This is Henrik's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Henrik's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Henrik
Recent Activity
It is delusional to think that global warming is reduced by making vehicles with higher mpg. Problem with fuel efficient vehicles is that they make the use of fossil fuels relatively more affordable. That means the consumption will continue even if oil go to 200 USD per barrel. That is a problem because at 200 USD per barrel of oil mankind can economically extract oil for another 100 years in as large or larger volumes than we currently does with catastrophic consequences for the global climate. We need to stop using fossils altogether and the only way to do that is to direct all future research and development into non-fossil technologies. Automakers must stop developing more fuel efficient vehicles as it only increases the problems. We need zero emission vehicles and nothing else. The fastest and most economic way to get there is to speed up the development of fully self-driving cars that operate on battery power. They can be made far more durable than fossil fuel cars or hydrogen cars that only are good for 200,000 miles and uses expensive fossils. BEVs can be made to go 1,000,000 miles and operated as self-driving taxi vehicles they can log 100,000 miles per year of transportation services. Google is currently leading the effort and there is a good presentation of Google's efforts at TED talks for those who need to know see https://www.ted.com/talks/chris_urmson_how_a_driverless_car_sees_the_road I hope that Tesla's next car after model 3 will be a self-driving taxi made for durability and low cost operation and without a steering wheel or a gas pedal. Tesla might use Google's software and Google's capital for launching a massive global transportation service with millions of cars with these self-driving and self-charging taxies. That would really matter.
BYD's sales are predominantly limited to China. To grow they need to sell in all markets so I don't believe BYD will take the crown from Tesla. Tesla is building capacity to do 60k model s per year 60k model x per year and 380k model 3 per year by 2020. At Tesla's annual shareholder meeting Musk said they were almost done with a new paint shop that could paint 500k car per year. Apparently they find it less costly to do that now instead of expanding it gradually. The most difficult part id to make enough batteries for 500k Teslas but that Gigafactory is on track to start production of cells and packs in the summer of 2016 and reach full capacity in 2020 for 500k units for Tesla cars taking 35Gw and another 15Gw for the energy business. Apart from Nissan perhaps I do not see any other automaker making the investments today that it takes to get any serious capacity for BEVs in the next 5 years. I hope BYD will do well but it will mostly be limited to China where BYD take advantage of generous incentives as an incumbent producer something Tesla cannot do until they start producing in China.
@mahonj It is elementary. You get another fully charged autonomous taxi BEV if the first one you drive need to stop for a charge. You can do that for as long as you need to go without losing average speed apart from the 60 sec it take to change the car. Also Musk said Tesla did not make a 600 miles range, 200 kwh Model S because it costs too much for most customers at Tesla to want it. It is not because it can't be done. In a world full of autonomous BEV taxis a few will be 200kwh versions that can take you non-stop for 600 miles during the night so you can sleep while you are transported to the destination in mind. That will end much of the short distance air travel. I imagine it to be a motorhome with bed, toilet and a small kitchen. Far more comfortable and private than an airplane and no time wasted going to and from an airport in a taxi.
This is more good news from Tesla. Globally Nissan sold 3417 Leafs in April and 3742 Leafs in May see http://ev-sales.blogspot.dk/2015_06_01_archive.html Final number for the global sales of the Leaf for June is not in but they appear to be a disappointment meaning that Tesla with 11.500 delevered Model S for 2015, Q2 is now the world's best selling plug-in car. With Model X starting deliveries in Q4, 2015 I think it is safe to say that by Q1, 2016 Tesla will also become the world's largest plug-in automaker.
@mahonj I agree with you that commercial self-driving taxi services will not come until 5 to 10 years from now. I hope only 5 years are needed to make it happen. Until then I do not believe BEVs will be more than a niche business in the global auto-industry. Specifically, BEVs will be less than 5% of total global vehicle production. Until self-driving BEVs arrive they will still be too expensive and they will still suffer from parking, charging and range anxiety all of which prevent them from going mainstream. Last month Google started running fully self-driving cars limited to 25mph on public roads for the first time so I hope Google will be able to start a commercial self-driving taxi service in about 5 years that is also allowed to do 60 mph on highways and drive in cities at 40 mph. It is true that the self-driving ability will also greatly enhance the value of gassers but BEVs stand to gain by far the most from this technology as it solves all the weaknesses of BEVs versus gassers. With self-driving technology BEVs will therefore gain the competitive edge over gassers. Self-driving BEVs will become better and less costly per mile driven than self-driving gassers in all situations. The self-driving taxi services will chose BEVs over gassers because they can do the required job better than gassers and they cost less to fuel and maintain and they are far more durable than gassers.
They still don't get it. With sef-driving cars worries about where to park the car and where to charge the car in the cities are ridiculous. The self-driving car can always find a parking space and start charging itself. This is another reason they will be very inexpensive to use relative to private ownership in a city where you in addition to the car need to pay for expensive parking. Just make those self-driving vehicles and all the current problems with BEVs will no longer be an issue. Parking, charging and range anxiety all solved by self-driving cars.
The 12 publicly available hydrogen stations for all of USA are heavily subsidized. In reality we don't have a price for hydrogen for fuel cell cars that is meaningful for comparison with gasoline or electricity. I expect it to be much more expensive than gasoline without subsidies for the hydrogen stations. This is just another show stopper for fuel cell vehicles. IMO the auto industry should instead focus on self-driving cars and BEVs. That is the future for that industry.
Tesla's Model S 70D does 101 mpge combined with 101 city and 102 highway. That Tesla can also do 0 to 60 mph in 5.2 sec whereas the smaller Mirai does that in 10 to 15 sec and only 67mpge. Also for a car that has virtually no places to fuel 312 miles range is pathetic. The Tesla can fuel for free anywhere and it has unlimited mileage warranty on the battery whereas the Mira only get 100,000 miles. And the Mirai does not have a trunk instead it has bulky hydrogen tanks that better not blow up at the extremely high pressure they store the hydrogen. Who will buy it?
It is nice to see that more people realize that solar power and wind power is affordable already and is going to become the lowest cost energy we can make in a few decades. I would say the average cost of new utility scale solar power is about 10 cents kwh now and we are heading for 3 cents per kwh in 2035. Wind power is about 6 cents per kwh and going down to about 3 cents per kwh by 2035. In 2014 50 GW of wind power and 40GW of solar power was added to the global grid for about 250 billion USD. It has become big business now but solar and wind needs to grow 11 fold to about 1000 GW per year in new capacity added. At that rate it will take 25 years to get 25,000 GW of solar and wind power globally and that is enough to power the entire planet without any biofuels or fossil fuels or nuclear or anything else. It can be done and it should be done for so many good reasons like eliminating air pollution, making cancer a rare disease, eliminating oil dependence, creating local jobs, stopping the ongoing Holocene mass-extinction event see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_extinction EP as you know solar power is nuclear power. It all comes from the giant fusion reactor at the center of our solar system, the sun. And the sun can be trusted not to blow up for at least one billion years to come. It is as reliable as it gets.
Very impressive. Hopefully some new world records can be made at the 2015 Pikes Peak race. I guess the boss wants to drive because he thinks he can do it and he probably also pays most of the costs. It is probably more of an enthusiast hobby than a real business.
Sorry Davemart after digging into it I can see I had you mixed up with E.C.I. that I had a long discussion with about the issue. Happende here and elsewhere http://www.greencarcongress.com/2015/02/20150219-volvo.html
Good to see that you are able to change your opinion on matters. I recall our discussions a few months ago and you were clearly among those who thought that self driving cars were far out in the future. In my opinion self driving cars are a reality in 2020 and no later than 2025 most countries will allow them on public roads enabling a transportation revolution of the biggest kind with repercussions for air travel, train and bus travel and private car ownership and the spread of battery electric cars versus cumbustion based. Everything will change in a very big way for the better. I noted at Tesla's shareholder meeting a few days ago that Musk said he had decreased his own estimate of when Tesla will have a fully self driving car made to begin extensive road testing and public approval. He now think that car is ready in 3 years instead of the 5 years he said in 2014 and the 10 years he said in 2012. What has changed for Musk is that now he is driving every day in a Model S, X with the latest prototype version for Tesla's autopilot system. He get weekly software updates so he now knows the speed of the progress. He expect the first beta autopilot is ready next month to be tested by hundreds of Tesla employees and beta testers and a final version 1.0 for all Model S and X owners will be ready by Sepember or October, 2015 probably in time for the first deliveries of Model X. I expect that when Tesla announces the availability of their first autopilot for highway driving it will trigger a subsequent media storm about autonomous driving by all automakers just like the announcement of Tesla's powerpacks have triggered it for battery storage system's that was off the raider for most people until Tesla made it interesting.
EP HVDC GW sized long-distance transmission lines (200 miles and above) can be laid underground using superconducting cables. If it is out of sight it is out of mind and you will be able to get those permissions to build it without a lot of opposition. The reason we are not making such transmission lines today is that the fossil based power plants in the current grid have not created the need. However, when going 100% solar and wind power we will need it. Hawaii being closer to the equatorial line and having some of its islands 500 km apart should rely mostly on solar power and less on wind power with subsea transmission lines connecting the islands into a single grid. But there are additional alternatives for Hawaii. For instance, they may also build a large heat sink and a thermal power plant to make power in the rare weather conditions with little sun and wind. Alternatively if Hawaii dramatically oversize their capacity for wind and solar power in order to produce enough in weather with little sun and wind it means that they will get a lot of low cost electricity when the weather is sunny and windy. That could enable electricity intensive industries to prosper on Hawaii such as aluminim production. However, these industries will only operate when the electricity prise is low and they will shot down when the electricity price increases as a result of weather conditions. It may sound cracy today but it will not be so crasy when solar power become the least cost power source available in 2040 at say 3 cents per kwh using average weather conditions and Hawaii being a very sunny island can therefore go lower than the 3 cents average per kwh in 2040.
No price per kwh. Reason. They can't compete with Tesla's products. Tesla's announcement was not big news because they showed a grid battery (apparently lots of other producers offer that. The big news for the battery storage industry is Tesla's price level which is about 60% below the market price currently. Apart from price Tesla's product scales from small to incredibly large. Samsung does not. Tesla's powerwalls are sexy even without a pretty young woman. They are more compact and less heavy. Half of Samsungs. Tesla's product is also more flexible. If you at a later point in time decide to double your solar panel installation from say 6kw to a 12kw installation you can also double the number of supporting powerwalls and replace the separate inverter with a larger one. This is not an option with Samsung's system that is locked into one size.
Let's consider the probable cost of the 4 main ways of dealing with intermittency in a society that is 100% powered by solar and wind power (Indeed it is indirectly nuclear energy as it all comes from the massive fusion reactor at the center of our solar system. Solar and wind is a genius way to implement nuclear power in a safe manner without any radioactive waste on our planet or powerplants that risk exploding and make enormous areas inhabitable for hundreds of years). Add 1) Tesla's power packs costs 250 USD /kwh. Musk said they can do 5000 cycles. Add 50 USD /kwh to combine them in large systems at each substation on the grid. That is 0.06 USD /kwh (=(250+50)/5000)). You probably only need to store 30% of your consumed kwh in batteries. The rest is used directly. So the price for battery backup is 0.018 USD per kwh consumed (=0.06*0.3). Add 2) Building lots of long-distance transmission lines globally is expensive but probably can be paid for by adding 2 cents per kwh consumed. Add 4) Building and maintaining a smart grid with price adjusting meters is not costly at all. The meter may cost 200 USD and the network data traffic for 20 years use may add another 100 USD. Over 20 years the meter in a household may measure 200.000 kwh so only about 0.0015 USD /kwh for the smart grid feature (=(200+100)/200000). Combine the cost of 1, 2 and 4 and we get 0.0395 USD /kwh. This is really not that much for clean air and saving the planet from global warming disasters (like mass extinction of species). Still these solutions may not be enough to deal effectively with the intermittencies especially the seasonally ones. So solution 3) about overcapacity should also be added. That is the solution you start to use when you want to go from say 70% renewable to 100%. The world is currently at 6% electric generation from solar and wind power so we can safely assume we will not need to implement solution 3) until at the earliest in 2040. Today wind power is 0.06 USD per kwh and in 2040 it is at most 0.03 USD per kwh. Today utility scale solar power is about 10 cents per kwh but it will also be about 0.03 cents in 2040. So 0.03 USD /kwh for both solar and wind in 2040. How much extra capacity you need to be certain to have enough in low production seasons will depend on the climate you live in. Near equator you could probably do with 110% of the needed capacity but high up north and south of equator it will more lileky be 150%. So assuming 150% it would make electricity cost not 0.03 USD/kwh in 2040 but rather 0.045 USD. Now add the 0.04 USD /kwh from 1, 2 and 4 and you get an industial price of electricity of 0.085 USD /cents. Add distiution cost and households will end up paying about 0.014 USD /kwh in the US. Not a big deal really for clean air and a healthy planet. And we assumed Tesla's batteries will not drop in price.
Super. Hopefully other states and countries will soon follow Hawaii's lead. 100% renewable electricity is simple to implement in any country using solar and wind power. Intermittencies are dealt with in four principal ways: 1) Using battery backup like Tesla's powerpacks. 2) Long-distance transmission lines connecting the grid over large geographic areas (ideally the entire planet should be connected into a super grid). Solar and wind produces a constant flow of energy on average on the planet. 3) Overcapacity. Seasonal intermittency can also be dealt with by building enough solar and wind power to supply the grid even in seasonally low production times (such as low winter production for solar energy and low summer production for wind power). 4) Implementing a smart grid enabling hourly changes of the electricity prices for every meter on the grid in order to fit supply and demand at any time of the day or the year.
Thank you for that info Davemart. I had not seen it yet. Have not changed Tesla's website to reflect that info. I just vent to see that shareholders meeting at http://www.teslamotors.com/2015shareholdermeeting Musk said a few other interesting things. He said the 7kwh pack is rated for 5000 cycles which is about 15 years on a nearly daily basis. The 10kwh pack is rated for 1200 cycles and is intended for backup predominantly. The 7kwh is intended as a virtual solar panel. Musk also say that for solar panel owners that has an inverter it will only cost about 500 USD in installation cost to add one powerwall. Musk also say that economics is best for the powerpacks for utilities as it enable utilities to support the grid with far less capacity for transformer stations and power plants. He said that 50% of the infrastructure cost for power plants and transformers stations can be sawed when you have batteries at every substation in the grid. I do not know how Tesla could upgrade the 7kwh powerwall from 2k to 5k without adding cost. I guess that some time has gone since the announcement and that more test results regarding the system shows that the current cabling of the system can safely handle 5kw instead of 2kw. So they simply change the software managing the pack to allow for 5kw instead of 2kw. Until Tesla's website changes the info on the powerwalls I do not think the 5kw is a final product specification.
Tesla limits the powerwall to 2kW per unit in order to save cost not because it is the limit of the cells they use. With only 2kW instead of 10kW you can use much thinner cobber wires that make the powerwall cost less. Cobber is expensive. Tesla also use the powerwalls as virtual solar panels that deliver electricity when the sun does not shine. Typically you would use one powerwall (rated at 2kW continuous and 3.3kw peak) for every 3kw of solar panel capacity that are installed so that if you are not using much electricity the solar panels charges the power walls using DC (direct current) thereby avoiding efficiency losses in the inverter that connect the solar battery system to the grid. See schematics of Tesla's solar panel, powerpack and inverter to grid. http://www.teslamotors.com/powerwall As DavidJ says the grid is used for large loads (like charging your Model S at 20kw) not the batteries that are used to store unused solar power for later use. Solar power installations will explode in the comming years because they get much cheaper and more people will want to be part of making a sustainable economy. So if the US households, businesses and utilities installs say 600 GW of solar panels i the next 20 years you need to support that with some 400 GW of battery power with about 1400Gwh of storage or the grid will not function. It will not be long before the law will require each 3kW of solar power capacity to be matched with 2kw of batteries with 7kwh storage. I am certain that Saft's system is far more costly (my bet 6000 USD for the 10kwh) because Saft does not produce at the scale that Tesla does and because they can do 10kW per 10kwh pack. For that reason it will not sell well.
I think Tesla's all-wheel dual motor design where the front motor is geared for high efficiency at highway speeds and the rear-end moter is geared for fast acceleration has made the need for multispeed transmissions in BEVs even more redundant. I think Tesla's dual motor BEV design is so brilliant that it will probably be the only one that Tesla will have in all af its future vehicles. Tesla still offers the single motor model S85 but I expect that model to go away before years end.
VW is still part of the problem and not yet part of the solution. They will not be part of the solution until they start to make long-range BEVs as Lad said. I also think short-range BEVs will do if they are 100% self-driving because that would solve the range issue as yu can just jump into another vehicle for longer trips. Alternatively you can have a large taxi fleet of 95% of short-range self-driving BEVs serving the 95% of the customers that order travel less than 100 miles with the remaining 5% of the taxi fleet should be long-range BEVs serving the 5% of the customers that orders travel above 100 miles. IMO the mass market for BEVs will not come until the self-driving technology is ready. That technology is the catalyst that will make BEVs price competitive and ability competitive with old style gassers. A self-driving BEV can do everything a gasser can do and at lower cost because of the high durablility of BEVs versus gassers and the low cost of electricity versus gasoline.
The 500 MWh is 0.5 million kwh times 250 USD per kwh for Tesla's powerpacks so a total order of 125 million USD for Tesla by this single customer. I have not read about any other deals for battery backups that are bigger than this. Tesla's low kwh price has created a new viable market for battery backup/grid leverage systems that could be worth several billion USD per year by 2018. It practically does not exist today because price levels closer to 600 USD per kwh made it uneconomical for nearly everything. So 250 USD per kwh is a game changer for this industry.
McAron you are clueless about the volume it takes to make plastic parts for a car. Donate a year's worth of your garden garbage and you have enough biomass to make the plastic components for one car give or take. Petroleum is primarily used for fuel production. If you do not need it for fuel production we have enough biomass to make plastics, asphalts, etc. Moreover, in most cases it is easy to substitute petroleum based products like plastics with other matirials such as wood or aluminium. The petroleum industry is not needed when Musk and others have replaced it with better and non-poluting alternatives. It will take time. We need a lot of demand for electric cars and battery power systems for the grid. That demand will explode with the coming of fully self-driving cars and inexpensive solar panels. We will get that in about 5 to 10 years and hereafter these 50Gwh factories will start to pop up everywhere on the planet. In about 2050 we will have about 200 of those factories globally and the oil industry will be in free fall as no new gas or diesel engines will be needed or allowed for vehicle production of any kind.
So Daimler does a 20,000 square meters, 110 million USD battery factory and Tesla/Panasonic makes a 1,000,000 square meters, 5,000 million USD 50Gwh battery factory. Tesla and Panasonic are changing the world economy with their 50Gwh factories. 200 of those could make enough batteries for 100 million long-range 100kwh BEVs per year and when that happens we do not need any oil production for anything on wheels. Daimlers factory changes nothing it is (1/50 of Tesla's factory) and I am certain they can't sell their industrial battery packs for as little as 250 USD per kwh as Tesla can because of that 50GWh factory.