TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[JRP3]

Gov. John Kasich Says He's 'Trying to Reach' Elon Musk

Kasich trying to call Musk about GM plant.

 

[ReflexFunds]

23′-5″ (7.14m) x 5′-3″ (1.60m) - Weird that they make them just a little too big for a 20' intermodal container (interior dimensions - 19′ 3″ (5.867m) x 7′ 8 19⁄32″ (2.352m) x 7′ 9 57⁄64″ (2.385m) ); they'll have to use 40' intermodal containers. They might be weight-limited rather than space-limited, but that just makes it worse - 40' containers hold 26,2 tonnes vs. 20' containers which hold 28,2 tonnes.

That said, I don't think they're weight-limited, given the 2673 kWh capacity (26,2 tonnes would work out to 101,75 Wh/kg). Which just makes the decision to make it just a meter too long to fit into a 20' container (with excess room above and to the sides) all the more baffling to me.

If I had to guess, the plan is that they use 40' intermodal containers and include a bunch of support hardware in the container with the megapacks. But that's just a guess.

I wonder if a Megapack could be modified into a semi-trailer for the Tesla semi. I like the idea of a mobile Tesla battery transporting sunlight across the country.

 

[Mader Levap]

I thought it was odd there were a number of twitter accounts with barely any activity over the past few years which suddenly came alive with new voices that sounded like TSLA short-sellers.

They weren't hacked, they are fake (bot) accounts for hire for anyone wanting to have voices spouting their propaganda.

 

[mongo]

23′-5″ (7.14m) x 5′-3″ (1.60m) - Weird that they make them just a little too big for a 20' intermodal container (interior dimensions - 19′ 3″ (5.867m) x 7′ 8 19⁄32″ (2.352m) x 7′ 9 57⁄64″ (2.385m) ); they'll have to use 40' intermodal containers. They might be weight-limited rather than space-limited, but that just makes it worse - 40' containers hold 26,2 tonnes vs. 20' containers which hold 28,2 tonnes.

That said, I don't think they're weight-limited, given the 2673 kWh capacity (26,2 tonnes would work out to 101,75 Wh/kg). Which just makes the decision to make it just a meter too long to fit into a 20' container (with excess room above and to the sides) all the more baffling to me.

If I had to guess, the plan is that they use 40' intermodal containers and include a bunch of support hardware in the container with the megapacks. But that's just a guess.

Going with first principles versus current standards? That's the size it needs to be to do what they want it to do. If they are not shipping overseas (due to localized GFs), no need to adhere to shipping container constraints.

 

[Fact Checking]

Everything you say is true but I think it is more simple: Model 3 is not yet on the administration´s eligibility list for the 2000+2000 EUR incentive. Don´t know why it is not there, but don´t think because Tesla doesn´t want it there. Likely updated next Tuesday...

Ok - regulatory hickup was my main guess for "delay due to other reasons".

 

[JRP3]

They might be weight-limited rather than space-limited, but that just makes it worse - 40' containers hold 26,2 tonnes vs. 20' containers which hold 28,2 tonnes.

That said, I don't think they're weight-limited, given the 2673 kWh capacity (26,2 tonnes would work out to 101,75 Wh/kg). Which just makes the decision to make it just a meter too long to fit into a 20' container (with excess room above and to the sides) all the more baffling to me.

This page says

The maximum cargo weight that can be safely and legally loaded, when a triaxle chassis is used, for most US areas is:

• In a 20” container - 44,000 lbs (19,958kg)
• In a 40” container - 44,500 lbs (20,185kg).

Which would work out to 134Wh/kg. I could imagine stationary storage products might be a bit heavier than that.

 

[KarenRei]

Interesting. Because Wikipedia's specs for the containers list the figures I gave:

Intermodal container - Wikipedia

The difference appears to be the "triaxle chassis" constraint.

I'd be surprised if megapacks were anywhere near 134 Wh/kg; that sounds awfully low, even for a stationary product.

 

[Johnny Ma]

They weren't hacked, they are fake (bot) accounts for hire for anyone wanting to have voices spouting their propaganda.

That makes sense, too. How does one tell the difference between hacked accounts and bots? Reporting the accounts best option to deal with them?

