Almost a year into his new research partnership with Tesla, battery researcher Jeff Dahn has been hitting the talk circuit presenting some of his team’s recent progress. We reported last week on his talk at the International Battery Seminar from March and now we have a talk from him at MIT this week.

He went into details about why Tesla decided to work with his team and hire one of his graduate students, but he also announced that they have developed cells that can double the lifetime of the batteries in Tesla’s products – 4 years ahead of schedule.

Update: Dahn reached out to clarify that the cells in question were tested in the lab and they are not in Tesla’s products yet.

During the talk titled “Why would Tesla Motors partner with some Canadian?” – embedded below, Dahn explained how they invented a way to test battery cells in order to accurately monitor them during charging and discharging to identify causes for degradation.

Like he admitted in his talk at the International Battery Seminar in March, Dahn doesn’t claim that he understands perfectly the chemistry behind the degradation, but the machines that they developed enabled them to test new chemistries more accurately and much faster – resulting in significant discoveries for the longevity of the cells.

One of his students working on the project went on to work for Tesla’s in-house battery cell research group and another started a company to commercialize the battery cell testing machines that they developed. Their client list includes Tesla, but also Apple, GM, 24M, and plenty of other large battery manufacturers and consumers.

Click Here to Read Full Article

As we reported yesterday, Tesla’s energy division is about to ramp up quickly with the deployment of another 50 MW/200 MWh of Powerpack projects.

In a new and updated patent application, Tesla explains how these grid-tied projects are using its Powerpacks and inverters for what the company describes as a scalable “turnkey” solution.

Tesla first applied for this patent back in September 2015, a few months after it launched ‘Tesla Energy’, and it updated it and applied again a year later when it was working on the second generation of its Powerpack.

It was released publicly yesterday.

In the background of the application, Tesla explains why they focused on making the system “scalable and flexible”:

Various approaches for energy storage have been tried. Some batteries that are designed for large scale energy storage have smaller cells arranged in series and parallel. For example, some cells are arranged in parallel, and then that unit is arranged in parallel with another similar unit, and so on. This can require the system to have a disconnect and fuse, and to apply some management strategy that occurs at the high level. These systems can be configured so that they are paralleled at an electrical interface, which can make them complicated to parallel.

One problem with such approaches can be that when batteries are paralleled, one must match their voltage characteristics precisely because they in parallel electrically. This can significantly limit scalability of the system. For example, one may need to use very similar chemistry, or similar cells, or come up with particularized balancing strategies, to manage the different cells within their ranges of operating characteristics. Also, with regard to the individual cells, the system is in a sense limited by its weakest link. That is, if one cell malfunctions this typically renders the whole array of batteries out of service.

That’s why they came up with turning hundreds of cells into dozens of pods which in turn go into the actual ‘Powerpack”:

Click Here to Read Full Article

Last week, we reported on Tesla’s Vice President of Energy products Lyndon Rive confirming that the company is in talks with local utilities to quickly deploy large-scale energy storage in Australia in order to address their current energy crisis.

CEO Elon Musk is now involved and they seem to have made progress over the weekend after talking with government officials.

As we discussed last week, Musk promised Tesla could deliver over 100 MWh of energy storage in 100 days or it would be free.

The executive has since discussed the project with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and with Jay Weatherill, Premier of South Australia, the state most affected by the energy crisis.

They appear to be seriously considering deploing energy storage at an unprecedented scale.

Musk tweeted about both conversations and representatives from both government officials said that they planned to keep the channels of discussion open.

Click Here to Read Full Article

Profitable production of electric vehicles is highly important. Our capitalist society revolves around profitability and therefore, if electric vehicles are to prevail over gas-powered cars, they need to be profitable to manufacture in mass.

A new study published this month by McKinsey & Company and embedded below looks into how automakers can move past producing EVs as compliance cars and “drive electrified vehicle sales and profitability”. Unsurprisingly, it describes battery economics as an important barrier to profitability and though the research firm sees a path to automakers making a profit selling electric vehicles as battery costs fall, it doesn’t see that happening for “the next two to three product cycles” – or between 2025 and 2030.

That’s despite battery costs falling from ~1,000 per kWh in 2010 to ~$227 per kWh in 2016, according to McKinsey.

The company wrote in the report:

Despite that drop, battery costs continue to make EVs more costly than comparable ICE-powered variants. Current projections put EV battery pack prices below $190/kWh by the end of the decade, and suggest the potential for pack prices to fall below $100/kWh by 2030.

We are talking about complete battery pack cost and not just the battery cells. The costs of both are often confused.

Automakers capable of staying ahead of that cost trend will be able to achieve higher margins and possible profits on electric vehicle sales sooner.

Tesla is among the automakers staying ahead of the trend. While McKinsey projects that battery pack prices will be below $190/kWh by the end of the decade, Tesla claims to be below $190/kWh since early 2016.

That’s how the automaker manages to achieve close to 30% gross margin on its flagship electric sedan, the Model S.

Though the Model S has a starting price of $68,000 and battery costs need to fall again in order to allow a starting price of $35,000, like for the upcoming Model 3.

Tesla aims to reduce the price of its batteries by another 30% ahead of the Model 3 with the new 2170 cells in production at the Gigafactory in Nevada.

It should enable a $35,000 price tag for a vehicle with a range of over 200 miles, but McKinsey sees $100/kWh as the target for ” true price parity with ICE vehicles (without incentives)”:

Given current system costs and pricing ability within certain segments, companies that offer EVs face the near-term prospect of losing money with each sale. Under a range of scenarios for future battery cost reductions, cars in the C/D segment in the US might not reach true price parity with ICE vehicles (without incentives) until between 2025 and 2030, when battery pack costs fall below $100/kWh, creating financial headwinds for automakers for the next two to three product cycles.

It matches the estimates of most battery manufacturers, but of course, Tesla is again pushing for a more aggressive timeline. CEO Elon Musk has previously hinted at a possibility of achieving a battery cost of $100 per kWh in 2020 – 5 to 10 years before most estimates.

They plan to achieve the price target with economies of scale and manufacturing efficiency improvements through the Gigafactory program. Whether they can achieve it or not remains to be seen, but it’s not impossible if they are truly currently below $190 while projections didn’t estimate that price point until 2020.

It wouldn’t be surprising to see other automakers following Tesla with their own efforts to build giant battery factories in order to reach similar price points. Another explanation for the cost lead could be the type of cell and the pack architecture. Tesla has been mostly alone in producing battery packs for electric vehicles using thousands of individual cylindrical li-ion battery cells in each pack. In contrast, established automakers, like Nissan with the LEAF or even GM with the Chevy Bolt EV, have been using fewer but larger prismatic cells to build their electric vehicle battery packs.

Recently, new electric vehicle companies have been following Tesla with cylindrical li-ion battery cells instead of prismatic cells like most automakers.

Click Here to Read Full Article

A carbon tax is being presented to the US President by very powerful people – Remember, Exxon wants a carbon tax, and Exxon is now the USA’s Secretary of State. Elon Musk being on the President’s advisory board pushing this is definitely having an effect. The particular model of carbon tax I don’t agree with – revenue neutral – as I think it won’t get the job done on its own, however, I will state I’d rather have it than nothing as I do believe future politicians will be able to add important rules surrounding it. Additionally, the offer being made is to replace Obama’s Clean Power Plan with this carbon tax…hrmm…we’ll see. Plan starts at $40/ton – 2.3¢/kWh natural gas electricity, 4¢/kWh coal & 36¢/gallon for gasoline. $220/ton is the number real economists use.

Fraunhofer releases new solar panel encapsulant technique, longer lasting, cheaper and faster to make without frames – (bring your translator) The image above is of the solar cells sealed in the new encapsulant. Solar panels go bad over decades because water vapor + hot/cold cycles affect the insides of the panels (solar cells, copper, silver, etc). It costs money, materials, production time and great expertise to create something that sits directly in sunlight for decades and can resist it. This technology advancement, like every other little advancement (this advancement drops pricing 2%, speeds up production, lasts longer) you see on this daily brief, adds onto the constantly accumulating knowledge that we have. This is why solar panels have fallen from $76/W to 34¢/W. Also – take a look at the link and view the image of the three different solar panels to see the visual difference as the modules age (degradation).

With tax reform on the mind, Legislatures push Energy Storage tax credit – The Federal Investment Tax Credit (ITC), a 30% dollar for dollar project discount, was very powerful in driving the adoption of solar power across the USA. The ITC does not, however, have the ability to drive solar power alone – as the solar industry is still very much based upon a state level legal structure. An energy storage ITC would probably lead toward a similar pattern – states who push energy storage mandates all their own will benefit the most.

Climate Scientists didn’t ‘trick world leaders’ with temperature data – Do understand, there are large monied interests that have many reasons for communicating that climate change science is wrong. 1. They simply think the scientists are wrong. 2. Money and nothing else. 3. Religion. 4. Ignorance. 5. Politics. 6. Power. 7. They want climate change to occur to shift the balance of power on the planet. All of these reasons are a terrible danger to the species – and you, the reader, need to comprehend that headlines are written to get you to click and read – just like the writing by myself. It’s your responsibility to sift through the garbage news and communicate reality to your peers.

Click Here to Read Full Article

Electrek has learned that Mateo Jaramillo, Vice-President at Tesla Energy and one of the early members of the company’s stationary storage effort, is leaving Tesla after 7 years. The company’s energy storage division has undergone a restructuring over the last few months ahead of the merger with SolarCity, but a source familiar with the situation told us that Jaramillo’s departure from the company is unrelated to the recent shake-up at Tesla Energy.

CEO Elon Musk once compared working at Tesla to being in the Special Forces:

“…the general understanding is that if you’re at Tesla, you’re choosing to be at the equivalent of the Special Forces. There’s the regular Army, and that’s fine, but if you are working at Tesla, you’re choosing to step up your game. And that has pluses and minuses. It’s cool to be Special Forces, but it also means you’re working your ass off.”

Seven years of Special Forces is a long time and our understanding is that Jaramillo is taking a break.

He joined Tesla back in 2009 as Director of Powertrain Business Development. At that time, Tesla was starting to work with other OEM to develop electric powertrains, namely for Toyota second generation Rav4 EV, Mercedes’ Smart EV and later Mercedes’ Electric B-Class.

Two years prior to Jaramillo coming on board, Tesla co-founder and former CEO, Martin Eberhard, launched the predecessor of ‘Tesla Energy’, ‘Tesla Energy Group’. The new division aimed to produce battery packs for other automakers and potentially for stationary energy storage.

In a since-deleted blog post, Eberhard explains the goal of the new Tesla division:

Tesla Energy Group is a group within Tesla Motors, Inc. created to allow us to design and sell Energy Storage Systems (ESS) to other companies.

Eberhard put Bernard Tse, a member of Tesla board of directors at the time, in charge of the new division.

Unfortunately, things were difficult at Tesla in 2007-2008 and Eberhard was replaced as CEO, leaving Tesla not long after. The company refocused its limited resources on the Roadster that had yet to start production and Tse also left the company. He started Atieva, now known as Lucid Motors, to enter the same business as ‘Tesla Energy Group’ – making energy storage systems for OEM.

Click Here to Read Full Article

Only a few weeks after announcing one of the biggest energy storage projects ever, Tesla Energy won again a massive energy storage contract. The automaker’s energy division will supply ‘Powerpacks’ to its energy storage deployment partner, Advanced Microgrid Solutions (AMS), for a major new project: a 7 MW / 34 MWh network of battery systems to support water treatment facilities of Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD).

The project is part of Tesla’s supply agreement with Advanced Microgrid Solutions signed last year. Under the contract, Tesla will supply AMS with up to 500 MWh of energy storage. It looks like this new project is the biggest between the two companies yet.

Previous projects include a 12 MWh with Cal State University, another one for several office buildings in Irvine, and more recently, a 1 MW Powerpack system inside Morgan Stanley’s San Francisco skyscraper.

In a press release today, AMS describes the new project as “the largest network of energy storage systems at a public water agency in the United States”. IRWD board president, Mary Aileen Matheis, commented on the announcement:

“Our agency has stepped forward with an innovative solution designed to protect customers while helping to reduce and better balance Southern California’s energy demands. This battery storage system – the largest in the nation – provides significant cost savings, enhanced grid stability and contributes to reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and a smaller carbon footprint.”

All the logistics related to water treatment consume a lot of electricity in California. As AMS points out, according to the California Energy Commission, the transportation and treatment of water, treatment and disposal of wastewater, and the energy used to heat and consume water account for nearly 20 percent of the total electricity and 30 percent of non-power plant related natural gas consumed in California.

This new energy storage system should help reduce peak demand for the water treatment facilities and stabilize its energy consumption.

Click Here to Read Full Article

BMW has a couple of initiatives to give a second life to used battery packs from its electric vehicles. Earlier this year, the German automaker announced a wall mounted battery storage system, not unlike the Tesla Powerwall, using BMW i3 22 kWh or 33kWh battery packs.

Today it announced that it completed and started testing, in partnership with Bosch, a new utility-scale energy storage facility again using used electric vehicle battery packs –  but the scale is much more impressive.

The new power station is located in Hamburg, Germany. It uses 2,600 battery modules from more than 100 electric vehicles for a total power capacity of 2 MW and a storage capacity of 2.8 MWh.

The system is used to stabilize the grid and reduce the impact of peak demand. Vattenfall, the energy company operating the project, highlights the advantage of battery packs that can just turn on in a matter of seconds.

Here’s a press release via Bosch:

A second life for used batteries

Vattenfall, BMW and Bosch test power storage in Hamburg

• 2,600 used battery modules from more than 100 electric vehicles are connected together to form a large power storage
• Stored energy is seconds available and helps to keep the power supply stable
• Cordelia Thielitz, Managing Bosch Energy Storage Solutions: “Electricity storage is a critical success factor for the energy transition.”

Hamburg/Munich/Stuttgart – What should be done with still-usable batteries at the end of their life cycle in electric vehicles? The Battery 2nd Life project organized by Vattenfall, BMW and Bosch merges them into a large storage facility in Hamburg, Germany, to keep the electricity grid stable.

Storage stabilizes the electricity grid within seconds

Electromobility and electricity storage are two core elements of the new energy landscape. Used batteries from electric vehicles are being merged to form a large electricity storage facility in Hamburg. The stored energy is available within seconds and can help to keep the electricity grid stable. Electricity storage is essential to enable a stable electricity supply with alternative energy sources. Natural fluctuations in solar power plants and wind turbines must be compensated as much as possible using storage methods with the greatest possible efficiency.

Click Here to Read Full Article