Tri motor Cybertruck better V2G *investment* value than dual?

rstrouts

Member
First Name
Richard
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Arvada, Colorado
Vehicles
Model 3
Country flag
Purchase $ for purchase $, would the tri-motor $69k CT's larger (?) or more efficient (?) battery have better *investment* value for V2G (Vehicle to Grid) than dual motor $49k CT?
 

Cyberman

Well-known member
First Name
Adam
Joined
Apr 7, 2020
Messages
93
Reaction score
112
Location
San Diego
Vehicles
F150,F550, Escape
Occupation
Cybercontractor
Country flag
Purchase $ for purchase $, would the tri-motor $69k CT's larger (?) or more efficient (?) battery have better *investment* value for V2G (Vehicle to Grid) than dual motor $49k CT?
I dunno, it's a big stretch from 50k to 70k, it can't have 20k worth of added battery power, can it? I know it has an extra motor, but the price jump is pretty steep. I think I'll stick with the C2 Dual. But, truth be told, if money were no obstacle, I'd spring for the C3
 

Rthardison

Member
First Name
Rusty
Joined
Dec 23, 2019
Messages
23
Reaction score
17
Location
TN
Vehicles
Cybertruck, Model 3, Model S
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
80 kWh extra for $20K. That is equivalent to six Powerwalls at $7,500 each = $45K. Sounds like a good deal, but those six Powerwalls will give you 30 kw of power where your CT will be limited to 11 kw.

Decisions decisions. :)
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
834
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
If you want to fantasize about V2G its your fantasy and you can imagine anything you want.

A more realistic fantasy is that the TriMotor will have multiple charging ports as the Semi is set up that way. The current chargers are capable of passing 48 A at 240 to the battery and with minimal modification could pass it back to the mains were Tesla to chose to make those mods and, of course, also add the additional hardware and software necessary for V2G. So why not fantasize that you will have 96 A available?

Musk has, in the past, indicated that he has little interest in V2G at this time but that may change if the utilities ever move towards V2G and if batteries whose chemical age isn't so severely impacted by repeared cycling are developed. At the same time he has got a charger architecture that is not incompatible with V2G so he can tell the starry eyed that Tesla's products are capable of it. The man is a genius when it comes to stuff like that.
 
Last edited:

Cybr on

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
105
Reaction score
90
Location
San Joaquin
Vehicles
Tri motor FSD
Country flag
Just to be clear, I appreciate you telling me what I can and cannot believe in. Funny, But I guess it helps you feel better about yourself. That’s ok. I get it. But I hope you understand that wisdom is not free and that our only price is to pay attention. I’m sure your an amazing thinker. But even the best of the best mess up every now and then. I love Elon for pushing through those personalities that said what he could do and rocketry was a fanatasy🤣 I’m enjoying every single day. Love his vision and his love for all of us and he does not know me from Adam:) so, you who call what Some like me believe to be the future as fantasy. Well, ok.. it’s mine and a handful of others. i think I will use common sense. approach here. Why can’t you see what I can ? lol anyways, be kind😊Life is too short.
 

Geo

Well-known member
First Name
George
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
110
Reaction score
111
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Vehicles
Subaru STI, KTM450EXC
Country flag
While V2G whole community’s have been formed to work this concept in some Scandinavian country’s I’ve seen.

I'm with AJDelange on this, its a fantasy.

V2G at the moment has a very marginal cash benefit to the consumer for a tradeoff in battery cycle accelerated degradation (devaluation $$), and vehicle convenience / use.

Due to certain substantial disadvantages inherent in the concept of vehicle battery serving regular consistent power to the grid.

In technical terms we’d call this whole idea “a bit of a wank”.

A/ You have to sign over control of the battery (vehicle) to the Electricity Utility,
or if Tesla wants to act as the intermediary, let them negotiate control with the utility )

B/ Assuming you are able to set a minimum available charge they can not allow power to drop below !

