Long-Term Fundamentals of Tesla Motors (TSLA)

[EldestOyster]

Thanks for posting the energy density chart. I'd like to see how the other Tesla products stack up there. Those are the RAV4-EV and the original electric Smart. I'd expect to see those numbers sticking up above the rest. Then again, I don't know if this is battery pack weight or finished vehicle weight. We always seem to be able to offset the higher energies with heavier vehicles. Sort of like every PC I've owned (MIPS vs. the O.S.).

 

[32no]

Thanks for posting the energy density chart. I'd like to see how the other Tesla products stack up there. Those are the RAV4-EV and the original electric Smart. I'd expect to see those numbers sticking up above the rest. Then again, I don't know if this is battery pack weight or finished vehicle weight. We always seem to be able to offset the higher energies with heavier vehicles. Sort of like every PC I've owned (MIPS vs. the O.S.).

I forgot the RAV4 EV for some reason. Anyway, the RAV4 has a 380 kg battery with 42 kWh, which results in an energy density of 110.53 Wh/kg, which is lower than Tesla's original 2008 Roadster energy density of 117.78 Wh/kg, but still higher than the highest energy density on a non-Tesla EV, which would be the 2016 Chevy Volt at 100.55 Wh/kg.

Maybe the weight is wrong since it being 36 kWh was a bit of a surprise? Otherwise maybe Tesla is user denser cells which they can't yet get in high enough volumes for the Model S.

Did some more research. Apparently the 36 kWh battery is part of a $600 upgrade, and 33.5 kWh is available to the driver. The original is 28 kWh.

 

[jhm]

I agree, but we are biased. There are small battery companies that are already "captured" by large OEM's, Sakti, as mentioned, and others, plus the big boys such as LGChem. I doubt we'll see any production ready breakthroughs in the next 3-5 years but it is a possibility, and even if the cost reductions are not in place the large OEMs could simply absorb the cost for a few years until production volumes ramp up.

How many of these "captured" companies sent a PowerPoint to Tesla some time ago?

 

[austinEV]

I was thinking the same thing as you, that an inventor of a better battery chemistry would likely shop it to Tesla first. I won't lay awake at nights worrying.

Honestly I might call Apple first. More $/battery shipped. Apple could charge $100 to the end user for a double capacity battery option. Once I had captured the mobile market I would tool up for the larger other markets. But yeah, if I as just an inventor I would run to Tesla since they have the factory in production and could help me productize the invention.

 

[Auzie]

Since we are speaking of competition and solid state batteries, I think we should take a look at energy densities of some electric cars, including Tesla's previous cars. I gathered some data to put into a chart:

View attachment 70439

And here is the chart:
View attachment 70438

The only data that is confusing to me is the Mercedes Benz B class, which apparently has a higher energy density than any of Tesla's models. Here is the link for the data. Perhaps I should be using the 28 kWh and 204 kg numbers to get an energy density of 137.25 Wh/kg, which is just under Tesla's 2012 number for the Model S of 141.67 Wh/kg.

Anyway, one interesting observation is that the Chevy Volt's battery energy density increased at a rate of about 4.5% per year, while Tesla's energy density increased at a rate of about 4.7%. This shows that pouch cells are not overtaking cylindrical lithium ion cells that Tesla and Mercedes use. Also, this means that lithium ion developments keep moving the goal posts for solid state batteries. The Gigafactory will accelerate the movement of the goal posts by making cylindrical lithium ion cells much cheaper. All in all, I think it will be at least decade until we see solid state batteries that are on par with cylindrical lithium ion in both energy density and cost.

Thanks for compiling this info 32no.

From the link you provided, MB is using Panasonic cells, Tesla battery. It does not make sense that Tesla will sell higher density battery and not use it in their models, so it is likely that the correct number for MB is 137.25 Wh/kg, or it might be the same as Tesla's model S.

One piece of good news in Benziga, and since we did not get a news section I will post it here.

Credit Suisse on Tesla: Check points to strong demand

The most interesting highlights

The analyst adds that combined with production increases and weakening of China orders, there exists a “substantial uptick” in order flow for North America and Europe.

Galves also states that 2013 Model S's are achieving 90 percent of their original base price at auctions versus approximately 55 percent achieved by Mercedes S-Class and BMW 7-Series sedans. The analyst believes that these levels are likely unsustainable as supply of used Model S sedans increase, but the gap between Mercedes/BMW supports a view that Tesla vehicles will hold better value.

Galves concludes that based on the above, he has confidence that Tesla could achieve its 2015 Model S deliveries guidance of approximately 50,000 units, an increase of 50 percent year-over-year.
“If Tesla can grow Model S 50 percent in 2015 despite some significant risk factors, confidence in forward demand could increase significantly and drive the implied multiples much higher over the course of 2015 (even if 4Q14 deliveries are a bit light),” Galves wrote.
Shares are Outperform rated with a $325 price target.

