Lopal Marble Bar Lithium Project Deal Extends Chinese Battery Material Supply Strategy

Lopal

Lopal Marble Bar lithium project acquisition will give China’s battery cathode material producer Lopal Tech another upstream position in Western Australia’s lithium sector. The company has agreed to acquire the Marble Bar project from Global Lithium Resources for A$14.85mn.

The Lopal Marble Bar lithium project is located in the Pilbara region of Western Australia. The project has an estimated resource of 18mn t grading 1.0% lithium oxide.

The Lopal Marble Bar lithium project deal reflects a continuing push by Chinese battery material producers to secure upstream lithium resources. Cathode and battery material companies are looking beyond processing capacity and moving closer to mine supply.

This matters because lithium raw material security remains central to battery supply chains. Even as lithium prices fluctuate, companies with long-term access to spodumene resources can better protect conversion plants, cathode output and customer supply.

Marble Bar Adds Pilbara Resource Exposure

The Marble Bar project gives Lopal direct exposure to a known lithium-bearing region. Western Australia remains one of the world’s most important hard-rock lithium supply bases, with spodumene projects feeding converters and battery material producers across Asia.

The project’s 18mn t resource at 1.0% lithium oxide gives Lopal a potential raw material position, although the acquisition price suggests the asset is still at an early development stage.

For Global Lithium Resources, the sale allows the company to focus more heavily on its larger Manna lithium project. Manna has a resource estimate of 52mn t grading 1.0% lithium oxide.

This creates a clearer portfolio structure. Lopal gains Marble Bar, while GL1 retains its larger Manna asset and existing downstream-linked partnerships.

The transaction also shows that Chinese battery material producers remain willing to invest in Australian lithium assets despite market volatility. Long-term supply security continues to matter more than short-term price weakness.

Manna Links Lopal to Future Offtake Supply

Lopal already has exposure to GL1 through the Manna project. It holds a 5% equity interest in Manna and has signed an offtake agreement to buy 40% of the project’s output.

China’s Canmax has agreed to take another 30% of Manna’s output and also holds a 9.45% stake in GL1. Australian lithium miner Mineral Resources owns 9.85% of GL1.

These relationships show how lithium supply chains are being structured around equity stakes and offtake agreements. Battery material companies want secured feedstock before projects enter production.

For Lopal, the Marble Bar acquisition adds another layer to its Australian lithium strategy. It gives the company project ownership while maintaining future offtake exposure through Manna.

The broader industrial meaning is clear. Chinese battery material producers are not relying only on spot markets. They are building upstream positions, offtake rights and strategic relationships to support long-term lithium chemical and cathode material supply.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Lopal’s Marble Bar deal shows that lithium strategy is shifting from price speculation to resource control. Even in a weaker lithium market, Chinese battery material companies continue to secure upstream positions that can support future conversion and cathode supply.

XFH Anode Material Sales Rise as China Battery Demand Expands

Anode Material

XFH anode material sales increased in 2025 as demand from China’s lithium-ion power battery and energy storage battery industries continued to grow. Shanghai XFH Technology sold 83,885t of anode materials during the year, up 22% from 2024.

XFH anode material sales outpaced production growth, showing stronger downstream offtake from battery manufacturers. The company’s anode material output rose by 11% on the year to 83,426t.

XFH anode material sales also lifted revenue. The company’s anode material revenue rose by 21% to 1.7bn yuan, supported by higher shipment volumes into battery supply chains.

The result reflects continued expansion in China’s battery ecosystem. Power battery shipments exceeded 1,000GWh in 2025, up by more than 50% from a year earlier, while energy storage battery shipments rose by 85% to 630GWh.

Suining Complex Expands XFH’s Anode Capacity

XFH increased anode material production capacity to 114,660 t/yr in 2025, up 27% from the previous year. The increase followed the production launch of its 60,000 t/yr complex in Suining, Sichuan province, at the end of 2025.

The new capacity gives XFH more room to serve fast-growing battery demand. Anode materials are a core input for lithium-ion batteries, influencing charging performance, cycle life, safety and energy density.

China’s rapid growth in power batteries and storage batteries is driving expansion across the anode supply chain. Producers are adding capacity to meet demand from electric vehicles, grid storage, industrial storage systems and consumer battery applications.

The Suining project also strengthens XFH’s position in a market where scale, cost control and customer qualification are critical. Larger capacity can improve operating efficiency, but it also requires stable demand to avoid inventory and pricing pressure.

Energy Storage Growth Supports Anode Demand

Energy storage is becoming an increasingly important driver for China anode materials. Storage battery shipments grew faster than power batteries in 2025, rising by 85% from a year earlier.

This matters because energy storage systems require large volumes of battery materials even when they have different performance priorities from electric vehicles. Cost, cycle life, safety and supply reliability are especially important in storage applications.

Power battery demand remains the largest driver. China’s battery shipments above 1,000GWh show the scale of the domestic EV and battery manufacturing base.

For anode producers, the opportunity is large but competitive. Demand growth supports shipments, but capacity expansion across China can still create margin pressure if supply grows faster than customer orders.

XFH’s stronger sales and output show that qualified anode producers remain tied closely to downstream battery expansion. The next challenge will be maintaining utilisation and profitability as China’s battery materials sector continues to scale.

The Metalnomist Commentary

XFH’s growth shows that China’s battery materials chain is still expanding quickly, especially in anodes. However, rising capacity means producers must compete on qualification, cost and customer access, not only shipment growth.

Lithium-Ion Battery Copper Foil Shipments Surge as Ultra-Thin Products Gain Share

Copper Foil

Lithium-ion battery copper foil shipments rose sharply in 2025 as global battery production expanded and manufacturers shifted toward thinner materials to reduce copper costs. Global shipments reached 1.302mn t, up 41.7% from 2024, according to Chinese research institute EV Tank.

Lithium-ion battery copper foil demand remains closely tied to electric vehicle and energy storage growth. Copper foil is a key current collector in lithium-ion batteries, making it essential to cell performance, energy density and manufacturing cost.

Lithium-ion battery copper foil shipments were dominated by China, which accounted for 82.9% of global deliveries in 2025. EV Tank expects global shipments to reach 2.615mn t by 2030, implying continued expansion as battery output scales.

The product mix changed quickly during the year. The share of 8μm foil declined, while 6μm remained the mainstream product and accounted for more than 70% of total shipments.

Ultra-Thin Foil Gains Momentum on Copper Cost Pressure

Ultra-thin copper foil gained share as battery producers looked for ways to reduce copper input costs. Persistently high global copper prices pushed cell manufacturers to use thinner foil while maintaining battery performance.

The combined share of 5μm and 4.5μm ultra-thin foil rose to 24% in 2025. This is a major shift for a material category that requires tighter production control, better surface quality and stronger consistency.

Thinner copper foil can help reduce battery weight and improve energy density. It also lowers the amount of copper used per cell, which becomes increasingly important when copper prices remain elevated.

EV Tank expects 5μm and thinner foil to become a key material for high-end batteries. This reflects the industry’s move toward lighter, higher-energy-density cell designs.

