Dave Borlace cuts through the relentless hype cycle surrounding electric vehicle batteries with a rare, grounded skepticism that is desperately needed in 2025. While headlines promise 800-mile ranges and revolutionary breakthroughs, Borlace argues that the industry is stuck in a "valley of death" where lab success fails to translate to mass production. He doesn't just list companies; he dissects the specific manufacturing hurdles that have kept solid-state batteries in the prototype phase for nearly a decade.
The Promise vs. The Reality
Borlace opens by acknowledging the fatigue of constant overpromising. He notes that back in 2018, the industry predicted commercial viability by 2020, a timeline that has since been pushed back repeatedly. "Given the fact that since then we've been fed an almost weekly stream of pronouncements from battery makers and auto manufacturers all over the world that their particular solid state technology will be in a real world production vehicle in just a few months time," he observes, "we could I think be forgiven for being a little bit disappointed and disillusioned."
This framing is effective because it validates the reader's skepticism rather than dismissing it. The core of his argument rests on the distinction between theoretical energy density and the brutal economics of scaling. He explains that while solid-state batteries replace flammable liquid electrolytes with safer, space-saving solids, the transition from lab to gigawatt production is proving to be a massive leap. "The annoying concept known as the valley of death has proven to be a far wider leap than most developers had hoped for," Borlace writes. "Manufacturing yield is low, costs are high, and scaling from lab to gigawatt production has proven to be very difficult."
Critics might argue that this focus on current manufacturing bottlenecks ignores the rapid pace of iterative improvement in other tech sectors, but Borlace's data on yield rates suggests this is a fundamental materials science challenge, not just a process optimization one.
The annoying concept known as the valley of death has proven to be a far wider leap than most developers had hoped for.
The Global Sprint
Despite the delays, Borlace highlights that the race is far from over. He details how major players like Volkswagen, Toyota, and Chinese giants are pouring resources into the sector. Volkswagen, for instance, is hedging its bets by partnering with US firm QuantumCape and Chinese firm Gan. Borlace points out that QuantumCape has finally moved beyond press releases, noting that "in Q3 of 2025, the company announced shipments of B1 samples of their so-called Qse5 cell."
He is careful to distinguish between genuine progress and marketing fluff. While QuantumCape has a reputation for overpromising, Borlace notes their new "Cobra" manufacturing process is claimed to be 25 times more efficient, and they are testing cells in real-world vehicles like the Ducati electric motorcycle. However, he remains cautious about the timeline, observing that analysts are now projecting a commercially viable product by 2027, a date that seems to be the new universal deadline.
The coverage of Chinese manufacturers is particularly dense. Borlace examines Gan's claim of a 1,000-mile range battery with a roadmap for mass production by 2030, and CATL's trial production of cells with 500 watt-hours per kilogram. Yet, he injects necessary context: "The company's actually been beavering away on this since 2016... and they themselves caution that despite the 500 watt-hour per kilogram headline number, charging speed, cycle life, cost, yield, and manufacturing scale still remain substantial challenges."
This balance between reporting the headline numbers and highlighting the company's own caveats is the piece's greatest strength. It prevents the reader from getting swept up in the "fevered reporting" that often accompanies Chinese tech announcements.
The Semi-Solid State Loophole
Perhaps the most insightful section of Borlace's commentary is his exposure of the "semi-solid state" workaround. Many automakers, including Nio, are touting long-range vehicles that use a hybrid technology. Borlace explains that these batteries still contain a gel to fill microscopic gaps between solid materials, a compromise that adds cost and complexity. "Adding a gel back into the mix adds cost and complexity in production," he writes, noting that it requires dual-phase manufacturing and special handling equipment. "In other words, many of the things that proper solid state battery developers are trying to avoid."
He argues that while these semi-solid solutions have a place as a stop-gap, they are not the holy grail. "It may well have its place for now, but when the all solid state batteries do eventually arrive, they will most likely spell the end for this stop gap configuration," he concludes. This distinction is crucial for investors and consumers who might otherwise mistake a semi-solid prototype for a fully realized solid-state revolution.
Bottom Line
Dave Borlace's analysis succeeds because it refuses to treat solid-state batteries as a solved problem, instead framing them as a complex engineering challenge where the timeline is dictated by manufacturing physics, not just chemistry. The strongest part of his argument is the relentless focus on the "valley of death" between lab prototypes and gigafactories, a reality often glossed over in press releases. His biggest vulnerability is the sheer number of variables; with so many companies claiming 2027 as the breakthrough year, the risk of another collective delay remains high, but his skepticism provides a necessary anchor for anyone navigating this noisy landscape.