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

Tesla Stationary Storage Investors Thread

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#261
Vgrinshpun,

It is interesting that incentives has gone down to 1 payment, while Tesla has maufactured 70% of all installed storage in CA under the SGIP. I can only conclude Solarcity has received the incentives since in 2014 it is estimated they have installed multiple units for Walmart, a few units for BJ's Wholesale, and hundreds of home storage units. Also, in 2013, Solarcity had 65 SGIP applications where Tesla had 3 payments received. http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Lesson-Learned-From-SolarCitys-First-Home-Energy-Storage-Installs

Moreover, Solarcity documents suggest Solarcity will take on the third party role in future SGIP applications, where Tesla takes on the manufacturer role. Solarcity controls/services customers energy management system, tesla does not.

Page 6, Solarcity 10-K
Grid Control / Energy Storage Systems . We are also developing proprietary battery management systems built on our solar energy monitoring communications backbone. These battery management systems are designed to enable remote, fully bidirectional control of distributed energy storage that can potentially provide significant benefits to our customers, utilities and grid operators. The benefits to our customers of energy storage coupled with a solar energy system may include back-up power, time-of-use energy arbitrage, rate arbitrage, peak demand shaving and demand response. The benefits to utilities and grid operators may include more stable grid management and improved up-time. We believe that advances in battery storage technology, steep reductions in pricing and burgeoning policy changes that support energy storage hold significant promise for enabling deployments of grid-connected energy storage systems.

Page 8, Solarcity 10-K:
As of December 31, 2014, SolarCity and its wholly-owned subsidiaries had 22 patents issued and 108 pending applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and its subsidiaries also had 11 patents issued and 62 pending applications with foreign patent and trademark offices. These patents and applications relate to various SolarCity technologies, such as solar cells, installation and mounting hardware, financial products, monitoring solutions and related software. Our issued patents start expiring in 2025. SolarCity intends to continue to file additional patent applications. “SolarCity,” “SolarCity and Sun logo,” “SolarGuard,” “SolarLease,” “PowerGuide,” “SolarStrong,” “SunRaising,” “PowerSavings Plan,” “Rooftop Rewards,” “Solar Made Simple,” “Energy Explorer,” “Zep Solar,” “Zep Compatible,” “Zepulator,” “Zep Groove,” “Silevo,” and “Triex” are among SolarCity’s registered trademarks in the United States and, in some cases, in certain other countries. SolarCity’s other unregistered trademarks and service marks in the United States include: “Better Energy,” “SolarBid,” “SolarWorks” and “DemandLogic.”

Page 4 Tesla 10-K:
We design, develop, manufacture and sell high-performance fully electric vehicles, advanced electric vehicle powertrain components and stationary energy storage systems. We also produce and sell stationary energy storage products for use in homes, commercial sites, and utilities.

Page 6 Tesla 10-K:
We began selling our home systems in 2013 and our commercial and utility systems in 2014. We plan to ramp sales of these products in 2015.

Thus, Tesla's primary business model is storage sales, not primarily ownership/lease as that appears to be where Solarcity is heading. SGIP incentives will primary benefit Solarcity directly. Tesla benefits by increased sales of storage through market expansion as a result of continuous cost/price point reductions.
 
Last edited:
#262
Just posted this in the "event" thread when it really belongs here:

(Someone asked why they are doing this when they always said they were battery constrained)

This is a KEY question. The only reason I haven't been rattling cages about this, is that Musk clearly said it was a different battery. Without that statement, I would (and so would the market) be saying that Panasonic has gotten ahead of the car factory and they are bottlenecked at the car factory or (god forbid) demand. So this battery supply is either:

1) Capacity from Panasonic but not the car stuff. Batteries that are functional but do not meet the auto spec. Maybe panasonic's output is 2% bad, 80% auto and 18% functional but not to auto spec. Panasonic had these stacking up and came to TM with a request for help to market these. This COULD also explain the 70D offerings (more cells of lesser density) as well. Also maybe they have multiple factories and for some reason or another some facilities just cannot make the special auto battery.
2) Capacity from other makers, Samsung for instance. It might be hard to qualify the other suppliers and/or they may not want to invest in TM's spec when they are about to come online with their own massive capacity in a few years. So TM is finding a good market for these other suppliers they could not quite get into their cars.
3) This IS the auto quality output from Panasonic. They invested in their output based on TM's projections and their supply is online and kicking ass. Panasonic rings up Elon and says "hey you need to take all this output. You having a bottleneck in your plant is not our problem". having excess batteries with good density is a good problem to have so they announce the storage business. This way they can assure Panasonic they can take their output at virtually any rate, since the storage market at $500/kWh is nearly unlimited.


So I will be looking for insight in the 30th event and the earnings call to settle this question. What are these batteries, where are they coming from, you used to be battery constrained if you are not what IS constraining you, how do you answer the critics who say you have a demand problem when you are seemingly finding a new market for your constraining part?
 
#263
My guess is that Panasonic has some older production lines that can't put out the higher density auto cells but can produce the stationary storage cells. I don't think the 70D has lesser energy dense cells since it's efficiency seems to be higher than any other Model S.
 
#265
uselesslogin said:
Don't forget this tweet from December 2013:
Elon Musk on Twitter:
Click to expand...

Thanks for digging up the tweet.

"Should mention that the battery cells used for this are 200 Wh/kg vs 250 for Model S. No short term supply constraint."

That is what I was referring to as Musk's statement. So my #3 should not be right. So the question is what is the source for those cells. Also I note that 200/250=80% and 70/85=82%. I have not kept up with the 70 pack speculation but it is possible but not necessary that the 70 cars could also have these cells.

But I still want to hear if the 250 Wh/kg cells are the limiting factor in Model S production. If not, what is?
 
#266
Foghat said:
Vgrinshpun,

It is interesting that incentives has gone down to 1 payment, while Tesla has maufactured 70% of all installed storage in CA under the SGIP. I can only conclude Solarcity has received the incentives since in 2014 it is estimated they have installed multiple units for Walmart, a few units for BJ's Wholesale, and hundreds of home storage units. Also, in 2013, Solarcity had 65 SGIP applications where Tesla had 3 payments received. http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/Lesson-Learned-From-SolarCitys-First-Home-Energy-Storage-Installs

Moreover, Solarcity documents suggest Solarcity will take on the third party role in future SGIP applications, where Tesla takes on the manufacturer role. Solarcity controls/services customers energy management system, tesla does not.

Page 6, Solarcity 10-K
Grid Control / Energy Storage Systems . We are also developing proprietary battery management systems built on our solar energy monitoring communications backbone. These battery management systems are designed to enable remote, fully bidirectional control of distributed energy storage that can potentially provide significant benefits to our customers, utilities and grid operators. The benefits to our customers of energy storage coupled with a solar energy system may include back-up power, time-of-use energy arbitrage, rate arbitrage, peak demand shaving and demand response. The benefits to utilities and grid operators may include more stable grid management and improved up-time. We believe that advances in battery storage technology, steep reductions in pricing and burgeoning policy changes that support energy storage hold significant promise for enabling deployments of grid-connected energy storage systems.

Page 8, Solarcity 10-K:
As of December 31, 2014, SolarCity and its wholly-owned subsidiaries had 22 patents issued and 108 pending applications with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and its subsidiaries also had 11 patents issued and 62 pending applications with foreign patent and trademark offices. These patents and applications relate to various SolarCity technologies, such as solar cells, installation and mounting hardware, financial products, monitoring solutions and related software. Our issued patents start expiring in 2025. SolarCity intends to continue to file additional patent applications. “SolarCity,” “SolarCity and Sun logo,” “SolarGuard,” “SolarLease,” “PowerGuide,” “SolarStrong,” “SunRaising,” “PowerSavings Plan,” “Rooftop Rewards,” “Solar Made Simple,” “Energy Explorer,” “Zep Solar,” “Zep Compatible,” “Zepulator,” “Zep Groove,” “Silevo,” and “Triex” are among SolarCity’s registered trademarks in the United States and, in some cases, in certain other countries. SolarCity’s other unregistered trademarks and service marks in the United States include: “Better Energy,” “SolarBid,” “SolarWorks” and “DemandLogic.”

Page 4 Tesla 10-K:
We design, develop, manufacture and sell high-performance fully electric vehicles, advanced electric vehicle powertrain components and stationary energy storage systems. We also produce and sell stationary energy storage products for use in homes, commercial sites, and utilities.

Page 6 Tesla 10-K:
We began selling our home systems in 2013 and our commercial and utility systems in 2014. We plan to ramp sales of these products in 2015.