However, thinner foil also raises manufacturing difficulty. Producers must control pinholes, tensile strength, elongation, surface roughness and coating compatibility more precisely.

That technical barrier could separate higher-end suppliers from lower-cost producers. As battery customers shift toward thinner grades, qualification and process reliability will become more important than simple capacity.

China Leads Supply as Competition Intensifies

China’s 82.9% share of global shipments shows its dominant role in battery copper foil supply. The country has built large-scale capacity around its lithium-ion battery ecosystem, supported by domestic EV, energy storage and cell manufacturing growth.

Competition intensified in 2025 as the market recovered and producers brought earlier-built capacity on line. This created a more fluid ranking among suppliers.

Longdian Wason ranked first with a 12.2% market share. Huachuang New Material followed after capacity ramp-ups lifted output and sales.

Defu Technology and Jiayuan Technology ranked third and fourth, respectively. Seven companies in the top 10 changed positions during the year, showing how quickly capacity, customer access and product mix are reshaping the sector.

Battery makers also increased procurement from second-tier suppliers to improve supply stability. This suggests buyers are trying to diversify supplier bases rather than rely only on leading producers.

For copper markets, the trend is strategically important. Battery copper foil growth creates a direct link between copper demand and battery technology. But the move toward ultra-thin foil also means battery growth will not translate into copper demand on a simple one-to-one basis.

The sector is therefore entering a more technical phase. Volume growth remains strong, but material intensity, foil thickness, supplier qualification and copper price pressure will all shape future demand.

The Metalnomist Commentary

The copper foil market shows how battery growth can lift copper demand while also forcing material thrift. High copper prices are pushing battery makers toward thinner foil, making technology and process control as important as raw capacity.

XTC New Energy LFP LMFP Capacity Expansion Targets Higher-Density Battery Materials

XTC New Energy

XTC New Energy LFP LMFP capacity will expand in Sichuan as the Chinese battery materials producer adds another 40,000 t/yr of lithium iron phosphate and lithium ferro-manganese phosphate production. The second-phase project will be built in Ya’an city and is expected to start production in June 2028.

XTC New Energy LFP LMFP capacity at the Ya’an plant will reach 80,000 t/yr after both phases are completed. The first phase already provides 40,000 t/yr of LFP capacity, while the new phase will add flexible LFP and LMFP output.

XTC New Energy LFP LMFP capacity expansion reflects China’s continued investment in lower-cost and manganese-enhanced battery chemistries. The project will be operated by subsidiary Ya’an XTC New Energy, with total investment expected at 743mn yuan.

The move comes as Chinese battery material producers position for growing power battery demand and greater interest in manganese-based cathode active materials.

LMFP Gains Momentum as Producers Seek Better Energy Density

LMFP is gaining attention because it can offer higher energy density than conventional LFP. This makes it attractive for battery makers seeking to improve driving range while keeping costs below higher-nickel chemistries.

However, LMFP still faces trade-offs. Batteries using LMFP cathode active material generally have shorter cycle life and lower charge-discharge efficiency than LFP batteries.

This means LMFP is not a simple replacement for LFP. Instead, it is likely to develop as a complementary chemistry for applications where higher energy density is more valuable than maximum cycle life.

The expansion also shows how manganese is becoming more important in battery materials. Manganese-based chemistries can reduce reliance on more expensive or supply-sensitive metals while supporting performance improvements.

For XTC, adding LMFP capacity gives the company more flexibility. It can serve established LFP demand while preparing for customers that want manganese-enhanced phosphate materials.

China’s Cathode Supply Chain Expands Into Manganese-Based Materials

XTC is not alone in expanding LMFP capacity. Several Chinese battery material producers are adding or building manganese-based phosphate projects.

Ningxia Hengchuang Nami began building the first phase of a 30,000 t/yr LMFP plant in Yinchuan in March. Hunan Yuneng, China’s largest LFP producer, is also building an LMFP materials plant.

Jiangxi Greatpower launched the first phase of a 20,000 t/yr LMFP plant in Pingxiang in January. These projects show that China’s battery materials industry is preparing for broader adoption of LMFP.

The trend is strategically important for the cathode supply chain. LFP has already become a major chemistry in electric vehicles and energy storage because of its cost advantage, safety and long cycle life.

LMFP could extend that platform by adding more energy density while preserving some of LFP’s cost and safety benefits. If technical limitations improve, LMFP may become a larger part of China’s battery chemistry mix.

For raw materials, the shift could support manganese demand in battery applications. It also reinforces China’s lead in scaling new cathode chemistries from pilot production to industrial capacity.

The Metalnomist Commentary

XTC’s Ya’an expansion shows that China’s battery materials race is moving beyond simple LFP scale. LMFP is becoming a serious development path because it offers a practical route to higher energy density without fully moving into costlier high-nickel systems.

Indonesia HPAL Nickel Ore Costs Rise as New HPM Formula Hits Limonite Feedstock

Nickel ore

Indonesia HPAL nickel ore costs are set to rise sharply after the government’s revised mineral benchmark price lifted the mandated price floor for limonite ore. The new HPM formula is expected to increase limonite ore costs by at least 50%, adding immediate margin pressure to mixed hydroxide precipitate producers.

The revised HPM for limonite ore containing 1.2% nickel, 0.1% cobalt and 2% chromium is calculated at $45.24/wmt under the updated Harga Mineral Acuan. That is around 50% higher than early April transacted prices of about $30/wmt for 1.2% limonite ore.

Indonesia HPAL nickel ore costs are also far above the previous benchmark level. Under the old formula, the HPM for similar ore was only $17.17/wmt, meaning the new benchmark is nearly three times higher.

The change matters because HPAL operations rely on limonite ore as feedstock to produce MHP, which is used in battery-grade nickel and cobalt supply chains. A higher government-mandated ore floor will raise raw material costs, increase royalty payments and pressure margins across Indonesia’s battery nickel industry.

Limonite Ore Repricing Raises MHP Cost Pressure

The new HPM framework has the strongest impact on limonite ore because this material typically trades closer to benchmark values than saprolite ore. HPAL producers therefore face a more direct cost increase than rotary kiln-electric furnace operators.

MHP producers will now have to absorb higher ore purchase costs and higher royalties. Since royalties are linked to official valuation, the total cost increase could exceed the headline 50% rise in limonite ore pricing.

The revised formula also changes how Indonesia captures ore value. It includes cobalt, iron and chromium in nickel ore valuation, making these contained elements taxable. This is especially important for limonite ore because cobalt content adds value to HPAL feedstock.

The correction factor for cobalt is set at 30% when ore contains at least 0.05% cobalt. Iron carries a 30% correction factor when content is 35% or lower, while chromium carries a 10% correction factor.

This means Indonesia is no longer valuing nickel ore mainly by nickel grade. The government is moving toward a broader contained-metal pricing model, capturing more value from battery-related by-products and ore chemistry.

For MHP producers, this creates a structural cost problem. HPAL projects were built around access to Indonesian limonite ore, sulphuric acid and integrated processing infrastructure. If ore costs rise by more than a third to half, the cost floor for MHP production moves higher.

