Tesla introduces Energy Storage Systems division
Now that Tesla is approaching Job 1 for their battery-powered Roadster, they are starting to look beyond just selling cars so that they can recover some of their investment in developing a battery pack system. As a reminder to our newer readers, rather than wait for someone to come up with lithium ion cells designed specifically for automotive use, they chose to use small off the shelf cells and create their own integrated battery pack system. While the design of most major automotive systems is pretty much a known quantity, the battery pack required some real innovation to ensure reliability and safety in addition to performance. After at least seven major design iterations of their pack system, Tesla has now successfully done a 50mph rear end crash test of the roadster.
Having reached this point Tesla has created the Tesla Energy Group to offer their pack technology to other manufacturers. Their first customer will be the re-born TH!NK. TH!NK is the Norwegian electric car builder formerly owned by Ford and they're working to bring a new design car that was designed during the Ford era to market. Other manufacturers have expressed interest and hopefully the increased volumes will help drive down the cost and drive up the rate of development.
[Source: Tesla Motors]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
AES 2:07PM (5/22/2007)
Great! An entire division of the company devoted to promoting a technological innovation that is over-engineered, overly complex, and more importantly, obsolete.
Reply
FredFlintstone 2:55PM (5/22/2007)
AES... Obviously you, like Wile E. Coyote, are a SuperGenius! Enlighten us please. Give one example of an EV battery solution that is more than proven on paper, fault tolerant, readily available and cost competitive. Inquiring minds want to know.
Reply
Doug 4:57PM (5/22/2007)
The TH!NK website (http://en.think.no/ytelse) says they were using Zebra batteries. If they're talking about what I think they're talking about, Zebra is a type of molten salt battery that has an operating temperature of around 300 degrees C. I'd much rather be driving around with a Tesla made, temperature regulated Li ion pack than that!
Reply
AES 1:12PM (5/23/2007)
From the perspective of a technophile, this frustrates me because Tesla's pack technology is entirely predicated on the intensive thermal and electrical management demands of conventional lithium ion batteries. Alternative battery technologies have emerged and been independently verified - ones that do not require this kind of intensive management. As an example, both Firefly and Altairnano's batteries have been independently verified, and both have competitive performance to the cells that Tesla uses.
Now, in fairness, those breakthroughs weren't around while Tesla was in the development phase, and business complications definitely prevent them from suddenly switching to another technology. But it frustrates me to no end that Martin Eberhard has gone on record as defending the continued use of the conventional cells, and even using misinformation to disparage other technologies. As an example, he has repeatedly dissed the Altair cells for both cost and for energy density - if you follow Altair, you know that they are a research company, not a factory, and that the nanosafe cells will be much much cheaper once proper manufacturing is put in place. And with energy density, the data from the cells shows that yes, at room temperature they have less energy density than conventional cells, but this improves dramatically at high and low temperatures. Altair hasn't spoken of this specifically, but a relatively simple (compared to Tesla's ESS) thermal manager would probably push a nanosafe pack beyond the Tesla's by leaps and bounds.
As for Martin Eberhard - I think it's crucial for the EV industry for Tesla to stay in business, but for them to do so successfully I think they need to have a much more open mind and a more honest mouth. I wish them, Phoenix, and Th!nk the the best.
Reply
AES 1:44PM (5/23/2007)
Addendum to previous comment - the case may very well be that Tesla defends their pack technology because it's their most distinguishing piece of intellectual property. Everything else on their cars is licensed from other groups (examples: modified Lotus Elise chassis, AC propulsion motor, etc). In all honesty, I don't blame them for trying their best, but the sooner they speak realistically about alternate battery solutions, the easier and more successful the transition will be.
Reply
GeorgeBush 2:51PM (5/23/2007)
@ AES
In one of Tesla's blogs they talk about how the total usable life of a lithium cell decreases dramatically when it gets hot, that's why they keep them at room temperature in the Tesla pack. It has no use for the Altair Nano cells have high energy density only at high temperatures if you have to replace your battery pack after 2 years!
I really hope that Altair Nano develops an amazing cell and figures out a way to produce them cheaply and in high volumes - so that America has a home-grown solution and don't become dependent on Asia for batteries - but for now the Altair cell is still an emerging technology, with high initial costs etc, and Tesla needs a production-ready technology, NOW. I'm sure that, 5-6 years from now, when the Altair cells are tried-and-trued, Tesla would regard them as a serious possibility.
Reply
Peter 4:17PM (5/23/2007)
AES - as you said, AltairNano is a research company and the cost of their batteries will come down in the future. But how soon? Tesla is delivering cars this year. Would you rather they sat on their hands like the rest of the auto industry and whined about how battery technology isn't good enough yet?
Reply
AES 11:00AM (5/24/2007)
With respect specifically to life expectancy at high temperatures: Again, Tesla's comment pertained to conventional battery electrodes, and not to alternative, more durable electrodes - Altair's just being one example. Plus, if you look at the nanosafe data, the energy density also increases at LOW temperatures.
Lest I be painted as nothing more than an Altair fanboy - or worse, a stockholder - if you look at the general trend in battery and material science, the trend is a move away from Tesla-type batteries, and towards electrode materials that completely eliminate the stability problems that the Tesla ESS is designed to mitigate. One example is the nanotechnology electrode recently designed by Argonne National laboratory. This indicates, beyond any sort of corporate favoritism, the superior principles upon which tomorrow's batteries are very likely to be built upon.
Regardless of WHOSE technology comes out on top, the logical observation is that scientific progress will make the Tesla ESS technology increasingly irrelevant in the relatively near future. While they've done a good job thus far out of getting the most out of existing technology, it's not wise for them to stake their entire IP arsenal on one thing. Martin Eberhard's not acting bullish on third party battery advances seems to be motivated purely by business tactics (i.e. distraction and confusion) and not by genuine scientific integrity. And as someone who really wants electric cars to take off, that baffles and scares me.
Reply
xaos. 6:00PM (6/19/2007)
From a bussness prospective tesla motor's invested alot of time and money in devolopment of there cell .It was a smart move for them to get the curent working,proven,tested technolgy out and in to production. Im sure as other sorce's become more stable and retaly available Martin Eberhard will be in consideration of there useage. I personaly am glad that some one is making the steps tword's puting more ev's on the road. Making the techoligy more retaly avalible to people like my self who might want to build there own design and not have to work out so many things involved with the deveolpment of a ev. Id love to have the funds I'd be building a ev k1 attack. or some thing simalar my self and people like Martin Eberhard are making it posable. It seems like you are so worried about the tech: of tomarrow to make useadge of the work that has already been done to produce a power sorce. let some one else make the next better batterie pack great but If you truely consider your self a green person be happy that people like Martin Eberhard have made this posable..
Reply
Chris M 9:10PM (6/19/2007)
AES, I'm afraid you've confused energy density with power density. The energy density (watthours per Kg) is determined by the chemistry and design of the cells, and does not change with temperature. The power density (watts per Kg) on the other hand, is determined by the rate of reaction and can vary considerably with temperature.
Martin Eberhardt has already stated that once other battery types are available and in production, Tesla Motors will consider testing them for use in their future products. They will not wait for some fantastic battery that may turn out to be impractical, or worse, never quite ready.
Reply