The substrate of composite collectors has a direct impact on battery performance. In terms of performance, PP is better than PET; in terms of cost, PET has the advantage; from a scale perspective, PP is more challenging than PET. However, downstream customers (battery factories) will make choices based on factors such as comprehensive performance, cost, scalability, and application scenarios. The development of the composite collector industry is optimistic, and we recommend PP substrate companies Dongjiu Technology and Copper Mountain Electronics, and suggest paying attention to Guofeng New Materials.

In terms of performance: different substrate materials have a direct impact on battery performance. PP (polypropylene) is more conducive to high-temperature cycling. The substrate materials currently used in composite collectors include PET/PP/PI, among which PET is a polar material with a high melting point and good toughness, while PP is a non-polar material with a lower melting point and toughness compared to PET, which makes it prone to defects during magnetron sputtering and has higher equipment requirements. However, its acid resistance is good and it has excellent performance in the battery electrolyte, which is conducive to battery high-temperature performance.

In terms of demand: performance and cost are compared comprehensively. At present, composite collectors based on PET substrates can achieve good battery performance through adjustments to the electrolyte and other materials, but it may cause potential cost increases and material changes. Most manufacturers' PP substrate collectors are still in the trial stage. Once successfully developed and recognized by battery factories, they will need to consider comprehensive performance, cost, scalability, application scenarios, and other factors before deciding on mass production. Due to its good high-temperature cycling performance, PP has obvious advantages in application scenarios that require high-temperature use, especially in the field of power batteries, while PET has better adaptability in energy storage applications.

In terms of supply: PET has achieved large-scale production, while PP has a smaller volume and a longer production cycle. PET has a wide range of downstream applications, and there are many domestic production companies that have achieved large-scale production. PP is mainly used in thin film capacitors, and the rapid growth of the industry has driven demand for PP substrates. From the perspective of expanding production, it requires importing stretching equipment from overseas, but foreign equipment manufacturers such as Bruckner and Mitsubishi are already operating at full capacity, which also limits the expansion of domestic PP production companies.

Source: Hexun Net (translated by AI)