-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla Gigafactory Investor Thread
- Thread starter teddyg
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Gigafactory TSLA
First round of production priority is to basically select customers that want a new Solarcity solar+storage package deal. Existing solar and powerwall only orders will fill in 2016.
New article from Fast Company showing what looks to be a recent photo of the gigafactory. You can see that they are preparing the foundation to extend the gigafactory (it is to the right of the already-existing four-section structure).
Elon Musk Powers Up: Inside Tesla's $5 Billion Gigafactory
1.9 million square feet of floor space under roof so far. 14% completed.
Elon Musk Powers Up: Inside Tesla's $5 Billion Gigafactory
1.9 million square feet of floor space under roof so far. 14% completed.
Thanks for the find, but I think the area to the right has been that way for quite some time. They were going to build that out, but then added a floor to the existing structure and removed some of what they had started there.
Imagine being on a jury with Musk.
Anyways, the article mentions that a Tesla exec now touts 13.6 million square feet, up from the 10 million square feet in the original Gigafactory presentation PDF. Most the article is already well know to us Tesla observers.
At least the initial production ramp is mostly Solarcity. They have a deals on both coasts with utilities for aggregation services which involves many new solar+storage combos and other customer sided devices like nest. Remember, Solarcity did a rather large 10,000 nest thermostat give away earlier this year to "select" new customers, so this might indicate a big initial powerwall order took place this year for Solarcity alone. To add, many of the initial orders through tesla energy was transferred to Solarcity sales directly. This is another indication Solarcity customers might be the first powerwall users to emerge this year.
In this case, Might find some chatter about new powerwall installs on Solarcity forums around the web.
Interesting. The partial mezzanine floor recently added to the current structure appears to account for the increase in square footage. My understanding is that the original final footprint of five plus million square feet remains unchanged.
brandude87
Member
I've heard a lot of conflicting information about the size of the Gigafactory. We heard a lot of detailed information regarding the size of the Gigafactory from Dean Haymore, Story County commissioner, in this video (skip to 2:25), posted back on July 13, 2015. Now, there's a new article out today from journalist, Max Chafkin, who visited the Gigafactory, which provides more conflicting information. Here are the facts from each of the two sources + Google Earth:
Dean Haymore (7/13/15):
Current building (Block 1) square footage: 2,500,000
Total square footage of building once complete in 2020: 24,000,000. Note: he uses the term 'structure' when referring to area, implying that this includes all square footage, including areas that are typically left out of square footage specs, such as kitchens, bathrooms, utility rooms, etc. He may also be including the surface of the roof which I will get to later in this post.
Floors: First floor will be at 0', mezzanine level at 23.5', third floor at 41', and roof at 71'. Note: 'mezzanine' seems to imply that the second floor will not be continuous, but may only exist in certain areas of the factory.
Blocks: There will be a total of 7 blocks (presumably of roughly equal size) that will be constructed to form the final building. The current structure is Block 1.
Max Chafkin (11/17/15):
Current building (Block 1) square footage: 1,900,000. Note: he uses the term 'factory space'. Therefore, this may exclude non-factory space, such as utility rooms, kitchens, bathrooms, etc.
Total square footage of building once complete in 2020: 13,600,000
Google Earth:
Using the measurement tools in Google Earth Pro, I have found the current building (Block 1) to have an 800,000 sq ft footprint as seen below:
Okay, so looking at these facts, there are some obvious contradictions regarding the size of the factory. Firstly, Chafkin claims that the current building (Block 1) is 1.9 M sq ft, whereas Haymore says 2.5 M sq ft. My theory is that the difference between these two numbers is what is meant by 'square footage'. Haymore uses the word 'structure' to describe area, whereas Chafkin uses the word 'factory space'. I believe Chafkin's 1.9 M sq ft is referring to the actual usable factory space, whereas Haymore's 2.5 M sq ft refers to the entire sturcture, including kitchens, bathrooms, utility rooms, etc. Assuming this is true, Block 1 will consist of 76% 'factory space' (1.9 M sq ft / 2.5 M sq ft). This brings us to our second contradiction...
