Another interesting read: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ill-expand-teslas-charging-stations/13481289/
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
-
- Tags
- elon is an ass investing TSLA
Another interesting read: http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ill-expand-teslas-charging-stations/13481289/
Here's an article claiming that a threefold increase in battery efficiency may be just a few years away:
Stanford breakthrough might triple battery life
While I am skeptical about most such claims of battery breakthroughs, including this one, I am also encouraged that someone, someday, will find a way to greatly expand the efficiency of battery storage. When that day arrives, the ICE vs. EV battle will be clearly won by EVs. If Tesla already has the best EVs in the world and the setup for the largest scale battery manufacturing in the world, we stockholders are going to be in for one amazing ride.
Stanford breakthrough might triple battery life
While I am skeptical about most such claims of battery breakthroughs, including this one, I am also encouraged that someone, someday, will find a way to greatly expand the efficiency of battery storage. When that day arrives, the ICE vs. EV battle will be clearly won by EVs. If Tesla already has the best EVs in the world and the setup for the largest scale battery manufacturing in the world, we stockholders are going to be in for one amazing ride.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I do wonder about the safety of using metallic lithium, since unlike lithium ions, it would be reactive in an accident.
This one has excellent technical merit. Some additional issues to work out including some of the safety reactive issues JRP3 points out. But this is a genuine article advancement. Precisely the bridge to ultra-capacitance. IMHO
Mario Kadastik
Active Member
sorry for for delayed response. Was in cabo.
yes, I really mean 80kwh of energy supplied as measured by the trip meter. This was the amount of energy his brand new 85 kWh car would deliver from a completely full range charge and driving car all the way down to zero miles left of rated range. Yes. There is a battery reserve of course and as we know the car protects the battery by not releasing that last little bit of energy (~5kwh)
I really like his way of measuring battery loss over time. Basically, with 75k on the odo, he performed the same test: drove car from full range charge down to zero rated range. The car only delivers 70 kWh of energy now whereas it delivered 80kwh when the car was new.
- - - Updated - - -
You're right. I seem to recall discussions that TM may have changed the amount of reserve energy that is really left in the battery when the car is displaying zero rated range remaining. That being said, I highly doubt that the amount of reserve was reduced by more than 1kwh. Therefore, it's possible he really only only has a capacity loss of 9kwh instead of 10kwh. Regardless, I concur this this amount of range loss (11% or 12%) is a little higher than we would have hoped for. But it's not horrible. As I mentioned, the owner said that he definitely isn't easy on the battery. He does a lot of full charges and runs the battery to low SOC often.
Cheers
I think the question here is did he do it on the same firmware. I have a feeling that Tesla changed some logging information between 5.8 and 5.9. In 5.8 I could use 78 kWh and still have 4% battery left according to the battery graph. In 5.9 after 72kWh I was at 0%. In both cases I started from full. In the first case I had 5.8 and the car was about 1 month old with ca 2000km on the odo. In the second case I had about 10k km on the odo and the car was 5 months old. I doubt there was such dramatic degradation, but I do think that in 5.8 the trip usage accounted all car usage including battery warming (was in January) and climate. In the second trip I drove the whole distance in one go and it was summerish so climate was working. After 5h drive I can fully understand that the car might have used 6 kWh for the climate and that wasn't shown in the trip meter. I've noticed it also when I had to stand and wait for 1h in the car in hot summer with climate blasting and the kWh didn't show up when I started driving. The km climbed, but kWh went up as per normal driving, neither did my chart reflect the 1h standing, which should have been a couple kWh of used battery. My range DID drop, but the accounting didn't show it. So that's what I'm basing my observation on that something changed in the accounting between 5.8 and 5.9.
Raffy.Roma
Rome (Italy)
NigelM
Recovering Member
I also noted earlier today that Model X reservations are almost exactly double what the Model S reservations were at a similar time before production started. Reservations could be up towards 40k by next spring. (That's $200m free cash flow btw....)
