• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tesla's Gigafactory in Shanghai

Lord of Planar said:
But it's still costing them more than fossil fuels...
Click to expand...

Storage isn't necessary yet. Iowa gets 35% of their electricity from wind, with zero storage, so the world is a long way from needing storagea. Although many locations of the world utilize energy storage schemes, most storage projects are futuristic research projects.
 
Media_Truth said:
Storage isn't necessary yet. Iowa gets 35% of their electricity from wind, with zero storage, so the world is a long way from needing storagea. Although many locations of the world utilize energy storage schemes, most storage projects are futuristic research projects.
Click to expand...

To get past the approximate 1/3rd point for power, expensive storage is needed.

Right now, it's an expensive novelty. It is still more costly than fossil fuel. Solar will have a future, but I wouldn't want to count on wind.
 
Media_Truth said:
Storage isn't necessary yet. Iowa gets 35% of their electricity from wind, with zero storage, so the world is a long way from needing storagea. Although many locations of the world utilize energy storage schemes, most storage projects are futuristic research projects.
Click to expand...

You also for example have Denmark that got 68 percent of their electricity from renewables last year.

As Wind Turned Down A Notch, Solar Soared -- 2018 Renewable Energy Report Denmark | CleanTechnica

There renewables in combination with batteries are already getting competitive in delivering power on demand.

'“Solar and onshore wind have won the race to be the cheapest sources of new ‘bulk generation’ in most countries," says Tifenn Brandily, energy economics analyst at BNEF. "But the encroachment of clean technologies is now going well beyond that, threatening the balancing role that gas-fired plant operators, in particular, have been hoping to play.”'

Renewable energy prices have fallen - this is how much | World Economic Forum
 
Bergslagstroll said:
You also for example have Denmark that got 68 percent of their electricity from renewables last year.

As Wind Turned Down A Notch, Solar Soared -- 2018 Renewable Energy Report Denmark | CleanTechnica

There renewables in combination with batteries are already getting competitive in delivering power on demand.

'“Solar and onshore wind have won the race to be the cheapest sources of new ‘bulk generation’ in most countries," says Tifenn Brandily, energy economics analyst at BNEF. "But the encroachment of clean technologies is now going well beyond that, threatening the balancing role that gas-fired plant operators, in particular, have been hoping to play.”'

Renewable energy prices have fallen - this is how much | World Economic Forum
Click to expand...

Its still higher than the wholesale prices Portland General Electric pays here in Oregon. They sell their power to me for $63.29 per megawatt hour and that includes profit for them.
 
Media_Truth said:
Sure about that??? Most Utilities charge a per kWH charge, not MWH.

Portland, OR Electricity Rates | Electricity Local

The average residential electricity rate in Portland is 10.72¢/kWh.
Click to expand...

I have broken my bill down before. How can you de so ignorant of my point? Is it ignorance or intellectual deception? Neither position says anything good about you...

My rate for the electricity, on my bill, is $0.06329 per kWh. That is for just the cost of the electricity. The other costs, adding an approximate 4 cents more per kWh are charges like the distribution charges and transmission fees.

You guys supporting these prices are absolutely clueless of what you are for. You are so damn brainwashed, you think the range of $65 to $95 wholesale is a bargain when I am paying $63.29 retail.

Take that $65 to $95, and with the 4 hour batter backup in 24 hours (if it actually works) of ~$190... divided by 6 for the day and add $33 to the wholesale. Now you are at $98 to $128 per mega-watthour, or $0.098 to $0.128 plus profit retail, then add another $.04 plus for the other fees, and you end up with no less than 13.8 cents per kWh.

That's considering ever goes right, which is very rarely the case.
 
Please notice in your link, that Portland offers a 5.35 cent per kWh industrial rate. That means our wholesale rate is under $53.50 per megawatt hour to do that.

Do you not have any critical thinking skills at all?
 