This could affect downstream nickel sulphate and cathode material economics. Producers with stronger integration, lower acid costs and better logistics will be better positioned. Higher-cost operators may face squeezed margins if MHP prices do not rise enough to offset the new ore benchmark.

The change also comes as Indonesia tightens wider nickel policy. Mining quota uncertainty, export tax discussions and stricter pricing formulas all point to a broader state strategy of capturing more mineral value before material moves downstream.

Sulphuric Acid Tightness Adds a Second Cost Shock

Indonesia HPAL nickel ore costs are rising at the same time as sulphuric acid prices surge. This creates a double pressure point for MHP producers.

HPAL operations require large volumes of sulphuric acid to leach nickel and cobalt from limonite ore. Any disruption in sulphur or acid supply directly affects processing costs and production reliability.

The US-Iran conflict has stranded several sulphur cargoes bound for Indonesian HPAL producers, preventing them from transiting the Strait of Hormuz. As a result, producers have shifted toward buying sulphuric acid directly.

That market was already tight because of limited copper concentrate availability. Sulphuric acid supply is expected to tighten further as China suspends exports from May.

Southeast Asian sulphuric acid prices have risen sharply. Prices reached $277.50/t cfr on 9 April, up 71% from $162.50/t before the conflict.

This is a major issue for Indonesian HPAL plants. Higher limonite ore costs increase feedstock expenses, while higher sulphuric acid prices increase processing costs. Together, they raise the full cost of producing MHP and weaken the advantage of low-cost Indonesian battery nickel.

Saprolite ore faces less immediate disruption. Saprolite is mainly used in RKEF operations to produce nickel pig iron and ferronickel. Although the new HPM for typical saprolite ore containing 1.6% nickel, 18% iron and 2% chromium rises to $52.90/wmt from $29.94/wmt, it remains below early April transacted prices of about $70/wmt.

This means RKEF producers may see limited immediate transaction impact because market prices are already above the benchmark. HPAL producers, by contrast, face a direct reset of the cost floor.

The difference could reshape relative economics between Indonesia’s stainless-linked and battery-linked nickel chains. NPI producers remain supported by high saprolite prices, while HPAL producers now face rising limonite, royalty and acid costs.

For the global battery supply chain, the key risk is that Indonesia’s MHP cost curve shifts upward. That could support nickel sulphate prices over time, especially if acid tightness persists or HPM-linked royalty costs remain elevated.

For Indonesia, the policy strengthens resource rent capture. The government is recognising that limonite ore contains not only nickel but also cobalt and other valuable elements. This gives Jakarta a stronger fiscal claim over battery material feedstock.

However, the policy also increases operating uncertainty. HPAL investors need predictable ore pricing, acid availability and tax treatment to justify large-scale expansion. A sharp change in HPM could force producers to revisit cost assumptions, procurement strategies and product pricing.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Indonesia’s new HPM formula marks a turning point for HPAL economics. The country is capturing more value from limonite ore, but the combined shock of higher ore prices, royalties and sulphuric acid costs could reset the cost floor for global MHP supply.

Zhongke Anode Material Sales Surge as Energy Storage Demand Accelerates

Zhongke

Zhongke anode material sales rose sharply in 2025 as China’s lithium-ion battery sector expanded across new energy vehicles and power storage. Hunan Zhongke Electric sold 363,253t of anode materials during the year, up 62% from 2024.

Zhongke anode material sales were supported by strong downstream demand and higher operating rates. The company’s output increased by 66% to 378,469t, reflecting a rapid scale-up in response to battery market growth.

Zhongke anode material sales also lifted revenue. Revenue from anode materials rose by 60% to 7.99bn yuan, broadly in line with the increase in shipment volumes.

The result shows how anode materials remain one of the key beneficiaries of battery expansion. Demand is no longer driven only by electric vehicles. Grid storage, industrial storage and AI-related power demand are becoming increasingly important.

Capacity Utilisation Tightens as China Battery Demand Expands

Zhongke’s anode material capacity reached 348,683 t/yr in 2025, up 46% from a year earlier. The increase followed equipment and technology upgrades across its production base.

Capacity utilisation rose to 108.6% from 95.7% in 2024. This shows that Zhongke was operating above nameplate capacity as demand outpaced available production capability.

The company is now expanding further. A third-phase project at its Zhaotong site in Yunnan province is under construction and will add 100,000 t/yr of anode material capacity by the end of 2026.

Zhaotong has become a key growth platform. The first phase, with 15,000 t/yr of capacity, started production in April 2020. The second phase, with 100,000 t/yr of capacity, began operations in March 2024.

Zhongke is also planning a 300,000 t/yr anode material complex in Luzhou, Sichuan province. This would further strengthen its position in China’s graphite anode supply chain.

The expansion reflects a broader industry trend. Anode producers are adding capacity to serve battery makers that need reliable supply, stable quality and lower-cost materials for high-volume cell production.

Overseas Expansion Targets Storage and Non-China Customers

Zhongke is also building a 100,000 t/yr anode material plant in Tangier, Morocco. The project targets customers outside China and reflects the growing need for regionalised battery material supply chains.

Morocco offers strategic value because it is close to European markets and has become more attractive for battery-related investment. For Chinese anode producers, overseas capacity can help serve customers facing localisation, trade and supply-chain security requirements.

Energy storage is becoming a major long-term demand driver. Global energy storage battery shipments reached 651.5GWh in 2025, up 76.2% from a year earlier. Chinese companies accounted for 614.7GWh, or 94.4% of global shipments.

EV Tank expects global energy storage battery shipments to exceed 2TWh by 2030. If this forecast materialises, anode material demand will continue rising across China and overseas markets.

Policy is also supporting growth. China is moving new energy storage from mandatory allocation toward a more market-oriented system, including capacity pricing support for independent grid-side storage.

AI data centres are adding another demand layer. Rapid growth in electricity consumption from AI infrastructure is increasing the need for power storage, grid stability and backup capacity.

Europe is also expanding storage under energy security strategies. EU member states installed 27.1GWh of new battery energy storage systems in 2025, up 45% from the previous year.

For Zhongke, this demand mix supports a larger and more international anode strategy. The company is positioning itself to serve China’s dominant battery ecosystem while preparing for overseas demand linked to storage, EVs and grid resilience.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Zhongke’s growth shows that anode materials are moving from an EV-driven market into a broader energy infrastructure market. The next competitive phase will depend on overseas localisation, graphite supply security and the ability to serve storage demand outside China.

Shidai Ruixiang Launches LMFP Battery Material Plant in Gansu

Baiyin Nonferrous Group

China’s Shidai Ruixiang has launched a new LMFP battery material plant with a production capacity of 20,000 tonnes per year. Located in Baiyin city, Gansu province, this marks the first phase of what will become the world’s largest LMFP facility. Once complete, the site will scale to 100,000 t/yr in lithium ferro-manganese phosphate production for next-generation EV battery applications.

