First Phase Of Building Tesla Gigafactory Nearly Complete


Well, that didn’t take long.

Review Journal (RJ) gives the scoop on the latest progress at the Tesla Gigafactory.

The first phase of the project is near completion. According to RJ, “the 900,000-square-foot building represents just 14 percent of the total size of the factory at build-out.

Steve Hill, director of the Nevada’s Governor’s Office of Economic Development, adds:

We'd say that is some pretty good progress, so far!

We’d say that is some pretty good progress, so far!

“That building will be seven times larger once fully constructed.” 

“They built the building… They will be starting to move machinery into that building in order to make batteries relatively soon.”

So, it seems Tesla Motors is ahead of schedule.

Hill further added that the finished Gigafactory will be about 5.8 million square feet, the largest building in the world. RJ adds:

“And it could get even bigger, possibly doubling in size, following Tesla’s recent announcement of a new unit to produce stationary energy storage units for use in homes and businesses that can store solar-generated electricity for use when the sun goes down or doesn’t shine.”

The Gigafactory is a job creator for sure. Lastly, Hill comments:

“They’re optimistic about Nevada being able to supply a good portion of their workforce at this point through the education system.” 

A few more photos and details can be found in RJ’s report here.

Here is another progress photo from a month ago.

Here is another progress photo from a month ago.

Hat tip to Anthony Fiti!

Categories: Tesla


Leave a Reply

44 Comments on "First Phase Of Building Tesla Gigafactory Nearly Complete"

newest oldest most voted

This has got to be scaring the crap out of other auto manufacturers. If you stop and think about what this site represents, it means the ability for Tesla to step out of the cars-for-rich-people niche and really encroach on the regular auto manufacturers bread and butter. Tesla was the reason GM created the first Volt. You can bet Tesla remains the reason they created the second gen Volt and the Bolt.

Someones got to do it.

No, the requirements set by the State of California are why GM is interested in the Volt and Bolt.

In fact, the Volt entered production two years before the Model S.

Finally, I should mention that Nissan shipped the LEAF before the Model S and has sold more than 250,000 electric cars to date. If I were GM, I’d be as afraid of Nissan.

The Leaf was a hurried reaction to the Volt. The Volt was a reaction to the Roadster & Prius. However GM had a lot of EV experience from the EV1.


No, the Leaf was not a hurried reaction to the Volt. The Leaf isn’t even a US-centric product, as the Volt is.

Ghosn saw the need to create sustainable mobility in order to expand the car market into developing countries. He understands that if everybody in India and China buys a car, the environmental footprint would be unmanageable.

The Leaf, and the Zoe, NV200, and Kangoo, the last three of which do not compete with the Volt at all, are part of an alliance wide initiative into EVs. Ghosn can be faulted for allowing the Leaf to be so odd in terms of styling, but he’s been acting on his own, not following GM.

But a few years after the Tesla roadster.

…and two years after the Tesla Roadster. Bob Lutz, at the time head of GM’s Volt development, has publicly credited the Roadster with inspiring GM to build the Volt.

This is not speculation; it’s fact.

Yes but after GM was embarrassed with the Tesla Roaster. Vollt was designed because of Tesla, that is what is call disruptive. How many think BMW will be having the i line and massively moving to Plug in hybrids without Tesla in the horizon?

Tesla’s primary mission is to inspire EV competition. Tesla is selling vehicles as fast as production allows but Tesla accounts for roughly 1/5 of plug in cars sales. Elon Musk welcomes EV competition and it looks like his plan is working. If GM or Nissan or some other auto company beats Tesla in producing an affordable long range EV, nobody would be more pleased than Elon Musk.


No, that’s not the case. Most of the other major manufacturers are content to build a token number of EVs. If GM only wanted to satisfy California requirements, they would only be producing the Spark EV and nothing else, much like what Honda, Toyota, etc, all do.

“No, the requirements set by the State of California are why GM is interested in the Volt and Bolt.”

