10-year

10-Year Anniversary Promotion (20% off)

Join GuruFocus Premium Membership Now for Only $279/Year

Once a decade discount

Save up to $500 on Global Membership.

Don't Miss It !

Free 7-day Trial
All Articles and Columns »

Will This Technology Hurt Tesla?

August 29, 2014 | About:
Juhi Kulkarni

JuhiKulkarni

0 followers

Electric vehicles have been around for quite a while, however they were not prominent due to different inadequacies like constrained extend and low speed. Tesla Motors (TSLA) was the first organization to change all that, and thus, it picked up a considerable measure of media consideration and saw a huge bounce in its impart cost in 2013.

Be that as it may, a lot of people huge and secured automakers like Toyota Motor (TM) and Hyundai are searching for the following enormous innovation to power tomorrow's autos and have wagered on hydrogen energy units. Toyota is confident to the point that power module electric vehicles, or Fcevs, will rule the car market in the years to come and is even expected to offer 5,000-10,000 vehicles per year. Moreover, Air Liquide SA is wanting to stretch its business by building filling stations for Fcevs as it predicts developing interest for such vehicles.

Tesla's CEO, Elon Musk, concedes that the innovation is a deadlock, yet you'd anticipate that he will talk down the opposition as he is wagering gobs of cash on Evs. The achievement of Fcevs will be terrible for Tesla and its investors, and, given the different focal points that Fcevs have over Evs, it may eclipse Evs and rule the auto showcase over the long haul. How about we examine these preferences?

Contamination-free myth

Tesla's Model S has a notoriety for being eco-accommodating on the grounds that it doesn't radiate hurtful gases into the air. Then again, producing one battery for an EV discharges somewhere around 10,000 and 40,000 pounds of carbon dioxide into the environment. Moreover, the lithium needed for the creation of these lithium-particle batteries is basically extricated through solar salt waters. Also, the European Commission on Science for Environmental Policy asserted that the extraction of lithium from these saline solutions causes a huge ecological, well-being and social effect to the spots where li-particle is placed.

Notwithstanding all that, batteries lose charge over time and at some point or another it gets to be futile. Hence, EV drivers will need to supplant the battery or purchase another auto. Thus, driving Tesla autos may be eco-accommodating, yet generally, it isn't as green as it shows up.

In examination, hydrogen-controlled autos are more environment-friendly as they utilize a mix of hydrogen and oxygen to make electricity. That brings about zero outflows, and the auto runs neatly.

Abundant

It is a well-known actuality that hydrogen is generally accessible; in this way there wouldn't be any sort of fuel lack if Fcevs get to be exceedingly mainstream later on, and automakers won't need to stress over exhaustion. Unexpectedly, Tesla has attempted to help its deals because of battery lack, and it doesn't say that the circumstances are going to change soon. Not to overlook that Tesla just offers around 22,000 autos yearly, which implies that it will truly battle to stay aware of the climbing request and grow comprehensively.

Cost

Tesla autos are lavish as a result of the introduced batteries, and it will be extremely hard to cut down costs without bargaining on quality or performance. In this way, it's obvious that shoppers will need to pay to purchase a Tesla auto. EV managers don't need to pay for refueling so it does make up for the high cost to a degree, yet given that batteries lose charge extra time, supplanting them further adds to the expense.

Power modules' disadvantages

For anybody needing to quicken rapidly, Fcevs won't be palatable. Also, the scope of a hydrogen auto fuel vehicle is restricted (around 250 miles). That makes it difficult to use for long excursions until there's a system of hydrogen fuel stations. Furthermore setting up a system of fuel stations will require colossal speculation and the accomplishment of Fcevs generally relies on upon the result of this issue.

Conclusion

The scale of generation that Toyota and Hyundai have is an enormous danger for Tesla. They can undoubtedly increase generation and cut down expenses if Fcevs click in the mass business sector. Furthermore, they won't be obliged by things, for example, battery creation. In this way, Tesla investors ought to doubtlessly keep an eye on these improvements in energy components as they are very fit for harming deals over the long haul.


Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote)

Voters:

Comments

oneglutathione
Oneglutathione - 3 months ago

Where does hydrogene come from again ? That's right, in the U.S. hydrogene would be produced from fossil fuels electricity. That extra step of using electricity to produce fuel (hydrogene), to produce electricity in the car makes this process super inefficient and...redundant !

Save a wasteful step and, directly use this electricity to charge the battery.

weaponzero
Weaponzero - 3 months ago

FCVs are a joke, that is why Toyoto and Hyundai are limiting their production. According to Toyota, their FCV requires that the NHTSA gives them an exemption from safety regulations and according to Hyundai they and Toyota will lose money on every FCV sold. The biggest reason they are developing FCVs is that it gives them 26 ZEV credits per FCV.

As far as from environmental perspective, this article is wrong on so many levels. First of all, to produce a BEV (the car + the battery) is about 9 tons of CO2. 20-40k pounds for the battery alone is way over inflating the number. As far as lithium extraction goes, lithium extraction is one of the least damaging. Getting 1lb of lithium does less environmental damage than 1lb of oil or 1lb of hydrogen. And you aren't burning it.

If you think batteries are dirty to make, wait till you learn about Fuel Cells. Unlike batteries they require rare metals such as Platinum and etc. Far worse than batteries.

Battery manufacturing process is not as complex as you make it out to be, there is actually very little room for error and even consumer grade batteries have 1 in 10 million failure rate. It gets far more complex with hydrogen storage tanks where even the slightest imperfection means you have 10,000psi hydrogen gushing out.

Also, the creation of hydrogen is a dirty business, at isssue is that the cheapest way to make hydrogen is through fossil fuels. And even then it costs more than gasoline. Even when made from renewable energy, it is still not as clean as an EV because of poor efficiency of Fuel Cells. Which means a Fuel Cell car can never be as clean as an EV.

You also did not do your research on abundance, Panasonic has spend 200 million to add a new construction line which will be in full production by end of this year. This allows for Tesla to hit a production rate of 100k vehicles next year. After that, the gigafactory will begin operation allowing 500k more vehicles per year once in full production.

Hydrogen is not that accessible, neither are fuel cells. On top of that the cost of Fuel Cells are high and cost of hydrogen is high. According to Tesla an affordable EV, the Tesla Model 3 will come in 2017. According to Toyota, an affordable FCV will come in 2025+. Then there is the cost of infrastructure, most of EV infrastructure is there and EV chargers are cheap. Fuel Cell infrastructure costs are in the TRILLIONS!

Before making the Tesla, the evaluated all possible technologies. The reason why Tesla went with EV over Fuel Cell is because it is superior in almost every way. Fuel Cells in automobiles are dead on arrival and nothing for Tesla to worry or care about. Fuel Cells are mostly a distraction to try to siphon government funding from EVs and keep selling gasoline cars.

Please leave your comment:


Get WordPress Plugins for easy affiliate links on Stock Tickers and Guru Names | Earn affiliate commissions by embedding GuruFocus Charts
GuruFocus Affiliate Program: Earn up to $400 per referral. ( Learn More)
Free 7-day Trial
FEEDBACK