June 20th Speculation

[austinEV]

I have travelled to the future (june 21) and read all the TMC forum posts. I can say for certain:

1) The photo title is a headfake. Whoever named that file would be insta-fired if that leaked out. There is actually no logical reason for a generic model S photo to have that particular name. It would just be "model_s_red_leftside_day_moving_126_feb17.jpg". The tesla guys read this forums too and they needed to buy time so we wouldn't guess the actual obvious announcement. and we are all falling for it nicely.

2) EM has said the announcement is (paraphrasing) obvious, but clever in execution... (some tweet) Battery swaps by hand in service centers fails this test.

3) Its a big hoopla announcement at a SC. It is NOT battery swapping. They can't secretly build a swapper (bay/building/robot) and not have us notice.... come on, we parse the sentences and filenames of every email. No one noticed the big robot being installed in the new bay at one of the 6 SC stations?

4) It is instead, exactly what they have been saying over and over. It's recharging very quickly. The faster 120kWh was a bonus announcement attached to the SC rollout announcement. No reason at all the 5th cannot be ultra-charging. 120kW is the baseline grid-based charging. Ultra-charging is DC to DC charging from captive battery packs at the SC stations, (insert the usual physics complaints here). This is accomplished very easily by.... time travel messages get garbled here....under your nose... garble...

5) You should have known it wasn't a battery swap demo for a another reason. It has been demo'ed before, in some old videos. Yeah its 30 bolts and some hoses and a team can change a battery in 5 min. So what, that isn't an exciting demo.

6) no more complaints about how the battery is "an important structural element so swapping is hard". It is a structural member in the sense that it keeps the square shaped frame from sheering during driving (going from a rectangle to a trapezoid) but those stresses aren't present when parked. The bit of 1/4 plywood tacked onto the back of your Billy bookshelf accomplishes the same thing, and I promise you can swap out that panel if you want.


Special bonus tin-foil-hat theory: we all already have 100kWh batteries installed. Its "under our nose" and "model S owners will be very happy". So, existing SC can go to 50% SOC in the newly released shadow capacity. As musk said in the June 20 announcement: "...we wanted to be sure that we would not need all that extra unused capacity before releasing it in software patch 6.0. But, after careful testing and the fixing of the sleep current issues, we are now confident we can enable this, as we had always intended". I mean, why did you think the curb weight was so high on an aluminum car?

 

[Palpatine]

1) The photo title is a headfake. Whoever named that file would be insta-fired if that leaked out. There is actually no logical reason for a generic model S photo to have that particular name. It would just be "model_s_red_leftside_day_moving_126_feb17.jpg". The tesla guys read this forums too and they needed to buy time so we wouldn't guess the actual obvious announcement. and we are all falling for it nicely.

That actually could be it. That type of error is just too silly for Tesla to make.
It would not surprise me if they intentionally made a fake name on the file to misdirect from the real announcement.

Someone take some pictures of how the battery pack is connected to the car. Does it even look like a quick release design? Or are there hundreds of bolts holding it in place?
I never looked that closely when in the store. I doubt the would make it easy to release the battery pack. They don't want people trying a DIY swap.

 

[stopcrazypp]

You are starting to get the idea of why the battery swap concept is a financial and logistical nightmare.
The battery swap station needs to have all sizes in stock for every model. And they also likely need multiple packs of every size and every model always ready to go.

Actually no. Tesla only has two platforms slated for production: the Model S/X platform and the GenIII/Roadster platform. There will be more cars built on those two platforms. That's two battery sizes. And in terms of capacity, Tesla will only have to stock the largest capacity available (so again, only two types of batteries). Tesla is planning a 7 year refresh cycle, which would coincide well with expected battery life (when those packs can be retired for other use). Tesla will not have to stock many types of batteries even if they plan to do a full swap network.

And I don't get why you hate battery swap so much. Tesla does not have to build a full network. It can be the service center version mentioned or it could be a slow expansion of stations at the most traveled routes. The key thing battery swap provides it ends the last weak point about EVs: that they can't refuel in less than 5-15 minutes. This is something that supercharging can't provide and charging in general can't practically provide.

