Tesla is a Battery Company • Hacker News Board

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#161

Post by ethanbond » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 6:00 PM UTC

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #130

ethanbond wrote: post #2

I don't think this is a revelation to anyone who has been paying attention? This seems to have been the dominant hypothesis for a long, long time, and is always what justified Tesla's early (very) red activities. They were a battery company using luxury automobiles to fund battery R&D.

>They were a battery company using luxury automobiles to fund battery R&D. This seems questionable to me. I just don't see lithium-ion powering electric cars in an affordable or usable fashion. The density isn't great and after 4-5 years the battery pack wears out, making your $30-50k battery investment disappear. There's no resale value on a battery that can't even hold 30% of its original charge. Musk's solar city…

> nor can he raise the price of gas.

I think this is one of two fundamental flaws in your reasoning. First, yes, R&D is incredibly, incredibly expensive. I don't think anyone doubts that, and I find it just hysterical that x or y "social startup" can burn through far more money than that and never have to answer questions about the value of their R&D.

We know what Tesla is doing, and we know that it's difficult. It should be no surprise that it's expensive as hell. This isn't to say I'm betting on their success, it's to say that "R&D is expensive" isn't an argument against Tesla or its potential for success.

Quite the opposite, it seems their model has done a decent job of offloading a lot of R&D costs by, as I said, selling automobiles on the side.

Now, the second flaw ("nor can he raise the price of gas") isn't that the statement is false. He can't. But the laws of thermodynamics paired with the laws of economics can, and will, forever. Further, when it does happen, the success of his cars (or "toys of the idle rich") is irrelevant: he owns the infrastructure and he owns the IP necessary for everyone else to leverage the inevitable growth in fuel prices.

Also, to address the battery capacity loss argument:

http://www.pluginamerica.org/surveys/batteries/tesla-roadste...

Independent study on the Roadsters.

126 vehicles (of 2500 produced) reported a total 3,198,749 miles traveled. Tesla's projections said the battery would have 100,000 miles driving range, so at 50,000 miles the projection was to have 70% capacity. In reality, an average Roadster has 80-85% original capacity after 100,000 miles. That said, there was considerable variation between batteries' health, so take that as you will.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#162

Post by mikepurvis » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 6:06 PM UTC

hnnewguy wrote: post #139

higherpurpose wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget the "car charging" business. Tesla announced before that it's willing to license its Supercharger network to other car makers. That business could one day replace most petrol charging stations.

> That business could one day replace most petrol charging stations. Why wouldn't gas stations merely re-equip with electric charging equipment? They already have the best real estate. There are also competing standards for DC charging, so I find it highly unlikely that the other manufacturers will license anything from Tesla, rather than settling on another standard.

Tesla has the established network, and also the fastest technology— by far.

I'm not sure existing gas stations really have the best real estate. Pulling off the highway for five minutes to gas up is pretty different from plugging in for an hour, and I'm not sure I'd want to do those two things in the same kind of location.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#163

Post by HeyLaughingBoy » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 6:18 PM UTC

Brakenshire wrote: post #100

apendleton wrote: post #68

I'm sort of curious how the economics of this will end up working out from a consumer's perspective. Lithium ion's big advantage was energy density -- you can store a lot of juice for not much mass or volume, which is a really big deal for portable electronics or cars... for a stationary home installation, though, much less so. Having a giant thing sitting in your backyard might be okay if it was high-capacity and ch…

Energy density is still important for home installations, especially if you have ambitions of retro fitting on a wide scale. If you could get to a situation where solar + battery was cheaper than a grid connection, a majority of the population will still not buy it if it's something which will require a half tonne object to be installed on a specially constructed concrete plinth, brought on a lorry with a crane syste…

In the rural or suburban US, it is very common for homes to have large propane tanks for heating and cooking, due to them being too far away from supply lines for natural gas. The tank is typically much larger than your example.

Not to mention essentially all new homes have central A/C with one of the heat exchangers "installed on a specially constructed concrete plinth." We have plenty of space; it's simply not an issue.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#164

Post by drzaiusapelord » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 7:15 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #161

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They were a battery company using luxury automobiles to fund battery R&D. This seems questionable to me. I just don't see lithium-ion powering electric cars in an affordable or usable fashion. The density isn't great and after 4-5 years the battery pack wears out, making your $30-50k battery investment disappear. There's no resale value on a battery that can't even hold 30% of its original charge. Musk's solar city…

> nor can he raise the price of gas. I think this is one of two fundamental flaws in your reasoning. First, yes, R&D is incredibly, incredibly expensive. I don't think anyone doubts that, and I find it just hysterical that x or y "social startup" can burn through far more money than that and never have to answer questions about the value of their R&D. We know what Tesla is doing, and we know that it's difficult. It s…

I already addressed this:

n practice we're seeing ~25% loss of capacity at 40k miles in LEAF real world testing. 30% loss at 50k miles is the accepted norm. Capacity goes down annually after that. It seems that some cars are doing better, but play cars owned by the rich that get very few miles like the early Tesla sportscars. Real world daily-drivers like the LEAF experience the exact decay that was predicted. Lithium-ion isnt some new hot tech we don't understand. We understand it very well.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#165

Post by mstachowiak » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 7:37 PM UTC

DenisM wrote: post #160

mstachowiak wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

BYD is building a similar Gigafactory. http://cleantechnica.com/2015/03/23/byd-gigafactory-to-be-wo...

Exciting times! One thing that Musk has and BYD doesn't is the eager attention of the world's best engineers. Musk has an interview where he described SpaceX having designed things in house instead of buying them, and coming up with much better solutions. I imagine that battery and rockets are similar to software in that regard - a top engineer is 10x more productive than an average engineer. Combination of scale and…

Musk is a great marketer. I would be reluctant to conclude BYD doesn't have the attention of great engineers though. There's a very large talent pool to pull from in China.

