Tesla's battery-swap stations will finally arrive in December

[ckessel]

High Fructose Corn Vehicles?

With tasty, tasty exhaust, just like caramel corn.

- - - Updated - - -

With tasty, tasty exhaust, just like caramel corn.

The bit about CARB, it says it's not enough to build the stations, but that they have to have some level of use. Are HFCV (and natural gas) stations actually getting enough use to qualify?

 

[Chris TX]

The bit about CARB, it says it's not enough to build the stations, but that they have to have some level of use. Are HFCV (and natural gas) stations actually getting enough use to qualify?

If that's the case, I see the swap stations being placed in locations where consumers will happily pay for it, and quite often. I'd also imagine there would be some kind of "holiday special" to promote the use of that station. If it takes 90 seconds to do a swap and 45+ minutes to fill up a battery (85kw) they would need to have ~30 packs onsite in a constant state of recharge to meet the demand. That would also require a HUGE amount of Superchargers! Something tells me there will be ~10 batteries at these stations with the capacity to charge 2-4 at a time.

As for HFCV, the trick is to get people buying them. That's why there's such a huge marketing push by Hyundai, Honda, and the likes and FUD for EVs.

 

[FLDarren]

Which December? 2015 or 2016?

ROFLMAO!

 

[invisik]

Whatever the motives behind it, I think it also gives the Tesla buyer choice. Do any other brands offer battery swaps like this? (I honestly haven't heard of any) Everyone else has to charge off 30 amp or the occasional CHAdeMO found in the wild--no other choices there.

It's very well suited to help tip the favor to the Model 3 with (by then) a zillion super charger stations and a lot of established swap stations--you can do whatever is convenient.

Tesla could almost franchise out the swap stations, where existing gas station owners may want to get in on the action. Maybe they'll swap other brands batteries in the future too as things hopefully will get more interchangeable.

-m

 

[rlang59]

Whatever the motives behind it, I think it also gives the Tesla buyer choice. Do any other brands offer battery swaps like this? (I honestly haven't heard of any) Everyone else has to charge off 30 amp or the occasional CHAdeMO found in the wild--no other choices there.

It's very well suited to help tip the favor to the Model 3 with (by then) a zillion super charger stations and a lot of established swap stations--you can do whatever is convenient.

Tesla could almost franchise out the swap stations, where existing gas station owners may want to get in on the action. Maybe they'll swap other brands batteries in the future too as things hopefully will get more interchangeable.

-m

Better Place had battery swaps, for them it didn't work out.

 

[jacobp]

Better Place had battery swaps, for them it didn't work out.

True, but their business model was totally different and their mgmt was very difficult.

 

[scaesare]

Those are certainly possibilities. I think the number of times most people's time is worth $180/hour would be pretty rare though.

If someone's time is regularly worth $180, they should probably hire a chauffeur so they can work while being driven.

I don't see it that way. I suspect I'll not need swapping 99% of the time, but the one time I do, it's not because I'm valuing it against a $180 cash outlay, but rather comparing it to what I would have had to do if swapping weren't available in that circumstance: Pay $80 to fill up my Sequoia instead.

So if I find myself in need of a "full pack" in the space of a few minutes, swapping allows me to do so, and still be better off in terms of time and money than if I had to take my other vehicle.

 

[ckessel]

I don't see it that way. I suspect I'll not need swapping 99% of the time

Well, yea, that was sort of my point:

I think the number of times most people's time is worth $180/hour would be pretty rare though.
​

but rather comparing it to what I would have had to do if swapping weren't available in that circumstance: Pay $80 to fill up my Sequoia instead.

First, you wouldn't "have had to do" charging. You're choosing to not wait that 20 minutes and instead pay $60 dollars. The other items you noted are extraneous rationalization for that choice. And that's fine, we all make time/money value judgements. If someone feels their time is worth $180/hour in some circumstance, that's perfectly valid.

My point was such circumstances would seem so rare as to make battery swapping a very low value proposition.

 

[scaesare]

ckessel: I think you are missing my point.

In the "rare, 1%" scenarios being described there are reasons why you simply can't wait (i.e. the "kids at daycare" example). In this case it's not a matter of my time being worth $XXX/hr, it's a matter of whatever the other issue not allowing the time necessary to wait for a charge.

In that circumstance, the only other option I'd have is to take the ICE vehicle with it's similar costs.

Thus, the value of the swap station is not dependent on the $180 extrapolated hourly cost of a battery swap, any more so than it's not dependent on the ~$1000 extrapolated hourly cost of filling up my SUV with gas.

To suggest that because you can get a limo for $180/hr that swapping doesn't provide value seems disingenuous...

 

[rlang59]

True, but their business model was totally different and their mgmt was very difficult.

I don't have any opinion on them, just answering the question of any other brands that had battery swap.

