Nov 4, 2014
eepic There could be more details about other non-Panasonic partners. Elon recently described at a very high level raw materials would flow into Sumitomo and Hitachi for precursors, then into Panasonic for cells, then to Tesla for packs.. his as-a-matter-of-fact tone implied that at least those two were on board with the Gigafactory.�
Nov 4, 2014
chickensevil Statements about final commitments of funding from interested third parties would be helpful and could be presented, especially since they said something like 5-10% of the funding would come from those sources. I hadn't thought about that since I was treating that as already "in the bag" as it were without remembering that they hadn't really locked those details in yet.�
Nov 4, 2014
eepic Personally I'm not as worried about funding (TM could easily fund that portion too if necessary). I see it more of having the supply chain lined up with no logistics bottlenecks, particularly with raw material (nickel, cobalt, lithium, graphite) suppliers. They talked about streamlining the process and even bypassing metals exchanges to go straight from mine to GF. This would require a mutual commitment with the mining companies and very large contracts signed on paper. If these mining companies have to ramp up production to deliver the resources, two years is a very short time if they need to spend significant capex develop a site.
The sooner everyone is signed on formally with contracts and all, the less likely a delay from any one ingredient missing for the battery brew.�
Nov 5, 2014
Zzzz... In the meantime Tesla's/Panasonic's li-ion supply chain continue to expand:
Sumitomo Metals Tesla batteries: Made in Fukushima- Nikkei Asian Review�
Nov 5, 2014
eepic Maybe the bears may jump on this and say the car is now packed with irradiated mutant anodes :biggrin:�
Nov 5, 2014
Johan From 2014 Q3 Earning Report.
"Together with Panasonic we are making good progress toward first cell production in 2016, slightly earlier than originally scheduled. Starting operations earlier will reduce ramp-up risks for Model 3 and provide some potential expansion capacity for Model S and Model X."
Huge!!!
Image from the actual site from the shareholder's letter:
�
Nov 5, 2014
hockeythug Agreed. Was just about to post that.�
Nov 5, 2014
Johan Elon on call: "Rough guess is that 30% of GF production will go towards grid storage". Wow.�
Nov 5, 2014
FluxCap Indeed.�
Nov 5, 2014
ckessel I like JB's increased presence on the ER calls, he's clearly the Gigafactory guy and Elon defers to him on almost everything gigafactory related.�
Nov 5, 2014
MartinAustin What was the term they used for the "first" production line inside the Gigafactory? Can't remember. Like prototype line, or something...�
Nov 5, 2014
Johan Pilot factory.�
Nov 5, 2014
chickensevil He is THE battery guy at Tesla. Anything battery related goes to him (which is why him being the CTO of a car and stationary energy storage company makes a LOT of sense!)
- - - Updated - - -
Something I also found new and interesting in the shareholder letter (I didn't catch all of the call but didn't hear anything that clarified this further)
So I assume this means that the way they are coming online by 2016 is that they won't be fully finished building the whole building but they will have at least some part of it finished enough that they can start manufacturing there while they continue to build outward. With about 10,000 acres at their disposal and 3,000 acres just for factory space they certainly have plenty of room to continue to expand the physical building outward as needed. This is a really cool way of building!�
Nov 5, 2014
techmaven I had always assumed that they basically build out in staged modules. Maybe in Suminoe sized modules, like 7-9kWh at a time (variance based on the fact that the cells are likely to have more power). Then they just duplicate it over and over. That's basically 25% at a time. Likely by 2017, we're talking 2 modules online.�
Nov 5, 2014
JRP3 Of course, and what I've been trying to tell the dolts over at SA for a while now. Since Panasonic has previously built complete factories in less than 2 years I was quite certain part of the GF would be operational within a similar time frame. The factory need not be completed to start production, once they have a roof, 4 walls, and power, they can start installing and testing a production line, then expand as needed.�
Nov 5, 2014
chickensevil Right, I has assumed that they would not "fill the factory" so to speak of the bat as well. But the way this is described is more like building multiple tiny factories that connect together to form on giant factory. Meaning they would build out a full building but the size to fit stuff in it for 7-9kW (as suggested above). Then start building a second building right next to the existing first building. This has the benefit of not needing to wait for a 1000 acre building to be fully built before they can start moving in equipment and getting stuff rolling. Instead they build a tiny building maybe the size of 100-200 acres. And from the picture the groundwork seems segmented along those lines already.
