The future of Australian 
battery manufacturing

Cell cans and current collector foils

Summary document | September 2026



Citation

de Looze, GR (2026), The future of Australian battery 
manufacturing: Cell cans and current collector foils. 
Summary document. CSIRO, Australia. 

Copyright 

© Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research 
Organisation (CSIRO) 2026. To the extent permitted by 
law, all rights are reserved and no part of this publication 
covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any 
form or by any means except with the written permission 
of CSIRO.

Important disclaimer

CSIRO advises that the information contained in this 
publication comprises general statements based on 
scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to 
be aware that such information may be incomplete or 
unable to be used in any specific situation. No reliance 
or actions must therefore be made on that information 
without seeking prior expert professional, scientific and 
technical advice. To the extent permitted by law, CSIRO 
(including its employees and consultants) excludes all 
liability to any person for any consequences, including but 
not limited to, all losses, damages, costs, expenses and any 
other compensation arising directly or indirectly from using 
this publication (in part or in whole) and any information or 
material contained in it.

CSIRO is committed to providing web accessible content 
wherever possible. If you are having difficulties with 
accessing this document, please contact csiro.au/contact.

Acknowledgement of Country

CSIRO acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the 
lands, seas and waters that we live and work on across 
Australia and pays its respects to Elders past and present. 
CSIRO recognises that Aboriginal and Torres Strait 
Islander peoples have made, and will continue to make, 
extraordinary contributions to Australian life including 
in cultural, economic and scientific domains.

Document information

This is a summary document based on the findings from 
a more detailed report, The future of Australian battery 
manufacturing: Cell cans and current collector foils, by 
Geoffrey de Looze, report EP2026-1973, 25 May 2026.

If more detailed information is required on the topics 
raised in this summary, please refer to this document. 
A copy of the extended report can be provided 
upon request.

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by the 
AU‑USA Climate, Critical Minerals and Clean Energy 
Technologies Compact – Research Facilitation Grant.



Contents

Executive summary....................................................................................................................................1Introduction..................................................................................................................................................2Part 1. Cell cans for lithium-ion batteries ......................................................................................3Cylindrical battery cells and cans......................................................................................................................................4Prismatic battery cells and cans........................................................................................................................................4‘Blade’ format battery cells and cans................................................................................................................................4Assessments of Australian capability, capability gaps and investments required 
considering cell form factor, material and manufacturing process...............................................................................5Manufacture of long prismatic (‘blade’) cell cans by roll forming and longitudinal welding....................................10General conclusions – battery cell cans..........................................................................................................................12Recommendations for Australian production of battery cell cans...............................................................................13Part 2. Current collector foils for batteries..................................................................................14Assessment of Australian capability, capability gaps and investments required 
for current collector foil manufacture............................................................................................................................16General conclusions – current collector foils for battery cells......................................................................................21Recommendations for Australian production of foils for battery cell current collectors...........................................22

Executive summary

This report assesses the technical requirements for 
producing two key lithium-ion battery cell components: 
external cell cans and current collector foils used in the 
electrochemical portion of each cell. It then compares 
these requirements against the known capabilities of 
Australian industry to identify the strongest opportunities 
for domestic manufacturing.

The following combinations of product, material and 
manufacturing process were identified:

• Cylindrical battery cell cans made by deep drawing/wall 
ironing of nickel-plated steel.
• Manufacture of prismatic battery cell cans by two 
possible methods:
– by deep drawing of aluminium sheet
– by impact extrusion of aluminium slugs.



• ‘Blade’ cell cans made by roll forming and longitudinal 
welding of aluminium or steel sheet. 
• Copper current collector foils made by two possible 
production routes:
– the rolled annealed (RA) method
– the electrolytically deposited (ED) method.



• Aluminium current collector foils made by the 
rolling process.


A general conclusion was that the availability (or otherwise) 
of Australian-produced input materials needed to be 
considered separately to the domestic manufacturing 
capability required to make the finished goods. 

In terms of material supply, Australia produces suitable 
grades of coiled steel sheet appropriate for deep 
drawing, but not in the required nickel-plated form. 
Similarly, Australia is strong in production of pure and 
alloyed aluminium material, but no longer makes the sheet 
or foil forms needed. For the case of copper, Australia is 
a significant producer of electrical grade copper cathode, 
but does not produce copper foil, and no longer produces 
copper rolling slab.

To achieve a manufacturing capability producing coiled 
sheet for battery cans or foils for battery current collectors, 
new investment would be needed in one or more of 
the following: 

• aluminium strip casting and rolling lines for sheet 
or foil production
• a nickel plating line for steel sheet
• casting and rolling plant for copper foil. 


These are all capital-intensive operations. Australia has 
previously vacated capabilities in these or similar areas: 
domestic rolling of aluminium sheet and foil ceased in 
2014 while electroplating of sheet steel (making tinplate) 
stopped in 2007. The quantities of materials needed for 
battery production are also unlikely to absorb a large 
portion of the capacity of new commercial-sized rolling 
plant, risking underutilisation.

With this as background, two opportunities were identified 
and recommended for further study: 

• manufacture of prismatic cell cans by impact extrusion 
from locally produced aluminium slugs
• production of copper foil using the 
electrolytic‑deposition method.


In each case, there is an existing domestic capability 
with production of the input materials and/or of the 
manufacturing methods required to produce the 
finished goods. 



Introduction

This document summarises the outcomes from a study 
with two primary considerations. The first consideration 
was the technical requirements (manufacturing processes 
and materials) for production of select components 
of lithium-ion battery cells. These components are the 
battery cell cans, and the current collector foils used in 
each cell. The second consideration was an evaluation of 
the identified technical requirement against the known 
capabilities of Australian industry, with the aim of 
identifying opportunities for domestic participation in the 
battery supply chain. The ideal outcome would be finding 
one or more direct matches between local capability 
and the technical requirement, so that the component 
or components could be 100% locally produced from 
Australian-sourced materials. ‘Australian sourced’ in this 
context means goods produced from Australian ore, 
locally concentrated, smelted and refined into the usable 
metal, then domestically processed into the applicable 
semi-finished forms, and then finally, transformed into 
the finished cell cans or current collector foils.

The summarised findings are derived from the report, 
The future of Australian battery manufacturing: Cell cans 
and current collector foils, report EP2026-1973, 25 May 2026. 
It is recommended that this more comprehensive report be 
consulted if further detail is required on any of the topics 
referred to in this summary. A copy of this report can be 
provided on request.

In the sections that follow, conclusions are reached for the 
different types of battery can and current collector foils, 
then general conclusions and recommendations are made 
which address next steps. 

Battery cell cans and current collector foil are made 
using different materials and manufacturing processes. 
As a result, they will be discussed separately, as Part 1 
and Part 2 of this summary.



Part 1. Cell cans for 
lithium-ion batteries 

Lithium-ion batteries come in three different 
form factors: 

• cylindrical
• prismatic
• the so-called ‘blade’ cells. 


These cells differ not only in shape and size, but in 
the materials from which they are made. All three 
form factors are made in large quantities and are 
commercially important. 

