Reno Selected For Tesla Motors Battery Factory 157
First time accepted submitter Mikenan writes Tesla has finally decided that it will build its battery "gigafactory" in Nevada, sources say. "That's a go, but they are still negotiating the specifics of the contract," a source within the Nevada's governor's office told CNBC Wednesday afternoon. The source noted that it could be a week before the deal is official. Nevada is planning a press conference Thursday in Carson City.
CARson City (Score:5, Funny)
Now we know why Nevada was chosen.
CARson City.
Makes total sense.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
That and the fact that Reno is just a few hours from Palo Alto and, more importantly, is not located in California.
Re: (Score:1)
more importantly, is not located in California.
The best reason of all besides gambling and hookers.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, wait...there goes your argument
Real reason for Reno? Land, labor are DIRT cheap since the opening of "indian" casinos in Cali.
And we all know about the Laxault class influence buying in Wide Open Republican Nevada, the state built with Mob Money.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
~~
Re: (Score:2)
Re:CARson City (Score:5, Interesting)
Point's still valid.
No it isn't. If you want to conserve water, then stop subsidizing wasteful irrigation. Nothing else matters. People have made similar complaints about casinos using water, but for every job created farms use more than thousand times as much water as casinos. We need farms, but we don't need farms in the desert.
Re: (Score:2)
How DARE you inject relevant facts into this conversation!?!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
They should rename it "taxbreak city" because you just know this is going to cost taxpayers a fortune.
Re: (Score:2)
Your humor will be a Bonanza.
Re: (Score:1)
Kill yourself.
I shot a man in Reno,
Just to watch him die...
Re: (Score:1)
Hey, I shot a man in Reno, too. He got better.
I shot a man in the foot. Actually it was in the abdomen, but I said "foot" because I can't spell "pancreas". :-)
Stop Making Up Words! (Score:1, Troll)
WTF is a "gigafactory?"
Is it somehow different than any other kind of factory? Or is it a made-up word designed to satisfy some narcissists ego?
Re: (Score:3)
Dude he can call it "cucumber" if he wants as long as it creates actual STEM jobs in North America.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Dude, all the STEM jobs in the world won't matter if they only hire H1B visa holders to work them.
I wonder if Tesla is going to start pushing for Mexico to become the next H1B nation, since the factory will be so close to their border...
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:4, Informative)
Am I missing something? Reno is a ten hour drive [google.com] from Mexico.
Re: (Score:2)
Am I missing something? Reno is a ten hour drive from Mexico.
. . . that's why the government is relocating the illegal alien kids close to Reno . . . cheap child labor for Tesla! They wanted real aliens from nearby Area 51, but there was a tooling problem with the factory, because the real aliens only have three fingers!
The new Tesla batteries will still be built using alien technology from Area 51, though. I don't want to be an alarmist or anything, but if your Tesla is dripping black goo, don't touch it . . . it might not be regular black oil!
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:4, Informative)
OK, obviously there' selection bias in play here, but I've never worked for a large dev shop that preferred HBB workers over workers that didn't require sponsorship. There are certainly H1B-only shops that exist (in defiance of the law) to exploit young workers, but those are contract-only shops (they only do contract work for other businesses). If you're keeping it legal, H1B workers aren't any cheaper (including legal costs).
I have worked for places that had 80-90% of their developers working in India and/or China. That saves money. I'm happy to compete with anyone who works and lives in the US - we all have the same expenses (and I don't send half my paycheck back home).
None of which has to do with manufacturing, of course. Tesla does use some H1Bs for software development (friend of mine's wife works there), but AFAIK they're like most places and pay competitively.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Dude he can call it "cucumber" if he wants as long as it creates actual STEM jobs in North America.
Once it's built it will probably only employee low-paid assembly line workers and some managers.
(Which isn't STEM, but may still be an improvement on the way the USA has been hedded for the past few decades.)
Re: (Score:2)
Factories need industrial engineers, not just assembly-line workers. No, you don't need a ton of IEs to run a factory, but still, there's some there. You also need engineers to do the design, testing, etc. (though some of that may be at their main location in California).
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:5, Funny)
Cucumber factory only has stem-removal jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
*slow clap*
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:5, Funny)
WTF is a "gigafactory?"
Is it somehow different than any other kind of factory? Or is it a made-up word designed to satisfy some narcissists ego?