C/ Car needs to be at a fixed address, presume home. Generally meaning not able to be accessed by the Utility during 8am to 6pm at least. Vehicle is away.

D/ Considering for primary use as a car battery, you should be regularly charging your battery to no more than 80%, and you should be aiming to charge it up before it goes below 20%.

And you wish to maintain a minimum charge to use the battery for its primary intended use, driving a vehicle !

So that a vehicle capable of 300 miles (Nominal ) perhaps 50% is the minimum charge you wish to allow the utility to access power down to.

That means 30% of the battery is all you will give over to the grid.

How many shekels can you receive for satisfying all the following conditions before receiving any money :

A/ The times you will be willing to sell power,

B/ Plugged in to sell power,

C/ Not need the additional range in the immediate future

D/ And the utility will want to access power ?

Considering a 300 mile nominal range, means about 265 miles highway range.

Then considering the battery is regularly supposed to be charged to 80% means an approx. range of 212 miles.

Then real world driving efficiency due to conditions / externalities means energy efficiency of 83% which equals 176 miles of range.

As regular battery bottom limit is set at 20%, that is to say, 60 miles. Your total miles available to drive is usually around 116 miles ( 176 - 60 ).

So if you were willing to sacrifice driving range to earn income from the grid regularly.
And sacrifice battery life and car value long term.

So in the case of the Cybertruck Dual Motor, 300 mile range from 100kwh (estimated) battery, if you wish to reserve 58 miles for daily driving use, then you roughly can give over 58 miles of range / to the utility to pay you perhaps !

Say approx. 10 c per kwh for 19.3 kwhrs = $ 1.93 for however many days a year you care to do this for !!
Note Power company won't need to buy it from you every day either.

In my humble view, electric vehicles need as much battery / energy for the primary purpose of driving. Cybertruck’s battery size and power points are a great advantage for, Home Back up battery use and even a little supplemental home energy use, but commercial, or incidental selling power back to the grid, is very minor and hardly worth it when all things considered, especially reduction in battery life/ vehicle valuation.

Yes the case improves for Trimotor Cybertruck with an estimated 200 kwh battery but then you did pay an extra $20,000 u.s !

( $30,500 Aus > $40, 600 after Luxury car tax )

P.S. I know I could have left it at one short sentence, V2G is a bit of a wank.

But then some Tesla disciples may have become apoplectic. Plus I thought I should quantify a little for myself. Please correct me if I have missed something substantial .

Oh' and one very big assumption is made in the calculation above.
All The Power You Sold To The Grid, You Got For Free In The First Place !

I think you'll make the same money riding an exercise bike, or better still, attaching electrodes to the balls of electric eels riding exercise bikes in a pond. Double the output :LOL:
 
Last edited:

Ranackley

New member
First Name
Randy
Joined
May 25, 2020
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
Location
Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Vehicles
Own: Model 3 long-range; Registration: Cybertruck 2m AWD
Occupation
Attorney
Country flag
80 kWh extra for $20K. That is equivalent to six Powerwalls at $7,500 each = $45K. Sounds like a good deal, but those six Powerwalls will give you 30 kw of power where your CT will be limited to 11 kw.

Decisions decisions. :)
I think you've nailed it. I keep going back and forth.... I've lost track of the number of times I've gone to the site to upgrade to a 3 motor..... but, damit, $20,000 is a lot of money.....
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
834
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
If you are chief bean counter for a company planning to buy CT's for the company's fleet you do detailed analyses to determine whether the TriMotor or AWD wll be the most profitable, If you are an individual you make the decision based on emotion. Is 0.94g acceleration just too cool to pass up? Do you still get antsy about range anxiety in your 350 mi BEV? Do you think you might buy a big camper some day? etc. From the POV of an individual purchase the main economic factor is how well the vehicle holds resale value. The TriMotor may turn out better in this regard. But the AWD could also.

You probably don't need a truck at all. Admit that to yourself and plan your purchase based on enjoyment.

From the engineer's point of view it's pretty clear that the RWD is designed for economy and the TriMotor for towing with the huge range being a delightful side effect of its towing capability,
 
Last edited:

Cybr on

Well-known member
First Name
John
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
105
Reaction score
90
Location
San Joaquin
Vehicles
Tri motor FSD
Country flag
I’m sure you will let me know what you think😊. Btw, the bike thing was off the hook funny.
 

ajdelange

Well-known member
First Name
A. J.
Joined
Dec 8, 2019
Messages
1,102
Reaction score
834
Location
Virginia/Quebec
Vehicles
Tesla X LR+, Lexus SUV, Toyota SR5, Toyota Landcruiser
Occupation
EE (Retired)
Country flag
D/ And the utility will want to access power ?
This is actually a major consideration and it quickly broadens out into the more general subject of "politics". The hippy owned power cooperatives in Vermont are all for solar power (just don't build a windfarm!). The investor owned utilities in Virginia are not. They have done everything they can to prevent connection of customer owned solar systems to their network (they are forced to accept some by law). Do we think they will embrace V2G?
 
Last edited:

Replicanthunter

Active member
First Name
JohnPaul
Joined
Feb 26, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
34
Location
Richmond Virginia
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
Sounds like some of you don't think V2G is possible or probable. I hope that's not the case and without taking a deep dive, it doesn't seem like a fantasy, to me. Tesla already uses its batteries effectively interface with the grid and works to reduce or sometimes eliminate power bills. We've all seen the credits on power bills people show off on the web.

A base model CT is similar to having what, six powerwalls? [The Tesla Powerwall boasts a maximum power rating of 5.0 kW to go along with 13.5 kWh of usable capacity]. Is the tri-motor 500 mile CT double the battery size? That's like 12 powerwalls possibly.

If the CT is capable of providing 30kW peak power and 162 kWh of energy then what is that worth to the utility? More interesting, what is it worth at Peak Demand when the grid is stressed?

According to Dominion Energy, it's quite valuable. You may not know that utilities have different rate schedules. Here in Virginia, if you sign up for the non standard residential rate schedule 1S then the cost is much different depending on the time of day. I don't think this will sound unusual to people on the West coast. So with a Time of Use schedule it's going to cost you $3.842 per kW for all summer On Peak demand, Plus a Generation kWh Charge on all On-peak kWh @ 2.6839¢ per kWh. If you use your CT to only shave on-peak charges to minimize your power bill then it would be worth hundreds per month leave connected at home during those times.

It would take quite an effort to simulate a power bill and Time of Use savings.

At night and other times (off Peak - refer to the link), and on that schedule, power would cost 2.672 cents per kWh. That's a real number we can buy electricity for.

There is a peak demand charge (which can be managed with battery help), a monthly connection fee, and riders but if you managed power right it would help offset your power bill significantly and help pay for your CT.

I roughly estimate being able to save $175 per month on electricity by using a CT to reduce Demand during On Peak times..

NOW if we were able to charge the utility for the use of our battery during On-Peak times then the idea that the original poster had is very intriguing and doesn't seem like fantasy at all. They may not be keen on us retail wheeling with their own power but if they can shut down a peaker here and a peaker there, why not?

https://www.dominionenergy.com/library/domcom/media/home-and-small-business/rates-and-regulation/residential-rates/virginia/schedule-1s.pdf?la=en&modified=20190401145908
 
OP

rstrouts

Member
First Name
Richard
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
10
Reaction score
9
Location
Arvada, Colorado
Vehicles
Model 3
Country flag
  • Thread starter
  • Thread Starter
  • #13
And then, if someone could build in power management by arbitraging with Autobidder and also robotaxi with its re-charging (off time to charge and $ expense) needs into the math, then which would be a better on the investment side, the dual or tri motor?

Somehow, Elon's got a trick or two up his sleeve with the V2G, VPP and Autobidder combo and I just know there's a math wizard around here that can factor in all this stuff. And let's not forget the upcoming Redwood recycling aspect.

Purchase price - all these monetizations = freebo CT? :)

iow, would it be better for me (you) to change my dual motor CT order to tri motor, dollar for dollar, purchase/investment/robotaxi $ wise and, of course, keep my place in line?
 

Geo

Well-known member
First Name
George
Joined
Mar 29, 2020
Messages
110
Reaction score
111
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Vehicles
Subaru STI, KTM450EXC
Country flag
Interesting article, thanks Cybr on.

All I can say is thank phuck for California ! Their leadership in reducing co2 emissions has been a shining light for the whole world to follow.

I’d hate to think where the world would be without them.

I think regulator policy goals translated into dollars /costs get inevitably slated home to the consumer. The power company’s find a way. Its just that as a consumer are you aware of this? Are you noticeably impacted by this ?

In Australia we are one of THE worst Co2 gas emitters per capita in the world.

But luckily there’s just so few of us. But if you included our methane emissions surely we would be no.1 ;)

When policy came out to encourage solar adoption here, the subsidy’s and the tariffs some people got was hugely beneficial, (a friend receives 70c / kWh he sells back to the grid, but that’s about to end and go to 10c or so ) But the people who didn’t adopt solar, their bills over time went up by orders of magnitude. As they were the ones doing the subsidy’s directly and through their tax’s.

So I expect that in some places around the world, V2G may indeed become worthwhile, but you really have to do your sums and take everything into account. But right now, at least where I am V2G only shows marginal cost benefit at the large expense of daily battery range and long term Cybertruck battery and vehicle depreciation. So no its not viable.

Repilcant Hunter I know V2G is technically possible, but not yet economically viable.

Its not just a question of what you get paid by the Power company to sell them power, even if they were willing to make it interesting as they could save firing up a peaker plant. (Yes that’s how the Tesla stationary battery proved magnificent to the South Australian govt. and Neoen.)

You seem to not be concerned with the critically small mileage your’re left with (58 miles per day) in my previous example. And that’s before loading the vehicle or towing !

If someone’s left with little range to drive their Dual or Single Motor Cybertruck or worse get stranded on the side of the road, then it defeats the purpose of having the vehicle at all.
So no, its not viable if Im making $175 per month, it's not viable at any amount of money.
Hence it is fantasy.
But if it was sufficiently lucrative, then use a stationary battery.

Now if I’m using the tri motor with the larger battery, so perhaps, I was left with sufficient range to use the vehicle for its primary intended purpose, again making $175 per month from the power company is not attractive given I paid $20,000 extra to buy the Cybertruck, and given the accelerated degradation of the battery and vehicle depreciation. Hence its still Fantasy.

P.S. Considering all the subsidy’s Tesla has got directly, and how it benefits in general from California’s policy’s that are carried by everyone in the state, I’m disappointed in Elon’s threats to move Tesla’s HQ and how ungrateful he’s appearing to the huge support he got from California.
Yes the relationship is symbiotic, but still he appears very unappreciative and shows no recognition.

Not that I think he will, or he has any intention of moving the Fremont factory.
 
Last edited:

Newton

Well-known member
First Name
Newton
Joined
Apr 2, 2020
Messages
199
Reaction score
150
Location
CA
Vehicles
p̶r̶i̶u̶s̶ c̶,̶ y̶o̶t̶a̶ p̶i̶c̶k̶u̶p, ⼕丫⻏🝗尺セ尺ㄩ⼕长
Country flag
My bet is VTG dos'nt get activated. (I think its there as a just in case, to activate in emergencies.)
Simple because it will cut into power-wall sales. AND

I also think Elon plans to have his extremely large, solar powered, battery manufacturing factories. Eventually act as HUGE batteries for selling electrons to consumers. (to basically be a utility company). He has talked about this for a while.... from 2015 https://www.mrctv.org/blog/elon-musks-solar-vision-explained well, kinda of.
 
Last edited:

                           











 
Top