Swapping is Coming [Discuss how it will be accomplished]

[deonb]

It is taking you guys 24 pages of mental gymnastics to justify a reason for this and it still doesn't even remotely make sense to do.

I think we're taking 24 pages of mental gymnastics because we don't have all the facts to make a decision or educated guess.

* We don't know how much batteries cost.
* We don't know what the rate is Tesla gets for re-selling stored energy.
* We don't know how much the "robot" cost, or whether it is even a robot.
* We don't even know the customer scenario - whether this is for the road trip or the city/apartment.
* We don't know the novel thing than Elon does.

 

[mitch672]

In only 7 days, all will be revealed. If it is swapping, who's to say it isn't done only at service centers? We don't really have a clue.
Who's to say what they'll be swapping in? Tesla has filed numerous patents for a combination lithium + metal air pack, maybe they've perfected a 500-600 mile hybrid pack, so you will minimize most of your charging on the long road trip. Perhaps you use this pack until you return, where the service center swaps your original pack back in. We simply have no idea what Elon is going to demo, and all of these mental gymnastics aren't going to "suss out" what's going to be demo'd in exactly 1 week. I'd relax and see what's being proposed before getting all bent out of shape about it, maybe it's because I'm older and tend not get too emotionally involved, it doesn't get you anywhere... You young whipper snappers take a chill pill

 

[Palpatine]

How do you think Tesla manages to get the power to each parking stall? Wireless transmission? No, they tear up the parking lot. You need to think harder about this.

Which doesn't cost the parking lot owner anything. They are basically running power lines. If Tesla removes the Superchargers in the future, there is really nothing lost.

An underground complex for an automated battery swap system (with 10+ battery packs down there being moved around) is an entirely different order of magnitude for construction.
Who is responsible for the expense of digging that turd out of the parking lot when the system becomes an obsolete white elephant in 3-5 years?

Again, I can't emphasize this point enough, the storage/charging requirements for SuperSwapping and SuperCharging are virtually identical. The only difference between the systems is that SuperCharging requires much more land area, and much more electrical infrastructure in order to support high throughput charging.

Do you even understand the complexity involved with an automated system of moving battery packs around? Removing them from a vehicle? Installing them into a vehicle? Moving those battery packs to be recharged, moving them into order for the next car that is coming? Then also planning for different size/types of battery packs based on the Model car (Model S vs Gen III) or 2013 battery pack vs 2016 new technology battery pack.

This is not a simple thing. That sounds like an incredibly advanced automated system. And it also sounds like it would be highly at risk of a simple error code requiring a visit by a technician who is specifically trained on it. So it is not something that would be subcontracted out. Tesla would likely need to have a lot of extra employees manning the system.

Service and support of a Supercharger is likely a subcontract with a local licensed electrician. No moving parts. All well understood technology that can easily find support anywhere in the USA.

My initial impression of battery swapping was a negative. Then the more I have read about it and thought about the logistics, it has crystalized even more negatives of why it makes no sense. And I am a huge supporter of EVs having owned a Roadster and now a Model S. Can you imagine the field day the EV naysayers are going to have with this? This is just a gift to the EV haters for pointing out the negatives of EVs. If you guys cannot convince EV supporters that this makes sense, then you are dead on arrival with everyone else.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

An underground complex for an automated battery swap system (with 10+ battery packs down there being moved around) is an entirely different order of magnitude for construction.
Who is responsible for the expense of digging that turd out of the parking lot when the system becomes an obsolete white elephant in 3-5 years?

The real problem is that SuperCharging is an uneconomical solution in 3-5 years.

Do you even understand the complexity involved with an automated system of moving battery packs around? Removing them from a vehicle? Installing them into a vehicle? Moving those battery packs to be recharged, moving them into order for the next car that is coming? Then also planning for different size/types of battery packs based on the Model car (Model S vs Gen III) or 2013 battery pack vs 2016 new technology battery pack.

Yes actually, I do. The fact that you think it is somehow complicated makes me think you are not that familiar with the engineering required.

This is not a simple thing. That sounds like an incredibly advanced automated system. And it also sounds like it would be highly at risk of a simple error code requiring a visit by a technician who is specifically trained on it. So it is not something that would be subcontracted out. Tesla would likely need to have a lot of extra employees manning the system.

It only sounds advanced because you haven't thought it through. It's no more complex than a typical conveyer driven car wash. Certainly there are fewer moving parts than a typical car wash.

Service and support of a Supercharger is likely a subcontract with a local licensed electrician. No moving parts. All well understood technology that can easily find support anywhere in the USA.