The LMFP battery material plant is operated by Shidai Ruixiang, a joint venture between Gansu Elephent Energy and Baiyin Nonferrous Group, a major Chinese state-owned metals producer. The full project will be developed in three phases, although details for the next stages remain undisclosed. This launch reinforces China’s dominant position in advanced battery cathode material (CAM) supply chains.

China Expands LMFP Footprint in Global EV Market

LMFP materials offer higher energy density and longer driving range than traditional LFP cathodes, while keeping manufacturing costs low. However, they have shorter life cycles and reduced charge-discharge capacity, making them more suitable for mid-range EVs or power tools. Despite this, China’s battery sector is accelerating investment in LMFP research and production.

Other major CAM players such as Hunan Yuneng and Ningbo Ronbay are also expanding LMFP production. Ronbay announced a dual LMFP and sodium-ion CAM plant in Xiantao, Hubei, while Yuneng is constructing a dedicated LMFP facility. These efforts position LMFP as a potential mainstream solution for future battery platforms balancing cost, safety, and range.

Strategic Role of State-Backed Metals Companies in CAM Expansion

The Shidai Ruixiang LMFP battery material plant highlights growing integration between state-backed metals enterprises and energy storage innovation. Baiyin Nonferrous brings decades of expertise in copper and zinc processing—critical metals for battery infrastructure—into the cathode materials space. The partnership reflects China's strategy to leverage existing industrial assets for clean tech scalability.

As battery chemistries diversify in response to cost and performance demands, China’s control over both upstream raw materials and downstream manufacturing provides a distinct competitive edge in the global energy transition economy.

The Metalnomist Commentary

The LMFP battery material plant in Gansu represents a strategic shift toward diversified CAM solutions for scalable EV deployment. As Chinese producers push LMFP into the mainstream, global automakers and battery buyers will need to weigh performance trade-offs against cost and availability.

Global Solid-State Electrolyte Shipments Surge as Semi-Solid Batteries Scale

Solid state electrolyte

Global solid-state electrolyte shipments are rising rapidly as semi-solid batteries move toward vehicle adoption and full solid-state battery commercialisation advances. Chinese research institute EV Tank said shipments reached 4,100t in 2025, more than doubling from a year earlier.

The increase marks an important early-stage signal for the battery materials industry. Electrolytes are one of the core materials that determine the energy density, safety and commercial viability of solid-state batteries.

Global solid-state electrolyte shipments are still small compared with conventional lithium-ion battery materials. However, the growth rate shows that downstream producers are beginning to prepare for larger semi-solid and solid-state battery output.

EV Tank expects global solid-state electrolyte shipments to reach 229,000t by 2030. That would imply a compound annual growth rate of more than 120% from 2025 to 2030, making electrolytes one of the fastest-growing segments in advanced battery materials.

The forecast reflects both technological progress and industrial positioning. Battery producers, automakers and materials companies are now investing ahead of expected demand from electric vehicles, energy storage systems and high-end electronics.

Semi-Solid Batteries Create the First Commercial Demand Base

Semi-solid batteries are likely to provide the first meaningful demand base for solid-state battery electrolytes. EV Tank expects these batteries to begin vehicle adoption from 2026, ahead of full solid-state battery mass production.

This timing matters because semi-solid batteries can act as a bridge technology. They offer improved safety and performance compared with conventional liquid-electrolyte batteries, while avoiding some of the most difficult technical barriers facing all-solid-state cells.

Semi-solid battery growth is already supporting electrolyte shipments. These products still use electrolyte systems that may differ from fully solid-state designs, but they create early commercial demand for sulphide, oxide, polymer, halide and composite electrolyte materials.

Full solid-state batteries are expected to enter small-scale mass production from 2027. That stage will likely remain limited at first because large-scale production still faces technical, cost and qualification challenges.

The market therefore looks likely to develop in phases. Semi-solid batteries will drive early electrolyte consumption, while full solid-state batteries will gradually expand once production processes, interfaces and reliability improve.

Electrolytes are central to this transition. They influence ion conductivity, safety, cycle life, energy density and compatibility with electrodes. Any weakness in electrolyte performance can limit the entire battery system.

This is why electrolyte development is becoming a strategic battleground. Battery makers cannot scale solid-state technology only by changing cell design. They need stable, high-quality electrolyte materials that can be produced consistently at industrial scale.

Capacity expansion is accelerating in response. EV Tank expects producers with annual electrolyte capacity at the thousand-tonne level to emerge within the next one to two years.

That would mark a shift from laboratory and pilot-scale material production toward early industrial supply. It would also create a more competitive market among electrolyte producers seeking qualification with battery manufacturers.

For battery materials suppliers, this creates a new growth category. Electrolytes may become a higher-value segment within the battery chain, especially if producers can meet strict requirements for purity, particle control, stability and conductivity.

For automakers, the key issue is reliability. Vehicle adoption requires materials that can perform under harsh cycling, temperature and safety conditions. This means electrolyte suppliers must pass long qualification cycles before volume demand can fully develop.

Technology Routes and Cost Cuts Shape the Scale-Up

Solid-state battery electrolyte technology remains diversified, especially in semi-solid batteries. Sulphide, oxide, polymer and halide routes are developing in parallel, while both single-electrolyte and composite-electrolyte solutions are being adopted.

This diversity shows that the industry has not yet settled on a single dominant material route. Different technologies offer different advantages in conductivity, stability, manufacturability, cost and safety.

Sulphide electrolytes currently dominate the roadmap for full solid-state batteries. They offer high ionic conductivity and are widely viewed as one of the most promising routes for high-performance battery cells.

However, sulphide systems also face challenges. They require careful handling, moisture control and interface engineering. These factors can raise production complexity and slow commercial scale-up.

Oxide electrolytes offer strong chemical and thermal stability, but they can face processing and interface resistance challenges. Polymer electrolytes offer manufacturing flexibility, but often struggle with conductivity at room temperature. Halide electrolytes are gaining interest because of their electrochemical stability and potential compatibility with high-voltage cathodes.

Composite electrolyte solutions may become increasingly important. By combining material systems, producers can try to balance conductivity, flexibility, stability and manufacturability.

Cost reduction is also becoming a major commercial driver. EV Tank said improvements in material quality and production processes lowered costs across several technology routes in 2025.

Sulphide electrolyte costs fell by more than 35% during the year. This is significant because cost remains one of the biggest obstacles to wider solid-state battery adoption.

Lower electrolyte costs improve the competitiveness of solid-state batteries against conventional lithium-ion technologies. They also make it easier for battery makers to test commercial deployment in premium vehicles, high-performance energy storage and other demanding applications.

Still, cost reduction alone will not guarantee rapid commercialisation. The industry must also solve interface stability, dendrite control, manufacturing yield, pressure management and long-term cycle reliability.

This explains why some major automakers remain cautious. BYD chief scientist Lian Yubo has said solid-state batteries still face core technical bottlenecks and that liquid and solid-state batteries should develop as complementary technologies.

Great Wall Motor also does not expect large-scale commercialisation of all-solid-state batteries in the near term. This caution suggests that the market may grow strongly, but unevenly.

