Tesla Trumps Toyota

That is not a fair apples to apples comparison because most people do not have a fossil fuel fueling station in the garage.

Your arithmetic btw should have been 1.4 MW
Now how about a quick charge to go to work and back -- say 40 miles or about 13 kWh.
If you want it in 5 minutes, power has to be 156 kW. The PW has been upgraded to 5 kW so you are at 30 PW. Still a lot, but doubling the PW again and waiting 10 minutes brings it down to 7.5 PWs. Much closer to a technical solution than FCV, that is for sure.

 

Thanks for the catch. Yes, it should be Megawatts.

40 miles every 5 mins would still require plugging in everyday. Gas-like functionality is to fill up every week or so.

 

At the fuel station. Not in your garage. You have a PiP (and I presume plug-in); do you not view the 'refueling' differently ?

 

You have a very selfish view of renewable energy.
If I buy 1000kWh of renewable energy, I want to lower the world's CO2 emissions.
I don't care if I get the bragging rights, or if my neighbor does.
I do understand your stance a bit better now though.

As to the quote above, we have far more information about the cost to Tesla of the Model S than we have of the Mirai, or even the Prius.

Tease announces the profit margin per car, in two ways, each quarter. Does Toyota do the same?
Tesla's profit margin on the Model S is 27%. As reported, it is about 25% if you don't include ZEV credits.

The average sale price for the Model S has been around $100k although I expect that to decrease with the much more attractive new base model vs the old base model. So the average is about a $25-27k profit per vehicle. Less on the base model, more on the fully decked out models.

Tesla is making a profitable large luxury vehicle which is having a substantial impact in the large luxury market.

 

I missed the discussion evolved from BEV to plugin hybrids. Yes, for PHEV you'll just need less Powerwalls.

Per my calculation, you'll need 17 PWs to recharge in 10 mins.

350 Wh/mi (Volt) x 40 miles = 14 kWh

14 kWh / 5 kW = 2.8 PWs to charge in an hour

2.8 PWs x 6 = 16.8 Pws to charge in 10 mins.

From my point of view, claiming that I used all the electricity generated from my solar panels, would be selfish - disregarding credits the others participate in using and fossil fuel to allow my time-shift.

 

Pardon my nitpicking:If you buy an additional 1000 kWh of renewable energy generation, ... ...

Buying what is already in the grid mix does not lower the world's CO2 emissions. I know this is old hat to you. I think the distinction is important to not forget.

 

While that is true, it is also true that buying renewable energy credits from utilities encourages more renewables being built. Energy credits bring more profit, and can only be sold when there is some to be sold, typically wind.

 

To paraphrase my Ferenghi friends,

Encouragement and an empty sack is worth an empty sack.

 

You will note that that article was from 2008 and it said, as you quote the price is difficult to estimate, so they stuck a number up there that no one would pay. Indeed in 2008 there was optimism that hydrogen at 5000 psi stations would cost a lot less than it actually did, and that many more vehicles would be on the road than are. I believe the $10/kg value Toyota gave for California included later doe and nrel analysis DOE analysed actual costs in 2013 and found these extra costs made hydrogen many times more expensive. That 2013 analysis assumed that volume of fcv would slip, and gave a new much lower estimate that there would be 50,000 fuel cell vehicles in California by the end of 2019. Given Toyota's planned shipments of 3000 to US through 2017 and only world wide production of 6000 units in 2018-2019, I think that 50,000 figure now looks very optimistic. I think toyota will ship at most 5000 fcv to the US in that timer period, and no one else will ship as many, bring 2019 to less than half doe's current estimate. Automakers were more optimistic in 2012 than today on prospects of fcv, and these lower volumes need to be included in operating costs per kg of the stations.

CARB is still sticking with the older revised down estimate of 50,000 fcv by 2017, but their is no hope that that figure will be reached.

 

Below is from the source. Price is free for initial because they are eating it. Long-term is what we should look at. $6 for 67 miles. That's like $4.5 gas for 50 miles.

Hydrogen fuel cost details - Hydrogen fuel cost is not set yet, but...longer term...probably less than current gas DOE’s long-term estimate: $5 -$7 per kilogram; initial: $9 - $11/kg. Fill-up for 300 miles (5/kg) is $30* in long term, about $50** initially

2014 J.P. Morgan Auto Conference - Bob Carter | Corporate

Perhaps, they have very high hope in Honda Clarity.

 

Cost is eaten by either the tax payers or the car companies, because the fuel cell lobby doesn't want signs saying how expensive it is. That would make it harder to lobby for more cash. Given that the hydrogen is included for 3 years, that almost guaranties most (over 90% will be leased as leased price is more subsidized). Absolutely we should think in terms of costs once the experiment goes to commercial phase, but I have great doubts that low prices are coming, as they always seem to be based on volume and breakthroughs that don't happen.

Gasoline in LA today is around $3.15. That is about $0.11/mi in a 28 mpg camry, $0.08/mi in a carmy hybrid, or $0.06/mi in a prius. If electricity costs $0.15/kwh (hint in many parts of the country you can get renewable for less) a tesla model S or gen II volt will cost $0.05/mile a .i3 or leaf $0.04/mile)

If Mr. Carter is right, then today a 67 mpge fcv will cost someone (taxpayers and/or toyota) $0.15/mile to fuel. If the cost drops to $6/kg which is possible it would be $0.09 certainly within the ball park of a non-hybrid. But who will buy all these fcv and who will build the stations.

The real problem for these high volume costs of hydrogen is you want a station to average selling at least 1000/kg a day. If that means on the initial 68 California stations you need 125,000 cars, so I assume costs will be higher for at least the next decade. California or Toyota plans to eat these initial costs, and that may be fine, but I don't know when we get to see the real price on a hydrogen station. Maybe when they have a tech breakthrough and can drop the costs at very low volumes of cars. Superchargers can do that.

Since the DOE did its estimate fewer cars appear bound tor california soon. Why not just say if the cars come the stations will be built with renewables. Right now it just seems to add more costs and corruption to the test.

 

Tesla is a small company for automotive. It does not recieve many of the government subsidies a toyota or general motors recieves. Since it is publically traded on nasdaq it must file financial reports, and we can see the effect of zev credits.

In 2014 10k report they averaged earning $6830 per car by selling zev and ghg credits. They don't break it down by country and state so we don't know how many are california zev credits, and how many are from other states or countries. In 2014 some earned 7 credits some 4 credits. Tesla recognizes credits as revenue for calculating margin. They had 27% margin in the last quarter, where california cars earned 4 zev credits which gives us a great idea of their costs.

I would think with nissan earning a lot of excess credits price will go down per credit but 9 versus 4 for tesla (200 mile old city test epa) or 3 for nissan (100 mile old city test epa).

9 credits definitely help toyota on pricing, but we shouldn't pretend tesla is not making money on each model S sold.

 

no, it isn't just getting started. The industry started claiming it would be ready in 10 years, in the early 1970's. They've been repeating it every decade since. I don't know where you were, but that's when it started, almost half century ago.
It can only grow? No, it can easily fail, as soon as we quit wasting the tons and tons of research money being thrown at it. I don't mind if Japan wants to waste their money - but I know a lot of Calif taxpayers that are sick & tired of the taxpayer shakedown forced on us by the hydrogen lobby.

yes, but this is where FC fans will smoke screen you, playing ring-around-the-rosie. "oh, but you don't have to get hydrogen from natural gas - you can distill it from tons of alternative methods - again, failing to mention WHY the hydrogen industry doesn't plan on using anything but natural gas .... because ONLY natural gas is (not even barely) cheep. But natural gas prices historically have been volatile ... and fracked wells have extremely short life expectancies ... and once the fracked gas supplies start drying up, the fossil fuel industry will STILL have you hooked - only it'll be on a way more expensive 'high-tech' vehicle.
.

 

I am not a FCV fan, but I am not a fan of 500 Kg of battery per car, either.

And honestly, I think that clean methods to make hydrogen will become competitive with natural gas. High Temp hydrolysis is over 60% already. So that only leaves all the other problems.

 

I like the idea of CSP, but I can think of others as well

 

New stanford research may have found catalysts for 80% efficient STP (standard temperature and pressure) electrolysis. Its on anouther thread. They received federal government fundaing and this may be more important than commercialization. The tech needs to make it out of the lab Plus you need an expensive compressor and chiller to fill 10,000 psi tanks.

CSP (very expensive), nuclear (not building more), or bs (or really renewable methane. Under AB32 a vendor can buy renewable methane, then use natural gas from a pipeline, and count it as renewable. That is probably how it will be heated if it will be heated.

commercial scale production is at least 20 years out, so 15 years to find cheaper renewable hydrogen isn't a problem. The question is why make the test more expensive with all these fuel regulations, then taxing people to pretend its clean?

 

This type of CSP:

GlassPoint Wins $53M From Oman, Shell, VCs for Solar Enhanced Oil Recovery : Greentech Media

 

Hydrogen continues to grow, maybe slow but progress is progress. It’s not going away anytime soon! Toyota knows their business pretty well.

Hauling With Hydrogen: DHL Adding Fuel Cell Vans To Its Delivery Fleet