Page 1

Tesla Roadster Power train Executive summary With climate change issues coming to the forefront of international politics, action is required to mitigate its effects by decreasing CO2 emissions. One of the main emitters of CO2 gases are transport vehicles and Tesla have attempted to persuade consumers that electric vehicles (EVs) are the future of sustainable and eco-friendly transport. The Tesla Roadster is the first electric sports car with substantial range (245 miles on one charge), offering high performance features such as 0-60 mph acceleration in 3.7 seconds and 0 mph instant maximum torque. Its defining feature is its advanced power train that boasts 288 bhp and considerably outperforms all current electric vehicles on the market. With a low ride chassis and aerodynamic body lines, Tesla has produced an EV that has mass market desirability. Tesla are attempting to portray the Roadster as a fun to drive yet environmentally friendly EV however Well-to-Wheel calculations have shown that powering EVs can cause more emissions than an ICV vehicle. Power plants (based on coal power) can significantly damage the environment through air acidification, photochemical oxidant release and water usage. Only through renewable, nuclear and gas power does it become more efficient. Tesla requires a clear brand strategy to persuade current autophiles to switch to their alternative rather than hybrids or ICVs. Key points that Tesla should be aware of in the next 20 years are:   

 

Rare metal prices and especially lithium which is an integral part of Tesla’s batteries. Tesla requires research into alternative materials that are more stable in acquisition and price. Tesla is currently 9th for number of patents and in particular with very specific battery patents filed and should use these as leverage to lease out technology for a charge. Timing large marketing campaigns with the latest legislative changes could boost Tesla chances of entering a new EV market before its competitors. These will be different for respective countries. Research lithium-air batteries due to the large specific energy density. The technology has the potential to become an industry standard and is being fervently researched by leading corporations (e.g. IBM). Increase vehicle range to 300/350 miles on one charge as this has been shown to satisfy 80% of those polled. Charge time should also be around 5 minutes to mimic petrol stations. Bring the cost of vehicles down to £15-20K, increase availability for the common consumer. 1

Contents 1 Current Product 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Basic statistics and comparison with rival Porsche Boxster 1.3 Market and Customer Strategy 1.4 ICV vs. EV 1.5 Torque 1.6 Motor Induction 1.7 Lithium-ion Battery 1.8 Range, Charging 2 Major External Factors 2.1 Political 2.11 Governmental Policy 2.12 Oil and Gas 2.2 Economic 2.3 Societal 2.31 Introduction 2.32 Recognition in UK consumer marker 2.33 Incentives 2.34 Charging Time 2.35 Range 2.36 Population Growth and Long Haul EV Fleet Opportunities 2.4 Technological 2.41 Introduction 2.42 Power Train future Industry Direction 2.42 Conclusions On Technology 2.5 Environmental 2.51 Well-To-Wheel Efficiency 2.52 Electricity Production 2.53 Well-To-Wheel Efficiency of EVs vs. ICVs 2.54 Air Acidification 2.55 Photochemical Oxidants 2.56 Lithium Reserves 2.57 Water Usage 2.6 Legal 2.61 US StimulusBill 2.62 Californian High Occupancy Vehicle Programme 2.63 UK Action 3 Specific Scientific Developments 3.1 Granted Tesla Patents 3.2 Patent Competition 3.3 Proposed Tesla Patents 3.4 Metal-Air Batteries 3.5 Lithium-Air Batteries 4 Summary Appendix 1: Personal Project Diary and Gantt Chart (planned and actual) Appendix 2: Supplementary Information References 2

5 5 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 11 11 13 15 16 16 16 17 18 18 19 20 20 20 22 22 22 23 24 25 26 26 27 29 29 30 30 31 31 31 32 33 34 35 37 41 45

Glossary Reserves: That part of the reserve base which could be economically extracted or produced at the time of determination. The term reserves need not signify that extraction facilities are in place and operative. Reserves include only recoverable materials. Reserve Base: That part of an identified resource that meets specified minimum physical and chemical criteria related to current mining and production practices, including those for grade, quality, thickness, and depth. The reserve base is the in place demonstrated (measured plus indicated) resource from which reserves are estimated. It may encompass those parts of the resources that have a reasonable potential for becoming economically available within planning horizons beyond those that assume proven technology and current economics. Water Consumption: Difference between water withdrawn and water discharge. It is effectively water that will not be made available for further use after is has been consumed. Water Discharge: Water returned to the source from which it was withdrawn from. Water Withdrawal: Water withdrawn from a surface water or groundwater source.


Acronyms CC: Climate Change ECU: Engine Control Unit ESC: Electronic Stability Control EV: Electric Vehicle HEV: Hybrid Electric Vehicle ICV: Internal Combustion Vehicle Li-on: Lithium Ion PEM: Power Electronics Module PHEV: Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle SOC: State of Charge or the level of battery power left. TTW: Tank to Wheel WTW: Well to Wheel


1 Current Product  1.1 Introduction The future of automotive design is changing quickly and in the next 20 years there are likely to be wholesale changes to the consumer market. New technological advancements such as hydrogen fuel cells and electric motors are leading an environmental push for sustainable development. This report outlines the current and future undertakings that will affect Tesla Motors all electric revolution. Particular focus will be spent on the UK market and Tesla’s flagship electric car: the Tesla Roadster

 1.2 Basic Statistics and comparison with rival Porsche Boxster The Tesla Roadster 2.5 (2012 power train edition) is the most recent version of Tesla’s electric vehicles (EV’s). It contains as a base unit three main components: An electric motor, controller and battery pack. Approximately 6800 lithium-ion cells grant the Roadster 288 horse power. The Roadsters maximum range is 245 miles on a single charge, however this can greatly vary depending on the driving style and whether air conditioning and other power usage systems are used. Originally, the base price for a Roadster was approximately £70,000, however with the current 2.5 model; it has had a price increase to £87,000.

Features Engine/Motor type Torque Transmission Acceleration (0-60 mph) Base Price ($) Economy (city/motorway) (mpg: miles per gallon)

2011 Porsche Boxster

2012 Tesla Roadster Sport

Flat-6 273 (lb-ft @ 4750 rpm) 6-speed manual 4.3 sec £40,000

375-volt AC 295 lb-ft (0 rpm) 1-speed 3.7 sec £87,000

19/26 mpg


Table 1: Porsche Boxster vs. Tesla Roadster 1 Comparatively (as shown by table 1), the Tesla Roadster has a current torque of 295 lb-ft, higher than the Porsche 2011 Boxster that has 273 lb-ft of torque, in a like for like sports car test. The Roadster also has a one speed transmission and only needs to be put into one gear to drive to maximum speed, whilst the Porsche relies on a conventional 6 speed manual transmission. The acceleration on the Roadster is also greater and demonstrates the technological achievement carried out for a first generation EV to out run a tried and tested Porsche sports model. The Porsche is less than half the price of the Roadster however the running costs of the Tesla are lower and over 4-7 years would work out cheaper. Comparative economy checks shows that the Roadster is over 6 times more economical with fuel. These features demonstrate that Tesla Roadster is superior as a sports car than the Porsche Boxster.