The commercial pathway is therefore not a simple replacement of liquid batteries. Conventional lithium-ion batteries, semi-solid batteries and full solid-state batteries are likely to coexist for years, each serving different cost and performance segments.

This has important implications for materials demand. Solid-state growth could increase demand for lithium metal, high-nickel cathodes, sulphur-based materials, oxides, halides and specialty chemical precursors. But it may not immediately reduce demand for conventional electrolytes, separators or liquid battery components.

The forecast of 229,000t of global solid-state electrolyte shipments by 2030 points to a large materials opportunity. But the final market size will depend on how quickly automakers adopt semi-solid batteries and how successfully full solid-state batteries move from demonstration to reliable mass production.

For supply chains, qualification will be decisive. Battery makers will not buy electrolyte materials only because capacity exists. They will need stable quality, competitive pricing, proven performance and reliable long-term supply.

For policymakers, solid-state batteries are increasingly tied to advanced manufacturing and energy security. Countries that control electrolyte technology and battery production could gain strategic advantage in next-generation electric vehicles and storage systems.

For the metals market, the key point is that battery innovation changes materials demand before full commercial adoption arrives. Producers begin scaling supply years before the technology reaches mass-market vehicles, creating early demand signals and investment cycles.

Global solid-state electrolyte shipments therefore offer a useful indicator of where advanced battery manufacturing is moving. The numbers remain small, but the growth curve is steep enough to attract capital, competition and supply-chain restructuring.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Solid-state electrolyte growth shows that next-generation battery competition is moving upstream into materials engineering. The market will expand quickly, but full solid-state batteries still need technical proof before they can reshape EV and energy storage supply chains at scale.

PLS Lithium Phosphate Offtake Signals Shift Toward Midstream Battery Materials

PLS Lithium

PLS lithium phosphate offtake with China’s Ningbo Ronbay New Energy Technology marks a strategic step by the Australian lithium producer into higher-value battery materials. The agreement covers lithium phosphate from PLS’ midstream lithium refining demonstration plant.

PLS lithium phosphate offtake gives the company an early customer pathway as it tests whether spodumene can be converted into an intermediate chemical product with broader downstream appeal. The plant is scheduled to deliver first product in the third quarter of 2026.

PLS lithium phosphate offtake also links the company directly with Ronbay, one of the world’s largest lithium iron phosphate cathode material producers. Ronbay will provide technical support as PLS works to optimise product quality and specification.

The agreement’s price and volume details were not disclosed. But the pricing structure will broadly reference lithium chemical prices, with a proportional mechanism similar to spodumene pricing.

Lithium Phosphate Could Shorten the LFP Supply Chain

PLS’ demonstration plant is designed to produce more than 3,000 t/yr of lithium phosphate. It will consume about 27,000 t/yr of spodumene.

The company took full ownership of the plant from former joint-venture partner Calix in February. That gives PLS more control over the development route as it moves beyond conventional lithium concentrate sales.

The strategic importance lies in the possible use of lithium phosphate as a direct feedstock for LFP cathode production. Some LFP cathode producers are testing lithium phosphate instead of lithium carbonate because it could shorten processing steps and reduce total production costs.

This matters because LFP batteries are gaining share in electric vehicles and energy storage systems. Cathode producers want lower-cost, reliable and scalable lithium inputs that can support high-volume manufacturing.

If lithium phosphate can meet strict cathode specifications, PLS could access a new customer base. Instead of selling only to lithium hydroxide or carbonate converters, it could sell directly into cathode material supply chains.

That would move PLS closer to battery manufacturers and allow it to capture more margin inside the lithium value chain.

Quality Testing Will Determine Commercial Potential

The opportunity remains at an early stage. PLS has warned that lithium phosphate must meet demanding quality requirements before it can become a commercial cathode feedstock.

Battery material customers require tight control over impurities, consistency, particle characteristics and chemical performance. A product that works technically at small scale must still prove reliability across repeated production.

Ronbay’s role is therefore important. As a major LFP cathode producer, it can provide practical feedback on product suitability, processing performance and downstream qualification needs.

The agreement also reflects a broader trend in lithium markets. Producers are no longer focused only on mining and concentrate production. They are looking for midstream products that can reduce processing complexity and improve customer access.

For PLS, lithium phosphate could serve multiple markets. It may supply existing lithium chemical producers, while also opening a direct route to cathode manufacturers.

The demonstration plant will test whether that strategy can move from concept to commercial scale. If successful, it could give spodumene producers a new pathway into battery materials without fully entering carbonate or hydroxide production.

The Metalnomist Commentary

PLS’ lithium phosphate strategy is a clear attempt to move higher in the battery value chain without jumping directly into full chemical conversion. The key test will be whether cathode makers accept lithium phosphate as a reliable feedstock at scale, not just as a technical possibility.

China Graphite Spherical Graphite Output Falls as Natural Anode Demand Weakens

China Graphite Group

China Graphite spherical graphite output fell in 2025 as weak demand from the natural graphite anode material sector and existing inventories pressured production. The Hong Kong-listed natural graphite producer produced 2,300t of spherical graphite during the year, down 28% from 2024.

The decline reflects a broader shift in China’s anode materials market. Battery producers are still expanding overall anode consumption, but natural graphite is losing share to artificial graphite because of performance and price competition.

China Graphite spherical graphite output weakness shows that battery material growth does not benefit all feedstock routes equally. Natural graphite remains important, but artificial anode materials are gaining ground because they offer stronger cycling life and rate performance for many lithium-ion battery applications.

Spherical graphite sales also fell in 2025, although less sharply than production. China Graphite sold 5,815t of spherical graphite, down 6.9% from a year earlier, suggesting the company partly relied on existing inventory to meet demand.

Artificial Graphite Competition Pressures Natural Anode Feedstock

China’s anode material shipments rose strongly in 2025, reaching 2.9mn t, up 39% from a year earlier. However, natural graphite anode materials moved in the opposite direction.

Natural graphite anode shipments fell to 210,000t in 2025, down 19% from the previous year. Their share of China’s total anode material shipments dropped to 7.2%, showing that natural graphite is becoming a smaller part of the domestic anode mix.

This matters directly for spherical graphite producers. Spherical graphite is a key processed feedstock for natural graphite anode materials. When natural anode production slows, spherical graphite demand weakens quickly.

China Graphite attributed the decline to price competition and lower output of natural graphite anode materials. The company also pointed to the shorter cycling life and weaker rate performance of natural graphite compared with artificial anode materials.

Artificial graphite has become dominant in China’s battery supply chain because many battery makers prioritise consistency, fast charging performance and long cycle life. These factors are especially important for electric vehicles and energy storage systems.

The result is a margin squeeze for natural graphite processors. Even when total battery demand grows, spherical graphite producers must compete against artificial graphite suppliers that are more closely aligned with mainstream cell performance requirements.

Flake Graphite Output Rises Despite Spherical Graphite Weakness

China Graphite’s upstream natural graphite flake business performed better than its spherical graphite segment. The company produced 57,600t of natural graphite flake in 2025, up 10.8% from a year earlier.

