Ford Battery Supply and F150 Lightning Production

Ford and SK Innovation have signed an MoU to create a joint venture – to be called BlueOvalSK – to produce approximately 60 GWh annually in traction battery cells and array modules, starting 2025.

By 2030, Ford expects annual energy demand for its vehicles will be up to 140 GWh annually in North America and up to 240 GWh globally. Ford could have 80-100 GWh/year of batteries supply available around 2025-2026 unless they get a lot more battery supply deals.

The Ford F150 Lightning uses 130 kwh of battery for the base model and 180 kwh for the top of the line. This is an average of about 160 kwh of batteries. If Ford was only selling F150 Lightnings then Ford expects to sell 1.5 million F150 Lightnings every year in 2023.

If Ford was able to make and sell 100,000 F150 Lightning EVs with average pack sizes of 160 kwh then they would need 16 GWh of batteries in 2022 or 2023.

Ford is making the Mustang Mach-E crossover, an all-electric F-150 and the new E-Transit.

SK Innovations currently makes about 40 GWh per year of batteries. SK Innovation supplies Ford, Volkswagen and Hyundai.

The Hyundai Kona Electric sold 65,000 units in 2020 and the VW ID3 sold 57,000 units. The Hyundai Kona Electric has a 64 kwh battery pack. Hyundai needs about 4.2 GWh/year of batteries for the Kona. The VW ID3 has 45-77 kwh in battery packs. If we assume 70 kwh per ID3 then VW needs about 4 GWh/year of batteries for the ID3. SK Innovation plans to become one of the world’s top three EV battery suppliers by 2025 with over 125 GWh in global production capacity. SK Innovation has 15-25 GWH/year of battery capacity coming online from 2021-2024.

Hyundai and Volkswagen had more electric vehicle production than Ford in 2020. Ford probably cannot get more than one-third of the SK Innovations battery capacity. The Ford F150 Lightning will start deliveries in spring of 2022. Current Ford battery supply will go mainly to the Mustang Mach-E crossover. Production of the Mustang Mach-E stands at some 6,155 units in April and close to 21,000 YTD. The production of the Mach-E dropped in April from March 2021.

Ford was investing $11.5 billion into EV production, development and factories from 2020 to 2022.

Ford will have to complete the factory conversions to electric and get production scaled. Ford might be able to make 10,000 per month of its EVs in 2021 and maybe 15,000 per month in 2022.

Tesla capital expenditures for 2021 and 2022 will be $12 billion and was about $3.5 billion in 2020. Ford’s EV factory and EV development spending is less than Tesla’s spending.

SOURCES- Ford, Statistica, theDriven.io, Electrek
Written by Brian Wang, Nextbigfuture.com (Brian owns shares of Tesla)

21 thoughts on “Ford Battery Supply and F150 Lightning Production”

  1. I have seen people claim that their environmental aim is breaking the parts of society that they don't like.

    The first example that springs to mind is from 30 years ago
    https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1989-04-19-vw-2042-story.html

    but I've certainly seen people in recent times that still agree with this. I can't say how many people actually agree with this. It may just be a handful of lunatics who happen to say things that are outrageous enough to make the news.

    Likewise, there are going to be people out there who DO like smokey exhausts, but I've seen no sign that they are numerous enough to matter.

    Reply
  2. Agreed. But… my sense of Dr TV is that the electriftying of EV pickups successfully was more about proving that society could have a rich, high-intensity, high-productivity, versatile, 'big and mean' base of personal and commercial transportation. That society could Have It All without 'golf carting' everything under the grand and unquestioned banner of 'carbon footprint' and 'sustainability' and 'green tech'.
    This may be hyper-cynical, but I do honestly believe that there is a significant group of people who really hoped that the quest for sustainability and reducing CO2 would lead to the 'real objective', that is: the dismantling of technological society into a hyper-communal, person-powered, low-productivity, reduced birth-rate, earth-wide commune of GMO/fertilizer-hating, Portlandite-like, dirty-hippies/ millenials. That electrification of vehicles would be limited to asia-type 3-wheelers, mini-cube vans and other such bizarro 'business transport'. The idea that we can all Go Big in our cars, trucks, houses, properties, etc., while still cleaning up our energy and undermining the supposed: ' 'true green path' of saving the world by being less and doing less' must have been a real kick in the Greenpeace Agenda. Its not about hating on pickup-ers – they're heroes. Its about exposing the Less is More fallacy. https://www.wired.com/story/ford-lightning-f150-electric-vehicle-dystopia#intcid=_wired-most-popular-right-rail_896afd46-77aa-4874-adf3-c752f17a0790_popular4-1

    Reply
  3. As far as I have understood, all car makers are going to use their propritary battery packs. The cells may be generic. So Ford will be limited by the least of their own capacity to make packs and SKs capacity to make cells.

    And it would seem that both of these will be very limited…

    Its an open question of the pouch cells will be standardized in such a way that SK could use the same process for all their customers or of there are customer specific modifications.

    Reply
  4. The objection to "green tech" was never really about "we want to pollute". It was always
    "You have to pay more and get worse results to meet my standards."
    "No. Fuque You."

    After all, that's why many of the pickup-truck drivers were using diesel engines in their F150s in the first place: because it used less fuel and gave better results than an old bigblock petrol burner. They didn't WANT to use more fuel for less pulling power, and when tech came along to give them a better option they took it.

