Case against Tesla 1/2 - solar panels and energy storage

[This and following post contain thoughts derived from multiple sources, including the great stratechery.com, many Seeking Alpha articles, WayMo self-driving car reports and other articles on the subject].

Disclaimer: I do not want Tesla to fail, nor I am against electric vehicles (EVs) nor solar energy or energy storage. I simply do not see Tesla as being in a good business and I see their stock as even less appealing investment.

I admire the boldness of Tesla in advancing EVs and making them cool. Likewise, I think the sooner we stop burning oil to move around cars the better, as we can save it for applications where it is much harder to be replaced, such as water and air transport, making useful chemicals, etc.

First principles

Famously, Elon Musk likes to refer to "first principles". It is from them, that I fail to see how current Tesla's energy storage strategy for stationary applications makes economical sense.

The most cost-efficient (see table 4) electrical energy storage is gravity, more precisely pumped-hydro or better yet operating dams when electricity is needed. Of course we do not have enough hydro capacity to shave off peak generation of the increasing amount of renewable energy sources.

Sodium-sulfur or compressed air are much more cost-effective today than Li-Ion, and in general it is unlikely that technology that is best suited for cars (high energy density) will also be the best one for stationary energy storage (where cost is the most important factor). Even if renewable energy was free to generate, Li-Ion storage cost amortized over its lifespan would be more expensive than the retail cost of grid energy for years to come.

I also don't see how Tesla could become the low-cost provider in this domain, given that "their" battery technology is owned by Panasonic and solar panels are a commodity mass-produced in China already.

Distributed vs. centralized energy generation and storage

Residential solar had some popularity in US and elsewhere, in large part thanks to subsidies and preferential net-metering which externalized costs such as energy storage for solar panel owners. But the solar and wind energy sources are becoming cheaper quickly and this trend will likely continue. They are likely to be the same kind of commodity that oil is. 

I see nuclear power as the perfect baseline and renewables as the ultimately 'free' energy. That leaves the energy storage the biggest obstacle for renewables to rule the energy generation.

Key element of the solution will be for sure an EV. Once (not if) this is the dominant transportation medium for humans and things, EVs can consume the surplus power from the grid, which will likely be generated mid-day, when traffic is limited. When economically sensible, they can give back energy to the grid during the off-peak times (especially in the evenings). Li-Ion or successor technology for car applications can be 'turned-on' instantly when the needs arise.

I see some potential in long-distance DC power lines time-shifting the energy consumption/production around the globe, but perhaps the human population is not distributed evenly enough for this to be practical.

Solar roofs

With solar panels becoming increasingly competitive with fossil energy sources (even w/o subsidies), the big question is - where they will be deployed?

Having them decentralized, on everyone's roof sounds very egalitarian and romantic, but I do not think it will be the most popular way, especially in the US. The deployment and maintenance costs of solar panels placed on roofs (or being the roof) will necessarily be higher than having the same panels deployed in a central location with safe, easy access. It also makes it easier to track sun movement to maximize utilization. As US has an abundance of land, central generation is much more economical and practical choice. In Europe, the landscape considerations might sometimes make for different trade-offs, though.

Elon Musk's concept of integrated solar roofs does not withstand common sense scrutiny. Why one would couple roof tiles and small solar panels and add deployment complexity on top of this? Also the recycling of such roof tiles will become much more complex than necessary. The most logical is to decouple the two. If, as Elon claims, these tiles are so beautiful to increase home value by 5% (really?), one can imagine that having glass tiles without integrated solar panels to have exactly the same effect, but being much cheaper.

Overall, I am an optimist with regards to humanity switching within a few decades to renewable energy sources for majority of energy consumption. But I do not see Tesla as being a significant part of this picture, given the lack of cost and technological advantages.