Battery Production Capacity Expansion
Annual nameplate capacity — the max a factory can produce if it runs at 100% — by top cell manufacturers, in GWh (gigawatt-hours per year). CATL and BYD lead China; LG/Samsung/SK supply Korea/US; the industry is racing toward 2+ TWh of total capacity by 2026. Sources: company filings, SNE Research.
Annual nameplate battery production capacity by manufacturer (GWh). 2025E and 2026E are company-guided targets. Sources: company filings, SNE Research.
Battery Cell Format Comparison
Side-by-side of the four cell form factors — prismatic (flat-rectangular, CATL), cylindrical (like AA batteries, includes Tesla's 4680 = 46mm × 80mm), pouch (soft-pack, LG/SK), and blade (BYD's long-thin LFP design) — on energy density, cost, cycle life, and manufacturers.
| Format | Energy Density | Cost/kWh | Cycle Life | Key Users | Pros | Cons |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prismatic | 200–280 Wh/kg | $85–110 | 2,000–6,000 cycles | CATL, BYD, Samsung SDI, CALB | High packing efficiency, good structural rigidity, easy CTP/CTC integration | Swelling under cycling, more complex manufacturing than cylindrical |
| Cylindrical | 250–300 Wh/kg | $80–105 | 1,500–4,000 cycles | Panasonic, LG, Samsung SDI, Tesla, EVE Energy | Mature manufacturing, excellent energy density, good safety (small individual cell failure impact) | Lower packing efficiency (round in square space), complex wiring for large packs |
| Pouch | 230–300 Wh/kg | $90–120 | 1,500–3,500 cycles | LG Energy Solution, SK On | Flexible form factor, lightest packaging, excellent thermal management | Requires structural support, swelling risk, more expensive packaging |
| Blade (LFP) | 150–180 Wh/kg | $60–80 | 4,000–8,000+ cycles | BYD (exclusive) | Exceptional safety, lowest cost, longest cycle life, structural battery integration | Lower energy density than NMC, BYD proprietary format |
Comparison of major EV battery cell formats — energy density, cost, and manufacturers. Sources: industry reports, company filings.