    Reply
  5. Electric can pull harder, but even an ICE vehicle loses mileage when pulling a load. My 2000 Silverado loses about 20% when pulling a loaded 16 ft double-axle trailer.

    Reply
  6. Standard solar panel size is 2 m^2. 200 m^2 on an optimally sloped roof can fit 100 panels, and thus produce 30-60 kw peak power. Tracking mounts, which move the panels to follow the sun, take more ground area, to avoid shading each other, but are cheaper to install than rooftops. Depending on soil and climate, you can do agrisolar, and use the ground under the panels to grow stuff. Solar greenhouses are also an option – part panels and part glass for the plants underneath.

    Reply
  7. Interesting – but not a lot reported on how proprietary the battery-packs are for each vehicle, model, brand. Korean generics available to supplement local and just-starting-up North American/ European EV manufacturers? Panasonic in there, ne? Surely, off-brand and third-party battery manufacturers are half-crazed with trying to ramp up and mobilize and supply to those automakers without their own little GWh-plant empire. Not even sure if batteries have common international standards with their connectivity (much less performance and -hah- recyclability). Everyone really doing their own batteries? – exclusively? – methinks unlikely.

    Reply
  8. not about 'environmentally friendly' as much as now/soon the tech is allowing for the low carbon footprint from a strategy that is not 'less is more'. That's the deal breaker. Treehuggers may soon have a bigger carbon footprint (energy wise) from driving their grid-powered prius + bike/scooter + daily transit than a bloated-out F150 powered by solar panels and garage pack, stored on the 20 acre light-forest property 100 miles away…
    Even the Hummers are going EV….

    Reply
  9. We will have to see just what kind of outlets the Cybertruck will have. My guess is quite a few, and I also guess that the power will be far greater than for the F-150 Lighting. Say, about 10 kW.

    If you discard any preference for looks, then the Cybertruck will be the far more rational alternative. But we will have to see, of course…

    Reply
  10. Agree, at least when you are considering rational fleet buyers. And, I believe that Tesla will be able to ramp far quicker than Ford. I've read that Ford has planned for a battery factory with 10 GWh of capacity for 2022, i.e. about 65k F-150 Lighting. Not a whole lot.

    By contrast, Tesla has planned for 100 GWh in 2022, equivalent to about 800k Cybertrucks, if that is all that will be manufactured with those batteries. And from then on out, Tesla will continue to scale to hundreds of GW-hours…

    Reply
  11. When some liberal starts whining about conservatives and trump supporters and how they are not environmentally friendly, then suddenly coal rolling seems like a perfectly normal reaction to me.

    Reply
  12. De-centralized Electricity is the backbone of the burgeoning survivalist/reliabilist culture – heat/ cool, food store/ prepare, communicate, and -now- reliable fuel in a vehicle worth owning… get your 20 acre private parcel while you still can…
    can 2,000 sq.ft of Musk-Solar-shingles + a rear supplemental panel provide + small array of tesla-batteries provide a moderate suburban lifestyle off-the-grid with your F150 – say south of 37-d N?

    Reply
  13. It should be noted that an electric motor has a lot more traction than a diesel motor. An Electric F-150 can outdo and outwork a ICE F-150. And that might be important to people buying a F-150 for work.

    Reply
  14. I believe battery production will constrain EV production. I think Ford is going to have issues sourcing their batteries. Those who make their own batteries might have less problems.

    Reply
  15. understood – however, many F-150ers tend to lean Libertarian and would love to charge their truck at-home, on-site, and work, thereby sticking it to Gas Station Corporate culture and the near-arbitrary gas/diesel pricing. A solar panel array, propane/gas reformed out of their garage, shed, back-lot, cabin acreage appeals to the decentralized, live-and-let-live, and near-off-the-grid lifestyle of the 'almost prepper'.

    Reply
  16. The diesels tuned to pump out black smoke can also give more power and torque. I'm not saying that giving a big finger to the puritans of society isn't a major factor, but there is a practical side to it too.

    Reply
  17. The biggest obstacle to Ford electric truck adoption I see is political. Electric vehicles are for liberals, and most Ford truck customers tend towards conservative. You see it where they make black smokers out of their diesel trucks just to make political statements regardless of introducing inefficiency with poorer fuel mileage. There would have to be some very clear, obvious and undeniable advantages to stimulate adoption, and even then it will take time. My two cents. I could be wrong but…

    Reply
  18. Contractor environment means they need to think hard about power takeoff inverters as well as air compressors as standard options. Hell, if thinking contractor stuff, having a DC rail for DC charging handheld device batteries may be important.

    Reply
  19. Cant compete with cyber truck. Who would want to by a steel frame with an inferior technology and slower acceleration etc? Cyber truck is expected to last 750K miles. Another question is how Ford is expected to produce enough batteries for a large mass production? Always where are gonna and we will and we project etc. Only company I see building giga factories is Tesla not the competition.

    Reply
  20. EV-F150 = Game changer.
    It's all about durability and minimal maintenance in a Contractor environment – vibrations, jolts, cold starts, water & dust & debris, unfair loading, ruthless off-roads/ barely excavated sites. Heard over 300 miles range on upgrade – may need to work on that with towing. Since most F-150 ICEs are well over $60k and many over $90k – this is a delicious market that will attract innovation, dealership buy-in (most dealerships and their mech bays out back hate EVs) and hungry competition – unclear if Ford and their ilk provide any support on the home/shop charging options -fast 60A panel, etc?

    Reply

Leave a Comment