This is Change's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Change's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Change
Recent Activity
They used non-automotive grade cells in a lab to make conclusions about BEVs. LOL. Why is green car congress even reporting this crap.
Another fairytale project from Toyota. Shame on them for not being serious about sustainability. Toyota sells less than 1000 zero emission vehicles per year. Tesla sells over 100,000 per year. Musk tweeted that Tesla will reveal their zero emission BEV semi for long-haul heavy duty by September this year. That will be interesting because it is not a fairytale. BEV semis will not even need a driver cabin because they will be driverless. And range does not matter as the unmanned BEV semi has no problem waiting to charge every hour or so (every 100 miles, 24/7). The first BEV semi, however, may get a cabin because the autopilot system needs to be developed based on driver inputs from a human driver at first.
Tesla’s and all other car makers’ driver attention systems are based on hands-on, steering and pedal input. Going to be interesting to see how GM believes they can keep their drivers attentive without hands-on. I think Tesla will keep the hand’s on driver attention system active unlit the autopilot reaches level 4 and is approved for level 4 driving. When they reach level 5 Tesla will ask for permission to sell their cars without human controls. Pedals and steering wheel should be an optional feature in a level 5 car. You can have it but only if you pay extra like the 4000 USD it may cost in a 35k USD car.
Jeff go to Tesla order manager and you will see the 60kwh model s can be upgraded at any time after purchase to a 75kwh battery because Tesla do not make a 60kwh battery it is just software limited to 60kwh in order to offer the car at a lower price point to some customers. https://www.tesla.com/models/design Same with autopilot hardware. All Tesla cars come with it (also model 3) even if you do not order it. But if you decide later on you want to activate it you just make a few tabs on the car's touchscreen and pay the price it cost to have these abilities activated. You pay more to have it activated after purchase of the cars than if you order it with these features when you configure and buy your car. That is how Tesla do it.
The 30% energy density improvement may actually be a reference to improvement from the original 85kwh pack to the new battery pack in Model 3. Since the 85kwh pack is now a 100kwh pack the change from 18650 cells in that pack to 2170 cells will probably imply a 15% improvement in energy density from the the curret 100kwh pack. See https://electrek.co/2016/11/14/tesla-model-3-battery-energy-density-model-s/
I also expect Tesla to soon drop making different size battery packs. They will make the 100kwh pack for Model S and Model X and a 75kwh pack for Model 3. I expect Tesla to price differentiate by offering their cars with different kwh available at purchase. For example, the Model 3 can be ordered for 35k USD with 55kwh available for 220 miles range but since it has a 75kwh battery it can always be upgraded to that pack size by a software purchase. Say pay 5000 USD more to get 75kwh unlocked and get 300 miles range. There is a good chance that Tesla will stop making the 75kwh pack for Model S and Model X later this month when they discontinue the 60kwh version for Model S. Hereafter all cars will come with a 100kwh pack to be software limited to either 75 or 100kwh. Tesla’s battery cost are really low now so Tesla can save money by simplifying production and development if they only develop one pack size for each distinct car model. So one pack only for Model 3 and Model Y and one pack only for Model S and X.
Musk say 30% increase in his Q4 shareholders webcast. Link below. Elsewhere he has said the 100kwh is enough for Model S we may not see a larger battery pack for Model S when it starts to use the 2170 cells in 2018. Range will nevertheless increase as the weight could drop 200 to 300 pounds with the 2170 cell. I think the 2170 cells will be optimized for faster charging. 300 to 400k watt or 15 min for a 300 mile charge. Important for self-driving cars that needs to operate 24/7 and spend lille time charging. http://ir.tesla.com/events.cfm
What matters are the state of the art batteries that can be produced today for current BEVs. Electrek had a rare piece of news about the 18650 cell that Tesla and Panasonic has co developed and compared it to the standard cell by Panasonic. Note the Tesla/Panasonic cell is good for 3000 deep cycles at 25 degrees Celsius and still maintain 90% of its capacity. The Model S 100 can drive 3000*335 = 1,005,000 miles with its battery. No other BEV maker currently has such a durable battery. Tesla’s next negation 2170 cell will probably have the same durability but Musk say its energy density increases by 30% and it is cheaper to produce. That cell will go into the Model 3 this year and Model S and X in early 2018. https://electrek.co/2017/03/22/tesla-battery-cell-breakdown/ When Goodenough co invented and patented the worlds first lithium battery it took Sony 13 years to make the first product that used this battery. Expect 10 to 15 years lead time for battery inventions to market applications. I have stopped reading about battery inventions for that reason. It is more interesting to read about what Tesla does and how fast others are able to copy what Tesla does. LG and Samsung are working on bringing similar 2170 cells to market by 2018 to 2021 for Faraday and Lucid. This is interesting. https://electrek.co/2016/12/19/lucid-motors-lg-chem-supply-li-ion-battery-cell/ https://electrek.co/2017/01/09/samsung-2170-battery-cell-tesla-panasonic/