 1.3 Market and Customer Strategy Elon Musk, one of the co-founders of Tesla Motors, declared the overlying strategy for the electric vehicles company. He stated that “The strategy of Tesla is to enter at the high end of the market, where customers are prepared to pay a premium, and then drive down market as fast as possible to higher unit volume and lower prices with each successive model” 2. Tesla has entered the market with the Roadster (previously noted as being £87,000), and is due to release their second car, a midsized saloon: the Sedan (Model S). A basic unit Sedan will retail for approximately £40,000 ($49,900), more than double in drop in price of the Roadster. Finally a new and innovative SUV (Sports Utility Vehicle) has been unveiled by Tesla, due to be in production in late 2013, called the Model X (figure 1, bottom). For its size and weight it boasts quick acceleration times (0-60MPH in less than 5 seconds) with a base price of about £47,000 3. Although the Model X will cost more than a Sedan, it is still proportionally low for an SUV model (which is naturally more costly to manufacture than a saloon due to additional material and component costs). The type of customers that Tesla Motors have been targeting, are also the ones most likely to invest in EVs and are known as ‘early adopters’. These customers are typically young, high income earners (>$200,000), who already own more than one vehicle and probably don’t have any children (as the Roadster is a two seater). The most recommended geographical location for EV expansion is currently southern California, where favourable weather conditions and infrastructural stability allow for trouble-free EV ownership 4. Sports cars such as the Tesla Roadster require specific ‘must have’ features that appeal to the corresponding cliental. The following table shows the critical features that a sports car should have 5: 

 

Engine and transmission are two of the most features of a sports car as they indicate the vehicles power delivery capabilities. Superchargers and turbochargers are critical for high revolution-engine performance to achieve greater power. In terms of transmission specifically a manual set up is preferable as it grants the driver greater control. 6-cylinder engines are more desirable as they have greater capacity for air intake that correspondingly translates into more power transferred onto the wheels after engine combustion takes place. Handling can be especially important for sports car enthusiasts and the receptiveness of a vehicle to the road and driver are often looked-for. In particular minimal body lean, quick steering response and steering feedback are 3 handling features that should have considerable attention by the manufacturers. A rule of thumb for sports vehicles is that rear-wheel drive cars are generally better than forward or all-wheel drive. A rear wheel drive car allows the driver to ease the rear end of the car through corners with better throttle control. Acceleration for sports car hobbyists is very important and many of the potential customers often consider and contrast 0-60 mph values of different sports vehicles before purchasing. Safety is another key feature on a sports car and it is understandable that a vehicle with rapid acceleration and top speed should also have anti-lock brakes and increasingly Electronic Stability Control (ESC). ESC being the moment at which computer controlled brakes are applied to prevent sideways slide.



Aesthetically sports cars should also have low centres of gravity and sleek body lines for better aerodynamics and so faster acceleration and top speed.

Figure 1 : From top Tesla Roadster, Sedan and Model X 6

 1.4 ICV vs. EV

Figure 2: Watermelon size electric motor 7 An ICV is a well recognised and understood piece of technology in the current age, but it can be extremely wasteful, especially in terms of transmitting petrol energy into forward motion. Only 30% of the whole energy is used and the rest dissipated as noise and heat. However the Tesla electric motor converts electricity into mechanical power whilst also acting as a generator. Compared to the overabundance of moving mechanical moving parts in ICVs, the Roadster motor only has a solitary part: the rotor which provides the torque whilst spinning about its own axis. This naturally grants Tesla’s EVs many advantages, most importantly maintenance (due to less mechanical parts: 7

connecting rod, piston, inlet valves etc) but also the engine weight savings are great (however these are offset by the heavy battery cells). The main advantage of accommodating an electric motor is that instantaneous torque is provided for the wheels with on the spot throttle control.

 1.5 Torque Through current induction in the stator, the rotor spins in order to draw level with the magnetic field created. The action of the moving rotor creates the vehicles forward moving motion or torque. The larger the difference between the rotor field and the stator field, the larger the torque force that is produced 8. Depending on the pressure exerted on the accelerator pedal, the equivalent amount of torque created for forward motion is created.

Figure 3: Torque: ICV vs. EV 8 Figure 3 shows the different torque curves that a high performance ICV vs. Tesla Roadster produce. For an ICV there is a local point of peak torque, either side of which the torque drops below this maximum value. Due to this occurrence, a multi speed transmission is required to keep the engine working at its most effective point. A maximum torque of 6000 RPMs is constant for the Roadster, and only then does it gradually drop off at higher RPM’s. Due to this wide torque band, the Tesla Roadster only requires a single gear transmission to propel the vehicle from zero to maximum speed. Previously, it was stated that an ICV vehicle only converts around 30% of its fuel energy; however the Tesla Roadster transfers 88% of its electrical energy, almost 3 times the amount 8. A smart addition in the Tesla motor is that it acts as a generator with the engine rotor switching two of the phases the motor runs in reverse, and this can occur once pressure is released off the accelerator pedal. This sends energy back into the battery pack; therefore the motor is referred to as a generator in this mode of operation 8.


 1.6 Motor Induction Tesla Motors is aptly named after the famous Serbian inventor Nikola Tesla. The Roadster contains an AC induction motor originally patented by Nikola Tesla, from whence the name of the automotive company begins. In an electric motor, there is interaction between the stationary stator and the moving rotor.

Figure 4: Stator Coil 9 As shown in figure 4, the stator is assembled by wrapping copper wires around a stack of steel plates known as laminations. Copper is highly conductive and the wires conduct any electricity that is passed onto the motor via the Power Electronics Module (PEM). Altogether there are 3 different types of wires, each conducting a phase of electricity. As a phase is an alternating wave (similar to a sin wave), they can combine to produce current and therefore power 8. Furthermore, a smooth flow of current can be created by aligning all 3 phases. This flow of alternating current into the copper windings creates a magnetic field. The alternating current, deviates between peaks and troughs and similarly, the concurrent magnetic field alternates between north and south as shown below in figure 5. With the laminations ideally placed in a circular shape, the magnetic field also traces its pattern in a circulatory motion around the stator, similar to a ‘Mexican Wave’ in football stadiums 8.


Figure 5 : Rotor stator interaction 8

 1.7 Lithium-Ion Battery

Figure 6: Lithium-ion rechargeable battery discharge mechanism 10 Tesla’s Roadster is comprised of an electrochemical cell with two half cells or electrodes (figure 6). The negatively charged electrode contains an overabundance of lithium electrons, whilst the positive electrode is electron deficient (metal oxide). The two electrodes are connected via an electrical wire that transports electron from the negative cathode electrode to the positive anode, in a process commonly referred to as electricity 12. The lithium combines with the metal oxide to form lithium metal oxide and release energy (Appendix A5) 11. When an electric motor is running, electrons will 10

continually flow to the anode until the battery becomes empty of charge. Rechargeable batteries effectively reverse the electrochemical cells and reverse the flow of electricity and in doing so recharge the batteries 12.

 1.8 Range, Charging

Figure 7: Charge lead 13 The range of the Tesla Roadster is clearly the main factor in its success over other electric vehicles as well as the reason sceptics still question its potential. The most recent model (the 2.5 version) has an average range of 245 miles (tested by Tesla in various modes of use), and this is currently the highest range of any electric vehicle. Comparatively, the Venturi Fetish (a competing electric sports car) does produce a respectable 155-217 miles of range, however the Venturi has a lower acceleration , top speed and costs almost four times as much as a Roadster (~ÂŁ250,000). The charging time is an issue that the researches at Tesla Motors have endeavoured to improve. As shown in A1 (Appendix 2), the charging time can vary greatly depending on the various variables that can affect the process. In short the charge time depends on the mains voltage, current, battery power, vehicle charger capacity as well as secondary issues such as optimum ion cell uptake to prevent cell damage. The best time currently for a full charge is around 4 hours and Tesla should aim to develop chargers that could potentially carry out a full charge in 5 minutes, similar to the average time it takes to visit a petrol station.

