One Tesla owner's confusion......

I’m also tired of the electric car bashing. While we can argue all day long about where the electricity comes from, even if the it’s a wash on energy usage at the end of the day, there’s a lot to be said for controlling where the pollution is produced. Smogging up densely populated cities is really bad for the health and quality of life for those that live there. Also we’re still in the early days of electric cars. Yes yes they’ve been around for over 100 years, but due to the efficiency of the internal combustion engine no real development was done for the best part of that 100 years. Also you need the early adopters to drive the technology. Expensive high end cars were where many of the performance, safety and fun features that are available on every $15k economox started.

bluej wrote:

cutter67 wrote: as soon as they get a charging station in DC in Hancock MD or Cumberland MD and one in Pittsburgh i will buy one. i spend $12,000.00 a year in fuel making this trip. it is 245 miles it scares me right now because its on the limit and i always stop about half to get something to eat so charging station there would seal the deal for me. i know where there is a 2008 roadster with 3100 miles on it for 50k

there are charge stations all over DC. does it have to be an SC station? heck, there's a tesla dealership in the city. a few maps: http://evadc.org/charging/ http://carstations.com/ http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_locations.html

the problem geting it charged in dc or pittsburgh is not the problem its the distance between them. and yes the SC station is what i would like to see.

as far as the roadster not being able to charge at the SC station i am sure someone or Telsa themselves will come up with some kind of a adapter of course for big money

In reply to cutter67:

It's not the adapter, it's the battery. The older EV's weren't designed with such "fast" charging in mind and will, quite literally, explode. They might be able to retro-fit a newer gen battery, but I doubt it will be cost effective.

Guys,

Thanks for the insights. The closest Nuke is in Omaha, and with Lake Powell and Lake Mead 50% full, not much Hydro out here.

Not bashing the Tesla car or company, just snickering at one owner. (Yeah, probably shouldn't do that either..)

Assuming that Elon can get the supercharging network operational, that will be a huge boost for the business and all electric cars.

Rog

JoeyM wrote: Fine I'll be the one to say it. I do care about the environment.

I care too but when I read a breakdown of how a Yukon XL was actually less detrimental to the earth than a Prius over the life of the vehicles I became a skeptic.

Edit: I just read another article but this time it was a Hummer.

I really hope they get electric cars worked out and selling well but I will never buy one.

ebonyandivory wrote:

JoeyM wrote: Fine I'll be the one to say it. I do care about the environment.

I care too but when I read a breakdown of how a Yukon XL was actually less detrimental to the earth than a Prius over the life of the vehicles I became a skeptic. Edit: I just read another article but this time it was a Hummer.

Huh? How so? Not a rhetorical question. Just interested in the science behind the statement.

dyintorace wrote:

ebonyandivory wrote: I care too but when I read a breakdown of how a Yukon XL was actually less detrimental to the earth than a Prius over the life of the vehicles I became a skeptic. Edit: I just read another article but this time it was a Hummer.

Huh? How so? Not a rhetorical question. Just interested in the science behind the statement.

I believe it involved the processes necessary for manufacturing the batteries, parts being shipped back and forth as the vehicles were assembled, etc. such that the pollution involved in the creation of the Prius was worse than that generated by the far less efficient vehicles. I saw something similar, but have never been certain whether to believe it...

The nickel extraction processes and resultant pollution for one. The lack of platform sharing with the Prius and the almost total parts/platform sharing of the massive GM SUV line. And the almost complete recycling of the GM stuff while the Prius has very little that is recyclable.

It's at least feasable

Oh look, a thread on GRM about electric cars getting political and judgemental instead of focusing on the actual vehicle itself. Weird, never seen one of those before!

Asses in seats, guys...that's what it takes to convince people that EVs are the bees knees. For you naysayers drinkin' EV Hatorade, go for a ride in a Model S (or Fit EV, or Focus Electric, or whatever)...EVs are really fun to drive! You might be surprised, you might stop caring about the BS politics around EVs so much if you realize they're ALSO fun.

Bryce

Lesley wrote:

JoeyM wrote: Fine I'll be the one to say it. I do care about the environment. [why do you guys make me feel like that should be in the Minor Confessions thread?] I've never seen a tesla up close, but I wish them the best. Having US factories and the jobs they create is good. Having a US automobile industry is good. ...and sure, there may be owners who are sanctimonious tools, but you see a fair bit of that with BMW and porsche owners, too

Seriously. It's about a lot more than stinky air. I feel sick every time I see oil-covered birds, read about more vanishing species and whales that have such high levels of crap in their bodies, that they can actually be classified as toxic. I'm all for pushing boundaries to come up with a solution - and not because I'm some sanctimonious Prius driver with millions in the bank and nothing better to do than shoot off my mouth about other people's carbon footprint. berkeley, I own a V8. But I haven't seen a salamander in 30 years, and they used to be plentiful. Amphibians aren't doing well with all the E36 M3 we've pumped into the environment. People don't swim in the rivers and lakes up here anymore - we used to live in them all summer. A friend took her dog to the beach last week, and now it's on antibiotics to deal with the E-coli it ingested. Yes, I care about the environment, passionately and deeply. I'd rather see more turtles, hawks and forests than another god-forsaken development, and I think we need to put more money into developing cleaner energy alternatives.

Lesley, Joey and I are right in line. I MUCH prefer trees grass etc to a bunch of poseur 5000 sq ft McMansions occupied by 2 or 3 people who just have to put a finger in the eye of those beneath them. I do NOT think we should foul our own nest bcause it's the only one we have.

I just don't see the Tesla as the cure. As another poster noted, it's a high end product aimed squarely at the people who typically are hardest on the environment on an individual basis so they can pretend to be cool and with it.

Things would go a LOT quicker and better for the environment if we were to switch to methane powered vehicles.

The technology is already out out there, as in forklift conversions. Many of those use propane too, but propane is a fossil fuel which for purposes of this discussion is not a renewable resource.

Methane already occurs naturally.

It can be produced in ways which are not as environmentally damaging as fossil fuels.

It burns cleanly, only water and carbon dioxide are left. The CO2 problem would not be insurmountable.

But instead we get super expensive electric cars with limited utility.

Javelin wrote: In reply to RossD: Hydro (which is where the vast majority of the power "comes from" for the NW) is pretty dam consistent...

muted trumpet

whaa whaa whaaaaaa...

Enggboy wrote:

Javelin wrote: In reply to RossD: Hydro (which is where the vast majority of the power "comes from" for the NW) is pretty dam consistent...

*muted trumpet* whaa whaa whaaaaaa...

And when the wind is blowing and the wind farms are putting out juice they just reduce the flow through the dams and raise the water levels in the reservoirs to use when the wind stops blowing...sort of like a giant capacitor.

I agree with the tree-huggers (I mean that in a good way). I just want ACCURATE facts to be out there and barring that, at least dissenting views to be heard.

Are electric vehicles et al really as environmentally friendly as some claim? Could it be true that fuel consumption is only a fraction of the picture? Could a recyclable gas guzzling tank be more environmentally friendly than a Prius?

That said, the instant torque from an electric motor is a really intriguing prospect!

Curmudgeon wrote: Methane already occurs naturally. It can be produced in ways which are not as environmentally damaging as fossil fuels.

My girlfriend would likely argue that second one, at least as far as the immediate environment is concerned.

Curmudgeon wrote: I just don't see the Tesla as the cure. As another poster noted, it's a high end product aimed squarely at the people who typically are hardest on the environment on an individual basis so they can pretend to be cool and with it.

I personally know two Tesla owners, and they are normal everyday people who bought them just because they like the car. That's such an asinine statement, like saying all BMW owners are pricks or all diesel 4x4 owners are small-phallus shiny happy people or all Miata owners are gay. WTF?