It's the opposite of a nanofactory.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a billion factories. That's what he must mean, because giga- used as a prefix has a set, specific meaning.
Re: (Score:1)
"Gigas" and "gigantism". Two words with the giga prefix that don't meet your set, specific meaning. Your rule is broken.
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:4, Informative)
Hmm.. "Prefix".. I'm not sure that word means what you think it means. At least the two examples you gave do not fit.
Re: (Score:1)
Looking at the dictionary it means exactly what I thought it did.
But given your limited idea of what it means, who says it fits "gigafactory". Hmm?
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying it's not actually a factory, but something completely different called a "Gigafactory"?
If you think "giga" is a prefix in the words "Gigas" and "gigantism", you think "s" and "ntism" are words. Sorry, they're not.
Re: Stop Making Up Words! (Score:1)
Oh come on, we all know what a prefix is. It's the first part of a word. As an example, "pref" is the first part of "prefix", thus its meaning: "to prefer 9s".
Re: (Score:3)
In neither of those words does giga serve as a prefix.
Re: (Score:3)
Now I am concerned about your mastery of negation in English.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But from the context of my post it was pretty clear I was speaking about English, as I was speaking in English, and not about Greek, because I was not speaking in Greek, so the meaning of giga(s) in Greek is entirely irrelevant to the point being made.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If you build hard drives it's 1,000,000,000
If you build RAM it's 1,073,741,824 or anything else remotely related to a power of 2 (last I checked hard drives didn't have address lines) and would be called a GiBiFactory
Re: (Score:2)
It is to show the size of the factory. From the article, it is supposed to produce "35 GWh." worth of batteries. I assume that is per year, but they are a bit coy on that detail.
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:5, Funny)
35 GWh/Year isn't fooling me!!!
That's only 4 megawatts!
Re: (Score:2)
I decided to do the math. 1 year producing 411,000 batteries which could kick out 128 Gigawatts at maximum output! Or the output of a hundred power stations for a short period of time.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. Say NO to those linguogogues and their linguomorphic practices!!!
Re: (Score:2)
It's a factory the makes gigawatts worth of batteries.
Duhr.
Re: (Score:2)
We should certainly NOT stop making up words. We don't want a dead language thank you very much. Here, watch this:
http://www.ted.com/talks/erin_... [ted.com]
In any case, it's not "a gigafactory" it's "The Gigafactory". It's a proper name. Tesla can call it what they like, just as you can call any children you have exactly what you want.
Re: (Score:2)
In any case, it's not "a gigafactory" it's "The Gigafactory". It's a proper name.
Well then, somebody needs to tell the media, because they sure do like treating it as a common noun.
Tesla can call it what they like, just as you can call any children you have exactly what you want.
Not exactly true. [jonathanturley.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Well then, somebody needs to tell the media, because they sure do like treating it as a common noun.
Today's media can't even spell words properly or use proper grammar; it shouldn't be too surprising that they'd screw up Tesla's factory name.
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing stopping you calling your child "Gigachild"
Re: (Score:2)
You mean other than the fact people will think Kim "Dot Com" was the father or something right?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe it's the font, but that looked like "Kim Dot Corn" for a minute there.
Re: (Score:1)
Because Elon Musk.
Re: (Score:3)
Let me only reply to the topic for a second.
Making up words is healthy. It's a necessary part of communicating sometimes. Especially when it's just dropping a prefix onto a word to help establish one of its primary qualities(in this case, scale).
Re: (Score:2)
WTF is a "gigafactory?"
A factory that makes giants.
Re: (Score:3)
WTF is a "gigafactory?"
It gets it's power from lightning striking the clock tower of Reno City Hall.
Re:Stop Making Up Words! (Score:4, Funny)
That would be a Jiggafactory.
Re: (Score:2)
If a car need 8000 batteries, that's 125,000 cars. Its a believable number for sure.
Re: (Score:2)
WTF is a "gigafactory?"
This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
California Betrayed (Score:3, Informative)
Nevada; No corporate income tax. Far fewer and less effective environmental and labor pressure groups. How selfish. Who does this Elon think he is refusing to be suckered in with environmental rule waivers [latimes.com]?
I suspect it's going to take a lot more of this kind of corporate profiteering before the bloom comes off the Telsa rose around here though, and my poor karma will suffer a lot more hits — because fanbois will be fanbois.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you saying you drive a Karma [wikipedia.org]?
Re:California Betrayed (Score:5, Interesting)
Tesla has the car factor in CA and Elon has a major SpaceX factory there as well.
Betrayed?
Re:California Betrayed (Score:4, Insightful)
Bloom off the rose? There are few things that give me greater pleasure than seeing a leftist parasite howling because it's been deprived of it's host. Go Tesla!
Re: (Score:3)
Nevada; No corporate income tax.
Nor inventory tax...hence the huge warehouse district in Reno.
Re:California Betrayed (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.usatoday.com/story/... [usatoday.com]
When the topic first came up on Slashdot [slashdot.org] a number of people seemed to think offering such incentives was a bad idea. Maybe the California legislature agreed with that reasoning, but if they've made any statements about why they did what they did i haven't heard about it.
Another building full of robots? (Score:5, Insightful)
I mean, I guess it's good that they're not manufacturing the batteries in China (batteries are heavy so I guess the shipping outweighs the labor savings) but it sounds like Tesla is just going to pocket a ton of tax credits and other stuff in exchange for putting a building of robot manufacturers in Nevada.
Say what you will, but the middle class needs work. We need something for the vast majority of people who aren't scientists, engineers or politicians to do. That used to be traditional assembly-line manufacturing. After that, it was the millions of people routing documents and reports around large corporations. This next wave of automation is going to put a real crimp on the middle class that it can't easily absorb. Unless people start paying full-salary wages for stupid stuff like rating cat videos or posting on social media, the traditional model of 2-kids-and-a-mortgage is out the window. For the low end, we need something like the steel mills and other factories that would employ thousands of workers in 3 shifts. And for the medium end, we need to preserve at least some of the "corporate drone" jobs. At the risk of sounding like a Luddite, it looks like there's nothing left for the middle of the economy -- it's going to split into ultra low end jobs like cleaning and food service, and high-end jobs like engineering, science, etc. (And I'm guessing management will reserve itself a place in the high end too.)
The problem is, without rolling back a lot of the benefits automation brings, I don't know how we're going to handle the next level of change.
Re: (Score:2)
Local media has said they expect 6,500 new jobs to come from the factory and associated support services, so it's a significant employment boost no matter how many robots are in the factory.
Re: (Score:3)
Local media has said they expect 6,500 new jobs to come from the factory and associated support services, so it's a significant employment boost no matter how many robots are in the factory.
Local media always overplays the number of jobs a new thing brings in; namely, they fail to point out that most of the "new jobs" are temporary ones that exist only during the construction phase.
I want to know exactly how many full-time employees are necessary to run this factory. That should be easily quantifiable for someone who knows the details of the project.
Re:Another building full of robots? (Score:5, Informative)
Whoops, 6,500 direct factory jobs, 9,000 associated jobs.
http://www.rgj.com/story/money/reno-rebirth/2014/06/15/reno-rebirth-tesla-game-changer/10406441/
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Another building full of robots? (Score:4, Funny)
Say what you will, but the middle class needs work. We need something for the vast majority of people who aren't scientists, engineers or politicians to do.
Oh please. We can just put everyone to work in retail sales and real estate. We'll all get rich selling houses to each other!
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that outside of VERY narrow manufacturing, assembly line jobs suck.
They are NOT middle class jobs. They are unskilled labor jobs that pay basically minimum wage (see unskilled). These are NOT jobs you want because they'[re mind-numbingly boring, dull, and because of that, dangerous.
T
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
This next wave of automation is going to put a real crimp on the middle class that it can't easily absorb.
I often see this argument, and always disagree. Technology has, I believe, reduced the number of farmers from 66% of the population down to 4%. And yet, 62% of the population isn't out of work. Ditto for factories that mass-produce items, making them much more quickly and efficiently than a craftsman could do by hand. What happened is we started buying more stuff. We weren't content with 1900s levels
Re:Another building full of robots? (Score:4, Insightful)
... we wanted more. (And probably always will.)
No, we won't.
This is a major fallacy of economic thinking that really needs to be put to bed. It isn't true. Thinking like this is the basis for the Trickle Down Theory of economics, which has been soundly falsified. No, we won't always want more. Unbridled all-consuming unsatisfiable greed is a neurosis. It is abnormal and very unusual. Adults who suffer from the condition are considered stunted, little more than children. Children are expected to grow out of it, if they ever go through that phase at all. If you always want more, everybody around you thinks there's something wrong with you, and will usually avoid being around you any more after a while.
Normal people, by definition most people, are satisfiable. And satisfiable without actually all that many resources, in the grand scheme of things. Yes we all want more than a 19th century standard of living, but that's because the ancient Romans had a better standard of living than most of the world in the 19th century. It didn't take much to do better than that. Our needs get satisfied in a hurry. A variety of food, some indoor plumbing, and a roof that doesn't leak covers most of it. Add on some form of personal transportation if you live in a large, mostly empty continent like North America, and you're done. The wants that go on top of that are actually quite minimal. Almost nobody has more than two cell phones, and the vast majority of the world has only one. Practically every type of consumer electronics and appliance follows the same pattern. People have one cell phone, one tablet, one laptop, one desktop (they forgot they had), one blender, one microwave, one toaster oven, one deep fryer. The only people who have six cell phones are neurotic or app developers (but I repeat myself).
Yes, once you have one of everything, you can just go bigger. But again, there are pretty serious upper limits. Most people don't want a 700 room palace on the order of Versailles. Even those who did had a tendency to stuff 3000 permanent residents into that space. Most people don't want their own yacht, let alone their very own cruise ship, or there would be many more yachts in the world. So it goes for every thing you can possess.
So no, most people won't always want more. Most people in developed nations are quite satisfied with what they have. Sure they dream about palaces and fleets of sports cars, but drop unlimited funds on their cringing heads and they still won't buy all that. They'd be uncomfortable trying to live in a palace.
People's needs can be trivially satisfied. People's wants can be easily satisfied. Whither now your broken economic system that requires unlimited growth?
Re: (Score:2)
I think we're on different wavelengths, since I actually agree with what you say.
What I'm trying to do is refute the Broken Window Fallacy, which says that if you go around breaking windows you'll benefit the economy, by creating jobs fixing windows. But what you've done is made owning windows more expensive, since they periodically need to be replaced. And the standard of living drops a little, because you're wasting resources fixing windows that you could be using for something else.
Making a window factor
Re: (Score:1)
People have to own the machines; it's the only way I can see for humans to remain viable. We need to be buying our kids stock, not college education.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a result of artificially low interest rates. Any time you build manufacturing capability you need to do a cost/benefit analysis of how much to automate. I've done this analysis in the past when I worked for an automation house. The main factors are the local cost of labor and the interest rates. In times where interest rates were high (I have lived long enough to see this) and there was high unemployment so people would accept a lower wage it always made sense to hire more people than machines. The
Re:Another building full of robots? (Score:4, Insightful)
Right, which is what I was saying -- no one is going to actually support subsidizing unemployment no matter how bad things get. Look at the number of poor and lower-middle class people who idolize the "job creator" class and deride people on unemployment/welfare. People are convinced that just working harder will make them rich -- and no amount of convincing will change that mindset. Unless, of course, 80% of the workforce is unemployed.
I don't have a good answer for this. People who worked like dogs their whole life won't support it because their entire self-worth is based on what they've managed to save in their retirement accounts. People who are working are going to feel like they're subsidizing freeloaders. It's going to be a very ugly 21st century.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
After unionization, assembly line work became middle class work. As unionization has declined, such unskilled work has reverted to working class.
In almost all interpretations except ridiculous statistical definitions, middle class means an ability to ride out unemployment. How long is a matter of interpretation. 3 months, 6 months, 2 years. Whatever it is, middle class effectively means being able to ride out unemployment without losing your home or family stability. You can be more aggressive in seeking be
Don't they use a lot of water (Score:1)
I may be wrong, but doesn't the production of batteries use a lot of water? Something Nevada is known not to have?
Re: (Score:2)
I may be wrong, but doesn't the production of batteries use a lot of water? Something Nevada is known not to have?
I was thinking the same thing....
They need Electrolytes... So... Brondo???
Re: (Score:2)
The electrolytes used in lithium ion batteries don't use water. Water is unstable at those voltages.
Of course, the factory must use some water, if only for the employees drinking. I don't know how much, though. Perhaps it is worth mentioning that there appears to be a small river near the site.
I made a battery in Reno . . . (Score:1)
. . . just to watch it die.
Well that's a relief (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone can get a sweetheart deal in Nevada. Microsoft and Amazon are already firmly established their.
Nevada's economy is so weak that there was once serious consideration of reverting its rushed statehood.
Re: (Score:2)
...and watching the states trip over each other to "give away the store" in luring Tesla is just sad, and especially unfair to regular companies who don't have this kind of pull and will never get such sweetheart deals.
This is standard practice for any large business. Texas just gave Toyota tens of millions of dollars in incentives to get them to move their headquarters here.
Hopefully Calistan will lick its wounds (Score:1, Troll)
And decide no Teslas can be sold there unless they pay a million dollar tax per vehicle.
Yawn (Score:2)
You mean that place where they've been building the big factory? That place? The place where work has been ongoing for months?
What a surprise.
Will it help? (Score:2)
Re:This company would be nowhere without handouts. (Score:5, Interesting)
Tesla is making over 25% profit on every car sold. All of that money is going into growth and expansion. While they get emission credits, they don't rely on them since they are shrinking.
That's not what MotherJones says (Score:4, Informative)
From 11 months [motherjones.com] ago:
But make no mistake: Tesla still relies on subsidies to stay in the black. Its first-quarter profit, a modest $11 million, hinged on the $68 million it earned selling clean-air credits under a California program that requires automakers to either produce a given number of zero-emission vehicles or satisfy the mandate in some other way. For the second quarter, Tesla announced a $26 million profit (based on one method of accounting), but again the profit hinged on $51 million in ZEV credits; by year's end, these credit sales could net Tesla a whopping $250 million. There are also generous tax credits and rebates for electric-car buyers: $7,500 from the federal government and up to $5,000 if you live in California.
Beyond that, leaving out the HUGE tax credits buyers get for purchasing Telsa cars (10-17% of the price of a Model S) is intellectually dishonest on your part; Tesla would sell far fewer cars and at lower prices with out those extreme tax credits.
Re:That's not what MotherJones says (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You math is off on a number of counts. The tax incentive is between 5.6% and 17.6% depending on the model, options and state incentives. Tesla Model S prices range from $71,070 to $132,420. Incentives start with a federal incentive of $7,500 plus up to an additional $5,000 incentive depending on your state.
However, I think that your largest mis-calculation is assuming that electric car sales would go down if we eliminated ALL automobile related subsidies. It is easy to see how much the unsubsidised cost
Re: (Score:2)
NO! What I am saying is that we should not be subsidizing either technology because it will only serve to artificially distort the market. Having said that there is a big different between providing short term incentives and propping up a market. There may have been an argument at one point to subsidize the oil industry the U.S. was in the early stages of building our economic engine, but those days have long past. The oil industry is no longer fueling growth, but instead it is inhibiting innovation. T
Re:That's not what MotherJones says (Score:4, Interesting)
Yea, but the people buying Tesla can afford to pay the full cost. Why are we subsidizing luxury cars for the higher wage earners?
Re: (Score:3)
Because there's no carbon/pollution tax, so subsidizing zero-emission vehicles is the flip side of the coin, paying them back just a little bit for the savings in health care costs from zero-emissions vehicles, that will be spread over a large population.
Encouraging the early adopters also helps quickly get the production costs falling, which, in a few years, will help the rest of us to af
Re: (Score:2)
My point still stands. The people buying Tesla can afford to pay the full price. I don't think they're at all in jeopardy without them, therefore we're not really getting any benefit out of the subsidies going to Tesla. When hybrids were new, and it was just the Prius versus the Insight, it made more sense. Now hybrids are common and EVs are following close behind. It's probably time to cut the cord, or at least target it to where EVs are missing, such as the more common lower cost vehicles.
I scratch m
Re: (Score:2)
I "can afford to pay the full price" of a Tesla, but I NEVER, EVER would. Supply/demand is a curve. Raise the price of a Tesla by 10%, you'll see a significant decline in sales, even if every single one of their customers "could" afford to pay more. "can afford to pay" is only relevant when it comes to life-or-death matters, not anywhere that there are options.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, Nevada lithium is in the form of naturally occuring brine. The brine is pumped from underground to evaporation ponds and dried.