2 Major External Factors 2.1 Political  2.11 Governmental policy It is possible through political activities for a government to transform corporate attitudes and public misconceptions on electrical vehicles. This may be achieved directly through initiatives such as the Ultra Low Carbon Vehicle Demonstration Programme (which aimed to develop 100 innovative electric vehicle designs) and was proposed in 2008 by Geoff Hoon of the Department of Transport. 11

Figure 8: Consumer trials of EVs 14 Figure 8 shows an example of the data obtained from the 3 month low carbon programme, in which drivers were asked about their expectations of using an electric vehicle on a daily basis. Before trailing the electric vehicles only 53% of the people agreed that the speed of charging the vehicles would be adequate for comfortable daily use and after 3 months this percentage increased by 37% 14 . This demonstrates the potential for positive attitude changes by formal programmes and trial schemes. Positive political actions that boost EV’s sales can also be brought about indirectly via the CC debate. Currently, the scientific consensus on CC is being scaled up or down by those whom are affecting the urgency with which it is being assessed (reference). In the wake of wide-spread public uncertainty regarding the severity of climate change (CC); it has been difficult for the UK government to enact proactive legislative changes. CC has come to the fore front of media attention for various reasons such as the frequency and severity of natural disasters (Japan 2010, Thailand 2004) to influential reports by scientific think tanks such as the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Figure 8: Cost of natural disaster damage (stack), mortality rate (top) between 2010 and 2030 15 12

(politics 4) Figure 8 shows an example of the cost of damages (stacks) to a country via CC in 2010 and 2030, with an additional single value of the mortality rate that could accompany it. The mortality rate alone is projected to increase by more than 4 times and the damage costs also portray high escalation. Governments can use reports such as this to educate the public about CC as well as push for political reform. For example, should the UK government introduce new taxes aimed at petrol/diesel vehicle drivers this would encourage the wider public to adopt changes in transportation, be it public (train, trams) or alternate means such a hybrid or electric vehicles.

 2.12 Oil and gas The oil and gas industry is directly linked to electrical generation and thus electric vehicles. It is projected that by 2020 a third of the UK’s coal fired power stations will reach the end of their natural life cycle 16. As the UK currently relies on oil and gas for 75% of its primary energy usage 17 it is vital for the economy and energy security to diversify generation processes. It is also projected rz that by 2020 the UK will still rely on 70% for its energy demands despite the 15% target 18 for renewable energy being met.

Figure 9: Energy diversification in the UK between 1850 and 2030 19 Figure 9 shows that between now and 2030, the use of oil and coal as the primary mode of energy will be reduced, whilst the role of natural gas will proportionally increase and will become the predominant fossil fuel used. This will commence on a short term basis and gas will eventually be replaced by renewable sources of energy moving towards 2050. Moreover an ExxonMobil report predicts that by 2030, there will be a 35% increase in energy demands as compared to 2005 20 (Figure 10). All of this data suggests a stronger demand for energy in 2032 and with current oil and gas supplies set to stretch, and prices hike even more, people will further look to alternative forms 13

of transportation to avoid large fuel prices. This will further strengthen the position of EV such as the Roadster when demand becomes evidently higher with the predicted energy market shape in 2032.

Figure 10: World energy demand from 1980 till 2030 20 BTU=British Thermal Units

Figure 11: Risk factors for environmental programmes in the UK 17 Figure 11 shows 8 of the main ways the UK may diversify its energy requirements with a rating 0 to 3 showing increasing risk (where CCS is Carbon Capture and Storage). On a scale of 0-9 of risk, introducing electric vehicles is 6/9 which indicates it carries a medium to high risk of failure. Although it is clear through international policy shifts that future action lies towards reducing fossil fuels, figure 11 demonstrates that for government and policy making it is extremely risky to push for mass use of electric vehicles at their current level of technological advancement. It is imperative that Tesla showcase continual breakthroughs that will eventually lead to large scale governmental support.


2.2 Economic Tesla have invested in a top to bottom business plan, starting with expensive, low run vehicles to mass produced cheaper EVs. A potential hurdle to stability in component supplies, are rare metals and in particular Lanthanum and Neodymium. 97% 21 of the world’s current rare metal production lies with China and they are seeking to reduce exports sharply in line with in-house demand. Another potential future difficulty is that currently the majority of raw materials are being extracted from third world and developing countries. As these continue to grow in the next 20 years the price of organising investment and contractual agreements for excavation and exploration of raw materials will become increasingly expensive. Furthermore, there will be increased competition in contracts from countries such as China, India and Brazil as they prepare to support a growing population and increasing consumption. This will all add to an ever increasing cost of withdrawing precious metals and so drive up the cost of producing the key EV components such as Tesla’s EV power trains. It is advisable that Tesla should increase its research of alternate materials for the power train, to mitigate the risk of a global shortage raising the raw metal prices and correspondingly the Roadster and Tesla’s other models.

Figure 12: Electricity prices in the UK, France and Germany, in 2010 and 2030 17

Despite the imminent need for national scale progress of renewable energy resources and the reduction of fossil fuels figure 12 indicates the difficulties that could arise from failing to implement change. In 2010 the July average (of about 80-90 Euros/MW hours) compared to projections in July 2030 (approximately 200 Euros/MW hours) shows more than a double in electricity price. One of the most important factors effecting consumer opinion is the cost of purchase and running costs of an EV. Although the purchase costs of a Tesla Roadster are still high, the running costs are much lower than a sports ICV counterpart. Figure 12 shows the difficulties that Tesla could face in persuading buyers to invest in EVs if the cost of electricity becomes high enough to discourage acquisition.


Figure 13 Cost of mid-sized power train (Euros) 22

There are however encouraging signs that the mid-term (up till 2020) costs of power trains will decrease sharply for EVs as shown by figure 13. Tesla’s main competitors will increasingly be Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) and as the rate of power train costs drops by less percentage for PHEVs, future Tesla vehicle costs can be more competitive.

2.3 Societal  2.31 Introduction 3 words are inhibiting the mass scale approval by wider society of electric vehicles; range, performance and price. Tesla has already broken through the first reservation and their Roadster outperforms many of the current ICV sports cars. Price is an issue for potential Roadster customers however Tesla outlined a long term vision to eventually release large orders of cars with lower prices. Should they commit to their original goal, prices of the Tesla vehicle models should be within the reach of the majority middle class by 2032. Currently it is estimated that it takes 4-7 years 23 to recuperate the higher costs of investing in an electrical vehicle owing to the cheaper electricity costs compared to a petrol/diesel car. As the average American changes his car every 4 years it becomes evident why other than those dedicated to environmental conservation, economically it isn’t attractive.

 2.32 Recognition in UK consumer market


Figure 14: Recognition of competing automotive companies in the UK 24 Tesla faces a great challenge in entering the UK market according to figure 14. Figure 14 shows the percentage of UK recognition of current car manufacturers that are actively producing electric or hybrid vehicles. The Toyota Prius has significantly more detection from potential customers in the UK than Tesla or other leading companies. For greater identity and thus market share in 2032, Tesla should organise a more aggressive advertising campaign, especially with its current Roadster that boosts some of the most advanced features of any electric vehicle to date with its high range and performance. A useful strategy would be to target specific hotspot areas that generally advertise new schemes to the rest of the country and also have a large capability of setting up a committed charging network. London in particular is a very appropriate city to begin a larger advertising campaign with, and it has a traditional track record of exporting contemporary initiatives to the rest of the UK.

 2.33 Incentives Society may also be encouraged to take up new technology through incentives. For example solar panels have government subsidies that reduce their overall cost and allow more private home owners to implement renewable energy cheaper. Similarly the UK government has also made allowances for electric vehicles as par the following 25: 

20% up to £5,000 purchase subsidy for M1 band (no more than 8 seats) electric cars.

Exempt from annual road tax and London Congestion Charge (£10 per day).

Free parking and charging in London for £100 per year.