The sooner we get to level 4 and 5 the more lives will be saved. If we can get to it 12 months earlier by using level 3 first we will save nearly 1.2 million lives on a global scale. I am convinced that level 3 will result in some death accidents because of the inattention it induces at some people who simply can’t get it that they must pay attention and must be able to take over immediately. I am not convinced that 1.2 million people will die on that account. Not even close. There are also ways to force drivers to keep attention in a level 3 car like requiring hands on the steering wheel and driver input at least once every 60 seconds etc like Tesla does. The time it takes to evolve from level 3 to level 4 in an OTA updatable car like Tesla is probably also very limited. It will be only 6 to 12 months for Tesla. Volvo is overreacting and thereby risking more deaths as a result. Level 3 is saving lives both by shortening the time it takes to get to level 4 and 5 and by saving people that would have created an accident if it was not for the always on attention of the level 3 autopilot. However, once level 4 and 5 becomes available I think the law should require that cars come with minimum level 4 just like cars are required to satisfy crass tests etc. After 2024 no new car should be allowed for sale anywhere on the planet unless it has level 4 or level 5 autonomy. Such a law would save lives and speed up things.
So only 40,000 work on BEVs in the US auto industry and Tesla employ 20,000 of those directly or indirectly or 50%. It shows the old auto industry is not serious about BEVs. There are no sustainable automakers apart from Tesla. Other automakers are only in the BEV business for compliance reasons or green show-off without real effort.
The arrival of fully self-driving BEVs will change everything. That will give the BEVs the edge they need to outcompete gassers as fast as the world can built the 100 gigafactories to go all BEVs in the global autoindustry.
We need this pipeline and many others to come. Transporting oil using rail and truck is the far more polluting/energy intensive alternative. The cost of transporting 1 barrel of oil 1000 miles is about 3 USD with a pipeline, 7 USD with rail and 15 USD with trucks. Most of that cost increase is for burning diesel. So we should use pipelines that are cheaper and pollute less. Tar sand is stone dead at 50 USD per barrel. No new project will be build. However, shale oil is booming at 50 USD per barrel. The shale revolution is bigger than most people understand. It will make the US an oil net exporting nation before 2020. We need that to happen for the free world to stop buying oil from islamofascist countries. The clash of civilizations is happening and it is accelerating. We need to prepare for more war because it is coming. The biggest change will happen with self-driving cars that will make BEVs the only kind of vehicles in demand with gassers declining because they cost more to operate per taxi mile. Can’t wait for that to happen.
Musk did a lot of tweeting last night about the Model 3 and the solar roof that they will take orders from in late April and start delivering in the summer. Musk tweeted a low resolution video of their first release candidate made by production equipment. It looked exactly like previous models apart perhaps from a sharper front end. https://electrek.co/2017/03/24/tesla-model-3-release-candidate-drive-elon-musk/ Musk said it will feature one screen only for everything infotainment, autopilot, speed etc. So no fancy head up display. The door handles also look more conventional in the video. I do not think they are electric. Herman the battery will be new for model 3. It will use the new battery packing tech that was introduced in Model X and S with the 100kwh pack. That battery packing tech will also soon replace Tesla’s 60 to 75kwh packs with my guess a 65 to 80 kwh pack for model s and x. Model s and x still use the 18650 cell in their pack but model 3 will use the new 2170 cell made at the giga factory. That cell is different in form factor and cell chemistry from the 18650 cell. The cell is produced already at the gigafactory for the powerwall 2 and the powerpack 2. Musk said that the 2170 will also go into the model s and x but not before the start of 2018. The cell is a huge step up from the 18650 with a 30% increase in wh/kg but Musk has also said that 100kwh is enough for the model s that get 335 miles range. So when the 100kwh pack comes with 2170 cells it will just be used to cut weight and cost of that pack. Musk said the Model 3 will launch like Model S with RWD first and then 9 months later with a dual engine drive and 3 months later with a performance model. He even said the top battery pack for model 3 is 75kwh. I am sure the entry battery pack is a 55kwh and that the model 3 will do 4 miles per kwh so 220 miles range for Model 3 55 and 300 miles for Model 3 75. Musk also said that the fastest Tesla will still be the Model S until they make a new roadster. The performance version of model 3 will not beat the 2.5 sec to 60mph than model s manages. Musk has also said that Tesla’s 30,000 employees will get ahead of everybody when ordering the Model 3 so the first few thousands will be for Tesla employees.
