May 2, 2014
Cattledog I really think they need to do two so that they have redundancy. If some natural or industrial disaster took the solitary Gigafactory offline for an extended period they'd have a near impossible task to meet demand even by going back to past suppliers. Capacity just wouldn't be there. I also think it's a bullish sign that 500K/year cars is not the end game, its a stop on the longer hyperloop of success.�
May 3, 2014
pGo Just a thought, could a potential Chinese partner help fund for gigafactory? Tesla will eventually find a strategic partner in China to save on taxes and quickly expand in local markets. Does anybody see this a possibility?�
May 3, 2014
Jackl1956 MIT Review
Will Musk's Gigafactory Gamble Pay Off? | MIT Technology Review�
May 3, 2014
Bgarret Elon met with Terry Guo on his trip to China. Terry is founder and CEO of Foxconn - the 3rd largest electronics supplier globally after Samsung and Apple (by revenue). Foxconn subsidiaries are already Tesla suppliers and Terry is advocating for a Foxconn partnership to manufacture in China.
http://www.streetinsider.com/Insiders+Blog/Foxconn+Said+to+Lobby+Tesla+(TSLA)+for+China+Production+Lines/9412377.html
Foxconn. Has about $2 Trillion in assets.�
May 3, 2014
wycolo San Antonio, TX is nearby Port of Corpus Christi so receiving Li from Chile is easy, although the ships must use Panama Canal.
--�
May 3, 2014
JRP3 The plan is not to use Li from Chile.�
May 3, 2014
AlMc I am hoping Western Lithium Mining Company�
May 3, 2014
JRP3 Me too :biggrin:�
May 4, 2014
Matias This is a good article. Also comments are worth reading.�
May 4, 2014
Madartist This makes sense to me too. If one of the gigafactories were to be located in Nevada (say Reno area?), it would benefit not only from its proximity to the factory in CA (to reduce shipping costs), but also to a large Li reserve nearby, such as Wester Lithium.�
May 6, 2014
wycolo Hmm, a penny stock with a future . . .
--�
May 6, 2014
AlMc Hopefully :wink:�
May 6, 2014
RobStark And a potential new cobalt mine in Idaho.�
May 7, 2014
Benz Shareholder Letter ER Q1 2014:
"Planning discussions with Panasonic and other potential production and supply chain partners continue to go well and we are pleased with the high interest level in the project."
�
May 7, 2014
FredTMC I want a lot more color on gigaF. TM barely beat their Q1 guidance and didn't raise 2014 guidance. Mgmt had to know the stock would sell off. Give us investors some developments. Announcement Dates of state selection etc... Something / anything...�
May 7, 2014
Benz Panasonic signed Letter of Intent.
Joined working team.
YES YES YES�
May 7, 2014
Johan GF=30% cost reduction per kWh, possibly more.�
May 7, 2014
Benz California is back in the running for the Gigafactory!!!
- - - Updated - - -
"Improbable but not Impossible"�
May 7, 2014
FredTMC Panasonic would be the exclusive cell manufacturer inside the giga factory campus. They'd produce 35gwh of cells. Other cell mfgs would supply tesla outside the GF for tesla to make more battery packs/modules. Total output from GF is 50gwh.
This is the details I wanted to see. Very nice tesla. Thank you�
May 7, 2014
mershaw2001 "it's critical that we have the first giga factory up and going" ... Love it! That would imply the second and third ones will be right behind.�
May 7, 2014
c041v I also like that Deepak emphasized the need to complete it on time even if it means spending more up front, than lose out on the capability to build Gen III. Too bad I build highways and other infrastructure, I'd work day and night to make sure this factory was done in time.
I wonder if they'll just have a bunch of rolling chassis' teed up waiting for battery packs?�
May 7, 2014
Benz You got that right, I think.�
May 7, 2014
chickensevil For those with interest in other stocks that would benefit off of this. In the CC tonight they said that they were going to need a LOT of nickel for the cells (that is the highest metal material). They said they were looking to source this metal from Canada.
CNX.CA is retweeting not just one comment, but three separate tweets regarding the gigafactory needing to source Canadian Nickel. Either that is an admission that they are one of the mines being looked at or someone is simply looking to turn a penny stock into a pump and dump. Maybe someone with better investment knowledge on such things would care to input on this...
it it is nice that they said they are looking to break ground in 2 months! Should be a lot more information coming out soon on this!�
May 8, 2014
TSLAopt Does anyone on here have any guesses as to stipulations there would be on the Letter Of Intent from Panasonic?
i would imagine some possible stipulations might be:
Tesla is able to secure X more funding
Tesla is able to get X govt approval and X permits for Y activities
Tesla demonstrates X growing demand globally for their product
Tesla has X contingency plans in place (I.e. Perhaps a stipulation like this could have spurred the 2nd site)
the he fact that they say Panasonic will officially sign on board at the end of the year makes me think the stipulations can be met by that time, so just trying to see what possibilities people on here think there could be in this Letter of Intent from Panasonic. They are very risk averse and want to be sure they are not fully committing to doing something big that could fail....it's like the opposite business philosophy of Elon Musk, ha.�
May 8, 2014
Auzie My take on Letter of Intent between Tesla and Panasonic is that it serves the purpose of clarifying key points between the parties in a complex transaction and to declare officially that the parties are negotiating. It takes time to finalize all the details of a complex agreement. Third parties to a deal (banks) may require LOI as a signal of both parties intentions before committing resources to such deal. So LOI may just be a way to speed up the process.�
May 10, 2014
chickensevil You are pretty close. A LOI is pretty common in any deal between two companies when they go into a join venture. For example I work for company X and our partner company Y has the primary order for work with a customer. Although our two companies have been doing business together for 2 years now. When the contract was renewed with the customer is was with the primary company (company Y). Now as they finalize the paperwork to submit the purchase order over to my company they aren't going to have us just sit around not continuing to work. So they signed a letter of intent to my company signaling that it would be business as usual just had to get the full details together.
in this case Tesla and Panasonic have a very simbiotic relationship. Panasonic's largest battery customer is Tesla and Tesla would be in a pretty tough spot without Panasonic. So the LOI is so they can prepare to do a new business venture together, even though everything is not finalized yet. I would say the negotiation part is pretty much done. Tesla is making Panasonic the sole battery supplier INSIDE the factory. Any other cells will have to come from external the factory. The only reason they won't be doing this together at this point is if something dramatic happens between the two companies. They just can sign the final agreement until they get site selection and the rest of the suppliers lined up.�
May 10, 2014
Auzie I used LOI when buying equipment from overseas vendors. It takes time to build equipment and vendor will not start without LOI. It may take long time to get approved funds for the purchase. So LOI significantly speeds up the process.
In the case of GF, there will be so many parties to such deals (states, real estate brokers, various vendors, banks, etc). These parties need to move on the deal now, rather than wait for all the details to be finalized.�
May 12, 2014
Auzie Article in Bloomberg, Tesla's Solar Backup Battery.
Interesting bits in the article:
-Tesla not trying to build demand for stationary storage because it would push up the price of cars
- battery pack capacity target: 500,000 cars annually
- Panasonic to manufacture cells onsite
- other suppliers may supplement Panasonic's cells for Tesla's packs�
May 12, 2014
TSLAopt great info�
May 15, 2014
BlueTan85 New Bloomberg article on Elon talking about Hundreds of Gigafactories.
Seems a bit much.
Now, don't get me wrong, I am flat-out long on TSLA but I cannot help but wonder: what happens if (when) another, cheaper, better energy-density solution appears? Is Tesla then vulnerable because of gigantic investment in one or more Gigafactories, or does Tesla retool and adopt the new technology? Seems like the Gigafactory could start out being a wonder of the world, and a boon for the company and its stock, but later become an albatross.�
May 15, 2014
dha
Here's a term borrowed from software engineering that I'm certain Elon is familiar with:
Extensibility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia�
May 15, 2014
JRP3 Seriously, why is such a basic concept lost on so many? If people were always worried about the possibility of future technological advances no factory would ever get built. As I've been saying all along building a factory does not mean being locked into a specific chemistry, form factor, or technology.�
May 15, 2014
Auzie Quote from the article: "Elon Musk said the need for lower-cost batteries for autos and power storage means there will need to be hundreds of �gigafactories� like the one the carmaker is planning to build."
1. I do not interpret this statement that Tesla will be the one to build all these giga factories.
2. If one assumes that one day bev technology prevails over ice technology, that translates into corresponding increased demand for powertrains for the new cars.
I tried to find out how many car manufacturing facilities are there currently in the world, but could not easily find such data. There is some data by countries.
I do wonder how future manufacturing of anything will look like. I have concerns about efficiencies of giga organizations. Their size simultaneously facilitates significant benefits from the scale but also facilitates significant disadvantages due to inefficiencies and risks inherent in large organizations.
One of these risks is diminished capacity to derive benefits from new technologies. That is the risk that we are now seeing taking hold of current ice makers, they are simply caught in a set up that makes them losers no matter what they do.
Even if ice car makers do become extinct due to bev prevailing, their existence was not in vain.
The nature of the car making business is such that it does require a large organization to be able to derive benefits from the scale.
I can not fault current manufacturers for resisting the change and dragging their feet to prolong survival, that is the rational and economical decision from their perspective.
However there is a new technology that better serves our needs and that technology has a chance to displace current car makers. In doing so, that new technology might become very similar to what it has displaced. Until it is displaced with some better technology, it will serve a great purpose.
�
May 15, 2014
chickensevil Auzie, while I can appreciate your concerns, I don't think that it is quite the same as to compare to the situation that ICE manufacturers find themselves in. This switch is like when we moved from large mainframe computers to PCs... or PCs to Laptops... or Laptops to Tablets.
We are switching from ICE to EV. As long as we stay on EV I don't have any concern for the future of the company. Theoretically if a new DC power source came around or even an AC power source, they could still use the SAME AC Induction motor. It is even less of a concern as long as they are able to fit the same power source into the same form factor, since that means they can avoid a major body redesign and simply add on a new pack (and maybe a couple other parts).
While expensive to switch over an entire factory if they had to move to some brand new power source that was completely different from the current, I would not be concerned about them getting stuck as far as the rest of the car goes. I would also assume that there will be a transition from say... lithium to whatever they go to next. Just like we started with a specific ICE and have made improvements to the whole thing over the years. If you think we have the same engine design in a Ford Focus that they had in a Model T back in the day, you would be crazy.
So again, it is a valid concern, but I don't think it is game breaking. Who knows, Tesla might be the one to discover and implement the next power source. They have already stated that they have heavily modified the original panasonic battery design and it is nothing like the one you can get from them normally.�
May 15, 2014
Auzie My concerns do not relate directly to new battery technologies. I have general concerns with large organizations having less capacity to be responsive to any change. Battery business is likely to focus on improving energy storage and retrieval efficiencies. There is a great need for such business now and such business will serve great purpose.
Such business is highly unlikely to focus on a new technology that eliminates the need for a battery.
Say we can propel a car (or anything else) with different power source, with no need to store the energy and attach the stored energy to a car. Such idea may be far fetched but I would like to think (or dream) that future is something more elegant compared to what we have now.
Nikola Tesla said it much better than me:
"Throughout space there is energy. Is this energy static or kinetic! If static our hopes are in vain; if kinetic � and this we know it is, for certain � then it is a mere question of time when men will succeed in attaching their machinery to the very wheelwork of nature."
�
May 16, 2014
ggr How many oil refineries are there? If half of the world moves to electric cars, doesn't this make perfect sense?�
May 16, 2014
vgrinshpun Exactly.
