The 40-year old technology is cheaper, more well known, widely deployed, 100% green, non-toxic and extremely reliable. Its both a short-term and long-term solution.
TSLA batteries don't even beat the status-quo in the energy field, let alone the new technologies that are coming (Supercapacitors, Redox Flow, Compressed Air...)
Look, this is just like the PC revolution vs mainframes. Mainframes were cheaper and better on ANY axis relative to PC's in the 1980's.
However, a PC didn't require a multi-year allocation in the capital budget. A PC didn't require buy-in from multiple players. A PC was locally controlled.
So, PCs won. And the money expended on PCs eventually made them better than the mainframes they were displacing.
Okay. So why are PowerWalls going to beat the current state-of-the-art in battery technology?
Look, for areas with resources, Pumped Hydro / Compressed Air is straight up superior. For areas without resources, getting a shipping container for a Redox Flow battery is more efficient.
Plus, you are ignoring the biggest advantages of the PowerWall concept-- the decentralization and small-scale aspect. I don't think homeowners in my town are going to be building hydroelectric dams in their back yard, even if it weren't an earthquake zone (and it is...)
With regard to new battery chemistries... sure, there are probably things out there much better or stabler than lithium-ion. But posting some marketing copy about a not-yet-shipped new battery product proves nothing. I'm surprised you didn't latch on to the "ultracapacitor" hype since that is also a year away from taking the world by storm (and has been for the last 5 years, at least). As a layman, none of us have any idea whether these physics breakthroughs are 5 months away or 5 years, and none of the people who do know are going to talk about it.
If new battery chemistries do take the world by storm. I don't see why Tesla wouldn't just license them, much like they are licensing lithium-ion now. Tesla has the high-current charging network that a better battery would need anyway. Traditional car manufacturers have a spotty and low-wattage charging network that might not even benefit from a better battery chemistry.
You seem to be grasping at any possible reason to be negative about Tesla. I agree they're overvalued right now, but the idea of building a big factory for batteries, and focusing on a high-end electric car is smart, and the next few years will show that. There are strong network effects in building a charging network, and major economies of scale in building the gigafactory.
And it has nothing to do with "better". Lithium Ion has more energy per watt, but Redox Flow is just so much cheaper and also has a 20+ year life expectancy. It will be very hard for Tesla to compete when they're making car batteries and trying to apply it to utility scale.
Who cares about energy density when you're just going to bury the battery into the ground? The ground can support a lot more weight than the lighter Lithium Ion batteries. The Redox Flow's heavier weight is not a disadvantage in the utility space.
There are many things which are more cost-effective long-term, which lose to something which costs less short term.