Wow, I'm so glad this could be $20 less than what I thought. This could move the cost from $116 to $96 and price from $164 to $141.
Thanks, evme.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Gigafactory Financial Modeling
- Thread starter jhm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Gigafactory TSLA
Thanks, evme.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
From Nissan battery leaks, it looks like LG is ready to supply batteries at $200/kWh from 2016 - so, gigafactory will have some competition.
Chickenlittle
Banned
you must be confused. all my FUD sources claim that batteries cannot be produced so cheaply.
This is nice, but my model is suggesting Tesla could offer a much better deal. $165 with no upfront money at which price Tesla makes a 31% GM or better. Or lock in $125 for five years with $95 upfront. The upfront money basically finances the Gigafactory expansion in the first 2 to 3 years when it would otherwise be cash flow negative.
So if Nissan is obligated to buy a certain amount for several years or is paying substantial money upfront to lock in this price, it will not prove to be very good deal. We should always be wary of unit prices without knowledge of the upfront money or other obligations of the deal. The buyer could be essentially buying a call or selling a put to get to a better unit price. Certainly by 2020, that $200 unit price is going to look highly uncompetitive.
Elon said on the last earnings call that he'd be really disappointed if the cost per kWh was more than $100 in 10 years. I took that to mean 10 years from today, not 10 years from 2017 when it opens. So <$100/kWh by 2024. He hasn't let us down yet, other than delaying the Model X a bit. I think that's a number you can bank on. I think this is even more in their wheelhouse than you could say building a car was a few years ago.
Years ago, the joke about HP was that it was just a printer company. The internal joke, however, was the it wasn't a printer company, but an ink company.
Yup. Makes me want to go back to a question I asked awhile ago - when do we think Tesla Motors, Inc. changes their name to Tesla, Inc.? It's similar to Apple's drop of 'computer' when it was already a foregone conclusion that its personal digital devices would be two orders of magnitude more popular than their computers.
chickensevil
Active Member
Even if LG is able to pump out at 200$/kW how many cells can they put out? I mean keep in mind that competition isn't just about the magical 30k price point but also at least 200 miles of range. If Nissan has to compromise at a 150 mile car (or less) because they can't get enough cells then it doesn't matter. On the other hand if Nissan breaks down and makes a 200 mile+ range car but can only make a small number of them then it is pretty much the same boat.
Finally I would welcome a second or third serious competitor to Tesla, since it will make EVs more mainstream without serious risk of hitting on Tesla's demand.
Finally I would welcome a second or third serious competitor to Tesla, since it will make EVs more mainstream without serious risk of hitting on Tesla's demand.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I've not seen the model so I can't make any specific comments - but the numbers look optimistic.
One thing to consider is that Nissan is the largest EV maker in the world and LG getting Nissan to buy from LG instead of from their own JV would be a big win. Nissan thus has a lot going for it when they get to the negotiation.
- - - Updated - - -
A LOT.
The important thing to remember is LG is already a very large producer of batteries and can probably ramp up production of cathodes.
Nissan already has large plants in Japan, US & Europe to manufacture batteries. If Nissan uses LG, they'll probably get the cathodes and manufacture the batteries themselves. Nissan battery factories are sized to produce 250k or so batteries a year.
http://www.autonews.com/article/20140917/BLOG06/140919855/scrap-nissans-leaf-battery-plant?-hardly
Interesting blog. If I understand the author with orange glasses correctly, LG will only provide "battery technology." Nissan will still have to transform "large rolls of imported ultra-thin electrode sheets" into cells, then cells into modules, and modules into battery packs. So clearly there's a lot of finishing work for the Tennessee plant to do. This begs the question then of what the complete battery pack cost per kWh will be for Nissan. If LG is charging them $200 for "battery technology", does Nissan have to spend another $100 to $200 per kWh to arive at a finished product?
The Nissan/Infiniti blogger with orange glasses seems intent to defend Nissan's investment in the Smyrna plant, but he may unwittingly be exposing that the economics of a $200/kWh deal with LG may not be as favorable as it sounds. To put this in perspective, the Gigafactory is geared to minimizing the cost of finished battery packs. So if Tesla brings this under $165, that may well be under half the finished pack cost of Nissan and LG.
If you find any information on just what is included in this "battery technology" deal, do show. I've been having a little fun with the apologist with orange glasses, but I should hope that Nissan is at least getting some finished cells out of this deal. For the greater good of EVs in the world, I hope Nissan can bring their total cost under $200. Perhaps just the threat of competion from the Gigafactory will press LG to offer better terms to Nissan. So whether Nissan ever buys from the Gigafactory, it can surely benefit from competition among potential suppliers.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
You are putting 2 totally different things together - out of context.
The $200/kWh comes from what Nissan targets. The leaked reports say cost of Nissan batteries is 10% or so higher - and that's the reason Ghosn may want to get LG batteries.
The battery factory needs to be seen in the context of manufacturing capacity. In other words. don't look at Nissan buying LG batteries as a battery deal - but a critical technology and parts deal that will help Nissan achieve that $200/kWh target while utilizing the battery manufacturing plants they can't close down anyway under the loan agreements with governments.
BTW, describing someone you don't know much about as an "apologist with orange glasses", I think, reflects more on you than on the author. The context for his article was the leaked report that claimed the battery factory will be shutdown. He is saying why he thinks that won't be the case. There are a lot of other reports to the same effect, if you search.
Ok, so your understanding is that $200 is an all in taget cost for complete battery packs. Please, keep us posted as specifics come to light. Thanks.
chickensevil
Active Member
But that's my point. If they ramp their factories to full production and they want to up their battery size to 60kW (what I assume would let them also hit 200 miles of range) you are looking at cutting their total output to 100k a year from their 250k potential (Because they have a 24kW battery in current Leaf's... Leaves... errr you know what I mean)
So they would still have to build out a ton more supply of batteries if they actually want to compete with Tesla. Unless, they plan to continue to sell the leaf with low range and instead cut the price in half so the car only costs 15k? Because otherwise if they continue to sell it for 30k and it only has 75miles they why would I buy a leaf when I could get a Model 3 which will have greater performance, range, and luxury?
Note if they only up to 150miles (what people are suspecting they will do) that drops their 250k potential down to around 125-150k a year... they would do better just squeeze out just a bit bigger of a battery IMO.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Lots of assumptions there. First, you mean 60 kWh and not 60 kW.
The basic idea is that LG has been able to cut costs by increasing density (and thus using less materials). So, if the same size battery stores more energy, you are not decreasing the battery manufacturing capacity from 250k to 100k. Note that it will be far more difficult for Tesla to expand capacity to more than 500k compared to Nissan (or for that matter other large OEMs).
Here is my guess on Leaf & Infiniti options.
Leaf 80 mile : $25k
Leaf 150 mile : $30k
Leaf 200 mile : $35k
Infiniti 200 mile : $40k
One thing Nissan/Infiniti won't have is the super chargers. They have the more chaotic CHAdeMO though, much better than non-existent CCS of GM.
chickensevil
Active Member
Seriously? kWh/kW you knew what I meant, please don't be pedantic about such little things. (one of the few times I had actually typed it incorrectly...)
Where do you get the notion that it will be harder for Tesla vs Nissan to expand capacity? If everyone is battery limited, then it will be whoever can secure more batteries than the other that will determine who is able to win that fight. While Tesla has issue with exceeding 500k right now, by the time they are on track to exceed it they will be fully intending to build another factory... likely well before the cap. But the biggest issue remains the batteries. LG isn't likely to resolve that issue any quicker than Panasonic/Tesla is.
Note that the 250k capacity for the leaf is their current cap, that isn't how many they are ACTUALLY producing, but rather their hypothetical capacity just like Tesla's hypothetical capacity is 500k. This means that even if Nissan's battery issues are magically solved tomorrow and they could build as many Leaf's as possible then they would still be capped at 250k. So to overcome this, Nissan will have to either install more capacity somewhere or build a new factory... which is pretty much the same boat Tesla is in, except Tesla has double the potential before they have to really worry about it.
The only leg up that Nissan might have is that they might potentially have more cash reserves for such an expansion than does Tesla.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Plus One. As if Panasonic/Tesla is not increasing energy and power density as well. :biggrin:
Only Nissan/LG can improve batteries and the range of their electric cars.
Leaf 80 mile : $27k
Leaf 150 mile : $35k w/ more standard content.
Leaf 200 mile : Does not exist
Infiniti 200 mile : $45k
The big question is will Nissan add TMS?
Last edited:
EVNow
Well-Known Member
I don't follow your postings to know whether you were making a typo or didn't know.
I was talking about cars and not batteries there.
- - - Updated - - -
Shouldn't we assume Tesla has taken that into account when talking about Gigafactory ?
Actually, of the above none but the first one exists, right ?
I'm always amazed how sure people here are that no Tesla competitor car can ever emerge. I expect a big drop in TSLA when Nissan or other OEM announces a long range EV.
In the context of the discussion (see thread title) is the batteries. Nissan could ramp up producing a million car bodies if they wanted to, but if they can't supply enough batteries then that doesn't matter. You have 24kWh x 250k = 6 GWh annual production. I'd like to see any claims by LG to be able to double GWh production as you've implied, whether by cell chemistry improvements or production expansion. Surely such a thing would have been worthy of a press release.
I absolutely expect a competing long range EV to emerge, I just don't see one appearing out of the blue. And certainly not a compelling one anytime soon from Nissan, as their current solution lacks any sort of thermal management systems and degrade quite rapidly. If you have any sources to the contrary, I would love to hear about it.
Krugerrand
Meow
More accurately, a competitor or compelling, no compromise long range BEV hasn't appeared so far and other than a little bit of gum flapping none appear even close. It's not like Tesla didn't tell the OEMs what was coming. It's not like Tesla hasn't encouraged competition, copying or partnership. The response by the OEMs thus far has been a flick of the hand, as if brushing a bug from your arm. Only Daimler and Toyota had any sense early on to get in and even their reaction has been underwhelming. In truth, it's been NADA and certain state politicians that have turned themselves inside out about Tesla and tried to stop them.
At this point there is no indication from any OEM for any Model S, X or 3 competitor on the near horizon. While I don't recall 'how sure people are here that no Tesla competitor can ever emerge', I do recall how sure people are here that they want a Tesla competitor for the good of all of us. That a competitor does not mean a big drop in TSLA as there's plenty of market for more than one BEV manufacturer, but rather a competitor means faster adoption of sustainable transport - the end goal of Tesla, and therefore a win.
EVNow, I would challenge you to name one competitor that is willing to disrupt its own ICE business by making an EV model that is clearly superior to all their conventional models. Is the Leaf the best car that Nissan can make? Is the i3 the best car BMW can make? Only when a competitor puts forward an EV as the best vehicle it can offer will it be worthy to compete with Tesla.
Similar threads