The cell cans – the object of this study – are a thin-walled 
hollow metallic container enclosing the electrochemical 
part of the cell. 

There is a fourth battery form factor, known as the 
‘pouch’ style. The can (enclosure) for this form factor is 
made from laminated polymer films. While not discussed 
further here, more information on pouch cells is provided 
in the full report.



Cylindrical battery cells and cans

Cylindrical battery cells and cans are shown in Figure 1. Such cans are typically made from nickel-plated steel, the can 
wall thickness ranges from 0.3 to 0.5 mm, and the popular 21700-size cell has a nominal diameter of 21 mm and a 
height of 70 mm. An example application is the battery pack of some versions of the Tesla Model Y electric vehicle, 
which uses 4416 of the 21700-size cells.

Figure 1. Cylindrical battery 
cells and cans: Cells of two 
different sizes (left) and a 
rendered image of an empty 
4680 cell can (right).

Prismatic battery cells and cans

Prismatic battery cells and cans are shown in Figure 2. Prismatic cans are typically made from aluminium alloy. A typical 
cell size is 280 mm x 63 mm x 82 mm, and the can wall thickness ranges from 0.7 to 1.5 mm. An example application is 
the battery pack of a 2020 Tesla Model 3 vehicle which used 106 prismatic cells of this size. 

Figure 2. Prismatic 
battery cells and cans: 
cells of various sizes 
(left) and empty cell can 
prototypes (right).

‘Blade’ format battery cells and cans

Blade battery cells and cans are shown in Figure 3. They represent a special category of prismatic cells due to their 
extended length. As produced, blade cell cans are open at both ends, unlike cylindrical and prismatic cell cans, which 
are produced with one end closed. Most often they are made from aluminium alloy; however, nickel-plated steel or 
stainless steel are also mentioned as possibilities. A typical (long format) blade cell is 980 mm long x 90 mm high x 
13.5 mm thick; the wall thickness is believed to be in the range of 0.3 to 0.5 mm. Between 100 and 120 cells of this size 
are used in the battery pack of a Tesla Model Y RWD vehicle.

Figure 3. ‘Blade’ battery cells 
and cans: eight blade cells 
(left) and three blade cell 
cans with two short format 
blade cell cans (right).



Assessments of Australian 
capability, capability gaps and 
investments required considering 
cell form factor, material and 
manufacturing process

The form factor and the material determine which 
manufacturing processes will apply. The study has identified 
the following combinations of cell can form factors, material 
and manufacturing process as being most relevant: 

• Cylindrical battery cell cans made by deep drawing/wall 
ironing of nickel-plated steel.
• Manufacture of prismatic battery cell cans in 
two subcategories:
– by deep drawing of aluminium sheet
– by impact extrusion of aluminium slugs.



• Blade cell cans made by roll forming and longitudinal 
welding of sheet. 


The following sections provide a summarised assessment 
of each of these cases in a tabulated form. The primary 
consideration was to provide a comparison of the technical 
requirement of battery cell can manufacture against the 
ability of the Australian industry to provide the input 
materials, and to manufacture the actual cans. 

Manufacture of cylindrical battery cell cans 
from nickel-plated steel sheet

Table 1 summarises key items relevant to production of 
cylindrical battery cell cans in the Australian context. These are: 

• the availability of locally produced input materials
• the capability of the domestic industry to produce 
equivalent product
• an assessment of the investments required to 
address the gaps. 


A summary of outcomes and conclusions is presented 
after Table 1.

Table 1. Cylindrical battery cell cans – by deep drawing of nickel-plated steel sheet

INPUT 
MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

IS THE REQUIRED NICKEL-PLATED 
STEEL (NPS) SHEET INPUT 
MATERIAL MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING SIMILAR 
PRODUCTS TO CYLINDRICAL 
BATTERY CANS FROM NPS SHEET?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED FOR A 
CYLINDRICAL BATTERY CELL CAN 
MANUFACTURING CAPABILITY

NPS suited to deep 
drawing. 

Typical thickness 
range is 0.2–1.5 mm, 
~0.5 mm is required 
for the latest 4680 
cell can format. 

(Aluminium sheet is 
also mentioned, but 
NPS steel is seen as 
the primary option.)

Partly.

• Australian-made extra-deep-
drawing-grade sheet steel 
is available from BlueScope 
Steel (e.g. CA5SN-E steel is 
supplied uncoated, not nickel 
electroplated).
• Available thickness range of 
CA5SN-E sheet is stated as 
0.6–3.2 mm. Correspondence 
with BlueScope indicates that 
a 0.3 mm thickness should be 
possible – this would meet the 
need if it could be available 
nickel-plated.
• There is no domestic nickel 
plating of steel sheet. 
• Tin electroplating of steel sheet 
(tinplate) was done in Australia 
from 1958 to 2007.
• Hot-dip coating of sheet is done 
by BlueScope (e.g. ZincAlume 
(Zn-Al-Mg)). 


Partly. 

• The production method for 
cylindrical cell cans is deep 
drawing and wall ironing 
of NPS sheet.
• High-volume production 
of finished parts using this 
technique has not been 
identified in Australia.
• Australia makes large quantities 
of steel cans from tinplate 
steel, e.g. paint tins and steel 
aerosol cans. This involves 
pressing/ stamping and 
seaming operations.
• Imported tinplate is used 
for the above.


• Nickel (electro) plating line 
for steel sheet to produce NPS, 
using BlueScope steel as 
the input.
• Production cell(s) for cylindrical 
battery can manufacture from 
sheet (e.g. an integrated 
blanking and transfer press 
facility as offered by Schuler 
(or others) as a turnkey system). 








Observation 1: There are no hard barriers 
preventing local manufacture of cylindrical cell 
cans made from nickel-plated steel, but sourcing 
local input material presents challenges.

It is quite feasible for Australia to develop a cylindrical 
battery cell can production facility, since Australia has 
depth of expertise in sheet metal working, and already 
carries out high-volume production of some categories 
of sheet metal container product – even if not exactly in 
the class of battery cell cans. Production equipment for 
cylindrical cell cans is available to purchase as a turnkey 
system, and the scale of this plant is likely not prohibitively 
expensive. The technical/commercial challenge appears 
to be in sourcing locally produced coiled sheet material in 
the grades and thicknesses required – discussed below.

Observation 2: There are gaps in the Australian 
supply chain for nickel-plated steel sheet. 

BlueScope locally produce sheet steel with the required 
physical properties; however, it is not available 
nickel‑plated, and the minimum available thickness 
(0.6 mm) in the current product range is at the upper 
end of what is acceptable; the latest format 8650-sized 
cylindrical cell can requires ~0.5 mm thick sheet, while 
the smaller cell types require input sheet as thin as 
0.3 mm. Private correspondence with BlueScope indicates 
that production of thinner deep drawing grade sheet – 
to 0.3 mm – should be feasible using existing plant by 
applying additional annealing stages. 

Since nickel plating of sheet is not done domestically, a new 
nickel-plating line for coiled sheet steel will be needed. 
Australian capability in this field was demonstrated over five 
decades with a somewhat similar product: tin-plated sheet 
steel (tinplate). However, the economic challenge of new 
investment is illustrated by the closure of the tin‑plating 
line in 2007 despite there being a comparatively large local 
market for tinplate in the packaging industry (lidded tins 
and food cans).

Conclusions – manufacture of cylindrical cell 
cans in Australia from nickel-plated steel sheet

In a technical and commercial sense, there is no 
fundamental obstacle to Australian implementation of 
a deep drawing production line for cylindrical cell cans, 
presuming that suitable nickel-plated coiled sheet steel 
is available in the correct thickness. The investment 
required for the deep drawing plant needed for actual 
can production is unlikely to be prohibitive. 

The bigger commercial challenge is likely to be in 
obtaining domestic supply of the input material: 
substantial upgrades are indicated for the Australian 
sheet production capability. These include an extension 
of the existing product catalogue to include the thinner 
grades of sheet possibly needed, and more significantly, 
investment in a new nickel-plating capability for coiled 
sheet steel.

As a result, this option presents significant commercial 
challenges if a prerequisite is use of Australian-made 
nickel-plated sheet.



Manufacture of prismatic battery cell cans by deep drawing and wall ironing 
of aluminium sheet

Table 2 summarises key items relevant to Australian production of prismatic battery cell cans from aluminium sheet 
using the same methodology as the previous section. Outcomes and conclusions are presented after the table.

Table 2. Prismatic aluminium cell cans – by deep drawing aluminium sheet with wall ironing

INPUT 
MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

IS THE REQUIRED ALUMINIUM 
SHEET INPUT MATERIAL 
MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING 
DEEP DRAWN ALUMINIUM 
PRODUCTS SIMILAR TO 
PRISMATIC BATTERY CELLS?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED FOR 
AN AUSTRALIAN PRISMATIC 
CELL CAN MANUFACTURING 
CAPABILITY

3003 grade 
aluminium sheet 

Partly. 

• In Australia, aluminium ore (bauxite) is 
mined, refined to alumina, then reduced 
to aluminium metal in large quantities. 
• Aluminium slab suitable for rolling 
into sheet is produced by several 
Australian smelters.
• However, no aluminium sheet has 
been produced (rolled) in Australia 
since 2014*.


* From 2025, Jamestrong Packaging 
in Taree NSW is producing aluminium 
slugs from thicker sheet for impact 
extrusion: via melting, belt casting, 
rolling and blanking.

Yes/partly. 

• The applicable prismatic 
cell can production method 
is deep drawing and wall 
ironing of aluminium sheet.
• Two Australian companies 
are using this method to 
make billions of (cylindrical) 
aluminium beverage cans.
• Imported aluminium can 
stock is used. 
• High-volume production of 
equivalent prismatic‑shaped 
objects has not been 
identified in Australia.


• An aluminium sheet 
production facility, 
including melting, belt casting, 
hot rolling, annealing, pickling 
and cold rolling plant or the 
equivalent hot rolling from 
slab approach.
• Production cell(s) for prismatic 
cans from sheet, i.e. sheet 
blanking, deep drawing and 
ironing transfer press facility 
for prismatic cell cans, e.g. as 
offered by Schuler (or others) 
as a turnkey system.






Observation 1: There are no technical barriers to 
local manufacture of prismatic cell cans made 
from aluminium sheet, but Australia will need to 
restart rolling of aluminium sheet at scale – this 
presents economic challenges.

It is feasible for Australia to develop a prismatic battery 
cell can production facility using the deep drawing of 
sheet method. Plant for prismatic cell can manufacture 
is available as a turnkey installation, while Australia has 
experience producing billions of similar deep-drawn and 
wall-ironed items in the form of aluminium beverage cans. 

However, Australia will need to return to local production 
of aluminium sheet, as all general-purpose or deep‑drawing 
grade aluminium flat products, including sheet, are 
currently imported. The economic challenge of such new 
investment is significant, and plant utilisation would need 
to be high to get a favourable assessment. As a point of 
reference, the Australian sheet production capacity, shut 
down in 2014, totalled some 200,000 tonnes/annum. 

Observation 2: Cost of the necessary sheet 
production plant is the main barrier to Australian 
aluminium sheet.

Australian industry offers plentiful aluminium alloy 
input material: either as ingot for melting or slab suited 
to rolling. Australia did produce aluminium sheet and foil 
for many years by the hot rolling of slab method, so in a 
technical sense, the task is ‘doable’. This is in fact proven 
by the return of production of (thicker) aluminium sheet to 
Australia in 2025, using the modern ‘cast rolling’ method 
– noting that the form of this product is specific to the 
requirements of impact extrusion slugs, and the output 
from this plant is likely captive to the aluminium aerosol 
can manufacturing industry. 

On the basis that any new plant for aluminium sheet 
production will likely be able to produce a range of 
grades and thicknesses of sheet material, the commercial 
opportunity for such capital investment would presumably 
be enhanced by assessing the entire aluminium sheet 
import replacement market. This means considering the 
other classes of flat aluminium product that could be 
produced with a new facility: can stock, general-purpose 
aluminium sheet and plate, and packaging foil, in addition 
to supply of sheet tailored to the needs of battery cell cans. 



Conclusions – scope for Australian manufacturing of prismatic cells from deep drawn locally made 
aluminium sheet 

Australia could feasibly enter the market for supply of 
deep-drawn aluminium prismatic cans. The supply of 
local aluminium is plentiful, and local production of 
similar deep drawn product is already being done in 
quantity by makers of beverage cans. However, new 
capital investment will be required. The new plant needed 
for high-volume production of prismatic cell cans is 
commercially available and is probably not prohibitively 
expensive. New plant for aluminium sheet production 
would also be needed. The commercial feasibility of 
such plant has in fact been demonstrated by the recent 
Jamestrong Packaging investment in plant for production 
of (thicker) aluminium sheet specific to manufacture of 
extrusion slugs. Overall, however, a new commitment 
to scale production of thin-gauge aluminium coiled 
sheet probably presents the biggest economic challenge, 
considering previous decisions made to close Australian 
sheet rolling operations in 2014 due to the pressures of 
low-cost international competition.

As a result, this option presents significant commercial 
challenges if a prerequisite is use of Australian-made 
material inputs.

Manufacture of prismatic battery cell cans by impact extrusion of aluminium slugs 
with wall ironing

Table 3 summarises key items relevant to Australian production of prismatic battery cell cans by the impact extrusion 
route with aluminium slugs as the input, using the established methodology. Outcomes and conclusions are presented 
after the table.

Table 3. Prismatic aluminium cell cans – by impact extruding aluminium slugs and wall ironing

INPUT 
MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

ARE THE REQUIRED 
ALUMINIUM SLUG INPUT 
MATERIALS MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING IMPACT 
EXTRUDED ALUMINIUM 
PRODUCT SIMILAR TO 
PRISMATIC BATTERY CELLS?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED 
FOR A PRISMATIC CELL CAN 
MANUFACTURING CAPABILITY

Aluminium slugs in 
3003 grade alloy

Yes – but possibly not commercially 
available for battery applications.

• 100% Australian aluminium 
is available in suitable grades 
and in forms for melting in 
large quantities from four 
domestic smelters.
• Jamestrong Packaging 
is manufacturing aluminium 
slugs from Australian aluminium 
to input to its in-house impact 
extrusion of aerosol cans. 
Availability of slugs suited to 
battery cell can applications for 
external customers is unknown, 
as this is a commercial decision 
for company management. 


Yes/partly. 

• The applicable manufacturing 
method for prismatic cell cans is 
impact extrusion of aluminium 
slugs with wall ironing.
• Australian companies are using 
this method to make millions 
of (cylindrical) aluminium 
aerosol cans. 
• High-volume production 
in Australia of equivalent 
prismatic‑shaped objects has 
not been identified.


• Investment of ~AUD$6–8 M in 
an additional slug production 
line. This presumes Jamestrong 
Packaging will not be supplying 
bespoke slugs for prismatic 
cells to external customers. 
Required plant would provide 
aluminium melting, belt casting, 
sheet rolling, slug blanking, 
annealing and slug surface 
finishing processes.
• Production cell(s) for impact 
extrusion and wall ironing of 
prismatic cell cans, as offered 
by Schuler (or others) as a 
turnkey system.








Observation: There are no barriers to local 
manufacture of prismatic cell cans by impact 
extrusion of aluminium slugs, but Australia will 
likely need to invest in additional capacity for 
aluminium slug manufacture.

It is feasible for Australia to develop a prismatic battery 
cell can production facility using the impact extrusion 
of slugs method. Investment will be required in new 
plant dedicated to prismatic cell can production, but this 
is available as a turnkey installation. Australia also has 
experience in producing millions of similar impact-extruded 
items in the form of aluminium aerosol cans. From 2025, 
the input material – aluminium slugs – has been locally 
produced from Australian aluminium, from a melting/belt 
casting/rolling/blanking and annealing cell investment 
that reportedly cost $6–8 million. While the slugs 
produced by this plant may not be commercially available 
for other applications (they are allocated to aerosol can 
manufacture), a way forward for battery can slugs has 
been demonstrated. The technical requirements of sheet 
used to make relatively thick extrusion slugs will be less 
stringent than the thinner sheet needed for deep drawing. 
As a result, the cost of the plant needed for slug production 
will be comparatively lower. 

Conclusion – scope for Australian manufacture 
of prismatic cells using impact extrusion 

Australia is well placed to enter the supply chain for 
fully Australian prismatic cell cans. Australian industry 
offers plentiful aluminium alloy input material, either 
as ingot for melting or slab suited to rolling. While no 
standard flat (sheet) aluminium products are made 
in Australia, recent investment in aluminium slug 
manufacture for aerosol cans proves the feasibility of 
producing this semi-finished input product; presumably 
this could be repeated as necessary for battery cans. 

Investment in new plant for impact extrusion and 
wall ironing of prismatic cell cans will be required. 
Such plant is commercially available as turnkey 
operations. The same process is used domestically 
for somewhat similar product (aluminium aerosol 
cans), showing there is a demonstrated local 
capability and supplier support base for this class 
of manufactured product. 

Overall, this option presents one of the lower-risk 
opportunities. This is based on the known Australian 
capabilities with manufacture of similar product, and 
the comparatively moderate investment required 
to locally produce the required input materials 
(aluminium slugs). 



Manufacture of long prismatic 
(‘blade’) cell cans by roll forming 
and longitudinal welding

Table 4 summarises key items relevant to Australian 
production of ‘blade’ cell cans using the sheet 
roll forming and welding process, applying the 
established methodology. 

The analysis is complicated by consideration of three 
different candidate input sheet materials: 

• coiled nickel-plated steel sheet
• stainless grades of coiled steel sheet
• coiled aluminium sheet. 


While other forming methods for blade cell manufacture 
have been mentioned in the literature, roll forming with 
longitudinal welding has been selected as the process of 
most merit.

Table 4. Prismatic ‘blade’ cells – made from roll formed sheet material 

INPUT 
MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

IS THE REQUIRED 
SHEET INPUT MATERIAL 
MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING 
SIMILAR PRODUCT TO 
BLADE CELL CANS?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED FOR AN 
AUSTRALIAN BLADE CELL CAN 
MANUFACTURING CAPABILITY

Several candidate 
materials are 
referenced:

• NPS sheet, 
0.3–0.5 mm 
thickness.
• Stainless steel 
sheet (possibly 
310 grade).
• Medium to 
high strength 
aluminium sheet 
e.g. 5005 or 7075 
grades, thickness 
0.3–0.5 mm.
• Confirming 
actual materials 
will require 
metallurgical 
inspection of blade 
cell samples.


No, or partly.

NPS

• Australian-made sheet steel 
suited to roll forming is 
available from BlueScope 
Steel, but this is supplied 
uncoated, not nickel 
electroplated.
• Minimum thickness of 
BlueScope sheet, e.g. 
CA5SN-E at 0.6 mm minimum, 
is likely not thin enough for 
blade cell manufacture. 


Stainless steel

• No stainless sheet steel is 
produced domestically.


Aluminium sheet

• Australian aluminium rolling 
stock is available, but no 
domestic rolling of this 
material into sheet.


Yes, or partly.

• Roll forming of thicker steel 
into rectangular closed 
shapes using inductive 
seam welding is done by 
several companies.
• Roll forming of thin sheet 
(as needed for blade battery 
cells) is also done, but not 
into the welded closed 
forms required. 
• Closing of the rolled sheet 
sections by seaming may 
be done.


1. Investment needed for supply 
of the required sheet material:


NPS

• Nickel (electro) plating line 
for steel sheet to produce NPS, 
using BlueScope steel as the input. 
• Possibly an upgrade to BlueScope’s 
rolling facilities to permit production 
of sheet thinner than the current 
0.6 mm minimum.


Aluminium sheet

• Aluminium sheet production facility 
including melting, belt casting, hot 
rolling, annealing, pickling and cold 
rolling plant or the equivalent hot 
rolling from slab approach. 


Stainless steel sheet

• Upgrade to existing BlueScope 
melting and rolling plant to enable 
production of stainless sheet, or a 
new facility.


2. Investment in a roll forming and 
welding line for blade cell cans.






Observation 1: Setting up a blade cell can 
production line in Australia should be relatively 
straightforward, but sourcing local input 
materials is an issue.

Domestic implementation of a roll forming line for 
production of blade cell prismatic cans from coiled sheet 
should be relatively straightforward. Such a dedicated 
roll forming line should be commercially available as a 
turnkey operation. 

The capital expense should be moderate, there is plenty of 
local experience with roll forming, and there is no reason 
to expect difficulties with the embodied laser-welding 
process. The technical/commercial challenge appears to 
be in sourcing locally produced coiled sheet material in 
the grades required – as these materials are not locally 
produced at present. This is discussed below.



Observation 2: There are gaps in the supply of 
locally produced input sheet material – for all 
three candidate materials.

Nickel plated steel 

The status of the Australian industry to provide the needed 
grade of nickel-plated steel sheet has already been discussed 
for the case of cylindrical battery cell cans. BlueScope Steel 
locally produces sheet steel with the required physical 
properties; however, it is not available in the nickel-plated 
form, and the minimum available thickness of the coiled steel 
product in the current catalogue is 0.5–0.6 mm, which is 
too thick. Private correspondence with BlueScope states that 
extension of the product range to sheet as thin as 0.3 mm is 
likely possible using extra annealing stages, so the required 
base steel can probably be produced in Australia. 

This being the case, investment will be needed in a new 
nickel-plating line for coiled sheet steel, as this is not 
done domestically. 

Stainless steel sheet

Stainless grades of steel sheet are not produced 
domestically; the sheet produced in Australia is limited 
to the plain carbon and low-alloyed steel grades, and the 
sheet available has a minimum thickness around 0.6 mm. 
It follows that upgrades to both the steel melting/alloying/
refining plant, and to the sheet rolling mills, will be 
required to achieve a production capability for thin gauge 
stainless sheet (0.3–0.5 mm). The investment required to 
achieve domestic production of battery-grade stainless 
steel sheet looks to be substantial.

Aluminium sheet

The status of the Australian industry to provide suitable 
aluminium coiled sheet has already been discussed for 
prismatic battery cell cans; the same applies to blade 
cell cans. The Australian industry offers plentiful aluminium 
alloy input materials, either as ingot for melting or slab 
suited to rolling. However, as mentioned, Australia left 
the field of flat aluminium products in 2014. Returning to 
sheet product will involve new investment in either the hot 
rolling or cast rolling sheet production methods. For the 
hot rolling option, on the basis that such new plant would 
be able to produce various grades and thicknesses of sheet 
aluminium material, the case supporting the required 
capital investment would presumably be enhanced by 
assessing the opportunity for replacement of imported 
aluminium flat product of all kinds, rather than limiting the 
scope to production of sheet suited only to battery cans. 

The newer cast rolling method of aluminium sheet 
production probably offers lower capital and operating 
costs by comparison to the more traditional slab rolling 
approach. Consideration of this technique is likely to assist 
with the investment case for new plant for flat aluminium 
product, including that suited to battery cell manufacture.

Observation 3: The most obvious customer for long 
blade cells – BYD – makes all its batteries in‑house.

The centre of (long) blade cell can usage is BYD 
Motor in China. However, BYD is vertically integrated, 
with in-house supply of blade batteries reportedly 
at 100% – so selling blade cell cans to BYD is unlikely. 
Other manufacturers of blade cells are Geely and SVOLT. 
The technical approach adopted by these companies are the 
so-called ‘short’ blade cells. The market opportunities for 
Australian-made blade cells will thus reside with companies 
like the latter mentioned, unless a new integrated battery 
cell maker in Australia becomes established.

Conclusions – scope for blade cell manufacturing 
opportunity in Australia 

There appears to be no obstacle for successful 
implementation of an actual roll forming production line 
for manufacture of either long or short blade cell cans 
in Australia, as the technology is available, reasonably 
straightforward, and well known to the local industry.

However, imported coiled sheet (one of nickel-plated 
steel, alloyed aluminium sheet, or stainless steel sheet) 
will need to be used until the local industry upgrades 
its capability to provide such materials – and each of 
the upgrade choices presents commercial challenges. 

The most difficult (expensive) upgrade is probably that 
of production of thin stainless steel sheet. Deciding 
between the other two (aluminium sheet or nickel-
plated steel sheet) will require further economic 
analysis, but the real driver of this choice will naturally 
be the customer’s preference of material, and general 
access to the battery can market.

Overall, the commercial challenges embodied in this 
option parallel that of the other processes requiring 
Australian-made sheet materials as the input (in this 
case, aluminium or steel) – being reasonably high-risk. 
The investment required to reinstate manufacture of 
thin aluminium sheet will be large, and the economics 
of upgrading the Australian sheet steel capability to 
the nickel-plated variety in the thinner gauges requires 
scrutiny. Accessing the international market for blade 
cells would also appear to be particularly challenging.



General conclusions – battery cell cans

The following combinations of battery cell can 
form factor, material and manufacturing process 
have been identified and considered:

• cylindrical cells made by deep drawing 
of nickel‑plated steel
• prismatic cell cans made by deep drawing of grade 
3003 aluminium sheet
• prismatic cell cans made by impact extrusion 
of aluminium slugs
• blade cell cans made by roll forming and longitudinal 
welding, using one of coiled nickel-plated steel 
sheet, coiled stainless steel sheet or coiled 
aluminium alloy sheet.


Regarding the actual manufacture of such cell cans in 
Australia, implementing the necessary metal working 
processes is almost certainly technically feasible, 
and probably commercially viable – whether it be deep 
drawing (of steel or aluminium), impact extrusion or 
roll forming. This is based on the assessment that:

• the required production equipment is commercially 
available as a turnkey production cell
• the capital costs involved would be relatively 
moderate in each case
• the processes will have a high degree of automation
• Australia possesses a skill base in each category, 
successfully manufacturing similar product.


It follows that at the level of actual cell can production, it is 
not possible to single out or exclude any of the product 
forms and materials as offering the best opportunity 
without first carrying out more detailed analysis. For the 
current purpose, they can all be considered technically 
feasible, and at the current level of knowledge, having 
a similar cost basis. The choice of which should be 
pursued could therefore be a matter of analysis of 
the battery cell market. For instance, which product is 
most in demand or offers the best commercial return, 
or alternatively, is most relevant to the Australian 
strategic requirement.

Greater obstacles are presented by the shortcomings 
of the Australian industry in providing the required 
input materials. Despite Australia being a producer 
of 100% locally made steel and aluminium, there 
are substantial shortfalls in the availability of these 
materials in the semi‑finished forms necessary for can 
manufacturing processes:

• Australia produces deep drawing and roll forming 
grades of steel sheet, but not in the required 
nickel‑plated form, nor in stainless steel grades, and 
currently not in the required thinner sheet gauges.
• Australia is a globally significant supplier of pure and 
alloyed aluminium, in forms suited to either rolling 
or melting, but does not process this ingot into the 
semi‑finished sheet product that is required.


There is, however, one example of an Australian operation 
producing a semi-finished input material suitable for 
battery can manufacture. The Jamestrong Packaging 
company is producing aluminium slugs for impact 
extrusion by the process of roll casting, hot rolling, cold 
rolling, blanking and annealing. These slugs are supplied 
to automated impact extrusion cells producing aerosol 
cans. As such, they are equivalent to what is needed to 
make prismatic cell cans by impact extrusion.

These gaps in the domestic capability mean that 
manufacture of wholly Australian battery cell cans will 
require significant investment. The metal working 
equipment needed to produce the finished cans could be 
considered the more straightforward part, be it setting up 
production facilities for cells by either the deep drawing, 
impact extrusion or roll forming processes. 

Upgrading the local industry capability to supply the 
necessary sheet materials, be it nickel-plated steel sheet 
or aluminium sheet, involves a level of investment that 
may be prohibitive. Nickel-plated steel will certainly 
require investment in a new nickel-plating line for steel 
sheet. For aluminium sheet, an entire new production line 
will be needed. The equipment required runs the gamut 
of melting, direct chill (DC) casting and homogenisation 
(or melting and belt casting), then plant for hot rolling, 
annealing and cold rolling. 

The economics of these upgrades require serious scrutiny. 
In particular, to maximise the utilisation of the investment 
in plant, the aluminium sheet upgrade route would need 
to be assessed against the opportunity for supply of the 
full suite of aluminium flat products that are currently 
imported into Australia. These are general-purpose 
aluminium sheet and plate, can stock and packaging 
grade foil, plus foil for battery cell current collectors. 



Recommendations for Australian production 
of battery cell cans

The primary recommendation, based on the easiest path forward, is to first consider 
production of prismatic format battery cells made from Australian aluminium, 
using the impact extrusion route. 

Two key investments will be required:

1. An aluminium slug production facility equivalent 
to that commissioned by Jamestrong Packaging 
in 2025 for $6–8 million – but tailored to the 
requirements of prismatic cells.

2. An automated, high volume, production 
cell specific to impact extrusion of 
prismatic type battery cell cans.



Part 2. Current collector foils 
for batteries

Spools of current collector foils are shown in Figure 4. 
Two types of foil are used in a battery: 

• copper foil, which is used in the anodic current 
collector of the battery
• aluminium foil used as the cathode current collector. 


Both foil types are first coated in electrochemical materials, 
then wound into a ‘jelly roll’ (Figure 5, upper). The foils 
physically support the chemical layers – the black coatings 
seen in Figure 5 (lower) make the battery work electrically. 
The foils also ‘collect’ and conduct the electrical current 
to the battery terminals. Both types of foil are equally 
applicable to the different battery formats: cylindrical, 
prismatic or blade. The battery pack of a Tesla Model 
3 vehicle provides an example of how much current 
collector foil is used: approximately 312 m2 (~10 kg) of 12 μm 
aluminium foil and 335 m2 (~15 kg) of 5 μm copper foil is 
used in one vehicle.



Figure 4. Spooled current 
collector foil for batteries: 
copper foil (left) aluminium 
foil (right).

Figure 5. 4680 cylindrical battery cell internal components: identifying the ‘jelly roll’ portion of the cell, which is comprised of 
wound sheets of coated current collector foils with interwound separator sheets (upper image) and after partial unrolling of 
the jelly roll into the four components (lower image), from left to right: 1. remainder of the jelly roll; 2. unrolled and re-spooled 
anode [copper foil (current collector) with black graphite coating on both sides]; 3. unrolled and re-spooled separator (white); 
4. unrolled and re-spooled cathode [aluminium foil (current collector) with black lithium-iron-phosphate coating on both 
sides]; 5. unrolled and re‑spooled separator (white). Ank et. al. (2023), Lithium-Ion Cells in Automotive Applications: Tesla 4680 
Cylindrical Cell Teardown and Characterisation. J. Electrochem. Soc. 170 120536. DOI 10.1149/1945-7111/ad14d0 (Images used 
with permission).



Assessment of Australian capability, 
capability gaps and investments 
required for current collector 
foil manufacture

The study has identified the following relevant 
combinations of foil types and manufacturing processes:

• Copper current collector foils made by either 
of two production routes:
– the rolled annealed (RA) method
– the electrolytically deposited (ED) method. 



• Aluminium current collector foils by the rolling process.


The following sections provide a tabulated assessment 
of each of these cases. The primary consideration was to 
compare the technical requirements of foil production 
against the ability of the Australian industry to provide 
the input materials and to carry out actual foil production. 

Following each summary table, conclusions are listed 
for each of the three cases. After the assessment of 
the individual material and process combinations, 
general conclusions are reached on current collector foil 
manufacture in Australia. Finally, recommendations provide 
the potential ways forward.

Copper current collector foil production 
by the Rolled Annealed (RA) route

Table 5 summarises key items relevant to Australian 
production of copper foil by the RA process, considering:

• the availability of locally produced input materials
• the capability of the domestic industry to produce 
equivalent product
• the investments required to address the gaps. 


The outcomes and conclusions are provided after the table.

Table 5. Copper foil for battery current collectors – manufacture by the RA process

INPUT 
MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

IS THE REQUIRED 
INPUT MATERIAL 
MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING 
ROLLED COPPER SHEET 
OR FOIL?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED FOR AN 
RA COPPER FOIL MANUFACTURING 
CAPABILITY

Rollable slab of 
electrical grade 
pure copper

Partly. 

• Electrical-grade copper is made 
domestically. Three Australian 
smelters produce electrolytic 
copper cathode from Australian 
copper ore.
• No rollable copper slab is cast 
in Australia.
• However, other copper product 
forms are cast locally from 
Australian cathode: round 
extrusion billet by Kembla Metals, 
copper rod for drawing wire by 
Tyree Cables.


No.

• Neither copper sheet 
nor copper foil is rolled 
in quantity.


Plant for production of RA copper.

Starting material for rolling:

• copper slab casting facility, or
• belt casting facility.


Sheet/foil production equipment:

• hot rolling plant 
• homogenisation plant
• strip milling
• cold rolling plant 
• plant for intermediate annealing or 
pickling/annealing 
• coiling and uncoiling plant.








Observation 1: Setting up an RA copper foil 
production line in Australia is not necessarily 
difficult, but the new plant required will be capital 
intensive as there are significant gaps in the 
domestic capability.

Australia is a significant producer of electrical grade 
copper cathode made from Australian ore. Australian 
expertise in manufacture of finished and semi-finished 
copper products extends to casting of extrusion billet 
and copper rod, extrusion of copper pipe, and drawing 
of wire. No copper foil is domestically produced, and 
copper is no longer locally cast into rolling slab. It follows 
that production of copper foil using the RA method will 
require substantial investment. Obtaining material in the 
form necessary for rolling of foil first indicates investment 
in either a copper slab casting facility, or alternatively, 
a belt casting installation. Investment in a full rolling line 
for foil production will then be needed. Such a production 
line will involve hot rolling mills, homogenisation plant, 
strip milling, cold rolling mills, plant for intermediate 
annealing (or alternatively, a pickling and annealing line), 
plus coiling and uncoiling plant. The investment required 
will be substantial.

Observation 2: RA copper foil may be seen as 
a ‘premium’ product compared to ED foil.

RA copper foil is generally expected to cost more than 
equivalent ED copper foil. However, in the current 
collector application, it has some superior attributes. 
Customers looking for higher levels of battery cell 
performance may be prepared to pay this premium 
depending on the battery application and the market 
position of the finished battery cell. 

Conclusions – production of copper foil by 
the RA process

Production of RA copper foil in Australia is feasible, 
using Australian-produced copper cathode as the 
starting material. However, relatively large investments 
in plant will be required, namely casting, hot and cold 
rolling mills, annealing, and other processes. Unless a 
case is made justifying this investment in terms of the 
nominally superior properties of RA copper foil, the 
alternative production route of ED is likely to be an 
easier or lower cost option. 



Manufacture of copper foil by the Electrolytically Deposited (ED) production route

Table 6 summarises key items relevant to Australian production of ED copper foil, using the assessment method 
used previously. Outcomes and conclusions are included after the table.

Table 6. Copper foil for battery current collectors – manufacture by the ED process

INPUT MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

IS THE REQUIRED 
INPUT MATERIAL 
MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING 
SIMILAR COPPER FOIL BY 
ELECTROLYTIC DEPOSITION?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED FOR AN 
ED COPPER FOIL MANUFACTURING 
CAPABILITY

Clean, easily 
dissolvable copper.

• Ideal material is scrap 
copper wire, stripped 
of insulation. 
• Alternative is 
granulated/finely 
divided solid copper 
from scrap pipe (or 
similar), or from new 
cathode copper. 


Yes.

• Input material (as scrap) 
can be obtained from 
the existing Australian 
copper recycling 
industry.
• Scrap could be 
supplemented, if needed, 
with new Australian 
copper cathode, 
processed into granules.


No.

• However, an Australian 
skill and industry supply 
base resides in the 
substantial domestic 
copper electrorefining/ 
electrowinning industries. 
These have considerable 
technical commonality to 
ED foil production.


Electrolytic copper foil deposition facility.

This will comprise:

• dissolving/electrolyte preparation plant 
• foil electrodeposition cell(s)
• foil post-treatment plant. 


The smallest plant with the minimum 
investment has one electro-deposition cell. 
Capacity can be increased by adding extra 
cells. Ultimate capacity is dictated by the size 
of the copper dissolving plant.





Observation 1: Use of recycled copper as the input 
material for ED foil production potentially reduces 
costs and the dependence on otherwise readily 
available Australian-produced copper.

ED foil production requires a supply of clean copper in a 
form that is easy to dissolve into copper sulphate electrolyte. 
The ideal/lowest cost feedstock is scrap copper wire stripped 
of insulation; the Australian scrap metal industry should be 
able to provide substantial quantities. If the supply industry 
for scrap wire cannot meet the quantity required for ED 
copper production, any deficit could be met by milling other 
types of scrap (e.g. copper pipe) into a granular form, or else 
by introducing new Australian cathode copper into the feed, 
also in a granulated form, to make it easier to dissolve.

Observation 2: Establishing an ED copper foil 
production capability requires a smaller investment 
than the alternative RA production route. 

Establishing an ED copper production plant is relatively 
modest compared to the large and extensive plant required 
for RA copper production. The ED process is also more 
easily scalable, in the sense that ED foil production capacity 
can be increased by adding additional deposition cells and/
or additional dissolving tank capacity. 

Observation 3: The significant Australian capability 
with electrorefining and electrowinning of copper 
provides a supplier base and a body of local 
experience relevant to ED copper production.

Copper electrorefining or electrowinning is undertaken 
at three Australian sites. This involves handling of large 
amounts of copper-bearing sulphate solutions for copper 
electro deposition, thus providing considerable technical 
overlap with the electrolyte handling and deposition 
processes intrinsic to ED copper foil production. 

Conclusions – production of copper foil 
by the ED process

ED copper foil production could be established in 
Australia for a relatively modest capital investment. 
This is based on the feasibility of an ED foil production 
facility which is comprised of a circuit with a dissolving 
tank system feeding a single deposition cell (plus the 
necessary foil post treatment process). An advantage of 
the ED approach is that the production capacity can be 
expanded by adding more dissolving and deposition 
cells in a parallel arrangement. 

A further advantage is that a body of relevant experience 
resides in Australia due to the considerable investment in 
the similar electrolytic processes for copper refining and 
electrowinning currently undertaken in Queensland and 
two places in South Australia. 

The required input material is available as 
Australian‑sourced copper. Whether this is from 
scrap, new copper cathode, or a combination of both, 
is arguably a matter of lesser importance. 

Considering the advantages listed, the production of 
copper foil in Australia using the ED method is probably 
a more viable option than the RA route.



Aluminium foil for cathodic current collectors (rolling process)

Table 7 summarises key items relevant to Australian production of aluminium foil, considering:

• the availability of locally produced input materials
• the capability of the domestic industry with rolling sheet or foil
• an assessment of the investments required to address the gaps. 


Outcomes and conclusions are provided after the table.

Table 7. Aluminium foil for battery current collectors (rolling process)

INPUT 
MATERIAL 
REQUIRED

IS THE REQUIRED 
INPUT MATERIAL 
MADE IN AUSTRALIA?

IS AUSTRALIA MAKING 
PRODUCTS SIMILAR TO 
ALUMINIUM FOIL?

INVESTMENT REQUIRED FOR AN 
ALUMINIUM FOIL MANUFACTURING 
CAPABILITY

High purity 
aluminium 
rolling slab
(e.g. 1045 grade) 

Yes.

• Australian aluminium 
ore (bauxite) is mined, 
refined to alumina then 
reduced to aluminium 
metal in large quantities 
at four Australian 
smelters. 
• The smelters offer 
aluminium slab suitable 
for rolling into sheet 
and foil, and also, ingot 
suited to melting.


No, or only partly. 

• Aluminium sheet and foil 
production in Australia ceased in 
2014 when Alcoa Australia closed 
its two rolling plants. 
• From 2025, production of 
aluminium sheet (not foil) returned 
to Australia, when Jamestrong 
Packaging of Taree NSW, 
commissioned an aluminium slug 
production facility, reportedly 
for ~AUD$6–8 M. This includes 
sheet making by the ‘cast rolling’ 
process: a melting furnace, belt 
caster for thick sheet, plus hot and 
cold rolling mills to reduce the 
sheet thickness. 


A foil production facility based on either 
the ingot hot rolling process or the cast 
rolling process.

The ingot hot rolling process will involve 
plant for: 

• ingot (rolling slab) scalping
• ingot homogenising and pre-heating
• multi-stage hot rolling
• multi-stage cold rolling with 
intermediate annealing
• coiling/recoiling
• final annealing and lubricant removal with 
pickling, washing, drying and foil cutting.


The alternative cast rolling process will 
involve investment in:

• melting furnace and holding furnace
• twin roll or belt casting machine
• uncoiling/recoiling equipment
• multi-stage cold rolling mills
• plant for intermediate and final annealing 
• brushing, washing, drying and cutting plant.








Observation 1: Australia produces large quantities 
of aluminium and has produced aluminium foil 
before. New investment in a foil production 
line will be required – and this will need to be 
economically justified.

Aluminium foil represents a special category of aluminium 
sheet. Essentially it is the ultimate expression of the process 
of rolling aluminium into thin material; the ‘front end’ of 
foil production will parallel that used for sheet, and some of 
the same equipment could be used. However, most, or all, 
of the foil cold rolling stages will use mills dedicated to foil 
production because of the specific technical demands of 
foil manufacture.

The status of the Australian industry to provide suitable 
coiled aluminium sheet has already been discussed 
for prismatic battery cell cans and blade cell cans. 
Australian industry offers a plentiful supply of aluminium 
input materials: either as ingot for melting or slab suited 
to rolling. However, Australia left the field of rolled flat 
aluminium products, including foil, in 2014. All aluminium 
foil (and sheet) used in Australia in 2026 is imported. 

Returning to foil production will involve new investment in 
either hot rolling, or more likely, the increasingly important 
cast rolling sheet production method. The following quote 
by Woodward (TALAT Lecture 1301) suggests that the 
economic challenge should not be underestimated: 

A modern complex including melting furnaces, 
DC casting facilities, pre-heat furnaces, hot mill, cold mill 
and annealing furnaces involves a very large capital 
investment which can only be fully justified on financial 
grounds if a big market is assured. Obviously, if such 
facilities are not fully utilised the economic viability 
is threatened. As indicated above, however, hot mill 
coil can be obtained for further reduction in cold mills 
of lower capacity/speed/complexity. 

Clearly, decisions on Australian investment in aluminium 
foil production would need to address the need to 
maximise utilisation of any new plant. This could be done 
by considering the ‘whole of market’ opportunity based on 
replacement of imported flat aluminium product, spanning 
the categories of commercial aluminium sheet, beverage 
can stock, food packaging grade foil, and battery current 
collector grade foils. Cast rolling, hot rolling and annealing 
plant could provide starting strip material for all these 
products, with the specialised requirements of sheet and 
foil cold rolling being met using separate cold rolling lines, 
perhaps of the ‘mini-mill’ class.

Conclusions – production of rolled aluminium 
current collector foil in Australia

Australian-produced aluminium feedstock is available 
for foil manufacture, but none of this is locally 
converted to commercial-grade aluminium sheet 
or foil. New investment in foil production would likely 
involve plant for cast rolling of sheet, hot rolling, 
annealing, and a dedicated cold rolling line dedicated 
to foil production. Such plant will be substantial 
and expensive. The question of whether the financial 
viability of such an investment could be enhanced by 
capturing the wider market for currently imported flat 
aluminium product (for instance, commercial sheet, 
can stock, packaging foil and battery current collector 
foil) is a complex matter needing detailed technical, 
commercial and market analysis. 



General conclusions 
– current collector foils for battery cells

The following options for manufacture of foils for 
battery cell current collectors have been identified:

• copper foil made by the traditional RA route
• copper foil made by the ED process
• aluminium foil made by the cast rolling, annealing 
and cold rolling process
• aluminium foil made by the traditional hot rolling, 
annealing and cold rolling process. 


Australia can provide the following base input materials 
for current collector foils, but as noted, not in the 
required finished or semi-finished forms:

• electrical-grade refined copper in the form of raw 
cathode (but not as foil, nor as slab suitable for 
rolling into foil)
• scrap copper in various forms such as scrap copper 
wire or scrap copper pipe
• electrical-grade aluminium either as slab suited to 
rolling, or ingot suited to melting (but not as sheet 
or foil).


Copper foil can be produced by the RA or ED method.

The challenges of upgrading the Australian capability 
to produce RA copper foil parallels that for producing 
aluminium sheet or foil: large and expensive investment 
in plant is required, and such plant would need a high 
utilisation to have any chance of being economically 
viable. Such plant will include a slab casting facility 
(or a melting and belt casting facility), then plant for hot 
rolling, homogenisation, strip milling, cold rolling, and 
an intermediate annealing or a pickling/annealing line. 

By comparison, a smaller investment will be required 
to set up a plant for production of ED copper foil. 
This approach has other attributes:

• the capacity of the plant is more easily scalable
• there is an existing Australian supplier and experience 
base in similar activities
• the input material will, at least partly, comprise locally 
sourced copper scrap.


In terms of the aluminium foil opportunity:

• upgrading Australian capability to produce aluminium 
foil requires a new production line for ‘flat product’ 
• to maximise the utilisation of the ‘flat product’ 
equipment, replacement for the full range of 
currently imported flat products may be necessary, 
including general aluminium sheet product and 
plate, can stock, packaging foil and battery current 
collector foil
• input of aluminium sheet to the foil production 
rolling line could absorb a portion of the capacity of 
any new rolling plant, noting that rolling of foil will 
require a dedicated cold rolling line, additional to 
that producing finished sheet.


The economics and costs of any upgrades require 
serious scrutiny. Maximising plant utilisation would 
need to be targeted by replacing a significant portion 
of all flat aluminium products currently imported 
into Australia, not just producing foil for battery 
current collectors. These include general-purpose 
sheet and plate, can stock and packaging grade foil. 



Recommendations for Australian production of foils 
for battery cell current collectors

1. 
Production of copper foil in Australia using 
the ED method should be considered as the 
first priority, as it is the option more likely to 
offer a viable commercial case compared to 
RA copper foil or rolled aluminium foil.

2. 
A study should be carried out to confirm 
that ED copper current collector material 
is an appropriate material to target for 
investment. Consideration should be given 
to the requirements for current and future 
lithium‑ion batteries, taking into account 
the market demand for this product, and any 
relevant technical developments in the field 
of battery technology. Points of reference for 
this study are the alternative forms of copper 
current collector, such as copper foil made 
using the RA process.

3. 
An ED copper foil facility should be scoped 
and costed. The design of the plant should 
be on the lines of a ‘scalable’ facility. This will 
enable a smaller up-front investment to reduce 
the barrier to entering the market but also 
offer scope for straightforward expansion of 
the production capacity by adding additional 
parallel production cells.

4. 
An assessment should be undertaken of the 
capacity of Australian sources to supply suitable 
copper input material for ED foil production. 
The recommended starting point is the 
Australian scrap metal industry’s ability to 
provide stripped scrap copper wire. The cost and 
availability of such material should be compared 
with the alternatives, such as new copper 
cathode processed into granulated form. 

5. 
Following the study of ED copper, production 
of aluminium foil for current collectors could 
be considered as a second priority. In this case, 
market analysis should be carried out based 
on planning for ‘re-shoring’ the full range of 
aluminium flat products currently imported 
into Australia, such as aluminium sheet and 
plate, aluminium can stock, and aluminium 
packaging foil. This would be supplemented 
with the new opportunity for aluminium foil 
battery current collectors. The aim of this 
analysis is to explore ways to maximise the 
utilisation of plant to improve the potential 
economics of the investment.

6.

Based on recommendation 5, a technical and 
commercial study could be undertaken on 
the design and commercial viability of new 
manufacturing plant needed to re-shore the 
identified flat product, including production 
of current collector foil.



For further information

CSIRO Technology

Geoffrey de Looze
+61 3 9545 8436
geoff.delooze@csiro.au

CSIRO Technology

Adam Best
+61 3 9545 8660
adam.best@csiro.au

Contact us

1300 363 400
csiro.au/contact
csiro.au

CSIRO is Australia’s national science agency, 
delivering solutions for a productive, 
sustainable and secure future.

CSIRO. Improving the life of every Australian.