Hacker News Reader

Comment by hi | Hacker News Reader

Tesla Gigafactory will cost $4-5B (of which Tesla will invest $2B) and exceed 2013 global battery production, enough for 500,000 cars, 30% less than current costs due to third generation technology.

That is 12x growth in 72 months.

The Gigafactory is named after the gigawatt or 1,000,000 kW because it will be producing multiple GWs of cells and battery packs.

An annual production of 500,000 automobiles will put Tesla squarely in the #1 spot for luxury production 3x more than Mercedes.

If you look at global auto sales[0] Tesla will be one of the largest, read top 5, auto manufacturers in the USA depending on how you slice the pie between domestic and international sales.

[0] http://wap.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/2_3022-autosales.html#aut...

View on HN

An annual production of 500,000 automobiles will put Tesla squarely in the #1 spot for luxury production 3x more than Mercedes.

Mercedes-Benz produced 1.49 million vehicles in 2013 and BMW produced 1.8 million in 2012 worldwide.

If you look at global auto sales[0] Tesla will be one of the largest, read top 5, auto manufacturers in the USA depending on how you slice the pie between domestic and international sales.

That would be far more impressive if there weren't only 3 major US car manufacturers (Chrysler, Ford & GM). In fact, Tesla must be the #4 largest US automaker right now.

I believe the key term of the parent comment you're replying to in your first statement is "luxury production". While Mercedes and BMW both produce a large number of luxury vehicles, they also produce a large number of non-luxury vehicles such as trucks, buses, vans, motorcycles (BMW only) and even garbage trucks.

For global auto sales from US manufacturers, I'm guessing that companies like Paccar and Oshkosh are keeping Tesla out of the top five currently. They make trucks and commercial vehicles so people tend to overlook them when it comes to comparing auto manufacturers.

Still, I do agree with the underlying message of your post. It's not like there are a ton of US auto companies left.

Even still, Tesla's plan isn't to become a luxury car company- they've been clear from the beginning that they've started with luxury as a way to bootstrap development. I'm guessing that the 500k cars a year that they're looking for is also going to include those new "standard" models.

I doubt that they plan on 500,000 luxury sales. If so that would pretty much mean abandoning any pretense of having a mass market electric car.

I would hope that they think they will put this towards a sub 40k car, or better yet below 30k which is where many of the smaller electrics are now.

Still a large factor like opens the possibility of packs not certified for cars being given other uses. Put in Texas and reap the power of the wind to power the factory too!

I anticipate that Tesla will enter the grid battery intertie business, possibly even buying off peak electricity and selling it during high demand.

Interesting concept, I'd never think of anyone to do such a thing, and I suppose Tesla is the only one poised to do so.

Particularly excited about the cost reduction of batteries. They remain a barrier to having more affordable electric cars, and 30% goes a long way in putting more EVs on the road.

By the time batteries become mainstream, the subsidies for EVs will probably disappear as well.

I suspect they'll still have some sort of "not a gas guzzler or CO2 producer" subsidy, though it'd likely be very mild.

If you don't have solar panels on your roof, chances are it's still coming from fossil fuels. Generation/transmission efficiency for taking energy from fossil fuels and getting it to your house is around 30%. Electric cars are part of a solution to CO2 emissions, but they aren't one on their own.

I was under the impression that coal plants, et cetera, were quite a bit higher efficiency than ICEs?

And I'm sure we'll continue to bulk up non-CO2 methods of power generation. Hydro power is commonplace, solar panels are a growth area, and likewise wind turbines...

(Lastly, since I live in BC, my power is 86% hydroelectric already, but I'm speaking generally. :) http://www.energybc.ca/map/bcenergymap.html)

Hmm, wikipedia says ICEs in cars are up to 25-30% efficient. Then there's additional losses from the rest of the car. But the electric car has its own losses from the battery charge/discharge and the motors and whatnot, so it seems like they're at least roughly in the same ballpark. Electric cars certainly have more room for improvement though, since fossil fuels aren't the only way to run the electric grid.

That's when it flips to become a tax on non-EVs.

Only a portion of those will be Model S. I suspect that most will be Model E.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com