Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla Gigafactory Investor Thread

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
To my opinion the multi-billion dollar deal between BMW and Samsung SDI shows BMW's growing confidence in the electric vehicle market and corresponding battery cell demand.

I have always felt that the BMWs and MBs of the world would not try to compete with TM. The question is will the public be satisfied with hybrids? BMW and MB would as it will allow their dealers to still have the ICE part of the vehicle to service so they will be very willing to sell hybrids versus EVs. Many in the public will be happy with 40-80 mile battery ranges for short trips and having the convenience of being able to gas up anywhere for long trips. No range anxiety.
TM, and other EVs will 'win' when they can charge a battery to give it 200+ miles of range in the time it takes to fill a gas tank.
 
A new development:

Can the world Quartz


It seems that NMC will not get the promise of improvement they thought it will. This is a pretty big blow to GM(with LG chem) and BMW(with Samsung)


GM == Epic Fail

RT

Sounds more like the battery researchers weren't able to deliver the required performance. A better battery would be great news, just as long as it doesn't give GM an advantage over Tesla :wink:
 
TM, and other EVs will 'win' when they can charge a battery to give it 200+ miles of range in the time it takes to fill a gas tank.

a total win perhaps- but I think the might win the war on a different mantra: 'plug in at home- always a full tank' even better -
couple that with the SC free for long trips- done deal, 'we're home free' (all puns intended)
 
A new development:

Can the world Quartz


It seems that NMC will not get the promise of improvement they thought it will. This is a pretty big blow to GM(with LG chem) and BMW(with Samsung)

Great find. Thanks for posting this.

I corresponded with the author a little bit, asking for some clarity about various NMC chemistries and the like, because he seems to put the Nissan Leaf chemistry with the Samsung SDI/BMW chemistry into the same category. Paraphrasing, he's saying that the NMC issue with fade has to do with trying to increase the operating voltage above 4.2 volts which is what they were hoping to achieve to gain the specific energy levels above NCA and hopefully not suffer from the relative instability of NCA. He also said that the price levels he quoted are from "Burrell's presentation at the Annual Merit Review in
Washington last month." Does anyone have access to that? It looks like energy.gov will publish it in October.

The implications of this are pretty startling. That means that there is little hope that the improvements in NMC chemistry that various non-Tesla automakers are banking on will pan out. Which means that Tesla's approach by using relatively volatile NCA chemistry but designing a battery pack to mitigate the issues with the volatility is going to be, in the short term, the winning solution. The existing NMC based cells as shipped by BMW and others have had far lower specific energy than Tesla's cells, and even given the cooling jackets and spacing, the overall specific energy at the pack level Tesla's solution is still superior.

That means that the next generation of BEVs will be locked behind Tesla's battery solution due to the inability to achieve higher specific energy density at the cell and pack levels.

 
Professor Dahn still thinks the chemistry has some life in it:

Dahn suggests that the Department of Energy and Argonne are making too big a deal of the issue. The problem is real, he says, but “there has been a sort of mental explosion that this is a disaster. Even with voltage fade, it doesn’t mean the material is useless. You just have to deal with it.”
His approach is to modify how the material is used. Until now, the cathodes have been a uniform construction of the NMC formulation. Dahn has found better results using the formulation only as a thin and potent shell around a differently comprised inner electrode. This approach does not trigger voltage fade even at 4.7 volts, he said.
 
Professor Dahn still thinks the chemistry has some life in it:

The issue is what specific energy do you get when you do that. There is a big gap to jump - they were originally hoping for 280 Wh/kg, which is only slightly better than Tesla's 250-260 Wh/kg NCA cells. Using a different cathode with lower specific energy and using NMC as a shell is likely to make them miss the 280 Wh/kg target.
 
I wonder if the recent announcements from GM and BMW have something to do with all this. A lot of the manufacturers were hesitant to invest in batteries because they were waiting for their technology to breakthrough. Since they were most likely aware of these recent findings, could it be they decided to invest in it and focus on bringing down the cost on mass production? It might also explain why BMW had that meeting with Tesla.


I mean the timing can't all be a coincidence.


As for Nissan Leaf, I thought they used LMO then transitioned to LMO-NMC, didn't they?
 
A little off topic, but I got into a discussion about the future of BEVs vs FCEVs on Green Car Report. The FCEV proponents were over the top defending FCEVs, making claims there were more charging stations, etc.

So I contacted DoE about that. I was directed to their alternative fueling station lists.

The list includes both public and private refueling/recharging sites. It doesn't differentiate, but was told it included employer refueling/recharging stations as well.

FCEV ALL OPEN (nationally): 53
FCEV ALL PROPOSED (nationally): 49

BEV ALL OPEN (nationally): 1192
BEV ALL PROPOSED (nationally): about 9000

It would seem, ignoring which was the better technology, that BEVs have public mind share, and investor interest for recharging systems.
 
A little off topic, but I got into a discussion about the future of BEVs vs FCEVs on Green Car Report. The FCEV proponents were over the top defending FCEVs, making claims there were more charging stations, etc.

So I contacted DoE about that. I was directed to their alternative fueling station lists.

The list includes both public and private refueling/recharging sites. It doesn't differentiate, but was told it included employer refueling/recharging stations as well.

FCEV ALL OPEN (nationally): 53
FCEV ALL PROPOSED (nationally): 49

BEV ALL OPEN (nationally): 1192
BEV ALL PROPOSED (nationally): about 9000

It would seem, ignoring which was the better technology, that BEVs have public mind share, and investor interest for recharging systems.

