Tesla Model S, Third Fire

[SeanB]

I will point out the big problem with fuel cells is they really do need a catalyst inside. Thus each cell needs a few grams of either Platinum, Palladium, Iridium and other Platinum group metals. these are not cheap, are a very hard to mine item ( Lonmin anyone) and are pretty much a limited resource. Recycling it as well is difficult, as the 1g will be a thin coat on a substrate, and that is not easy to separate out from the base.

As world wide production of PGM is measured in tons in single figures ( 7-8 tons typically) and will not easily ramp up to make millions of fuel cells this means that fuel cells will stay expensive for cars.

As well the production of Hydrogen needs the same PGM metals, though there they are typically in plate form and the value of those catalysts are millions of dollars per installation, and they also have a finite life before they need to be regenerated to remove contaminants.

[tom66]

The remote door locks still worked even though the entire front end was melted! 

The DC-DC converter and 12V battery are located over the passenger side front wheel well, away from the heat, so it's possible this is why they survived given how the fire vents from the battery pack.

Though it always seemed like a strange place to me, a strong impact on that wheel bay and you could  have access to high voltage components?

[c4757p]

Nonsense. Just learn how to drive (IOW switch to a lower gear when going uphill).

Sure, you figure out how to do that with an automatic gearbox , and i'll do it ...

...pull the shifter down into "3" or "2"? What auto doesn't let you force a downshift?

sure. try that . put it in 3 and try reaching  55MPh or 60MPh ... you'll be lucky if it doesn't blow up.

No. Step hard on the gas at 65 MPH and it will shift into third anyway... and 2nd is OK well into the 50s in most cars, though the engine will be screaming.

[nctnico]

@Whales: you are comparing apples & oranges when comparing the efficiency of an electric motor versus combustion engine. Depending on where the electricity is coming from an EV (Tesla S, Leaf, Volt) can produce over 200grams of CO2 per km (if your electricity is coming from coal powered power plants). For comparison: my 14 year old diesel produces about 142 grams of CO2 per km. If you want an EV to be clean you have to source low emission electricity from somewhere.

You keep repeating this inaccuracy.

The fact is that EV's produce less CO2 than combustion cars - period.  The only way that is not true is if you compare the most CO2 efficient of combustion engines against an area with exceptionally high CO2 from electric production.

Unfortunately most people live in places where the CO2 production per kWh is exceptionally high. In China for example one kWh produces 800 grams of CO2 (180grams of CO2 per km for the average EV). Add to that that most cars in Asia have efficient 1.0 to 1.3 litre engines which produce very little CO2 per km. Besides that the world wide trend is to make car with IC engines way more efficient. AND don't forget bio-fuels are about to emerge. EVs are very much hyped nowadays but bio-fuels which have no impact on food production are here sooner than the battery technology required to give EVs a range which is acceptable for the majority of people. Bio-fuels are also a solution to polution problems because they burn cleaner than fossile fuels.

Every study I have seen says that combustion cars generate more CO2 per mile driven than EV's.  When you delve into the math

That is because those studies are wrong and based on false assumptions like existing cars dating back over a decade and people buying inefficient cars. Who pays for them?

You don't need a study or a Phd to see where and how an EV is less efficient. The average amount of CO2 produced per kWh for a country is easy to find using Google. The amount of CO2 a car produces is easely calculated by using the molecular weight of carbon and oxygen of the fuel and the mileage. In case of gasoline its 2392grams of CO2 per litre, in case of diesel its 2640 grams of CO2 per litre.

With these numbers you don't have to be a math genius to work out whether your new car should be an EV or an efficient ICE based car if you want to drive green. And it turns out that in many cases a new efficient ICE based car is more efficient than a new EV (unless you are able to source enough electricity with an ultra low CO2 footprint which isn't 'washed green' by buying CO2 emission certificates).

Ofcourse electricity production tends to get greener but so are cars. Over here the fuel prices and taxes on inefficient cars are insanely high so you'd be stupid to buy a very inefficient car if you drive a lot. The fuel costs alone would cut way to deep into your income (the same goes for large parts of Asia where people's income is low to begin with). Besides that the EU has put a CO2 quotum on car manufacturers limiting how much CO2 their cars may produce on average. So for every gas guzzler BMW sells they have to sell several very efficient cars to restore the balance. This limit gets lowered gradually over the next years to 95grams of CO2 per km in 2020 (that is a little over 6 years from now).

It would be a big win if they did the same in the US; basically banning all the gas-guzzlers. In Germany they did ban cars which didn't meet a certain polution standard and in many cities they banned much newer cars as well. This meant people where more or less forced to buy newer and cleaner cars. So it can be done without people trying to overthrow the government. BTW it didn't help at all to make the air cleaner in the cities.

