I think he stated $2.50 for gal diesel which was also on the 'cost page' of the screen.
Edit: Yup, economics data starting just after 13:30 with 'cost page' at about 14:45 in video of above post
Last edited:
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I think he stated $2.50 for gal diesel which was also on the 'cost page' of the screen.
Edit: Yup, economics data starting just after 13:30 with 'cost page' at about 14:45 in video of above post
The space behind the driver was a bit odd. Too small for a sleeper. I wonder if batteries will take up some of that space.
The event wasn't targeted at truck buyers. It was targeted at car owners, corporate execs, and the press. I assume they are talking with their initial set of buyers in much greater detail.
Megacharger may just be more total watts. Individual cells may charge at the same rate as today. I'll bet that Tesla first customers do less than 400 mile per day. The first trucks can charge overnight at the warehouse.
The event wasn't targeted at truck buyers. It was targeted at car owners, corporate execs, and the press. I assume they are talking with their initial set of buyers in much greater detail.
Megacharger may just be more total watts. Individual cells may charge at the same rate as today. I'll bet that Tesla first customers do less than 400 mile per day. The first trucks can charge overnight at the warehouse.
Back in June I made a guesstimate that Tesla would shave 15% off Semi operating costs per mile. That turned out to be a pretty good guess.
I also speculated that since the batteries plus charging would replace diesel fuel, Tesla could potentially capture most of the (discounted) portion of operating costs attributed to fueling, which could result in very large revenue streams, since in the past fueling represented something like triple the cost of the cab itself.
With the new information last night, we can refine this a bit. We don't know lease terms yet, but we might be able to make a rough guesstimate by backing non-Tesla items out of their stated operating costs of $1.26/mile.
The bottom line is that by creating and controlling the entire ecosystem, Tesla should be able to capture an enormous portion of the revenue stream.
For example, using Tesla's $1.26/mile figure and backing out driver salary ($0.36/mile based on the report cited in my earlier post), insurance, tires, permits and licenses ($.10/mile total) and the trailer ($0.08/mile) results in $0.72/mile cost. The Real Cost of Trucking - Per Mile Operating Cost of a Commercial Truck - TruckersReport.com
Maintenance and repairs for a diesel truck are estimated at $0.12/mile. I expect Tesla will do most of the maintenance and that the maintenance costs for a Tesla Semi will be significantly less than diesel, but for the sake of conservatism we'll take all of that out of the equation. This reduces the revenue stream to $0.60/mile.
Especially for larger fleets, a significant amount of charging will be done at their own facilities. For many fleet owners, it probably would pay to install Megachargers or another Tesla supplied charging solution since $0.07/kWh undercuts commercial electricity in many areas. So Tesla essentially can become a utility for truckers. But let's assume for the sake of argument that half of the electricity to charge Tesla Semis in the network is provided by other electricity sources, using Tesla chargers. At 2kWh/mile (the web page says it will be less) and $0.07/kWh results in a reduction of $0.14/mile for half the fleet, or an average of $0.07/mile fleet wide. This reduces the total revenue to Tesla to $0.53/mile.
Assuming 110,000 miles per year and a very conservative life span of 1 million miles (9 years), and assuming conservatively that they can lease 300,000 per year results in some really staggering numbers:
In my earlier post my estimates of charging costs were much too high. I thought Tesla would charge more per mile for charging rather than capturing the revenue in the lease price.
But I can see why Tesla's approach is better. Elon has stated in the past that the one who does the difficult work should get the rewards. The hardest work here is developing and building the Semi and batteries to power it. By capturing as much revenue as possible in the lease price rather than fueling/charging, Tesla captures the revenue from its hard work, innovation and investment. At the same time, it is creating an entirely new ecosystem that it controls. This structure leverages Tesla's strength in building batteries (and eventually Semis), which it is unlikely anyone will be able to match for the foreseeable future absent an unexpected new battery technology breakthrough.
By making the cost of charging extremely cheap, Tesla will maximize demand from the users who log the most miles. This promotes its core mission of accelerating the advent of sustainable energy by putting the greatest hit possible on diesel usage for each Semi delivered. Or if you think of the world as essentially limited by capital and other resources that can be deployed to make batteries and Semis, this structure maximizes the hit on diesel usage for the available production resources.
I should note that a key part of the target market is clearly hard-core, long range truckers. Exactly the opposite from what almost everyone has been predicting. Tesla is sticking to its playbook of going after the top end of the market first. Like the Roadster and Model S.
Analysts so far have been downplaying the Semi opportunity and I expect that will likely continue for a while. The ones that do "get it," like Adam Jonas, will likely attempt to minimize the impacts by making silly assumptions, such as that Tesla will sell only 25,000 Semis a year in 2028 or something equally ridiculous.
But in the long-term, what the analysts and talking heads have to say just won't matter. This is clearly going to disrupt the industry and generate gobs and gobs of cash for Tesla. The only question is how fast Tesla can build GF 3 and begin cranking out Semis in large volumes. They will be selling/leasing as many as they can build for a very long time.
I also speculated that since the batteries plus charging would replace diesel fuel, Tesla could potentially capture most of the (discounted) portion of operating costs attributed to fueling, which could result in very large revenue streams, since in the past fueling represented something like triple the cost of the cab itself.
With the new information last night, we can refine this a bit. We don't know lease terms yet, but we might be able to make a rough guesstimate by backing non-Tesla items out of their stated operating costs of $1.26/mile.
The bottom line is that by creating and controlling the entire ecosystem, Tesla should be able to capture an enormous portion of the revenue stream.
For example, using Tesla's $1.26/mile figure and backing out driver salary ($0.36/mile based on the report cited in my earlier post), insurance, tires, permits and licenses ($.10/mile total) and the trailer ($0.08/mile) results in $0.72/mile cost. The Real Cost of Trucking - Per Mile Operating Cost of a Commercial Truck - TruckersReport.com
Maintenance and repairs for a diesel truck are estimated at $0.12/mile. I expect Tesla will do most of the maintenance and that the maintenance costs for a Tesla Semi will be significantly less than diesel, but for the sake of conservatism we'll take all of that out of the equation. This reduces the revenue stream to $0.60/mile.
Especially for larger fleets, a significant amount of charging will be done at their own facilities. For many fleet owners, it probably would pay to install Megachargers or another Tesla supplied charging solution since $0.07/kWh undercuts commercial electricity in many areas. So Tesla essentially can become a utility for truckers. But let's assume for the sake of argument that half of the electricity to charge Tesla Semis in the network is provided by other electricity sources, using Tesla chargers. At 2kWh/mile (the web page says it will be less) and $0.07/kWh results in a reduction of $0.14/mile for half the fleet, or an average of $0.07/mile fleet wide. This reduces the total revenue to Tesla to $0.53/mile.
Assuming 110,000 miles per year and a very conservative life span of 1 million miles (9 years), and assuming conservatively that they can lease 300,000 per year results in some really staggering numbers:
- A total revenue stream to Tesla of $58,000 per year, per Semi, for 9 years.
- Roughly $525,000 to Tesla per Semi over a 9-year, million mile span.
- A massive $155 billion revenue stream from each year of full production, paid out over 9 years
In my earlier post my estimates of charging costs were much too high. I thought Tesla would charge more per mile for charging rather than capturing the revenue in the lease price.
But I can see why Tesla's approach is better. Elon has stated in the past that the one who does the difficult work should get the rewards. The hardest work here is developing and building the Semi and batteries to power it. By capturing as much revenue as possible in the lease price rather than fueling/charging, Tesla captures the revenue from its hard work, innovation and investment. At the same time, it is creating an entirely new ecosystem that it controls. This structure leverages Tesla's strength in building batteries (and eventually Semis), which it is unlikely anyone will be able to match for the foreseeable future absent an unexpected new battery technology breakthrough.
By making the cost of charging extremely cheap, Tesla will maximize demand from the users who log the most miles. This promotes its core mission of accelerating the advent of sustainable energy by putting the greatest hit possible on diesel usage for each Semi delivered. Or if you think of the world as essentially limited by capital and other resources that can be deployed to make batteries and Semis, this structure maximizes the hit on diesel usage for the available production resources.
I should note that a key part of the target market is clearly hard-core, long range truckers. Exactly the opposite from what almost everyone has been predicting. Tesla is sticking to its playbook of going after the top end of the market first. Like the Roadster and Model S.
Analysts so far have been downplaying the Semi opportunity and I expect that will likely continue for a while. The ones that do "get it," like Adam Jonas, will likely attempt to minimize the impacts by making silly assumptions, such as that Tesla will sell only 25,000 Semis a year in 2028 or something equally ridiculous.
But in the long-term, what the analysts and talking heads have to say just won't matter. This is clearly going to disrupt the industry and generate gobs and gobs of cash for Tesla. The only question is how fast Tesla can build GF 3 and begin cranking out Semis in large volumes. They will be selling/leasing as many as they can build for a very long time.
Last edited:
From the video on Tesla's Twitter feed, there are 4 large battery packs under the floor. Could it just be empty space outside the cab?
I doubt they have that number yet. Very few trucks run at GVWR, so it doesn't matter much as long as the semi is not extremely heavy
Could be space to go over 500 mile range, I suppose. But since the truck isn't targeted at OTR, they really don't need that range.
I expect the truck pulling a conventional trailer won't do more than 400 miles. Which should be fine. The long range EV semi won't happen until mid 2020s.
2-6, all depends on terrain, traffic, wind, etc. I'll see around 4-4.5mpg @ max gross in typical use.
Edit: if you stay around 60-65mph 5.5-7mpg is more realistic in a mix of terrain 6.5-7.5 average isn't out of the question either. bobtail you'll see 10-12mpg. Pulling a long grade expect 2mpg or less.
Don't drive 70-75 and you'll avoid my numbers
Last edited:
My WAG is a 900 kWh battery.
But, that's simply taking the 2kWh/mile figure provided on the website, lowering it by a Tesla secret-sauce factor(tm), and then multiplying by 500. 300 mile is probably a 550 kWh battery -- modestly more efficient because it's not carrying as heavy of a battery pack.
Low bound: 30 minute charge to 400 miles. 8 charge pins -> 4 packs, 125 kW charge rate per pack (from standard SC), 500kW charge rate total. 250 kWh in 30 minutes. 625 Wh/mile * 500miles = 312.5 Wh.
Double the current with better cooling: 1.3kWh/mile * 500 Miles = 650kWh. (previous calcs I've done showed 1.6kWh/mile for diesel if they were super efficeint)
Add buffer:
750 kWh. (without accessories)
Edit: that's not a multiple of 4, so I'll say 800kWh and the same pack is used in the Roadster (no not really).
So estimated 200-300kWh x 4 battery packs.
Really no new tech is needed to make the mile per minute charge rate Musk claimed. Just massive watts and massive cooling.
I would like to know how Tesla will make strong regen always available. One way is extra cells (100% isn't 100%). Or perhaps the cooling system can be over run when the batteries are full and regen is heavy.
I wonder how many kW are produced by a 80,000lb semi going down a steep grade.
Really no new tech is needed to make the mile per minute charge rate Musk claimed. Just massive watts and massive cooling.
I would like to know how Tesla will make strong regen always available. One way is extra cells (100% isn't 100%). Or perhaps the cooling system can be over run when the batteries are full and regen is heavy.
I wonder how many kW are produced by a 80,000lb semi going down a steep grade.
No they said less than 2kW per mile. So a 1000kWh battery would be the largest.
Thanks!
So full load, Tesla is at 2kwh/mile while diesel is at 4.5 mpg to be a bit generous. This gets to a electricity to diesel replacement ratio of 9 kWh/gal diesel.
Months ago we had debates about this. For EV autos, it is about 8kWh/gal gasoline, and fuel density arguments would imply 9kWh/gal diesel. So it is nice to see some confirmation of this. Other folks had argued that aerodynamic and roll resistance unique to semis would imply a much higher ratio of electricity needed to displace a gallon of fuel, a situation that would make EV economics worse in comparison to diesel. Fortunately, Tesla has achieved a .36 drag coefficient comparable to .65 to .70 for other semis. Tesla is owning the aerodynamics.
On implication of this displacement ratio is that if we want to relate average efficiency for the Tesla to 6 mpg for diesels, this 9kWh/gal ratio implies 1.5kWh/mile. So while there are myriad factors affecting efficiency, this is a nice ballpark figure for average use.
Wal-Mart says it’s planning to test Tesla’s new electric trucks
Walmart reported to test the Semi .... no surprise
Walmart reported to test the Semi .... no surprise
kind of irrelevant as the vast majority of trucks don't operate at gross weight. Weight distribution is a much bigger game in the trucking industry. You are limited to 12K on single axles and 34K on dual tandems. So you'll sometimes see truckers playing with the king pin position or rear axles(if adjustable) to balance the load. You can be at 60K lbs and be over on one of your individual axles weights.
For reference current tractors in a sleeper config will weight 17-22K; just depends on engine, trans, sleep congfig, etc. Day cab rigs are around 14-16K I think some of the single axle, day cabs get down to 13K or so.
Typically an engine will weigh from 1200lbs for a MAxx force7 up 3,500lbs for an ISX15 which you guessed it, is a 15L engine that puts out a go **** yourself 2100 lb/ft torque @ 1,200rpm. A heavy manual trans will run 750lbs and Fuel tanks run from 75-150 x2 sides @7lbs/gal so 1,000-2,100lbs of fuel. If you want to take the max possible weights you're looking at losing 6,350lbs of diesel related items. the 100kwh pack weighs around 1,300lbs so you can add close to 500kwh with a net zero weight change. As battery power density goes up you'll be able to stuff more KWH in the same space.
Similar threads