 

[ckessel]

In the "rare, 1%" scenarios being described there are reasons why you simply can't wait (i.e. the "kids at daycare" example).
...
To suggest that because you can get a limo for $180/hr that swapping doesn't provide value seems disingenuous...

Your example(s) seem disingenuous. Why would you suddenly need to charge on the way to daycare? What makes you think a battery swap would be remotely near the path to such daycare if swaps are intended for high traffic long distance corridors?

(Ignoring the fact that you can wait in your example. Daycare charges a fee when you're late, they don't throw your kids on the street. "Can't wait" would be something like a heart attackthough you'd probably be best calling the paramedics in such a case).

That's all a distraction from the main point, which I've stated several times, but you seem to have ignored, though your examples support the point. That the occasions you'd really want to pay to swap are rare, which makes battery swapping a low value proposition. Low value for most customer use cases and consequently low value for Tesla to build.

 

[scaesare]

Your example(s) seem disingenuous. Why would you suddenly need to charge on the way to daycare? What makes you think a battery swap would be remotely near the path to such daycare if swaps are intended for high traffic long distance corridors?

(Ignoring the fact that you can wait in your example. Daycare charges a fee when you're late, they don't throw your kids on the street. "Can't wait" would be something like a heart attackthough you'd probably be best calling the paramedics in such a case).

That's all a distraction from the main point, which I've stated several times, but you seem to have ignored, though your examples support the point. That the occasions you'd really want to pay to swap are rare, which makes battery swapping a low value proposition. Low value for most customer use cases and consequently low value for Tesla to build.

Then insert whatever reason you might have for not being able, or wanting, to wait. Maybe it's because you found a wait at a supercharger. Maybe it's because it was colder than you thought it would be and you burned more range. Maybe it's because your loved one's flight is arriving early. Or <insert_one_of_a_hundred_scenarios_here>.

In those cases, all the advantage that the swapper has to provide is being as quick and cheap as refueling your ICE. It doesn't have to equate to your general time being worth $180. It just has to be a reasonable alternative to other transportation in that instance.

Will it be used nearly as much as supercharging? Very likely not.

But with plans for 100's of thousands of Teslas on the road even a small percentage of use may be enough for Tesla to roughly break even, which they may well want to do if it removes another barrier for EV adoption.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Your example(s) seem disingenuous. Why would you suddenly need to charge on the way to daycare? What makes you think a battery swap would be remotely near the path to such daycare if swaps are intended for high traffic long distance corridors?

(Ignoring the fact that you can wait in your example. Daycare charges a fee when you're late, they don't throw your kids on the street. "Can't wait" would be something like a heart attackthough you'd probably be best calling the paramedics in such a case).

That's all a distraction from the main point, which I've stated several times, but you seem to have ignored, though your examples support the point. That the occasions you'd really want to pay to swap are rare, which makes battery swapping a low value proposition. Low value for most customer use cases and consequently low value for Tesla to build.

You'd never want to pay for swap. But just because you want free and convenient, doesn't mean you can have it. If swapping is significantly faster than charging, people who might need or want to save time could be willing to pay for it. I mean, what's a toll other than a convenience fee?

The other possibility to consider comes back to a question of Tesla's approach to the technology and how much they'd charge for it. For Superswapping to make sense it just needs to cost Tesla less to build and run the swappers than it would just to build Superchargers.
+ Reduce congestion
+ Reduce charging location footprint (?)
+ Easy battery upgrade and replacement
+ Out-of-car charging (faster?, cheaper?)
+ Asynchronous charging (cheaper?)
+ Large grid-connected battery bank
+ A few more ZEV credits
- Handle payments at swapper?
- More expensive to build (including requiring redundancy to avoid critical failure)
- More expensive to maintain

I think of Superswapping as something that might be a necessity for Tesla, with Tesla approaching it the same way as Supercharging and other things they do, attempting to lower overall costs as much as possible. Then the fee would be set to encourage appropriate use rather than aiming for it to be a profit center with high use.

 

[daxz]

...
+ Out-of-car charging (faster?, cheaper?)
...
+ Large grid-connected battery bank
...

+This could also reduce electricity demand charges by refilling swapped packs slowly or when the superchargers are not in use.
+ Battery to Battery charging could also occur in blackouts or during high demand by bypassing ACtoDC chargers



The $180/hr would be the total hourly rate for all the people waiting for the car. This is why the car full of kids scenario has more value. With 4 people waiting for a charge the rate would be $45/hr per person.

 

[strider]

That's all a distraction from the main point, which I've stated several times, but you seem to have ignored, though your examples support the point. That the occasions you'd really want to pay to swap are rare, which makes battery swapping a low value proposition. Low value for most customer use cases and consequently low value for Tesla to build.

So YOU would rather spend time at an SC to charge for free than pay for swapping but guess what, you're not representative of every Tesla owner! But even so, guess what, you can still do that! SC's aren't going away so you are free to sit and wait for your free charge but just because you don't need swapping doesn't mean no one else should have it.