 

[cdabel]

I have seen in to the future too, and Tesla has announced that they will have battery swapping, and power the SuperCharger grid from all of the back pedalling from this thread

 

[austinEV]

Or did they give it that name so that it would seem so obvious and throw us off that it was in fact battery swapping? Both cups could have iocane powder in it and the actual announcement is workable 30kWh Al-air frunk batteries that trickle charge as you drive/park, allowing easier access to the "cabin in the woods kind of far from a SC" situation that members keep describing. That also passes all the tests (obvious, but clever. under your nose. demonstration. can recharge anywhere, because Al cartridges can be sold at a retail partner).

The only actual problem with this theory is that it is far-fetched. But that is the real Tony Stark-esque home run.

 

[Palpatine]

Actually no. Tesla only has two platforms slated for production: the Model S/X platform and the GenIII/Roadster platform. There will be more cars built on those two platforms. That's two battery sizes. And in terms of capacity, Tesla will only have to stock the largest capacity available (so again, only two types of batteries). Tesla is planning a 7 year refresh cycle, which would coincide well with expected battery life (when those packs can be retired for other use). Tesla will not have to stock many types of batteries even if they plan to do a full swap network.

That assumes that battery pack technology is not going to change in the coming years. Tesla has already changed dramatically just since the Roadster battery pack was designed. JB and his team could figure out another way to do it entirely that makes more sense. Or a new format battery could make more sense and require a redesign of the shape of the platform. I would not bet at all on Tesla battery packs staying the same going forward on all future models.

 

[Johan]

I've been reading this thread with a lot of interest and I love the specualtion and all the different views. I believe Tesla will demonstrate quick swapping - there is just so much suggesting that. However, I believe that they may also at the same time demonstrate even quicker SuperCharging through use of on-site battery packs. I'm all for options (I believe some else who I think is very clever recently said something to that effect [Elon]).

One thing that amazes me a little are how people are coming on so strong critizising the whole battery swap idea. "It will drive Tesla to bancrupcy", "I'll cancel my order", "The stock will tank", "The dumbest thing I've ever heard". Do you guys really think that you are smarter than Elon and his team? Remeber what was said about so much of what Tesla has done so far: "It can't be done", "No-one can afford the car, there is no market, they will sell a few thousand and then run out of customers", "Who need a car with that much range?", "It will be impossible to cover the whole US with Superchargers", "The technology isn't mature yet" etc. etc.

Also those drawing conclusions from Better Place's failure: Better place didn't make cars. They were dependent on manufacturers and as far as I know they only had a deal with Renault. And Renault chose to have a 43kW AC charging option on their cars as well as swapping. Saying swapping will be the start of Tesla's failure is like saying Tesla will fail just 'cause A123 systems failed, or because GM shut down the EV-1 etc. Please, please judge Tesla on their own merit only. Tesla is another beast entirely. If Tesla decides to do swapping I'm confident they will do it sucessfully both technically and financially and even those who are now saying they won't go near a swapper will see the benefit eventually. It's all about conquering the market, and for that you have to appeal to everyone. Just the same as they will be making trucks, super-sport cars, SUVs, convertibles etc. in the future.

 

[Yggdrasill]

At the risk of getting off topic: It's not about being able to drive for 10 hours without stopping. It's about being able to go further between charges (and, with vampire drain, time is a factor as well - 10 miles of range loss/day can quickly add up).

I'm currently planning a trip from LA to SF. Superchargers on the way up will be great. But then I'm headed a little further north, to Sebastopol for a day, and then back down and over to Tahoe. Say I charge at Harris Ranch on the way up, and then cut over to Gilroy to top off. Gilroy to Sebastopol is 131 miles. Then I'll need to stop in Folsom to recharge on the way to Tahoe - that's another 120 miles. So we're looking at 251 miles between supercharger stops. Potentially doable, but a bit too close for my taste; I'll definitely want to recharge somewhere along the way.

For me, this is a situation in which a 500-mile range battery would make this trip a lot easier to plan and let me spend more time enjoying my trip and less time seeking out the Superchargers (or public stations where I can park overnight). For that benefit, I'd gladly drive over to our service center, rent a 500-mile pack for the week, and then swap it back out for my battery upon my return.

I completely agree with you.

Regular battery swapping would flop, but if you offer longer-range battery packs, I'm sure there's a market. Also, with longer range battery packs, you need fewer battery swap stations. (With a 500 mile range, Denmark and Israel would be covered with one battery swap station each, instead the dozens better place needed.)

