Tesla Model S, Third Fire

[mtdoc]

Excellent post 666 and I agree. 

I do have one quibble with this statement:

The supply of oil will never, ever, ever run out.  Ever.  Not in 100 years, or 1,000 years or 10,000 years or 100,000 years.  Never.  Economics and supply/demand simply does not work like that.

Yes, there will always be some oil in the ground. The problem is that eventually it will mostly stay there. 

There are numerous reasons for this - decreasing net energy returned from extraction due to high energy requirements to get at deeper offshore oil, tight oil, etc... , economic costs and associated general economic decline when oil prices rise too high - meaning there is an upper limit to the price of oil.

HERE is an excellent, well informed, referenced blog that discusses these issues - (though warning for those who want to stay in denial about our prospects for endless growth and progress - this blog is not for you).

In any case - all the more reason to transition to EVs.

[Corporate666]

0Wow.  That is awfully defensive and totally uncalled for.  I would suggest you learn more about tax credits.  They ARE a form of subsidy.  They are not direct as in the IRS takes the money from all of us and then gives it to you.  However, all of us still pay.  Bills have to be paid.  If you pay less then others have to make up the difference.  It's like splitting the bill at a restaurant but having one person take back some money in the end. 

Yes, I will grant you that if you made no money and bought the car, say out of savings, then you wouldn't get the $7500 back.  However, most (all?) Tesla buyers will get that $7500 back thus less money in the government chauffeurs.  Unless we cut spending to make up for that tax break, well others have to pay more so you can pay less.  BTW, many of the subsidies Dave is referring to are actually tax breaks, not handouts. 

This is at the state level but hits the point
http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/2013/06/new_hampshire_court_agrees_tax.php#.Uru3r7Rn2ZE
The Court sensibly notes that if “money that would otherwise be flowing to the government is diverted” for private ends, that is essentially the same as direct government spending. This shouldn’t be news to anyone familiar with the “tax expenditure” concept—the notion that a $1 million tax break for a specific business is not meaningfully different from government writing a $1 million check to the same business.

Now, you can dislike that I'm not a fan of subsidizing you but please the liar comment was uncalled for especially given that at least some state courts agree with me.

It's naive to think that everyone gets the $7500 credit.  Furthermore, it's naive to think that the money spent on the car which led to the tax credit would have simply been W2 income and taxed at whatever rate, leading to $7500 in taxable income if it was not spent on the car. 

In other words, you can't buy a Tesla as an investment, nor can you buy one as an advertising expense or as a medical device or other things for which one could claim a tax break.  To spend $100k on one, that is generally $100k worth of taxable income - taxed at what rate?  Likely 28-40%.  People who have the $$ to drop that much on a car almost certainly perform tax planning - so to imagine that everyone else paid $7500 towards their purchase couldn't be more wrong.

Not to mention the overall economic benefit of dumping $100k+ into the manufacturing sector of the economy which funds jobs at Tesla, R&D and many other things.

People always like to talk about how much a tax credit costs them, but never how much it benefits them.  I wonder if the same folks who are so critical of "subsidizing rich people" would be kneeling before Tesla owners thanking them if it turned out that the purchase generated at least $7500 in net benefit for the government?  And I bet it does generate that and more. 

[EEVblog]

Yes, there will always be some oil in the ground. The problem is that eventually it will mostly stay there. 
There are numerous reasons for this - decreasing net energy returned from extraction due to high energy requirements to get at deeper offshore oil, tight oil, etc...

As someone who worked in the oil exploration industry for a decade, designing ever better exploration exploration and also monitoring equipment designed to extract the most amount of oil from an existing field, I can confirm that is true. And it is a well known problem in the industry.
If you are betting on oil, you are betting on the wrong horse. Unless you speculate that the price of oil will go up, in which case you will make a killing.

[nctnico]

The best selling electrical cars are plugin hybrids which will probably run mostly on fuel.

Sorry, but this is just the same old crap as always.  There is plenty of data out there that shows that plug-in EV's run mostly on battery.  But why let facts get in the way of a biased opinion?

That data is biased because currently many of those cars are bought by wealthy people who have the space to charge at home. Charging at home is impossible for most people living in growded cities. For those there is the choice between waiting for 20 minutes at a charger or 2 minutes at the petrol station.

The ICE car industry is far from doomed. I travel a lot through Europe and the availability of bio-fuel increases steadily. Next year I plan to replace my car and ethanol readiness/convertability is definitely a concern for the 'new' car. Instead of waiting for technology to become available/affordable (which is still uncertain) I gradually reduce my fossil fuel consumption based on proven technology available today.

EV's today are based on proven technology available today.  The argument that EV's should not be produced until they can be produced cheaply is, frankly, idiotic.  How do people think technologies get cheaper?  It happens through R&D and volume.  I remember when plasma TV's came out and they were $40,000USD.  And now, you can buy a superior unit for 1/100th of that amount.  People who suggest EV's should be on the back burner until they are cheaper are either being disingenuous, knowing manufacturing and technology doesn't work like that, or they really just don't understand economics or business at all.

Well it took plasma TVs (invented in 1936!) about 30 years (since the 1980's) to become affordable. How long will it take before we see affordable EVs with a >500km range? At the moment the 'happy few' are pushing new technology forward as usual. There is nothing wrong with that and its how new technology becomes mainstream. But that always takes several decades! Meanwhile most of the people are sitting on their hands doing nothing to reduce their CO2 footprint while we are more or less running out of time.

Ofcourse oil, gas and coal will never run out. At some point they will become too expensive as a general purpose fuel.

[EEVblog]

That data is biased because currently many of those cars are bought by wealthy people who have the space to charge at home.

There appears to be bias there because there is bias there in market!
EV's appeal primarily to people who have the lifestyle situation that enables their use. Only a fool would by one who doesn't have a matching lifestyle and usage scenario.
In the same way that a family with two kids does not buy a tiny two seat sport car. Or a young single person would not buy a Toyota Tarago.

The ICE car industry is far from doomed.

No one is saying it is in the short to medium term.

[tom66]

Li-ion costs are falling by about 6~9% annually for the same capacity. Tesla's pack costs about $17k in the 85kWh model.  85kWh is enough for 95% of people if put in a smaller car, it could do 300mile+ with average driving.  Half pack cost reached in ~4-5 years? Perfect for 2017~2018 release of $20k car.

Wow they are some crazy numbers - $6 at $0.06/kWh is 100kWh or 1.5 x 67kWh batteries worth. So your ROI and cost predictions are based on Tesla owners supercharging less than once every 6 months...

Yes, it shows how infrequently people travel long distances and why having the network there only when you need it is the best solution -- and these aren't my numbers but are published by Tesla.

How much will this change with cheaper cars?

How often do people road trip? If you assume someone road trips say 5 times a year and keeps their car for 10 years. Each trip they use 3 superchargers there, 3 back, that's around 600 miles each way. They start charged at home. Each supercharger they top up from 10% to 80% in 20 minutes (using 60kWh of energy.) Total 10 year usage, 3600kWh. Cost to Tesla = $216, excluding inflation.

Still cheaper than an ad campaign!

[Robomeds]

You can try to justify it all you want but at least some court sees it as I and most people do.  Let's say both you and I have identical income and tax liabilities save for the purchase of this car.  Well now you pay less in taxes than me.  If the government says I'm paying my 'fair share' then you are paying less than your fair share. 
Regardless, the courts don't agree with your idea that this benefit that you got doesn't cost the public.  The courts are right. 

Even if there was no such an incentive i would still have bought the Tesla.

I suspect many would just as many would have bought Prii had we not given money to Toyota buyers. 

Now, if this means that they need to increase taxes overall that means this i too will have to pay more taxes overall. The one time break i got will be more than recuperated over my lifespan. i got 40 more years to live ( if i make it to 83 , which is median age these days ) If i work another 20 years i'll be forking over another 600.000$ in income taxes to the government. Add on sales tax on anything i buy and you end up well over 1 million dollar i still will pay to the government in my lifetime. That 7500 break is an ants piss in the bucket.

That's very kind of you to agree to pay a small amount extra so you can get a big tax break.  This is kind of like going to a restaurant with a large group and knowing the bill will be split evenly in the end.  It doesn't cost you much extra to order the lobster instead of chicken.  That of course is because the rest of the diners are subsidizing the bill.

Of course we are only talking about the buy's subsidies.  We aren't talking about how CA's EV mandates (as I no longer live their I can't vote against the clowns in Sacramento) effectively force other car companies to subsidize Tesla.  Yes, I don't pay for that via taxes but it does come out as an expense for car companies.  The Tesla is an impressive product.  Too bad they aren't doing it without forcing the non-buyers to help those buying luxury cars. 

[Robomeds]

0Wow.  That is awfully defensive and totally uncalled for.  I would suggest you learn more about tax credits.  They ARE a form of subsidy.  They are not direct as in the IRS takes the money from all of us and then gives it to you.  However, all of us still pay.  Bills have to be paid.  If you pay less then others have to make up the difference.  It's like splitting the bill at a restaurant but having one person take back some money in the end. 

Yes, I will grant you that if you made no money and bought the car, say out of savings, then you wouldn't get the $7500 back.  However, most (all?) Tesla buyers will get that $7500 back thus less money in the government chauffeurs.  Unless we cut spending to make up for that tax break, well others have to pay more so you can pay less.  BTW, many of the subsidies Dave is referring to are actually tax breaks, not handouts. 

This is at the state level but hits the point
http://www.ctj.org/taxjusticedigest/archive/2013/06/new_hampshire_court_agrees_tax.php#.Uru3r7Rn2ZE
The Court sensibly notes that if “money that would otherwise be flowing to the government is diverted” for private ends, that is essentially the same as direct government spending. This shouldn’t be news to anyone familiar with the “tax expenditure” concept—the notion that a $1 million tax break for a specific business is not meaningfully different from government writing a $1 million check to the same business.

Now, you can dislike that I'm not a fan of subsidizing you but please the liar comment was uncalled for especially given that at least some state courts agree with me.

It's naive to think that everyone gets the $7500 credit.  Furthermore, it's naive to think that the money spent on the car which led to the tax credit would have simply been W2 income and taxed at whatever rate, leading to $7500 in taxable income if it was not spent on the car. 

In other words, you can't buy a Tesla as an investment, nor can you buy one as an advertising expense or as a medical device or other things for which one could claim a tax break.  To spend $100k on one, that is generally $100k worth of taxable income - taxed at what rate?  Likely 28-40%.  People who have the $$ to drop that much on a car almost certainly perform tax planning - so to imagine that everyone else paid $7500 towards their purchase couldn't be more wrong.

Not to mention the overall economic benefit of dumping $100k+ into the manufacturing sector of the economy which funds jobs at Tesla, R&D and many other things.

People always like to talk about how much a tax credit costs them, but never how much it benefits them.  I wonder if the same folks who are so critical of "subsidizing rich people" would be kneeling before Tesla owners thanking them if it turned out that the purchase generated at least $7500 in net benefit for the government?  And I bet it does generate that and more.

If you think most Tesla buyers don't get the $7500 credit please show it.  I find it hard to believe that most buyers of a $100,000 car (or even $70,000 car) don't have at least $7500 in tax liabilities. 

[nctnico]

Li-ion costs are falling by about 6~9% annually for the same capacity. Tesla's pack costs about $17k in the 85kWh model.  85kWh is enough for 95% of people if put in a smaller car, it could do 300mile+ with average driving.  Half pack cost reached in ~4-5 years? Perfect for 2017~2018 release of $20k car.

Wow they are some crazy numbers - $6 at $0.06/kWh is 100kWh or 1.5 x 67kWh batteries worth. So your ROI and cost predictions are based on Tesla owners supercharging less than once every 6 months...

Yes, it shows how infrequently people travel long distances and why having the network there only when you need it is the best solution -- and these aren't my numbers but are published by Tesla.

How much will this change with cheaper cars?

How often do people road trip? If you assume someone road trips say 5 times a year and keeps their car for 10 years. Each trip they use 3 superchargers there, 3 back, that's around 600 miles each way. They start charged at home. Each supercharger they top up from 10% to 80% in 20 minutes (using 60kWh of energy.) Total 10 year usage, 3600kWh. Cost to Tesla = $216, excluding inflation.

This is only true if people can charge at home. If people have to rely on the chargers completely (like in crowded cities or where land is scarse) then you'll see completely different numbers. More like 3100kWh per year for the daily commute alone.

[tom66]

That's why Tesla won't build the supercharging network inside towns. Or, they could instigate a plan where if you live within 50 miles of such a charger, you have to pay for each charge. Given the price of electricity (it costs ~$11 to fill up the 85kWh) I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to charge at home.

[amyk]

You barely use the traditional brake pedal. Only for the last meter , and to hold the car in position. The regenerative braking controlled by throttle works perfect.

The Prius has something similar but most drivers seem to hate it. How has Tesla done it better?

I do t k ow how the prius system feels. The tesla works very well. Keep in mind the prius is a dual drive . The tesla is full electric ,so the mechanics probsbly get in the way with the prius.... I do t k ow.
All i can tell ks that the tesla brakes proportionally with how fast you remove your foot. Its like a computer mouse. Move slow for precision, move fast for speed.
It takes 5 minutes to get used to.

I think the problem is that most drivers expect the car to continue coasting along when they take their foot off - it's called the accelerator pedal, after all, so feeling the car braking when you let off is disorienting. On flat or downhill I usually press it just to get the car up to speed and then hover a foot on the brake, while the car coasts along at an approximately constant speed.

[nctnico]

You barely use the traditional brake pedal. Only for the last meter , and to hold the car in position. The regenerative braking controlled by throttle works perfect.

The Prius has something similar but most drivers seem to hate it. How has Tesla done it better?

I do t k ow how the prius system feels. The tesla works very well. Keep in mind the prius is a dual drive . The tesla is full electric ,so the mechanics probsbly get in the way with the prius.... I do t k ow.
All i can tell ks that the tesla brakes proportionally with how fast you remove your foot. Its like a computer mouse. Move slow for precision, move fast for speed.
It takes 5 minutes to get used to.

I think the problem is that most drivers expect the car to continue coasting along when they take their foot off - it's called the accelerator pedal, after all, so feeling the car braking when you let off is disorienting. On flat or downhill I usually press it just to get the car up to speed and then hover a foot on the brake, while the car coasts along at an approximately constant speed.

That depends on what kind of car you are driving. In my diesel car lifting the foot of the accellerator slows the car down pretty well. Sometimes I just shift the gear down and use the engine as a brake to slow down. When driving on steep slopes downhill I use engine braking almost exclusively to prevent the brakes from overheating. I wonder how that would work in an EV. The energy has to be dumped somewhere. In theory the battery should have room from the depletion driving uphill...

[tom66]

Some report that after a fully charged battery they're unable to regen until after a few miles of use. Also, a very cold battery limits regen to under 10kW. The only indication is a dotted line on the power meter.

I'd like to see the option of a large power resistor as and when the regen is unavailable but I'm not sure how practical a 60kW resistor in a car would be. It would have to surely be liquid cooled though that system is already available.

[NiHaoMike]

When driving on steep slopes downhill I use engine braking almost exclusively to prevent the brakes from overheating. I wonder how that would work in an EV. The energy has to be dumped somewhere. In theory the battery should have room from the depletion driving uphill...

By the laws of physics, at least as much energy is spent going uphill as is returned going downhill. Therefore, it's only a problem if you charge to full on top of a hill. (Even then, it leaves some reserve so it may not be a problem.)

Not sure how the Tesla works but in some other EVs, there is a large power resistor of sorts - the resistance heater. A quick solution is to run the heater and A/C at the same time.

[Rufus]

Just as bad, but the EV subsidies are significantly higher per vehicle.

Not if you factor in the subsidies covering fossil fuels and the damage they do. EVs are significantly cheaper for the government overall, so even if they offer a large subsidy it more than pays for itself.

As long as you conveniently forget they are charged with electricity mostly produced by fossil fuel.

[tom66]

Subsidies are much greater on gasoline/petroleum than any other fossil fuel. We don't go to war over coal and natural gas. And unlike a gas powered car, an electric car can be powered by anything within reason. If coal gets too expensive spend more on nuclear and wind. etc.

[free_electron]

space to charge at home.

?!? What kind of drugs are you on ?
So now a power outlet takes up space too ?   

All you need is a regular 110 or 240 volt outlet. The car comes with a simple cable you plug in.
If your car is in your garage or driveway you plug it in.

And don't give me the excuse "i don't have a garage or driveway, i park in the street". I grew up in a small village. EVERYONE has a garage my parents had one, my grandparents had one. Everyone i know has one. I dont know anyone who does not have a garage or dedicated parking spot or driveway.
. I lived in big cities. Had a garage. I lived in apartment complexes, i still had a , communal, garage with my own reserved spot. One spot allocated per household.

 

waiting for 20 minutes at a charger or 2 minutes at the petrol station.

 i used to fill up at costco. Cheapest gasoline, 30 pumps... I was frequently waiting for 20 minutes to get a pump because there were 100 cars before me...

In a few months the battery swap will be available. I can swap my battery faster than you can fill your tank. In fact the swap two cars batteries against filling one fuel tank.

[fmaimon]

As long as you conveniently forget they are charged with electricity mostly produced by fossil fuel.

Yes, they are. At a higher efficiency. Your fuel consumption will be much lower by generating the energy in a bigger and more efficient generator than an ICE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_efficiency#Internal_combustion_engines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_conversion_efficiency#Example_of_energy_conversion_efficiency
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil-fuel_power_station

Efficiencies:
Gasoline: up to 25%
Diesel: up to 40%
Coal and Oil: 33%
Gas turbines: up to 40%
Gas turbines with combined cycle: up to 60%

Even considering transmission losses (6.5% in 2007 in the USA -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#Losses ), you still have much more than you get in a car.

Just stay away from coal...

[Rufus]

Even considering transmission losses (6.5% in 2007 in the USA -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#Losses ), you still have much more than you get in a car.

Just stay away from coal...

So how do you keep those 42% of American electrons generated by coal out of your EV battery?

You ignore battery charging and discharging losses, electric motor and controller losses and having the carry an extra 1000 lb of batteries around to be able to do it.

I read the 85kWh Teslas are using 10% more energy than the 60kWh version for the same mileage. That must partly be because of the extra weight lugged around but I suspect more because the drivers have a little less range angst and thrash them more.

[tom66]

You don't ignore coal... it's about 50% of US electricity.  But even with that mix, the Model S produces around 90g/mi CO2 -- maybe just about beaten by a VW Bluemotion Diesel or Smart fortwo, but it seats 5+2 and does 0-60 in 4.4 secs... try doing that in a Smart!

If it had 100% coal it would produce 180g/mi CO2 which is worse than a lot of other cars. But unlike most fuels electricity gets greener as time goes on. Petrol is always polluting.

The battery in the Model S weighs 1200 lb (540kg) for the 85kWh version, so it figures the 60kWh weighs approximately 350 lb (160kg) less. I can't see this mattering much on a car weighing nearly 4,500 lb.

[fmaimon]

So how do you keep those 42% of American electrons generated by coal out of your EV battery?

Right now you still use them. They still generate a little more energy than the same gasoline car. In the future, you upgrade/"clean" your grid, using more gas turbines/nuclear/wind/solar systems.

You ignore battery charging and discharging losses, electric motor and controller losses and having the carry an extra 1000 lb of batteries around to be able to do it.

You ignore the costs of producing, refining and distributing oil/gas. We are all ignoring something... The only one not ignoring is the market, which gives the final price. A Tesla S 85 costs $0.0456 per mile ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S#Powertrain ) and a regular car, with a very good 35 MPG, costs about $0.0914 per mile ($3.2 per gallon).

Tesla S fuel economy: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=32557
US gas prices http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/gasdiesel/

[staxquad]

Setting aside all above commentary, driving a Tesla has one possible huge advantage, if you hit and kill pedestrians, you can get off scot free because you can claim that you are afflicted with affluenza.   (twinkie defense)

that possible huge advantage will disappear for sure once Tesla comes out with their mid priced versions (affluenzaless)

 

(California and Texas only?)

[nctnico]

space to charge at home.

?!? What kind of drugs are you on ?
So now a power outlet takes up space too ?   

All you need is a regular 110 or 240 volt outlet. The car comes with a simple cable you plug in.
If your car is in your garage or driveway you plug it in.

And don't give me the excuse "i don't have a garage or driveway, i park in the street". I grew up in a small village. EVERYONE has a garage my parents had one, my grandparents had one. Everyone i know has one. I dont know anyone who does not have a garage or dedicated parking spot or driveway.

Then your world is quite limited. I know only a few people with a garage. In the city I live in most people use public parking spots in the street. Sometimes it is so crowded with cars I have to park around the corner. In some areas cars are to be parked on small parking lots nearby.

[nctnico]

As long as you conveniently forget they are charged with electricity mostly produced by fossil fuel.

Yes, they are. At a higher efficiency. Your fuel consumption will be much lower by generating the energy in a bigger and more efficient generator than an ICE.
Just stay away from coal...

Stay away from coal you must. With electricity generated from coal an EV emits around to 250grams of CO2 per km. As a comparison: my 14 year old diesel car (with a 2 liter engine) produces around 140 grams per km. With the new emission limits in Europe new ICE cars may emit around 90 grams of CO2 per km on average (efficient and less efficient cars combined). Even in areas where electricity production is relatively clean an EV produces 110 grams of CO2 per km. If an EV is supposed to be 'green'  it must be powered from low emission electricity.

[dr.diesel]

Then your world is quite limited. I know only a few people with a garage.

Same here, a significant number (1000s) of people do not have garages and park on the street.

My Grandma's house doesn't as well, and has #6 main power feed!  The first house I bought did not have a garage, although I did build one a month after I moved in.