Exactly. California’s government is what scares the crap out of the automobile makers.

They scare the crap out of me, too. And I live here.

Yup. Conservatives always scare easier. It has to do with how your brain filters the world around you…

Mr. Scott,

Flee to Idaho. We need you here! Consider us North, North Orange County.The El Cajon of the high Northern desert.
That’s right. You’re not from Idaho, but Idaho needs you anyway. Besides, I can’t throw a potato in Eagle without denting a Tesla.

You two could live in your own private Idaho…

people on this forum can afford to make comments based on enthusiasm, but auto makers have to make decisions based on commercial considerations. the primary driver of EV adoption by auto makers is regulation, not Tesla. ICEs are not going to disappear overnight, if there were such enthusiasm for EVs in the general public, the Volt would have taken the market by storm because the Volt allows for the introduction of electric propulsion in a platform that integrates with existing gasoline infrastructure.

Then why is there customer demand for EVs?

If there were no demand, the EVs would be at the dealers gathering dust…

There is more to it than that. Ask Coda why dust collected on their vehicles… 😉

Perhaps building cars that looked like ten year old Lancers wasn’t what the public wanted?

Seriously, you call it demand? You mean all those Nissan Leafs being practically given away in Atlanta? Real demand would be if people were buying electric cars without incentives. I am an EV fan but reality is that only Tesla can create demand without incentives. I wish Volt, Leaf and the rest all the best, but currently they are cars for enthusiasts and those who buy them only because of incentives. I am of course hoping thing will change soon with more exciting models etc…

“no comment” said: “…the primary driver of EV adoption by auto makers is regulation, not Tesla” That is certainly true for California Compliance vehicles. It’s not true for either the Leaf or the Volt, both of which are (or at least were) sold internationally. In both cases, the auto maker showed a clear commitment to building as many as the market would bear, and in fact even more, since both had to cut back on production because they weren’t selling as many as they were making. Nissan showed its continuing commitment by building Leaf assembly plants overseas, in both Tennessee and the UK; this plan has been successful in increasing sales. GM has been slower to follow up, but has finally developed the Volt 2.0. To dismiss the Volt and the Leaf as mere compliance cars shows a distinct lack of understanding of the business. In fact, GM’s experience with the EV1, taken in isolation, would show every reason for GM to avoid developing another EV. The last thing GM wants is to give California’s CARB another excuse to impose a mandatory minimum number of zero-emission vehicle sales. In the case of the Volt, the influence of Tesla is clear… Read more »

there is more than california emissions compliance going on. there are also federal corporate average fuel economy requirements. the reality is that electric vehicles are not sold in large enough volumes to drive any company’s business plans other than tesla; and even tesla depends on energy credits to be profitable.

as far as international sales of EVs: you had better believe that other countries are imposing regulatory incentives for EV adoption. indeed, the reason why GM implemented “hold” mode was because of european regulations: that’s why it appeared in the Ampera before it appeared in the Volt.

Less than 5% of Tesla’s revenue is derived from regulatory credits. Tesla is not dependent on them for anything,like any company it rather have free money than not.

Tesla is starting to sell and create a market for EVs in Australia without any incentives and even a hostile government.

But it only makes sense for automakers to focus BEV marketing efforts on countries that offer EV incentives first.

that “5% of Tesla’s revenue” translates to nearly 20% of the gross profit last quarter, so it is an important revenue source, although i was incorrect in that the credits are not large enough to cover operating expenses.

tesla is in a bad place right now because, even though their cars are priced for the luxury car segment, the cars they sell aren’t expensive enough for the company to be profitable at the sales volumes that they are realizing; it would like mercedes-benz, or bmw, trying to be profitable by just selling benzo s-class or bmer 7-series cars exclusively.

Tesla is not aiming for profitability, they are aiming for growth. They spend every dollar of gross margin they make developing the tech and infrastructure for 100x their current sales. Think Amazon not Porsche.

i looked more closely at the most recent tesla 10q statement. what i presume you were looking at in stating your 5% comment, was a line item that reports sales of power train components. that does not represent sales of ZEV credits because those are included in automotive sales. however, unlike previous quarters i see no detailing of how much revenue was earned last quarter from sales of ZEV credits. i assume that tesla is delaying recognition of ZEV credits although it might also be the case that ZEV credit revenue has declined significantly in the recent quarter.

“no comment” said:

“…tesla depends on energy credits to be profitable.”

I think a lot of people have repeated that FUD so often they actually believe it’s true.

If any when carbon credits and ZEV credits disappear, Tesla will still make a profit. They’ll have to raise the price of their cars, and that will slow their rate of growth. But they’ll be able to stay in business, and my guess is they’ll still be able to remain a growth company, although with a slower growth.

Estimates are that Tesla will run out of its allotment of the (up to) $7500 tax credit per car, about the time Tesla starts selling the Model ≡, or shortly thereafter. That certainly isn’t slowing Tesla’s plan to develop and sell that car, now is it? No, they’re pushing forward with building the Gigafactory, to make sure they have enough batteries to make and sell the Model ≡ in high volumes.

You may have convinced yourself that Tesla can’t make a profit without government funded incentives, but Tesla is demonstrating by its actions that this is not true.

And as they say: “Actions speak louder than words.”

There are many other regulatory forces than just CARB. For example, in Europe the average fleet CO2 emissions must be reduced to 95g of CO2 by 2020. This is why companies such as VW, BMW, Mercedes, Renault etc. invest into EVs. Electrification is currently the only play to achieve this.

They are not scared. They have known since forever that electric cars don’t work!

-Hey, whatcha doing?
-Not much. Just creating the biggest building in the world.

I like the cartoon, very much.

But I think a more accurate meme is one of taking over and advancing the narrative about EV’s, and getting everyone else on board with it– even if automakers around the globe go kicking and screaming against it.

Tesla is setting bars that everyone else in the industry is going to have to measure up to. There’s been much talk, but little action. We’ll see how things unfold by this time next year…

This time next year, things are going to look much the same, except that the Volt and the Leaf will once again be selling relatively well.

We’re not going to see any real improvement in the PEV market until 2017, when those nominally “200 mile” EVs go on sale, followed by the Tesla Model ≡, probably in 2018. Those two advancements might finally kick the EV revolution into the exponential growth phase. Either or both of those together might (or might not) be “The Breakthrough”, as it’s termed on the graph linked below:

Erecting a rectangular building shell in a flat area that gets no rain can be done very quickly. The interesting and hard parts are the production lines themselves.

Right. The headline “First Phase Of Building Tesla Gigafactory Nearly Complete” is rather premature.

A more accurate headline would be “Building of the Shell for the First Phase of Tessla’s Gigafactory Nearly Complete”.

And different newspapers can’t agree on just how much of the complete Gigafactory this represents. 20% ? 25% ? This article claims 14%. But then, this article also claims “And it could get even bigger, possibly doubling in size”… which is a fairly strong indication to me that the reporter doesn’t understand the subject he’s writing about.

Battle of the Batts…
Battle of the Super Chargers…

…those are very costly & long lead-time infrastructure projects that how now being played by EV car makers will heavily determine who has the future advantage over whom. A bad play hand will be very hard to recover from.

This building is also putting a lot of pressure on other players in the battery business.

If what we see actually is 14% of the final building, this is going to be HUGE.

I think they mean 14% complete. Not 14% of finished size. The shell is the easy part. There is a lot more work to do with walls, windows, doors, wiring, plumbing, stairs, air conditioning, etc. These will take much more time.

14% absolutely is in regards to finished size… the current structure is only 900,000 sqft of the planned 5.8 million sqft.

And Installation if Produktion lanes

America, F*** Yeah!

what a time to be alive