Cost of Lithium-ion Batteries One Major Reason Why RAN Won't Adopt Them

A friend, with a wide knowledge of submarine battery usage rates and pricing, advised in late September 2016:

JAPANESE CONTEXT

Japan is adopting new technology Lithium-ion Batteries (LIBs) for the two Soryu Mark 2 submarines (27SS and 28SS)(see SORYU TABLE  below)  as well as the new Japanese class submarines (29SS onwards).

LIBs represent a major future submarine technology, but Japan may be the only (or at least the first) country that is fully moving to LIBs for newly commissioned submarines (ie. 27SS from 2020 onwards). The increased cost of LIBs appears to be one of the major reasons other navies are not shifting to LIBs.

The budgets for future Japanese submarines (including 27SS, 28SS and 29SS) suggests that LIBs are AUS$130 million (for one 6 year replacement cycle) more expensive than the existing LABs per Soryu submarine.

According to cost calculations (by the Japanese government) of mass produced LIBs, the equipment cost accounts for around 15% of total cost. So the cost of a battery modules consisting of 10 LIBs for the Soryu Mark 2s (27SS/28SS) is estimated as 1.5 million yen. This is significantly less than the actual cost of around 20 million yen and suggests that in very low volume production of submarine LIBs, the equipment cost accounts for more than 90% of total cost.

AUSTRALIAN CONTEXT

In constrast the Royal Australian Navy’s (RAN’s) appears to have rejected LIBs in favour of sticking with current Lead-acid Battery (LAB) technology. 

When increased LIBs/submarine costs are considered over Australian 12 Shortfin submarines  operating for 30 years, each with twice the quantity of LIBs than Soryus, and considering LIBs need replacing every 6 years, then you get the following estimate:

(+AUS$130 million per sub) x 12 subs x 2 (amount of LIBs per sub) x 5 (replacements) = AUS$15.6 billion higher than if the Shortfins used LABs.

Putting costs in context - assume DCNS proposed the LAB cost for the whole Shortfin program, over the Shortfin's 30 year lives, would total AUS$50 billion. Then assume the RAN used LIBs instead - then Australia would be pay the extra AUS$15.6 billion, hence totalling AUS$65.6 billion just for LIBs over the operating life of the Shortfins. Quite large figures.

But as the LIBs cost reduces with increases in production of LIBs, the adoption of a Japanese submarine by the RAN woud have considerably reduced price of LIBs (e.g. from 20 to 12 million yen per unit battery module).

SORYU TABLE (with earlier Oyashios) as at October 21, 2016

SS No.	Build No Name	Pennant No.	MoF approved amount ¥ Billions & FY	LABs, LIBs, AIP	Laid Down	Laun -ched	Commi-ssioned	Built By
5SS Oyashio	8105 Oyashio	SS-590/ TS3608	¥52.2B FY1993	LABs only	Jan 1994	Oct 1996	Mar 1998	KHI
6SS-15SS Oyashios 10 subs	8106 -8115 various	SS-591-600	¥52.2B per sub FY1994-FY2003	LABs only	Feb 1994		Mar 2008	MHI & KHI
16SS Soryu Mk 1	8116 Sōryū	SS-501	¥60B FY2004	LABs + AIP	Mar 2005	Dec 2007	Mar 2009	MHI
17SS	8117 Unryū	SS-502	¥58.7B FY2005	LABs + AIP	Mar 2006	Oct 2008	Mar 2010	KHI
18SS	8118 Hakuryū	SS-503	¥56.2 FY2006	LABs + AIP	Feb 2007	Oct 2009	Mar 2011	MHI
19SS	8119 Kenryū	SS-504	¥53B FY2007	LABs + AIP	Mar 2008	Nov 2010	Mar 2012	KHI
20SS	8120 Zuiryū	SS-505	¥51B FY2008	LABs + AIP	Mar 2009	Oct 2011	Mar 2013	MHI
No 21SS			No 21SS built
22SS	8121 Kokuryū	SS-506	¥52.8B FY2010	LABs + AIP	Jan 2011	Oct 2013	Mar 2015	KHI
23SS	8122 Jinryu	SS-507	¥54.6B FY2011	LABs + AIP	Feb 2012	Oct 2014	7 Mar 2016	MHI
24SS	8123 Sekiryū	SS-508	¥54.7B FY2012	LABs + AIP	Mar 2013	2 Nov 2015	Mar? 2017	KHI
25SS	8124 Seiyū	SS-509	¥53.1B FY2013	LABs + AIP	22 Oct 2013	13 Oct 2016	Mar? 2018	MHI
26SS	8125	SS-510	¥51.7B FY2014	LABs + AIP	2014	?	Mar 2019?	KHI
27SS First Soryu Mk 2	8126	SS-511	¥64.3B FY2015	LIBs only	2015	2017?	Mar 2020?	MHI
28SS  Second Soryu Mark 2	8127	SS-512	¥63.6B FY2016	LIBs only	2016?	2018?	Mar 2021?	KHI
29SS First of New Class	?	?	¥76B FY2018	LIBs only	?	?	2023?	MHI?

Table courtesy of information provided to Submarine Matters. LABs = lead-acid batteries,  AIP = air independent propulsion, LIBs = lithium-ion batteries. ¥***B = Billion Yen.

CONCLUSIONS

So, not only do LIBs present a new technology, with the RAN reluctant to take increased project and operating risks adopting them, but the substantial extra costs of LIBs are a reason the RAN appears to be rejecting the LIB option.

Put against the increased risks and cost of LIBs is the higher fully submerged range and higher fully submerged speed performance they provide, compared to LABs alone. See some related comparitive figures for Collins LABs vs TKMS Type 212A LABS+AIP vs Soryu LIBs. IF a future Australian submarine avoided imminent destruction because it had LIBs then the risks and costs of having LIBs might turn out to be worth it.

Pete  - Some translation and the Conclusions.

Friend – Most translation, all the calculations, data and views.