Fig. 4: Distribution of CAM production material costs (NMC 95, NMC 811, NMC 622, NMC 532, and NMC 111) for all regional lithium, cobalt, and nickel supply configurations, and comparison to aggregated costs of U.S. and global supply scenarios (in USD GWh−1). | Nature Communications

Fig. 4: Distribution of CAM production material costs (NMC 95, NMC 811, NMC 622, NMC 532, and NMC 111) for all regional lithium, cobalt, and nickel supply configurations, and comparison to aggregated costs of U.S. and global supply scenarios (in USD GWh−1).

From: Primary material supply configurations and domestic recycling for cost-effective battery material production in the US

Fig. 4: Distribution of CAM production material costs (NMC 95, NMC 811, NMC 622, NMC 532, and NMC 111) for all regional lithium, cobalt, and nickel supply configurations, and comparison to aggregated costs of U.S. and global supply scenarios (in USD GWh−1).The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

a Aggregated cost distribution for NMC chemistries: Absolute number of scenarios vs. aggregated costs of scenarios (grouped into 500,000 USD ranges). b Relative shares of the total number of scenarios above/under aggregated costs of U.S. and global supply scenario costs, including total aggregated costs of the lowest and highest cost scenario for each NMC chemistry.

Back to article page