But yeah, the important thing is that they don't have to spend money building giant empty buildings that won't be filled until much later.�
Nov 6, 2014
RubberToe You don't often see quotes like this except around here... :wink:
RT�
Nov 6, 2014
chickensevil I barely pay any attention to any other site or investor forums or what have you because they really suck to be honest... you can't get the information you need to piece together correct data. And I think all the FUDdites are too scared to post here because we shut them down too quickly. So you get some good clean discussion about the ongoings of Tesla/TSLA!�
Nov 6, 2014
CaptainKirk Just got an alert that Polypore (PPO) and Panasonic have signed a letter of intent for working on Li-ion cells together. Presumably PPO is likely involved with the Gigafactory, and its stock has shot up 25% too! Pieces are definitely coming together.�
Nov 6, 2014
RobStark CHARLOTTE, N.C., Nov 05, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE via COMTEX) --
Polypore International, Inc.'s PPO, +24.17% Celgard, LLC subsidiary ("Polypore") and Panasonic Corporation (otcpkCRFY) ("Panasonic") are pleased to announce that they have signed a letter of intent to work together in the development of coated and uncoated Celgard� brand separators to meet Panasonic's requirements for their next generation cylindrical battery cell production for various applications globally. Upon successful completion of this development effort, it is expected that the parties will enter into a long term supply agreement.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/polypore-and-panasonic-sign-letter-of-intent-for-lithium-ion-battery-separator-development-2014-11-05
Hmm. Polypore International is an American Co headquartered in Charlotte North Carolina.�
Nov 6, 2014
AlMc And is up 20%+ today!�
Nov 6, 2014
jhm 10M sq ft = 230 acres. Also Gigafactory may have two floors, so it might only cover 115 acres of land.�
Nov 7, 2014
chickensevil I thought it was 5M sq ft if 2 floors (thus giving 10M) or 10M if one floor. Since they cleared a plot of land for 10M that would suggest they were going with one floor.�
Nov 7, 2014
jhm IDK, but they may as well go two floors at 10M. They'll need a second GF site in a year or two. If they build this out in modules, they may as well go for 20M at full capacity. Of course, if there are operational or engineering issues against two floors, then so be it.
It makes me wonder if there are any advantages to two floors. Suppose you could make the cells on second floor and let them roll down to first floor where packs are assembled. Gravity feed of cylindrical cells would be pretty cool. The machine that makes the machine, that's where the action is. I hope to tour this in a few years.�
Nov 7, 2014
chickensevil They have access to more land that from what I understand was already basically given to them free of charge that includes 7000 acres of wind farm space and 2000 acres of whatever else they want it to be. The reason they got the land for free was because Tesla forced Nevada to build out USA parkway all the way down to US 50 (I think that was the road) which is something that the industrial park owner has been wanting to make happen for like 15 years. So getting the state to build that road was worth ~9,000 acres
Anyway, point is, it might be *easier* to build out rather than up. Keep in mind they are going to blanket the roof in solar panels. So either they need to make it 2 stories from the start, or not at all since it will likely be extremely expensive to remove all the solar panels, build the second floor, and then add them back.�
Nov 7, 2014
Model 3 Hmm... I may have missunderstud this, but I thought they got the land for the GF for free, and an option to buy upto the next 9,000 acres?
http://fortune.com/tag/gigafactory/
�
Nov 7, 2014
chickensevil Well crap... I remembered that part wrong. Thanks for the correction.
I think my point still stands. They have 980 acres that at present is only being filled with a 10m Sq Ft building, giving them room for expansion on the lot and even more room for expansion with the extra acreage of land.
So I don't see them building up, but rather out.�
Nov 8, 2014
DaveT In Tesla's 10Q filed on Nov 7, 2014, they include the detailed agreements signed between Tesla and Panasonic on Oct 1, 2014.
Tesla Motors - Quarterly Report
It seems to be about 30-40 pages of signed agreements:
10.1 Agreement between Panasonic Corporation and the Registrant dated July 31, 2014
10.2 General Terms and Conditions between Panasonic Corporation and the Registrant dated October 1, 2014
10.3 Production Pricing Agreement between Panasonic Corporation and the Registrant dated October 1, 2014
10.4 Investment Letter Agreement between Panasonic Corporation and the Registrant dated October 1, 2014
IMO, this is good news as it shows that Tesla and Panasonic have made significant progress in hashing out the concrete details of their relationship. It further de-risks Gigafactory.
I also found it interesting that Tesla noted earlier in the 10Q that "We plan to use the battery packs manufactured at the Gigafactory for our vehicles, initially for Model S and Model X, and later for our Model 3 vehicle, and stationary storage applications." So it look like GF batteries will end up in the Model S/X first, likely sometime in 2016.�
Nov 8, 2014
uselesslogin In a way this is no surprise though. They already said 15 GWh of cells are coming from existing factories and they will assemble packs there. They will have to clear out pack assembly from Fremont by then in order to make room for a Model 3 line.�
Nov 10, 2014
vgrinshpun Similar, but even more intriguing statement is included in the shareholder's letter. Based on Elon's answers during the Q2 ER call, the existing battery cell output is enough to make 150,000, may be 200,000 (stretch) cars per year. Now that Q3 shareholder's letter indicates that early production of the batteries at the GF could provide some potential expansion capacity for Model S and X, it is clear that TM is planning to have enough battery capacity to potentially sell more than 150,000 or even 200,000 MS/MX in 2017. It seems that this is flying under the radar for now, but I am sure that we are going to hear more in the coming quarters. Currently no analysts include these volumes of MS/MX in their models.
http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ABEA-4CW8X0/3473357330x0x791902/d7b8cc04-9c3e-4216-9ce3-7fb4d7e0c00b/Q314%20SHL%20Final.pdf�
Nov 11, 2014
jhm On the general theme of flying below the radar, I wonder how much of the stationary market story is just cover for building out excess capacity. Grid storage is likely to be a low margin market, certainly much lower than the per car gross profit Tesla can make on a car. Thus, the stationary products become expendable when capacity is needed for autos. So 30% capacity for stationary becomes a way to derisk a massive build out of capacity. It presents an option: break even on stationary sales or capture higher profits from autos if there is sufficient demand and auto capacity.�
Nov 11, 2014
Model 3 Good and interesting thoughts, but was it not that these 30% would be used for grid-storage and battery packs to other carmakers? Thinking that the size of this market is undervalued. Makes me especially think about VW group that has a stated policy of buying batteries - preferably finished standard battery packs - where they can get them cheaper, and thus do not develop their own capacity, or enter into long-term binding agreements with battery manufacturers that can form the basis for these to build out its capacity.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2662215-how-volkswagen-evaluates-batteries-to-compete-with-tesla�
Nov 11, 2014
jhm Yeah, I'm not so sure how literally we can take 30% "stationary". This why I've started another thread on high margin applications for battery packs. My main concern is about chasing low margin markets when there is a lot of low hanging high-margin fruit. I'm fine with selling complete packs to VW, I just want to make sure we get a high enough margin to forego the opportunity to make more Tesla cars.�
Nov 11, 2014
chickensevil Nothing wrong with having some diversification on the product offering. Not everything is going to be 30% margins on a 100k+ ASP. If they get 15%+ margins on selling just the packs I will be perfectly happy with that.�
Nov 11, 2014
Auzie Imo Tesla chasing any margin is just a necessary means to an end, not a primary goal. The primary goal is to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport.�
Nov 11, 2014
jhm Right, but margins are also a proxy for how much economic value is being created. Transportation fuels sell at a substantial premium to efficient grid electricity. Applications such as EVs have the potential for high margins based on arbitrage between the transport fuel and electricity markets. That's why its possible to power your Tesla for a fourth to third the cost of a comparable ICE vehicle. So the goal of sustainable transport is primarily about displacing oil with renewable electricity.
The problem with stationary batteries is not simply that the margin is low, but that due to the efficiency of the electricity markets their is not as much opportunity for energy arbitrage. There is some, to be sure, but my point is the need to arb oil is much greater, both economically and environmentally. I strongly suspect that the greenhouse gas reduction of 1 GWh of batteries in vehicles is much greater than the reduction of the same amount of storage in the grid. So chasing margin is not just a means to an end, it is a focus on where biggest environmenal and societal needs are.
Why would we want to slow the advent of sustainable transport by diverting Gigafacory capacity to grid storage? If it is there as an option to derisk the investment in Gigafactories, a kind of diversification, I can accept that. But that takes me back to my point about it being an expendable product should the opportunity to accelerate auto sales arise.�
Nov 11, 2014
Auzie I could be wrong, but my read on the situation:
Looking for a common denominator in EM enterprises, the key word is sustainability. Colonizing Mars, reducing carbon footprint, etc the unifying theory is to increase our species sustainability.
Perhaps if we look at GF enterprise through that filter, GF does have a purpose to facilitate distributed grid and make solar and wind more viable. Margins are secondary but necessary means to achieve such end goals.
( Not sure we deserve to be sustainable�
Nov 11, 2014
jhm I think we're on the same page. Stationary storage is very important to maximizing the penetration of renewables into the energy markets. Tesla is even doing this directly at the Supercharger stations and will be at the Gigafactory. Stationary storage enables intermittent renewables to be fully dispatchable. And this in turn is what is needed to retire coal plants and reduce fossil fuels in the electricity market.
My concern is more about timing. In 10 years the cost should come down 50% and 75% in 20 years. So eventually this could be high margin. So if Tesla focusses on growing the business fast, fueled by high margins, it will eventually address grid storage at scale. Globally, battery capacity needs to double every 24 months. So the question is what sort of cash flow is going to support that rate of expansion. Moving too quickly into low margin products could restrict the cash flow such that doubling every 24 months is not going to happen. So I think of high margin as the precondition for extremely high rates of growth. So we're in agreement about where this is going, and my concern is how quickly we can get there in a financially sustainable way.�
Nov 11, 2014
Model 3 Your absolutely right. But I think they are going slowly on this. My take is:
They will use all the batteries they can on their cars.
If they still have some batteries left (it should be ~30%), they use it to produce battery packs for other manufactures.
If they still have some batteries left, they use it on "home batteries" to Solar City customers (and maybe other users with home-solar/wind).
If they still have some batteries left, they use it to grid storage. Both "on the grid" and at bigger customers. Just to "bootstrap" the marked. They have to be there early to be considered later, and to get experience in this marked.
So yes, I think they are going slowly here. When they have a few more GF's they may push it more aggressively, and get a better margin.�
Nov 11, 2014
chickensevil Agree except I would flip the Solar City home customers and the grid storage since I think the grid storage will be a much bigger (and more profitable) market.�
Nov 11, 2014
Model 3 Agree on much bigger. And therefor, in time, with volume, more profitable. But in small volumes I think Solar City home customers will be more profitable on a $/kWh base, and as I wrote, I think they start slowly. Therefor I still think thats the right priority - yet.�
Nov 11, 2014
jhm I think I would give priority to SolarCity and other solar customers over the utilities. I believe they would be willing to pay a higher price, higher margin. But more importantly, it is a stronger move toward distributed power generation and renewable energy. Politically it's a stronger move. Selling to the utilities will further the critique that Tesla is just trying to make money off off subsidies and regulatory mandates. But rooftop solar customers are buying because they want to, not because the State of California or whatever says they have to. Moreover, I am critical of the Oncor proposal in Texas because I think they are just setting themselves up to protect themselves agsinst disruption by batteries and will be pushing the cost onto ratepayers. Ratepayers have little choice in this, but homeowners and businesses with solar are willing to buy on their own behalf. Basically, offering low margin batteries to utilities when homeowners and businesses are willing to pay more move in the direction of preserving the status quo monopolies of the utilities. Now if utilities want to pay the same price for a limited supply as homeowners, that's fair play. Moreover, if utilities want to lighten up on their political resistance to rooftop solar and stop interfering with SolarCity and other installer, that would be fair play. But if they expect Tesla to cut them a special deal and expect taxpayers and ratepayers to pick up the rest of the tab and preserve their monopoly power, I say no deal.