The increase was supported by equipment upgrades, showing that China Graphite improved mining or processing efficiency even as downstream spherical graphite demand weakened. Flake graphite sales also edged higher by 1.3% to 46,020t.

This creates a mixed operating picture. Upstream flake output increased, but downstream spherical graphite production fell sharply. The gap suggests that the company may need to manage feedstock allocation carefully if natural anode demand remains weak.

Natural graphite still has strategic value. It can support lower-cost anode production and remains important for battery supply-chain diversification. However, its competitiveness depends on purification, coating, consistency, performance and customer qualification.

For China Graphite, the next challenge is not only producing more flake graphite. It must defend its position in higher-value downstream graphite products as the anode market shifts toward artificial materials and more demanding battery specifications.

The company’s results also highlight a wider issue for natural graphite markets. Supply growth alone is not enough. Producers need downstream demand from qualified anode makers, battery customers and applications where natural graphite retains a cost or performance advantage.

The Metalnomist Commentary

China Graphite’s results show that battery demand growth is becoming more selective across the graphite value chain. Natural graphite suppliers must improve processing quality and downstream integration if they want to compete against artificial graphite in high-performance batteries.

DRC Cobalt Stockpile Plan Adds New Uncertainty to Export Quota System

DRC Cobalt

DRC cobalt stockpile plans could add another layer of uncertainty to a market already adjusting to the country’s export quota system. The Democratic Republic of Congo plans to create a state-controlled strategic reserve for cobalt, coltan and germanium, with cobalt expected to be the main focus because of its scale and strategic role.

The DRC cobalt stockpile will be managed by state-controlled mining company Gecamines and regulator Arecoms. The government said the reserve is intended to stabilise markets and strengthen national control over key minerals.

The DRC cobalt stockpile plan comes as the country tries to raise cobalt hydroxide exports toward a 7,500 t/month quota. That quota was introduced in October after an eight-month export ban, but exports have so far recovered only gradually.

This creates a more complicated operating environment for producers, traders and battery materials buyers. Cobalt units may now face two competing channels: export clearance under the quota system or diversion into state-controlled storage.

Export Quota Ramp-Up Remains Slow and Unclear

The DRC is trying to increase cobalt exports after months of disruption, but the quota system is still moving slowly. Around 7,000t of cobalt-contained material was reportedly cleared for export last month, although it remains unclear whether those volumes have crossed the border.

January exports were much lower. Around 1,000t of cobalt contained in hydroxide was exported during the month, far below the 7,500 t/month quota level.

An estimated 3,000t of cobalt-contained material also remains held inside the country awaiting decisions on allocation. This shows that administrative approval, quota allocation and physical logistics remain key constraints.

The new stockpile could add friction to this system. Producers may need to determine which material should be submitted for export clearance and which material may be directed into reserve storage.

This matters because cobalt hydroxide supply from the DRC is critical for global battery and superalloy supply chains. The country remains the dominant source of cobalt units for refiners, precursor makers, cathode producers and high-performance alloy manufacturers.

Any delay in DRC cobalt exports can affect feedstock availability outside the country. It can also influence cobalt hydroxide payables, refined cobalt prices and procurement strategies for downstream users.

The DRC government’s objective is clear. It wants more control over strategic minerals and greater influence over market flows. But the transition from export ban to quota system and now strategic stockpile introduces uncertainty for commercial counterparties.

For producers, the main issue is predictability. Mine operators and processors need to know how much material can be exported, how quickly clearances will be issued and whether stockpile obligations will reduce available sales volumes.

For traders, the uncertainty affects logistics and financing. Material held inside the country can create delays in shipping, documentation, payment cycles and customer delivery schedules.

For buyers, the risk is supply disruption. Cobalt consumers may need to hold larger inventories or diversify supply where possible, although alternative large-scale sources remain limited.

Stockpile Mechanics Could Decide Market Impact

The DRC government has not yet clarified how the strategic reserve will operate. The decree does not explain how stockpiled cobalt will be purchased, paid for or released back into the market.

This lack of detail is the most important issue for market participants. A strategic reserve can stabilise supply if it is transparent and predictable. It can also disrupt trade if it removes material from the market without clear pricing, payment and release rules.

Producers do not yet know whether cobalt earmarked for the reserve will remain on their balance sheets or be effectively requisitioned by the state. This distinction matters for accounting, working capital and sales planning.

There is also no clear communication on pricing. If material is diverted into the stockpile, producers need to know whether payment will be based on market prices, official formulas or negotiated values.

Payment timing is equally important. Delayed payment for stockpiled cobalt could strain cash flow, especially for producers already managing export restrictions and logistics delays.

The planned reserve also includes coltan and germanium. These materials have strategic value in electronics, defence, semiconductors and critical minerals supply chains. However, cobalt will dominate attention because of its larger volumes and direct link to battery supply.

The policy reflects a wider trend among resource-rich countries. Governments are seeking more control over minerals that have strategic value in energy transition, defence and advanced manufacturing supply chains.

For the DRC, cobalt stockpiling could provide market leverage. It could allow the government to manage supply release, support prices or protect domestic interests during periods of oversupply.

However, too much uncertainty could have the opposite effect. If producers and buyers cannot understand how the reserve works, they may price in additional risk or delay transactions.

The stockpile may also complicate the DRC’s attempt to normalise exports after the ban. Export quotas already require allocation decisions. Adding reserve obligations could slow the recovery unless the government clearly separates stockpile volumes from commercial export flows.

For the global cobalt market, the key question is whether the reserve removes significant material from export availability. If it does, cobalt supply outside the DRC could tighten even while official quota volumes suggest exports should rise.

The Metalnomist Commentary

The DRC cobalt stockpile plan shows that cobalt policy is shifting from export control to active state management. The strategy may increase national leverage, but without clear rules on pricing, ownership and release timing, it risks adding more uncertainty to an already fragile cobalt supply chain.

Dongdao Anode Production Expansion Adds More Capacity to China’s Battery Materials Chain

Dongdao Anode Production

Dongdao anode production expansion in Guangdong province shows that China continues to build scale across graphite and next-generation battery materials. Guangdong Dongdao New Material has started construction of two anode processing lines and one silicon-carbon anode line in Zhanjiang.

The two new processing lines will each have 10,000 t/yr of capacity. One line will produce synthetic graphite anode materials, while the other will produce natural graphite anode materials. The silicon-carbon anode line will have 500 t/yr of capacity, giving Dongdao a foothold in higher-performance battery material development.

Dongdao anode production growth matters because anode materials remain a core part of the lithium-ion battery value chain. China already dominates graphite processing, and the company’s latest investment reinforces the country’s ability to expand both conventional and advanced anode supply.

Graphite Anode Capacity Continues to Scale in China

Dongdao already operates 100,000 t/yr of natural graphite anode capacity and 100,000 t/yr of synthetic anode capacity. The new Zhanjiang lines will add more processing flexibility across both major graphite anode routes.

The company is also building much larger synthetic anode projects elsewhere in China. These include 300,000 t/yr of capacity in Leizhou, Guangdong, and 150,000 t/yr in Yilong, Guizhou. This shows that synthetic graphite remains a major investment focus as battery producers seek consistent performance, controlled quality, and scalable supply.