Zzzz...
Member
QUOTE: "We would have a cellphone with triple the battery life"
Come on - lets be real! No one will ever produce smartphones with triple battery life - what we will get is a thinner, more lightweight smartphones. Which is also good:biggrin:
Zzzz...
Member
Waiting for SpaceX launch(couple hours from now), rereading some Li-ion papers, and here is the quote:
"Under some abuse conditions, if the coating of GPE and LISICON film is broken, water will contact with Li metal. In the aqueous electrolyte, there is enough lithium salt. The reaction will produce insoluble LiOH layer on the surface of lithium metal and prevent the further reaction. By the way, the produced hydrogen will pass through the aqueous electrolyte and be cooled down. It is difficult for it to get on fire. In addition, the produced hydrogen is very light and will be very easy to dissipate into the atmosphere. The content of hydrogen will be very small to cause fire or explosion."
So if water based electrolyte would be used, the cells would be way more safe, mostly because of nonflammability of aqueous electrolyte compared to common organic ones.
doi:10.1038/srep01401
BTW, one of mine favourite papers, very cheap chemistry, basically metallic lithium, which is cheap, home made (sic!) gel polymer electrolyte, commercially produced LiMn2O4 and LISICON film... While showing excellent cyclability and good specific energy.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Except pretty much everyone wants cars with more range. The first question most people ask about an EV is "what's the range", not "how light is it". I know you don't care about range, but I hope you do realize that EV's will be getting more range as cost and density improves.
dmckinstry
Model X 2019
Aside from commenting about how great the car looks an is, how far have you gone is the most frequent question I get.
I usually underplay it and say "about 250 miles", but add that that's when I got to the charger.
After my Portland, OR -> Napa, CA road trip this summer, now I frequently say "pretty much as far as I want, I covered 650 miles in about 12 hours". That usually starts the conversation with a surprise and then it's an easier transition to explain the range, charge times, where the super chargers are.
As for the long-term part of this thread. The value in the super chargers is huge, more than I fully appreciated before this last trip. Even if BMW had a competitive EV by the time the Model 3 comes out, without access to the super charger network it loses a lot of its competitive value. I'm a Tesla believer and I still thought the super chargers weren't going to be quite good enough, but they are and they'll only get better for newer cars and batteries.
By the time Model 3 comes out, super chargers will be everywhere and that's an infrastructure lead that BMW/Audi/whatever is going to have a hard time competing with.
And I hope you realize people will stop asking that question after they get educated.
Remember how talk/standby time used to be an important measure on phones, people would brag about how many days they got? Before they realized it was not important to go for a week without charging their phone, and now you rarely see that stuff advertised.
And I get the question about weight quite often in my roadster, from anyone who likes driving.
Last edited:
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Except your phone running out of juice is no where near the PITA as running out of juice in your car.
Until every BEV has 300 plus EPA miles people will continue to ask that question.
Are you saying people don't rely on their phones for important things? Or are you saying you're likely to run out of juice with less than 300 mile range? Because neither of those things are anywhere close to true.
I don't think once, in my 25 years of owning a car, has someone asked me what a car weighs. I suppose if you're the type to hang out with race track folks, it happens, but even when talking to folks that are pretty passionate about cars, work on them, restored, etc, I've never had that question come up.
Well if you're driving a sports car, or the issue of performance comes up, then you'll get that question. I get it all the time. Not as much as range (which I usually brush off, because its not really important), but quite often. The amount of times it comes up will be proportional to the interest in driving of the person you're talking to. Otherwise the number means nothing to them since they have no benchmark as to how much a car should weigh.
I get it when talking about the model s as well, though not as often as the roadster.
I've had the weight question at least twice just in the last week. One talking to an frs driver, one a Nissan z driver.
One difference between a car running out of battery and a phone is that you can use the phone as soon as you plug in, while you're charging.
Similar threads
- Locked