[amyk]

Step hard on the gas at 65 MPH and it will shift into third anyway... and 2nd is OK well into the 50s in most cars, though the engine will be screaming.

It depends on the exact car/transmission  - I've driven ones that will downshift at the slightest tap of the pedal, and others that need it floored and the engine almost at idle.

[dr.diesel]

Then we will hit a tipping point.  The complexity of a combustion powered car are massive... numerous cooling and lubrication systems and mechanicals that are infinitely more complex than on an EV.  Pretty soon EV's will be cheaper to buy, cheaper to run, easier to maintain, require drastically less service, and offer a more comfortable ride (no big driveline tunnel, no engine drone, and more).  Children born today will tell their grandkids how they remember the old days when we put gasoline in cars, and the grandkids will laugh at how backwards we were.

Very true, but all we will be doing is trading one complexity for another.  When electric cars become the norm we'll soon be rushing in self driving cars, car to car communication, super fancy vision systems GPS etc.  It's the correct path I suppose, soon your car will be perfectly capable of driving your drunk ass home at night!

Our grandkids will never enjoy the thrill and exhilaration of a roaring classic V8 melting the pavement while shedding a brand new set of tires in one single burnout.

(how I miss my 468 Bigblock Chevy powered 1980 Olds Cutlass) 

[SLJ]

Our grandkids will never enjoy the thrill and exhilaration of a roaring classic V8 melting the pavement while shedding a brand new set of tires in one single burnout.

Won't matter.  Just like most kids today don't miss or even know what records are. Even CD's are on the way out.

There will still be a few "autophools" brewing gas in there shop to run the antique beasts.

[dr.diesel]

Our grandkids will never enjoy the thrill and exhilaration of a roaring classic V8 melting the pavement while shedding a brand new set of tires in one single burnout.

Won't matter.  Just like most kids today don't miss or even know what records are. Even CD's are on the way out.

There will still be a few "autophools" brewing gas in there shop to run the antique beasts.

Old records and CDs couldn't do this:

[Robomeds]

I'm afraid you're right.

We have no choice in the matter, it's not an option, it IS going to happen. Some will do their best to block EV's from replacing ICE vehicles, but it's going to be just a matter of time before all ICE vehicles are replaced with EV's. Yes battery technology (and our entire electrical power grid system) is still quite primitive (compared to what it's going to become), so it's going to take a little time before all ICE's are replaced.

Whether we like it or not, it's going to happen, and we are also going to be changing our driving habits, that too we have no option with, it's inevitable.

I don't think people are going to actively block EVs.  However, in the US there are two big issues with EVs that I'm not OK with.  First, I don't think buyers of $100k cars should be getting government handouts.  The Tesla is subsidized by several government programs.  Tesla the company would fold very quickly if they couldn't sell electric car credits and if DC didn't hand them nearly 10% of the purchase price of every car.  I'm not OK that I personally am helping pay for those cars. 

Second, we need to figure out a better road tax system.  Historically in the US gas taxes funded the roads.  Since all cars had to buy gas it was a reasonable way to force all users of the roads to pay for the roads.  It wasn't perfect.  The driver of the Ford pickup pays effectively 2x that of the Fiesta driver.  Realistically the cost to service the roads is the same for both.  The difference in road wear due to the extra weight of the truck is negligible (we aren't talking tractor trailer here).  The real cost is repairing weather damage, servicing traffic lights, plowing roads etc.  All of those costs are the same regardless of vehicle type.  So the Fiesta driver pays half as much.  The Prius driver pays yet less and the EV driver pays nothing.  For better or worse our road tax system does somewhat assume that cars all get an average mileage and drive an average amount per year.  When gas prices shot up (~2x over 3 years) the amount of gas we bought went down.  Our gas tax is a fixed amount per gallon (not a percent) thus less gas purchased due to more efficient cars or less miles driven means less road repair money.  EVs of course pay nothing into this system so they are again subsidized by gas drivers.  This is another thing that will eventually have to be fixed.  Right now the gas drivers can reasonably carry the freeloaders (freeloaders in the sense they don't pay, not that they are trying to avoid paying).  If we start seeing EV sales as say 10% of the market then there are simply too many people who aren't paying.

One other note, long live the standard transmission!

[dr.diesel]

One other note, long live the standard transmission!

Amen brother!

We're a LONG way from oil independence.  Electric cars is the easy part, electric 747-400s, over the road trucks, military jets/cargo plans/tanks are a completely different story to overcome.

[tom66]

A 747-400 produces about 90MW (121,000 hp) during take off. If an electric motor is about twice as efficient, then you'd require around 45MW... I think if you had a seriously large hydrogen fuel cell bank it could work (and associated inverters), but it would probably cost more than the lifetime cost of jet fuel.

At $4 per watt, said fuel cell would cost in excess of $150m... which is about half the cost of a new  747.

[Rufus]

The internal combustion engines time is up, no matter what the die hards have to say about it.

A tin can holding 2 US gallons of gasoline weighing about 20lb contains as much energy as the $20000 1500lb Tesla battery pack. The tin can can be refilled in seconds, costs almost nothing, and doesn't wear out.

The 60:1 difference in energy storage density is the problem EVs have no matter what the technically illiterate have to say about it. The higher conversion efficiency doesn't come close to making up for it or justifying an extra 1500lb of weight to lug around to get a moderately acceptable range.

Yes, it's unworkable with our current way of thinking/tech.

We need to allow enough time for us to come up with new currently unthought of ways of propulsion/power.

If only we had an engine powered by wishful thinking - something we seem to have an excess of.

[nctnico]

A 747-400 produces about 90MW (121,000 hp) during take off. If an electric motor is about twice as efficient, then you'd require around 45MW... I think if you had a seriously large hydrogen fuel cell bank it could work (and associated inverters), but it would probably cost more than the lifetime cost of jet fuel.

At $4 per watt, said fuel cell would cost in excess of $150m... which is about half the cost of a new  747.

Yes, it's unworkable with our current way of thinking/tech.

We need to allow enough time for us to come up with new currently unthought of ways of propulsion/power. The only way we are going to achieve that is to NOT waste the oil on replaceable ground based ICE's, and so going all EV's is a must.

You are way behind the facts:
http://www.boeing.com/Features/2011/06/bca_biofuel_06_15_11.html
I said it before and I'll keep saying it: bio-fuel has a much brighter future than the EV. People don't notice it but bio-fuel availability is increasing steadily. Every time I go abroad I see more gas stations offering bio-fuel or bio-fuel/fossile fuel mixtures.

[free_electron]

Old records and CDs couldn't do this:

Classified as vandalism and pollution.

[free_electron]

  However, in the US there are two big issues with EVs that I'm not OK with.  First, I don't think buyers of $100k cars should be getting government handouts.

Every EV is eligible. Not only tesla! Nissan leaf , plugin prius , volt , you name it.

The Tesla is subsidized by several government programs. 

Tesla repaid their government loan prematurely , in full. Only EV company that did that...

Tesla the company would fold very quickly if they couldn't sell electric car credits and if DC didn't hand them nearly 10% of the purchase price of every car.  I'm not OK that I personally am helping pay for those cars. 

EV driver pays nothing.

That does need fixing. Let's change to a system where the odometer reports yearly how many miles you have driven , make two or three categories depending on car, light duty truck, heavy duty truck, and automatically invoice you with your yearly tax bill or licence plate renewal.

Make the new law in such a way that the collected money can ONLY be used for road improvements.

[dr.diesel]

Classified as vandalism and pollution.

It wore off with no damage, and I suppose 3MPG classifies as pollution.

Pollution is the people down the road that burn rail road ties and tires for heat in the winter, by the hundreds.

[free_electron]

The internal combustion engines time is up, no matter what the die hards have to say about it.

A tin can holding 2 US gallons of gasoline weighing about 20lb contains as much energy as the $20000 1500lb Tesla battery pack. The tin can can be refilled in seconds, costs almost nothing, and doesn't wear out.

The 60:1 difference in energy storage density is the problem EVs have no matter what the technically illiterate have to say about it. The higher conversion efficiency doesn't come close to making up for it or justifying an extra 1500lb of weight to lug around to get a moderately acceptable range.

Yes, it's unworkable with our current way of thinking/tech.

We need to allow enough time for us to come up with new currently unthought of ways of propulsion/power.

If only we had an engine powered by wishful thinking - something we seem to have an excess of.

2 gallons gets you 50 miles. The tesla battery pack gets you 300. That is a sixfold gain in efficiency !

[dr.diesel]

Make the new law in such a way that the collected money can ONLY be used for road improvements.

And unlike social security, make it impossible to borrow from. 

[Robomeds]

  However, in the US there are two big issues with EVs that I'm not OK with.  First, I don't think buyers of $100k cars should be getting government handouts.

Every EV is eligible. Not only tesla! Nissan leaf , plugin prius , volt , you name it.

The Tesla is subsidized by several government programs. 

Tesla repaid their government loan prematurely , in full. Only EV company that did that...

Tesla the company would fold very quickly if they couldn't sell electric car credits and if DC didn't hand them nearly 10% of the purchase price of every car.  I'm not OK that I personally am helping pay for those cars. 

EV driver pays nothing.

That does need fixing. Let's change to a system where the odometer reports yearly how many miles you have driven , make two or three categories depending on car, light duty truck, heavy duty truck, and automatically invoice you with your yearly tax bill or licence plate renewal.

Make the new law in such a way that the collected money can ONLY be used for road improvements.

Every EV is eligible.... and that's no better. 
I am not referring to the federal loans which Tesla did pay back.  No I'm referring to the federal credits and more importantly to Tesla's current bottom line, all the EV credits CA is forcing other companies to buy. 
(I really dislike MJ as a source but this article hits on the basic issue)
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/08/tesla-q2-second-quarter-earnings-elon-musk-subsidies

All the infrastructure Tesla is building is being built with other people's money.  Not like gas stations that were built because people saw demand, not this is Tesla spending money from various governments.  Again, I'm not OK with that. 

[dr.diesel]

I am not referring to the federal loans which Tesla did pay back.  No I'm referring to the federal credits and more importantly to Tesla's current bottom line, all the EV credits CA is forcing other companies to buy. 

I for one am not happy I'm paying for rich people to drive around in their status symbols..

[Rufus]

2 gallons gets you 50 miles. The tesla battery pack gets you 300. That is a sixfold gain in efficiency !

Comparing a poor IC vehicle with wishful thinking range of the 85kWh Tesla.

The EPA thinks the 60kWh Tesla is good for 208 miles and that there are many IC cars which will give 80 miles from 2 gallons so the efficiency gain is about 2.6 - in reality better because the Tesla has to lug an enormous battery around. At 3:1 that still leaves EVs with a 20:1 energy storage density problem to overcome.

[tom66]

Tesla solution: give it a huge battery.

Not sure what the problem with this design is?

[mtdoc]

I for one am not happy I'm paying for rich people to drive around in their status symbols..

Yeah, I know how you feel.  I don't like paying for people to drive around in their inefficient, gas guzzling SUVs, muscle cars and monster trucks.  All those tax dollars going to pay for the environmental damage and health effects of burning fossil fuels - and not to mention all the money spent killing people in other countries to procure the oil...

[dr.diesel]

Yeah, I know how you feel.  I don't like paying for people to drive around in their inefficient, gas guzzling SUVs, muscle cars and monster trucks.  All those tax dollars going to pay for the environmental damage and health effects of burning fossil fuels - and not to mention all the money spent killing people in other countries to procure the oil...

Lol, no tax breaks on gas guzzling SUVs.

[free_electron]

The EPA thinks the 60kWh Tesla is good for 208 miles and that there are many IC cars which will give 80 miles from 2 gallons so the efficiency gain is about 2.6 - in reality better because the Tesla has to lug an enormous battery around. At 3:1 that still leaves EVs with a 20:1 energy storage density problem to overcome.

now you are comparing to the 60KW battery pack an you say  'plenty of cars' . Like dinky little toys with a sippy cup 4 cylinder engine ?
The 85KW is EPA ratedat 265 and experience from current owners gives that 300 miles is not a problem. Drive it normally and not like a lunatic and you get even 30 to 40 miles more out of it. some dude even pulled 412 miles out of it...

Let's compare apples to apples. Get a luxury sedan in the same category as the Tesla. See how far those 6 or 8 cylinder 4.0 to 5.3 liter gets you on a tank ... Grab a BMW740, 750 as comparison... 24 mpg highway. drive it around san francisco with its stop and go and see where you end up ... you may get 10...

The Tesla is in that high cost category because current technological barriers ( that are tumbling fast) make that the car is only feasible in that price segment.

This has been the starting idea from tesla all along. Any new technology costs a lot of money to design and sell. once it gets traction and volumes go up prices godown.
Look at the VCR , DVD , Blu-ray, Plasma and LCD Tv's. the first Plasma's were 5000$ or more for a 42 incher... Costco sells 56 inch TV's below a 1000$ now. Blu-ray players are 50$ ( down from 400$+). The early adopters pay the price.
Tesla is applying the same model to making cars. The early adopters will buy it. Once the ball gets rolling prices will come down.

I for one am not happy I'm paying for rich people to drive around in their status symbols..

It's a free country. Go complain to your congressman , vote differently, or become rich yourself. Whining and doing nothing is not a solution.

I'm not rich , i'm frugal and count every penny i spend. I work hard , spend my free time writing books and spreading my knowledge for free. Once every 10 to 15 years  i can treat myself something nice. This time it's a Tesla. It's a relly fine car , has more range than my current one , more gizmos and technology than anything else out there , and operational cost is lower (ok , purchase cost is higher but if i'd bought a BMW 750 with a bunch of options, or a big Lexus SUV,  i'd be in the same bracket . compare apples to apples. ), it has more cargo space ( so i can haul more test equipment from the next company that went out of business in one shot)
If i'm no longer allowed to spend my hard earned money on something i like becasue other people make less than me ... we should revert to communism.