Dongdao’s subsidiary, Zhanjiang Juxin New Energy, also plans to build a 20,000 t/yr spherical graphite facility in Zhanjiang. A commissioning date has not yet been set, but the project would add another processing step that supports natural graphite use in battery anodes.

Silicon-Carbon Line Signals Next-Generation Battery Focus

The planned 500 t/yr silicon-carbon anode line is smaller than the graphite lines, but it carries strategic importance. Silicon-carbon anodes can improve battery energy density and performance, although commercial scaling remains more technically demanding than conventional graphite.

Dongdao’s decision to build this line alongside graphite processing capacity suggests a dual strategy. The company is expanding mainstream anode capacity while preparing for future demand from higher-performance battery chemistries.

All three Zhanjiang lines are scheduled to start operations in December 2027. By then, battery supply chains may be more focused on cost reduction, fast charging, energy density, and material efficiency. Producers with both graphite scale and silicon-carbon development capacity could be better positioned for that transition.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Dongdao’s expansion shows that China is not slowing its grip on the anode materials chain. The strategic issue for global battery supply chains is no longer only graphite availability, but who controls processing scale, qualification, and next-generation material development.

China Anode Material Production Cuts Deepen as Putailai Slows Output

China Anode Material

China anode material production cuts intensified in 2024 as Shanghai Putailai New Energy reduced both output and sales due to oversupply and price pressure. The firm’s production dropped 18% to 136,707 tonnes, while sales declined 15% to 132,311 tonnes compared to 2023. The decline underscores the challenges faced by China’s battery material producers amid a saturated market.

Delays and Terminations Amid Market Imbalance

Putailai postponed the launch of its Sichuan plant’s first phase due to weak anode prices and funding constraints. Originally slated for December 2024, the 100,000 t/yr capacity line began operation in February. The second phase, also with 100,000 t/yr capacity, is now expected to come online by late 2026. Meanwhile, the company canceled its planned Swedish plant after failing to secure government approval.

Oversupply Challenges China’s Battery Sector

Despite strong EV sector growth, China’s anode material production cuts highlight growing pains in the supply chain. In 2024, China’s production capacity reached 3.5mn t/yr, but only 2.12mn tonnes were produced. Domestic demand stood at 1.83mn tonnes, according to ICC Sino, leaving a large volume of underutilized capacity.

The Metalnomist Commentary

China anode material production cuts reflect deeper structural issues in the battery materials market. Without pricing recovery or export diversification, producers like Putailai may face further consolidation or capacity rationalization.

Automotive Raw Material Supply Chains Hit Localisation Limits

Automotive

Automotive raw material supply chains are becoming the main constraint on electric vehicle localisation as carmakers seek more control over strategic components. Automakers want regional supply chains, but battery metals, rare earths and processed inputs still depend on global mining and refining networks.

Automotive raw material supply chains have shifted from pure efficiency toward resilience, security and geopolitical risk management. The industry is no longer trying only to minimise cost. It is trying to protect production from export controls, licensing delays, trade restrictions and raw material shortages.

Automotive raw material supply chains therefore cannot be fully localised by assembling batteries, motors or electronics closer to vehicle plants. The deeper constraint sits upstream, where lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese and rare earth materials remain tied to global extraction and processing capacity.

The result is a more selective supply-chain model. Automakers will regionalise the components they can control, while still relying on global raw materials for the minerals and refined products they cannot replace quickly.

EV Localisation Still Depends on Global Critical Minerals

Jaguar Land Rover has decided to control three critical parts of electric propulsion: battery assembly, electric drive units and energy management systems. This gives the company more control over the final systems that define EV performance.

However, vertical integration has limits. Even if an automaker controls battery assembly or electric drive units, it may not control the lithium chemicals, nickel sulphate, cobalt, manganese, graphite or rare earth magnets inside those systems.

Permanent magnet motors remain one of the clearest pressure points. Electric drive units depend on rare earth materials that are still heavily exposed to Chinese processing, magnet production and export licensing.

Obtaining magnet raw materials from China has become more difficult from a licensing perspective. This shows how export controls can affect vehicle production even when the final assembly line is located in Europe or the US.

Battery supply chains face the same structural problem. Automakers can localise pack assembly, module production and software integration, but raw material exposure remains global.

Lithium, nickel, cobalt and manganese supply depends on mine locations, refining capacity, chemical conversion and government policy. These inputs cannot be made local simply by building a battery plant near an auto factory.

This changes the meaning of automotive localisation. The next phase will be less about full independence and more about reducing exposure to single-country bottlenecks.

Recycling and Traceability Become Strategic Tools

Critical minerals recycling is becoming a strategic issue for automakers, not only an environmental goal. Black mass recovery can eventually return lithium, nickel, cobalt, copper and other materials into the supply chain.

Recycling can reduce raw material exposure over time. But it depends on enough end-of-life batteries, reliable collection systems, safe transport, processing capacity and customer acceptance of recovered materials.

The UK’s critical minerals strategy reflects this reality. Domestic production, partner-country supply agreements and recycling can improve resilience, but full self-sufficiency is not realistic.

That point matters for manufacturers. Supply security will depend on diversified sourcing, trusted partners, recycling loops and traceable material flows rather than a complete break from global markets.

The shift will also affect pricing. Materials may increasingly carry value based on origin, regulatory acceptability, sustainability documentation and licensing risk.

A battery metal or rare earth input from a secure and traceable source may command a premium over lower-cost material with higher geopolitical or compliance risk.

For automakers, the strategic challenge is clear. They must control more of the EV system while accepting that critical mineral supply will remain globally contested.

For metals suppliers, the opportunity is also clear. Producers that can offer traceable, compliant and secure supply will become more valuable to automotive customers than suppliers competing only on price.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Automakers are learning that EV localisation stops where raw material dependence begins. The winners in automotive supply security will be those that connect local manufacturing with diversified minerals, recycling capacity and credible traceability.

Livium LGES battery recycling deal extends Australia’s circular battery value chain

Livium

The Livium LGES battery recycling deal is expanding Australia’s role in the circular battery economy and black mass supply. Under the renewed Livium LGES battery recycling deal, Livium will process both recalled and end-of-life residential batteries. As a result, the Livium LGES battery recycling deal now runs to 2029 and anchors new growth in Australian black mass output.

Black mass volumes rise as Livium expands feedstock

Livium will continue processing LG Energy Solution batteries recalled in Australia and now add end-of-life units from local users. This expanded access to feedstock should increase black mass volumes and stabilise plant utilisation over the medium term.

The recycler sold over 350t of black mass in the 2024-25 financial year to 30 June. Therefore, management expects higher sales in 2025-26 as the Livium LGES battery recycling deal ramps up. Livium channels this black mass to processing partners such as South Korea’s SungEel Hitech. These partners convert black mass into battery chemicals, which return to global cathode and cell producers.

Meanwhile, LGES is building a 20,000 t/yr battery recycling plant in France with Derichebourg. That European joint venture will also produce and process black mass from end-of-life batteries from 2027. Together, these initiatives show how LGES is building regional recycling hubs to secure critical materials.

