AGORACOM Small-cap Investor Relations Blog

SPONSOR: Lomiko Metals LMR:TSX-V – A Canadian exploration-stage company discovered high-grade graphite at its La Loutre Property in Quebec and is working toward a Pre-Economic Assessment (PEA) that will increase its current indicated resource of 4.1 Mt of 6.5% Cg to over 10 Mt of 10%+ Cg through a 21 hole program at the Refractory Zone. Click Here For More Information

Contrary to what is believed, monolayer graphene (a sheet of carbon just one atomic layer thick) has 3D mechanical properties and they can now be properly measured and meaningfully described thanks to high-pressure Raman spectra measurements on the material. This result, from researchers at Queen Mary University of London, might have implications for when graphene – and indeed other 2D materials – are employed in applications such as mechanical sensors. It also highlights the fact that Raman spectroscopy can be used as diagnostic tool to measure the mechanical properties of graphene when it is employed as a reinforcement for other materials.

“Graphene is called a 2D material because its carbon atoms lie in a two-dimensional plane,” explains team member Yiwei Sun. “However, monolayer graphene has electrons in π-orbitals above and below this plane. If we compress a sheet of graphene in a direction normal to the sheet, graphene is strained because the π-electrons become compressed and strained. If the sheet is compressed in all three directions, it undergoes 3D strain, however. This means that 3D elastic parameters can and must be defined for this material.

“So, graphene should really be thought of as a 3D material, not 2D, as far as certain mechanical properties are concerned.”

Complementing previous experiments

Sun and colleagues also found that the stiffness of monolayer graphene is the same as that of graphite (which is a stack of graphene layers).

These results complement those from previous experiments in which researchers studied the effect of pressure in graphene supported on a substrate such as copper. The substrate strongly affects the contraction of graphene and thus skews the result, says Sun.

Such experiments are performed in a diamond anvil cell (DAC). Here, the samples are loaded into a pressure-transmitting medium, such as water, in a hole of a 50-micron-thick metal gasket sandwiched between two diamond culets 150 microns in size. Pressures of several gigapascals are then applied to the cell.

“What is new in our work is that we studied unsupported monolayer graphene in solution”, explains Sun.

The researchers started out in the usual way – with a monolayer of graphene on a copper substrate. They then got rid of the substrate by etching it away in a solvent after protecting the graphene by a polymer film (PMMA) so that it floated on the etchant and could be located. They took the graphene with the polymer out of the etchant, placed it on a glass slide and rinsed it with de-ionized water. Next, they loaded the graphene with the PMMA in DMF, which dissolved the PMMA leaving the monolayer graphene free-standing in it. “We loaded the monolayer graphene several times so that it was concentrated enough for a decent Raman signal,” says Sun.

The DMF prevents the graphene from crumpling and/or bonding together to form graphite for long enough to perform the high-pressure experiments. These involved compressing the graphene-containing liquid in a diamond anvil cell to pressures of 12 GPa and measuring its in-plane and out-of-plane (normal to the plane) stiffness using optical Raman spectroscopy.

In-plane and out-of-plane stiffnesses are the same for both graphene and graphite

The researchers compared their findings to those obtained on 3D graphite and found that both the in-plane and out-of-plane stiffnesses are the same for both materials, within the experimental errors of their experiment.

“Stiffness is usually defined in terms of the stress and strain (the change of thickness) a material can endure,” explains Sun. “We find that under pressure the thickness of graphene decreases at the same rate as that of graphite. Hence our claim that ‘graphene is graphite’ as regards some key mechanical properties.”

The team, led by Colin Humphreys and David Dunstan, also reports on a shift to higher energy frequencies of in-plane vibrations (phonons) of the unsupported monolayer graphene to 5.4/cm/GPa, which is very close to that of graphite (4.7/cm/GPa).

The in-plane force on graphene under pressure is significantly reduced since graphene, like graphite, is very soft out-of-plane (this is why we can write with the “lead” in pencils, which is graphite),” Sun tells Physics World. “This reduction is what causes the sublinear shift of its in-plane phonon frequency with pressure. This physically meaningful experimental observable allows us to define the thickness and strain of graphene in terms of the thickness of its π-orbitals.”

