Rocket Lab's Neutron's redesign

SpaceX isn't the only rocket company with re-usable rockets. Rocket Lab, which is based in New Zealand, is also trying to create a re-usable rocket.  Oddly enough, none of the aging dinosaurs of the industry (ULA, Boeing, etc., etc.) is even trying to produce re-usable rockets.  Bizarre.

From Teslarati

New concept art was released on Rocket Lab’s website today, showcasing new design choices for the company’s reusable Neutron rocket.

One of the major changes shown is how the payload fairing operates. In prior concepts, the fairing was comprised of 4 quarters that opened outward to allow second stage and payload separation. The new design shows two halves of the fairing opening.

Moving from four to two fairings will provide more reliability for the rocket and fewer moving parts.

Another change is a slight design to the forward strakes (fins) that help steer the rocket back to its landing site. Unlike SpaceX, which uses grid fins, the Neutron rocket will use fins that provide more lift and can return to the launch site from further downrange.

The forward fins also appear to have moved further up on the rocket, and the fairing halves size made a bit smaller.

Further down on the rocket, the landing legs are now folded in, similar to how Falcon 9 landing legs are folded, and appear to deploy the same way.

As of now, it appears the only changes are to the appearance, the Rocket Lab website still shows the same performance. The first stage will be powered by 9 Archimedes engines fueled by liquid methane and liquid oxygen, and 2nd stage powered by a single vacuum-optimized Archimedes engine.

Neutron stands 43 meters tall and is 7 meters in diameter at the base and slopes inwards to the top for a 5-meter diameter fairing. During an update on the rocket in December 2021, Founder and CEO Peter Beck said it would help the rocket make it back through the atmosphere by reducing the thermal load on the rocket.

Neutron deploying a stack satellite constellation, very similar to how Starlink satellites are stacked (Credit Rocket Lab)

Starlink now available in Antarctica

McMurdo Station, Antarctica

From Teslarati

Elon Musk was not kidding when he stated that Starlink is designed to provide high-speed internet access to everywhere in the globe. Starlink recently had a milestone in this regard, with SpaceX confirming that the satellite internet system is now on all seven continents, including Antarctica.

The idea of Starlink providing high-speed internet access to Antarctica seemed farfetched just a few years ago. But as per SpaceX’s post on Twitter, it is now possible to provide internet access to extremely remote locations like Antarctica thanks to Starlink’s space laser network, which reduces the need for ground stations.

The National Science Foundation praised Starlink, noting that scientists in Antarctica are “over the moon” due to the satellite internet service. The NSF also noted that the Starlink terminal had been installed at the McMurdo Station, a US Antarctic research station on the south tip of Ross Island.

“NSF-supported USAP scientists in #Antarctica are over the moon! Starlink is testing polar service with a newly deployed user terminal at McMurdo Station, increasing bandwidth and connectivity for science support,” the NSF wrote on Twitter.

McMurdo Station is the largest community in Antarctica, capable of supporting up to 1,258 residents. It also serves as one of three US-based Antarctic science facilities that operate year-round. With all months of the year having an average temperature below freezing, Starlink’s capability to provide internet access to such a location is indeed very impressive.

Starlink is quickly growing into Elon Musk’s latest disruptor, and with its coverage of Antarctica, the satellite internet system is proving that it does have what it takes to provide its services across the globe. SpaceX definitely seems to be ramping its mainstream efforts for the internet service, with Elon Musk noting recently that the private space company has had conversations with Apple for possible Starlink connectivity for iPhones.

Starlink Maritime is available

 From Teslarati

SpaceX announced a new Starlink product. Starlink Maritime will provide oceangoing vessels with up to 350 Mbps download while at sea. And it’s not just ships and boats that would benefit. Starlink Maritime is primarily for all types of sea-going vessels including merchant vessels, oil rigs, and even premium yachts.

According to the website, “Starlink Maritime allows you to connect from the most remote waters across the world, just like you would in the office or at home.”

“In addition to withstanding extreme cold, heat, hail, sleet, heavy rain, and gale-force winds, Starlink also holds up against rocket engines.”

“Starlink is currently being used to get high-quality video of SpaceX rocket landings at sea, providing continuous coverage in the face of engines capable of generating up to 190,000 lbs of force.”

Users will be able to monitor and manage their Starlink fleet from a single portal and installation is designed with minimal above-deck space in mind.