Livium LGES battery recycling deal supports lithium recovery innovation

The Livium LGES battery recycling deal also complements Livium’s work on recovering lithium from spodumene waste. Livium signed an agreement with Australian producer Mineral Resources in January to optimise this extraction technology. As a result, the partners formed a joint venture in August to commercialise the process at scale.

This positions Livium not only as a black mass producer but also as a technology player in lithium recovery. For LGES, the partnership reduces long-term exposure to mined feedstock volatility and environmental scrutiny. It also aligns with automakers’ and battery producers’ ESG targets on recycling and resource efficiency.

In strategic terms, expanding the Livium LGES battery recycling deal strengthens regional supply security for nickel, cobalt and lithium units locked in black mass. It also supports Australia’s ambition to move up the value chain from raw material supplier to processing and technology hub.

The Metalnomist Commentary

This partnership illustrates how structured offtake agreements can accelerate the build-out of regional battery recycling ecosystems. For metals markets, increasing black mass flows from deals like this will gradually reshape demand for primary material and reward recyclers with robust technology and downstream access.

Indonesia Nickel Royalty Changes Delayed as Jakarta Balances State Revenue and Producer Costs

Indonesia Nickel

Indonesia nickel royalty changes have been delayed as the government reviews planned royalty increases and export taxes for nickel products. Jakarta is trying to balance higher state revenue with the cost pressure already facing miners, smelters and battery-material producers.

Indonesia nickel royalty changes were initially expected to take effect in June. But the energy and mineral resources ministry will now reassess the policy after industry consultations.

Indonesia nickel royalty changes are part of a wider policy reset covering nickel, copper, tin, gold, silver and other minerals. The government wants a formula that captures more value for the state without damaging investment in downstream processing.

The delay also applies to planned export duties on nickel products. Indonesia will continue finalising the pricing mechanism for the duty, but implementation has been pushed back.

Downstreaming Policy Meets Rising Cost Pressure

Indonesia’s nickel export duty plan is tied to its downstreaming strategy. The policy aims to push mining and metals companies to build more domestic value-added capacity instead of exporting lower-value materials.

The country has already become the world’s most important nickel processing hub. However, officials say the sector has developed only about 40% of its potential, leaving room for more investment in battery materials, stainless steel and other downstream products.

The royalty delay shows that Indonesia understands the risk of overloading producers with too many cost increases at once. Miners and processors are already dealing with tighter RKAB quotas, higher ore costs and rising input risks.

Indonesia updated its nickel ore pricing formula on 15 April. The new mechanism includes cobalt, iron and chromium in ore valuation, increasing raw material costs for downstream users.

This change is especially important for high-pressure acid leach projects, which consume limonite ore and produce mixed hydroxide precipitate for battery supply chains. Higher ore prices can raise costs for nickel intermediates and reduce margins.

Sulphur supply risk is another pressure point. Middle East disruption has raised concerns over sulphur availability, a key input for nickel processing. This has supported nickel prices but also increased uncertainty for producers.

Nickel Prices Supported by Policy and Supply Risk

Indonesia’s recent policy shifts have generally supported nickel prices. LME nickel rose to around $19,450/t on 6 May from $18,075/t on 15 April, supported by the revised ore pricing formula, sulphur supply concerns and lower 2026 RKAB quota expectations.

The delayed royalty and export tax changes may ease immediate producer pressure. But they do not reverse the broader direction of Indonesian policy.

Jakarta still wants to capture more value from its mineral resources. It also wants companies to keep investing in domestic processing and a more complete nickel supply chain.

For the nickel market, this creates a more policy-sensitive pricing environment. Ore quotas, benchmark formulas, export taxes, royalties and downstream investment rules can all influence costs and trade flows.

The delay gives producers time, but not certainty. Companies will still need to plan for higher government take, stricter ore valuation and stronger pressure to invest in domestic value-added products.

Indonesia’s nickel strategy is therefore entering a more complex phase. The country wants to remain the dominant global nickel hub, but it must avoid weakening the economics that attracted downstream investment in the first place.

The Metalnomist Commentary

Indonesia’s delay is not a retreat from resource nationalism; it is a recalibration. Jakarta wants more value from nickel, but it also knows that excessive cost pressure could slow the downstreaming model that made Indonesia central to global battery and stainless steel supply.

XTC GEM CAM feedstock deal tightens China’s battery materials supply chain

XTC

XTC GEM CAM feedstock deal marks a major step in securing China’s high-end battery materials supply. Under the XTC GEM CAM feedstock deal, XTC New Energy will lock in large volumes of cobalt, nickel and lithium inputs. This XTC GEM CAM feedstock deal supports long-term cathode active material output for NCM, LCO and LFP product lines. As a result, Chinese battery makers gain greater visibility on costs and availability during a volatile raw material cycle.

Long-term CAM feedstock deal anchors XTC’s growth strategy

XTC New Energy agreed to purchase 150,000 t/yr of CAM feedstock from GEM between 2026 and 2028. The package covers cobalt chloride, nickel sulfate, cobalt tetroxide, NCM precursor and lithium salts for large-scale cathode production. This diversified basket reduces single-material risk and helps XTC balance different chemistries across consumer and power batteries. The deal also deepens an existing partnership, signalling confidence in GEM’s ability to deliver consistent quality volumes. Consequently, both companies move closer to a vertically aligned, closed-loop battery materials ecosystem.

XTC has rapidly grown sales of lithium cobalt oxide on the back of device replacement cycles and AI-enabled electronics. Government subsidies that push consumers to upgrade phones and tablets are boosting high-end cobalt-rich cathode demand. Meanwhile, combined sales of NCM and LFP cathodes also rose, reflecting broader growth across energy storage and EV platforms. By locking in feedstock now, XTC can support more aggressive volume and product planning with key OEMs.

China CAM feedstock integration deepens links with global battery OEMs

The agreement reinforces China’s position at the centre of the global CAM and precursor value chain. GEM will channel critical precursors to XTC, which already supplies ATL, Samsung SDI, Murata, LG Chem and BYD. These relationships span mid to high-end consumer devices and extend into power lithium battery producers like CALB and CATL. Therefore, the enhanced feedstock pipeline will indirectly underpin cell production for phones, tablets, EVs and stationary storage worldwide.

Tighter integration between feedstock suppliers and cathode producers can also stabilise pricing and contract structures. Long-term supply deals encourage joint planning on capacity, quality and sustainability metrics, important for global OEM qualification. At the same time, dependence on Chinese CAM feedstock raises questions for western policymakers about diversification and supply security. However, until alternative precursor hubs reach scale, China’s integrated CAM ecosystem will remain a critical anchor for lithium-ion supply chains.

The Metalnomist Commentary

This agreement shows how Chinese CAM producers and recyclers are quietly locking in the next wave of battery growth. As XTC and GEM align on volumes and chemistries, their joint leverage over cobalt, nickel and lithium flows will rise. For non-Chinese OEMs, the deal underscores the urgency of building competitive precursor and CAM capacity outside China.