Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

bananas

(27,509 posts)
Wed May 7, 2014, 09:05 PM May 2014

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 can’t disclose the location, a Tesla spokesperson said. The second will come one to two months later.

<snip>

Musk said that California didn’t 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/

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
1. One site in California has a distinct advantage
Wed May 7, 2014, 09:11 PM
May 2014

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)
2. That is very interesting. Found this on a quick search:
Wed May 7, 2014, 09:22 PM
May 2014

Last edited Thu May 8, 2014, 10:12 AM - Edit history (1)

Start-Up in California Plans to Capture Lithium, and Market Share

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, Simbol’s 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)
9. Evaporation is a more conventional method than evaporation? Who knew!
Thu May 8, 2014, 08:36 AM
May 2014

One editor needs to be slapped upside the head with a wet towel.

 

think

(11,641 posts)
11. I neglected to include the Cali company's planned method which differentiates from normal
Thu May 8, 2014, 10:16 AM
May 2014

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.


Firebrand Gary

(5,044 posts)
4. Good for him!
Thu May 8, 2014, 01:26 AM
May 2014

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)
6. i read this somewhere else where people assume all the left leaning types who might end up
Thu May 8, 2014, 01:35 AM
May 2014

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)
5. since most sales will be in california wouldn't they save some costs by just having it in state
Thu May 8, 2014, 01:29 AM
May 2014

already ?

Firebrand Gary

(5,044 posts)
7. I think you're right.
Thu May 8, 2014, 01:56 AM
May 2014

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.

Le Taz Hot

(22,271 posts)
10. "Calfiornia" did nothing to "the siracha guy"
Thu May 8, 2014, 09:15 AM
May 2014

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.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Tesla Will Break Ground o...