News
Why Tesla’s lead acid 12V battery needs to be lithium-ion based
It’s a prominent issue surrounding the electric vehicle market that the old-school lead acid battery just isn’t appropriate for new technology vehicles. Many users of electric vehicles, especially Tesla owners, have cited concerns with the poor performance of their 12V or low-voltage battery, oftentimes requiring annual replacement.
In contrast, a lead acid battery in a traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicle generally has a 4 year life-cycle, but why?
RELATED: Tesla Model S 12V Lithium-Ion battery replacement (up to 70% lighter, 4x life)
First off, some of the most important factors to consider in longevity of a battery are “cycle-life”, environmental conditions, discharge/charge rates and calendar-life; cycle-life is how many times the battery can be drained and recharged in its life. Environmental conditions include temperature and humidity. Discharge/charge rates are the amperages going out of and into the battery respectively.
There are two major differences between the way an ICE vehicle uses its 12V battery and the way an EV uses its 12V battery:
“OFF” state discharge and cycling frequency
ICE Vehicle: generally has a very low 12V load while the vehicle is in the “off” state, often this load doesn’t exceed a few watts and doesn’t present a major challenge for the 12V battery to maintain.
Electric Vehicle: The 12V load while in the off-state is often much higher due to advanced computer systems that are running to maintain the high-voltage battery, keep vehicle “connected” (all EV have some remote access features), maintain charging and BMS (Battery Management System) communications, etc. In fact a Tesla Model S/X puts about 50 Watts of load on the 12V system when the vehicle is in the “off” state. 50 Watts equals about 4.5 Amps of discharge on the 12V battery, this drains the battery down relatively rapidly and requires the 12V battery be “recharged” by the high-voltage battery regularly, this usage pattern results in many cycles being placed on the battery.
“ON” state utilization and purpose
ICE Vehicle: The 12V battery is used to initiate the ICE (start the car) and is designed for putting out large amounts of current to accommodate this process. Once an ICE vehicle is in the “on” state, it relies on an alternator to power all of the 12V sub-systems and also maintain the voltage of the 12V battery.
Electric Vehicle: The 12V is subjected to (practically) no additional load while the vehicle is being turned “on”, and although most vehicles are designed with DC/DC converters (which act as alternators) it is often an engineering design choice to reduce load on the DC/DC converter by minimizing the frequency with which it is utilized. This also extends the driving range of the vehicle because none of the precious high-voltage battery capacity is being shunted to non-driving tasks. Due to this usage profile the 12V battery is subjected to relatively low discharge and recharge currents.
When you combine the high number of cycles and the low current requirements of the electric vehicle 12V battery system you arrive at a completely different battery need than that of an ICE vehicle. Lead Acid batteries are very good at high discharge and low cycle count life-styles, this is their bread and butter and this is where they last a long time and provide the most bang for the buck (cheap cost and decent product life-cycle), but they aren’t lasting in electric vehicles.
The electric vehicle 12V battery system is one that is best suited by a battery capable of tremendous cycle-life as the main design goal. The battery chemistry that suits this usage scenario best? Lithium! Lithium battery technology is specifically very good at being cycled many times and continuing to provide minimal capacity loss and degradation. This, along with reduced weight, is why these batteries are used for the high-voltage battery packs, cell-phones, laptops, medical equipment and cars where batteries are being cycled frequently and longevity is important.
Editor’s note: This post was submitted into our network by Tesla Model S owner Sean Scherer. Having suffered an unfortunate incident in his Model S that left him stranded because of a faulty 12V battery, Sherer began on a mission to create a lithium-ion based 12V battery solution that was not only more reliable than the traditional lead acid battery, but better suited for the demands of a Tesla Model S, Model X, and electric vehicles in general. He began BattMobile Batteries, who have made it their mission to improve adoption of electric vehicles by solving some of the small details that has been missed by EV manufacturers.
We’ve also included a video tutorial on how to replace the Model S 12V battery.
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Version 3 booster crumples in early testing
Photos of the incident’s aftermath suggest that Booster 18 will likely be retired.
SpaceX’s new Starship first-stage booster, Booster 18, suffered major damage early Friday during its first round of testing in Starbase, Texas, just one day after rolling out of the factory.
Based on videos of the incident, the lower section of the rocket booster appeared to crumple during a pressurization test. Photos of the incident’s aftermath suggest that Booster 18 will likely be retired.
Booster test failure
SpaceX began structural and propellant-system verification tests on Booster 18 Thursday night at the Massey’s Test Site, only a few miles from Starbase’s production facilities, as noted in an Ars Technica report. At 4:04 a.m. CT on Friday, a livestream from LabPadre Space captured the booster’s lower half experiencing a sudden destructive event around its liquid oxygen tank section. Post-incident images, shared on X by @StarshipGazer, showed notable deformation in the booster’s lower structure.
Neither SpaceX nor Elon Musk had commented as of Friday morning, but the vehicle’s condition suggests it is likely a complete loss. This is quite unfortunate, as Booster 18 is already part of the Starship V3 program, which includes design fixes and upgrades intended to improve reliability. While SpaceX maintains a rather rapid Starship production line in Starbase, Booster 18 was generally expected to validate the improvements implemented in the V3 program.
Tight deadlines
SpaceX needs Starship boosters and upper stages to begin demonstrating rapid reuse, tower catches, and early operational Starlink missions over the next two years. More critically, NASA’s Artemis program depends on an on-orbit refueling test in the second half of 2026, a requirement for the vehicle’s expected crewed lunar landing around 2028.
While SpaceX is known for diagnosing failures quickly and returning to testing at unmatched speed, losing the newest-generation booster at the very start of its campaign highlights the immense challenge involved in scaling Starship into a reliable, high-cadence launch system. SpaceX, however, is known for getting things done quickly, so it would not be a surprise if the company manages to figure out what happened to Booster 18 in the near future.
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