 

[Ingenieur]

90%?
Where did he check?
I am willing to provide him 2013 S85P for 75%
Seriously if you check ebay there are 65-75k bids for S85-P85 with tons of extras.
The car holds value quite well considering you basicly get 7500 directly off the sticker

 

[haid]

I know someone who sold his P85 to get a P85D, and got 95% original price (with 14K miles on it). Unheard of... and incomprehensible...

 

[Ingenieur]

Did he get it on trade in for P85D?

 

[renim]

a classic presentation from 2009
http://www.almaden.ibm.com/institute/2009/resources/2009/presentations/JeffDahn-AlmadenInstitute2009.pdf

I would add, that there could be cost benefit (and safety benefit) to transition from higher Ah to higher V cathodes
Cathode Anode Powders | NEI Corporation
so a LMnO / Spinel cathode would probably halve the LME (London Metal Exchange) cost for cathode and reduce the anode cost by about a 1/3, compared to a NCA equivalent.

However there is probably a minor power trade-off and definitely a longevity tradeoff.

 

[Auzie]

90%?
Where did he check?
I am willing to provide him 2013 S85P for 75%
Seriously if you check ebay there are 65-75k bids for S85-P85 with tons of extras.
The car holds value quite well considering you basicly get 7500 directly off the sticker

Daniel Galves of Credit Suisse on Tuesday stated in a note that various auction and dealer checks suggest that Tesla Motors Inc TSLA 0.28% is benefiting from strong demand.

Galves also states that 2013 Model S's are achieving 90 percent of their original base price at auctions versus approximately 55 percent achieved by Mercedes S-Class and BMW 7-Series sedans.

I do not find that surprising at all. Car is upgradable, both hardware (battery) and software. The price of new models keeps going up, not down. People that purchased some time ago now find their models and options more expensive. Some people just want to jump the half a year long queue. That all translates into high resale value.

 

[32no]

Since we are speaking of competition and solid state batteries, I think we should take a look at energy densities of some electric cars, including Tesla's previous cars. I gathered some data to put into a chart:


And here is the chart:


The only data that is confusing to me is the Mercedes Benz B class, which apparently has a higher energy density than any of Tesla's models. Here is the link for the data. Perhaps I should be using the 28 kWh and 204 kg numbers to get an energy density of 137.25 Wh/kg, which is just under Tesla's 2012 number for the Model S of 141.67 Wh/kg.

Anyway, one interesting observation is that the Chevy Volt's battery energy density increased at a rate of about 4.5% per year, while Tesla's energy density increased at a rate of about 4.7%. This shows that pouch cells are not overtaking cylindrical lithium ion cells that Tesla and Mercedes use. Also, this means that lithium ion developments keep moving the goal posts for solid state batteries. The Gigafactory will accelerate the movement of the goal posts by making cylindrical lithium ion cells much cheaper. All in all, I think it will be at least decade until we see solid state batteries that are on par with cylindrical lithium ion in both energy density and cost.

Ok, so I have an update for the data. I fixed the Mercedes B-class numbers (I found the correct weight), and I added BMW i8, Mercedes SLS AMG Electric, and RAV4 EV. I will add the sources later, but the SLS Electric data is from a post on Tesla Motors Club by the user "vgrinshpun".

Anyway, here are the goodies:

And the chart (Red is 100% Tesla cars, orange is Tesla inside, and green is non-Tesla vehicles):

The most interesting thing is that the highest energy density EV that Tesla wasn't involved with is the Mercedes SLS AMG (This car also happens to be the most expensive car on this chart at $435,000), and that car has 30% less energy density than what the Model S had in 2012, and more than 40% less than the recently upgraded Roaster.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Ok, so I have an update for the data. I fixed the Mercedes B-class numbers (I found the correct weight), and I added BMW i8, Mercedes SLS AMG Electric, and RAV4 EV. I will add the sources later, but the SLS Electric data is from a post on Tesla Motors Club by the user "vgrinshpun".

Anyway, here are the goodies:

View attachment 70480

And the chart (Red is 100% Tesla cars, orange is Tesla inside, and green is non-Tesla vehicles):

View attachment 70492
The most interesting thing is that the highest energy density EV that Tesla wasn't involved with is the Mercedes SLS AMG (This car also happens to be the most expensive car on this chart at $435,000), and that car has 30% less energy density than what the Model S had in 2012, and more than 40% less than the recently upgraded Roaster.

I am loving it. Hugely entertaining to see the most famous "Tesla Killer" - BMW i8 - at the bottom of the chart, below the second lowest runner-up, Volkswagen E Golf.

Excellent idea to pull all of this data on one chart, 32no!

This chart should be posted in the comments section of every "Tesla Killer" article, accompanied by a simple question to the author: Does he know the energy density of the battery in the tesla killer du jour?

 

[sundaymorning]

Ok, so I have an update for the data. I fixed the Mercedes B-class numbers (I found the correct weight), and I added BMW i8, Mercedes SLS AMG Electric, and RAV4 EV. I will add the sources later, but the SLS Electric data is from a post on Tesla Motors Club by the user "vgrinshpun".

Anyway, here are the goodies:

View attachment 70480

And the chart (Red is 100% Tesla cars, orange is Tesla inside, and green is non-Tesla vehicles):

View attachment 70492
The most interesting thing is that the highest energy density EV that Tesla wasn't involved with is the Mercedes SLS AMG (This car also happens to be the most expensive car on this chart at $435,000), and that car has 30% less energy density than what the Model S had in 2012, and more than 40% less than the recently upgraded Roaster.

Great work!! Hopefully this hits the media. The more the public sees these types of charts, the easier it is for Tesla to sell cars.

 

[JRP3]

I think the projected Roadster upgrade figure is off. Available information would seem to put the capacity of the upgrade Roadster cell slightly lower than what is in the Model S.

 

[vgrinshpun]

I think the projected Roadster upgrade figure is off. Available information would seem to put the capacity of the upgrade Roadster cell slightly lower than what is in the Model S.

I am curious if you have specific information showing this. It seems that 32no's table includes data from the Roadster Upgrade blog post by Tesla Motors. It states that upgraded battery will fit 70kWh battery in the same package as the original battery, hence tha same weight (450kg) and the increased capacity (70kWh)

 

[Gerasimental]

I am curious if you have specific information showing this. It seems that 32no's table includes data from the Roadster Upgrade blog post by Tesla Motors. It states that upgraded battery will fit 70kWh battery in the same package as the original battery, hence tha same weight (450kg) and the increased capacity (70kWh)

But wasn't this achieved by filling previously empty slots with cells? This is where the new mass comes in. Don't think you can use the new capacity but the old mass.

 

[vgrinshpun]

But wasn't this achieved by filling previously empty slots with cells? This is where the new mass comes in. Don't think you can use the new capacity but the old mass.

It is my understanding that the new battery will have the same quantity of cells as the original pack. The cells will also have the same format (18650), but each cell will have higher capacity.

 

[JRP3]

70 kWh / 6831 = 10.25 / 3.6V = 2.85 ah per cell. Or using 3.7V = 2.77 ah per cell. Using 75 kWh / 6831 = 10.979 / 3.6V = 3.05 ah per cell. Using 3.7V = 2.97 ah per cell. Model S 3.2 ah per cell. It would be odd if the new cell was worse volumetrically but better gravimetrically.

 

[jhm]

Ok, so I have an update for the data. I fixed the Mercedes B-class numbers (I found the correct weight), and I added BMW i8, Mercedes SLS AMG Electric, and RAV4 EV. I will add the sources later, but the SLS Electric data is from a post on Tesla Motors Club by the user "vgrinshpun".

Anyway, here are the goodies:

View attachment 70480

And the chart (Red is 100% Tesla cars, orange is Tesla inside, and green is non-Tesla vehicles):

View attachment 70492
The most interesting thing is that the highest energy density EV that Tesla wasn't involved with is the Mercedes SLS AMG (This car also happens to be the most expensive car on this chart at $435,000), and that car has 30% less energy density than what the Model S had in 2012, and more than 40% less than the recently upgraded Roaster.

This is great. Awhile back I posted a formula for converting the ratio of two densities into into a number of year lead in technology based on the idea of doubling density every decade. For example, let's compare the i3 to 2012 Model S. I get:
10×ln(80.69÷141.67)÷ln(2)
=−8.1207249098
This indicates the i3 density is about 8 years behind where Tesla was in 2012. Frankly, I am shocked that the competition is so far behind. We often wring our hands about some breakthrough battery technology that will challenge Tesla, but seriously if the competing just copied Tesla's technology it would jump ahead 8 years. That would be a breakthrough. Just use the open source technology and follow the leader.

 

[woof]

This is great. Awhile back I posted a formula for converting the ratio of two densities into into a number of year lead in technology based on the idea of doubling density every decade. For example, let's compare the i3 to 2012 Model S. I get:
10×ln(80.69÷141.67)÷ln(2)
=−8.1207249098
This indicates the i3 density is about 8 years behind where Tesla was in 2012. Frankly, I am shocked that the competition is so far behind. We often wring our hands about some breakthrough battery technology that will challenge Tesla, but seriously if the competing just copied Tesla's technology it would jump ahead 8 years. That would be a breakthrough. Just use the open source technology and follow the leader.

It makes sense to me that BWM is 8 years behind. Here's why: BMW will only use tried and true technology, well known, well tested, well characterized as to cycles and degradation, well...boring. It takes time for tech to become mainstream, safe, and boring. 8 years sounds about right. As long as they stick to those design parameters, they will forever be 8 years behind the leading edge. Not a surprise. If tomorrow a great breakthrough in battery density occurs, BMW will not adopt it until after 8 years of study when it will finally be declared "safe" for automotive use.