The cost of Starlink Maritime includes a monthly payment of $5,000 and a one-time hardware cost of $10,000. The latter also includes two high-performance terminals. That may sound expensive but Elon Musk pointed out that SpaceX was paying $150,000 per month for a worse connection for its ships.

He added it wasn’t easy to ruggedize Starlink for relentless salt spray and extreme winds and storms in the deep ocean. As someone who lives in a state that has hurricane season, I’m sure these ocean storms will definitely put Starlink to the ultimate test.

Starlink has proven to save lives already. Elon Musk provided Ukraine with thousands of Starlink terminals which has helped the nation stay online despite the continuous attacks from Russia. SpaceX also provided Starlink terminals to St. Charles Parish after hurricane Ida left most of the southern portion of Louisiana without power and communications.

In the comments below the article, it was pointed out just how lucrative this would prove to Starlink/SpaceX.

Starship to be upgraded to increase LEO tonnage

 From Teslarati

SpaceX CEO Elon Musk says that future Starships – or at least certain Starship variants – are being upgraded with 50% more Raptor engines and stretched propellant tanks.

On December 17th, the CEO revealed the plans, confirming a tweet published three months prior stating that Starship was “begging for an extra 3 engines.” Musk was likely referring to the fact that a 9-engine Starship – combined with upcoming 33-engine Super Heavy boosters – would create a rocket with 42 engines, a number made famous as “the answer to the ultimate question of life [and everything]” in Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy – both of which the CEO vocally enjoys. As ever, it’s thus almost impossible to tell jokes from serious, consequential plans – as is the case with Starship.

Nonetheless, origination aside, adding another three Raptor engines to Starship – boosting the count from six to nine – and stretching its tanks could be a substantial upgrade.

According to amateur modelers, who are generally able to estimate rocket performance with enough information about its structures, shape, and engines; an optimal nine-engine Starship’s tanks would be stretched about 25% to store an additional 300 tons (650,000 lb) of cryogenic liquid oxygen and methane (LOx/LCH4). That upgraded Starship would have a liftoff mass close to 1600 tons (3.5M lb) and stand about 55 meters (~180 ft) tall – 10% taller than current ships.

At stage separation, close to vacuum, a stretched Starship with three sea-level-optimized Raptors (RCs) and six vacuum-optimized Raptors (RVacs) should produce at least 2000 tons (4.4M lbf) of thrust – and possibly more than 2250 tons (~5M lbf) depending on engine performance. At that upper level of thrust, Starship – an upper stage – would be just 10% less powerful than the first stage of Falcon Heavy, the most powerful operational rocket in the world.

Regardless of its thrust, dimensions, or weight, what matters most is how a stretched, nine-engine Starship would impact that overall rocket’s launch performance. If unofficial modelers are to be believed, the results are significant: compared to a ‘normal’ Starship with a six-engine upper stage and 33-engine booster, the stretched ship could theoretically boost the amount of payload the rocket can launch to low Earth orbit (LEO) from about 150 tons to 220 tons or more (330,000 to 485,000+ lb) – an almost 50% improvement. In fact, per another recent comment from Musk indicating that Starship – unlike almost all other rockets – won’t temporarily throttle down on ascent, the total payload performance could be a bit less than 230 tons (~500,000 lb) – more than 50% greater than a shorter six-engine Starship.

If those estimates are accurate, upgrading Starship with nine Raptors and stretching its tanks is a no-brainer. It might slow development and make all nine-engine ships cost a substantial fraction more but a 50% improvement in payload performance would significantly improve the efficiency of Starship’s more ambitious Moon and Mars launch profiles, which require numerous orbital refuelings.

In effect, a 50% payload increase would allow SpaceX to complete most refueling tasks more efficiently, quickly, and cheaply. Even if the upgrade plans mean that all Starships will be stretched and carry nine Raptors, fully refueling the new Starship variant in LEO could require 7 tanker launches instead of 8-10. If SpaceX doesn’t mind maintaining multiple distinct Starship variants, which appears to be the case, then ships that are exclusively dependent on refueling (Moon and Mars landers in particular) could stay at their current size, with ~1200 tons (~2.6M lb) of propellant storage and six Raptors. A fleet of upgraded Starships could thus refuel their smaller siblings with just 5-6 tanker launches.