All told, more energy storage production is a good thing, regardless of the producer. There is a massive technological shift underfoot, the next 5 years are going to be fun to watch.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#166

Post by ethanbond » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 8:12 PM UTC

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #164

ethanbond wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nor can he raise the price of gas. I think this is one of two fundamental flaws in your reasoning. First, yes, R&D is incredibly, incredibly expensive. I don't think anyone doubts that, and I find it just hysterical that x or y "social startup" can burn through far more money than that and never have to answer questions about the value of their R&D. We know what Tesla is doing, and we know that it's difficult. It s…

I already addressed this: n practice we're seeing ~25% loss of capacity at 40k miles in LEAF real world testing. 30% loss at 50k miles is the accepted norm. Capacity goes down annually after that. It seems that some cars are doing better, but play cars owned by the rich that get very few miles like the early Tesla sportscars. Real world daily-drivers like the LEAF experience the exact decay that was predicted. Lithiu…

Two completely different cars show different rates of deterioration: "Must be because rich people drive one of them."

I just told you the actual numbers, 100,000 miles at 80-85% capacity. You can't just say "get very few miles." I just told you how many miles.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#167

Post by drzaiusapelord » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 8:29 PM UTC

ethanbond wrote: post #166

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already addressed this: n practice we're seeing ~25% loss of capacity at 40k miles in LEAF real world testing. 30% loss at 50k miles is the accepted norm. Capacity goes down annually after that. It seems that some cars are doing better, but play cars owned by the rich that get very few miles like the early Tesla sportscars. Real world daily-drivers like the LEAF experience the exact decay that was predicted. Lithiu…

Two completely different cars show different rates of deterioration: "Must be because rich people drive one of them." I just told you the actual numbers, 100,000 miles at 80-85% capacity. You can't just say "get very few miles." I just told you how many miles.

Its the same battery tech. The only difference is that daily driving, which is the typical use case, wears them out faster. Probably due to getting the batteries hotter as they run longer, in traffic, etc.

Its still lithium-ion. It will behave the same way regardless of brand or celebrity CEO worship.

>I just told you the actual numbers

From a non-daily driver two seat sports car. Other sources follow the LEAF's numbers. My buddy's Porsche runs fairly well and its 30 years old. That doesn't mean you can have a 30 year old daily driver.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#168

Post by warfangle » Thu, Apr 02, 2015, 8:46 PM UTC

threeseed wrote: post #112

PinguTS wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what sense is Tesla a leader in JIT manufacturing? Do you know how manufacturing takes place at all those other car companies in Germany, Japan, and South Korea? I can not talk about the Asian-based companies, but I know for sure that the manufacturing plants in Germany are very ahead. Because they produce different models at same time on the same track. Each and every car is different in every aspect. In Europe i…

It's stupid. Tesla manufactures a couple of cars with an insignificant volume in less than a handful of countries. When they are building at Toyota volumes with their diverse product range then I will be impressed.

When was the last time a United States automobile manufacturer started and lasted for longer than a decade?

Of the major US manufacturers, none were started after 1925 (though some had brands that began after that - like Saturn, which operated from 1990 to 2010); of the minor ones, only Tesla and DeLorean could be considered household names - and only one of those is manufacturing new automobiles.

Most of the minor manufacturers are niche (e.g., racing / supercar; off-road; golf cart; single-part mfg; kit; etc) oriented. Of the modern minor manufacturers that are or are planning to sell actual automobiles to consumers:

* Tesla produces ~700 vehicles per week, and has a global cumulative sales of 46,948 units through Sept '14. * Fisker has delivered ~1,800 vehicles (ca 2012) * Detroit Electric (revived in '08) has yet to deliver a single automobile * Aurica doesn't even have a prototype * AM General is primarily a military outfit, manufacturing HMMMWVs

Frankly, I'm impressed that a non-military-contractor has been able to even begin producing at the levels TSLA has been able to (~37,000 units per anum).

For a new automobile manufacturer, their sales numbers are anything but insignificant: they're larger than any other minor US manufacturer, and larger than a lot of foreign minor manufacturers.

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#169

Post by mstachowiak » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 1:20 AM UTC

drzaiusapelord wrote: post #167

ethanbond wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two completely different cars show different rates of deterioration: "Must be because rich people drive one of them." I just told you the actual numbers, 100,000 miles at 80-85% capacity. You can't just say "get very few miles." I just told you how many miles.

Its the same battery tech. The only difference is that daily driving, which is the typical use case, wears them out faster. Probably due to getting the batteries hotter as they run longer, in traffic, etc. Its still lithium-ion. It will behave the same way regardless of brand or celebrity CEO worship. >I just told you the actual numbers From a non-daily driver two seat sports car. Other sources follow the LEAF's numb…

Here's the actual data for the Tesla Model S. Far superior to the Leaf and inline with the roadster. No need to compre apples to oranges.

http://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/battery-degradation-f...

Re: Tesla is a Battery Company

#170

Post by pdonis » Fri, Apr 03, 2015, 3:34 AM UTC

waterfowl wrote: post #131

pdonis wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would imagine the software does that. Obviously the lithium-ion cells themselves aren't doing the computation; software is. But the software should be considered part of the "battery" as a system. Without the software the lithium-ion cells are useless for this application, and indeed for any application more dynamic than a flashlight. So the software development that Tesla has done is essential for making batteri…

would "realtime battery management software company" be a better fit?

Possibly, but as I understand it, the software is tightly coupled to the battery hardware; if you were to swap in a different kind of cell, or even the same kind of cell but from a different manufacturer, you would have to rework much of the software. That's why I think it's better to view the storage cells and the software as a single integrated "battery" system.