The bottom line is that NO ONE KNOWS the cost-benefit-ratio of swapping Model S batteries. You are full of opinions but they're just that, YOUR OPINIONS. I can tell you that as I have small children, if I'm on a trip and there is any kind of wait at an SC I would pay to swap. I've found you have only have a certain amount of time that little kids will tolerate being in the car and I'd rather spend that time on the road than waiting on an SC. The alternative of trying to drive with cranky kids is simply horrendous.

I also think as others have posted that having swap stations would allow folks to buy smaller packs for daily driving and swap in a big pack for trips. This will allow more people to afford Tesla's since they wouldn't have to buy the car that satisfies that "one trip per year to grandma's house."

So let Tesla put in swap stations along I-5 and see what happens. If they are used then they'll roll out more. If not then they get some extra ZEV credits and chalk that up as a learning experience.

 

[ckessel]

I can tell you that as I have small children, if I'm on a trip and there is any kind of wait at an SC I would pay to swap. I've found you have only have a certain amount of time that little kids will tolerate being in the car and I'd rather spend that time on the road than waiting on an SC. The alternative of trying to drive with cranky kids is simply horrendous..

You are full of opinions but they're just that, YOUR OPINIONS.

I have no idea why you're yelling at me. This is exactly the point I've been making. You indicate you feel your time is worth more than $180/hour, at least in the situation you described. That's fine. I've acknowledged that type of use case multiple times now.

The bulk of the population, particularly more price sensitive Gen 3 buyers, aren't likely to feel like they can burn $180/hour for the sake of a faster recharge. That makes swapping stations valuable to the niche of folks who have a lot of money or whose time has a premium value at that moment (the "cranky kids" moment).

If the demand from that niche is sufficient for swapping to be viable, that's great. Average income statistics would say that niche is pretty small.

I also think as others have posted that having swap stations would allow folks to buy smaller packs for daily driving and swap in a big pack for trips.

I'm not visualizing how this would work. If you're swapping a 40 for an 85, you still need super chargers for the full trip. This means swappers only exist at the major hub end points, so unless you happen to live pretty darn close to one of these hub endpoints, the swapper isn't of much use to you.

Unless they're going to put swappers everywhere like they did with super chargers, but Tesla's purposefully trying out high traffic routes precisely because the cost (both to Tesla and for the swapper) requires high usage, a usage level that's not going to exist on most routes.

 

[strider]

I have no idea why you're yelling at me. This is exactly the point I've been making. You indicate you feel your time is worth more than $180/hour, at least in the situation you described. That's fine. I've acknowledged that type of use case multiple times now.

The bulk of the population, particularly more price sensitive Gen 3 buyers, aren't likely to feel like they can burn $180/hour for the sake of a faster recharge. That makes swapping stations valuable to the niche of folks who have a lot of money or whose time has a premium value at that moment (the "cranky kids" moment).

If the demand from that niche is sufficient for swapping to be viable, that's great. Average income statistics would say that niche is pretty small.

The reason I'm yelling is that you go completely off the rails with your last statement above. The pricing model for swapping was specifically set to be equivalent to buying a tank of gasoline. Last time I checked there were lots of people with "average incomes" taking road trips in ICE vehicles so it's clearly more than a "niche" of people who could afford such a thing.

I'm not visualizing how this would work. If you're swapping a 40 for an 85, you still need super chargers for the full trip. This means swappers only exist at the major hub end points, so unless you happen to live pretty darn close to one of these hub endpoints, the swapper isn't of much use to you.

Unless they're going to put swappers everywhere like they did with super chargers, but Tesla's purposefully trying out high traffic routes precisely because the cost (both to Tesla and for the swapper) requires high usage, a usage level that's not going to exist on most routes.

In places were there are clear endpoints like SF to LA or Boston to DC you could do exactly that. For other routes and the city-to-highway pack swap model the swap stations could be in a local Service Center. So on your way out of town you swap, Supercharge along your trip, and swap back when you get home. In that model the $160 becomes more of a "large pack rental fee" than a "recharge" fee.

 

[jeff_adams]

I have a feeling the swap stations are being built for "compliance". They will be California only and the minimum built to allow them to sell the ZEV credits.

 

[Krugerrand]

What IF the cost wasn't $60? What IF it was $30? What IF it was $10? What IF as the number of Tesla cars on the road increased (and uses of swap stations) such that the cost could be reduced over time? What IF the lower cost of battery manufacturing from the GigaFactory allows for the cost to be reduced? What IF Elon has something in mind that none of us have thought of yet?

I'm not looking for those questions to be answered. It's a suggestion to think beyond the parameters of your immediate life. Worse case scenario, they construct a few swap stations and nobody uses them or not enough to make them economical. Middle case scenario, they construct a few swap stations and nobody uses them or not enough to make them economical, but out of the experiment comes another idea/innovation that pays off big. Let's see how it plays out.

 

[Hawaii J]

CA politics are so lame