Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

teslamotors.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 109 posts

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#81

Post by swypych »

ansible wrote: post #65

I am curious about the choice of lithium-ion vs. something like lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry. Obviously, there is a good reason for Tesla and Panasonic not to have chosen LFP, does anyone know why? I know the energy density is lower, but are there other reasons?

I would suspect safety is probably the driving force here, especially considering the capacity of these batteries.

https://suite.io/mike-dehaan/4bfn2v4 http://www.umanitoba.ca/outreach/conferences/phev2007/PHEV20...

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#82

Post by centizen »

cpwright wrote: post #38

I found some of the business arrangements interesting, though maybe not surprising. I think those are the real new details of this release. First, they'll be producing 50GwH of packs, but only 35GwH of cells; so they'll still be dependent on external cell manufacturing for a sizable portion of the packs. Second, that it sounds like Panasonic will basically own and run the cell part of the factory; as opposed to Tesla…

Panasonic already has one of the largest production complexes in the world for battery production; but with the huge demand from Tesla they have had a hard time keeping up with the market. I see this as a way for them to scale up to a capacity that can handle Tesla's orders while still being able to produce 18650 cells for the rest of the electronics market. Over the past few months I (and many others) have had a very hard time getting a reliable supply of the NCR18650B cells Tesla is using in their packs.

I don't see Panasonic wanting to give up any of the control it has over this sector. The agreement is probably positioned to obligate Tesla to purchase X amount of cells a year to make the new gigafactory economically feasible for Panasonic.

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#83

Post by swimfar »

grecy wrote: post #80
DiabloD3 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel this comment is getting downvoted, not because it is wrong, but because it is crude. I actually hope Tesla "Fs them in the A", because the entire industry has sat on its laurels for pretty much 20 years. Instead of innovating, they have been, essentially, polishing a turd.

> Instead of innovating, they have been, essentially, polishing a turd. In North America, yes. The rest of the automotive industry has been advancing a lot. I love that BMW get the same power/torque from a 3.0 liter engine as Ford/GM do out of a 6+ liter engine.

Are you comparing a naturally aspirated engine with a turbo-charged engine? Also, I don't think it's fair to compare truck/utility engines (which generally run on regular gas) with the engines that go into BMW's highest performance cars.

And, the 2.7 liter V6 which is going into the new F-150 supposedly makes 325hp.

http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/2015-ford-f-150-weighs-less-th...

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#84

Post by Chronic29 »

nitrogen wrote: post #64
DannyBee wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"opening up patents" There is still no truly legally enforceable promise, that explains in detail, exactly what Elon is giving away and what he isn't, and what the terms are. It's now 1.5 months later, and despite many people asking such a thing, nothing has been forthcoming at all. So before you give them amazing amounts of credit for this, could we please wait till they actually do something more than PR?

Do you know for sure that they haven't been negotiating the promised agreements in secret? I'd be very surprised if behemoth automakers managed to finish an agreement in less than two months, when it can take years in other cases. I'd also be surprised if the automakers wanted their names thrown around by Tesla before anything was official.

We know for sure they haven't been negotiating and agreement. You'd hear about it otherwise.

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#85

Post by seanflyon »

trose wrote: post #72
NickM wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to raise the same point. And, considering that the average new car sold in the US gets 25MPG, we should be just about breaking even.

Breaking even eventually. I doubt they're going to suddenly just stop refining all of that oil. There will have to be a trend before the oil companies start lowering their output.

A given car will either use refined gas or electricity. The point is those both use a similar amount of electricity, either way the impact on the grid is similar. Oil companies are not going to refine more gas than is used. They might refine more than is used on a particular day or even month, but they are not going to outpace demand on any long time scale.

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#86

Post by seanflyon »

ansible wrote: post #65

I am curious about the choice of lithium-ion vs. something like lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) battery chemistry. Obviously, there is a good reason for Tesla and Panasonic not to have chosen LFP, does anyone know why? I know the energy density is lower, but are there other reasons?

I assume cost per watt-hour is the dominant factor.

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#87

Post by BrandonMarc »

snarfy wrote: post #33

Has there been any analysis on the amount of joule energy pumped out of all of the current gas stations on a daily basis? I'm worried the current electric grid is woefully insufficient for a world full of electric cars. I know their are plenty of electric lines out there running at greater than 100% of their rated capacity already.

Is this where a Solar City type of setup would come into play? Tesla's charging stations generating their own electricity, thank you very much, partnered with SC. Or would that be feasible? Of course, Tesla could also use vertical windmills [1], geothermal, etc at its stations. I'm a big fan of distributed generation; that makes the electric grid's shortcomings a moot point.

-----

[1] http://www.quietrevolution.com/qr5/faqs-qr5-turbine.htm

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#88

Post by seanflyon »

mseebach wrote: post #78
makomk wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reviews I've found claim they remotely disable your ability to recharge the battery if you go over the mileage you've paid for, so the car keeps going until the battery runs out and is no more at risk of dying at a dangerous time than if they hadn't disabled it.

Ah, that makes better sense, but that's probably not a remote capability, just a check on the milage in the charger.

Since that charger can be an electrical outlet with no internet connection, I think it has to be a remote capability.

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#89

Post by BrandonMarc »

cowmix wrote: post #66
cgearhart wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Napkin math supports your concerns. - The US used 134.51 billion gallons of gas in 2013.[1] - There are ~33 kWh/gal in gasoline [2] 134.51e9 gal x 33 kWh / gal = 4.44e12 kWh (4.44 trillion kWh / year) - The US used a total of 3.856 trillion kWh of electricity in 2011 [3] Ignoring improved efficiency and excluding other factors, converting all gasoline usage to electric would more than double US electricity consumptio…

One fact everyone seems to forget is that it takes approximately 6.5 Kwh of energy to refine one gal of gas. That is JUST refinement and not the energy to pump, store, etc. My Volt drives around 22 -> 28 miles on that power.

Keep in mind we'll still be refining oil / petroleum for other uses (lubricants, ink, plastic, fertilizer, diesel, etc). If this is independent of the refining into gas, then all's well with your math.

Re: Panasonic and Tesla Sign Agreement for the Gigafactory

#90

Post by lbearl »

ksec wrote: post #76
twoodfin wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is perhaps too cynical, but it's to Tesla's advantage to be supporting as many workers in the United States as possible. They benefit tremendously from wide array of state and federal incentives, and having jobs directly depending on the continuation of those incentives makes them politically more likely to continue.

Of coz, i am not saying it is bad to have it built. And all the advantage of local workforce you mention. I am just not getting the business and technical / tactical advantage of it.

Lobbying. Its how you get a congressperson to actually listen to you, have lots of jobs and then you can throw your weight around.
Post reply on HN