- - - Updated - - -
Yeah, that pretty much how I would prioritize it, but I also think that's the order of who would be willing to pay a higher price and who would most value the value added engineering Tesla can deliver. Utilities can buy cheap batteries from any number of vendors, but Tesla designs advanced computer controlled energy storage devices. The technology they add to cells is the critical thing that commands a high margin.�
Nov 11, 2014
physicsfita A question for those of you who can estimate these things better than I: What percentage of the GF's stationary-storage production will be headed toward supercharger installations to (a) reduce demand charges and/or (b) store energy from the solar canopies that are promised to be built?�
Nov 12, 2014
JRP3 I think it depends on what type of grid support they would be supplying. As I understand it the shorter response time the higher the value, so a frequency regulation application has a high value since it smooths out generating demand fluctuations and avoids the need for the least efficient operational modes, i.e. quickly ramping up and down generators. Same thing with peak load leveling though on a larger time scale and somewhat lower value.�
Nov 12, 2014
Robert.Boston My view has always been that Tesla will send the "seconds" from cell production into stationary storage. The "prime" cells go to automotive. As to your question, I'd expect that Tesla is going to use only aged batteries from Model Ss at the Superchargers, not any of the GF production.�
Nov 12, 2014
jhm Yes, this would make sense. I'm curious if you have any sort of financial model for this. I'm not challenging anythig, just curious about how it would create enough value to support a high margin. How many cycles per day would be typical?�
Nov 12, 2014
JRP3 No I can't put any numbers to it, just speculating from discussions I've had with those who know more about it.�
Nov 12, 2014
jhm Fair enough, my curse is always to look for a mathematical model in things.
Perhaps you may find the discussion of electric ferries the high margin battery pack thread. Ferries can make substantial value out of batteries by rapidly cycling with every voyage, maybe ten or more cycles per day. If you've got a battery that can take 10,000 cycles, with many applications it is hard to use that many cycles in a reasonable payback period, but a ferry can make 10,000 voyages within three years. So I'm wondering if the high frequency smoothing works on basically the same principle.�
Nov 13, 2014
chickensevil In a perfect world assuming we are just looking at solar as you input (which very predictable) you would have enough generation to fill the batteries during the day so they cycle out to depleted (or close to it) by the next morning as the sun comes out. Now since you would nees to plan for a worst case day and some spare you would almost always have more storage and over generation happening than you needed in order to cover that. But it would essentially be a single cycle per day.
Now on the other hand if you were attacking this from a "flatten the line" angle it would depend on how many times your target load peaked each day as to how many cycles you would hit on the pack. But from the conversations JB and Elon have talked about being stationary storage is like a day off for a battery and pack designed for a car. Because the highest discharge is nothing close to a car and the highest recharge is also nothing close. And keep in mind with regen we are dumping a decent amount of power back INTO the pack albiet in short bursts and then back to massively discharging it.
So take a look at their example draw during the symposium JB did last year showing one of the SCs with the pack on it. It really helped mellow out their peaks and looked like on the capture that it drained out the pack totally probably a good 3 or 4 times (as I recall) within one day. Still we are talking about slow draws and recharges. So I would think the packs would rather enjoy that kind of workout over what we are doing to them in the cars.
I don't know if this helps you with anything you were asking for... But there it is!�
Nov 14, 2014
LakeForest Awesome and incredibly long article in Fortune about the Gigafactory incentive negotiations. Tesla seemed to allow Diarmuid O'Connell to be rather open with his discussions on this one. Also, great pic of construction progress on the top and in video with Lance Gillman.
Inside Elon Musks $1.4 billion score - Fortune�
Nov 14, 2014
jhm I agree. And the Supercharger application is actually quite impressive. The utilities love to complain about how solar and wind are intermittent, but in fact demand is quite intermittent. SC storage systems supply very high power demanded on a radically intermittent basis with a trickle of low power supplied. To be sure this demand is derived from the use of batteries used in transportation. So it is part of how EVs arb the transportation fuel market by concentrating energy for rapid recharging.
Another thing to note about the SC application is that it does envolve multipe cycles per day. So the arbitrage from low power input to high power output does not have to be great to generate a strong return. If you save say $0.05 / kWh / cycle for 8 cycles per day. You net $438 savings per kWh capacity in three years. And if you can pull that off with used or low grade cells so much the better. So once you recognize that cycle frequency is key making SC batteries cost effective, youbalso see why you don't want this system in your own home. Basically for home use you are unlikely to get more than 1 cycle per day so it would take you decades to get enough cycles to make this pay for itself.