However, there’s a good chance that the extra mass required to stretch Starship ~5.5m (~4 tons or ~9000 lb) is minor enough that SpaceX will instead stretch all Starship variants. In fact, for variants like NASA’s HLS Moon lander and future Marsbound Starships, which depend entirely on refueling to reach their destinations, stretched tanks and more propellant storage could increase the amount of payload they could send to the Moon, Mars, and other high-energy destinations by quite a bit. Ultimately, it will be fascinating to hear more details from SpaceX and Musk on how exactly the upgraded Starship design might benefit those operations in the coming weeks and months.

Rocket payload seems to me to rise at the square of size.  A small increase in power and size produces a disproportionate increase in payload, and (since both Starship and its Super Heavy booster will be fully re-usable) a disproportionate decrease in the cost of lifting one kilogram to orbit.  Observe that the increase in fuel needed is small (25% for Starship, 10% for Super Heavy/Starship combined) relative to the 50% rise in payload.  And fuel will represent most of the cost of launching to LEO (low Earth orbit), since both booster and Starship will be re-used.  I haven't estimated how much this improvement will cut the cost of a ticket to Mars, but the decrease should be substantial.  It will also dramatically cut the cost of launching the Starlink internet satellite constellation.

Other aerospace developers spend decades designing and building new craft, and only when the new craft are in production, do they start on improvements and refinements.  SpaceX hasn't even launched either of its mammoth spacecraft to orbit, and yet it is already moving towards much lower per kilogram cost launches.  

A Starship with 3 vacuum engines being loaded onto the Super Heavy booster.
Source: Teslarati

New Starlink satellite "dish"

 As ever, SpaceX continues race forward at the speed of light, while its competitors are still putting their shoes on.  From Teslarati.

SpaceX has launched a smaller, more compact, second-generation version of its Starlink satellite internet dish.

SpaceX said on its Starlink support page that the new dish utilizes a square-shaped design that is more compact and lighter than the previous circular dish. The new, square Starlink unit weighs just 9.2 pounds, a 42.5% reduction in weight from the first-gen model, which weighed 16 pounds in total.

The Federal Communications Commission also gave approval for SpaceX to operate the new dishes yesterday, the same day the company launched the second-gen model of its internet satellite.

SpaceX has planned for several months to launch the newly designed dish in an effort to cut production costs and increase production output. In September at the annual SATELLITE conference, SpaceX CFO Bret Johnson said that the company was manufacturing around 5,000 Starlink dishes every week, translating to an annual capacity of a quarter of a million user terminals. Johnson also gave details on the new satellite design, stating that the new dish would reduce production costs drastically. It was also a good boost to the company’s financial sheet, as the new dish costs roughly half to build compared to the first-gen model.

The new dish features a 3×3, MU-MIMO router that can transmit three bandwidth streams to three different devices. This prevents network congestion and slower speeds, which some users, unfortunately, face when crowding a single modem or transmitter device with too many internet-using pieces of technology. The previous dish only had a 2×2 MU-MIMO router, meaning the new dish can now accommodate an additional device, a huge advantage for households with multiple internet devices.

There are also improvements with the dishes’ WiFi modem’s ability to handle various weather scenarios. The new modem can now operate in temperatures as low as -22° F (-30° C) and as high as 122° F (50° C) and is completely waterproof. The first-gen model was also waterproof but only operated to function indoors between 32°F and 86°F.

The new dish does have one drawback, however, which is the absence of a built-in Ethernet port. SpaceX will sell a separate Ethernet adaptor for the dish in its online shop. “Bypass functionality is coming soon, and we are actively working on development of a Starlink mesh product,” the company’s support page said.

The price of the dish is not increasing and will remain the same at $499. The internet service is currently $99 per month.

SpaceX has been selling its satellite dishes at a loss, and this advance will allow the dish itself (as opposed to the service) to be profitable.  Expect the roll-out of Starlink to accelerate.  Starlink isn't just a global ultra-high-speed network, it's also the way SpaceX will raise enough money to fund Starship and the colonisation of Mars.

SpaceX to save NASA billions

 From Teslerati

In a move that’s likely to save the US taxpayer several billion dollars over the next few years, NASA has carefully extricated a mission to [Europa,]one of Jupiter’s ocean moons, from the claws of its own Space Launch System (SLS) rocket.

Known as Europa Clipper, the six metric ton (~13,300 lb) spacecraft will instead launch on a SpaceX Falcon Heavy rocket for less than $180M. Had Falcon Heavy not been ready or NASA shied away from the challenge of switching launch vehicles, sending the ~$4.25 billion orbiter to Jupiter could have easily added more than $3 billion to the mission’s total cost. Instead, Europa Clipper will be able to launch one or two years earlier than SLS would have been ready and at a cost that’s practically a rounding error relative to the alternative.

Measuring approximately 3100 km (~1940 mi) in diameter, Europa is approximately 10% smaller and 30% less massive than Earth’s Moon. Both are similar balls of rock with solid metallic cores. However, based on observations taken over decades by spacecraft and Earth-based telescopes, odds are good that Europa also has a vast liquid water ocean insulated by 10-30 km (6-20 mi) of ice so cold that it’s as hard as granite.

Scientists estimate that Europa’s saltwater ocean is dozens to 100+ km (~62 mi) deep, covers the moon’s entire surface, and holds more water than all of Earth’s oceans combined. Signs of a liquid ocean under Europa’s crust (and the crust of numerous other outer solar system moons, as it would turn out) were especially surprising because of the implication that those moons possessed vast heat sources. In the case of Europa, it’s believed that Jupiter’s immense gravitational pull and the moon’s close orbit are balanced in such a way that Europa is heated as those tidal forces violently stretch and squeeze its interior.

In an orbit 30% lower than Europa, tidal heating is so aggressive that the moon Io is littered with titanic volcanoes and lava lakes more than 200 km (~120 mi) across – so large that waves have been spotted on its surface with Earth-based telescopes. In short, because Europa appears to be in the right place to have enough – but not too much – tidal heating, it’s believed to be one of the best potential harbors of extraterrestrial life and Europa Clipper’s primary purpose is to pursue that potential astrobiological treasure trove.

Europa Clipper’s history is a truly bizarre one. Championed almost singlehandedly by fundamentalist Christian and former Republican Representative John Culberson, it’s almost certain that the mission would have never come together and never secured enough funding to proceed. Culberson’s singular goal: determine if humanity is (or is not) alone in the universe. If life can independently evolve twice in the same average solar system, the logic goes, it would practically guarantee that life will be omnipresent anywhere we look.

Culberson’s original vision was an orbiter (Clipper) that would effectively scout Europa for a lander that would follow just a few years later. Incredibly, he appears to have all but guaranteed that Europa Clipper will launch. However, he lost a reelection bid in 2018, casting the lander component into limbo before proper funding or commitments could be ascertained. It now seems likely that the future of Europa Lander will depend almost entirely on what Clipper does (or doesn’t) find.

Europa Clipper is now scheduled to launch on an expendable Falcon Heavy rocket no earlier than a two-week window set to open in October 2024. As part of the politicking to secure the billions of dollars needed to fund the mission, Culberson originally shackled Europa Clipper to NASA’s SLS rocket – now half a decade behind schedule and set to cost more than $23 billion before its first launch. However, it appears that SLS is so mismanaged and uncharacterized that even its infamously zealous, pork-motivated Congressional cheerleaders weren’t willing to put up a public fight to retain the SLS rocket’s only confirmed non-human payload.

Ultimately, on launch alone, Falcon Heavy’s Europa Clipper launch will likely save taxpayers more than $2 billion – the likely minimum cost of a single SLS Cargo launch. Due to issues with the rocket, Ars Technica also reports that Europa Clipper and SLS would have required at least $1 billion in modifications and upgrades to safely fly, meaning that choosing SpaceX will likely end up saving NASA more than $3 billion – equivalent to almost three-quarters of the entire Europa Clipper mission’s price tag.

Of course, by 2024 Starship will prolly be operating, but Falcon Heavy is proven technology, whereas Starship has yet to make it to orbit.

SpaceX assembling orbital Starship

 From Teslarati

SpaceX has begun rapidly assembling the first orbital Starship prototype and the Super Heavy booster set to launch it isn’t far behind.

SpaceX’s Boca Chica, Texas rocket factory seemingly turned a corner in early July as sections of Starship 20 (S20) began to pop up around the site. Though parts labeled Starship “SN20” first appeared as far back as March 2021, the only unequivocal work on SpaceX’s first purportedly orbital-class Starship began in mid-June with the integration of the first engine section with mounts for six – not three – Raptors.

However, in line with SpaceX’s strict focus on maximizing the speed of Starship development and shortening the path to orbit, the company has frequently built Starship hardware before firmly assigning that hardware to any given ship, booster, or tank. In other words, until SpaceX actually begins stacking multiple completed rocket sections, there’s always a degree of uncertainty about the fate of any given ring, dome, or tank barrel. With Starship S20, that process began earlier this month and Super Heavy Booster 4 is likely to follow suit within the next few days – if it hasn’t already.

Since SpaceX unceremoniously rolled Starship prototype SN16 to an empty lot in mid-May, the company didn’t stack a single Starship part until the first week of July – unusual after a frenetic seven months spent building, qualifying, and launching Starships SN8, SN9, SN10, SN11, and SN15 and testing test tanks SN7.2 a nd BN2.1. Around the same time as Starship SN15 became the first prototype to successfully complete a high-altitude test flight and land in one piece, news broke that SpaceX was striving to perform Starship’s first orbital test flight with Ship 20 (S20) and Booster 3 (B3) as early as July.

Eventually, Booster 3’s orbital launch assignment shifted to Booster 4 as it became clear that the former prototype wasn’t meant to fly, but Starship S20 remained. More likely than not, the almost two-month gap between Starship SN16’s instant retirement and the start of the next flightworthy prototype’s assembly can be explained by the significant changes, upgrades, and undecided design decisions required to jump to S20.

Two weeks after the first stack, Starship S20 is already approximately half-assembled and the last section of the vehicle’s tanks is almost ready for installation. What could be Starship S20’s nosecone is also in the late stages of assembly, though SpaceX has yet to even attempt to fully cover a nose in heat shield tiles and getting that process right could take an attempt or two.

Musk has emphasised that there will probably be several mishaps along the way before Starship orbital flights work.  In the first attempt to get Starship orbital, the booster will try to make a soft landing in the sea off Boca Chica,  and Starship will splashdown off Hawaii.  We're so used to SpaceX reusing its rockets that the apparent waste is actually quite shocking, but I expect SpaceX thinks that things could go wrong, possibly badly wrong, and doesn't want to completely destroy its Boca Chica base.   The Super Heavy booster and Starship itself are far too large to land on the drone ships that SpaceX currently uses for its Falcon 9 boosters, so that option is out.  It says a lot about how SpaceX has changed space paradigms that we should be surprised that the spaceships  from the first orbital Starship launch should be dropped into the sea, but of course that's exactly how all other rocket manufacturers still operate.

If the development of orbital Starship seems unbearably slow, that's because we are watching it happen in front of us, day by day.  Musk only announced the stainless steel Starship in January 2019, two and a half years ago.  By contrast, NASA's SLS was announced in 2011, uses old technology, and hasn't flown yet.  Oh, and when it does, the booster will be dumped in the ocean.  Plus each Starship launch will cost roughly $2 million while each SLS launch will cost roughly $1.5 BILLION.

SpaceX says Starlink can overcome plasma blackouts

 From Teslarati

SpaceX has asked the FCC to allow Starship and its Super Heavy booster to communicate with Starlink during the rocket’s first orbital launch attempt, potentially unlocking game-changing capabilities.

Filed on June 28th, SpaceX’s Special Temporary Authority (STA) application contains a number of surprising details about the company’s plans to expand the experimental use of its Starlink satellite constellation to communicate with rockets in flight. That effort was first made public in April 2021 when a separate FCC application revealed plans to test Starlink on a Starship prototype. Starship serial number 15 (now known as Ship 15 or S15).

That particular prototype became the first of its kind to successfully launch and land in one piece on May 5th. Nothing is known about whether Starlink was actually used or how the Starship’s lone dish performed during the 10 kilometer (6.2 mi) flight test, but SpaceX’s plans to again combine both two 'Star–' programs do offer some new lines to read between.'

“SpaceX intends demonstrate high data rate communications with Starship and the Super Heavy Booster on the ground at the launch site in Starbase, TX during launch, during booster recovery, in flight, and during reentry. Starlink can provide unprecedented volumes of telemetry and enable communications during atmospheric reentry when ionized plasma around the spacecraft inhibits conventional telemetry frequencies. These tests will demonstrate Starlink’s ability to improve the efficiency and safety of future orbital spaceflight missions.“

In short, in the two months since SpaceX first requested permission “to operate a single user terminal…during flight tests,” the company appears to have become extremely bullish about Starlink’s potential as a solution for rocket communications. The logical conclusion is that Starlink performed well during its trials aboard Starship S15 on the ground and in flight – possibly even exceeding SpaceX’s own expectations. Simultaneously, SpaceX is in the midst of expanding efforts to certify Starlink for aviation communications and has been generally ramping up tests on aircraft, ships, and road vehicles.

Indeed, at least in theory, the same attributes that allow Starlink to blow traditional consumer satellite communications solutions out of the water could make Starlink a boon for launch vehicle communications. That’s especially true for the test flights of experimental launch vehicles like Starship, where failure is an inevitable part of the development process. However, those launch failures are only beneficial insofar as they expand the knowledge base and allow lessons to be learned.

Data, in other words, is essential, and the more data recovered from test flights, the better. Even on modern rockets, state-of-the-art telemetry usually involves maximum bandwidth on the order of a few hundred to a few thousand kilobits per second, often requiring software and compression gymnastics and uncomfortable triage to ensure that all necessary telemetry keeps flowing.

If Starlink could expand that bandwidth from a few megabits per second (Mbps) to dozens or even hundreds of Mbps, SpaceX could extract unprecedentedly widespread and high-resolution telemetry from Starship and Super Heavy during their first orbital test flight, leaving a wealth of data for likely post-flight failure analyses.

Perhaps most surprising is SpaceX’s claim that Starlink antennas could allow Starship to maintain a strong communications link throughout orbital reentry. Traditionally, all spacecraft capable of reentry produce a superheated sheath of plasma as they careen into Earth’s upper atmosphere. That plasma effectively blocks most radio waves, creating an inevitable several-minute communications ‘blackout’ for any reentering spacecraft.

If Starlink can somehow allow SpaceX to break through that ‘plasma barrier,’ it would give the company an unprecedented capability invaluable for the process of perfecting orbital Starship reentry, descent, and landing – a process Musk expects to involve several unsuccessful attempts. According to SpaceX’s FCC application, Starship’s first orbital launch and reentry attempt could occur as early as August 2021.

Biden's $174 billion EV package

 From Teslarati

President Joe Biden’s $174 billion aid package for electric vehicles has been broken down in an email sent by officials from the United States Department of Transportation. Biden’s plan to increase EV production and adoption across the U.S. is fueled by the massive spending package that aims to woo car buyers away from petrol and gas-powered engines, favoring electric cars instead.

The $174 billion package can be broken down into several categories that all have different spending allocations. The largest is the consumer rebates portion of the package, accounting for $100 billion of the $174 billion package, Reuters said. The rebates would be a significant boost to U.S. automakers, especially ones like Tesla and General Motors, who cannot offer $7,500 rebates when a vehicle is purchased. Previous limits axed the EV tax credit after manufacturers sold 200,000 electric cars. The reintroduction of the $7,500 tax credit would undoubtedly convince some car buyers to consider all-electric options, bringing down their car’s cost by a significant amount in some cases.

With $100 billion out of the way and $74 billion remaining, it appears that $15 billion will be used to accelerate the buildout of the electric vehicle charging infrastructure. President Biden’s campaign is targeting at least 500,000 new EV charging stations. One of the main concerns and points of non-EV owners is the lack of charging options available throughout the United States. However, with more companies joining the EV sector, the focus on charging is becoming an evident focus of automakers moving forward. Tesla has started to plan for larger Supercharger stalls in highly populated areas. New companies like Rivian are just releasing their EV charging plans a few months ahead of their first vehicles being delivered to customers.

The final $59 billion of the package will be divided into three subsections: $20 billion for electric school buses, aligning with President Biden’s plan to electrify the government fleet, $25 billion for zero-emission transit vehicles, and the remaining $14 billion going to “other tax incentives.”

The cost of battery packs continues to decline rapidly, and it seems likely that we will reach the magic $100/kWh of storage by late 2022 or early 2023, which will give EVs price parity with petrol/diesel cars.  Add to that the powerful government support for EVs in the USA, the EU  and China and it is abundantly clear (a) that legacy car-makers which don't have an EV line-up will be in dire straits very soon and (b) we have seen peak oil, and no, it didn't come because of supply constraints but because of collapsing demand.

A render of the Tesla $25,000 Model 2

A beaut picture of Starship

 SN11.  From Teslarati.  It looks as if there will be a test flight this week, and we'll see whether the 'belly-flop' and 'skydiver' techniques will work (best guess: yes).

The $25K Tesla

 From Teslarati

Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas believes electric vehicles in the market could drop as low as $5,000 in the future. Tesla seems well on its way to releasing more affordable electric cars with its $25,000 car. 

Jonas explained that high volume production of EVs would eventually lead to price cuts. 

“We would not be at all surprised to see the prices of many EVs eventually fall to below $5k/unit,” Jonas wrote in a note after talking with carmakers, suppliers, and experts in the electric vehicle sector. 

Since the sales and release of the Model 3, Tesla has introduced several price cuts in its vehicles made within the United States and China. The Model 3 Performance is a good example of this, as the car debuted with a $78,000 price tag before Autopilot. Today, a Model 3 Performance with basic Autopilot costs $55,990.  

Tesla doesn’t seem to want to stop at price cuts for its current lineup, either. The company has also shared its plans to release a $25,000 car in the future. There is already talk of Tesla’s $25,000 electric vehicle being developed in China. 

Elon Musk talked about the company’s price goals during the Q3 earnings call last year, revealing Tesla’s objective to make its cars as affordable as possible. 

“I do not think we lack for desire for our product, but we do lack for affordability,” said Musk. “And so we have to improve the affordability of our products, so they are not out of reach of people. We want to bring them more in reach over time but also improve our cost of production.”

According to Street Insider, Jonas highlighted the impact manufacturing efficiencies would have in high-volume EV production in his note, which Tesla seems highly aware of based on past comments by Musk and the company’s CFO Zachary Kirkhorn.

Global Equities Research analyst Trip Chowdry argued that Tesla has a “generational lead in battery technology.” He estimated that Tesla’s battery tech might have reduced the price per kilowatt-hour by 56% and production costs by 69%. 

[Read more here]

I hadn't realised just how much the cost of the Model 3 de luxe versions had fallen.  The Model 3 was only introduced in July 2017.  At the same time, Tesla has been steadily increasing the cost of autopilot software ("full self-driving") from $3K in 2017 to $10K in October 2020.  In other words, the cost excluding FSD  software has fallen from $75 K to $45,990, or 39%.  It's not clear whether the price of the new 'Model 2' will include FSD software, but it is obvious that an EV costing $5,000 won't.  Is the $5,000 pricing implausible?  Judging by the cost declines for the Model 3, perhaps not.  The Dacia (= Renault) 'Spring' is already available for $10K, though not in all markets.  Which also suggests that Tesla's $25K EV will have full self-driving.  Which will make it a compelling choice for cash-strapped consumers.

The Tesla Model 2 (concept)

 

Electric 2- & 3-wheelers disrupting oil

From Teslarati:

The world’s oil companies are taking a hit due to electric modes of transportation and their increasing popularity in today’s world. Studies from BloombergNEF indicated that EVs are taking around one million barrels of oil consumption away from the world. Although this figure is only 1% of the 100 million barrels per day consumption rate from 2019, it is still something.

It must be highlighted that most of the impact of oil consumption is coming from something other than electric cars. In fact, two and three-wheeled vehicles powered by electric batteries are affecting commercial oil use on a larger scale more than any different mode of sustainable transportation currently.

Bloomberg’s Nathaniel Bullard stated that electric bikes, trikes, and scooters are disrupting global oil consumption on a massive scale. In 2020, this category of transportation has accounted for around 60% of avoided oil consumption. According to further estimates from BloombergNEF, it will continue to lead in oil consumption until 2030.

Interestingly enough, scooters and other small-scale forms of transportation are displacing more oil and contributing to positive environmental awareness on a larger scale than luxury electric cars.

In previous analyses, BNEF highlighted that electric 2- and 3-wheelers already have sticker prices close to or equal to their petrol equivalents.  This is because they are much lighter than cars, and so new much smaller batteries than EVs.  Also they need less range.  They aren't designed for long-distance travel.  Like the Microlino in Europe.

Many of these 2- and 3-wheelers are produced and sold in Asia.  India is the world's largest producer and exporter of 3-wheelers.  I got these images from Walk Through India.

Bajaj Auto, India (and the world's) largest manufacturer of 3-wheelers

Piaggio Ape (= bee).  Italian name but Indian manufacturer.