Nashco wrote: Oh look, a thread on GRM about electric cars getting political and judgemental instead of focusing on the actual vehicle itself. Weird, never seen one of those before! Asses in seats, guys...that's what it takes to convince people that EVs are the bees knees. For you naysayers drinkin' EV Hatorade, go for a ride in a Model S (or Fit EV, or Focus Electric, or whatever)...EVs are really fun to drive! You might be surprised, you might stop caring about the BS politics around EVs so much if you realize they're ALSO fun. Bryce

They don't make fun roaring noises or the smell of burning gasoline. That is really my only problem with EVs. It takes one of my favorite things out of the car. I could care less about politics etc.

In reply to 93EXCivic:

One of the Tesla owners I know is trying to make it play X-Wing zooming noises at the next autocross.

Javelin wrote: like saying all BMW owners are pricks or all diesel 4x4 owners are small-phallus shiny happy people or all Miata owners are gay. WTF?

If the shoe fits, wear it. But then again, I own two BMW's, so OBVIOUSLY, I am just being a prick.

My one - and big - issue with electric cars isn't with the car, but the often deeply-piled BS that is their marketing. I just want facts to see what's what. When they show their car "beating" a Ferrari at the dragstrip, I'm yelling at the monitor, "Yeah, so try two out of three." I don't like being lied to about capability.

the first company to make a normal looking electric car with a 400 mile range, a 10 minute or less recharge time, and an under $30k price tag will put all the other companies that are making them out of business..

Javelin wrote:

Curmudgeon wrote: I just don't see the Tesla as the cure. As another poster noted, it's a high end product aimed squarely at the people who typically are hardest on the environment on an individual basis so they can pretend to be cool and with it.

I personally know two Tesla owners, and they are normal everyday people who bought them just because they like the car. That's such an asinine statement, like saying all BMW owners are pricks or all diesel 4x4 owners are small-phallus shiny happy people or all Miata owners are gay. WTF?

All Jensen owners are nasty old curmudgeons. Right?

It's well known that early adopters of tech do it in no small part to be seen as 'bleeding edge'. That's what Apple etc build their business model around and is why every 6 months suddenly all smartphones are horribly outdated and your friends will laugh at you if you don't immediately spend $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to be back on the bleeding edge. That's bad enough for the environment when applied to consumer electronics. When it's applied to something like a car, I tend to view it as a bad idea. And yeah it applies to the dino powered versions as well.

kb58 wrote: My one - and big - issue with electric cars isn't with the car, but the often deeply-piled BS that is their marketing. I just want facts to see what's what. When they show their car "beating" a Ferrari at the dragstrip, I'm yelling at the monitor, "Yeah, so try two out of three." I don't like being lied to about capability.

In that particular instance they are likely not lying about capability. Even the high level EV drag racers, using battery packs that favor power over range as much as possible, have enough range for 3 drag runs and the return roads. The batteries actually perform better when fairly warm so the 2nd and 3rd races should turn out about the same if not better. Polar bears hugging you on the other hand.................

MrJoshua wrote: Polar bears hugging you on the other hand.................

You may be on to something!

Canadian biologist Dr. Mitchell Taylor, one of the foremost authorities on polar bears, says: "We're seeing an increase in bears that's really unprecedented, and in places where we're seeing a decrease in the population it's from hunting, not from climate change."

Tesla starting with a high-end car makes sense financially. If Tesla has a fixed gross margin per vehicle, they have to move a lot more cheap cars to match the profit margins from more expensive vehicles. Then, they have to pay for higher capacity manufacturing, more labor, etc. as sales increase, they can in turn reinvest (or convince others to invest) in the infrastructure that will allow greater manufacturing capacity. Besides, a strikingly good looking sedan is great advertising for Tesla. It turns heads.

Of the current manufacturers based out of the US, which one is the youngest aside from Tesla? Jeep? Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that one was pretty heavily subsidized by the government at first, too.