Wow, 9000 really is a lot. But in how many years?
 
The better question is, what do the the utility companies charge vs their cost of generation.

Can homeowners generate power for less dollars than the utility will sell it for?

Can business owners generate power for less dollars than they are paying?

This competitive paradigm will improve costs across the board. If you are a business owner, how much are your demand charges? There is a reason Walmart is the number one user of solar power in the U.S.

For homeowners the answer is NO. For business owners the answer is in their current power consumption, the reason being the amortized cost of the generating equipment.

- - - Updated - - -

Many criticize the business environment in California. Let's consider California's business history. In the interest of brevity we'll keep the list short.

Disney

Apple

Intel

McDonalds

Qualcomm

Hollywood (the entire movie industry)

Tesla

I tried to limit the list to firms that have absolutely "changed the world".
With the exception of Tesla and Qualcom, your list is of firms founded before the insanity ensued. I relocated my communications equipment business from San Bernardino, CA to Coeur d'Alene, ID in 1991. The change in governmental attitude was immediate, as was the growth of my firm. The exodus of California firms around that time resulted in several changes in California business work rules/taxes (that have all regressed to starting point).

- - - Updated - - -

An impressive list, Jack, however McDonald's as an earth shaker really needs to be credited to Illinois.

In 1955 Ray Kroc of Illinois bought the name and fast service system from the McDonald brothers who had opened a restaurant in California in 1940. The first McDonald's restaurant under Kroc's corporation was in Des Plaines, Illinois and is now a museum. He then began franchising like crazy, which was what really brought about the fast food revolution. The corporate headquarters is in Oak Brook, Illinois.

The first "McDonald's" was located at 13th and "E" Street in San Bernardino, CA. In 1949, my father, an airman at nearby Norton Air Force Base was an evening manager.
 
A little off topic, but I got into a discussion about the future of BEVs vs FCEVs on Green Car Report. The FCEV proponents were over the top defending FCEVs, making claims there were more charging stations, etc.

So I contacted DoE about that. I was directed to their alternative fueling station lists.

The list includes both public and private refueling/recharging sites. It doesn't differentiate, but was told it included employer refueling/recharging stations as well.

FCEV ALL OPEN (nationally): 53
FCEV ALL PROPOSED (nationally): 49

BEV ALL OPEN (nationally): 1192
BEV ALL PROPOSED (nationally): about 9000

It would seem, ignoring which was the better technology, that BEVs have public mind share, and investor interest for recharging systems.


Those numbers seem outdated as I am pretty sure there are over 5000 public charging sites, that said maybe you meant to post this under:

Competing technologies to BEV

Because I don't see what this has to do with the gigafactory or batteries is specific.
 
I have always felt that the BMWs and MBs of the world would not try to compete with TM. The question is will the public be satisfied with hybrids? BMW and MB would as it will allow their dealers to still have the ICE part of the vehicle to service so they will be very willing to sell hybrids versus EVs. Many in the public will be happy with 40-80 mile battery ranges for short trips and having the convenience of being able to gas up anywhere for long trips. No range anxiety.
TM, and other EVs will 'win' when they can charge a battery to give it 200+ miles of range in the time it takes to fill a gas tank.

Tesla has developed a 'quick change' system whereby the battery is swapped in less time than it takes to gas up. Re-charging is not the issue any longer, it is the availability of recharging stations away from home or work. There are over 9000 stations BEV recharging stations planned (nationally) at this time. Tesla is spearheading the development of these sites with its Supercharger stations. One of these is co-located with a motel. I see motel co-locating as a mutually beneficial development for the BEV industry and the lodging industry.

- - - Updated - - -

Wow, 9000 really is a lot. But in how many years?

The "download" was to another tab in my browser. From there had to I copy it to Excel. Yuck. Everything showed up in the first column (it ignored comma delimitation). The info may be there, but I was not going to try to break it out.

I would suspect in the next 3 - 5 years.

- - - Updated - - -

Thanks, as you can see I am new here, and not that familiar with all the subjects. The email I received

Shannon Brescher Shea
Clean Cities Communications Manager
Vehicle Technologies Office, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
U.S. Department of Energy
(202) 586-8161
[email protected]

said this about timeliness of date
Most of the charging station data (the stations that are associated with ChargePoint, the Blink network, or Semacharge) are updated on a daily basis with a feed directly from those chargers. The other stations are updated regularly.
 
Alternative Fuels Data Center: Alternative Fueling Station Locator

9,739 electric stations
22,757 charging outlets
including private stations, excluding Level 1 stations

vs

2,976 propane stations
1,399 CNG stations




Including Planned:
1,558 CNG stations
3,007 propane stations
9,789 electric stations
22,914 charging outlets

The site will also separate out Hydrogen, bio-diesel, LNG, and ethanol, for what that’s worth.
 
Tesla has developed a 'quick change' system whereby the battery is swapped in less time than it takes to gas up.


[/FONT][/COLOR]

Gregg, I am aware that technology exists. How many has TM actually opened? It is my opinion that instead of those stations, over time they will upgrade the software/hardware on the cars and the SCs to allow for very fast charging of the battery (ex: 80% in 10 minutes=close to time it takes to fill a gas tank). When that happens there will be no range anxiety. Until then, many people (not early adopters like we have on this forum) will not embrace EVs. In addition, even if they would adopt them TM will need to bring the Model E out at $35K to open up another market.

This will all happen but it is difficult to predict when that will be.
 
Last edited: