As far as I know, most lithium reserves are actually in North-/Southamerica, so shipping costs could be cheaper in total!
But as you said, shipping will not be a huge cost factor anyway
-
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
But as you said, shipping will not be a huge cost factor anyway
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Lithium is only about 4% of cell material, 2% of pack, so any savings would have essentially zero impact. The copper and aluminum likely have the highest shipping costs per kWh.
I've seen some concerns raised on this thread about natural resource requirements needed for Giga Factory (let alone many many times more factories if EVs supplant ICE).
In this 5 minute video Elon offers his take on the sustainability of large scale battery production. If you don't have 5 minutes, skip to 1:50 in the video
Elon Musk Thoughts on transitioning to 100% renewable energy - YouTube
In this 5 minute video Elon offers his take on the sustainability of large scale battery production. If you don't have 5 minutes, skip to 1:50 in the video
Elon Musk Thoughts on transitioning to 100% renewable energy - YouTube
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Yes, but now we need Faux to spin that into Elon says his factory requires mining the whole planet for cobalt....
It is amazing how simple common sense knowledge based arguments can lack inflammatory content.
It is amazing how simple common sense knowledge based arguments can lack inflammatory content.
One way to solve the battery giga problem is to use less per car and have a much wider amount of superchargers.
imagine a highpotency battery that solves the "must have more to accelerate fast".
Put such a battery in the car for most driving - how many 85 owners drive 200 miles a day?
Then pull into your local "batt shop" and switch to a long range battery for a summer trip. Small capacity and large capacity battery would be housed in the same casing. If you must drive every weekend to your mountain house, then buy the large capacity car up front. I can't see everyone driving with that pattern.
that means, something like a 35kWh battery in something like a Model E and then a quick swap to 80kWh battery temporarily for a jaunt cross country, then when you return home swap back to your smaller stock battery.
this kind of solves two issues. Keeps stock cars cheaper and offers a solution for long range. The average battery usage can be half or less than half. Does have a few drawbacks, but if you can lower prices, you can also get more EV adoption.
price the large battery rental at something like $60/day.
Maybe this is the plan long term but can't occur until 500-1000 sc'ers are laid out? Battery tech will allow for it as they keep getting better. Battery swap is supposed to be in the long range plans too.
yes, I have read the range extension battery patent presented by the company. I think my idea would work when the consumer cars become commonplace. And perhaps is the same idea as the Tesla range extension idea as well. But the real issue is how to make it easy to manage for the battery swapping or extending.
For EVs to grow to giga sales, they don't need to all be sold with such large batteries. 200 mile trips are not that common for most auto owners. And as batteries become higher density and smaller, the worry about the weight will abate.
imagine a highpotency battery that solves the "must have more to accelerate fast".
Put such a battery in the car for most driving - how many 85 owners drive 200 miles a day?
Then pull into your local "batt shop" and switch to a long range battery for a summer trip. Small capacity and large capacity battery would be housed in the same casing. If you must drive every weekend to your mountain house, then buy the large capacity car up front. I can't see everyone driving with that pattern.
that means, something like a 35kWh battery in something like a Model E and then a quick swap to 80kWh battery temporarily for a jaunt cross country, then when you return home swap back to your smaller stock battery.
this kind of solves two issues. Keeps stock cars cheaper and offers a solution for long range. The average battery usage can be half or less than half. Does have a few drawbacks, but if you can lower prices, you can also get more EV adoption.
price the large battery rental at something like $60/day.
Maybe this is the plan long term but can't occur until 500-1000 sc'ers are laid out? Battery tech will allow for it as they keep getting better. Battery swap is supposed to be in the long range plans too.
yes, I have read the range extension battery patent presented by the company. I think my idea would work when the consumer cars become commonplace. And perhaps is the same idea as the Tesla range extension idea as well. But the real issue is how to make it easy to manage for the battery swapping or extending.
For EVs to grow to giga sales, they don't need to all be sold with such large batteries. 200 mile trips are not that common for most auto owners. And as batteries become higher density and smaller, the worry about the weight will abate.
Last edited:
dhrivnak
Active Member
How about a portable generator, about 10 KW that could run on natural gas or other cleaner fuel that one would pull behind on trips? Similar to the BMW I3 concept. That would likely be FAR cheaper than nationwide battery swapping.
The idea is fine for a generator but it would have to put out enough power for longer drives. Meaning something at least the size to fill the frunk and a fuel store. If you are traveling, you want the frunk for luggage, etc. musk seems averse to burning anything. The SC network, if done to the extreme, would have one every 30-40 miles in all directions. Still far less than gasoline stations but that is one way to do "long distance".
Every service center would do battery swaps. And with smaller, denser batteries, the task becomes far easier. I don't mean 90 second swaps either. Just do it in the time it takes to do a full charge. Much like visiting a dealer for an oil change. We have to think what this looks like in the future, not the 1000 pound module of today. I believe we will see 500Wh/kg in our lifetime.
keep in mind that this is a 10-15 year view of this. Until then EV adoption will continue to be relatively slow.
Every service center would do battery swaps. And with smaller, denser batteries, the task becomes far easier. I don't mean 90 second swaps either. Just do it in the time it takes to do a full charge. Much like visiting a dealer for an oil change. We have to think what this looks like in the future, not the 1000 pound module of today. I believe we will see 500Wh/kg in our lifetime.
keep in mind that this is a 10-15 year view of this. Until then EV adoption will continue to be relatively slow.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Here's the problem. Most high power batteries have poor specific energy density, which means it takes more material to produce the same capacity. So your high output 35kWh pack is the same weight and uses as much material as your 60kWh pack. Tesla hasn't saved much at all in the materials department, especially when you now figure in the fact that it has to build extra packs and stock them at swap stations for when people need them.
In today's technology, sure. I am believing in future tech changes that will help solve this. Li-S and other chemistry changes are coming. I think your reply is comparing today's Li-Ion to LiFEPO4. Also, consumer EVs will not have 400hp electric motors. 130-150KW for more "pedantic" cars will be far more commonplace. Just as Ford has a 50 to 1 sales ratio of Focus to 5.0L Mustangs. People on a budget need technology on a budget. Interesting times are coming.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Then there is no need for your swap plan. Future cells will be more energy dense, and as long as they are able to produce the power needed for daily driving, especially in more pedantic vehicles, there is no need to use two packs. One pack in the 40-50kWh range, fast charge capable, with fast chargers everywhere, will do the job. In road charging as you drive is also another real possibility, already being used for buses in Korea.
http://www.cnet.com.au/electric-road-charges-buses-while-they-drive-339345092.htm
http://www.cnet.com.au/electric-road-charges-buses-while-they-drive-339345092.htm
I think the public's psyche, at least here in the U.S., requires 200+ miles of range for large scale adoption of EVs, even if actual usage patterns don't require it. I think there's sort of an instant emotional reaction to a 100 mile range as a downgrade, something taken away (even with battery swap, for some people some of these feelings might still linger... "I want to just be able to get in my car and go... I don't want my freedom cramped relying on Tesla and their network...").
By the time EVs firmly have mainstream adoption, I think we get to JRP3's timeframe where packs with 400 or 500 mile range are as affordable as ICE cars. So, in places like the U.S. I don't know that we'll ever see the more logical 120 mile pack with swap option (and to JRP3's point, it may not really be more logical as if I understand correctly, the packs involved would use as much resources to maintain the quality of driving experience Tesla's batteries are offering).
Things may be different elsewhere. In the "developing world", there are (and will be growing numbers) of people who'd love a 100 mile range car swap capacity or not. The psyche problem of a seeming downgrade to Americans to take a car with 100 miles range, wouldn't seem to be nearly the issue for large groups of people for whom any car is an upgrade.
By the time EVs firmly have mainstream adoption, I think we get to JRP3's timeframe where packs with 400 or 500 mile range are as affordable as ICE cars. So, in places like the U.S. I don't know that we'll ever see the more logical 120 mile pack with swap option (and to JRP3's point, it may not really be more logical as if I understand correctly, the packs involved would use as much resources to maintain the quality of driving experience Tesla's batteries are offering).
Things may be different elsewhere. In the "developing world", there are (and will be growing numbers) of people who'd love a 100 mile range car swap capacity or not. The psyche problem of a seeming downgrade to Americans to take a car with 100 miles range, wouldn't seem to be nearly the issue for large groups of people for whom any car is an upgrade.
I agree with the first part of your post, not sure about the second one. I live in a country the size of Indiana. When I talk to friends about Tesla and the 300 mile/500km range, the first reaction is usually: yeah, it's getting there, but still, not enough in all scenarios. So then I start talking about Superchargers and mention how small our country is anyway and I manage to sort of convince some. But I have the feeling we will need a dense & quick (<10 minute to full) SC network and a 300+ mile range on highway speed with a maximum 15-20% surcharge in price over an ICE for mass adoption.
Diesels have pretty much taken over the new car market of Western Europe, even though they are usually 10-15% more expensive, because they consume less fuel. So free, or even just cheaper "filling up" can balance a somewhat higher price. But, in my opinion, range and charging speed are still the main psychological challenges EVs need to break through.
I think that Tesla's real secret weapon in this game is building out that SC network by the time Model E hits the road. If they keep expanding the network at this rate, with Gen3's - most probably - more advanced battery, the 2016/2017 BMW 3 series is going to wake up to a nasty surprise.
Steve, that freedom and convenience will eventually pass. When oil does run down, energy based on thorium reactors, renewables, new forms of fission and more will be somewhat limited in providing the freedoms we only came to enjoy following WW2. Three or four generations of cheap oil later, we have to think a bit more like those who endured limited freedoms. Conservation of resources is going to be critical in our next fifty years if we really intend to keep the 7 billion people on the planet. We can't expect gasoline energy density and cheap costs to be here forever. The 200 mile Ev argument for convenience sake today will eventually mature into whatever it does in the future. 150 mile EVs will eventually be pretty common. There are the bigger ones and those with range extenders. We are in year four of the current Lithium powered EV world. It is just a baby and few know what we have in store for us in 20 to 50 years. Lots of discovery ahead.
I live near a few Amish farms. Their range is whatever their horse's range is. And they are getting along fine in their frame of reference. I think the future is somewhere between what we enjoy today and Amish culture. Being conservative, living more off the land and lowering our individual resource usage. The big challenge is determining if the American suburban commuter lifestyle is at risk of eventual extinction. We do it differently than the rest of the world. Some of us commute 50 to 100 miles one way to maintain that large home in the countryside rather than live a metropolitain lifestlyle. Look at the length of commutes in California and NYC. Some are over two hours by car or train each way. I know a few going into NyC doing 3 hours each way.
I live near a few Amish farms. Their range is whatever their horse's range is. And they are getting along fine in their frame of reference. I think the future is somewhere between what we enjoy today and Amish culture. Being conservative, living more off the land and lowering our individual resource usage. The big challenge is determining if the American suburban commuter lifestyle is at risk of eventual extinction. We do it differently than the rest of the world. Some of us commute 50 to 100 miles one way to maintain that large home in the countryside rather than live a metropolitain lifestlyle. Look at the length of commutes in California and NYC. Some are over two hours by car or train each way. I know a few going into NyC doing 3 hours each way.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
While I agree with your overall message I have to point out that a move to a more sustainable power grid coupled with expected advances in energy storage technology could actually provide more travel freedom at lower cost. A more reasonably sized and highly efficient EV commuter car would allow the continuation of suburbia with lower cost and lower environmental impact. Even a Model S provides lower travel costs, though the purchase price is high.
This is a tall order for anyone. Read what you wrote and see if you can determine a good way to do all that. It is very hard.
bonaire, I see what you are saying. In the long run it may not be a matter of choice to have the convenience and freedom of the status quo for personal transport.
Very valid point, but as you said that is about the long run. Nearer term (5-15 years anyhow), I think to get this transition to EVs going, Tesla needs to make the car as appealing as what's already out there from a purely performance point of view. Why? At this point in time, it's a minority that are considering the longer term as you described it. So by producing something appealing to the majority who take for granted what they have now, Tesla is building up capacity to allow for this transition years ahead of what otherwise would happen.
As to $35K Model E with BMW performance. wow, that was fun to think about. May not be doable by 2017. If not, there's always redesigns... 2022, 2027, I see them getting there.
Very valid point, but as you said that is about the long run. Nearer term (5-15 years anyhow), I think to get this transition to EVs going, Tesla needs to make the car as appealing as what's already out there from a purely performance point of view. Why? At this point in time, it's a minority that are considering the longer term as you described it. So by producing something appealing to the majority who take for granted what they have now, Tesla is building up capacity to allow for this transition years ahead of what otherwise would happen.
As to $35K Model E with BMW performance. wow, that was fun to think about. May not be doable by 2017. If not, there's always redesigns... 2022, 2027, I see them getting there.
I disagree SteveG. I believe they can produce a 35k Model E with base model BMW 3 series performance. Especially if/when they do the Giga factory and drive their cost for the 40kw or 60kw battery way down for this 35k car.
TSLAopt, I simply don't know one way or the other on that, so I hope you know better :smile:
(fwiw, I was reading up on 328i specs a couple of hours ago. the thought of the Model E matching that for $35K was a bit of a rush. even if not, I am confident the car will be good enough to keep the company supply constrained).
Similar threads
- Article