I also think SC stations have the potential to provide peak power back to the grid. I don't know if Tesla has this arrangement with any utility, but in priciple the hardware is all there. As Tesla builds out a fleet of SC stations it could also function as merchant of instant dispatchable power. I think each station may be capable of close to 1MW since it can handle 6 cars at 130 kW. I don't think this service alone could pay for the battery pack, but it could make the net cost of electricity pretty low. Suppose in an average day the SC discharges 100 kWh to the grid at a peak price of $0.40 / kWh and 850 kWh to cars for free. If it could charge 1000 kWh at an average price of $0.08 / kWh, then the net cost per day is $40 = 80 - 40. So the net cost per kWh delivered to cars is just $0.047 (=40/850). So by selling a coulpe of supercharges per day to the grid, Tesla can cover a substantial fraction of the cost to deliver free charges to customers. Of course another way to take this is to contemplate selling charges to EV owners who do not have unlimited access to the network. Selling to non-access vehicles at say $0.80/minute or $$0.40/kWh (could take up too much time if charging at a low rate) would have the same effect of producing a small amount of revenue to offset the cost of power for access members. In any case, I digress. The main point is that SC infrastructure has some revenue generating potential particularly to provide peak power to the grid. Not only does this offset some operating cost, but it enables Tesla to put out more capacatity to better serve customers. We should like it if we never have to wait in line to get Supercharged, but this reqires a lot of assets to sit idle, or so it would appear.�
Nov 14, 2014
Cosmacelf I agree. Great article. Thanks for the link.�
Nov 14, 2014
DaveT Most excellent article! Thanks for sharing. Definitely worth the read.�
Nov 16, 2014
Zaxxon Here's a new RGJ article about current status of the gigafactory site, including new comments from Diurmund O'Connell.
Union raises concern about Tesla gigafactory contracting�
Nov 16, 2014
Krugerrand *le sigh*
Leave it the union to 'have concerns' and not be able to balance those concerns with a possible (very likely) positive outcome for their workers. Don't like how Tesla is contracting the job, don't like that there's no specific wage listed so Tesla might under pay, don't think Tesla will abide by the 50% minimum of Nevadan workers, blah, blah, blah... Control freaks!�
Nov 16, 2014
JRP3 Get ready for the wackos to come out of the woodwork. I predict an appearance by Sam Dehen (sp?)�
Nov 16, 2014
linkster I just don't understand how you could make such disparaging statements regarding unions. :biggrin::biggrin:�
Nov 16, 2014
Tasmanian Devil Great article on the Gigafactory deal. It is mind boggling how close to the wind Musk sails. Pioneer spirit at it�s best.�
Nov 16, 2014
jhm I like that Tesla is taking a more hands-on approach to contracting Gigafactory construction. I think there will be a lot of innovation in the whole effort, and it makes sense to keep a close grip on the process. Moreover, I expect Tesla to build many more Gigafactories, so it benefits Tesla to build internal competency in overseeing construction.
I really do not think the unions have anything to worry about with Tesla taking a more active role. Tesla has always treated unions and workers with respect. They even give free office space to the UAW in the Fremont plant.�
Nov 16, 2014
Johan Like we've seen Tesla focusing heavily on manufacturing quality and a from the ground up systems approach to their production I think they will go about it the same way with the GF. They'll ramp up slowly but will be very good at building GFs once the battery revolution really takes off...�
Nov 19, 2014
jhm Sources: NMs | KRQE News 13
Looks like New Mexico was all set to put up all of $300M for the Gigafactory. Clearly, out of their depth.�
Nov 20, 2014
Tyl It's moving along!
�
Nov 20, 2014
RubberToe How did you get these pictures?
RT�
Nov 20, 2014
JRP3 Weren't those pics already posted? I'm still seeing a lot of dirt.�
Nov 20, 2014
jhm Tyl, nice picks! I had to use the Electric Ave pic for my avatar. I hope you don't mind.�
Nov 20, 2014
LakeForest Guessing all the pics are from the Fortune article or the associated video.
So, if they are only building section one where are the other 4 going?
�
Nov 20, 2014
Tyl I think this is a picture of the entire site. It just so huge it is hard to see the stages being worked on.
�
Nov 21, 2014
chickensevil From the RGJ story:
Very likely what you are seeing right now is just Phase 1. It looks like from the picture you posted that the factory is sectioned into 5 parts. My guess would be that Most of Phase 1 is getting all the groundwork done for the whole site focusing first in the area they plan to stand up and then expanding to the other sections after and finally they will focus in on the building of the first section fully which will likely complete in Sept 2015. They will then have section two completed in Dec 2015 and so on.
So the last section will be finished in Dec 2017 and if the timeline is correct from previous where they will come online in 2016 with section one. I would anticipate that section 5 will come online in late 2018/2019 just in time for the 100% capacity mark to pump out the 50GW target for 2020.
This is all speculation of course, but it seems to fit with the timelines.�
Nov 21, 2014
LakeForest Chickensevil, you could be right with the five sections of the orange fence they have up. I am just surprised that if that is the entire building it doesn't take up more of the pad they flattened.�
Nov 21, 2014
ggies07 Hope they remember to make a safety track for those tours Elon talked about.
But seriously, it would be a nice flow of extra cash for them if they do it. Who wouldn't want to go see the world's biggest battery building that makes the most advanced car out there?�
Nov 21, 2014
Krugerrand Do you think they'd charge people money? I don't think so. It would go against what they stand for and what they are trying to do. They'd want to encourage people to see the factory for educational and inspirational purposes.�
Nov 21, 2014
ggies07 True, but then why haven't they done that for the factory they have now?�
Nov 21, 2014
Krugerrand Because they are currently holding their cards close to their chest. :wink:�
Nov 22, 2014
chickensevil Seemed pretty big to me, some of the area is going to be parking and such. Looks like it is the whole length of the pad... Or am I missing something?�
Nov 22, 2014
AudubonB I thought somewhere there had been a thread specifically about materials sourcing for the gigafactory but, other than one devoted to lithium, now I cannot find it, so am presenting here an article in tomorrow's (23 Nov) Alaska Dispatch News regarding GRAPHITE.
It turns out there is a significant, and long-known, graphite deposit in western Alaska, in the Seward Peninsula (its location is at Graphite Creek, which is why I safely can say it's 'long-known'), that has been targeted for the past three years by a scratch exploration firm. From the article:The exploration company is from Vancouver; name is Graphite One Resources. I'll try to find out more about it.
Article:
Residents of Seward Peninsula villages meet with graphite mining company on Imuruk Basin deposit | Alaska Dispatch�
Nov 23, 2014
JRP3 Maybe you were thinking of this thread: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/29151-The-Resource-Angle�
Nov 23, 2014
AudubonB That was it - and now I remember that one is, for the most part, "your" thread. I'm sorry I couldn't find it last night.
What I did unearth is that Graphite One appears to be your bog-standard junior miner: focused on a single product and, in this case, a single expl'n area (many juniors have a small stable of prospects - these are, for the most part precious metal plays). Undercapitalized, as also is the norm. G1 did, however, just finish a re-capitalization exercise so that immediate danger is away for a while. They claim their burn ratio is very low - that's good.
The prospect covers an extremely large area; very shallow. That portion of the Seward Peninsula is no stranger to mining - a very large # of gold scratches there about this time last century. However, the infrastructure there is either rudimentary or none. I'll look again to see how close the deposit is to the Kougarok Road, but on the face of it material probably would have to be barged out from some kind of port in the Imuruk Basin to get to the deep water of Port Clarence - now I see they say they're 18 miles off the Teller Road, which is a tough push in that country but not necessarily a mine-breaker. The Teller more closely resembles what most people consider a "road" than is the really rough Kougarok. But access to either of the roads still only gets the material as far as Nome, which is not to be confused with Fremont, Reno or even Sparks. It's a start, though.�
Nov 23, 2014
Benz Next Gigafactory in Germany?
Link: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-says-talks-bmw-over-152243111.html
Link: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/elon-musk-elektroautobauer-tesla-plant-batteriefabrik-in-deutschland-a-1004441.html�
Nov 23, 2014
Cosmacelf I don't believe Tesla uses mined graphite, I believe it uses synthetic graphite.�
Nov 23, 2014
blakegallagher Thats correct Cosmacelf they use synthetic graphite�
Nov 24, 2014
Cattledog Is it a ploy to drum up sales? Or if it's in Germany it more likely speeds adoption of BEV by BMW, MB, VW, Audi, Porsche! etc.? or both?�
Nov 24, 2014
Curt Renz Keep in mind that a person's comments found in individual publications are generally not due to "announcements" planned by the interviewee. They are "responses" to reporters' questions.�
Nov 24, 2014
Robert.Boston My guess is that it's a combination of factors:
- Deep personnel pool in precision engineering & metalwork
- Generally pro-business environment
- Excellent transit links
- Proximity to other auto OEM factories (for delivering batteries)
- Becoming "part of the club" of German manufacturers to overcome domestic prejudice
�
Nov 28, 2014
aronth5 Not sure if this post belongs in this thread but I ran across an article written earlier this year related to Tesla that summarized the graphite market and some of the leading companies that might produce the anodes that are used in lithium ion batteries.
Graphite constitutes a significant % by weight of a typical lithium-ion battery compared to other materials so reducing the price is important.
There have been recent rumors that Tesla will announce fairly soon additional gigafactory partnerships. I wonder if any will be mining suppliers or is it too soon?
Going Natural: The Solution To Tesla�s Graphite Problem
http://www.techmetalsresearch.com/2014/03/going-natural-the-solution-to-teslas-graphite-problem/
Of the three companies the author highlights Northern Graphite located in Ontario just announced an Open Source Battery Research and Testing Facility.
"The facility will be available on normal commercial terms to any company, including Northern's competitors, provided that all results are made publicly available and shared with the industry"
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/northern-graphite-creates-open-source-172136013.html�
Nov 28, 2014
chickensevil I believe the stated reason for using synthetic graphite is because it produces a higher quality cell. So they won't sacrifice quality for price since the quality determines how dense the cell is.�
Nov 28, 2014
Cosmacelf Yes, I don't know why people keep talking about mined graphite. Elon has said that they use synthetic to ensure consistency. It may be one of many reasons why Tesla batteries are so long lived.�
Nov 28, 2014
aronth5 That may be why we haven't heard much about mined graphite recently. The article was from March 2014 but there doesn't seem to be much written about it since. Thank you for the feedback.�
Nov 30, 2014
Zzzz... QUOTE:"Tesla acknowledges that it is working with new cathode and anode materials for its next-generation battery, hoping to improve cost, density, and longevity.�
Tesla CEO Elon Musk: Next Disruption Is Next-Gen Battery�
Nov 30, 2014
Benz That quote is from Bob Rauh, director of business development for automotive and infrastructure at Panasonic.�
Dec 1, 2014
chickensevil I really like seeing this from Panasonic's view. The article even notes that we don't get a glimpse into this relationship from Panasonic's view very often. It helps validate that Elon isn't just blowing smoke and also shows that Panasonic seems to really care about working with Tesla on this project.�
Dec 1, 2014
favo That quote is just an excerpt from the Car & Driver blog (author Eric Tingwall). Presumably, he talked to someone at Tesla.�
Dec 2, 2014
aznt1217 Somehow nobody has posted this.
How Nevada won the Tesla Gigafactory | Fortune: How Nevada won the Tesla Gigafactory | Fortune - YouTube�
Dec 21, 2014
aronth5 I'm sure Tesla loves hearing the can do attitude because there will be many challenges over the next few years.
From Sparks Assistant City Manager Neil Krutz.. "Really, it's up to us to deliver on those capital and operating plans so that the capacity is there when it is needed," he added."
Regional officials: Reno area can handle Tesla growth but at hefty price
http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/story/6c236a774c754e12af6f369d1976b4e9/NV--Tesla-Impact-Reno/�
Dec 21, 2014
LakeForest Over in the "Tesla Motors" section Gigafactory thread there are pictures of the steel frame going up in case you only live in the investor threads.....�
Jan 7, 2015
RobStark 
�
Jan 7, 2015
ScepticMatt Looks like the two story steel structure is roughly 1/4 the size of the full factory.
I.e this is one of the "modules" they were talking about.�
Jan 7, 2015
chickensevil See I thought they were supposed to be doing just one floor not two... won't this make the factory 2x the size we were originally expecting? Are they building fewer modules at first to compensate the 2 floors thereby giving them more room off the bat? I am not complaining if this is true, just trying to figure out what the plan is.
So exciting seeing steel go up!�
Jan 7, 2015
RobStark 
�
Jan 7, 2015
chickensevil Looking closer it appears that the second floor height is shorter than the first floor. Maybe they are just going to use the second floor for offices? Which would save space. If this is the case would they extend the second floor across the whole factory or just over a small section? Would throw off the symmetry of the building... and they did say they wanted the building to look good... hrmmm... this has only raised more questions! GAH! Tesla give us some details already.�
Jan 7, 2015
Robert.Boston The Fremont factory also has two floors, in some areas. They use the upstairs for battery assembly. Perhaps they're planning something similar here: cell manufacturing downstairs, cell QC and battery assembly upstairs?�
Jan 7, 2015
Adm The second floor has a very high ceiling too, but it's not very clear until you zoom in further and see the construction workers.
Source: https://transportevolved.com/2015/01/07/tesla-gigafactory-update-high-res-shot-shows-buildings-now-going-reno-nv/�
Jan 7, 2015
ScepticMatt The 10M sq ft figure was 5M on two floors as long as I can remember (can't find where it was announced first)
Edit: found it here: http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/gigafactory.pdf
�
Jan 7, 2015
ScepticMatt are those solar panels?�
Jan 7, 2015
RubberToe I suspect that the steel that you see is the not entire first "module". I'll bet the first module is the end of the factory, so the steel you see is in the upper left of the first module. The entire first module would then include everything that lies on the leveled ground from there to the lower right. That is obviously the "end" of the factory. Future modules would then be added to the left of that. You don't want to be trying to set up a working assembly line in an area that has work going on around it on three different sides.
Thats a good sized area of floor space, even just in the steel already erected. Anybody with the skills to pull up google Earth and estimate the dimensions of what we see here?
RT�
Jan 7, 2015
RubberToe Assume the distance from the left edge to the line of yellow cones is either 6' or 10'. That gives you a total side to side of 100' or 160'. Assume the depth is 2x the width, so either 100' x 200' or 160' x 320'. Then assume that the area that doesn't yet have steel is about 4x the area that does. So your 20,000 or 51,200 sqft would then turn into 100,000 or 250,000 sqft. Allow 2x for both floors and you are looking at 200,000 or 500,000 sqft for the first module assuming the first module fills the graded area.
Even 500,000 sqft is pretty small compared to the 10,000,000 sqft mention in the graphic. And it certainly doesn't look like the site could hold 20 of these?
RT�
Jan 7, 2015
chickensevil It was previously mentioned that they could either go for 1 floor at 10M/Sq FT or 2 floors at 5. It was estimated that the acreage of the area that was cleared was enough for 10 on one level. That number easily fits in the same scope when you talk about the amount of land that they were given for the project (although granted some of that land is going to be parking lot and roads and such... but still)
Good eye on those potentially being solar panels. It is either that or just bare metal (like aluminum) sheets for the roof that are unpainted since they aren't likely to need to paint the roof if they are just going to cover it up anyway, right? But if it is just the roof itself they are building it out... a bit weird... since usually those metal sheets overlap with each other so you start on one side, go the full length and then work your way down. They have pieces off here and there with only one section completed. This to mean makes me lean toward solar only because I have never seen someone put a roof on a building in that fashion (and in a previous life I did some roofing work... although nothing on this level... so who knows?)
