How much do you think batteries can store in 5 years, and how cheap will they be?
Will there be a P400?
Will there be a P400?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Batteries in 5 years?
- Thread starter ElectricFuture
- Start date
There's a tradeoff between range/capacity, weight, performance and cost. Plus, there's a shrinking market interested in paying increasingly higher prices for additional range that is rarely needed (for most customers).
Musk has stated he believes the 100 battery packs may be the largest they put into a Model S/X - and after driving an S 100D since March, I'm not sure we'd need a much larger pack.
5 years ago, the largest battery pack for a Model S was an 85. Today, the largest pack is a 100. So we've only seen a 15 KWh increase over 5 years, using the same battery. Tesla is using a newer battery for the Model 3 - and it's likely Tesla could build a higher capacity battery for the S/X - within the size/weight constraints for the S/X and increase the capacity above 100.
But will they?
Increasing battery capacity also increases charging times. Even if you could produce a 400 KWh battery pack - how long would it take to charge it at a typical home? And would it be cost effective for Tesla to produce S/X superchargers that could deliver 200 KWh in 20-30 minutes?
What seems more likely is for Tesla to focus on reducing the weight by going to newer batteries, which should also result in a small performance gain. Newer batteries (at the same battery pack capacity) should also lower the production cost, which Tesla will need to compete against other manufacturers and to achieve profitability. And, Musk has already indicated they are planning ultra-fast chargers, that could reduce charging times down to 5-10 minutes (assuming 100 battery packs).
Musk has stated he believes the 100 battery packs may be the largest they put into a Model S/X - and after driving an S 100D since March, I'm not sure we'd need a much larger pack.
5 years ago, the largest battery pack for a Model S was an 85. Today, the largest pack is a 100. So we've only seen a 15 KWh increase over 5 years, using the same battery. Tesla is using a newer battery for the Model 3 - and it's likely Tesla could build a higher capacity battery for the S/X - within the size/weight constraints for the S/X and increase the capacity above 100.
But will they?
Increasing battery capacity also increases charging times. Even if you could produce a 400 KWh battery pack - how long would it take to charge it at a typical home? And would it be cost effective for Tesla to produce S/X superchargers that could deliver 200 KWh in 20-30 minutes?
What seems more likely is for Tesla to focus on reducing the weight by going to newer batteries, which should also result in a small performance gain. Newer batteries (at the same battery pack capacity) should also lower the production cost, which Tesla will need to compete against other manufacturers and to achieve profitability. And, Musk has already indicated they are planning ultra-fast chargers, that could reduce charging times down to 5-10 minutes (assuming 100 battery packs).
Bob_p's post is pretty on target, though I, for one, really would like more 'real world' range. I'd like to have a full 300 miles in cold weather on the interstate at 10mph over the speed limit...like I'd drive my gas vehicle. Not sure what that would mean as far as battery size, probably something in the 150-175kWh range I'd guess for a Model S. I'd rarely use all that, but there are still plenty of routes that I drive where I can't get to and there's inadequate supercharger infrastructure. And, frankly, it's annoying on routes I drive frequently that are 220 miles on interstate where it can be done if I drive 60mph and the weather is warm, or I have to stop for 20-30 min or more to charge half-way and then charge again on arrival so I'm ready for the return trip. The additional buffer could eliminate 2 stops on a trip of that length (the midway charges going up and coming back) and lend a little peace of mind should there be an accident that slows me down and extends the drive.
We do enough round trip drives of 360-450 miles or more that the bit of extra time to charge starts to add up and be a bit annoying and takes additional planning.
We do enough round trip drives of 360-450 miles or more that the bit of extra time to charge starts to add up and be a bit annoying and takes additional planning.
No, it doesn’t. It would actually decrease charging times. You’re falling into this logical fallacy, where you’re thinking of the battery as being a binary object, where it’s used, and that makes it “empty”, and then you fill it, and that makes it “full”. But it’s not like that. You drive some amount of miles, and you need to refill that amount of miles, unrelated to what the total size of the battery pack is.
Think this through. You drive to work and back home and are going to refill overnight. You used 88 miles or something that day. So you only need to refill 88 miles, not however big the battery capacity is. People get this wrong idea that bigger and bigger batteries in the future are going to mean more and more charging time, but that’s not so. You only live however far you live from work. An 85 kWh or an 85,000 kWh battery does not change how many miles you drive and need to replenish.
So back to the other thing I said—actually faster charging time is because with bigger batteries, you get to charge faster for longer periods of time. Remember what I was saying about miles driven and miles to be recharged? When you’re on a trip, and you go 200 miles at a time between Superchargers, then if you have a battery where 200 miles is all of it, then you’re in the tapering slowdown for a lot. But if 200 miles is only half the capacity, then you get to run at the fast full speed charging rate the whole time, and you’ve got your 200 miles back sooner.
Absolutely.... And, to some degree, it shortens charging time. If you drive 200 miles on a 300 mile pack and need 200 miles to get to your next stop, since the "full" mark is 300 miles you get to take advantage of the fastest charging speeds during the entire time you're adding the miles you need. If you have a 230 mile pack and need 200 miles to get to your next destination you have to wait through the much slower charge rates as the battery gets more full.
While an empty 400 mile pack will take longer to get 100% full than a 200 mile pack, it isn't linear since the peak charge rate will blow right past the 200 mile mark on the 400 mile pack and won't start slowing until the ~350 mile range. Your need for 'full'/max charges will be much less frequent.
Electric700
Active Member
I think that in 5 years, Teslas will have a minimum 450 mile range, standard. The higher end Teslas will probably have a 550+ mile range and wireless charging as standard features as well. All of this can be accomplished with new battery technologies as well as integrating with the next generation of Plugless Power. Let's hope it happens!
Similar threads