Media_Truth said:
Bold, Irresponsible, Lackluster, Visionary --- you will find all these words, and many more, in articles and opinions about Tesla. However, wealthy entrepeneurs continue to gamble large sums of money on large potential future payouts. What other company has had the balls to take on the American Auto Industry? Although Tesla is still struggling with profitability margins, they are rolling cars off an assembly line in California.

But the Gigafactory being built in China is enormous.

View attachment 67262341

The May 2019 article is worth a read, but here are a few excerpts...

Tesla Gigafactory 3 building in Shanghai looks almost complete - Electrek

About 7 months ago, Tesla announced a deal with the Shanghai government to build a wholly owned local factory and only about 5 months ago, they secured the 210-acres of land for Gigafactory 3 in China necessary. They officially broke ground in January and plan to be done with the building by this summer.

Considering the size of the building, it seemed almost impossible, but a new drone video update shows that the building is almost complete (from Jason Yang):
...
When first announcing the plant, Tesla said that it expects “construction to begin in the near future” and that it “will take roughly two years” until they start volume production with a planned capacity of 200,000 units and “then another two to three years before the factory is fully ramped up to produce around 500,000 vehicles per year for Chinese customers.

More recently, Musk said that Tesla wants to produce 3,000 Model 3 vehicles at Gigafactory 3 in Shanghai by the end of the year.

The CEO said that they plan to start production at the beginning of the fourth quarter.

This is insane! Build a plant this size and begin producing units, all within a year.
Click to expand...

They are making a point of being environmentally friendly and are showing China how it is supposed to be done.
 
Here is my latest bill:

ijToLZs.png


Please note I pay $0.06329 per kWh, or $63.29 per mega-watt-hour. Getting past that 10 cents per kWh includes distribution and transmissions fees. This is higher than what is probably under $50 wholesale, and your renewable plus battery is about double this rate, if that low price is even to be believed... Which I do not. Pundits often lie about the actual costs.

Look at item 135 to 137. I'll bet if I look it up, its added costs associated with the renewable in my mix. My prices have done nothing but go higher as they add wind power in the Columbia River Areas.
 
Lovebug said:
They are making a point of being environmentally friendly and are showing China how it is supposed to be done.
Click to expand...

I hope you are right, but I doubt it.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Here is my latest bill:

ijToLZs.png


Please note I pay $0.06329 per kWh, or $63.29 per mega-watt-hour. Getting past that 10 cents per kWh includes distribution and transmissions fees. This is higher than what is probably under $50 wholesale, and your renewable plus battery is about double this rate, if that low price is even to be believed... Which I do not. Pundits often lie about the actual costs.

Look at item 135 to 137. I'll bet if I look it up, its added costs associated with the renewable in my mix. My prices have done nothing but go higher as they add wind power in the Columbia River Areas.
Click to expand...

Now that makes more sense. There is the roughly 11 cents per kWH that I mentioned. Of course, you have to factor the distribution charge. And your complaining about renewables is unwarranted. Solar is a peak load producer, which prevents the need for construction of new power plants, which are the primary driver of electricity cost increases. Wind is a low cost producer, and should not be blamed for your cost increases. Actually, 11 cents per kWH is about what I pay, and that's low compared to the rest of the US, which averages 13.34 cents.

https://www.chooseenergy.com/electricity-rates-by-state/
 
Media_Truth said:
Now that makes more sense. There is the roughly 11 cents per kWH that I mentioned. Of course, you have to factor the distribution charge. And your complaining about renewables is unwarranted. Solar is a peak load producer, which prevents the need for construction of new power plants, which are the primary driver of electricity cost increases. Wind is a low cost producer, and should not be blamed for your cost increases. Actually, 11 cents per kWH is about what I pay, and that's low compared to the rest of the US, which averages 13.34 cents.

https://www.chooseenergy.com/electricity-rates-by-state/
Click to expand...

If you had any critical thinking skills at all, I would not have has to show you 1 + 1 = 2.
 
Lord of Planar said:
If you had any critical thinking skills at all, I would not have has to show you 1 + 1 = 2.
Click to expand...

Sad that you are in such a tizzy. I challenged your claim to an unrealistic electrical cost, and it turns out that you didn't take into account all the expenses. No problem - I'm an Electrical Engineer, and I tend to understand these things better than laypersons.
 
Media_Truth said:
Now that makes more sense. There is the roughly 11 cents per kWH that I mentioned. Of course, you have to factor the distribution charge. And your complaining about renewables is unwarranted. Solar is a peak load producer, which prevents the need for construction of new power plants, which are the primary driver of electricity cost increases. Wind is a low cost producer, and should not be blamed for your cost increases. Actually, 11 cents per kWH is about what I pay, and that's low compared to the rest of the US, which averages 13.34 cents.

https://www.chooseenergy.com/electricity-rates-by-state/
Click to expand...

You guys are so gullible with renewable. They still cost more than retail rates when the other factors are included, and you champion the wholesale rates like they are cheaper.

It is rather short sighted to see a wholesale retail cheaper than total gross consumer costs, and think it is less expensive.

You guys or so indoctrinated, I'm about to cry... out of pity for you.
 
Media_Truth said:
Sad that you are in such a tizzy. I challenged your claim to an unrealistic electrical cost, and it turns out that you didn't take into account all the expenses. No problem - I'm an Electrical Engineer, and I tend to understand these things better than laypersons.
Click to expand...

If you say so. It appears your BSEE is from Cracker Jacks Academy.
 
Lord of Planar said:
You guys are so gullible with renewable. They still cost more than retail rates when the other factors are included, and you champion the wholesale rates like they are cheaper.

It is rather short sighted to see a wholesale retail cheaper than total gross consumer costs, and think it is less expensive.

You guys or so indoctrinated, I'm about to cry... out of pity for you.
Click to expand...

The levelized cost is the most reasonable approach to analyzing the cost of electricity. Wind does very well, almost the low-cost producer - just a little higher than natural gas.

Electricity_LevelizedCost_byType.jpg
 
Media_Truth said:
The levelized cost is the most reasonable approach to analyzing the cost of electricity. Wind does very well, almost the low-cost producer - just a little higher than natural gas.

View attachment 67262914
Click to expand...

Those are utopian and untested values.

As an engineer, how many times have the advertised costs been far lower than reality?

They assume nothing goes wrong for the lower levelized costs.

Well guess what. We don't live in a perfect world, where everything goes right.
 
Please don't tell me you aren't really that gullible, to believe such propaganda?
 
PoS said:
LOL are you surprised he believes it? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Him believing it and his claim to be an engineer are in conflict.

Of course I know he believes the propaganda.
 
Lord of Planar said:
Those are utopian and untested values.

As an engineer, how many times have the advertised costs been far lower than reality?

They assume nothing goes wrong for the lower levelized costs.

Well guess what. We don't live in a perfect world, where everything goes right.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand the concept. Levelized costs are the most honest way to determine costs. Just because you don't like the results, does not change that.

https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/08/f25/LCOE.pdf

Measures lifetime costs divided by energy production
• Calculates present value of the total cost of building and
operating a power plant over an assumed lifetime.
• Allows the comparison of different technologies (e.g., wind,
solar, natural gas) of unequal life spans, project size,
different capital cost, risk, return, and capacities

ABOUT IER --->

About - IER

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.
 
Media_Truth said:
Probably, but I don't think this is a big gamble for the lenders in China. There is probably some provision that Tesla must use the Chinese profits to repay the Chinese loan first. There are two trends in China that make this a win-win. First, China has some of the worst air quality in the world. Second, Chinese citizens are wealthier and demanding more personal comforts - i.e. personal cars. Tesla will be the major auto manufacturer in China. I also foresee this plant manufacturing vehicles for the rest of Asia.
Click to expand...

The Chinese are committed to electric cars and renewable energy. They see these things as technological imperatives.

Tesla is out of the world’s biggest market if it doesn’t have a plant there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom