I’ve read most of your posts and links. The issue is summed up in one of the articles:-
“…we’re able to offer better performance at a lower cost while not sacrificing recharge, while we’re not sacrificing power, we’re not sacrificing safety.”
Any new chemistry will have to demonstrate that it can hit all three of these requirements and that’s not going to be easy. Improvements in technology have a habit of developing and accelerating much faster than people either think or expect. The issue for us is whether these developments include nickel or not.
The really big unknown, of course, is the speed with which EVs will be adopted. Even if a new chemistry reduces the amount of nickel and cobalt used and therefore cost the likely consequence of that (EVs achieving cost parity with ICE sooner than expected) the uptake of EVs will be faster.
We have so many variables here that its difficult, if not impossible, to form a clear picture of not only what is happening but of what is possible.