Finally, when you go to the site that was linked (transport evolved) and click the full high-res image and pan around, you can see some really great things. The section that was cropped and posted by adm show people which really shows the scale of it all.�
Jan 7, 2015
Cattledog No, the shiny elements you see are the metal decking that spans from beam to beam.�
Jan 7, 2015
maoing Anyone has ideas of what's the two white buildings in the middle-left side of the picture? It looks too close to Gigafactory and will it potentially limit the size of gigafactory?
�
Jan 7, 2015
LiveLong&Profit Cannot view high-res image
Hi all,
I have been following TMC, mainly the investor thread for a while. This is my first post.
Great forum, keep up the good work!
Adm: Great work posting both the high-res image and the cropped version, thx!
chickensevil: Nice idea to pan around the high-res image! I have tried 7-8 times but no joy
It seems like the (real or virtual) server hosting this image at cloudfront.net is busy:
Sometimes a tiny bit of the image is displayed. Most times nothing is displayed. In both cases the laconic error message is: "Aw, Snap! Something went wrong ..."
- Anyone else having problems viewing the high-res image?
(Step 1: Follow the URL at the bottom of post #1821. Step 2: Click on the small image in the article to view the high-res image)
- Is the high-res image cloned/mirrored somewhere else?�
Jan 7, 2015
ScepticMatt Diapers.com in the back, Toys R Us in the front.
Edit: 600,000 and 700,000 square feet, respectively.
http://www.tahoereno.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Basemap_005-111_LR.pdf
The full image is 120MB, so it may take a while.
I uploaded a larger full size crop on abload:
�
Jan 7, 2015
RichardL I have no trouble seeing the high-res version
Interesting seeing those white buildings are 700,000 and 600,000 sq feet (the Toys R Us looks to be a single story, 500 X 1400ft from Google Maps). Hard to tell from the perspective, but the module going up looks huge in comparison. I had estimated it to be 520 X 475 (the entire marked out footprint, not only the piece going up currently). But guessing from the other buildings it could be much larger.
It will be cool when the Google imagery shows the ongoing work.�
Jan 7, 2015
chickensevil need to tell google to deploy the satellites! go go go!�
Jan 7, 2015
hobbes Looks like the GigaFactory is about where the TahoeReno Industrial Park Logo is located in the map
Matt linked (article on TransportEvolved says pic is looking north west which would be along Portofino Drive):
So they are not even on a parcel marked here which makes sense as they had to do their own ground work.
I don�t see any danger the site might become too small, there is a whole parcel (23) as a buffer in
between the Gigafactory area and ToysRus. I am pretty sure Tesla thought about how much space they�ll need.
Cool to see things are happening!�
Jan 7, 2015
chickensevil Actually, from this map it looks like it might be that they took over portions of Parcel 24 (maybe even 23???) but it does indeed extend into the white space. Portofino Drive was what was renamed to Electric Ave.
- - - Updated - - -
I take it back, it is definately outside of the space of parcel 23 and 24. The angling of the aerial shots really throws things off...
If you look at this picture you can see what appears to be the site plan of the Gigafactory depicted. but it has a really WEIRD layout? So I am not sure how old/new this map actually is.
�
Jan 7, 2015
hobbes It might date back to the time before they moved the mountain�
Jan 7, 2015
rtz When are they going to start laying out the railroad track? That stuff takes time.�
Jan 7, 2015
c041v Okay, after some Googling and a little scaling, here's what I get;
The yellow cranes in the picture appear to be Liebherr LR1300's (These guys also seem to have a few, Bragg Companies - Branches) and the largest lower lattice boom sections comes in 40' 2" sections, which they appear to have installed on these machines.
I scaled the image using the lower boom section as a reference, and you can see (hopefully) the rest of the dimensions.
40' First floor clearance
25' Second floor clearance
"Module" dimensions appear to be 500' x 320' based on what they currently have foundations for. That's 160,000 sqft per level, and then it just depends on how many modules they go with. I agree that it does not look like they will be able to fit anywhere near 10,000,000 sqft in the currently prepared area.
The other interesting thing is the second floor joists are smaller depth W beams, and not open web joists like you'd see in a normal warehouse/factory application, so they are preparing for a ton of weight to go on top.
�
Jan 7, 2015
jhm Nice work, everyone, on piecing this together. I find it oddly stirring emotionally to see this factory start to take shape. I'm proud of the work being done, and proud to have a smale part in this as a shareholder. This is a very special factory. This Gigafactory will change the world.�
Jan 7, 2015
rtz Land a quadcopter on the solar panels then we will know what they are.�
Jan 7, 2015
Cattledog It's galvanized metal deck that spans between the beams. What looks like a solid roof structure is simply the beams marching off in perspective.
Above metal deck there may be a slab, but I doubt it on the roof. Would have insulation, then a membrane roof, then we'll see a zillion solar panels interspersed with rooftop mechanical equipment.�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét