I agree JRP3 . Clearly it's nice to see these things happen now, like the raft of issues with the roadsters that led to a much better model S. We have about 2 years to get the factory going and producing. Hopefully we can see the tow trips eliminated before the factory starts producing.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
petit_bateau
Active Member
If it helps I'm calculating the 14% using cumulative global installed capacity and 2022 global annual solar production. Clearly there is a data quality issue to consider (where are those numbers actually coming from, i.e. who is actually reporting them into the IEA dataset, and do they really know in the energy ministries of the various governments !?); and of course that will include sites all over the world; but also that global fleet includes a tail of older sites/panels/etc that will be poor performers compared with a modern install.
So I'm very happy to use a higher number for capacity factor.
But also we should not get too carried away with over hopeful CF%. In the last few weeks I popped a news item on the energy thread regarding investors being grumpy about actual yield (i.e. capacity factor) vs promised yield on a lot of US solar installs that were investor-backed (so utility scale). That is of course not unique to the US.
But in any case I think we now have a feel for the amount of solar PV land take; electrical supply need; Megapack desirability; and so on that are associated with HGV/Semi usage. I just want to see some depots go down this route so we can see it in practice. Soon I hope.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Yeah, I don't buy "investor slide deck" projections either. SCTY's 15% CF was actual production from their existing installed base, not a projection. At least that's what they said.
14% global sounds right. There's been tons of bad solar installed in Europe.And some in China, due to central planning. I'm a huge fan of un-stored solar in dry, southern regions where seasonal variation is reduced and ROI is high.
Northern solar? Not a fan. IMHO it's mostly feel-goodism with crap ROI. A waste of perfectly good panels.
I don't agree on Megapacks, but I'd also love to see some solar powered depots. Preferably in the southwest US using battery swap.
well the Semi's are almost all going to charge at night. So in the USA that means Nuke, Wind, or Stored. That is if you want to do renewables.
So, battery it will be for us...at some point after price craters.
One factor that may help alleviate the problem is the fact that, at least for carriers, pickup and delivery activities happen only on weekdays, so with a good storage solution a terminal can bank the energy generated over the weekend to dispense to the trucks during the week. Likewise for holidays. That said, as I mentioned earlier on, there’s no number of solar panels that can cover the full charging need of a well utilized fleet of semi trucks, with the exception of a truck terminal somehow having enough land to install their own solar farm. I guess one other possible solution would be to install a roof over the entire terminal. I don’t know what the issue with this solution would be. It sounds wrong to me but I can’t put a finger on why.
Lucky you! I wish we had 50 acres period.
petit_bateau
Active Member
For myself in southern UK I get 9.5% CF (i.e. 3,000 kWh/yr from 3.6 kW) and my experience is that is a very typical CF% for real life residential solar in these places. We live where we live, and I guess trucks are mostly located where humans live. Short of relocating the UK, or Berlin, or Boston, or Brussels, then I guess CF% will remain hampered. Personally I'm very impressed by the continued steady increases in CF% that the solar industry as a whole is demonstrating. It has gone from a global average 8.8% CF in 2010 to 14.1% in 2022.
It did occur to me that if the solar PV array cannot be co-located with the truck depot; and given that running private wire networks is practically impossible in most places (for good reason); and given that public grid access for small packet amounts; then one option is to do a daily lift & shift of the Megapack battery itself. That sounds like an awful faff which is why I'd discounted it, however it would be easier than doing pack swaps at truck level ! More likely imho the truck/HGV/PSV depots will relocate further out to colocate with the solar, or at least to where the grid can be suitably reinforced in a cost-effective manner.
The problem with significantly overbuilding the storage so as to be able to bank energy from the weekend to carry one through the week, is that the additional battery is getting a very low capital utilisation. That makes it very expensive, and is why (at present) we struggle with interseasonal storage.
Sounds like your fleet will next be up for renewal in 4-5 years, so by then the landscape should be clearer.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Sorry, I just don't think solar trucking works where you live. Especially not in winter when your CF drops below 5%. What market forces would deploy valuable PV assets where they produce 1/3rd the benefit and create horrible seasonal issues? That kind of awful resource allocation is a job for craven politicians, not promoters of "first principles" thinking.
petit_bateau
Active Member
Winter will be primarily wind trucking.
Summer will be primarily solar trucking.
Both will be smaller build-outs than one alone.
Storage will be approx 12h level.
It is cheaper to do it this way than to build a 2,000-km grid of the required capacity to do the requisite N-S/S-N transfer, though grid will play a role.