Haymore claims that Gigafactory will have a total area of 24 M sq ft ('structure') once complete in 2020, whereas Chafkin claims it will have a total area of 13.6 M sq ft ('factory space'). If we assume the completed Gigafactory will have 76% factory space, using Haymore's 24 M sq ft of stucture, there should be 18.2 M sq ft of factory space, not 13.6 M sq ft. So what happened to the other 4.6 M sq ft??? To find out, let's take a step back. Haymore claims that the Block 1 stucture is 2.5 M sq ft and that there will be 7 blocks. Using photoshop, I have overlaid an area equal to 7 times that of Block 1 over the sattellite image of the Gigafactory, and it lines up perfectly with the bounds of the construction site as well as Telsa's rendering, implying that, indeed, the final factory will by seven times the size of block 1. See my photoshopped overlay below (Block 1 outlined in red) compared to Tesla's final rendering of the factory:
So, if we assume that the Gigafactory will be 7 times the size of Block 1, then the Gigafactory should be 17.5 M sq ft of structure (2.5 M sq ft x 7), not 24 M sq ft as stated by Haymore. So why the discrepency? First, let's look at the footprint of the factory. From Google Earth, we know that the footprint of Block 1 is 800,000 sq ft, which implys that the finaly factory will have a footprint of 5.6 M sq ft once complete (800,000 sq ft x 7). By the way, this would make the GF the largest building in the world by footprint, which no one seems to be talking about. So, if the footprint is 5.6 M sq ft and the total structure is 24 M sq ft, then there would have to be an average of 4.3 floors. One might say, "but there are only 3 floors!" However, looking at recent construction photos, I have noted in previous posts that it appears that Tesla is adding a 4th floor. See image from my earlier post below:
But 4 floors is still less than 4.3 floors, so what's the deal? It could be that the final factory will actually be slightly larger than 7 times it current size, giving it a footprint of 6 M sq ft, rather than 5.6 M sq ft. If that were the case, 4 floors would make it exactly 24 M sq ft. However, again, this contradicts Chafkin's claim of 13.6 M sq ft (17.9 M sq ft of structure if you assume he is implying 76% 'factory space').
So, there could be a few reasons for the discrepency:
1. Both Chafkin and Haymore are right, but their facts have been misinterpreted. It could be that Haymore's claim of 24 M sq ft includes the roof of the building (note: his claim of 2.5 M sq ft for Block 1 seems to exclude the roof, since 2.5 M sq ft x 7 blocks = 17.5 M sq ft, not 24 M sq ft). If this were the case, the actual structural area of the building (excluding roof) would be 18.4 M sq ft (24,000,000 sq ft - 800,000 sq ft * 7 blocks) or 2.63 M sq ft per block. This 18.4 M sq ft is very close to Chafkin's implied 17.9 M sq ft, so this is an extremely plausible explaination. Also, note: Haymore's claim of 2.5 M sq ft could reasonably be considered an approximation of 2.63 M sq ft per block, which would explain the discrepency of his implied 17.5 M sq ft (2.5 M sq ft x 7 blocks) of floorspace vs. 18.4 M sq ft (2.63 M sq ft x 7 blocks) of floorspace.
2. Both Chafkin and Haymore are right, but their facts have been misinterpreted. The final factory could have a much lower 'factory space' utilization of 57% (13.6 M sq ft / 24 M sq ft). I can't imagine 43% of the factory being used for something other than factory space, so this would be an extremely unlikely explaination.
3. Chafkin is wrong and Haymore's claim of a 24 M sq ft structure actually implies that there will be future floors added and that there may be areas with as many as 5 floors. I don't think that this is likely since adding a 5th floor would start to make things pretty tight. The maximum height of a 5th floor would be about 10' if they split the bottom level in two.
4. Chafkin is wrong and Haymore's claim of 24 M sq ft actually does refer to floor space, implying that the factory will be much larger than anyone else is claiming. For this to be true, however, there would need to be an average of 4.3 floors as previously stated. This does not seem likely.
5. Haymore is wrong, and the factory really will be 13.6 M sq ft of factory space (17.9 M sq ft of structure if you assume Chafkin is implying to 76% 'factory space').
6. Haymore is wrong, and Chafkin's claim of 13.6 M sq ft actually does refer to total floor space. For this to be true, however, there would need to be an average of 2.4 floors (Chafkin's claimed 1,900,000 sq ft area of block 1 / 800,000 sq ft footprint of block 1). This seems unlikely, given that you can already clearly see 4 floors (at least in some areas) from the construction photos.
In summary, I think that option 1 is the correct explaination (however, I would like to believe option 4 to be true). I think Haymore's comment about 24 M sq ft includes the surface of the roof of the GF. Therefore, I believe that the final GF will have 18.4 M sq ft of floor space (13.6 M sq ft of which will be dedicated factory space), have a footprint of 5.6 M sq ft (making it the largest building in the world by footprint), and have an average of 3.3 floors (meaning that there will be 3 floors in most areas, maybe 2 floors in some areas, and 4 floors in other areas).
So, what do you guys think? How big will the Gigafactory be, given all the facts out there?
Last edited:
Nice little analysis, esp. because you provide each of us to reach our own conclusions.
I find the concept of using the roof as allowable square footage to be amusing - in a positive way. If you consider that the roof is to be close to fully covered with PV panels, then why not? That's a factory component that is working [sunlight hours] * 365d/yr, and sure as shooting is providing continual value-added.
I find the concept of using the roof as allowable square footage to be amusing - in a positive way. If you consider that the roof is to be close to fully covered with PV panels, then why not? That's a factory component that is working [sunlight hours] * 365d/yr, and sure as shooting is providing continual value-added.
brandude87
Member
The foundation to the right (left in the photo below) of the existing structure that you are referring to has actually been there since February. The image below was taken on February 28, 2015 (see post: Tesla Gigafactory - Page 27).
Furthurmore, Tesla had actually begun building a fifth section on that foundation, however, removed it to focus on the original four sections as referenced in my post back in May.
Last edited:
This FC article confirms the numbers I have been posting many times, yet mixes it up in the title:
- There's basically no Gigafactory at the moment; with just 14% of the planned floor space Tesla can only make a fraction of the total cells/packs.
- The $5bn number in the FC article title however refers to the full Gigafactory project. So far, Tesla invested only around $261 million (Sept 30, 2015) plus maybe a little on equipment. Panasonic invested even much less.
- Adding the additional builings (86%) and building out the full GF will again take years. This will also be visible of course as soon as construction starts (drones, local press reports etc.).
So far there's no indication work has resumed on the additional builings as of late 2015.
Why is this important? The Model 3 can't be sold in announced numbers (Tesla's goal of 500k vehicles in total, of which maybe 350-400k units are Model3 - maybe even more if cells for the S/X continue to be imported from Japan) unless the full Gigafactory structure is completed.
Tftf, the original Tesla Gigafactory PDF presentation showed the phased build out. This is nothing new, other than now the Gigafactory is to be bigger. Further, the cost savings necessary for initial Model 3 launch can be achieved with the initial phase as made clear in the presentation and subsequent remarks by various Tesla executives. Assuming 14% floor translates to actual capacity, we are talking about 4.9 GWh. However, Tesla has discussed that they have further optimized floor usage and expect better efficiency. Therefore, assuming more like 5.5 GWh, that is slightly less than all of LG Chem's worldwide automotive cell production capacity in 2015. In any case, this first phase is good for about 90,000 to 100,000 Model 3's depending on the final pack size. That is in addition to the roughly 80,000 to 100,000 Model S and X production capacity. A roughly 200,000 unit capacity in late 2017/early 2018 is quite good and they can then step up from there.
Panasonic already stated their expansion plans and allocated capital for the Gigafactory. Obviously, they cannot install the equipment until the building is ready for them. There is no way you know how much Panasonic has spent on equipment or labor so far, it isn't broken out that way in their financials.
The goal is to reach roughly 500,000 unit capacity by 2020. Nothing so far with the Gigafactory build out indicates that they won't achieve that. The fact that there is an inside space already with a certificate of occupancy, as well as Tesla Energy already moving in during 2015 indicates that they are dramatically ahead of schedule. Matter of fact, this first phase might not even be for Model 3. There is plenty of time to bring the second phase online for Model 3, which is likely 2 more years.
Panasonic already stated their expansion plans and allocated capital for the Gigafactory. Obviously, they cannot install the equipment until the building is ready for them. There is no way you know how much Panasonic has spent on equipment or labor so far, it isn't broken out that way in their financials.
The goal is to reach roughly 500,000 unit capacity by 2020. Nothing so far with the Gigafactory build out indicates that they won't achieve that. The fact that there is an inside space already with a certificate of occupancy, as well as Tesla Energy already moving in during 2015 indicates that they are dramatically ahead of schedule. Matter of fact, this first phase might not even be for Model 3. There is plenty of time to bring the second phase online for Model 3, which is likely 2 more years.
On the cell level (that's the tricky part) I see nothing "dramatically ahead of schedule".
Cells for ESS/storage by late 2016 and first cells for EV use by 2017 - these are Tesla's current estimates.
Looking at Tesla's balance sheet they will need to raise a few billion USD to complete the Model 3 and the full GF project until 2020 imho.
If readers don't agree, let me ask this simple question:
If Tesla still is so bullish on Model3 / Powerwall demand and if Tesla has ample cash why is it only building out 14% of the entire factory at the moment?
Why did they remove section 5 as outlined by poster brandude87 a few months ago: Tesla Gigafactory - Page 46
And why didn't they restart work on additional structures since then?
It's not like the remaining 86% of the factory can be added overnight in case demand is there.
Cells for ESS/storage by late 2016 and first cells for EV use by 2017 - these are Tesla's current estimates.
Looking at Tesla's balance sheet they will need to raise a few billion USD to complete the Model 3 and the full GF project until 2020 imho.
If readers don't agree, let me ask this simple question:
If Tesla still is so bullish on Model3 / Powerwall demand and if Tesla has ample cash why is it only building out 14% of the entire factory at the moment?
Why did they remove section 5 as outlined by poster brandude87 a few months ago: Tesla Gigafactory - Page 46
And why didn't they restart work on additional structures since then?
It's not like the remaining 86% of the factory can be added overnight in case demand is there.
Last edited:
I'm really tempted to be insulting here, but instead I'll just point out some realities.
1. Markets take time to build up. Initial sales of the first iPhone were not all that impressive, until a few months after release.
2. They get to work the bugs out of the system on 1/7th of it, not the whole thing.
3. They get to use cash flow from the first bit to contribute to building the rest of it.
4. Construction crew are also a limited resource; I imagine they had to choose between getting 1/7th of it running quickly or waiting an extra year.
With a moment's thought I could probably think of more reasons. But let me just say that these are smart people who are paid to put a lot of thought into the best ways to optimize Tesla's and their own outcomes. So second-guessing them is an interesting pastime, but you have almost none of the information needed to do it correctly. Admittedly, neither do I, but I know who I trust.
I see the logic behind making a large pilot line first.
My point was about uber-bullish investors reiterating the "$5 billion", "500k vehicles a year" and "Tesla's (EV) battery capacity is unmatched" mantras when the current (late 2015) reality on the ground in Nevada is very different.
Same for Tesla's current balance sheet. There are a few billions missing to complete this project and the Model3 imho - and I think there's no way this gap can be filled with internal cash-flows until 2020., i.e. Tesla has to tap outside sources again.
I doubt all Tesla retail investors are fully aware of this - especiallz since CEO Musk is already talking about additional Gigafactories overseas in the press.
Many investors think the Gigafactory will soon start churning out "batteries" (without understanding the difference between cells, modules and packs) for all "500k cars/year".
Which reiterates my bigger point about the car industry compared to other sectors: It takes a lot of time and cap-ex to add one additional $ of revenue in the car sector, probably more so than in any other sector.
My point was about uber-bullish investors reiterating the "$5 billion", "500k vehicles a year" and "Tesla's (EV) battery capacity is unmatched" mantras when the current (late 2015) reality on the ground in Nevada is very different.
Same for Tesla's current balance sheet. There are a few billions missing to complete this project and the Model3 imho - and I think there's no way this gap can be filled with internal cash-flows until 2020., i.e. Tesla has to tap outside sources again.
I doubt all Tesla retail investors are fully aware of this - especiallz since CEO Musk is already talking about additional Gigafactories overseas in the press.
Many investors think the Gigafactory will soon start churning out "batteries" (without understanding the difference between cells, modules and packs) for all "500k cars/year".
Which reiterates my bigger point about the car industry compared to other sectors: It takes a lot of time and cap-ex to add one additional $ of revenue in the car sector, probably more so than in any other sector.
Last edited:
Uhm, why did Tesla raise over $2bn in early 2014 and communicate it was primarily for the GF project - but then spend 80-90% of these funds on other stuff?
Reminder from early 2014:
All that cash is gone anyway as of late 2015 - while just 14% of the entire GF is under construction.
Seems like this is a bit of an exaggeration so Links please so we understand the context of this statement.
Similar threads
- Article