Reduced company car tax, 100% first year allowance.

Depending on the work and living location of an EV driver, more than £5000 can be saved compared to an ICV vehicle with the incentives outlined. Although they are an attractive start for first time 17

buyers more needs to be done to encourage a larger portion of the population to switch to EVs. The government could put in place special exemptions for EVs to use designated traffic lanes that are less congested. Furthermore, those owning EVs could get further cuts in their electricity bills to further boost ownership via a smart grid; however this could be potentially expensive to implement.

 2.34 Charging Time

Figure 15: Societal preference of EV charging times 4 Charging time is amongst the most crucial issues for electric vehicle consumers. Currently it may take anything from 4 hours to 30+ hours to fully charge a Roadster from low fuel depending on the mains capability and charging connector. Figure 15 shows that even with a charge time of 4 hours at home only 34% of the population are willing to carry out the charge. Tesla should reduce the charge time to make a tangible difference as one automotive executive stated “You need an electric car that can recharge in five minutes —that’s how a gas station works”. This should be a critical target to aim for, for 2032. 20 Years should allow for certain technological breakthroughs that will eventually lead to very short charge times.

 2.35 Range


Figure 16: % satisfaction of EV range 4

Improvements on range depend mainly on technological breakthroughs and whether the recharging battery infrastructure is updated enough to reassure the mass population of safe driving ranges. Figure 16 shows a survey carried out by the professional services firm Deloitte (rz), and depicts the percentage satisfaction of the range of electric vehicles. As the Tesla Roadster has a range of 245 miles it falls within in 50% of the satisfactory opinion of the population. It should be a firm intension of Tesla to increase this to 300-350 miles where more than 80% are satisfied with the range at least by 2020. This coupled with faster charging connectors and a network of charging stations will significantly increase consumer confidence in Tesla’s products.

 2.36 Population Growth & Long Haul EV Fleet Opportunities By 2030 it is projected that the global population will be 8.2 Billion (from 7 Billion in 2011 rz). On top of this great increase in population, there will be a large shortage in the transportation workforce (rz) in particular. As the world population increases transportation and logistics of goods and trade will increase rapidly putting extra strain on ageing work forces (especially in developed economies that are set to have an ageing population). Not only are there projections of a short fall in the workforce but there will need to be heavy investment of a dedicated freight fleet to transport goods transcontinentally. There is potential for Tesla Motors to work in partnership with a well established transport business. A contract on high range battery packs (as well as maintenance back up) could provide to be a lucrative market for Tesla to exploit. Currently Tesla is already working in conjunction with Mercedes on the small SMART cars on higher performance EV engines and there is nothing to suggest they cannot expand this to a large network of electric delivery vehicles such as the Mercedes Vito E-Cell (Figure 17).

Figure 17 : Mercedes Vito E-Cell 26


2.4 Technological  2.41 Introduction Current legislation is increasingly tightening CO2 emissions on transportation vehicles with financial penalties coming in for vehicles with giving more than the prescribed CO2 limits. Japan and the EU are set to charge 5 Euros for each g/km CO2 (rz) (95 Euros in 2020), and this will spur auto manufacturers to better design their power trains to avoid large monetary fines.

Figure 18: Global revenue of main vehicle components for 2010, 2020 and 2030


Figure 18 shows the projected sub-power train parts and how their sales will be affected up until 2030. Conventional parts such as the turbo charger and crankshafts will exhibit little overall changes in sales but he majority gain will be in the electric motor department. The exploration into electric motor optimisation is new and under developed and with the advent of higher hybrid and EV sales, is set to rise a quarter by 2030.

 2.42 Power Train Future Industry Direction The power train industry will mainly grow in three parallel tracks, the first being a continuation of the downsizing of the ICV engines to higher efficiencies. The second is the development of hybrid engines and the third is the design of more efficient pure electric power trains. In the near to medium future (now-2020), ICV power train design will continue to dominate the market, however between 2020-2030 it is proposed that hybrids cars will pick up on mass in the medium term. This is due to the global movement that is helping to encourage hybrid and electric vehicles through tax incentives and subsidies and also the prediction of ultra high oil prices driving up the fuel costs for ICVs. 2030 onwards will see a much more robust market for EVs and whilst hybrids will continue to grow, EVs sales will increase rapidly, especially with larger amounts of electricity being converted through renewable energy sources.


Figure 19: Automotive focus on current electric motors 28 The most current EV engines are run by PMSMs or permanent magnet synchronous motors. As the acronym suggests these motors have permanent magnets in the rotor that allow it to rotate at the same time as the stators magnetic field. This is also the reason these motors are called synchronous. Two other types of electric motors that are under development are the SRM (switched reluctance motor) and TFM motors (transverse flux motor) (rz). Rotor poles

Stator poles

Figure 20: (SRM: 3-phase, 6 rotor/4 stator poles, left) & (TFM, right) Figure 20 (left) shows a representative diagram of the SRM motor, and this motor does not contain any copper wires but rather relies on the energisation of a phase that will align the rotor poles with the stator poles 28. Due to the simple structure of the SRM motors and their lack of permanent magnet, they are cheaper to produce than conventional PMSMs 28. However SRM motors does have drawbacks, and they are known to be especially noisy due to the micro movements of the rotor causing vibratory normal forces on the stator. This can also unsettle a smooth torque line and SRM 21

motors can also suffer from high fluctuations in torque. The number of phases of the motor can be increased which decreases the torque ripple but this can raise the cost of producing the components 28 . TFMs on the other hand have a very complex 3-D shape that requires raised costs to produce as compared to PMSM and SRM but they have greater power and efficiency. In the next 20 years a significant amount of automotive research will be spent on improving these electric motors to the level of efficiency that ICVs currently enjoy.

 2.43 Conclusions On Technology An alternative route for Tesla would be to research alternate materials that can support a powerful power train other than lithium, as there are potential shortfalls in supply should countries like China restrict exports. Potential materials in place of lithium that are currently being researched are zinc, magnesium-sulphur and nickel. Other than the engine significant components of Tesla’s EV line-up that are crucial are chassis/body weight and aerodynamic performance. These can also affect the power/weight ratio and drag respectively and correspondingly the car efficiency. A stream lined intuitive media system can also wholly benefit Tesla’s vehicles as customers are increasingly looking for greater cooperation between their cars, mobiles, ipads and laptops.

2.5 Environmental  2.51 Wheel-to-Wheel efficiency The effect of the environment on Tesla and their power train design activities revolves mainly around the impact of CC action in the next 20 years. The role of CC can be amplified by events such as natural disasters and eccentric weather patterns, often invoking international political action as well as individualistic engagement. The core message for Tesla is to demonstrate that through the purchase of electric vehicles people can help mitigate the effects of serious and irreversible climate change. Increasingly in the modern sphere, comparisons are made between EVs and ICVs in terms of their impact on the environment, not only during the running phase of their use, but also the total process of acquiring and producing the energy required to run these vehicles. The standard often used is Well to Wheel (WTW) efficiency, and it encompasses the extraction, mining, delivering, and producing of vehicle fuels. The other element is made up of the actual carbon footprint that the running of the vehicle adds to the overall representation (such as tailpipe emissions). The main environmental factors considered are CO2 emissions (WTW), air quality impact, waste treatment, water usage, and human related consequences of EV production. To support Tesla’s belief that EVs are indeed more environmentally friendly, a strong argument has to be made with which to stake that claim. Researchers have different methods of testing a vehicle’s released emission quantities. They may be the TTW (Tank to Wheel) which in essence looks at the power train efficiency of a vehicle. They may use the energy required to extract the source fuel and transport it to a fuelling station (Well to Tank). The Well to Wheel analysis is an all encompassing method that considers all chains in the link from fuel extraction down to the power train efficiency and tail pipe emissions. It is the most useful general analysis but may contain larger errors due to the expansive operation that it attempts to chart.


Figure 21: WTW operation Figure 21 shows a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of the full process of fuel extraction for an EV. At each stage of the cycle CO2 is emitted and for Tesla to truly prove it is more environmentally friendly compared to an ICV it must demonstrate better efficiency in the LCA analysis. It is argued by those questioning the large impact of EVs in reducing CC damage that although TTW emissions are minute, the process of producing electrical energy reduces this benefit. To compare the real effect of emissions emitted by EVs and ICVs there are two standard functional units used to weigh the results: energy use/km (Joules/km for ICVs and kWh/km for EVs) and grams CO2 /kWh electricity (rz). In particular, the CO2 emissions can greatly vary from country to country depending on the mix of methods used to generate electricity. For example, coal power stations release twice as much CO2 than a conventional gas cycle station. Nuclear produces even less and renewable energy sources emit the least amount of CO2 (regardless of whether it is wind, solar, geothermal etc).

 2.52 Electricity Production


Figure 22: Energy mix in producing electricity from now until 2030 29 Figure 22 shows the predicted carbon dioxide emissions for the next 20 years when a mixed fuel scenario is envisaged between EVs and ICVs. By mixed fuel, it is suggested that a mix of coal cycle, gas cycle, nuclear and renewable sources are used to produce electricity. It is clear that under this assumption the EVs would release just under a third of the amount of CO2 in the total LCA. Owing to political policies it is predicted that ICV manufacturers will have to produce more efficient vehicles that figure 22 shows the rapid reduction in emissions up till 2020. During the gap from the modern day up until 2020, a larger portion of electricity production will be via renewable sources and this accounts for drop in CO2 emissions for EVs. It is to be noted however that if it was presumed that all electricity was produced via lignite or coal, EVs would in fact produce more release more carbon dioxide into the environment 29. EVs are only more efficient when powered through gas cycles, nuclear and of course renewable sources.

 2.53 Well-To-Wheel efficiency of EVs vs. ICVs According to estimates the extraction of natural resources has an efficiency of 92% 29.Electricity production has efficiencies as low as 39% (coal powered plants) to 42% (gas). Therefore it can be estimated that for an all-gas powered electric grid the Well to Tank efficiency is:

The Tank to Wheel efficiency for an electric vehicle depends on the battery charging, battery storage, transmission, electric resistance and electric motor which accumulates to about 65-80% (rz). Therefore the overall WTW efficiency (for the lower bound) is:

With a similar analysis carried out for the ICVs, table 1 is a result of the full LCA.

Well to Tank Tank to Wheel Well to Wheel



83 15-20 12-17

38 65-80 25-30

Table 2: ICV vs. EV WTW The results show that Evs are up to twice as efficient in terms of CO2 emissions as the ICVs. It is important to consider than the methodology used was based on gas cycles and any involvement of nuclear technology and renewable energy would only increase the efficiency gap between Evs and ICVs. The general picture is that EVs do have credible green credentials as their manufacturers relate, however it would be more useful to compare the Roadster with competing vehicles.


Example Vehicle

Source Fuel

Well To Tank

Vehicle Mileage 24

Vehicle Efficiency

Well To Wheel

Well to Wheel

efficiency (%) Natural Gas Engine Hydrogen Fuel Cell

Honda CNG Honda FCX


VW Jetta

Petrol Hybrid (gas/electric) Electric

Honda Civic Toyota Prius Tesla Roadster

Natural Gas Natural Gas Crude Oil Crude Oil Crude Oil Natural Gas


efficiency CO2 (km/MJ) emissions


35 mpg




64 m/kg




50 mpg




51 mpg




55 mpg




110 Wh/km



166.0 g/km 151.7 g/km 152.7 g/km 141.7 g/km 130.4 g/km 46.1 g/km

Table 3: WTW values for main technology competitors of the Tesla Roadster 30 As table 3 shows, the Tesla Roadster compared to other vehicles of different source technology with the maximum efficiency currently available. It was expected that the extraction of fossil fuels such as natural gas is more inefficient then crude oil and so the WTT value for the Roadster is much lower. It is however assumed to be powered 100% from natural gas, striking a balance between the less efficient coal and more efficient nuclear and renewable energy production methods. The WTW is calculated by multiplying the WTT with the vehicle efficiency (Appendix: A2). The actual values of the potential carbon dioxide emissions released are shown at the far right column of table 3. Tesla’s Roadster is releasing about a 1/3 of the carbon dioxide emissions compared to the next most green vehicle (Toyota Prius).

 2.54 Air Acidification Characteristically EVs are seen as positive in improving the air quality as they do not emit any tailpipe emissions. However, during the fuel extraction and transportation of fossil fuels required to produce electricity, significant air pollutants are released. Air acidification is the process by which the atmospheric air absorbs emitted substances such as sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and ammonia. The acid precipitate leads to the damage of natural wildlife and the soil ph balance.


Figure 23: Global Air acidification according to respective transport technology 32 Figure 23 shows the emitted sulphur dioxide content between the three types of vehicles, EVs, petrol and diesel. At the current time it is estimated that the sulphur dioxide emittance from EV usage is far greater than that of the ICVs. It is mainly due to the obtaining of the fuels required to produce electricity rather than the EV itself that is releasing the toxic substances into the environment, however 12% of the emissions are from the acquirement of lithium metals in the battery. By 2030, EVs are on par with their ICV counterparts due to the larger portion of electricity being projected to be produced via renewable and nuclear technology.

 2.55 Photochemical Oxidants Photochemical oxidants are another form of environmental damage that may come about from the use of transportation. It is claimed that high levels of these in the environment reduces crop yields, especially those responsive to sensitive ecological disturbances such as wheat. The majority of the photochemical oxidants released by ICVs are through the tailpipe, while for EVs they are emitted at the power stations producing electricity.

 2.56 Lithium Reserves


Figure 24: Global lithium reserve base 31

Although the inception of EVs is being proved to be a positive addition into society, particular attention has to be also laid on the materials required to overhaul an existingly large consignment of ICVs. It is projected that the number of vehicles in the world, surpassed 1 billion in 2011 (rz). For Tesla Motors, the ideal 20 year goal is to hold a significant stake in the portion of EVs being sold in the international market. To successfully overturn the overwhelming number of ICVs in the vehicle market, it is crucial to persuade society that EVs are capable of taking over without causing further strain to the world’s stock of rapidly depleting raw materials. For Tesla’s Roadster and EVs in general, the battery is the central technology persuading autophiles to switch to EVs. The Tesla Roadster battery is currently made up lithium ions, similar to laptop batteries but in multiple batches. To envisage the mass take up of EVs, it is obligatory to ascertain the effects of mining for and obtaining lithium on the orders of magnitude required to supply international demand. Figure 24 (rz-environment 6) shows the majority of the lithium reserves in the South American regions of Bolivia, Chile and Argentina. William Tahill of Meridian International Research predicts that in a presumptive case that Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) replace ICVs globally, 25% of the world’s Lithium Carbonate would be required. That is a huge strain not only the raw materials available but also the associated mining and extraction that could potentially cause great environmental damage to the local vicinity that house the lithium. Essentially lithium could replace oil as the next sought after substance, with the potential to politically transform South America into the next Middle East. Lithium unlike oil is recyclable but 100% recuperance is impossible and continuous production of lithium will be required. It would be a strategically advantageous for Tesla to demonstrate to government and the wider public, how shortfalls in lithium would be met and mitigated, especially in the next 20 years and further by which Tesla is hoping to command strong EV sales.

 2.57 Water Usage


Figure 25: Global water usage by technology type in 2010, 2020 and 2030 32

The majority of the electricity produced at the present day relies on power stations using a substantial amount of water for cooling in the steam cycles. This is especially true for coal, gas and nuclear power stations. Figure 25 shows the current and predicted water consumption levels in 2020 and 2030. Through EVs a much larger portion of the water supply is being withdrawn and consumed, and little is discharged back into the supply streams. By 2030 there is a reduction in the order of a half of the water consumed by EV usage directly or otherwise, and this is due to the projected greater role of renewable electricity production that uses less water.

Figure 26: Total USA water withdrawals 33 28

Figure 26 shows the total USA water withdrawals by category in the year 2000 and almost 50% of the water withdrawn that year were used in electricity producing power plants. This figure is estimated to grow in the next 20 years where energy demands are set to raise by 50%. This is a major environmental problem as the combination of CC and other external effects affecting the water supply, there is concern for the global supply of water.

Figure 27 : Global water scarcity 34

Figure 27 shows the scale of water scarcity in 2025 with a large segment of the world population facing one kind or another form of water shortages. By this year it is estimated that 5 billion people will face periodic water shortages 33, which is approximately 60/70% of the anticipated population of 2025. It is crucial that Tesla Motors demonstrate that in the oncoming future, they are committed to supporting electricity production through renewable mean. This could be achieved by supporting research and infrastructural projects that attempt to switch the electricity burden to wind, solar power or other forms of least water usage.

2.6 Legal  2.61 US Stimulus Bill It is predicted that in the next 20 years there will be significant legislative proposals that will naturally increase the sales of EVs. For example the United States passed a Stimulus bill in 2009 that 29

contained measures, aiding the expansion of the EV industry. In the 787$ billion stimulus bill, a significant portion was reserved for electric vehicles (table 4)


Cost ($ billion)

Loan guarantees for automakers to retool for electric cars and plug-ins Grants to battery manufacturers Plug-in vehicle tax credit Tax credits Plug-in vehicle manufacture Federal procurement of high efficiency vehicles Table 4: US Stimulus Bill breakdown 35

6 2 2 0.51 0.4 0.3

Table 4 shows a list of the prominent EV friendly actions from the Stimulus Bill that has increased EV design by auto manufacturers. With these incentives, auto manufacturers produce new EVs with the confidence that governments are playing an increasingly supporting role in footing the huge costs in developing new technologies and bringing them to market.

 2.62 Californian High Occupancy Vehicle Programme Tesla Motors should also be aware of local legislative acts that are often not internationally advertised but may provide a niche market for marketing campaigns. One such example is California’s High Occupancy Vehicle (yellow sticker) programme 35. This programme as its name implies. Covered only the state of California (fortunately the design home of Tesla), and allowed vehicles with zero-emission stickers to drive in special carpool lanes. Carpooling has been advertised in the USA and is a scheme that encourages car sharing, particularly in high pollution periods and high fuel prices. After the programme ended in April 2011, many of the hybrid vehicle drivers stated a desire to be able to use the carpool lanes again through buying a zero emissions vehicle for a similar programme (called the white sticker programme), that currently still allows carpool lane use.

 2.63 UK Action The first major modern policy shift by the UK government was in 2008 with the Climate Change Act (CCA). It was an ambitious piece of legislation that proposes to reduce the emissions by up to 80% by the year 2050 (also 50% reduction by 2027 is scheduled). The UK government is also due to introduce a Finance Bill in autumn 2012 (currently being approved). It contains details of particular tax reliefs to businesses producing electricity through fossil fuels who install Carbon Capture Storage (CCS) technology. These are two recent examples of the growing action by the UK government to commit to a long term CO2 emission reduction programme. These legislations will further strengthen Tesla’s position in the market as it will forcefully reduce CO2 emissions at electrical power plants and increase the role of renewable energy technology. This will reduce the overall WTW emissions that en electric car such as the Tesla Roadster exhibits, making it much more commercially attractive for the wider public.


3 Specific Scientific Developments  3.1 Granted Tesla Patents Patents can be a clear indication of the direction that a particular company are taking, and as they are applied over a course of 20 years, and would see out the forgoing period of the growth of EVs. Table 5 shows a list of patents that Tesla has been granted in the last 5 years, and they show a spread in the technology that has been worked on. Table 5 also demonstrates that Tesla is investing heavily on their power trains and especially the battery.

Patent Granted Title Condensation-induced corrosion resistant cell mounting well User configurable vehicle user interface (media interface) Battery thermal event detection system using a thermally interruptible electrical conductor Liquid cooled rotor assembly Battery capacity estimating method and apparatus Method for battery charging based on cost and life Table 5: Granted Tesla Motor patents

 3.2 Patent Competition

Figure 28: Patents taken out by major auto companies since 2002 36


Figure 28 shows a list of patents taken out (period 2002-2011) by the largest auto manufacturing investors of hybrid or EV technology. Tesla run 9th on the overall number of patents taken out since 2002 but have been granted many patents in 2009 and 2010. Although the other manufacturing companies such as Toyota and Honda have been taking out large amounts of patents, many of them have been for hybrid technology. This may be advantageous in the medium term (10-20 years) but electric vehicles will eventually replace hybrids and ICVs and Tesla would be ideally placed for patent leases as their patents are very specialised in EV technology.

 3.3 Proposed Tesla Patents

Figure 29: Liquid Cooled Rotor Assembly patent ( Figure 29 shows the patent “Liquid Cooled Rotor Assembly� that was granted to Tesla Motors in August 2009. Tesla has the highest performing electric power train on the market and is working on supporting network to strengthen the overall performance of their engines. Essentially it is a veinlike cooling system (100) that runs through a hollow rotor (101), and reduces of the assembly. This is especially for batteries in EVs that can be susceptible to high ambient temperature changes. (113) shows the position of the coolant feed tube orifice (109) where coolant is channelled to an end wall at position (105). The coolant flow (115) is reflected to either the lower or upper side channels, inbetween the feed tube (109) and rotor drive shaft (103). Support members (111) may be configured in various different spoke formations depending on the requirements, and (117 & 119) are coolant seals. This rotor coolant device demonstrates that Tesla Motors are constantly tightening their already outstanding engine capabilities with supportive technology.

Patent Pending Title Method and apparatus for extending lifetime for rechargeable stationary energy storage devices Control, collection and use of metal-air battery pack effluent Hazard mitigation within a battery pack using metal-air cells Efficient dual source battery pack system for an electric vehicle Battery pack configuration to reduce hazards associated with internal short circuits Method of controlled cell-level fusing within a battery pack Table 6: Latest patents that Tesla Motors have currently applied for 32

Table 6 shows a list of the current patents that Tesla motors have taken out and are awaiting a decision on. It is evident by the titles of the patents that Tesla is very much focusing on battery technology. As an example, the patent ‘Efficient dual source battery pack system for an electric vehicle’ was published in February 2012 and is awaiting acceptance. The basis of this patent was to optimise the power source for an EV through using two battery packs (a non-air metal and an airmetal battery pack). This patent not only showcases a new form of power source use, but patents the algorithm required for the ECU to carry out the process (Appendix: A4).

 3.4 Metal-Air Batteries

Figure 30: An EV with dual battery pack (Espace.ent) Figure 30 shows the basic configuration for an EV fitted with a non-metal-air battery pack (NMA) and a metal-air battery pack (MA). As an example, a metal air battery could be lithium-air and works by taking air (during driving or discharge) from the ambient environment and letting it react with the lithium ions to produce lithium peroxide (on a carbon matrix). For recharging, the oxygen is dissipated into the environment and the lithium moves back to the anode (figure _: IBM research). Metal-air batteries could be composed of any of the following metals mixed with air: aluminium, zinc, iron, lithium, nickel and lead. Depending on the metal used the specific energy density and the specific power of the battery can change.


Figure 31 : IBM Lithium-Air battery 37 Figure 32 shows a list of different metal-air battery combinations and their respective statistics in terms of power and energy. Each combination of metal-air has advantages and disadvantages however only some of them can become realistically commercial ventures. Zinc/air has the opportunity of being commercially viable due to its large reserves and lower costs. It also has a high specific energy which effectively means a zinc/air battery can carry a larger fuel load for the same volume of space. Zinc however has a lower specific power or power to weight ratio.

 3.5 Lithium-Air Batteries The most attractive acquisition in future battery technology is lithium/air and as figure 32 shows, it has the potential t to grant 600-1000 (Watt hours/kg) of specific energy to the EV. It is proposed that in the next 20 years Tesla motors will increase their activities in the area of metal/air batteries. Lithium ion batteries are being improved constantly; however metal/air batteries are a new invention area and with specific breakthroughs, could potentially replace lithium-ion cells. Before lithium/air batteries take hold they have to address logistical problems the main being: very low power (sti 5) and the handling of lithium peroxide which is a very reactive oxidising agent.


Figure 32: Competing metal-air battery technologies 38

4 Summary Tesla Motors are in a strong EV market position and they require consolidation in the next 20 years to truly become a globally recognised and respected brand. They currently have the best performing power train in terms of performance and range and the most important step in improving sales is to enter the most likely global locations for EV infrastructural development. The better strategy is to penetrate capital cities such as London, Tokyo or Moscow, where there is a combination of strong political influence, scheme exportation to the rest of the country and more customers able to invest in their EVs. A potential market strategy is to focus on the USA where Tesla enjoy nationwide coverage and then slowly penetrate European countries such as Norway and UK with long term EV plans. This could be whilst selling to high earning one-off customers elsewhere in the world. Innovation in the field of battery technology also puts them in an advantageous position to collaborate with other companies and export their patents, charging a lease price. Tesla however has to beware of the potential hikes in rare metals, especially in the next 20 years. As EVs take hold in the international markets there will be a growing need for metals such as lithium and Tesla have to have a stringent strategy of overcoming price hikes or emergency supply shortages. Divergence in Tesla’s battery research like zinc or nickel ion batteries as they are cheaper, more readily available and less likely to incur abrupt price changes is advised. Societal views on CC are likely to take hold in larger portions by 2032 with natural disasters projected to increase with corresponding damage costs and mortality rates. There are therefore high chances that governments around the world are going to take greater action to reduce CO2 emissions and also increase vehicle incentives to encourage EV buying and so meet their legal 35

binding emissions targets. This will open up multiple market exploitation opportunities for Tesla and they have to ensure that they advertise and promote their products around the inception of these schemes to prevent competitors taking a larger EV market share. Currently Tesla has a very low recognition factor in the UK, and Toyota (with their Prius) in particular have shown that solid marketing can massively increase peoples awareness of new products. Aggressively advertising overseas should one of Tesla’s near future activities. For example, Tesla has good foundations with which to build a positive argument for the purchase of the Roadster (especially with long range and high performance). However marketing budgets can be excessively large and there possibilities that after an aggressive advertising campaign Tesla could still remain a niche market product for wealthy individuals, as opposed to becoming a global brand with mass market appeal. Judging from the patent activity of Tesla and its competitors, the battle ground for future EV technology will be based around the battery pack design. Although Lithium-ion batteries are the most popular material of the EV engine, research is being done on metal-air batteries and they could quite possibly be the permanent to go engine type for future EVs, pending technological breakthroughs. As a pioneer in EV battery technology Tesla has the opportunity to become established before competing companies such as Toyota, Honda and GM who are currently spreading their work between ICV, Hybrid and EV technology enter the market wholesale. Tesla is actively pursuing many battery patents at the cost of an expensive R & D programme and there are risks that the money invested will become obsolete should the technology produced be unworkable. Tesla’s WTW efficiency can be lower or higher than ICVs depending on how the electricity is produced. Coal powered power stations are extremely hazardous to the environment and can be responsible for air acidification, photochemical oxidant release and excessive water use. If Tesla wants to portray an image of environmental protection, they have to publically support renewable energy projects and gain societal trust with action. Without clear brand messages, Tesla’s EV sales could be exceedingly slow and the common consumer may be more likely to opt for the safer option hybrid vehicles who have strong automotive support (GM, Toyota). Tesla’s short term plan should be to consolidate their position in the EV market by increasing their vehicle range to 300/350 miles, where 80% of those polled are satisfied. This may be done with continual improvement of their battery technology. A long term plan is to release vehicles in the £15,000 range that is accessible for a large portion of the common population.


Appendix 1: Personal project diary and Gantt plan Week 1: I spent the first week gathering information about Tesla Motors to gain a better overview of the company dynamics and future aspirations. Most of the findings were either off Tesla’s official site, online blogs or auto news websites. The formative task was handed in on time however the mark I received urged me to write in a more formal, academic style as opposed to a magazine article as my writing had been affected by the articles I was reading online. Week 2: In week 2 I was scheduled to complete the Gantt chart and carry on research on the current product. I felt that the pace of work was too slow and that I would have to read a lot of information for little output. Week 3: After researching the current product I set out to write but I often found it difficult to write concisely without key pieces of information. I believe for future projects I require a narrative for a report and stick to the central narrative instead of digging for random pieces of information. Week 4: I began to fall a little behind in my weekly schedule, and the current product had been started but I was struggling to find the information that I wanted. I think a key strategy that I would use in the future is the importance of fishing for good reports and references. Information is important but it has to be factually reliable and most of my online references weren’t. Week 5: Still working on current product and have started to pinpoint better references. I am also working on untangling EV terminology and technology. Weeks 6-8: Little work done due to alternative coursework’s that had forthcoming deadlines as well as the master’s project. By now I had completed around 3000 words and had some momentum. Easter: Majority of the external influences and scientific breakthroughs were done in these 3 weeks. Due to some tips from Dr Jones I decided to look further into reports made by professional organisations such as IBM or the department of transport. The increase in quality information led me to write twice as much as planned and I had reached 9000 words by the end of Easter. That is double the maximum limit prescribed. I found this actually helped as I had a large amount of information to use for the final report and it became easier to reduce it to a respectable word limit. Week 9: In week 9 I refined the report and added the references. I found it useful to leave notes of the report or website that I used for a particular reference, without having to formally fill it in. This kept my writing style more fluid. I also referenced by each section as opposed to the whole report and that helped keep track of the sources of information. My main deficiencies were lack of planning before each writing session and poor sources of information that I have now learnt from. Conclusions: The main weaknessed in writing this report was the management of time over a long project period, especially when urgency is less require at the beginning. I believe I should also be aware of spiralling the size of a project beyond control, where it becomes difficult to cohenrently bond the project narrative. My strengths have been the scope and detail of a lot of different information put together to give a birds eye view of the central message.



Tesla Motors- Powertrain

Work Break Down Structure Start Date

Duration (Wk)

30/01/12 06/02/12 30/01/12

1 1 12

30/01/12 30/01/12 30/01/12

4 4 4

27/02/12 30/01/12 27/02/12 30/01/12 27/02/12

3 5 3 5 4



09/04/12 09/04/12

2 2




Week Starting

Start Date: 30/01/2012





13-Feb 20-Feb



1.1 Planning 1.11 Formative Task 1. 12 Gantt Chart 1.13 Diary

1.2 Current Product 1.21 Current Technology Used 1.22 Market Currently Served 1.23 Customer Demands

1.3 Major External Influences 1.31 Politcal 1.32 Environmental 1.33 Societal 1.34 Technological 1.35 Economical 1.36 Legal

1.4 Scientific & Technological Developments 1.41 Scientific Technology Research

1.5 Summary 1.51 Viability of Developing New Products 1.52 Main Risks

1.6 References 1.61 Reference check


Gantt Chart 1: Pre-planned Event Plan 39







05-Mar 12-Mar 19-Mar 26-Mar 02-Apr 09-Apr






23-Apr 30-Apr 07-May 14-May 21-May

Tesla Motors- Powertrain Start Date: 30/01/2012 Week Starting


Work Break Down Structure Start Date

Duration (Wk)

30/01/12 06/02/12 30/01/12

1 2 6

30/01/12 30/01/12 30/01/12

5 5 4

26/03/12 26/03/12 26/03/12 26/03/12 26/03/12 26/03/12

3 3 3 3 3 3



16/04/12 16/04/12

1 1







1.2 Current Product 1.21 Current Technology Used 1.22 Market Currently Served 1.23 Customer Demands

1.3 Major External Influences 1.31 Politcal 1.32 Environmental 1.33 Societal 1.34 Technological 1.35 Economical 1.36 Legal

1.4 Scientific & Technological Developments 1.41 Scientific Technology Research

1.5 Summary 1.51 Viability of Developing New Products 1.52 Main Risks

1.6 References 1.61 Reference check





Easter Easter





30-Jan 06-Feb 13-Feb 20-Feb 27-Feb 05-Mar 12-Mar 19-Mar 26-Mar 02-Apr 09-Apr 16-Apr 23-Apr 30-Apr 07-May 14-May 21-May

1.1 Planning 1.11 Formative Task 1. 12 Gantt Chart 1.13 Diary


Gantt Chart 2: Actual Event Plan 40

Appendix 2: Supplementary information A1. Differing charge times depending on mains power levels. Electrical power is a derivative of the components of Ohm’s law, namely current I and Voltage V. Power is equal to:

For a standard Tesla Roadster with a 53kW battery pack and standard North American mains of 110 volts and 15 amp, the number of hours required to charge a battery is:

American households have the ability to enhance their mains power level to a 220 volt, 70 amp setting. Accordingly the time required to fully charge a Tesla Roadster would be:

A2. Well To Wheel (table _) The USA’s Environment Protection Agency has provided a guide process of calculating the WTW. The most efficient hydrogen fuel cell measured by the EPA is the Honda FCX, which utilises 80.5 km/kg. With the energy content of hydrogen being 141.9 MJ/kg, the vehicle efficiency is obtained by dividing the two values:

The WTW is calculated by multiplying this value by the WTT value from table _ (61%):

A3. Carbon Content of Source Fuel (table _) It is possible under certain assumptions to calculate the carbon content of any source fuel. For example natural gas a carbon content of 14.4 grams/MJ (rz-environment 5). 1 gram of carbon can be considered 3.67 grams of CO2 (emission equivalent) due to the respective atomic weights of carbon and oxygen (12 and 16). The carbon dioxide content of natural gas is thus:


A4. Schematic diagram of the process of battery selection for a dual battery source EV (sti 3)

A5. Lithium-metal oxide chemical reaction

Where x and y are the volume fractions of the respective metals and compounds. 42

A6. UK type of energy use in 2011 (left) and 2010 (right)

(environment 14)

A7. Liquid Cooled Rotor Assembly



References 1: Reynolds, Kim. Comparison: 2010 Tesla Roadster Sport vs 2011 Porsche Boxster Spyder, [Online] Available from orsche_boxster_spyder_comparison/viewall.html February 2010 2: Musk, Elon, The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan, [Online] Available from August 2006 3: Dapena, Peter, Tesla racks up $40M worth of Model X orders, [Online] Available from February 2012 4: Giffi, Graig et al, Gaining traction: A customer view of eletric vehicle mass adoption in the U.S. automotive market, 2010 5:, Sports cars features. [Online] Available from, n.d 6: Tesla Motors, Tesla Vehicle Range, [Online] Available form, n.d

7: Zero Emission Motoring, Tesla Roadster Sport 2.5 [Online] Available from [assessed November 25th 2010] 8: Tesla Motors, Roadster Innovations/Motor, [Online] Available from n.d 9: Wizzlefits, Axial Flux Stator Coils, [Online] Available from [assessed September 10th 2010] 10: Marshall, Brian, How Lithium-ion Batteries Work, 14 November 2006, [Online] Available from [assessed 10th April 2012] 11: Wiley, John & Larmini, James, Electric Vehicle Technology Explained, [Online] Available from, 2003 12: Lampton, Christopher, How Electric Car Batteries Work, 18 August 2008 [Online] Available from, [assessed 19th April 2012] 13: Goldenrider, Tesla Roadster 2.5 Released by Tesla Motors, [Online] Available from, 11th July 2012


14: Everett, Andrew et al, Initial Findings from the Ultra Low Carbon Vehicle Demonstrator Programme, Technology Strategy Board, 2011 15: Climate Vulnerability Monitor, Weather Disasters, 2010 16: Sharman, Hugh & Constable, John, Electricity Prices in the United Kingdom: Fundamental Drivers and Probable Trends, 2008 17: Oil & Gas UK, Economic report 2011, [Online] Available from September 2011 18: Eur-Lex, Official Journal of the European Union, [Online] Available from 5th June 2009

19: Dudley Bob, Energy Outlook 2030, BP, 2011 20: Exxon Mobil, Outlook for Energy A View to 2030, n.d 21: Le Page, Guy & Comas Andy, Hastings Rare Metals Limited, 6th February 2012 22: Valentine, Micheal, Powertrain 202, The Future Drives Electric, 13th October 2009 23 Aecom, Economic Viability of Electric Vehicles, [Online] Available from 4th September 2009 24: Kleber, Micheal, Electrification of the Automotive Industry – The European Consumer’s View, March 2011 25: Connevted, EV Numbers, [Online] Available from, n.d 26: Agememnon, Mercedes Vito E-Cell, [Online] Available from 27: Kampker, Ing & Franzkoch, Bastian, Boost, Mckinsey and Company, n.d 28: Direnzo, Micheal, Switched Reluctance Motor Control – Basic Operation and Example Using the TMS320F240, 2000 29: Kampman, Bettina et al¸ Development of policy recommendations to harvest the potential of electric vehicles, January 2010 30: Eberhard, Martin & Tarpenning, Marc, The 21st Century Electric Car, 2006 31: Tahil, William, The Trouble with Lithium, December 2006

32: Department of Transport, Investigation into the Scope for the Transport Sector to Switch to Electric Vehicles and Plugin Hybrid Vehicles, October 2008


33: Sovacool, Benjamin, RUNNING ON EMPTY: THE ELECTRICITY-WATER NEXUS AND THE U.S. ELECTRIC UTILITY SECTOR, n.d 34: Global Warming Forecasts 2025, Water Shortages, [Online] Available from 35: Becker, Thomas & Sidhu, Ikhlaw, Electric Vehicles in the United States, Center for Entrepreneurship & Technology (CET), Technical Brief Number: 2009.1.v.2.0, Revision Date: August 24, 2009 36:Farley, Heslin & Mesiti.P.C, Clean Energy Patent Growth Index 2011 37: EcoFriend, IBM’s Lithium-ion battery, [Online] Available from 38: Bakker, Daan, Battery Electric Vehicles, August 2010


Tesla Roadster Powertrain  
Tesla Roadster Powertrain  

Future viability of Tesla's business growth including particular focus on their Roadster model's powertrain