The technique employed in this study, which is reported in Physical Review Letters, might be used on other unsupported 2D materials in solution, he adds.

“Fiddly handiwork”

“High-pressure experiments like these are easy to describe, but they are notoriously difficult to perform,” writes John Procter of the University of Salford in a related Viewpoint article. Procter’s group was the first to study the effect of strain using Raman measurements of graphene in Si/SiO₂ substrates under high pressure. “Fiddly handiwork is required to align the DAC and sample with micrometre-precision. Because of these demands, such experiments also have a high failure rate. Sun and colleagues’ ability to study graphene under a known high stress – a first – is therefore a major achievement.”

He adds that the research could help in the development of strain sensors based on graphene. “It may also affect how Raman spectroscopy is used as a diagnostic tool for new types of graphene composites that serve to reinforce other materials. Here, the spectroscopy helps determine the extent to which stress or strain is transferred from the host material to the graphene reinforcement. Knowing graphene’s 3D characteristics will help researchers optimize this reinforcing behaviour.”

Sun and co-workers say they are now looking at how the atmosphere affects the mechanical properties of graphene and graphite. Such studies will be important for when it comes to real-world applications of these materials. “For example, a graphene-based device may perform very differently in a humid Manchester in the UK to a dry Arizona in the US,” says Sun.

Source: https://physicsworld.com/a/high-pressure-experiments-reveal-graphenes-3d-nature/

SPONSOR: Lomiko Metals LMR:TSX-V – A Canadian exploration-stage company discovered high-grade graphite at its La Loutre Property in Quebec and is working toward a Pre-Economic Assessment (PEA) that will increase its current indicated resource of 4.1 Mt of 6.5% Cg to over 10 Mt of 10%+ Cg through a 21 hole program at the Refractory Zone. Click Here For More Information

Last April, Elon Musk promised that Tesla would soon be able to power its electric cars for more than 1 million miles over the course of its lifespan. At the time, the claim seemed a bit much. That’s more than double the mileage current Tesla owners can expect to get out of their car’s battery packs, which are already well beyond the operational range of most other EV batteries. It just didn’t seem real—except now it appears that it is. 
A. Paul Gill, CEO of Lomiko Metals (TSXV: LMR, OTCQB: LMRMF) stated “If we’re going to continue to expand the electric vehicle industry in Europe and  North America, we need a secure supply of raw materials.”,stated Gill. “The shortage of graphite is going to be a real concern in the coming years.”,he added.   
Earlier this month, a group of battery researchers at Dalhousie University, which has an exclusive agreement with Tesla, published a paper in The Journal of the Electrochemical Society describing a lithium-ion battery that “should be able to power an electric vehicle for over 1 million miles” while losing less than 10 percent of its energy capacity during its lifetime.
Led by physicist Jeff Dahn, one of the world’s foremost lithium-ion researchers, the Dalhousie group showed that its battery significantly outperforms any similar lithium-ion battery previously reported. They noted their battery could be especially useful for self-driving robotaxis and long-haul electric trucks, two products Tesla is developing.
What’s interesting, though, is that the authors don’t herald the results as a breakthrough. Rather, they present it as a benchmark for other battery researchers. And they don’t skimp on the specifics.
“Full details of these cells including electrode compositions, electrode loadings, electrolyte compositions, additives used, etc. have been provided,” Dahn and his colleagues wrote in the paper. “This has been done so that others can recreate these cells and use them as benchmarks for their own R+D efforts.”
Within the EV industry, battery chemistries are a closely guarded secret. So why would Dahn’s research group, which signed its exclusive partnership with Tesla in 2016, give away the recipe for such a seemingly singular battery? According to a former member of Dahn’s team, the likely answer is that Tesla already has at least one proprietary battery chemistry that outperforms what’s described in the benchmark paper. Indeed, shortly after the paper came out, Tesla received a patent for a lithium-ion battery that is remarkably similar to the one described in the benchmarking paper. Dahn, who declined to comment for this article, is listed as one of its inventors.
The lithium-ion batteries described in the benchmark paper use lithium nickel manganese cobalt oxide, or NMC, for the battery’s positive electrode (cathode) and artificial graphite for its negative electrode (anode). The electrolyte, which ferries lithium ions between the electrode terminals, consists of a lithium salt blended with other compounds.
NMC/graphite chemistries have long been known to increase the energy density and lifespan of lithium-ion batteries. (Almost all electric car batteries, including the Nissan Leaf and Chevy Bolt, use NMC chemistries, but notably not Tesla.) The blend of electrolyte and additives is what ends up being the subject of trade secrets. But even those materials, as described in the paper, were well known in the industry. In other words, says Matt Lacey, a lithium-ion battery expert at the Scania Group who was not involved in the research, “there is nothing in the secret sauce that was secret!”
Instead, Dahn’s team achieved its huge performance boosts through lots and lots of optimizing of those familiar ingredients, and tweaking the nanostructure of the battery’s cathode. Instead of using many smaller NMC crystals as the cathode, this battery relies on larger crystals. Lin Ma, a former PhD student in Dahn’s lab who was instrumental in developing the cathode design, says this “single-crystal” nanostructure is less likely to develop cracks when a battery is charging. Cracks in the cathode material cause a decrease in the lifetime and performance of the battery.
Through its partnership with Tesla, Dahn’s team was tasked with creating lithium-ion batteries that can store more energy and have a longer lifetime than commercially available batteries. In electric cars, these metrics translate to how far you can drive your car on a single charge and how many charges you can get out of the battery before it stops working. Generally speaking, there’s a trade-off between energy density and battery lifetime—if you want more of one, you get less of the other. Dahn’s group was responsible for the seemingly impossible task of overcoming this tradeoff. The energy density of a lithium ion battery is one of the most important qualities in consumer electric cars like Tesla’s Model 3. Customers want to be able to drive long distances in a single charge. Tesla’s newer cars can get up to 370 miles per charge, which is well beyond the range of electric vehicles from other companies. In fact, based on the average American commute, Dahn estimates that most EV owners only use about a quarter of a charge per day. But to make a fleet of robotaxis or an empire of long haul electric trucks, Tesla will need a battery that can handle full discharge cycles every day. The problem is that fully discharging and recharging everyday puts greater stress on the battery and degrades its components more rapidly. But simply maintaining the current lifespan of a Tesla battery pack— about 300,000 to 500,000 miles—isn’t enough either. Long haul electric trucks and robotaxis will be packing in way more daily miles than your average commuter, which is why Musk wants a battery that can last for one million miles. Musk asked and Dahn delivered. As Dahn and his team detailed in their benchmarking paper, “one does not need to make a tradeoff between energy density and lifetime anymore.” The team’s results show that their batteries could be charged and depleted over 4,000 times and only lose about 10 percent of their energy capacity. For the sake of comparison, a paper from 2014 showed that similar lithium-ion batteries lost half their capacity after only 1,000 cycles
“4,000 cycles is really impressive,” says Greg Less, the technical director at the University of Michigan’s Energy Institute battery lab. “A million mile range is easily doable with 4,000 cycles.” Just days after the publication of the benchmarking paper, Tesla and Dahn were awarded a patent that described a single-crystal lithium-ion battery almost identical to the batteries described in the benchmarking paper. The patented battery includes an electrolyte additive called ODTO that the patent claims can “enhance performance and lifetime of Li-ion batteries, while reducing costs.”
It’s not certain that the battery described in the patent is the million-mile battery that Musk said would enter production next year, and neither Tesla nor Dahn are talking. But it’s a safe bet that Tesla’s proprietary battery performs even better.
Shirley Meng, who runs the Laboratory for Energy Storage and Conversion at the University of California, San Diego, says many electric vehicle companies are pursuing batteries with higher nickel content than what Dahn’s paper and patent describe. That approach can boost the energy density of a battery. Meng says the next step is to merge those higher-density designs with some high-performing mix of electrolytes and additives. Whether it’s the formula Dahn’s group perfected is an open question.
“I believe the ultimate goal of Jeff’s team is to demonstrate ultralong life in a high-nickel-content cathode, but perhaps they need a completely different mixture of the electrolyte additive cocktail,” Meng says. “I don’t think the same formula will work, and that’s why they released all the formulations.”
Whatever design ends up making it into production at Tesla’s massive Gigafactory, the signs are clear: A million-mile battery will be here soon.

Source: Daniel Oberhaus is a staff writer at WIRED, where he covers space exploration and the future of energy.

Lomiko Metals Inc. (“Lomiko”) (TSX-V: LMR, OTC: LMRMF, FSE: DH8C) and Quebec Precious Metals (“QPM”) (TSX.V: CJC) announces that further to the Company’s press release dated December 31, 2018, the Company wishes to update shareholders regarding its option to earn a 100% of the La Loutre Flake and Lac des Îles Flake Graphite Properties, Quebec (the “Properties”). The Company has completed its initial option and has earned its 80% interest in the Properties.

Pursuant to an agreement dated December 22, 2018, the Company and Quebec Precious Metals Inc. (“QPM”) (previously known as Canada Strategic Metals Inc.) agreed to extend two options agreements relating to the Properties which allow the Company to earn a 100% ownership. Pursuant to an amendment dated May 13, 2016, in order to earn a further 20% interest for a total of 100%, the Company was to issue an aggregate of 5,000,000 shares (pre-consolidation) (2,500,000 on or before July 31, 2017 and 2,500,000 on or before December 31, 2018) and fund exploration expenditures of an aggregate of $1,125,000 ($250,000 by December 31, 2016; $375,000 by December 31, 2017 and $500,000 by December 31, 2018). The parties agreed to extend the deadline date for the Company to fund exploration work of $1,125,000 to December 31, 2019 and the Company shall forthwith, upon regulatory approval, issue 500,000 common shares (5,000,000 pre-consolidation) shares. In order to close the transaction, the Company must have adequate funds available and the transaction is subject to the approval of the TSX Venture Exchange. The transaction is arm’s length.

Further to the press release dated August 20, 2019, announcing the engagement of Leede Jones Gable Inc. (the “Agent”) as lead agent on a commercially reasonable agency basis to undertake a brokered private placement (the “Offering”) of a combination of Units (as hereinafter defined) and FT Shares (as hereinafter defined) for gross proceeds of up to $2,750,000, the Company discloses that it will be relying on certain prospectus exemptions including but not limited to, the Existing Security Holder Exemption and BC Instrument 45-536 Exemption from prospectus requirement for certain distributions through an investment dealer. An exemption where the purchaser has obtained advice regarding suitability from a person registered as an investment dealer.

Subject to applicable securities laws, the Company will permit each person or company who, as of September 13, 2019 (being the record date set by the Company pursuant to Multilateral CSA Notice 45-313 – Prospectus Exemption for Distributions to Existing Security Holders) (“CSA 45-313”), who hold common shares as of that date (a “Current Shareholder”) to subscribe for the Units and FS Shares that will be distributed pursuant to the Offering, provided that the Existing Security Holder Exemption is available to such person or company.

Pursuant to CSA 45-313, each subscriber relying on the Existing Security Holder Exemption may subscribe for a maximum of 300,000 Units or 300,000 FS Shares, being such amount of Units and FS Shares that results in an acquisition cost of less than or equal to $15,000 for such subscribers, unless a subscriber is resident in a jurisdiction of Canada and has obtained advice regarding the suitability of the investment from a registered investment dealer (in which case such maximum subscription amount will not apply). In the event that aggregate subscriptions for Units or FT Shares under the Offering exceed the maximum number of securities to be distributed, then Units will be sold to qualifying subscribers on a pro rata basis based on the number of Units or FT Shares subscribed for. In addition to conducting the Offering pursuant to the Existing Security Holder Exemption, the Company will also accept subscriptions for Units or FT Shares where other prospectus exemptions are available. Any Current Shareholder subscribing for Units or FT Shares pursuant to a prospectus exemption other than the Existing Security Holder Exemption will not be limited to a maximum of 300,000 Units or 300,000 FT Shares.

The Company also advises that the insiders of the Company may also participate in the financing, which will be completed pursuant to available related party exemptions under Multilateral Instrument 61-101 Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions.

Up to 20,000,000 units (the “Units”) of the Company will be offered at $0.05 per Unit to raise gross proceeds of up to $1,000,000. Each Unit will consist of one (1) common share and one half of one (1/2) common share purchase warrant (“Warrant”). Each full Warrant shall entitle the holder to acquire one (1) common share at $0.07 per share for a period of 24 months following closing. Up to 35,000,000 flow through shares (the “FT Shares”) will be offered at $0.05 per FT Share for gross proceeds of up to $1,750,000.

The gross proceeds from the issuance of the FT Shares will be used for Canadian exploration expenses and will qualify as flow-through mining expenditures, as defined in Subsection 127(9) of the Income Tax Act (Canada), which will be renounced to the subscribers with an effective date no later than Dec. 31, 2019, to the initial purchasers of the offered securities in an aggregate amount not less than the gross proceeds raised from the issue of the flow-through shares, as applicable, and, if the qualifying expenditures are reduced by the Canada Revenue Agency, the company will indemnify each FT subscriber for any additional taxes payable by such subscriber as a result of the company’s failure to renounce the qualifying expenditures as agreed.

The net proceeds from the Offering of the Units and the gross proceeds from the Offering of FT Shares will be primarily used for: (1) approximately $50,000 for a new Resource Estimate prepared in accordance NI #43-101 regulations which will include recent drill results from the Refractory Zone; (2) approximately $700,000 for completion of work required for a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA), including but not limited to, metallurgical/engineering testing and drilling, community relations, testing for conversion to spherical graphite for use in graphite anodes, environmental assessment and extraction and processing cost studies; (3) fund exploration work of $1,125,000 to December 31, 2019, $425,000 on exploration in 2020; and (4) approximately $150,000 to pursue potential off-take partners, fees and for general working capital. While the Company intends to spend the net proceeds from the Offering as stated above, there may be circumstances where, for sound business reasons, funds may be reallocated at the discretion of the Board.

The closing of the Offering is expected to occur on or about October 30, 2019. Closing is subject to a number of prescribed conditions, including, without limitations, approval of the TSX Venture Exchange. All the securities issued under the Offering are subject to resale restrictions under applicable securities legislation.

Offering Jurisdictions

The Offering will take place by way of a brokered private placement to qualified investors in such provinces of Canada as the Agent may designate, and otherwise in those jurisdictions where the Offering can lawfully be made under applicable exemptions.

Agent’s Compensation

On the Closing of the Offering, the Company has agreed to pay to the Agent, subject to certain exclusions, a commission equal to 8% of the gross proceeds arising from the Offering. At the closing of the Offering, the Company will also issue to the Agent non-transferable warrants exercisable at any time up to 24 months from closing, to acquire common shares from treasury in an amount equal to 8% of the aggregate number of units and FT shares issued pursuant to the Offering.

The Company discloses that there are no material facts or material changes about the Company that has not been generally disclosed.

The Corporation does not expect to provide any offering materials to subscribers in connection with the Offering.

For more information on the Company, review the website at www.lomiko.com, contact A. Paul Gill at 604-729-5312 or email: [email protected].

On Behalf of the Board,
LOMIKO METALS INC.

