Elon Musk has unveiled the Tesla Semi Truck. It supposedly boasts a single-charge range of over 500 miles, more than what analysts had expected. Tesla could begin producing the vehicles by the end of 2019 (assuming it isn't delayed):
The truck can go from zero to 60 miles per hour in five seconds without a trailer, and in 20 seconds when carrying a maximum load of 80,000 pounds, less than a third of the time required for a diesel truck, he said.
He gave no price for the truck but hinted that it would be costly. "Tesla stuff is expensive," Mr. Musk said, drawing another cheer from the crowd, gathered at an airfield outside of Los Angeles. But he also said the electric truck would be less expensive to operate, in part because it has fewer components that require regular maintenance (no engine, transmission or drive shaft). Instead, the truck, called the Tesla Semi, is powered by a giant battery beneath the cab. It has two rear axles, each outfitted with two electric motors, one for each wheel. Its acceleration and uphill speeds will allow it to cover more distance in less time than diesel trucks, he added.
As a result, Tesla is estimating it will cost $1.26 per mile to operate, compared with $1.51 a mile for a diesel truck. The cost can fall further — to 85 cents a mile, according to Tesla — if groups of trucks travel together in convoys, which reduces wind drag. "This beats rail," Mr. Musk said.
In typical Tesla fashion, the truck is a sharp departure from industry norms. The cabin is spacious enough for a driver and passenger to stand. The driver's seat is in the center of the cab, not on the left side. It is flanked by two laptop-size video screens providing navigation and scheduling data as well as images of blind spots and other areas around the truck. It will be equipped with radar sensors, cameras and processors to enable drivers to use a version of Autopilot, the advanced driver-assistance system featured in Tesla cars such as the Model S and the new Model 3.
Tesla will also produce a new version of the Tesla Roadster that can go from 0-60 in 1.9 seconds.
Also at BBC, TechCrunch, and Firstpost.
Pre-conference coverage at Bloomberg
Previously: Tesla Sued Over Alleged Racism; Deliveries Pushed Back; Semi Truck to be Unveiled
Related Stories
Auto production is hard:
Having racked up its first quarter of burning through more than $1 billion of cash in the three months ending in June, Tesla topped that with $1.4 billion of negative free cash flow in the third quarter. In the past two quarters, therefore, Tesla has burned through more cash than the previous six combined. More importantly, it has burned through roughly four out of every five of the $3.2 billion dollars it has raised since late March through selling new equity and convertible debt and its debut in the high-yield bond market.
Consequently, debt has soared. Even just using debt with recourse to the company, on a net basis it has almost tripled since the start of the year to $3.36 billion.This would matter less if the primary objective of sucking in most of that external funding -- mass production of the Model 3 -- was fast approaching. Instead, it has receded further.
When Musk first talked about production targets for the Model 3 in 2016, they implied Tesla would be producing roughly 3,800 to 7,600 a week in the second half of 2017. By July of this year, Musk was guiding toward production hitting about 5,000 a week by the end of December. I estimated at the time that this implied a second-half average of maybe 1,400 a week.
Now, Musk estimates production might hit 5,000 a week by the end of the first quarter of 2018. As for this year, it might be in "the thousands" by the time New Year's Eve rolls around. He refused to say what the current run rate was. But I would estimate Tesla will be lucky to produce 10,000 Model 3 vehicles in total this year, or an average of 400 a week for the second half -- roughly 5 to 10 percent of the original guidance. As for the earlier target of 10,000 a week in 2018 ...
Also at NYT and MarketWatch.
Previously: Tesla Adds Lots of Certified Pre-Owned Model S Vehicles for Under $40,000 with New Warranty
Time to Bash Tesla Model 3
Tesla Reportedly Teaming Up With AMD for Custom AI Chip
Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees
Tesla has been sued by an employee for alleged racist harassment and termination for complaining:
Tesla Inc.'s production floor is a "hotbed for racist behavior," an African-American employee claimed in a lawsuit in which he alleged black workers at the electric carmaker suffer severe and pervasive harassment. The employee says he's one of more than 100 African-American Tesla workers affected and is seeking permission from a judge to sue on behalf of the group. He's seeking unspecified general and punitive monetary damages as well as an order for Tesla to implement policies to prevent and correct harassment.
[...] The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Marcus Vaughn, who worked in the Fremont factory from April 23 to Oct. 31. Vaughn alleged that employees and supervisors regularly used the "N word" around him and other black colleagues. Vaughn said he complained in writing to human resources and Musk and was terminated in late October for "not having a positive attitude."
Although customers who have reserved a Tesla Model 3 (at a cost of $1000) have seen their delivery dates pushed back, they apparently remain loyal to the company:
Even as the company led by Elon Musk struggles with manufacturing bottlenecks and pushes back production targets by at least a quarter, many reservation holders aren't budging. Bloomberg News contacted 20 consumers who paid deposits for the Model 3 and none had canceled their orders. Regardless of the concerns raised by slower output and an uncertain future for U.S. electric-car tax credits, Nomura analyst Romit Shah predicts the affinity for Tesla Inc. products will prevail. "We believe there is a real passion for the brand," Shah wrote in a report to clients that reiterated a $500 price target for Tesla shares, the highest on Wall Street. "It is bigger than loyalty because much of the enthusiasm comes from people who have never owned a Tesla. The only comparable we see is the iPhone."
Finally, Elon Musk says that the Tesla Semi Truck will be unveiled during a live webcast at 8 PM on Thursday, and that it will "blow your mind clear out of your skull and into an alternate dimension".
Previously: Elon Musk Says Tesla Pickup and Semi-Trucks Are Coming
Time to Bash Tesla Model 3
Tesla Discussing Autonomous Semi Truck Testing in Nevada
Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees
Tesla Burns More Cash, Fails to Meet Production Targets
If Elon Musk can increase Tesla's market value 12-fold in the next 10 years, he may be entitled to a maximum of $56 billion in stock awards (likely lower if more shares are sold to the public). This, along with the ballooning of Musk's existing $12 billion share in his company, and his stake in SpaceX and other companies, could help Musk become a Kardashev I trillionaire alongside Jeff Bezos:
A new payment plan for the CEO was approved by Tesla (TSLA) shareholders Wednesday, a spokesperson confirmed. The incentive-based package essentially states that if Musk hits a series of performance milestones between now and January 2028, and he drives his electric car company's market value 12 times higher — taking it from $54 billion to $650 billion — he'll become astronomically rich.
Now, if Musk does drive a 12-fold increase in Tesla's market value, that doesn't necessarily mean the price of a single share in the company will be 12 times larger. The company can do things like issue new stock that could dilute the value of existing shares. But let's assume Musk's Tesla stock would grow at least 10 times more valuable. That would mean just the shares Musk owns today would be worth $120 billion.
Plus, reaching the agreed upon milestones means Musk would get additional stock awards. According to the new compensation plan, Tesla estimates the value of the stock awards to be $2.6 billion, using accounting methods for estimating the cash value of stock options. But if Tesla's market value balloons just as the payment plan hopes, those stock awards could be worth nearly $56 billion, according to a public filing.
Also at Reuters, Fortune, and CNBC.
Related: Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees
Tesla Burns More Cash, Fails to Meet Production Targets
Tesla Sued Over Alleged Racism; Deliveries Pushed Back; Semi Truck to be Unveiled
Tesla Semi Truck Will Have a 500+ Mile Range
Tesla Delivers on 100 MW Australian Battery Promise
Elon Musk Vows to Build Tesla Pickup Truck 'Right After' Model Y
Woz Likes his Tesla, Doesn't Trust Elon
Tesla Creating Huge Virtual Power Plant
Elon Musk Expects to Do Coast-to-Coast Autonomous Tesla Drive in 3 to 6 Months
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @07:04AM (7 children)
I was expecting something with the compatible interface being containerized shipping, not a fifth-wheel coupling. By going with a fifth-wheel coupling, he loses the ability to place the battery under the load.
One can do containerized shipping on a flatbed too, providing a bit more usage flexibility.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by RedBear on Saturday November 18 2017, @09:06AM (4 children)
That seems like a pointless loss of functional flexibility that would cause a drastic price increase. Battery costs are still the main expense in an EV, even for Tesla. The semi already has a 1,000kWh battery (I've heard) that will require new Tesla "Megacharger" stations delivering 1.5MW to charge in a reasonable time. As it is designed it will handle deliveries up to 250 miles from origin without needing to recharge until it returns. It's not really made for long-hauling as much as it's made for the kind of local and regional route that around 80% of the trucks on the road are actually doing. Making it only useful for hauling full containerized loads wouldn't make much sense. But when the charging network is built out sufficiently even the long-haul routes will be do-able. 400 miles of range after a 30-minute break is nothing to sneeze at.
But what's just as interesting as the vehicle itself is Musk saying that every Tesla Megacharger station for these trucks will be completely solar powered, off-grid, and backed by the industrial Tesla PowerPacks, with a guaranteed network-wide energy cost of 7¢/kWh. So if you have a fleet of Tesla semis they will be powered completely by sunlight (which you can brag about to your clients, and they can brag about to their customers) and your "fuel" costs won't be fluctuating the way diesel costs jump around from year to year and region to region. For trucking companies with routes that can be handled by this vehicle, it would seem to be a no-brainer to make the shift. Fleet operators all over the country are probably creaming their jeans over the idea that they would be able to predict per-mile fuel costs accurately years into the future. That's impossible with diesel.
Imagine all the routes across mountain ranges where diesel trucks can only do 40mph on the way up and a Tesla semi can maintain 60-65mph all the way to the top, and then the Tesla maintains speed down the other side by using regen braking instead of burning up brake pads. On certain mountain routes a Tesla semi with its insane torque (unaffected by elevation) will be able to get the load to the destination in half the time of the best diesel truck available. And then return with another load. Recharge, rinse, repeat. Cha-ching! That's money in the bank for the trucking company. And the costs they were presenting during the event were supposedly best-case for diesel and worst-case for the Tesla semi. In a lot of applications the cost savings could make it ludicrous to continue to choose diesel.
The Tesla semi won't be a perfect fit everywhere, but it will absolutely murder diesel trucks in many areas. The only question is whether Tesla can really make a truck that will have minimal breakdowns for a million miles, as they are promising, and if they can build out the Megacharger network fast enough. The demonstration of their windshield not even cracking when hit with a trailer hitch was also very interesting. I want to know more about that glass they're using.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @10:07AM (1 child)
80% of the world's freight moves in 40-foot containers. Another 10% goes in 20-foot and 53-foot containers. Lots of the rest goes nicely on flatbeds. There are even tank containers.
Another trouble with the fifth-wheel coupling is that Tesla can't usefully put stuff on the back. Tesla wants to have cameras and radar for self-driving features, but the back becomes a huge blind spot when it is supplied by a cheap-ass third party.
(Score: 3, Touché) by MostCynical on Saturday November 18 2017, @02:06PM
You do know trucks drive *forward*, don't you?
The human drive may have to park, reverse into docks, and similar, but driving down the highway, even changing lanes, is done now, without sensors or cameras on the trailer. If a human with mirrors can do it, ir and laser and whatever sensors mounted higher, further out (where you can't put mirrors, let alone a driver), means this thing will be fine hauling any old trailer (stopoing distances may be impacted)
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday November 18 2017, @02:51PM (1 child)
Maybe. We'll see what sort of heating problems these vehicles develop.
(Score: 2) by RedBear on Monday November 20 2017, @03:38AM
Well, I am looking forward to seeing real-world stress tests of 80k loads back and forth over the Eisenhower Pass. But I'm optimistic based on the demonstrated towing capabilities of the Model X. Bjørn Nyland, of YouTube fame, has been towing a lot of heavy things since he won a very early production Model X. His only major problem in 100,000 kilometers with the vehicle was finally tracked down to an abraded CANBUS wire that was installed improperly. Certainly things heat up while towing up a slope but the vehicle's cooling system seemed to handle it well, ramping down from maximum very quickly after the vehicle stopped. The design of Tesla's cooling/heating system is quite advanced.
If Tesla can't take their experience with people towing 5,000 lbs with the Model X CUV and make a semi that won't overheat under real world loads, they deserve to fail. The trucking companies operate on such slim profit margins that they won't stand for an incompetently designed vehicle. I'm confident Musk understands this, and the compactness of the EV drivetrain leaves plenty of room for heavy duty cooling options. We'll see in 2.5 years how they hold up.
¯\_ʕ◔.◔ʔ_/¯ LOL. I dunno. I'm just a bear.
... Peace out. Got bear stuff to do. 彡ʕ⌐■.■ʔ
(Score: 3, Interesting) by theluggage on Saturday November 18 2017, @02:16PM (1 child)
No - if you buy a shiny new Tesla Semi as soon as the first ones roll off the line, the last thing you are going to do is load a dinged-up rusty shipping container filled with 200,000 pairs of incontinence pants on the back.
Sure, the long-term Elon-saves-the-world plan will have to involve containerised shipping, but in the short term these are going to be bought by companies who want them roaming the freeways resplendent in full bow-to-stern company livery with "Acme Logistics - Giving a Shit About the Environment Since Last Week" in large, friendly lead-free painted letters down the side.
Early adopters are going to want these as flagships, to deliver samples of their high-value goods to trade shows, or as rolling advertising hoardings serving their top customers... Heck, how else are football players going to get their new Tesla Roadsters to the track day with a fully charged battery and no mud?
If it helps prove the technology and create demand, what's not to like?
Interesting observation: even without full autonomy, I'd guess that these things are going to be a cinch to drive compared with the skill needed to manoeuvre a traditional large vehicle...
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday November 18 2017, @10:55PM
Apparently Wal-Mart was first in line with a pre-order for 15 copies.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @07:23AM
... to get all the way around yo mamma's waistline.
(Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Saturday November 18 2017, @08:18AM (16 children)
From TFM (Musk):
If trucks beats rail on the same distance (as long as it is at least a few dozen miles/km) then your economics of rail are _really_ messed up or it is in very light use.
Rolling metal-on-metal in long trains coupled directly together are about as good as it gets while still having contact with solid ground.
Sadly enough, if even half of what I've read about how trains are operated in USA I'm inclined to agree with Musk.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Saturday November 18 2017, @10:58AM (13 children)
This. I recall reading that it takes about 1/3 the energy to travel by rail compared to paved road. Narrow steel wheels vs fat rubber tires, tighter convoying so to speak, more level routes, and on the railroad, engines have been hybrid for decades now. Surpassing the hybrid engine isn't enough to offset all the other advantages rail has.
The US is prone to ignoring energy savings. Crazy how much low hanging fruit is not being picked. It's like it's against the state religion to conserve energy, because that might make them look poor, weak, and more feminine. Small cars are for liberals, wimps, and girls. Real men drive pickups. And of course, "drill, baby, drill!" I heard a bad joke about this: "What's the sound of a Prius accelerating? I'm gaaaayy!"
Making boxy truck trailers more aerodynamic is incredibly easy to do, but truck operators will reach for the damnedest reasons not to. One crazy guy wouldn't consider vortex generators on the trailing edges because they are "ugly". I protested that the standard gray box trailer is already about the ugliest thing on the road, how could its appearance possibly matter? But it was like arguing with a brick wall. One change I have seen in recent years is the addition of a spoiler to move air around the outsides of the wheels, but still no dimples like on golf balls, or vortex generators on the trailing edges.
(Score: 2, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday November 18 2017, @12:13PM (7 children)
I once drove on a two-lane highway alongside truckers outside of Mobile, Alabama in weather that was so shitty that even maximum windshield wipers couldn't prevent the heavy rain from obscuring my view.
I was driving a small car, and big-rigs were passing me left and right at 90 miles per hour like a walk in the park even though I was white-knuckled scared-shitless. The problem with California faggots, especially those with too much rigteous indignation on their hands, is that they believe that they know fucking everything from their safe little comfortable vantage points, and that they can magically apply their silly mentality everywhere else.
Sure, their trucks would work from Menlo Park to Sunnyvale, but I doubt they'd work as succesfully anywhere else.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Ethanol-fueled on Saturday November 18 2017, @01:16PM (1 child)
Hah. You Silicon Valley fucks can mod me down all you want. But I won the battle. You will lose the war!
Best of luck to you, bitches: I will fight you until my dying breath!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @05:07PM
Meds, don't forget to take your meds!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @02:24PM
> big-rigs were passing me left and right at 90 miles per hour like a walk in the park
Visibility is much better from a higher vantage point. While the lack of visibility from-the-rain is about the same for everyone on the road, the spray-from-vehicles is much worse closer to the ground.
(Score: 3, Informative) by bzipitidoo on Saturday November 18 2017, @05:55PM
A pity those trucks weren't more aerodynamic. More aerodynamic vehicles kick up less spray and wind. And your car would have been affected less by the buffeting if it was more aerodynamic.
So easy to improve aero that a private citizen tinkering in his garage can drastically improve it, even on the best cars available in the US: http://aerocivic.com/ [aerocivic.com] Look at the underside of almost any car, and you'll see all kinds of things that stick out and add to the drag.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @04:33AM (2 children)
I'm wondering if he's thinking ahead and whether these things have slide-in battery packs.
I can see a driver pulling into a depot, grabbing a sandwich and refilling his thermos, and by the time he's back to his rig he's got another 500 miles of range replacing the depleted thing.
I was driving a small car, and big-rigs were passing me
Tim "The Toolman" Taylor: "This needs MORE POWER."
http://www.google.com/search?tbm=isch&q=dragstrip+electric.car [google.com]
The biggest problem those guys have is keeping the wheels from smoking.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @01:13AM (1 child)
> slide-in battery packs.
Just in case you check back, this might work in CA and the SW. Here in the NE USA, we have salted roads and things get really ugly in the winter. I don't give battery replacement much of a chance in this part of the world, too much contamination. Not to mention the problem of standardizing battery packs, when the different manufacturers are still improving them with every generation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 20 2017, @06:39AM
too much contamination
I would expect the battery compartments to be a sealed thing.
Weatherstripping on doors of buildings keeps out the nasty stuff.
Car trunks stay dry.
Passenger compartments too.
I don't see this as being any different.
in the NE USA
Yeah, that will have to be considered.
The initial development is all being done in The Sun Belt.
I expect subsequent generations of the tech, however, to be suitable for wider use.
(The first automobiles were open configurations, unsuitable for winter up north.)
standardizing
Again, second-generation stuff should iron out the fine points.
(The wide adopttion of the IBM PC architecture a few years after the birth of the personal computer was actually an anomaly for an industry.)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday November 18 2017, @03:06PM
There's two things to keep in mind here. First, energy savings aren't that valuable due to the usual low cost of electricity. And such things also have costs.
For example, I've worked security guard at a location where everyone leaves at the end of the day. It made sense in that situation to turn lights off when I found them (this is despite the fact that workers were trained to turn lights off at the end of the day).
Now, consider instead a location where no one patrols the location after dark. Now, if you want someone to check the lights at the end of the day, you have to pay someone to drive in and walk around, just checking lights. Sorry, you just made making sure the lights are off into an expensive operation.
The marginal cost of checking that lights are out in the first scenario is zero cost. I would be there and often turning lights on and off anyway. The marginal cost of the second scenario is much higher since one has to pay for significant transportation and time costs just to send someone out to check lights. To the person who never considers the cost of energy savings, the two scenarios are equivalent. But they aren't.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @04:03PM
Rail requires more involvement by the government and more trust in the government. If sixty different companies want weekly shipping between Chicago and Miami, they have to make arrangements with the private and government agencies that own rail lines between the two cities and bid against each other for the available trains and schedule time to move their material. Track maintenance is a serious disruption, alternate routes may not be available or may be too expensive to use.
If sixty different companies want to ship by truck between Chicago and Miami, they just ignore each other and buy thousands of trucks. Road maintenance is a minor annoyance, they just use other roads.
And that's even ignoring the price of fuel. Diesel taxes are dramatically higher in Europe, so if rail uses 25% as much fuel to ship a load the cost savings are colossal. Cost savings aren't nearly as big in the US, or at least aren't big enough to drive more investment in rail infrastructure.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday November 19 2017, @06:57AM (2 children)
They aren't hybrid. They're electric. Have been for many many decades. Even the 'diesel' locomotives are electric. The diesel engine has no connection to the wheels, it only drives the electric generator.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 19 2017, @09:00AM (1 child)
It is a series hybrid.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Sunday November 19 2017, @09:56AM
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @03:15PM
"This beats rail," Mr. Musk said.
I find that hard to believe especially at long distance! I've seen trains pulling around a hundred cars. Would a hundred electric trucks really be more efficient even in a convoy?
The last thing we need is more semi trucks on the roads.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Saturday November 18 2017, @11:03PM
The US has screwed up rail pretty good, but I think any efficiency studies that show these trucks ahead of rail are neglecting cost of infrastructure, tires, and many other costs that are higher per kg-mile of cargo on the roads than on a rail.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 18 2017, @05:32PM
Wal-Mart has ordered 15 semi trucks from Tesla
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/wal-mart-jb-hunt-are-among-the-first-to-order-the-tesla-semi-truck-2017-11-17 [marketwatch.com]
So, if that works out, there is already a large market just for short range hauling of supplies to stores.
(Score: 2) by Open4D on Saturday November 18 2017, @09:46PM
Here's our article from 2017-07-13 (submitted by me): https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=17/07/13/1119244 [soylentnews.org]
`
A few other news sites picked up on the referral program thing, without really emphasizing how much of a step forward it represented in Tesla's public/formal level of commitment to actually going ahead with new Roadster. (AFAIK, prior to that, all there had been was a few Musk tweets, and perhaps one or two other hints.)
And we might have been the only 'news site' that made the link with Musk's shareholder meeting comments, making the point that there was a realistic chance he was hinting that the Roadster would be unveiled along with the Semi.
Contrast that with this week's news stories:
`
The only problem with this 'scoop' is the aspect I have failed to mention so far. The Tesla Semi event was originally scheduled for September, so that's what our headline was: Tesla's Next Gen Roadster is One Step Closer; Speculation of September Announcement
In reality, late September arrived with no word from Tesla. Then they announced a date of 2017-10-26. Then they postponed it until 2017-11-16.