There are 153 refineries in US alone. If one assumes that US max. car production at 20 million cars per year, the total quantity of GF would be approx. 40.
Elon's words, as always, make a lot of sense.
List of oil refineries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia�
May 16, 2014
chickensevil Actually, Tesla had plans to draw power directly from the sky itself... using our own earth magnetic field to generate power and then transmit that power freely and wirelessly to everyone... it is too bad the funding was pulled before he could even really begin to test these theories and they have pretty much died with him or have been buried deep into some Government Vault.
But I think that concept would be more what you were talking about.�
May 16, 2014
Auzie I just think that our current way of transforming energy with the objective of propelling a car is a bit cumbersome and inelegant. There may be a different way, that is faster, more efficient and negates the need to store energy and hence have a battery attached to a car.
The hardest step might be transforming electrical energy into kinetic. We already have AC motor that does that in an elegant way.
Powering AC motor on a car is a bit harder without battery.
May 16, 2014
JRP3 Might be a little off topic here :wink:�
May 16, 2014
chickensevil So, thanks to Cosmos and NdGT, I have actually learned that much of this relation and basic understanding of electricity with light and magnetism are all interconnected and can work together to accomplish many different things is all thanks to Michael Faraday. It truly is something that we take for granted in everything we use including the display I am looking at right now as I type keys on my keyboard... So awesome!
Sorry, we are getting a bit off topic here... but I do agree that perhaps one day, having the battery in the car will be irrelevant. In the mean time I don't doubt that Tesla will make all their money back and then some on this investment!�
May 18, 2014
TSLAopt Any of the battery experts on here have anything to say about this? Another claim of a new revolutionary battery
Memo to Tesla Motors, Inc.: Use Our Batteries (TSLA)
�
May 18, 2014
Papafox I hear of "the new breakthrough battery to replace lithium ion" fairly frequently. One thing is for sure: at some point a successor for traditional lithium ion batteries will be unveiled. When a considerably better battery is demonstrated, Tesla will likely make the move. I suspect Tesla has a team that investigates all new battery designs and evaluates them. Perhaps this battery design is better, perhaps not.
The faster charge times of this design is intriguing.
I see a better battery chemistry/design as a positive for Tesla, and not a threat. Tesla will adjust to the new, better chemistry/design, and EVs move forward versus traditional ICE vehicles.�
May 18, 2014
mrdoubleb Tesla is the single biggest user of battery cells in the automotive industry so any new batter tech innovator will go to them first. I am quite sure this company already contacted them - the article even hints at that. Add to that, the chief scientist supposedly worked on the cells (at Pana?) of the Model S and you even have a personal connection. Also I am sure Tesla is monitoring all battery related research - they are not finding out by reading of it in USA Today.
The good news is, they say this tech fits into exisiting battery manufacturing, so if it really pans out over the next years, Tesla could easily make the switch before the Gigafactory even starts ramping.�
May 19, 2014
JRP3 There's a thread discussing it: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/31122-The-Atlantic-The-Organic-Battery-From-Japan-That-Could-Spawn-The-Next-Tesla
Looks like worse energy density than what Tesla is already using, so...�
May 19, 2014
chickensevil At the very least the pictures they were showing of it seem to fit exactly in the same format that Tesla already uses, so it does make sense that it should be fairly plug and play if they wanted to switch over to it.
If the claims about thermal runaway is true and thermal management in general this might actually be a good switch since at that point all they would do is use the heater/cooler in the batteries just to keep them at optimal ambient temperature and wouldn't have to counteract the heat being put off by the battery itself. Which should mean less power being consumed to keep the batteries happy and more power to driving the car.�
May 19, 2014
Zzzz... 1) This is li-ion battery. Same lithium ions, same principles. Marketing speak used to call LiFePO4 batteries an "iron" ones, but they also li-ion. Same here with "carbon" battery.
2) Little is known about this particular formulation but...
There is a paper, about similar chemistry, and I'm quite excited about it: http://homepages.rpi.edu/~koratn/resources/publications/ncomm2.pdf
1) Only carbon for anode and cathode, plus lithium for cathode of course. No nickel, no cobalt, no aluminum.
2) No need for current collectors, so no aluminium and copper there.
3) Extremely stable electrodes, no degradation. Provided stable enough electrolyte 20+ years without degradation seems possible. Well more testing needed but that what I see.
4) Fully compatible with all widely used commercially available electrolyte systems and separators.
5) Should have no temperature related degradations(we are speaking about electrodes again).
6) High enough coulombic ef?ciency, so no usual crap that potentially cripple other "breakthrough" batteries. And I do not see why proposed cells will get problems with self discharge. No extreme or semi-extreme (like >40[SUP]0[/SUP]C requirement to operate efficiently, no such crap).
7) Seems it is possible to fully discharge cell without bricking it(they cycled cells down to 0.03V...)
8) Potentially electrodes are capable of 150C(recharge in 24 sec anyone). High C rates confirme low or no degradation. But who needs more than 10C anyway?
9) Last but not least, I would estimate around ~340Wh/Kg specific energy on a cell level(do not pay too much attention to Wh/Kg numbers in the paper). Not a record, but coupled with above points make this chemistry interesting for EV applications, especially if you take into account possibility that thermal management would not be needed for the battery pack(stable electrodes).
So is there a pot of a rat poison in this barrel of honey? Well probably. I do not know what the heck is graphen. More specifically graphene oxide. I tried to figure that out, but failed. No one seems to produce it in industrial quantities. It very well could be more expensive than platinum.�
May 19, 2014
tentonine Graphene is indeed very expensive and was produced for the first time only about 10 years ago. A lot of countries and companies have made significant investments into researching graphene applications, but it is only just entering the early stages of commercialization - as far as I am aware, it is still quite a long way off from actual commercial use in anything and people are still trying to figure out the best way to produce it in large quantities at a reasonable price.�
May 19, 2014
JRP3 The two graphs on this page show it to have less energy density than existing LMO chemistry. http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1092056_dual-carbon-battery-same-energy-density-safer-longer-life-than-lithium-ion-says-power-japan-plus�
May 19, 2014
chickensevil yeah, unfortunately I do not have high hopes for anything that uses graphene at the moment. It is supposed to be one of those magic chemicals that has a million and one applications... if only they could produce it cheaply and in large quantities.
- - - Updated - - -
If it is in the early stages, energy density will rise over time as they figure out what is the best electrolyte compound to stick in the battery... so I would not be too worried about that one.�
May 19, 2014
JRP3 You should worry.�
May 19, 2014
Zzzz... There are chemistry enthusiasts who produce graphene in the kitchen. Literally. Like there is a video tutorial with 3 bottles of something commercially available on a kitchen table...
And not only graphene itself, but graphene oxide, and even graphene oxide paper... But I could not estimate cost of GO from that.�
May 19, 2014
chickensevil They have been refining the Lithium Cobalt batteries for how many years? To just now be hitting the levels they are. Does the capacity blow me out of the water? not really... but it's other properties make it at least worth further research and investment.
That would be like suggesting that SSD are worse that HDD because they have smaller capacity, even though just about every other quality in them make them superior devices. And look, they have been increasing the size density of SSD's now with each passing year. Even though it is unlikely for them to be able to hit the same size of a regular HDD, they are still worth it for many numerous other reasons.
The capacity is not so terrible so as to be worthless, and I assume there is room to grow that capacity.�
May 19, 2014
JRP3 The problem is their press release makes it sound as if they already have superior density, and they don't. Sure they may be able to increase it some, but will it be enough to be competitive, or to catch up with other chemistry that's already higher and also still improving? I've seen too many of these "breakthroughs" over the years. There should be a rule that any new battery announcement must show a direct comparison of Wh/kg with the best existing technology.�
May 19, 2014
chickensevil but don't they do that? their second chart is mAh/g comparison over charge discharge cycles... and don't these things output all at the same voltages? So hypothetically you could retrieve the Wh/kg if you wanted... what is it, 1.5 volts?�
May 19, 2014
WarpedOne No.
Different chemistries have not just different voltages, but different voltage ranges and different voltage / SOC relationships.
Even newer Panasonic's 4000mAh LiIon cells have lower nominal (i.e. 'average') voltage (3,4V?) than their 3400mAh cells (3,7V) hence they do not hold 17% more energy, only 8% more.�
May 19, 2014
chickensevil Ok, thanks for that WarpedOne, I couldn't remember and a lot of this information isn't the easiest to find.
JRP3, I know you and others are pretty jaded at the whole "new batteries just around the corner" schpeal, so I can't say I blame you for being cautious about it. I assume anything that is worth their time that Tesla or Panasonic or both are going to be at the front of that line to take a look given their current high volume for batteries plus their expected future volume for batteries.�
May 19, 2014
jeff_adams Here's the rub with any new battery chemistry. It will have to be tested exhaustively. Tesla will not risk using any new tech that could run into issues and damage their reputation. Just look at the fallout with all the GM recalls. Battery recalls could bankrupt Tesla.
They will play it safe until they are big enough. The "new batteries" will be well known technology by the time Tesla trusts them to run their cars.�
May 19, 2014
TSLA Siempre color me cynical and paranoid, but i get the sense that this is vaporware put out to give companies second thoughts about partnering on the gigafactory. tesla already has technology that works and offers a clear path towards electrification of transport on a large scale. no need to derail that train.�
May 20, 2014
chickensevil http://powerjapanplus.com/en/prof/takeya-en.pdf
I don't think it is entirely vaporware. At the very least their CTO is a pretty strong technical individual with quite a patent portfolio and a ton of battery experience under his belt. If you look at some of the other things they have listed that he is working on, seems a bit fitting. I wouldn't think this is all smoke and mirrors.
- - - Updated - - -
To add, since some other people were claiming either here or elsewhere regarding the validity of the website itself, suggesting that it may be a suspicious site intended to misdirect.
The site was registered on 2013-06-17 and the IP address belongs to a Japanese based ISP, interQ GMO Internet, Inc. which is based in Tokyo, Japan.
The people listed on their website all seem to trace back to real individuals with profiles that match the claims for the company that they are representing.
It is highly probable that all of this is on the up and up. Nothing is saying that Tesla and/or Panasonic can't license their technology to use it in the Gigafactory... That would be an ideal situation for this small company, to be honest.�
May 20, 2014
JRP3 I think it's quite real, I just don't think it's the miracle the press seems to be trying to make it, since the energy density seems weak.�
May 20, 2014
Julian Cox
Well whatever it is their US office is just across the bridge from Fremont. No Doubt Tesla has had the first opportunity to look at it.
One were thing from a science perspective, not sure how much exothermicity there is in a NCA redox reaction or whether thing could possibly be endothermic on discharge.
In the absence of weird, unless it has zero internal resistance it would be a bit hard to support a claim of it never getting hot.�
May 20, 2014
Robert.Boston Take a spin through the Battery Tech thread on this forum, dating back a long way. There are many miraculous new battery techs, at least one per quarter, that are going to make Tesla's battery tech obsolete. Going from the lab bench to production scale is hard and slow. I wish them all well, but Tesla cannot wait until one of these comes to fruition.�
May 20, 2014
kenliles Nor do they need to. Current formulations can produce GENIII. And some tweaks to that chemistry can exceed those expectations. Furher, the next formulations can easily become part of the next implementation and a cost retrofit. I agree, we are there with the correct deployment of current and imminent technology. Ditto with PVC Solar by the way. The next years are going to be incredible.�
May 21, 2014
Lump Getting closer
Japan's Panasonic Corp said on Wednesday it's examining U.S. electric automaker Tesla Motors Inc's plans for a lithium battery factory before the electronics firm decides how much to invest in it.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/05/21/panasonic-tesla-motors-investment-idUST9N0NT00320140521?feedType=RSS&feedName=mergersNews
More details in a WSJ article titled Panasonic Says Tesla Investment Won't Be a Risky Gamble (google & search it, its behind a paywall)�
May 21, 2014
chickensevil Yeah, note the key difference here. They said "before the firm decides how much to invest" this is most definitely no longer a question of if, but now to what level of investment! Hopefully the two companies can come to a mutually beneficial agreement that makes a better and cheaper product for the consumer�
May 21, 2014
DaveT From the WSJ article:
"We will make sure to carry out investments one step at a time in line with demand," said Yoshio Ito, Panasonic's senior managing executive officer who heads the automotive unit."
