Muskiness

The human rated version will only hit 2G, if you read further.

shes/

Will you lay off the denialist propaganda? Anthony Watts only interest in t he subject is to use it to push claims that electric cars aren't a potentia l replacement for gasoline-powered cars, and his puff provides no other inf ormation than that he's bought-and-paid-for propagandist.

Do try to read a little more critically - it would make you look less like a gullible sucker.

That's for the test vehicle. The faster it hits the target speed, the less test track needs to be built.

I'll give Musk a heap of credit for trying new things. Even if he fails, he's setting the bar a lot higher for the competition. Anyone remember all those electric car kits where you installed a bunch of lead acid truck batteries and hopped that the car didn't collapse during its brief travel?

Musk is in the scifi government subsidy business, and still loses billions on everything he tries. The SpaceX thing has a chance, if Bezos and others don't make it unprofitable.

I sure don't want a Tesla. They are impractical and expensive and buggy and ugly.

Electric cars are far from general purpose at this time.

Telsas are very popular urban cars. For people with bad commutes and a gas guzzling family car, switching to a Tesla is essentially free.

Of course in that scenario, buying a hybrid would cost quite a bit less than zero. (Most of us call it "saving money".)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

Until it comes time to replace the batteries.

Subsidies make that work.

There are real problems still: batteries dying in cold weather, batteries dying in general, problems with long trips, driving ugly cars, poor quality.

I see very few Teslas in San Francisco. Maybe hauling a ton of batteries up and down the hills is a problem; the downhills mostly dump energy into the brakes. Hybrids get bad mileage here too.

I suspect that Tesla sales will saturate like PT Cruisers.

Den torsdag den 12. maj 2016 kl. 19.27.11 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:

buts-fut

ty-crash

ead

ts

you can say many things about a tesla but ugly is not one of them

who would think that hauling things up and down hill cost energy it is almost as if the laws of physic applies to cars regardless of what drives them.

A tesla does regen braking, but if you want to dump it in the brakes instead you can do that

-Lasse

It has an induction motor, so it depends on how fast you enjoy driving down steep hills.

Den torsdag den 12. maj 2016 kl. 22.07.00 UTC+2 skrev John Larkin:

afaict a tesla can do 30kW regen at 30mph

-Lasse

They're $100 K. That's not very "free".

Man you guys are out to lunch, there are like 500,000 preorders for the Tesla model 3, which costs $35,000. Tesla is attempting to ramp up their production over 5x in the next 2 or so years to produce 500,000 vehicles per year. The costs of production are currently at their all time high, due to setting up the assembly lines and buying production equipment, design costs, and buying from suppliers instead of in house production etc.

Electric cars like the teslas can be FAR simpler mechanically than modern internal combustion vehicles, and internal combustion vehicles are a dead end for future efficiency gains, whereas electric vehicles can have much cheaper and better batteries in the future.

Tesla's costs will decrease as they produce batteries in house with their gigafactories, also selling the same batteries for home solar setups. Really anyone who advocates for internal combustion is kind of brain dead considering all the cancer caused by air pollution as well as sending so much money overseas to buy foreign oil from dictators.

cheers, Jamie

That $500M saved their shakey cash position. Now they need to build the cars before they run out of cash again. It will be interesting if they can't make the model 3 cars for $34K each.

Tesla is attempting to ramp up

The home battery things don't make sense to me. If batteries were economical ways to load level, utilities would do it far more efficiently than individuals.

Gasoline cars are very clean now; diesels are dirty.

The US would now be an oil exporter, if it was allowed. Fracking changed everything.

Well, no. That's precisely why my car has, not just one, but two catalytic converters in it. And it's a '95.

Kind of sad that my mileage doesn't vary much around 29 MPG. Slightly higher in city than highway, but never above about 30. (I drive very conservatively; I have no clue what horrible driving style the EPA methods use, to get such horrible in-city ratings.)

Tim

The utilities have invested a huge amount in the distribution network. Abou t half what I pay for electricity is to cover the costs of the poles and wi res that get it to me.

Domestic batteries reduce the load on the distribution network, and make th at load less predictable, so the utilities are the last people to decrease the value of their cash cow.

Diesels are now dirtier than gasoline-burning engines. Neither is "clean".

The Saudis increase production to drop the price of oil below the level whe re fracking was worth the trouble. It screwed up the Russian economy as wel l.

The Saudis are going to run out of oil eventually - just like everybody els e - though it isn't so much "running out" as being forced to exploit ever m ore inaccessible and expensive-to-extract deposits.

John Larkin is too dumb to appreciate that burning even more oil is eventua lly going to put enough CO2 into the atmosphere to raise the global average temperature to a point where even John Larkin won't be able to ignore the negative consequences (unless of course he has died in the meantime, from i gnoring the risks in even more obviously risky behaviours).

No question of that. :)

Wow.

Sure. It's just that SWAP for gasoline has dominated all other calculations since ... my grandparents were born. And I'm old now.

... we hope.

I ... just... well, hope that works out.

Thanks for the update. That's awesome. I hope they don't deLorean on us.

Utilities are pretty conservative. They hove long finance horizons.

yes, it did. In the 1940s. And again, and again. A representation of fracking is in the movie "Tulsa" ( with Susan Hayworth and Robert Preston ) from 1948. That was the "dynamite and column of water" version.

bill.sloman ieee.org wrote in news:a108dd85-282a-4728-8e30-b197728329e0 googlegroups.com:

Making John's point even stronger.

There are lies, damned lies, and Hollywood. When Hollywood and Democrats get together, you have the US c.2016.