Battery swapping larger batteries also resolve one of the issues that Tesla is catching flak over here in Europe. If you're cruising down the autobahn at 100 mph, in a Model S with 5 people and luggage, running the AC, you have probably around 100 miles range. Stopping for 20 minutes every 30 minutes is unacceptable for most people. Stopping for 10 minutes every two hours is more acceptable.

This mostly solves the issues for the Model X, if you're towing a trailer. Just pull in to a battery swap station, get a fresh 200 kWh battery and you're good to go for maybe 200-300 miles. (A 200 kWh battery would need around 600 Wh/kg, approximately where we are currently at with lithium-air.)

 

[Palpatine]

Let's say that Tesla does have the engineering in place to do battery swaps easily. If they demo it on June 20th, the story the next day would be comparing the concept to Better Place, which lost $800 million in venture capital trying the idea.
Nobody is going to parse the fine points of how Tesla is different. The headline will simply draw numerous comparisons to Better Place.

So even if the ability exists to do battery swaps, it makes zero sense to rollout the demo right now. Better Place just declared bankruptcy two weeks ago. Don't you think the smart guys at Tesla would have the common sense to wait a few months to let that disaster fade a bit before doing a battery swap demo?

 

[austinEV]

Supercharging: surprisingly cheap in cap-ex to roll out. Work with retail partners to locate them lots of places. no moving parts. Minimal maintanence. Market reaction: wait, free power? down 5%. Oh, electricity is relatively cheap, and solar panels largely provide the power. I get it. stock back up.

Battery swappers: similar expense as a gas station to build out. Need new sites at market prices. Lots of moving parts. lots of maintanence. May need 24 hour staff. Market reaction: down 25%. holy crap there goes the cash cushion, and didn't that other company JUST go out of biz doing this? What is TM doing different exactly?

 

[WarpedOne]

My bet is on 240 kW charging with two SC cables that go into a sturdy 2-to-1 adapter that plugs into Model S charge port.
Maybe limited to MS85 or maybe not even that.

 

[vgrinshpun]

My bet is on 240 kW charging with two SC cables that go into a sturdy 2-to-1 adapter that plugs into Model S charge port.
Maybe limited to MS85 or maybe not even that.

This is highly unlikely for many reasons, current carrying capacity one of them. If doubling of cables is needed on outside of the car to carry 240kW, how is this current flow will be handled by the car connector and circuitry inside the car?

 

[serkol]

And building out an underground system will cost how much? Doesn't seem like a very cost effective approach. Battery swapping maybe but it needs to be simpler.

I don't think that it would cost too much. It would be possible for Tesla to build a "black box" swapping station with say 12 batteries inside, that will fit under a single parking spot. Just dig a not very large hole under one parking spot, place the "black box" there, connect it to the grid, and you are ready to go.

I had a funny thought about Tesla and Solar City partnering with Shell or another gas company

SC would install solar panels over the entire gas station and/or carwash, and Tesla would install a supercharger and/or a swapping station.

Gas stations and carwashes also use electricity. A gas station that works even during a blackout, that could interest Shell. Saving on the electric bill and "green image" could also interest them.

A battery swap at the end of an automatic car wash just kidding

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I agree 100% with everything above.
I cannot think of a single situation where I would do a battery swap. The Supercharger network seems absolutely perfect to me.

If it is a battery swap, it is not an option that I would even consider paying extra for. What a waste of money. I don't care if it is a one time fee, subscription, whatever.
I own my battery pack. I don't want to risk getting one that was abused. I don't want Tesla to use my battery pack as a grid backup.

Focus on improving the battery pack and recharging rates so we can go from 120 kw to 240 kw.
Maybe two superchargers plugged into the same Model S and charging different parts of the battery pack at the same time.

Imagine every car on the road is a Tesla with Supercharger capability. Given the charging technology limit of 120kW, how long would your wait time be at a Supercharger during peak use? Would you be prepared to wait that long?

No, I don't think announcement will be about swapping, but I think you're lacking ambition if you dismiss swapping as an idea entirely.

I believe the battery is held in by 20 bolts. Because they are ambitious they deliberately packaged it as an easily installed, easily removed component for use in a car or a storage box. Less assembly time, less service time, easy re-use, safer.

Because the battery can easily be mechanically removed, it could be removed and charged outside the car. I'd expect that a nice nitrogen bath would allow faster charging. Remove, lower, connect, bathe, blast, raise, install. Put two "Nitrochargers" in at congested locations (to allow for one failing), alleviate congestion problems, sell lots and lots of cars, keep working on faster Supercharging and hope that one day you can eliminate the Nitrochargers.

Any futuretech demo should be showing that they are working on solving the big problems and demonstrating to customers, investors, competitors and information twisters that they are one step ahead of everybody's concerns. They have the range and performance. They have charging fast enough for now, but they need to make it as fast as gas in mph refueling and they need to lower the cost of the car. Gen 3 is the cheaper car, so this demo could be the final piece.

 

[GSP]

Actually no. Tesla only has two platforms slated for production: the Model S/X platform and the GenIII/Roadster platform. There will be more cars built on those two platforms. That's two battery sizes. And in terms of capacity, Tesla will only have to stock the largest capacity available (so again, only two types of batteries). Tesla is planning a 7 year refresh cycle, which would coincide well with expected battery life (when those packs can be retired for other use). Tesla will not have to stock many types of batteries even if they plan to do a full swap network.

And I don't get why you hate battery swap so much. Tesla does not have to build a full network. It can be the service center version mentioned or it could be a slow expansion of stations at the most traveled routes. The key thing battery swap provides it ends the last weak point about EVs: that they can't refuel in less than 5-15 minutes. This is something that supercharging can't provide and charging in general can't practically provide.

DC fast charging can refuel in 10-15 min. Existing Superchargers and cars can now do 20 min with 120 kW. GM's Spark EV will also offer 20 min refuel when GM gets around to shipping cars with J1772-DC charging.

Two existing supercharger stations with 240 kW combined can refuel in 10 min with a high, but realistic, rate of 2.5-3.0C.

Battery swapping is much more expensive. Also, more things can go wrong with a swap. Cross-threaded bolts, leaking coolant connections, etc. Battery installation in the factory is not always flawless on first attempt (see video of Tesla engineer responsible for the battery's high power electrical connection system). If you do lots of battery swaps there will be more incidents than for lots of 240 kW charging sessions.

GSP

 

[WarpedOne]

If doubling of cables is needed on outside of the car to carry 240kW, how is this current flow will be handled by the car connector and circuitry inside the car?

Do we know for sure that on the inside installations aren't capable of much more than 120 kW already?

We know there are cables from charging port directly into battery. They could easily use same cables that run from battery to PEM and carry over 300kW / 1000A already.
Weight, flexibility and safety are not a problem in there, they are a problem on the outside where people need to hold and manipulate those cables.

The only question remaining is if charging port is capable of accepting 600A without overheating.

 

[marvinat0rz]

Agree with GSP and WarpedOne. Faster DC charging is the only thing that makes sense. The Supercharger network is built for more power than what is offered today, no question. There is no way that Tesla would be making long-term infrastructure investment in a world with rapidly increasing battery capacity otherwise. In five years, batteries will have a *lot* more capacity than today. It doesn't make sense to me that Tesla will have to replace Supercharger stations when this scenario materializes.

 

[ShortSlaver]

I have travelled to the future (june 21) and read all the TMC forum posts. I can say for certain:

1) The photo title is a headfake. Whoever named that file would be insta-fired if that leaked out. There is actually no logical reason for a generic model S photo to have that particular name. It would just be "model_s_red_leftside_day_moving_126_feb17.jpg". The tesla guys read this forums too and they needed to buy time so we wouldn't guess the actual obvious announcement. and we are all falling for it nicely.

Special bonus tin-foil-hat theory: we all already have 100kWh batteries installed. Its "under our nose" and "model S owners will be very happy". So, existing SC can go to 50% SOC in the newly released shadow capacity. As musk said in the June 20 announcement: "...we wanted to be sure that we would not need all that extra unused capacity before releasing it in software patch 6.0. But, after careful testing and the fixing of the sleep current issues, we are now confident we can enable this, as we had always intended". I mean, why did you think the curb weight was so high on an aluminum car?

At least the conversation has finally reached the conspiracy theory point.

However, I like your ideas here and hope you're right.

 

[deonb]

1) The photo title is a headfake.

Why would that be the one with the headfake?

Why not then say any of the following was also a headfake:
"Under your nose"
-or-
"throughout the country"
-or the SEC filing-
"our capability to rapidly swap out the Model S battery pack and the development of specialized public facilities to perform such swapping, which do not currently exist but which we plan to introduce in the near future;"

 

[jeff_adams]

And what's with "hero"? Is that an acronym?