Thus, Tesla's primary business model is storage sales, not primarily ownership/lease as that appears to be where Solarcity is heading. SGIP incentives will primary benefit Solarcity directly. Tesla benefits by increased sales of storage through market expansion as a result of continuous cost/price point reductions.
Click to expand...

Just in case you missed it, the GreentechGrid article quoted and linked in your post is almost two years old, so any SGIP stats coming from it are out of date.

In reality, Tesla is the direct beneficiary of the SGIP program because SG incentive is tied to the size of installed battery storage system, which is manufactured by Tesla. The incentive reduces cost of the system for the buyer, whether the buyer is a Host Customer (homeowner) or System Owner (Solar City leasing system to homeowner). The bottom line is that Tesla would probably not be able charge $1000/kWh without the incentive. It is important to note though, that, as I posted before, even without the incentive stationary storage will be immensely profitable to Tesla. What this incentive, that will be phased out at 10% per year, does is helping Tesla with the initial hump of the expenses associated with building the new business.

Most importantly to your point, though, the focus of my discussion was not who physically gets the credit and/or owns the storage system (Host Owner, System Owner or Third Party), but what the data gleaned from SGIP spreadsheet tells us about Tesla's nascent stationary grid storage business.
 
#267
austinEV said:
Thanks for digging up the tweet.

"Should mention that the battery cells used for this are 200 Wh/kg vs 250 for Model S. No short term supply constraint."

That is what I was referring to as Musk's statement. So my #3 should not be right. So the question is what is the source for those cells. Also I note that 200/250=80% and 70/85=82%. I have not kept up with the 70 pack speculation but it is possible but not necessary that the 70 cars could also have these cells.

But I still want to hear if the 250 Wh/kg cells are the limiting factor in Model S production. If not, what is?
Click to expand...

That's interesting, but it does not explain the difference in efficiency: 292 Wh/mile for the 70D vs. 315 Wh/mile for the 85D. The two cars would have roughly the same weight.
 
#268
vgrinshpun said:
Just in case you missed it, the GreentechGrid article quoted and linked in your post is almost two years old, so any SGIP stats coming from it are out of date.

In reality, Tesla is the direct beneficiary of the SGIP program because SG incentive is tied to the size of installed battery storage system, which is manufactured by Tesla. The incentive reduces cost of the system for the buyer, whether the buyer is a Host Customer (homeowner) or System Owner (Solar City leasing system to homeowner). The bottom line is that Tesla would probably not be able charge $1000/kWh without the incentive. It is important to note though, that, as I posted before, even without the incentive stationary storage will be immensely profitable to Tesla. What this incentive, that will be phased out at 10% per year, does is helping Tesla with the initial hump of the expenses associated with building the new business.

Most importantly to your point, though, the focus of my discussion was not who physically gets the credit and/or owns the storage system (Host Owner, System Owner or Third Party), but what the data gleaned from SGIP spreadsheet tells us about Tesla's nascent stationary grid storage business.
Click to expand...

Right, in the end, someone receives the credit which ultimately makes it more affordable for the end user to buy/lease. This incentive enables the market to grow, thus allowing storage costs to come down. In theory, as those costs come down, the incentive fades away proportionately and we have a thriving market place on its own two feet.
 
#269
austinEV said:
Just posted this in the "event" thread when it really belongs here:

(Someone asked why they are doing this when they always said they were battery constrained)

This is a KEY question. The only reason I haven't been rattling cages about this, is that Musk clearly said it was a different battery. Without that statement, I would (and so would the market) be saying that Panasonic has gotten ahead of the car factory and they are bottlenecked at the car factory or (god forbid) demand. So this battery supply is either:

1) Capacity from Panasonic but not the car stuff. Batteries that are functional but do not meet the auto spec. Maybe panasonic's output is 2% bad, 80% auto and 18% functional but not to auto spec. Panasonic had these stacking up and came to TM with a request for help to market these. This COULD also explain the 70D offerings (more cells of lesser density) as well. Also maybe they have multiple factories and for some reason or another some facilities just cannot make the special auto battery.
2) Capacity from other makers, Samsung for instance. It might be hard to qualify the other suppliers and/or they may not want to invest in TM's spec when they are about to come online with their own massive capacity in a few years. So TM is finding a good market for these other suppliers they could not quite get into their cars.
3) This IS the auto quality output from Panasonic. They invested in their output based on TM's projections and their supply is online and kicking ass. Panasonic rings up Elon and says "hey you need to take all this output. You having a bottleneck in your plant is not our problem". having excess batteries with good density is a good problem to have so they announce the storage business. This way they can assure Panasonic they can take their output at virtually any rate, since the storage market at $500/kWh is nearly unlimited.

So I will be looking for insight in the 30th event and the earnings call to settle this question. What are these batteries, where are they coming from, you used to be battery constrained if you are not what IS constraining you, how do you answer the critics who say you have a demand problem when you are seemingly finding a new market for your constraining part?
Click to expand...

4) Tesla is having difficulty getting Panasonic's cell partners to invest in the Gigafactory. With the China market failure and the Model X delays, they're not confident in Tesla, so Tesla is bringing forward the full launch of the home storage unit to sweeten the deal and regain confidence.
 
#270
ItsNotAboutTheMoney said:
4) Tesla is having difficulty getting Panasonic's cell partners to invest in the Gigafactory. With the China market failure and the Model X delays, they're not confident in Tesla, so Tesla is bringing forward the full launch of the home storage unit to sweeten the deal and regain confidence.
Click to expand...

Well, interesting theory, except it would not be consistent with Tesla starting registering stationary storage with the California SGIP all way back in 2011. Stationary storage was in the strategic planning for years, assuming that it is tactical response to problems with Panasonic is in contradiction with written and video records.
 
#271
#273
Last edited:
#274
32no said:
Kurt Kelty, Director of Battery Tehnology at Tesla Motors, says that there is trouble with Japanese suppliers.

Perhaps stationary storage was always a part of the vision at Tesla, but it's development was prioritized recently in order to give a a collateral market for Tesla's and Panasonic's batteries, and therefore convince Panasonic to ramp up production.
Click to expand...


I think this tesla director is referring to other suppliers besides Panasonic and Samsung

These suppliers have stepped up. Panasonic big time and Samsung is getting certified as a secondary supplier (Samsung is Korean of course). I totally get that other Japanese suppliers are risk adverse.
 
#275
FredTMC said:
I think this tesla director is referring to other suppliers besides Panasonic and Samsung

These suppliers have stepped up. Panasonic big time and Samsung is getting certified as a secondary supplier (Samsung is Korean of course). I totally get that other Japanese suppliers are risk adverse.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. Why would the director of Battery Technology be talking about anything but batteries?
 
#279
bonaire said:
Except it would not be legal. Batteries are not considered a solar generator and are not eligible.
Click to expand...

I have been to many solar conferences and have heard first hand from tax attorneys that have stated they are eligible.

We install off grid systems all the time and every one of our customers has claimed the tax credit. We advise everyone to talk to their accountant or tax attorney about it.

Here is a recent article talking about it.

IRS Confirms that Batteries Qualify for the Energy Tax Credit But Imposes Limitations
 
#280
Off grid differs from conventional homes installing essentially a standby battery with load shaving features.

75% haircut rule applies.

if the battery is in a hybrid system, charged from the solar pv mid day and released late afternoon, you are actually going to use more grid power overall than if the array were simply grid tied. Since it takes over 10% energy in excess to charge batteries, than to export to the grid with net-metering, the end result is not a net benefit. If the IRS gives 30% credit to Solar city for such a sale, it is really a misuse of public funds for monetary benefit of the taxpayer, which is Solar City in that case. The benefit should be to both the grid and the site of installation. And in that case, night time charging during lower grid demand with release during the day benefits both the grid and consumer with lower bills. In states with aggressive incentives, it surely is not in the best interest of the IRS to pile on more tax credits.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Buckminster
Wiki Investor Thread Index
Replies
1
Views
746
TSLA Investor Discussions
Buckminster
Buckminster
T
The last few days new threads are popping up bashing Tesla
Replies
0
Views
896
Tesla, Inc.
TesMarley
T
Buckminster
Super Bull Future TSLA Valuations
Replies
112
Views
13K
TSLA Investor Discussions
Buckminster
Buckminster
G
Supercharging for an Early Model S - Can't Tesla do the right thing?
Replies
162
Views
11K
Model S
scgaskill
S
R
TSLA, biodiversity collapse & climate change
Replies
42
Views
4K
TSLA Investor Discussions
Nrkl
Nrkl
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu