TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Envia - Tesla "cannot bring the battery cost down with the chemistry they are using"

Discussion in 'Battery Discussion' started by Owner, Jan 5, 2013.

  1. Owner

    Owner Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2012
    Messages:
    1,226
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
  2. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Texas
    Translation: Tesla doesn't use the batteries that we make.
     
  3. FredTMC

    FredTMC Model S VIN #4925

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,999
    Location:
    Orange County CA
    Yeah. LOL. I read that interview too. He's wrong. Tesla isn't married to any particular battery chemistry. Elon and team will use whatever is best at any particular time in the future. Up to this point, the standard laptop chemistry and 18650 form factor was best. In the future, they'll weigh their options.
     
  4. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,038
    Exactly. Plus 18650 format is very flexible and Tesla has already had a chemistry change (from standard Lithium cobalt oxide to the newer NCA chemsitry, which is more energy dense and cheaper due to using less cobalt).

    Envia is riding a wave of good PR, but I suggest they not set expectations so high lest they become the next a123.
     
  5. FredTMC

    FredTMC Model S VIN #4925

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2012
    Messages:
    2,999
    Location:
    Orange County CA
    yep. Exhibit A. TM has already switched chemistry once and they will do again many times as tech evolves.
     
  6. dpeilow

    dpeilow Moderator

    Joined:
    May 23, 2008
    Messages:
    8,572
    Location:
    Winchester, UK
    Not really most.
     
  7. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    Well, most of the ones at a Tesla store.
    :)
     
  8. LazMan

    LazMan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2012
    Messages:
    123
    Location:
    Toronto
    My understanding is that Envia, or any other improved battery technology that comes along would be used by Tesla if they felt it was an improvement on what they have now.
     
  9. Zythryn

    Zythryn MS 70D, MX 90D

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,660
    Location:
    Minnesota
    I don't believe so.
    Tesla uses consumer batteries for a number of reasons. The technology is well proven, and the cost is lower. It also allows them the greatest flexibility in suppliers. A123 went bankrupt, Fisker now has major concerns about what the Chinese company that owns the remains of A123 is going to do.
     
  10. Zzzz...

    Zzzz... Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    East Asia/Canada
    In one interview Musk said that there is chemistry in development(last summer I believe) that have a real promise for delivering of much lower prices. But he right away made a remark that he could not discuss the subject(NDA?).

    So Tesla is definitely open to propositions. But so do other automakers.
     
  11. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,038
    As long as they make it in 18650 format, Tesla can pretty much use it. So Tesla can use A123 if they wanted to since A123 does make their cells in that format:
    http://www.a123systems.com/lifepo4-battery-cell.htm

    Apparently Envia can make their chemistry in 18650 format too:
    http://enviasystems.com/company/about-us/
     
  12. Zzzz...

    Zzzz... Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    East Asia/Canada
    ??? Are you aware that Fisker fought fiercely in a court in attempt to prevent Johnson Controls from acquiring A123? Fisker created lawsuit specifically designed to give Wanxiang more time to come up with competing bid. And Wanxiang was reluctant to bid, having it share of problems with Chinese authorities approving oversees investment. Plus doubting US legal system/authorities after first(summer) acquisition attempt failed.

    Are you aware that first thing that Johnson Controls did after placing it bid was asking judge to dismiss contract between A123 and Fisker? Johnson did not like to be bothered by being forced to deal with smallish EV producers like Fisker...

    How dose this constitute "major concerns about ... Chinese company"?

    At the end Wanxiang was able to get approval in China and placed it bid virtually in a last minute of the auction. But with all anti-Chinese sentiments around Fisker & Wanxiang might get screwed again. There are lots of press that deal should not go through... And US authorities seems to still have a means of doing just that.

    PS. Sorry, I missed your post on first pass. You might have posted after I started to type mine or something.:smile:
     
  13. JRP3

    JRP3 Hyperactive Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    10,084
    Location:
    Central New York
    Actually he's right, and your last sentence brings home his point. He said Tesla cannot bring the cost down with the chemistry they are using. In fact they are using different chemistry in the S than they used in the Roadster, and future cost reductions will probably come from different chemistry as well. I'd say he's wrong when he says Tesla is using the wrong chemistry, they are using the most energy dense and cost effective chemistry at the moment. If Envia or anyone else comes up with something cheaper and better I'm sure Tesla will use it.
     
  14. jerry33

    jerry33 S85 - VIN:P05130 - 3/2/13

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2012
    Messages:
    12,743
    Location:
    Texas
    But his overall point is that Tesla isn't sustainable because Tesla is using the wrong chemistry (not his). Because Tesla isn't married to a particular chemistry, the overall point is wrong, and the fact that the particular chemistry Tesla is using now isn't likely to decrease in price doesn't enter into it.
     
  15. JRP3

    JRP3 Hyperactive Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    Messages:
    10,084
    Location:
    Central New York
    Where did he say anything about Tesla being sustainable? All he said was Tesla did a great job working with the cells they have but that the current chemistry they are using doesn't have room for much cost reduction. I think you are reading more into it than was said.
     
  16. Zzzz...

    Zzzz... Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    East Asia/Canada
    I was wondering what "more manganese and less cobalt" chemistry Envia is using. It happens to be:

    "cells based on a novel high-voltage Manganese rich (HCMR) layered-layered Li2MnO3·LiMO2 composite cathode"

    so no cobalt at all.
     
  17. Delian Stoikov

    Delian Stoikov New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2013
    Messages:
    1
    Location:
    Germany
    I don't remember where, but there was a video with some interview with musk, and he said he sees no reason that the price of batteries can't come down, if the cost of raw materials is $80 per kWh, there is obviously a lot of room for improvements. Not sure where he takes the $80, but I assume he knows what he is talking about.
     

Share This Page