This is what I was expecting, specifically that Panasonic's investment could be in various steps along the way and they could be re-assured by various milestones that Tesla would reach (ie., 50k Model S run rate, 100k Model S/X run rate, etc).�
May 21, 2014
GravityPull WSJ - Are Tesla's Plans for a Giant Battery Factory Realistic?
Can some of our battery experts comment on this harsh assessment that appeared in Wall Street Journal a few days ago?
Below are a few quotes from the article by a research Professor from Northeastern Univ.
May 18, 2014 4:46 PM
WSJ By YULIYA CHERNOVA
Are Tesla's Plans for a Giant Battery Factory Realistic?
K.M. Abraham is a research professor at the Northeastern University Center for Renewable Energy Technology, has worked for 30 years on lithium battery technology, was one of the first to demonstrate rechargeable lithium batteries and invented next-generation lithium air batteries.
"I don't see how they can reduce the cost more than 20%."
"We are already reaching the limit on the energy density you can get in the lithium-ion battery. Next-generation chemistries, such as lithium air, are another 25 years away from commercialization."
"It won't be as simple as it has been so far. We'll need scientific discoveries in the electrode materials. Usually, from invention of battery materials to production it takes 15 to 20 years, and we haven't invented it yet."�
May 22, 2014
Johan Disclaimer: I'm not a battery expert, but I have followed Tesla very closely for quite som time.
He is obviously talking on this matter as a researcher/Professor. I would think that even though he is very knowledgable when it comes to the chemistry and engineering og batteries he does not have the full picture when it comes to the production chain and the enormous benefits Tesla can get from economics of scale, better deals with suppliers, in-house production of subcomponents, anode, cathode and electrolyte and any other improvements that can be done to the whole production process. If Elon and JB say they can reduce cost 30% I believe them more than this outsider who just puts his finger in the air and says "20% maximum". JB and Elon know all the details, he does not. They know how and where they can cut costs and improve efficiency.
Tesla will produce the same batteries they have today in the Gigafactory. There will be small iterations over time, but noone at Tesla has spoken of a sudden jump to a new chemistry. I don't know what this has to do with anything. Today's batteries can already do the job. I'm all for better batteries in the future (lighter, denser, safer etc.) but that's not what the GF is for primarily.�
May 22, 2014
JRP3 Plus there are a number of different versions of li ion with higher density that are showing promise before we get to li air.�
May 22, 2014
ItsNotAboutTheMoney What is the secret of the Gigafactory?
Battery and the cell are one.�
May 22, 2014
Robert.Boston That's very Zen.�
May 23, 2014
MikeC This thread: Tesla CTO on Energy Storage: �We Should All Be Thinking Bigger� links to this article: Tesla CTO on Energy Storage: : Greentech Media
Really great article:
-Gigafactory "breaking ground in the next few weeks."
-"Lithium-ion battery technology would dominate 'for five, maybe ten years.'"
-"2 megawatt-hour battery pack has been helping to manage loads at the Fremont Tesla factory, managing 10 percent of peak demand...will be expanded to 4 megawatt-hours in the next three to four months."
-"400 kilowatt-hour battery pack at the Tejon Ranch supercharger."�
May 23, 2014
Auzie Great article, thanks for posting.
"He said that there will be improvements in cathode, anode and electrolyte materials, but that for the next five or ten years, things will look pretty much the same. There was little reason to battle about the size of the cell or the 18650 form factor, in the CTO's view. The improvements to the cell will come with better anode and cathode material, not with the shape and size of the cell."
Straubel also said he was bullish that stationary energy storage "can scale faster than automotive."�
May 23, 2014
Auzie Panasonic wants exclusivity but seems to be not in a hurry to invest. Makes me wonder about the level of their enthusiasm for gigafactory.
Panasonic wants to be sole battery cell maker at Tesla project - Reuters�
May 24, 2014
RobStark
Like almost every business they want maximum return for minimum investment.
Remember Panasonic's original assessment of Model S sales prospects in 2011?
1000 units per year for a total seven year run. 7k units through the 2018 model year.�
May 24, 2014
Auzie Panasonic:scared: is overcoming fear one small step at a time�
May 24, 2014
ElectricAvenue Can someone tell me how I can invest in the GigaFactory?
I have tried to find the answer in this sea of threads but cannot find it.
Is the a way for the individual investor yet?
Thanks�
May 24, 2014
DaveT They're not taking individual investors in the Gigafactory.�
May 24, 2014
AlMc It appears it will be established by Tesla, who will have partners (Panasonic is one we know of at this point). I do not believe they will be setting up a separate company to 'own' it that you can invest in. So, investing in Tesla appears to be the best way to get 'in' on the Gigafactory. Some are investing in Mining companies that mine the materials needed for the battery production but that is VERY speculative. Others are investing in Panasonic. For my money (and do your own research as I could be wrong) if I wanted to invest in the factory I would buy TSLA.�
May 24, 2014
drinkerofkoolaid Didn't Elon say 100 Gigafactories would be needed for automobile demand alone? If Tesla Motors, Panasonic, (Apple?), and other companies are going to partner with Tesla to fund these factories, it will make it very difficult for any other competition to emerge. Tesla will become the largest battery supplier in the world, for Electric Vehicles, home and business energy storage, etc. The economies of scale will allow Tesla to produce Electric Vehicles for significantly less than any other company. On top of this, Tesla can sell batteries from old Tesla's to Solar City at a discount, allowing them to be repurposed as energy storage units at a price below what any other company can achieve. Sound about right?�
May 24, 2014
sleepyhead That sounds about right, except that the big problem I see with re-purposing car batteries for storage purposes, say at 70% capacity, is that batteries already are huge and having 30% of dead weight would be a big problem IMO, except for rare cases where land is not an issue.
Unless there is some cheap way to recycle them (which is what I hope Elon has come up with). I am not an engineer, so I don't know if maybe its as simple as replacing the cathode and anode?�
May 24, 2014
pz1975 Going way OT here of course, but does anyone (sleepy?) know how big of a battery (ie. recycled Model S battery packs) would be needed for a regular house to store enough solar energy to run the house for 2ish days (as I imagine that would be reasonable for a house not going fully off-grid)? I am trying to imagine how many Model S battery packs stacked on top of each other this would be in terms of storage space at a house.�
May 24, 2014
AudubonB
Whaa? So now what am I suppozed to do with this $1.8 billion check I just wrote out? Sheesh!�
May 25, 2014
AlMc I have not done the calculation but couldn't you get a general feel by looking at a couple of your monthly utility bills (assuming you are on the grid and use it for most of your home energy needs) and take the average of your monthly KW use?�
May 25, 2014
dhrivnak If we assume that at less than 70% capacity the battery should be reused outside of a car it will still have about 56KWh or enough power to power an average home for 2 days. With the battery being a slim 4.5 inches one would just need a wall to attach it and it would take up very little floor space.�
May 25, 2014
JRP3 Tesla is already using a lower energy density cell for their stationary storage products, so I don't think that will be much of an issue. A pack could also be installed vertically if floor space it tight.
No, there are a number of different techniques being developed but it's basically a total shredding of the cells and then sorting and extraction of valuable elements. Electrolytes are burned to power the process, maybe some plastics too, and low value elements such as lithium are sold as slag for other processes. Some companies can extract lithium but at this point it's too cheap to be worthwhile.�
May 25, 2014
Jonathan Hewitt How much electricity does an American home use? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
Average US home 10,836 kWh a year, therefore 29.7 kWh a day.
Tesla CTO on Energy Storage: : Greentech Media
From this link if you scroll to the very bottom it looks like Tesla is marking a 10 kWh residential storage unit, aka good enough for 1/3rd of the average household's daily use. The main goal is demand smoothing and not going off grid.�
May 25, 2014
jhm Average use per household is about 30 kWh/day. So 10 kWh storage would be good to round out PV plus grid. Off grid, 20 kWh may be needed. However, if one goes so far as to charge an EV at night from PV during the day, onevery would need additional storage for that. 10 kWh would give you MS 85 about 31 miles of range per day. Proximity to a Supercharger station could become an issue for an off grid EV owner. I could see the off grid, PV plus 2 EV household of the future needing at least 50 kWh of storage.
Tesla has a 10 kWh unit with 5 kW of power. So this seems to be a good building block size.
One thing worth noting here is in a steady state EV world there may be no need for new batteries for residential storage. Rather EVs will cast off more than enough used capacity. For example, 2 EVs may require 100 kWh or more new batteries every 10 years, but may cast off 60 to 80 kWh of used capacity in a 10 cycle. Over the next two decade we will not see this abundance of used EV batteries. So the Gigafactory will address the stationary market with new batteries.�
May 25, 2014
Theshadows Removing the fact that I charge my car at home. The 85kwh battery in our car, at an 80% depth of discharge (I don't know how deep you can discharge them 80% is from my lead acid calculations) would run our entire house for just over 3 days. That is for our average yearly usage, and we have geothermal so our entire house is electric except for our stove and clothes dryer.�
May 25, 2014
30seconds I would not believe that tesla would be able to prohibit Panasonic from partnering with other companies to build battery factories. But, until another auto company breaks ground on their own gigafactory tesla is just building a huge lead.
Don't forget BYD and Samsung can eventually become real competitors�
May 25, 2014
techmaven I do not share this view. I think others will build gigafactories and compete. Nissan has already built one. Their Smyrna, Tennessee plant has a nameplate capacity of 200,000 battery packs per year, or roughly 4.8 gigawatt hrs. At the moment, they are actually building about 1/10 of that, or half a gigawatt hrs. They secured a $1.4 billion dollar loan as part of the ATVM program that Tesla borrowed money from which helped to build this factory. This is not the only battery factory that they have built.
The LG Chem plant in Holland, Michigan was built for $300 million and has a nameplate capacity of 60,000 packs which works out to just over 1 gigawatt hr capacity. Again, they aren't selling that many Volts/ELRs/Sparks so its running at far less than 1 gigawatt hr.
Both of these plants are churning out batteries that are significantly behind Tesla's NCA cell based battery packs in terms of specific energy and volumetric density. However, it shows that the problem isn't so much that they can't build gigafactories, it's that they can't build compelling enough EV's to run their existing plants at full capacity.
Tesla is not having a problem with demanding 2 gigawatt hr's a year last year and will probably need somewhere near 3 gigawatt hr's this year. The new Panasonic supply agreement with Tesla announced in the fall of 2013 was for basically somewhere around 6+ GWh/year. The move to 35 GWh/year by 2020 should not be seen as nearly as stupendously large, but more a natural consequence of increased EV demand.
The big issue in my mind is the battery chemistry and the battery pack costs, not so much the size of the factories. It won't be difficult for any of the major auto manufacturers to scale to these levels once they really choose to do so. But it will be gut wrenching because it means taking money away from ICE development to do so. They would have to truly commit to EV's to take that much capex to do it. Each year they choose to wait is another year that Tesla solidifies its lead.�
May 26, 2014
trils0n I thought the Tesla gigafactory was planned at 35 gigawatt hours of battery production. At 4.8 gigawatt hrs the Nissan plant at Smyrna, Tennessee is 1/7 the size. LG Chem at 1 gigawatt hr would be 1/35 the size. That would be quite some scaling up to just match Tesla's planned capacity. Gut wrenching is a good description.�
May 26, 2014
kenliles yeah- clearly nobody has done scaling to double the world production from a single factory- that's going to be a wholly different type of scaling. So the question becomes whether it's execution and implementation can in fact bring prices significantly lower to it's output product than previous configurations of integrated segments (and associated profit margins). Elon says it can to a 99% assurance level (because he's talking about 30+% below the current Tesla battery price- not 30% below other current pack prices). I personally think he;s translating that to 3 years from now as well with the already baked in technology elements, although I haven't heard him say that specifically- Regardless- this is clearly something not tried before, so right or wrong going to be an interesting outcome and a template for others.�
May 26, 2014
Student_Forever I remember Elon saying that batteries improve on average at 8% per year. Extrapolation three years from now makes it 24%. Projecting five years out brings us to 40%. That's still using a linear extrapolation. -- I realize that there is a law of diminishing returns, but in this case the evolving chemistry technology implies that the production function gets up-lifted in each cycle. Hence assumption of a linear extrapolation.
Even under this scenario the purpose of the GF becomes a matter of securing supplies, quality control, and on-demand production with practically no inventory overhead.
1) Following this logic would it make sense to take over the mine drilling to secure supply of the raw materials as well?..
2) And if that is the case, then building the (first) GF in Nevada is probably a preferred choice.
3) The projections above are still within the 30% target. I don't see them having any impact on profit margins as Panasonic seems to be alluding. If anything, assuming good execution, cost reduction could actually be even higher due to the economies of scale.
Can someone please make counter-arguments to the three points above or enhance the logic here? Maybe I am ignoring something. Thanks!�
May 26, 2014
Theshadows It's easy to calculate. Look at your bill. There should be a number for kWh used in past year. Divide that by 365 and you have your average daily kWh usage.�
May 26, 2014
AlMc Agree with #2 and #3...Trouble with #1: Can't see it being a huge cost savings AND the 'mining' part is probably the least ecologically friendly part of the equation so not sure it would be 'politically correct' or extremely cost effective to save a couple dollars at that point. Just buy direct.�
May 26, 2014
RobStark Tesla may one day become a battery cell company but it should leave the mining to miners. Trying to acquire that skill on top of auto manufacture and battery manufacture is a bridge too far.
What Tesla should and appears to be doing is bypassing the mercantile exchanges and dealing directly with the mining companies.
No need to deal with the London Metal Exchange when buying this much volume regularly.�
May 26, 2014
Robert.Boston I'm guessing that you are intentionally making an extreme case. There's no benefit of integrating mining because it produces common commodities with standardized grades and Tesla has no comparative advantage in production--the same reasons that Tesla hasn't integrated backwards to mining bauxite, smelting aluminum, and rolling sheets. That said, there are good examples of coal-fired power plants co-located with coal mines to minimize shipping costs, so it wouldn't surprise me to learn that the GF will be located near lithium mines in Nevada.�
May 26, 2014
dhanson865 My 58 month average electricity usage is ~1067 kwh per month (~35 kwh per day). My 12 month average is down to ~930 kwh per month (~30 kwh per day).
I'd assume I'd be more frugal on electricity usage in a prolonged outage (no need to run the clothes dryer (240v) or kitchen stove/oven (240v), reduced use of heat or air conditioning). My lowest months of the year (Oct, Nov, May, Jun) are usually around 700 kwh (~23 kwh per day)
So looking at the question
Does a 60 KW battery pack cover my needs for 120v AC for 2 days? Is it a 1 to 1 need for KW in a battery pack vs kwh used on my electric bill?�
May 26, 2014
Student_Forever AlMc, RobStark, Robert.Boston, thank you very much! These are the exact kind of comments that I was looking for. I appreciate your feedback.
Robert.Boston, yes, I was intentionally exaggerating the case just to test how far the notion makes sense. Your comments about co-location answer the question economically.
Little bit off-topic:
RobStark, I kind of agree with you about establishing direct relationships with the vendor / mining companies. I think that's how typically agricultural products such as grains are aggregated from individual farmers to elevators & co-ops.
However, on a fundamental level I am a proponent of transparent markets. There is a role that the commodities exchange such as LME or NYMEX can play here. For instance, at initial negotiations and/or at contract renewal (or price reset) it helps to know where the general market levels are (plus-minus local transportation basis and maybe product grade basis).
In absence of the exchange you have a similar situation as with railroad shipment contracts where same carrier would charge different rates to different customers or cargo type. Also, should the price of raw materials fluctuate a lot, it makes sense for TSLA to use the exchanges for delta-hedging (or through the customized OTC contracts with the banks where the banks then turn around and hedge themselves with the exchange traded contracts).
Although it may not be feasible to acquire the mining company itself, it may make sense to have deeper interaction with them aside from consumption of raw materials. Mining companies generally run on thin operating margins and are subject to oil price spikes due to heavy consumption of petroleum based products. So perhaps if TSLA or SCTY could provide electric energy supply to the mine it would reduce the mining company's exposure to the oil markets. That would be a win-win situation where TSLA would also save on hedging costs by virtue of not having to deal with the forwards/futures/options trade execution. I don't expect this to be a large item on the income statement, however, maybe 1-2% at most. -- Anyway, I am getting off topic here. Sorry.
Once again, thank you all for the quick feedback!�
May 26, 2014
roblab Just as a side note, in a discussion with Nissan, I asked about their battery plants. They are not on the scale of what Tesla is planning. The reason they are at a half gigawatt right now is because they are supplier constrained. They cannot get the anodes and cathodes they need, so they cannot build the batteries. So says Nissan.
Tesla wants to bypass that bottleneck by being their own supplier. No one else is doing that. Not saying they can't, but they don't. Like saying that MickeyDs might beat out TacoBell selling crunch wraps. Oh, sure, they could. But they don't. They build something similar to what they are already doing and push the advertising on that.
Hmmmm. Sounds familiar.�
May 26, 2014
techmaven Interesting, the various articles I have read indicate that it is a customer demand issue, not a supplier issue. It would be interesting to see what the inventory levels are like for the Leaf.... There is also something about the new battery that might also muddy the picture. Did Nissan indicate when they might be able to gets more supply?�
May 26, 2014
Robert.Boston FWIW, there are 40 2014 Nissan Leafs sitting unsold on dealers' lots within 50 miles of Boston (according to Nissan's web search tool). That sounds like a lot at first, but it's a lot lower than the inventory of other models, e.g. there are 271 2014 JUKEs and 376 2014 Maximas. Some data points, not sure how to interpret them.�
May 27, 2014
TD1 2014 Energy Storage Symposium - JB Straubel's Keynote
2014 Energy Storage Symposium - JB Straubels Keynote - YouTube�
May 27, 2014
Zzzz... Quick internet search, this was posted a ~year ago:
Well, within 150 miles of SF there are 789 Leafs now. Within 150 ml of LA there are 232 Leafs. Only 73 in Dallas. Only 132 in Portland.
Someone could check other cities, same cars.com source.�
May 27, 2014
RobStark
U.S. Sales 2010?
U.S. Sales 2011?
U.S. Sales 2012?
U.S. Sales 2013?
U.S. Sales 2014?
?
?
?
Year
U.S. Sales?
Canadian Sales?----- 170 240 470 257 �
May 28, 2014
chickensevil Great video all around, some good new info here for sure!
something great that I want to point out, the question asked at around 43 minutes was do you think that lithium will dominate forever and what are you doing about that.
this is an incredibly important answer from the perspective of those who have asked, isn't Tesla just wasting money on the factory and are they planing for flexibility... Just listen to his whole response... But to sum it up, he thinks lithium will only dominate for maybe the next 5-10 years... He himself is rooting for battery innovation. He said he would love it if a high capacitor type cell would come out and be viable because it would work perfectly for everything they are working on. However, their stance is that if you can do something now and make money off of the technology now, then you are losing money by just sitting around and waiting. Technology is always getting better and you can't wait to act.
anyway, he said it better than I, and i highly recommend anyone who questions the logevity or viability of the factory for Tesla should listen to what he said and how he said it... I know my confidence level in JB and Tesla has gone up!�
May 29, 2014
ClownMouth Hey all, first post here after reading for a few months now. I have a question that I emailed Investor Relations about after watching JB's Keynote but have yet to hear back. I own common stock and am planning to add to it (in general, but specifically after hearing JB's thoughts on the potential for the the stationary storage business). I want to be sure that as a TSLA investor we are going to be the primary beneficiary should the stationary storage unit segment take off. From what I've heard and read it seems so since Tesla is the company developing these units, but almost every mention is followed up by something to the effect of "to be leased/sold through Solar City". I do not currently own any SCTY and do not want to miss out on the future stationary storage revenue streams. Thanks for any help, and thanks also for all the excellent information constantly kicked around on this forum.�
May 29, 2014
eepic Welcome to TMC ClownMouth! They are already selling a very small volume of stationary storage units through SolarCity. This is in partnership, likely where Solarcity buys the packs from Tesla and then leases it to residential customers. This makes a ton of sense as it leverages the channel SolarCity is using to sell and install home power electronics already. As public companies that have to be accountable to shareholders, Tesla wouldn't just hand over developments stemming from significant R&D investments and gigafactories. They could be sweetheart deals but would certainly be mutually beneficial to shareholders of both.
The short answer is that they would both be very large participants in stationary storage market growth, but it would benefit each respective company in different ways.
Here's the current offering for your reference:
Home Energy Storage & Battery Backup System - SolarCity
�
May 29, 2014
ClownMouth Great. Thanks for the information and link, eepic.�
May 29, 2014
Robert.Boston Right, so the real question is what the transfer price will be between the companies, and therefore how the profit is split. This is always a huge issue between related firms. I worked on a legal dispute that hinged on how Exxon priced transfers between its subsidiaries, and it's really complex when there are no market transactions against which to compare. Fortunately, Tesla Motors and Solar City are independent companies, with no overlapping officers (remember, Musk is the non-executive chairman of Solar City, not an officer), so there's good reason to believe that the pricing is fair to Tesla Motors.
You do wonder, though, when Tesla is going to drop the word "Motors" from its corporate name, or create a distinct Tesla Storage company under a Tesla Holdings umbrella.�
May 29, 2014
kenliles Tesla Power�
May 29, 2014
xhawk101 Like�
May 29, 2014
JRP3 Tesla Manufacturing, then it can still be TMC.�
May 29, 2014
Auzie I am all for power. I have never heard of a monopoly in manufacturing, but power monopolies are common.:wink:�
May 30, 2014
jjkroll For the new name.
Tesla Power Systems. This way we can all talk about the TPS reports. (see movie Office Space)
I thought we were supposed to hear about the ground breaking of a site before the end of June. They have one day left. Maybe this falls within the Musk time dilation.
Lower post is correct with end of june being a month away. I guess I have a hard time waiting.�
May 30, 2014
Familial Rhino End of June is a month away in all reference frames�
May 30, 2014
vgrinshpun Why drop "Motors"? --> Tesla Power Motors
:smile::smile:�
May 30, 2014
TSLAopt ths article is very good with regards to the inevitable energy storage takeover and fall of electric utilities
Barclays Downgrades Utilities On Solar Threat - Business Insider�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét