China’s dominance in batteries stems less from mineral reserves and more from its long-term strategy of subsidies, standards, midstream control, and scalable platforms that others can learn from.
Image Source: Pexels
Minerals may be the new oil, but extraction alone does not create value. In batteries, these minerals only capture value after refining, component manufacturing, and cell production at scale, day in and day out. This is where most countries fall short, and where China has surged ahead.
Today, lithium with liquid electrolytes powers nearly every electric vehicle (EV) and much of the stationary storage. However, China’s advantage comes from the midstream “machinery” that turns materials into qualified cells at an industrial scale. In January 2025, the China Geological Survey reported that China’s lithium reserves had risen to about 16.5 percent of the global total (up from ~6 percent), but this only reinforced China’s dominance of the battery value chain and the global lithium‑ion market, valued at roughly USD107.14 billion in 2024. In practice, control over processing, cathodes, anodes, and factory know-how matters more than simply sitting on ore, because that’s what turns minerals into bankable projects and shippable products. This is well known. What is talked about less, though, is that control arises not only from processing hubs but from the wider environment Beijing has built around them: subsidies, suppliers, factories, standards, patents, scale, and long-term planning that preceded execution.
China’s edge is not minerals, and not just processing either, but a flexible platform. The same suppliers, machines, and manufacturing software can shift across chemistries as science evolves. This platform took lithium iron phosphate (LFP) from niche to mainstream and is now pulling sodium-ion and semi-solid into reality. The question this article asks is simple: how did China build this platform, and what lessons can others draw from it?
Most countries are still doubling down on lithium liquid‑electrolyte lines. China, by contrast, is running a multi‑lane strategy: keeping lithium lines humming, scaling sodium‑ion where abundance and price fit, and industrialising semi‑solid as a practical bridge to fully solid‑state.
Sodium is widely available, abundant, and far less geopolitically fraught. Crucially, much of the battery-making toolkit (slurry mixing, coating, drying, formation) carries over, so retooling costs stay low. China tied this to a national sodium‑ion standard plus tenders that cap energy storage system (ESS) prices to kick‑start early projects by companies such as CATL and BYD.
China, by contrast, is running a multi‑lane strategy: keeping lithium lines humming, scaling sodium‑ion where abundance and price fit, and industrialising semi‑solid as a practical bridge to fully solid‑state.
On the solid track, 99 percent of commissioned solid‑state cell manufacturing capacity sits in China, reflecting an early, coordinated push into semi‑solid industrialisation with live auto integrations. China is taking a more pragmatic and realistic approach: a semi-solid bridge-to-solid strategy to scale manufacturing and learn at low risk now. For instance, CATL’s “condensed” semi‑solid cell, claiming up to 500 Wh/kg, continues staged testing before wider automotive rollout.
The thread that ties this together is a platform logic: dense midstream suppliers, retoolable factories, and standards‑led procurement. It shortens the time from lab to field across sodium‑ion, semi‑solid, and eventually all‑solid, giving China a near‑term manufacturing lead even as others chase higher‑upside all‑solid at scale later in the decade. The same pattern is visible in the United States (US) and the European Union (EU), where firms are doubling down on all-solid-state lithium‑metal systems. For example, QuantumScape’s “Cobra” ceramic‑separator has entered baseline production with Murata, marking clear lab‑to‑pilot progress that points to late‑decade readiness.
China couples industrial policy with patents and simple, national standards to steer technology pathways.
China’s battery primacy is not geological, but a long-term, retoolable operating model. Beijing has paired subsidies and demand policy with standards, IP buildup, and ruthless scale. That has allowed “good enough” chemistries like LFP to dominate today, while keeping options open for sodium-ion, semi-solid, and solid-state. Investing where it moves the needle is the rule, not just mineral luck. Prioritise bottlenecks, publish clear standards, and scale what works now. Then bank the learning, and keep the door open for riskier next-generation chemistries when they are ready.
Manini is a Research Assistant with the Centre for Economy and Growth at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Manini is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Economy and Growth, ORF New Delhi. Her research focuses on the intersection of geopolitics with international ...
Read More +
PREV
