Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Used A Third of All Electric-Car Batteries Last Year
cartechboy writes "We've heard about Tesla building this new gigafactory to produce battery packs for its electric cars. Heck, the company's current bottleneck is its ability to get battery packs for its electric cars. In fact, last year Tesla used a bit more than one-third of the auto industry's electric-car batteries, and that was with only selling 22,477 cars last year. Tesla is expanding its model lineup as quickly as possible with the introduction of the Model X crossover next year and a compact sports sedan in 2017. With the rapid expansion of its vehicle line, Tesla is going to need a crazy amount of battery packs, and quickly. Thus, the Silicon Valley upstart is building the gigafactory to engineer and produce battery packs in much larger quantities. If Tesla can remove the battery production bottle neck it's currently facing, the only question left will be market acceptance of a mainstream electric car."
At current projected usage, Tesla is threatening to use up all the supply of batteries by 2016, and then there'll be trouble. I foresee a US invasion of Fremont in the near future as mayor Gus Morrisson continues to engage in belligerent talk and saber rattling related to commercial zone redistricting and increased parking fines. Rumors still abound regarding the untimely demise of his predecessor Bob Wasserman. Was it pneumonia, or something far more sinister?
Let's see about the benefits.
No cooling water
No oil
No flammable liquid fuel
No brake fluid
No grease
No "fan" belts
No noise of consequence
No engine and drive train with 2000 parts
No internal combustion engine repairs/adjustments
Very low brake pad usage (unless you are 18 years old)
Tesla is going to need a crazy amount of battery packs
Lucky they don't need a gigacrazy amount of battery packs, they'd have to build a super-duper-gigafactory.
It's an interesting article for perspective but somewhat inaccurate. The article fails to point out that not all Lithium batteries are the same. The Volt for example uses such a different battery chemistry that it tends not to catch on fire even when punctured. The one simulated in lab fire occurred from the battery coolant catching on fire after it had a chance to dry out. (Took about a week.) The trade off is that the Volt's battery has lower power density which means that it holds less power for a battery its size. The Tesla S uses laptop batteries which have great battery density but have the obvious trade-off of catching on fire when punctured. An Iphone uses a Lithium Polymer battery which has some of the highest energy densities of all Lithium batteries. The downside is they explode when punctured. In a small device like a phone or tablet this isn't a big deal but in a Car which this would give it some amazing range, if it crashed it would literally be a bomb on wheels.
You've got to be fucking kidding me.
"Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option."
Renting a car for $500/pop three times a year is "too expensive" for a guy who has no problem dropping $90,000 on a car? I could see that the inconvenience might be a reason, but cost? We rented a mini-van a couple times a year for our family vacations because the sedan wasn't big enough. NBD.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
Right now, the ONLY thing that is preventing me from getting a Tesla is that I have to travel longer than 500 miles a few times a year, and renting a car for a week, three times a year is too expensive an option
Odd.
I'm a pretty firm believer that if you're going to drive 500 miles, renting a car is almost always a better option in terms of the wear and tear on your own car. [Obviously if you're leasing and under your mileage quota, things change, etc. etc.] I suppose it breaks down to what a week is (3-5 days? 7-10 days?) and how far longer than 500 is. Car rentals for non-luxury vehicles, especially for anyone who rents regularly are easily had in the sub-$40 range. Econoboxes are cheaper, but rarely enough cheaper to justify. On a whim, with no notice or club status, It's $44 a day for me to pick up a "mid-size" or "intermediate" (Sentra, Corolla, Fusion, Malabu) right now in my town.
At $334 a week, if you're only driving 500 miles, you're probably not ahead.
But 5 days and 600 miles -- Those 37c/mile probably come out ahead nicely with actual wear and tear on your car. AAA thinks so. *shrug*
Even if it's only a small loss over driving your own car (in terms of big picture wear and tear), it might be overall worth it after switching to a Tesla.
This whole discussion on electric cars reminds me of digital cameras when they first came out. People act as if no technology ever improved over time. The first cameras were about 320 x 240 or so. Film purists were laughing. In order to get the same resolution as 35 mm film, you would need 5 MEGAPIXELS!!! which considering cameras were barely .1 Megapixels seemed purely ridiculous. No way is digital going to replace film! Of course the camera resolution doubled year after year and now digital cameras are ubiquitous and film is almost extinct.
EV batteries will get cheaper and more powerful over time. Range will go up, vehicle prices will go down. Economies of scale and technological progress will see to that. As they get cheaper and better, they will make more sense to more people. People who might not buy a $40k car with a 120 mile range may well buy a $25k car with a 200 mile range.
None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.