That only makes sense if it's actually possible to economically scale SuperCharging up to support millions of vehicles. It's not.

- - - Updated - - -

Well.. The swapping part is less complex than a car wash. Hooking, and unhooking each battery up to the CES system is a bit more complex. But not terribly so.

 

[Palpatine]

Explain to me what you think the extra option price that Tesla would charge for access to the battery swap network?
What percentage of Tesla owners would have to participate before it makes sense for Tesla to do?

 

[DaveT]

Well.. The swapping part is less complex than a car wash. Hooking, and unhooking each battery up to the CES system is a bit more complex. But not terribly so.

I totally agree. Swapping is not very difficult engineering wise. It's a problem that's already been solved and is quite straightforward. Again, see Better Place Electric Car Switching Station - YouTube .

I remember Elon Musk saying that battery swap was not difficult (just needs a robot) but that the more challenging issues was the economics, convenience, etc. If Tesla announces battery swap it would mean they've got a solution for the economics.

Here's my view on the economics.

1. The Supercharger stations are genius because with solar they become income-generating properties over time. After the initial CapEx, they start to generate more power than they use, thus feeding into the grid and generating monthly income. This is why Supercharging is "free" (after pre-payment) forever. Because the Supercharging stations are long-term cash generating assets.
2. Grid storage only increases the income-generating capacity of the Supercharger stations. In other words, they make each Supercharger station more profitable over time. Also as CapitalistOppressor points out, it makes it possible to handle larger crowds during heavy use times.
3. Supercharger stations aren't in heavy use every day, just on weekends. So on weekdays they're barely being used. Thus, grid storage generates most of its income during the weekdays.
4. Tesla can use the extra revenue generated by grid storage (in addition to the solar panels) to offset the ongoing maintenance costs of both Supercharging and battery swap.
5. The initial CapEx for battery swap can come from various options. They can use some of the $2000 supercharging option money. They can charge an additional option of a few thousand dollars at initial car purchase for swap. They can have a monthly/yearly subscription. Or they can have it pay per use.

Now for the initial construction costs:
1. They're already building Supercharger stations and they can come up with a creative way to add a small swapping station. I like the drawing that TD1 did, June 20th Speculation - Page 28 . This is an above ground swapping station and I can see it working without huge capital costs. The batteries are already being used for grid storage so it would just be the container, battery holding mechanism, and swap robot.
2. The rollout of the swap stations will start small - probably just 2 in California (the locations where they already have grid storage) and slowly roll out eventually to all Supercharging stations (after solar installation and grid storage installation).
3. I don't see it adding that much CapEx cost. They're already adding grid storage, so the extra cost would be the swap robot.

I think some are assuming that battery swap inherently has bad economics. However, I think it's better to assume that Tesla and Elon know what they're doing and wouldn't release something that's not economically feasible and sustainable.

I'd rather spend on energy on discussing how they can make the battery swap economics work, rather than assuming it's a failure and a dumb idea.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Explain to me what you think the extra option price that Tesla would charge for access to the battery swap network?
What percentage of Tesla owners would have to participate before it makes sense for Tesla to do?

I think it's covered under the same $2,000 fee you are paying for SuperCharging. The underlying costs for the systems are virtually identical when you scale into the next decade (if anything swapping is cheaper). If not for the fact that someone might attempt a "permanent" swap it might make sense for Tesla to do this for "free" as well. But I think Tesla will charge for it because in the near and medium term there is a higher initial cost, and ultimately they need for you to take back your battery. So I expect a swap fee, and some additional rental fee to ensure that folks bring the battery back.

If you want to bundle the swap fee into the rental fee you can do that. One way might be to just have a fee based on usage, like 12 cents per mile, and unlimited access to swapping.

So you swap your battery, and keep swapping (or charging) for as long as you want, but pay a per mile fee. Unfortunately, someone might still swap the battery then store the car for a month. I'll admit structuring the rates requires thought. A simple swap fee (say $15 per swap) plus a $10 per day rental until you pick up your battery might make sense.

 

[Palpatine]

Tesla charges $45 for little adapters that they are just reselling from a 3rd party where they didn't really do anything other than put it on their website. Those adapters likely cost them $10 each.
http://shop.teslamotors.com/collections/model-s-charging-adapters

Trust me on this. A battery swap of an 85 kwh battery pack, by a Tesla built automated system, is going to cost a heck of a lot more than $15 per use.

 

[CapitalistOppressor]

Tesla charges $45 for little adapters that they are just reselling from a 3rd party where they didn't really do anything other than put it on their website. Those adapters likely cost them $10 each.
http://shop.teslamotors.com/collections/model-s-charging-adapters

Trust me on this. A battery swap of an 85 kwh battery pack, by a Tesla built automated system, is going to cost a heck of a lot more than $15 per use.

The only thing I am halfway sure if is that it will not be free. When I try and model the costs I keep coming to somewhere in the $20-$30 range, but it really depends on factors that only Tesla knows. It should be cheaper than purchasing gas for an equivalent automobile. If they charge $32 (which is the cost for 8 gallons @ 25mpg; 200 miles of range) they would likely make a tidy profit under any reasonable assumptions that I've tried.

I am very interested in seeing the details of what they do. I see real logistical problems that come from folks still owning their batteries (meaning they have to come back and pick it up). I've modeled solutions, and depending on what Tesla announces I might see if I can sell them on my ideas, lol.

But swapping itself is simple, and the concept scale far better than I am able to make SuperCharging scale. If they don't cap their footprint with a reasonable system, they will quickly overflow existing rest stops, even assuming that the owners let Tesla bogart all of the available spaces, and the physical plant required also quickly scales up beyond what is probably required with SuperSwappers.

So the key for me is the details of what they actually implement, and how they charge for the service. Frankly, I think it could be a nice business opportunity even in the short/medium term if they charge reasonable fees. And in the long term the money they make from load leveling the entire electrical grid could dwarf their automotive business, and the infrastructure to do that is something they have to build anyways (whether they swap the batteries or not).

- - - Updated - - -

Keep in mind also, that the really expensive part is the batteries. If there are new batteries in 10 years that allow massively fast recharge times, you just knock down the swap buildings (which are the size of an automated car wash) and keep the existing storage facilities up and running.

The CapEx for this portion of the business is sorta small. Even if the facility (sans batteries) costs ~$1.5m you are only talking ~$150m for an initial capacity of 100 stations. Even 100 stations has enough throughput to support ~2m cars. That's a per car cost of ~$75. I think Tesla can afford that.

In terms of the batteries, you need something like 5% (very rough figure) of your installed capacity to support either SuperCharging or SuperSwapping. Even if the battery packs cost $20k (which they probably don't) that works out to ~$1,000 per car. I see no reason why these charges aren't already factored into the $2,000 cost you are paying for the SuperCharger.

 

[deonb]

Even 100 stations has enough throughput to support ~2m cars

Only if you throw energy usage completely and utterly out of the window and stomp on it.

2m cars, at 15 charges per year each (splitting the diff between your and mine assumptions, though I think I'm correct - see my other post) = 30 million charges per year. Split over 100 stations = 300'000 charges/swaps per station per year, or 821 per day. That's 34 swaps per hour 24 hours per day (already falls over at this point, but let's continue).

At 45kWh per charge = 13.5 GWh per station of electricity consumption per year. To generate 13.5 GWh per year (or 37 mWh per day) with 300 watt Solar Panels running for 5 hours/day each, you need to have 24000 Solar Panels per station. To put it another way, your 100 SuperCharger locations would have to be the size of 1440 parking bays each...

Ok, so how about grid power instead? For 37 mWh per day you will need to draw 1541 kWh per hour, or basically 1.541 mW continuously. That's not just 480V service (3210 Amps!). Now you're talking about 10'000V transmission lines and a substation for every SuperCharger. That's not going to just be $1.5m per station.

To support 2 million cars, whether SuperCharger or SuperSwapper, you need a minimal of 12000 locations with 200 panels each. With SuperCharger math it actually still work out. 2 million cars @ $2000 per car each == $4 billion. And 12'000 locations @ 300k each == $3.6 billion.

BUT if you add $1m for a swapper, you're talking about an addition $12b to be recovered over 2m cars - or another $6000 per vehicle.

 

[renim]

Pareto principle not strictly 80/20

there are fleets, business and users for whom supercharging is not sufficient, they may only be 5% of the vehicle parc, but they are large mileage users, daily continual use. Battery swap makes sense for them, nil battery swap = nil daily high mileage users.

in my country, Taxis do 150,000 km per year. They won't be using superchargers, the Taxi industry use of lpg (propane/butane) provided the market for petrol stations to offer LPG nationally (now a simple majority).

 

[uselesslogin]

I just have to say I'm not sure why being able to get a new battery and get on the way in a couple minutes is a bad thing. Also, I watched the Better Place video and I have no idea why they needed so much space. I would think you could build an above-ground solution that takes up no more than 4 parking spaces at an existing rest stop. Also, it doesn't have to be at all the superchargers. I think it will also be far less expensive for Tesla than people seem to think. Well, I sure hope this tanks the stock because I would love to pick up some more shares.

 

[deonb]

Pareto principle not strictly 80/20

there are fleets, business and users for whom supercharging is not sufficient, they may only be 5% of the vehicle parc, but they are large mileage users, daily continual use. Battery swap makes sense for them, nil battery swap = nil daily high mileage users.

in my country, Taxis do 150,000 km per year. They won't be using superchargers, the Taxi industry use of lpg (propane/butane) provided the market for petrol stations to offer LPG nationally (now a simple majority).

At least in a city (like NYC) it's easier to create a taxi fleet using extra/standby cars and a supercharger rather than extra batteries & swappers. Also works out quite favorably when compared to gas taxis.

If I could afford 12 Model S's and a SuperCharger I would open a Model S taxi company in Manhattan. (With 10 drivers that just swap cars when they're empty - which shouldn't be more than every 6 to 8 hours. The avg. daily driving for a Taxi in NYC on a shift is 180 miles). Yeah, you have 2 "unused" cars, but you save > $150k on gas per year.

- - - Updated - - -

I just have to say I'm not sure why being able to get a new battery and get on the way in a couple minutes is a bad thing.

Are you speaking as an owner or a shareholder?

Also, it doesn't have to be at all the superchargers.

It does. At least up to the point of the SuperCharger network as it has been announced till 2015:

Elon: There is a way for the Tesla Model S to be recharged throughout the country faster than you could fill a gas tank.

If you know of a way to cover the country using a layout that's less than the currently proposed 200 SuperCharger locations, you should (please) write a letter to Tesla and let them know.

 

[Citizen-T]

Elon: There is a way for the Tesla Model S to be recharged throughout the country faster than you could fill a gas tank.

If you know of a way to cover the country using a layout that's less than the currently proposed 200 SuperCharger locations, you should (please) write a letter to Tesla and let them know.

He makes no mention of a timeline there. I think it makes perfect sense to roll out battery swapping slower than the supercharging network. Just to take a shot in the dark...say it takes swapping 5 years to reach 200 stations and cover the US. This would not conflict with the quote you cite.

 

[deonb]

He makes no mention of a timeline there. I think it makes perfect sense to roll out battery swapping slower than the supercharging network. Just to take a shot in the dark...say it takes swapping 5 years to reach 200 stations and cover the US. This would not conflict with the quote you cite.

Sure, but it would cost the same. (I was responding to 'uselesslogin''s assertion regarding cost being much lower since it does not have to be as common as SuperChargers. I would think 200 is the minimum you can provide. '$x' over 5 years is still '$x'. )

 

[Citizen-T]

I am becoming increasingly convinced that the $12k pre-purchased battery plan is the fee that will be charged to use the swapping network. Some of the objections put forth in this thread over the past 24 hours have contributed to this theory.

Think about it, the original program was billed as a way for you to lock in the price of a new battery, but you had to wait 8 years to get it. At the 8 year mark, you'd take your pack (with let's say 70% capacity left) somewhere to get it swapped for a new one. You'd then repeat the process.

Now, what if for the same $12k, you could swap your battery any time you like, as many times as you like, for 8 years. This is effectively the same thing, right? At the end of the 8 year period, you do one last swap, and if you leave the program you now have a relatively new battery in your car. Alternatively, you could pay a new fee to renew your membership in the program (I think this is unlikely because of people's car buying habits). The big difference is that this also enables you to "recharge" quickly if your travels take you past a swap station.

So the value proposition is three fold. First, you lock in a price for a new battery in 8 years (more than enough people were already willing to do this). Second, you guarantee that during those 8 years your max charge will never drop below some level (because packs are taken out of circulation as they age). Third, extremely fast recharging at swap enabled stations.

The argument was made a few pages back that a battery swap network would actually cost something like $6k per car (if I remember the number correctly). Let's say that (seemingly high number) is right. Well, here's a way to collect twice that much per user. Sounds like it is economically viable even given those assumptions.

A few more points to support this theory:

- CapOp's extensive research on the cost of Tesla's batteries tells me that $12k just for one swap 8 years from now is a complete rip-off. You must be buying more than just one swap for $12k.
- This would also explain why Tesla hasn't actually started selling these pre-purchased batteries yet, even though they announced it months ago.
- Elon seems very adverse to per-use charges. In talking about the Superchargers at the shareholder meeting he mentioned that he always wants it to be free at time of use. He wants the costs integrated into the price of the car as an option. This would allow him to do the same with swapping.
- Tesla would have one less system/network to build (a payment one).

 

[FredTMC]

I am becoming increasingly convinced that the $12k pre-purchased battery plan is the fee that will be charged to use the swapping network. Some of the objections put forth in this thread over the past 24 hours have contributed to this theory.

Think about it, the original program was billed as a way for you to lock in the price of a new battery, but you had to wait 8 years to get it. At the 8 year mark, you'd take your pack (with let's say 70% capacity left) somewhere to get it swapped for a new one. You'd then repeat the process.

Now, what if for the same $12k, you could swap your battery any time you like, as many times as you like, for 8 years. This is effectively the same thing, right? At the end of the 8 year period, you do one last swap, and if you leave the program you now have a relatively new battery in your car. Alternatively, you could pay a new fee to renew your membership in the program (I think this is unlikely because of people's car buying habits). The big difference is that this also enables you to "recharge" quickly if your travels take you past a swap station.

So the value proposition is three fold. First, you lock in a price for a new battery in 8 years (more than enough people were already willing to do this). Second, you guarantee that during those 8 years your max charge will never drop below some level (because packs are taken out of circulation as they age). Third, extremely fast recharging at swap enabled stations.

The argument was made a few pages back that a battery swap network would actually cost something like $6k per car (if I remember the number correctly). Let's say that (seemingly high number) is right. Well, here's a way to collect twice that much per user. Sounds like it is economically viable even given those assumptions.

A few more points to support this theory:

- CapOp's extensive research on the cost of Tesla's batteries tells me that $12k just for one swap 8 years from now is a complete rip-off. You must be buying more than just one swap for $12k.
- This would also explain why Tesla hasn't actually started selling these pre-purchased batteries yet, even though they announced it months ago.
- Elon seems very adverse to per-use charges. In talking about the Superchargers at the shareholder meeting he mentioned that he always wants it to be free at time of use. He wants the costs integrated into the price of the car as an option. This would allow him to do the same with swapping.
- Tesla would have one less system/network to build (a payment one).

as an owner, I'd really like this option

 

[Bipo]

Now, what if for the same $12k, you could swap your battery any time you like, as many times as you like, for 8 years. This is effectively the same thing, right? At the end of the 8 year period, you do one last swap, and if you leave the program you now have a relatively new battery in your car. Alternatively, you could pay a new fee to renew your membership in the program (I think this is unlikely because of people's car buying habits). The big difference is that this also enables you to "recharge" quickly if your travels take you past a swap station.

Maybe a 99 $ per month fee? (8 x 12 x 99 = 9,504 $). As it includes the electricity it is an adequate price.

- Elon seems very adverse to per-use charges. In talking about the Superchargers at the shareholder meeting he mentioned that he always wants it to be free at time of use. He wants the costs integrated into the price of the car as an option. This would allow him to do the same with swapping.

A monthly fee matches with that assumption, as it is not like a "per use" fee but an "use as many times as you want" fee.

 

[Citizen-T]

Maybe a 99 $ per month fee? (8 x 12 x 99 = 9,504 $). As it includes the electricity it is an adequate price.




A monthly fee matches with that assumption, as it is not like a "per use" fee but an "use as many times as you want" fee.

I think Tesla would rather collect the cash up front as the CapEx is going to be up front; but, sure, I could roll with a monthly fee.

 

[deonb]

I am becoming increasingly convinced that the $12k pre-purchased battery plan is the fee that will be charged to use the swapping network. Some of the objections put forth in this thread over the past 24 hours have contributed to this theory

I like your theory. I am hesitant to buy an upfront battery for $12k as it is today because:

a) 8 years from now I wouldn't want a 85 kWh battery. I want a 200 kWh battery or whatever is the latest and greatest.
b) Tesla tells me they can't/won't make a larger battery available for the Model S, but this is the same company that told me you can't install a twin charger after the fact.
c) I'm not convinced that the current battery would degrade more than 10% in 8 years.
d) $12k now is worth much more than $12k 8 years from now. Just buy $12k of TSLA stock instead. Either the company will be out of business (in which case you're not getting a new battery anyway), or you'd have enough to just buy a new car, or at least battery.

Is this a minority opinion?

If I'm not the only one, and there is a segment of people who don't really care about having a new battery in 8 years, is there another way to participate in swapping?