>>. I don't know what you are smoking but it's some good shit.<<

sounds like something I hear from very misguided wumaos all the time. It's fairly apparent that you know nothing about the industry or the "shipping" numbers, much less the chemistries. You've been drinking too much CCP Kool-aid.

>> NCM, NCMA, LFP, sure chemistries are cool to talk about but all that actually matters is batteries that are actually shipping. <<

Wrong, NCM/NCA, not LFP, are the most popular/manufactured/shipped with 70% of the global EV market share. The majority of EVs in China for instance are running on NCM -- only last year China achieved almost 50/50 between NCM and LFP on new EVs. Most LDVs outside China are also NCM/NCA. Even in ESS market, NCM still dominates today; though LFP will take over since LFP is suitable for stationary, low-density use cases. I also already commented earlier that the majority of CATL's output is still NCM, which is based on LG Chem tech, not LFP.

>> LG Chem is claiming they can catch up, claiming they can start building LFP by 2026. CATL didn't develop LFP but they deve... Right now all I see is the Koreans claiming they can make up lost ground, <<

Wrong. There is nothing to catch up -- LG Chem has no plan to use LFPs for EVs; nor did they ever have any "ground" in LFPs. They are not really interested in doing LFPs because of their low margin (and absurd LFP licensing fees; though they are now all, but expired). The Japanese/Koreans stayed away from LFP b/c of their low density and weight which in turn makes it unsuitable beyond stationary energy storage. LFP is far easier to manufacturer than NCM/A and subsequently cheaper, which is the main market driver for it, but the cost advantage of LFP isn't necessarily true anymore either: LFP is 20%-30% cheaper per Wh/kg compared to much older, least densest NCM532, but not against the recent high-nickel (811), most commonly used today on new EVs, or ultra-nickel (955) batteries, the emerging de facto industry standard; notwithstanding recent wild fluation in lithium/nickel price. LFP today is largely still limited to entry-level, non-performant, low-range EVs. Tesla uses NCMs from LG Chem for high-end models even in China and LFPs from CATL for lower, entry-level EVs.

>> ... by 2026+ and somehow then they will then become the dominant producers. ... <<

No worries, it's widely expected that the Korean trio would dominate 70% of the North American market. Biden's IRA and the EU's CRMA no longer promises exclusive subsidies or ban against Japanese or South Koreans competition. LG Chem also announced last month that they are going to start enforcing patent rights on high-nickle NCM batteriese against Chinese battery makers (which is one of the main reasons why China has been aggressively moving towards LFP in and outside China).

>> ... They do this based on projections of CATL not growing at all which makes no fucking sense given they are entirely supply constrained right now ...<<

Biden's IRA also takes a few steps further limits subsides on EVs made in China or EVs with batteries/material sourced from China. As of last week, even Tesla's entry-level EVs with Chinese LFP sold in the US are now partially excluded from receivign EV credits -- which explains why Tesla is now instead offering them in Canada. You should be familliar with this, since this is exactly China used to do to promote their own domestic makers CATL/BYD over foreign ones.

As for supply-constraint, it seems you are also quite slow to realize that battery constraints has easied substantially since the end of China's EV subsidies on Jan 1, 2023. The price of Lithium has more than halved since, for instance, and some Chinese processors are idling their factories to prevent further price drop (yes, they are still falling like a rock).

The only other bottleneck in EV battery supply-chain is the new "No China" constraints for battery and raw materials under Biden's new policies -- which in turns require severing ties with Chinese material suppliers, or pulling factories out of China -- will need at leat a year or two to build new domestic supply-chain in the US or its allies.

>> Protectionism doesn't and can't explain the sheer capacity of CATL/BYD. <<

Sure, it does. You combine that with blatant IP theft, forced tech transfer, and generous subsidies, it works out. The inefficiencies born by China's protectionism are ameliorated by huge subsides that accounts for as much as 40% of the purchase cost in some Chinese EV models. Ditto, watch the US EV supply-chain and market develop under Biden's IRA over next couple of years.