I'm not sure that's true -- or at least not to a degree that matters, compared to having the flexibility to do something "new and better" for Model X given the larger vehicle size that it is expected to have. Same goes for the pickup truck market. A "super duty" 2x85kWh truck is likely pretty compelling, but if you can bump it to 200kWh by using a different packaging that might be worth your effort.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Does it have to? No of course not. Will it? More than likely.
Tesla just eliminated a variation in battery pack component by eliminating the 60kWh pack by using the same modules from the 85kWh pack for the 70D. (Unconfirmed speculation, but only logical conclusion based on data available.) The 70D would still use the 14 module slots the 60kWh pack used, except with more cells per module. So no change there. Not even a change in voltage from the original 60kWh pack. Literally an updated field in the programming of the pack BMS to adjust the module capacity. The pack housings are the same with different innards near the nose. Switching to one module type is logical and eliminates a complexity.
Adding another complexity (a completely new pack that holds more modules) would seem to undermine the need for production optimization.
Again, considering the Model X is basically built on the Model S "skateboard" (wasn't this officially said somewhere?) then it is logical that it will use the same battery form factor.
I generally agree. My point for raising the question was for evaluation purposes (devil's advocate, etc.). We tend to have a bit of group think of "well the simple/logical is ... and thus of course Tesla will ..." and then Tesla surprises us in one way or another by "meandering" from the path we expect only to point out that they had one or more additional long-term targets we weren't aware of. (Long sentence alert!).
Regarding your first sentence, one could interpret differently...
DjiM
Member
What if the announced product is a very rapid DC home charger that approaches SuC speeds?
If you add a home-installed buffer battery to the mix, a home supercharger could become a possibility.
While the car is absent, the buffer battery that is installed at home is charged using solar power or grid power. When the car returns, it can be charged quickly, draining DC from the buffer battery (might even use the SuC protocol).
If you add a home-installed buffer battery to the mix, a home supercharger could become a possibility.
While the car is absent, the buffer battery that is installed at home is charged using solar power or grid power. When the car returns, it can be charged quickly, draining DC from the buffer battery (might even use the SuC protocol).
I don't see a general use case for that. The number of times I would have needed this in the last two years is zero. Plus you'd have to have a pretty big buffer battery (at least half the size of the car's) to make it worthwhile. Most of the home installations Tesla has talked about and deployed are in the 10kWh size.
DjiM
Member
Would allow you to charge at night using solar power
For solar owners, rates are the cheapest at night. You would want to have the battery charge up using the grid at night, at Super Off Peak rates, and that battery discharges / powers your home at more expensive rates. During the day, solar will be sold back to the utility.
In a perfect world, a home battery would do something like this for me:
Midnight to 6am (Super Off Peak, $0.09/kW): Fully charge 15kWh home battery to 100%
6am to 2pm (Off Peak, $0.21/kW): Over-generate / sell solar power back to utility
2pm to 8pm (On Peak, $0.34/kW): Home switches to 15kW battery
8pm to midnight (Off Peak, $0.21/kW): If home battery discharged, buy back power from utility at $0.21/kW - same price that was sold to them earlier in the day.
For your utility on your rate plan maybe, but don't project that onto everyone.
I'm on a municipal power company in MA. They don't offer TOU plans, and my utility does not do net metering (in MA, muni's are exempt from the net metering law). They pay wholesale (currently $0.06/kWh) for excess generation, and charge me retail (currently $0.15/kWh) for power I draw from the grid.
Edit:
I wouldn't mind a system that allowed me to capture excess production and store it during the day (rather then sell at $0.06/kWh), and draw from it when consumption exceeds production. However, I think integrating that into my system, and monitoring the Enphase microinverter system for production data and energy flows would be tricky.
I envision the Tesla system as being a grid-tied string inverter with integrated batteries, giving a single point of control to manage power flow to/from the grid, from the panels, and to/from the batteries.
Last edited:
You made a blanket statement that "For solar owners, rates are the cheapest at night." I just gave an example where it wasn't necessarily true. Seemed like you were assuming everyone had a similar situation as you.
Agree, but we will have to see if it can integrate with the particulars of my system. I have a multi-level roof, with a couple of large dormers. The result is that a few of my 36 panels (sometimes 1, sometimes 4) are in shade morning/afternoon. Microinverters allow my system to continue to get maximum output from the panels that still have sun throughout the day. If I had to replace them with a Tesla battery-equipped string inverter, my production would drop to near 0 during those morning/afternoon times.
Also, I have to be able to outright purchase it. My utility doesn't allow grid-tied leased (non-customer owned) equipment, so no leases through Solar City.
Could be worse - here muni's aren't even required to pay for excess generation. They're doing me a favor paying me wholesale instead of nothing.
A new owner at TM Forums was told by a service technician that the 70D used next generation battery cells with a higher power density.
I wouldn't be surprised if a service technician said that the Teslas secretly ran on ground up smurfs at this point. They say all kinds of stuff.
qwertzy
Member
A month ago JB spoke at an energy symposium. He said that Model S batteries improved by 20%-30% since Roadster, and that the Model 3's batteries will improve another 20%-30% from today's Model S. JB said that the improvements to energy density in lithium-ion cells can continue at this rate for a really long time. Well, Model 3 is only two years away. If the 70 kWh pack was based on higher density cells, then it represents a 17% improvement. The numbers appear to scale according to what JB has said.
qwertzy
Member
And here it says there has been an increase in density from 233wh/kg to 300wh/kg
Predictions for new battery | Forums | Tesla Motors
Predictions for new battery | Forums | Tesla Motors
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
But Elon is not necessarily talking about cells currently in production. From his tone it sounds as if he's talking about lab grade cells that might be close to production.
Similar threads
