Tesla Will Break Ground on Multiple Gigafactory Sites - And California Is Now in the Running
Source: Recode
Tesla Chief Executive Elon Musk said the company will break ground on at least two competing sites for its much discussed Gigafactory, in order to ensure the massive battery plant is online when the company is ready to kick off production of its forthcoming mass-market car.
<snip>
The first groundbreaking will occur on June 1, although the company still cant disclose the location, a Tesla spokesperson said. The second will come one to two months later.
<snip>
Musk said that California didnt make the initial cut while Texas, Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico did because it would take too long to construct the Gigafactory in the state, given the complex and lengthy process for approval for development on so-called greenfield sites. But the company has met with Gov. Jerry Brown and his staff, who have tried to do everything they can to make California a significant candidate for the Gigafactory, including exploring possible legislative remedies.
But the question of timing is still a big one, and we need to make sure ongoing operational costs are not significantly worse than other states, Musk said. California is in the improbable, but not impossible, category at this point, Musk said.
Read more: http://recode.net/2014/05/07/tesla-will-break-ground-on-multiple-gigafactory-sites-and-california-is-now-in-the-running/
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)I met with a legislative aide from the San Fernando Valley last month, who told me that there's a site in his boss's district where the water is full of naturally occurring lithium, which they could use to make the batteries! That was the first I heard that California was even in the running.
think
(11,641 posts)Last edited Thu May 8, 2014, 10:12 AM - Edit history (1)
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: September 28, 2011
A start-up company will announce on Wednesday that it is beginning commercial operations at a factory in Southern California to capture lithium from existing geothermal energy plants, a technology it says has the potential to turn the United States into a major lithium exporter.
~Snip~
The company, based in Pleasanton, Calif., will piggyback on an existing geothermal plant that makes electricity by pumping hot water from deep underground and using its heat to make steam to drive a turbine. Then it re-injects the water into the ground. The water is actually a very strong brine, composed of about 30 percent dissolved salts, according to Luka Erceg, Simbols co-founder and chief executive.
~Snip~
Extracting lithium from brine is a standard way to produce the metal. The only American lithium producer, Chemetall Foote, in Clayton Valley, Nev., makes the material by pumping brine into ponds and waiting months for the water to evaporate. Two other companies have announced plans to produce lithium in Nevada using the more conventional method of evaporation.
Simbol officials say they have developed a proprietary filtering process that takes minutes and will be located on piping that is a minor detour for brine that the geothermal energy company is pumping anyway. Costs are low enough to compete in the world market, company officials say, and environmental impacts are small since the geothermal plant is already in operation.
~Snip~
Full article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/28/business/energy-environment/simbol-materials-plans-to-extract-lithium-from-geothermal-plants.html?_r=0
Massacure
(7,521 posts)One editor needs to be slapped upside the head with a wet towel.
think
(11,641 posts)evaporation. I edited my snips so hopefully it makes more sense now. It appears they will still use evaporation but the process will start after steam is produced and used to power turbines. This would make a stronger brine water with more metal in it to start with.
Still awkward phrasing but that's the difference.
msongs
(67,405 posts)Firebrand Gary
(5,044 posts)Considering that every major corporation already does, it's about time we play on an equal footing. Who knows, we just might save our planet while building another great american brand!
JI7
(89,249 posts)moving to places like texas because of what may seem business friendly will still hold liberal views and have certain expectations of what they want from society .
people don't suddenly become liberal or conservative just because they might benefit from an issue. we see this all the time with right wingers who get welfare but complain about food stamps.
but anyways, these people that move to places like texas will want what they are used to in places like california. this could be anything from economic issues like demanding the state fund parks and other green areas to social issues like abortion , and support for gun control.
this is how virginia became more blue and why north carolina while still red went blue for 2008 and could now be more red/purple than solid red.
JI7
(89,249 posts)already ?
Firebrand Gary
(5,044 posts)California takes it's environmental safety very seriously, but if the state can do everything that Tesla needs them to do to build the gigafactory, California would probably be the best fit.
I'd guess that New Mexico and Arizona are both no-go's, Texas, Nevada-Reno and California seem to be the logical choices (imho). What ever the location, Tesla is going to going to need train and shipping access on a massive scale.
AngryAmish
(25,704 posts)Fuck that noise.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)Last edited Thu May 8, 2014, 10:02 AM - Edit history (1)
it was the residents of Irwindale who complained and their City Council responded.
Edited to make the quotation marks make sense.