 

[Silent Ludicrosy]

I wonder if a Megapack could be modified into a semi-trailer for the Tesla semi. I like the idea of a mobile Tesla battery transporting sunlight across the country.

Mobile off-grid supercharging station.

 

[Unpilot]

Happy weekend everyone.
Are these megapack batteries coming from GF1?
Do they have the capacity to produce that much?

 

[KarenRei]

Happy weekend everyone.
Are these megapack batteries coming from GF1?
Do they have the capacity to produce that much?

Tesla buys whatever cells it can't produce itself for its stationary products.

 

[JRP3]

I'd be surprised if megapacks were anywhere near 134 Wh/kg; that sounds awfully low, even for a stationary product.

Initially the S was around 160Wh/kg at the pack level as I remember, (not sure where they are now). I would think lower density NMC for storage plus all the ancillary components could easily be heavier than 134Wh/kg.

 

[mongo]

A few observations-
It’s not weird IF Tesla were considering only the NoAm market, as it is at least as easy and efficient to place any number of them on 53’ flatbed trucks (2 w/o any permitting; 4 if they go to Wide Load permitting).

For projects across the world then I absolutely agree with you.

However, I have to disagree about your descriptor: it’s fully 22% longer than a fit. So why can’t they make it just enough wider and taller...and shorter? Perhaps there are site-specific reasons for this project (doubtful); perhaps this is the ideal configuration and for international projects they will have to compromise for shipping reasons (and if so, certainly hope they scrunch the shape so that TWO can fit in a 40).

So apparently I was not current on the thread when I posted, hence my redundancy to your post.

To actually add something:
The mega ships once and lives there for decades, so transport seems the wrong variable to optimize. In terms of optimizing shipping, for a large, monolithic like this, it seems the using a shipping container would be a net negative.

• load mega into container somehow
• Secure it
  
• Ship
• Either unload from container while still on the transport (central dock) or unload container from transport to ground, then pull out megapack
• Crane, fork, or telehander megapack into position
• Ship container back (possibly after reloading onto transport)

Verse a flatbed approach:

• Load mega onto flatbed via c,f, or t.
  
• Secure
• Ship
  
• Unload via crane, fork, or tele and place on pad in one step
• Flatbed potentially picks up a load on the return trip

 

[KarenRei]

Initially the S was around 160Wh/kg at the pack level as I remember, (not sure where they are now). I would think lower density NMC for storage plus all the ancillary components could easily be heavier than 134Wh/kg.

The larger the pack, the closer the pack density is to the cell density. 134kWh is about the density of Powerpacks. Megapacks should be better than that.

But, it's plausible.

 

[SageBrush]

Feel free to think it. But learn some basic social interaction skills. Believe it or not, "I'm so much smarter than you" isn't exactly a powerful persuasive stance. Indeed, claiming that immediately makes people think that you're not, given that you clearly lack the common sense not to write such a thing.

Your reasoning is circular

 

[mongo]

Initially the S was around 160Wh/kg at the pack level as I remember, (not sure where they are now). I would think lower density NMC for storage plus all the ancillary components could easily be heavier than 134Wh/kg.

4 power packs (210kwh/1622kg) plus an inverter (1200kg) work out to 110Wh/kg. Should be quite a bit of savings in removal of duplicate structure and components: one redundant cooling loop verses 5 individual ones, less need for pack to inverter protection, less wasted space for clearance, and such. So should be denser than that.

 

[SageBrush]

@neroden
Please consider your own thread. I for one would happily ready it diligently and be thankful I didn't have to scrounge for worthwhile analysis in the mountain of noise. I only agree with you some of the time but I very much appreciate your posts. I say the same for Audie and a handful of others.

 

[AWDtsla]

Or worse: they messed up

What, like changing the hub geometry and rear brake clearance on the Model 3 then shipping wheels that don't fit for them?

 

[mongo]

OT Mega
From the small print, each inverter is 11 70kW power stages, so 11 battery units per MP. Slight (30%) increase from the 50kW per power pack specification.

Not that it is directly relatable, since power pack is made of sub battery units that each have a dc/DC for charge/discharge control.

 

[AudubonB]

@neroden
Please consider your own thread.... I say the same for Audie...

Ummmm......