A lot depends on the utility (preference) function when doing rational multi-factorial optimisation of this nature. Because NIMBYs definitely vote.
It is no different for trucking than for pretty much any other load.
=======
In this example (for here, today) the local generation is solar, and the imported grid is all renewables which in practice means wind overnight. That's an 8-bed house running on an ASHP, but it might just as well be a fleet of vehicles.
Doggydogworld
Active Member
Sure, but now you're talking about "grid trucking". By solar trucking I meant direct solar-to-truck that cuts out the grid middleman (griddleman? ha). The type of thing being discussed upthread, with 10 acres of panels or whatever near the depot. IMHO that could work in the US southwest and could cut fuel price from nearly $1/mile to a few cents per mile.
I would say, having done the numbers..that it is directionally right. A few cents or 15 cents...it will change logistically heavy industries. Bricks, aggregates, lumber, logs, corn. livestock. These things are often so localized because shipping is so expensive.
I think @petit_bateau point being wind/solar it really doesn't matter. From my perspective solar to truck will only work when you can store solar because most trucks run during the day and thus can't charge when you have sunlight. So you'll need to store it. WIND...wind in the SW is a nightime thing...perfect for trucking companies. Wind energy is already virtually free in TX at night because they don't have phase change related industries setup to run processes to take advantage of intermittent but nearly free energy. Cool stuff. We're going to start by putting in the solar and trade Solar for Nuke via our local utility. That is unless we get a big grant and then...well the inflation creation act may be calling our name.
IMO grid connected solar farms with storage can support some truck and car fast charging.
It all depends on where the depot is located, where the truck might need to recharge, and where the solar farm is, or where there is enough free land to build a solar farm.
Free land is more likely to be available in remote locations or on city fringes.
The availability of land for a solar farm would not be a reason to move a depot, but it might be one of the factors in location selection for new depots.
Depots typically need to be where people are located and/or close to ports. both locations where large amounts of land are scarce/expensive.
The warehouse roof or a solar covered carpark are options which can generate a modest amount of electricity.
They need a Megapack or 2 anyway, some solar is better than none.
However, for a highway "truck stop" it might be possible to build it in a location near a solar farm.
Now all we need is the Semi factory to start churning out Semi's. Oh, Semis will also dramatically change economics of trucking through..say Wales or Switzerland or West Virginia or Japan. Areas where mntn roads are a significant inhibitor. Pulling loaded trucks up and down significant slopes is a huge expense and time sink. We estimate we can cut 45mins off a 4 hour route by moving to electric.
petit_bateau
Active Member
I don't see a way around the grid for winter wind. It is very obvious that for the vast majority of situations wind will be utility scale grid-connected in 100-1000 MW chunks. Political control of that grid and being able to extract rents from that grid is going to be a significant political matter for the coming decades. And unlike railroads, most people just yawn when they hear 'grids' because they cannot understand how excess rent/etc matters to them. Big money will do its usual thing with politicians I fear ....
So what is Tesla’s short-term plan with the Semi? Seems like they’re just testing the product in a real business environment with Frito Lay. What’s next? Where else are they testing? When are they planning to deliver the rest of Pepsi’s order? What’s the timeline for mass production?
Tesla issues its first Tesla Semi recall
The Tesla Semi has the dubious honor of receiving its first recall, but it's not quite as bad as it sounds.
electrek.co
97% of all Semis delivered have been recalled.
Tesla's supplier recalled a valve.Tesla issues its first Tesla Semi recall
The Tesla Semi has the dubious honor of receiving its first recall, but it's not quite as bad as it sounds.
97% of all Semis delivered have been recalled.
Navistar and Paccar also impacted (and Nikola)
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
How many Semis have been delivered to date, and what is your source of data since Tesla has not revealed the number?
Tesla delivers a new fleet of Tesla Semi electric trucks to PepsiCo
Tesla has delivered a new fleet of up to 21 Tesla Semi electric trucks to PepsiCo as the automaker slowly...
electrek.co
Ah so not all 36 trucks were delivered last year to Pepsi. With this recent delivery, looks like 21 will be operating around Sacramento and 15 around Modesto. Hopefully we can soon see from satellite images what kind of charging infrastructure Pepsi is using for the Semis.
When avoiding the edges, it is correct that faster = more efficient = more power
HP= torque*RPM/5252
torque = current * factor
Resistive loss = current^2 * resistance
Twice as fast at half the current is the same power at one quarter the copper losses. Given inverters are current limited, higher RPM allows higher power once that limit is reached.
At the absurd extreme, a motor makes no power at zero RPM
Similar threads