It is going to fail because they are not fully self-driving. By 2020 the Tesla Network could do all zero emission taxi driving in London for a fraction of the price per kilometer than this London Taxi.
Incremental changes will not save this planet from a global warming mass extinction event that will wipe out most life on this planet. It is already happening with species going extinct a 1000 times faster than in the preindustrial era. We need transformative change to completely end the burning of fossil fuels. And we need it fast. The fastest way to make a transformational change to a fossil fee future is to embrace self-driving vehicles. Self-driving cars doing 100,000 miles per year instead of 15,000 miles per year will make BEVs cheaper than gasser all cost considered. That will cause BEVs to take over. With a mass market for BEVs the cost and quality of batteries will improve even faster and that will lead batteries to take over in shipping and aviation as well. Also renewable energy can be deployed on a massive scale when their intermittencies can be dealt with effectively using cheaper and more durable batteries. The most affordable way to deal with renewable intermittency is a combination of battery backup, long-distance transmission lines, over capacity (install more solar and wind than needed average in order to have enough energy under unfavorable weather conditions) and variable electricity prices that give consumers an incentive to adjust their consumption to the demand. Steel and aluminum production should happen only during spring and summer where electricity is cheap because of overproduction of solar power.
Or maybe the truth is even direr. The old automakers can’t change because they are ruled by people who can’t change. This may be the more plausible explanation and it is quite often the explanation for why companies fail. Think about it all companies that are created will eventually die. Very few companies are over 50 years old and almost none over 100 years. I expect very few of today’s car companies to be around by 2035. But there will be many new auto companies like Tesla and perhaps Lucid and who knows maybe Apple, Samsung and Intel and Nvidia.
No it does not add up. They have been at it for 20 years with natural gas vehicles and noting meaningful has happened. Nothing at all. What part of less than 15,000 barrels per day in oil equivalents and diesel and gasoline is 13 million barrels per day in the US did you not get?
Natural gas as a vehicle fuel does not matter at all. It is less than 15,000 barrels per day in oil equivalents. For comparison, diesel and gasoline is 13 million barrels per day in the US. Problem is that handling gas is too expensive. Maintenance cost of high pressure gas tanks is a show stopper for viable vehicle applications. However, natural gas that is now predominantly produced by shale wells in the US is inexpensive at 3 usd per mBTU compared to 9 USD per mbtu for oil. It will be used more for electricity production in the USA for sure. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu_nus_a.htm https://www.unitjuggler.com/convert-energy-from-boe-to-MMBtu.html
Tesla only issue 250 million USD of common stock and Musk will personally buy 10% of that. I am looking forward to see Tesla launch their on-demand driverless Taxi service Tesla Network sometime in 2018. Profits from service is all Tesla need to finance multi-billion USD construction of new Giga factories and thousands of new service centers and supercharger stations globally while at the same time have positive net earnings.
The old auto-industry show little interest in making attractive BEVs that are not destroying life for future generations. However, new companies like Lucid and Tesla will change the world for the better eventually. The price/spec offering from Lucid is definitely competitive with other similar priced gasser offerings. However, Lucid have not yet started to build their factory. They believe they can build it from scratch and start making this car by the end of 2018. That sounds unrealistic in my ears. They have found the location (Casa Grande, Arizona, USA) for the factory but it is just a piece of dirt right now. It will take 3 years. Lucidmotors are also only 300 people right now. I think they should move on as fast as they can but they need a lot of money to grow. Just like Tesla. Auto making is a capital intensive industry. To make 1 million BEVs per year you need to invest something like 20 billion USD in factories. Apple may buy Lucid if they can get their production started by 2019 and make 15,000 units for 2020. Smartphones is no longer a growth business. They will start to drop in price soon because they don’t need to get much better for most people. That is a problem for Apple and other tech companies like Samsung. The big growth opportunities are driverless BEVs, renewable energy and grid storage. http://azbigmedia.com/azre-magazine/driving-in-manufacturing http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/economy/2016/11/29/electric-vehicle-company-plans-casa-grande-plant-lucid-motors/94610502/
@Mahonj I think Intel is right about going into the self-driving vehicle business. They should because in 20 years there will be over a billion vehicles on the road with full self-drive and a monster computer as their AI brain and Intel could supply these cpus. But the price they pay for mobileye is insane. Intel could have poached talent from all over the world by paying higher wages and got what Mobileye has for a fraction of the 15 billion USD. It would take more time though. Also I really believe that self-driving tech and software in particular is so strategically important for any auto maker that they will all want to do it all by themselves as soon as possible. Tesla dropped Mobileye when they could do the camera vision themselves and Tesla is preparing to make their own cpus so they will eventually not need Nvidia or anyone else for that either. Other car makers will do the same. They start by buying from the best external suppliers like mobileye and Nvidia and when they are ready to do it themselves they do that because this is how to differentiate their products and gain a competitive edge. There is a lot of stuff that can be done differently or better with self-driving software. For instance, better software could give better user experience and also better accident statistics but also better fuel economy and less maintenance cost simply by improving algorithms. This is how you will be able to gain market share and make more profits.
Alaska needs it badly for their economy. The Alaska pipeline is in danger of being closed because of declining oil production.
The ability of cars to drive without any human involvement is what is needed for BEVs to quickly triumphs over cars with combustion engines. The economics is simple. BEVs will always cost more upfront than gassers because of the expensive battery. However, BEVs cost much less to drive per mile than gassers because of their low fuel costs, their lower maintenance requirements and their longer durability. So the trick to make BEVs less expensive to drive than gassers is to put as many miles on the BEV as possible. We need to drive the BEVs 24/7 or at least 50k miles per year and we can only achieve that with fully self-driving tech operating BEVs as on-demand taxi services. Self-driving tech also solves the BEV’s range issue and charging availability issue because you can always travel on in a new a fully charged BEV and the BEV can drive out and charge itself at night. BEVs could probably succeed without self-driving tech but it would take many more decades to happen because battery development is a slow process that take decades to yield significant improvement. With fully self-driving tech being rolled out currently at Tesla and subsequently at the old automakers by 2020/2021 BEVs will spread as fast as it is humanly possible to make the 100 Tesla sized giga battery factories that the world need to go all BEVs in the auto industry. I estimate these giga factories could all be built before 2030. After that gassers will no longer be in production apart from spare parts for old gassers.
We need a global ban on the production of the highly pollution lead acid batteries. There are plenty of non-toxic alternatives available like Toshiba’s lithium batteries but also super capacitators. Start by banning the use of lead acid batteries in luxury cars and follow up with banning lead acid batteries in successively less expensive cars. It is sickening that we live in a world that cares so little about humans and their environment. We need clean water, soil and air to live good and healthy lives. Pollution should not be accepted and those creating it should be held accountable and severely punished. If I should blame Tesla for one thing it is that they are still using a small lead acid battery in their cars. They need to fix that ASAP.
Low electricity prices made by much lower cost for future renewable solar and wind power will not change the fact that hydrogen for FCV will be at least 4 times more expensive than electricity for BEVs as measured per mile driven because BEVs are 4 times as efficient as FCV per mile driven when the loss of electrolysis and compression is also included as it should. Electrolyzers are not getting more efficient. The best platinum based electrolyzers that are very expensive to make has 70% efficiency and then you need compression that is also 70% efficient so you lose 50% (=.7*.7). Another 55% is lost in the FCV so you end up with about 22.5% total efficiency for the FCV. BEVs are 90% efficient or four times better than FCV to convert a kwh into miles driven. However, it gets worse because there is not enough platinum on the planet to deploy high efficiency platinum FCV and high efficiency platinum electrolyzers in scale. So a future based on hydrogen electolysers and FCV must use less efficient non-platinum based alternatives. And it gets worse because BEVs last much longer and are less costly to maintain than FCV and their needed electrolyser and compressor infrastructure. And it gets worse because FCV cost more to make than BEVs. And it gets worse because BEVs are getting the ability to charge at 350 kw before 2020 meaning only 10 minutes is needed to charge 50kwh or enough to go 200 miles in a BEV. They also get fully driverless before 2020 so they can drive out at night and charge themselves if you do not live at a place where charging is available at where you park. And it get worse because with driverless BEVs people can just buy a super affordable small BEV that is short range and instantly hail a large long range BEV when they need such a vehicle. This is the future. Ownership of super affordable short range BEVs combined with on-demand hailing of BEV for more demanding use cases. FCV is a scam by the old auto-industry to pretend that they care about making sustainable vehicles for the future. FCV will never happen apart for some staged small scale sales and concept vehicles to keep the believers happy and hopeful. You are being deceived Harvey and so is Davemart.