
The cost of ion batteries has fallen sharply since it began production 25 years ago.
These obstacles are not insurmountable, but they are becoming more and more difficult as lithium iron phosphate permeates the market.
Does that make sense?
Yes, that makes sense, although in China I just heard that NMC is replacing these lithium ion batteries, right?
This is correct.
This will be true for electric vehicles with particularly high mileage requirements-they require energy density and mileage-NMC meets the requirements.
LFP is more suitable for commercial vehicles, tools and energy storage solutions for power grids.
If I remember correctly, NMC is expected to grow twice as fast as LFP, but both will play an important role in the foreseeable future.
So there is a very healthy future for LFP.
The advantage of the lithium iron phosphate is that you can get 10,000 deep cycles from it.
With the NMC, you can get thousands of deep loops from it, which is OK for longer-distance EV batteries, since regular drives use only a fraction of the capacity per day
This leaves plenty of additional reserves for occasional long-distance driving.
LFP is for applications that do not require \"occasionally extended ranges\", but you do need a longer calendar life or longevity.
JCZ: how about fixed use and energy storage?
Yes, I think LFP can dominate the field. The high-
The volt spinel I mentioned earlier can also play a key role.
They have similar properties in terms of cycle and power, but the voltage distribution of spinel brings other advantages that simplify power systems and charging.
In applications where energy density is less important, both chemicals provide longevity and thousands of cycles.
The media tend to focus on consumer electric vehicles, so the focus is often on related materials, but the energy storage market is bigger, LFP and high-voltage spinel.
JCZ: You\'re talking about spinel cathode material, what specific cathode material are you talking about?
Are you talking about iron phosphate or something?
DB: No, when I said spinel, I said high-
This is a lithium oxide material.
The processing technology of Nano One is particularly good at manufacturing. We already have a lot of ways to make it.
75% Mn, 25% Ni.
From the perspective of raw materials, it is relatively cheap because it eliminates cobalt, mainly manganese.
Its capacity is not as good as cobalt-
Based on material but longer
Faster charging and higher voltage.
Okay, that\'s the last question.
And other ions-based non-
Lithium batteries such as sodium-ion, magnesium-
Ion and aluminum
I even learned from the professor\'s research and development.
I had the privilege of interviewing Michael Zimmerman from the University of taffz a few weeks ago, which goes beyond all the techniques mentioned earlier, although he did not really mention the specific chemical nature of the technique
So, is there a strategic plan for Nano One to address these challenges?
DB: We can also do something like this.
Imagine our process as a chemical assembly line.
We can assemble sodium instead of Li, Ni, Mn, Co (Na)or Zinc (ZN)
With those materials
This is all within the capabilities of our processes.
In this way, we are also agnostic, and we have enough flexibility to adapt to different market trends.
I went back to the premise that the new battery technology and chemicals needed to overcome a terrible manufacturing barrier, lithium-
There are 25 ion batteries-The beginning of the year.
But we are agnostic and we are fully capable of making future materials.
At Nano One, we are committed to cutting
Edge materials, but avoid materials that take 10 years of development and hundreds of millions of dollars to commercialize.
The only exception is our high.
We believe that voltage spinel has been around for three to five years and has been firmly on the technology roadmap for major battery producers.
Through industrial cooperation, we think this is feasible, and we can expand the scale through the manufacturing platform.
So overall, you believe we have lithium.
The ion battery has been around for a while, right? DB: Yes.
I firmly believe this.
As the cost of lithium-ion batteries decreases, barriers to entry are increasing.
In order to overcome the low-cost trajectory of Li-, other battery technologies will require a very large performance boostion batteries.
Okay, good.
Dan, it\'s very pleasant to chat with you, hope it will end in about a week, OK? DB: Wonderful.
You helped me a lot and were friendly.
So I want to thank you.
So you have to take care of Juan Carlos.
Have a great week and I look forward to reading your thoughts on finding the alpha.
Okay, great. Thank you very much.
I will meet you. Bye.
Disclosure: I/we have no positions in any of the stocks mentioned and no plans to start any positions in the next 72 hours.
This article was written by myself and expressed my views.
I received no compensation (
In addition to Seeking Alpha).
I have no business relationship with any stock company mentioned in this article.
Editor\'s note: This article discusses one or more securities that are not traded on major US securitiesS. exchange.
Please note the risks associated with these stocks.