A. Paul Gill,
Chief Executive Officer

SPONSOR: Lomiko Metals LMR:TSX-V – A Canadian exploration-stage company discovered high-grade graphite at its La Loutre Property in Quebec and is working toward a Pre-Economic Assessment (PEA) that will increase its current indicated resource of 4.1 Mt of 6.5% Cg to over 10 Mt of 10%+ Cg through a 21 hole program at the Refractory Zone. Click Here For More Information

The world’s biggest carmaker announced Friday that it had struck a deal with Sweden’s Northvolt to build a giant battery factory in Germany. It also confirmed production dates for two new models key to the group’s success.
A. Paul Gill, CEO of Lomiko Metals (TSXV: LMR, OTCQB: LMRMF) noted that the graphite supply from China to Europe and North America has dropped tremendously over the past few years. This market change may be an opportunity for the Company as European and North American battery manufacturers are now looking for stable suppliers. “If we’re going to continue to expand the electric vehicle industry in Europe and  North America, we’re need a secure supply of raw materials.”,stated Gill. “The shortage of graphite is going to be a real concern in the coming years.”,he added.
The German company said production of lithium-ion batteries would begin in late 2023 or early 2024, a move that will be vital to Volkswagen’s (VLKAF) ability to mount what it calls “the largest electric offensive in the automotive industry worldwide.”
The group plans to launch almost 70 new electric models in the next decade, and hopes to build 22 million electric cars over this period. It is investing more than €30 billion ($33 billion) into electrifying its fleet over the next four years, prompted in part by pressure from regulators and the fallout from its diesel emissions scandal.
If successful, Volkswagen could overtake rivals such as Tesla (TSLA) and Warren-Buffet-backed BYD in China.

Battery factory big win for Europe

Lithium-ion batteries, the majority of which are currently produced in China, are a critical part of Volkswagen’s electrification strategy. Batteries account for about a third of the cost of electric cars, according to consulting firm Wood Mackenzie.
China is home to 70% of global lithium cell manufacturing capacity, with the United States in second place at 12%, said Simone Tagliapietra, a climate and energy fellow at Bruegel, the European economic think tank. Europe lags behind and hosts only about 3% of global production capacity, according to the European Commission.
The Volkswagen-Northvolt deal represents a “very significant investment for the future of European battery production,” Tagliapietra told CNN Business.
Volkswagen is investing €900 million ($993 million) into the Northvolt joint venture. Some of the money will go into the German factory, the rest will secure Volkswagen a 20% stake in Northvolt and a seat on its supervisory board.
Volkswagen also confirmed that production of the new ID.3 electric car series would begin this November, with the first models delivered to customers next year. It has already sold out a limited edition of the ID.3, which is due to make its world debut on September 9 at the Frankfurt Motor Show.
Also premiering at the show will be an electric version of the vintage Volkswagen Beetle. The conversion of the Beetle is being done by a specialist partner company, eClassics, and will use of components from the new VW e-up! city car. Porsche, one of Volkswagen’s premium brands, confirmed on Friday that it would start producing its first all-electric sports car — the Taycan — on September 9.

A New Production Plant

Alongside investing in battery production, Volkswagen is pouring €1.2 billion into overhauling its Zwickau vehicle plant, which formerly produced internal combustion engines, so that it can make electric cars. This process began in 2018 and is expected to be completed by 2020. By 2021, the plant is expected to produce 330,000 vehicles per year, making it Europe’s “largest and most efficient electric vehicle plant,” according to Volkswagen.
The ID.3 will be the first vehicle to be built on this new modular electric car production platform, or MEB. In the next three years, production of 33 models across the group’s brands is due to start on the MEB. 

SPONSOR: Lomiko Metals LMR:TSX-V – A Canadian exploration-stage company discovered high-grade graphite at its La Loutre Property in Quebec and is working toward a Pre-Economic Assessment (PEA) that will increase its current indicated resource of 4.1 Mt of 6.5% Cg to over 10 Mt of 10%+ Cg through a 21 hole program at the Refractory Zone. Click Here For More Information

• Porsche will be investing over US$6 billion in battery power over the next few years
• Markedly superior to the Tesla Model S it competes with.

It just debuted two days ago, but Porsche has already taken some 30,000 deposits for its new Taycan. Not exactly Tesla numbers, but impressive nonetheless. Closer to home, more than 1,000 Canadians have plunked down $2,500 hoping to secure one of the first electrified Porsche four-doors to hit the street. Again, neither number rivals the multitudes that offered up deposits on Tesla’s Model 3, but Taycan does play in an entirely different snack bracket.

A more appropriate context, then, might be to note that said deposits are roughly equal to the number of 911s that Porsche Canada sells in its best of years. In other words, September 4’s worldwide launch of the Taycan was a very good day at the office for Porsche Canada’s president and CEO, Marc Ouayoun.

Now, never mind that a few of those chomping at the bit may well be put off by the Taycan’s price — the base Turbo starts at $173,900 and the Turbo S is a wallet-stretching $213,900. If that means Porsche has finally brought profitability to the electric vehicle segment, so much the better.

More important is that the company is depending on the Taycan to be successful, Detlev von Platen, Porsche’s executive board member for sales and marketing, telling the launch event attendees the company will be investing over US$6 billion in battery power over the next few years and expects more than 50 per cent of the company’s cars to be electrified within the next decade. In other words, Porsche needs the Taycan to be successful.

And more important than that is that the automotive industry needs the Taycan to be successful. So far, the electric vehicle segment has been all Tesla, the Silicon Valley upstart the only truly successful purveyor of battery power. Yes, I know Nissan’s Leaf remains the best-selling EV of all time, but, while semi-plentiful, it’s actually selling well below – barely 10 percent of initial projections – what was predicted when it was introduced ten years ago.

Tesla, meanwhile, has become the poster child for planet-friendly motoring, Elon Musk’s decision – whether it was brilliant insight or bulls%^t luck really doesn’t matter – to focus on the luxury segment proving to be providential. Whither goes Tesla, it now seems, goes the entire electric vehicle industry.

The problem is that Mr. Musk’s influence – and the cult-like devotion it has engendered – is not good for anyone except Tesla shareholders.

Whether you’re a fan of long-range plug-ins or prefer fuel cells, it is not so much that Tesla is winning, but that Mr. Musk so dominates the conversation surrounding EVs that it stifles discussion into what a truly multi-platform zero-emissions future might look like.

Now, to be certain, the company and man – for they are one and the same – deserve all the accolades they have received for a) creating the luxury EV segment where none existed and b) legitimizing the concept of the battery-powered car in the eyes of a formerly skeptical audience. For that, Mr. Musk will undoubtedly be lauded in history books as the founder of a movement.

The problem is that said worship has gone too far, creating disciples for whom any dissent, any mention of competitive brands is seen as traitorous. In my 35 years in this biz, I have see nothing – not the Ford-versus-Chevy wars, not Jeep Wrangler aficionados, not even “one-per-centers” devoted to their Hogs – to match the cult-like allegiance Tesla enjoys amongst its minions.

Unfortunately, that deference is stifling competition. Despite the deception that traditional automakers are dragging their heels on electrification, nothing could be further from the truth. The problem they all face is that, any time they introduce a (costly-to-develop) EV, they are met with the mildest of “mehs.”

Initially, they were decried as too ugly (Chevy’s Bolt), too slow (the Kia Soul) or lacking in panache (pretty much everyone). But, then Jaguar came out with the I-Pace, offering both pedigree and panache. Yet they too were greeted with another giant yawn. Too slow, said the disciples, ignoring the fact there’s more to a sporty automobile than Ludicrous acceleration. So I-Pace sales have crashed. Audi’s e-tron? Better, but hardly all-conquering, especially considering that the Model X with which it competes is the weakest model in Tesla’s lineup.

And that’s why the Taycan is so important. It meets every single objection even the most devoted of Teslarati could dream up. Brand image? None is stronger than Porsche’s. Build quality? Ditto. Beauty? The Taycan is the four-door 911 that Porsche always promised the Panamera would be. Ludicrously fast? My Lord, yes. Toss in handling that is all but a match for the best of supercars and you have a car that is markedly superior to the Tesla Model S it ostensibly competes with.

Oh, the haters will no doubt point to its price as an objection, but the fact remains that, if the Taycan fails to become a genuine Tesla rival – if not in sales then at least in influence – then we really may have to come to grips with the possibility that what we have been projecting as an electrified future is really just cult worship writ especially large.