Tesla S

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
thewizzer
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:11 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by thewizzer » Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:25 pm

killjoy2012 wrote:
madbrain wrote:EVs can charge locally at the home (or business) from solar power with very little loss.


Math please - show your work. A solar solution that will provide anything even close to a reasonable recharge time is going cost you significantly more than the vehicle itself. And that assumes you live in a part of the country where that level of production is even feasible year-round. And overlooks silly technicalities like the fact that most people would need to charge their EVs overnight (when the sun isn't out).

This is about as practical as me burying some trees & plants in my backyard today, and then waiting a 1000 years for them to turn into "free" oil for my ICE.


DFWinvestor wrote:I haven't checked this thread in a good while but it seems to me the naysayers are getting more and more nit picky, to try to find criticisms. Kind of a desperate run to find something not to like about the car or the company.

...

With disruptive technology that none of the major players have been able to replicate, nor will they in the immediate future.


It goes both ways. There's plenty of fanatics defending an unproven company with unproven technology at any cost - both financially and logistically. I've listed plenty of sound rationale above. For example, if you call not having a Tesla dealer within 300 miles &/or a 4 hour drive from my home "nit picky", then I guess I'm nit picking. :oops: If I did own a Tesla and had a problem with it, I couldn't even drive it to the dealership on a full charge!

I disagree with your assessment of the other "major players". I think the other players realize just how small the market is for a $100k vehicle, let alone an EV that's currently a PITA to live with compared to ICE, and have determined it's just not worth their time right now. Way too much investment/risk for a very small payoff. Telsa is producing what? 2k units per month? That's nothing - Toyota produces about as many Camry's in a single day. And when the Feds decide to stop subsidizing EV purchases, let's see what happens to sales.


boroc7 wrote: but the Tesla is indeed a well made car that far surpasses any of the other auto startups that it has been compared to.


The company is barely 10 years old, has only produced a vehicle for last 5 years (assuming you're counting 2008-2010'ish), and just turned it's first profitable month this year. A $100k car better be well made... in someone's opinion, anyway.


Diogenes wrote:I highly doubt many buyers are picking up a Tesla S as their only vehicle.


Exactly. No one who is rich enough to be able to buy a $100k EV is going to be stupid enough to have it as their only car. They will still have that evil ICE for when EVs are impractical.


You seem angry. Try meditation

angelescrest
Posts: 825
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:48 am
Location: The Third Coast

Re: Tesla S

Post by angelescrest » Wed Sep 04, 2013 9:36 am

killjoy2012 wrote:
boroc7 wrote: but the Tesla is indeed a well made car that far surpasses any of the other auto startups that it has been compared to.


The company is barely 10 years old, has only produced a vehicle for last 5 years (assuming you're counting 2008-2010'ish), and just turned it's first profitable month this year. A $100k car better be well made... in someone's opinion, anyway.



Yes, as you point out, those are great reasons why Tesla is currently a major success.

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 3:42 pm

Tesla S just caught on fire and was videoed. Stock seems to have taken a bit of a hit but it is up huge since this thread started.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... sla-stock/

jdb
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by jdb » Wed Oct 02, 2013 3:49 pm

Jfet wrote:Tesla S just caught on fire and was videoed. Stock seems to have taken a bit of a hit but it is up huge since this thread started.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... sla-stock/

I have heard that ICE vehicles have also been known to catch fire from collisions once in a while.

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 3:58 pm

jdb wrote:
Jfet wrote:Tesla S just caught on fire and was videoed. Stock seems to have taken a bit of a hit but it is up huge since this thread started.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... sla-stock/

I have heard that ICE vehicles have also been known to catch fire from collisions once in a while.


Sure, but most ICE manufacturers are not selling for 90x future earnings. Tesla can't afford to have too many mistakes.

jdb
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by jdb » Wed Oct 02, 2013 4:03 pm

Suspect that there is no vehicle ever made that would not catch fire under certain conditions after collision.
May be overstating to call it a mistake.

lightheir
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 11:43 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by lightheir » Wed Oct 02, 2013 4:28 pm

Jfet wrote:
jdb wrote:
Jfet wrote:Tesla S just caught on fire and was videoed. Stock seems to have taken a bit of a hit but it is up huge since this thread started.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... sla-stock/

I have heard that ICE vehicles have also been known to catch fire from collisions once in a while.


Sure, but most ICE manufacturers are not selling for 90x future earnings. Tesla can't afford to have too many mistakes.


Like Amazon's, right?

PE ratio nearly 4x of Tesla!

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 4:35 pm

lightheir wrote:
Jfet wrote:
jdb wrote:
Jfet wrote:Tesla S just caught on fire and was videoed. Stock seems to have taken a bit of a hit but it is up huge since this thread started.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... sla-stock/

I have heard that ICE vehicles have also been known to catch fire from collisions once in a while.


Sure, but most ICE manufacturers are not selling for 90x future earnings. Tesla can't afford to have too many mistakes.


Like Amazon's, right?

PE ratio nearly 4x of Tesla!


Amazon is crazy priced too, but at least it has 60B in sales for a 140B market cap, vs 1B in sales with a 22B market cap.

jdb
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by jdb » Wed Oct 02, 2013 4:45 pm

Jfet wrote:
lightheir wrote:
Jfet wrote:
jdb wrote:
Jfet wrote:Tesla S just caught on fire and was videoed. Stock seems to have taken a bit of a hit but it is up huge since this thread started.

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/thetell/20 ... sla-stock/

I have heard that ICE vehicles have also been known to catch fire from collisions once in a while.


Sure, but most ICE manufacturers are not selling for 90x future earnings. Tesla can't afford to have too many mistakes.


Like Amazon's, right?

PE ratio nearly 4x of Tesla!


Amazon is crazy priced too, but at least it has 60B in sales for a 140B market cap, vs 1B in sales with a 22B market cap.

Sounds like someone with a short position in this stock. Probably wrong forum, doubt there are many short sellers or potential short sellers on this site.

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 4:47 pm

I wish I had purchased a short position, but I am scared of the big hedge funds..they can manipulate for years.

jdb
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by jdb » Wed Oct 02, 2013 4:57 pm

Jfet wrote:I wish I had purchased a short position, but I am scared of the big hedge funds..they can manipulate for years.

You should be glad that you didn't. Lots of them have lost lots of money.

User avatar
Meaty
Posts: 484
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 7:35 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Meaty » Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:01 pm

There is only 1 company that manufactures the battery. Good luck if they go out of business (the battery is the entire floor of the car)
"Discipline equals Freedom" - Jocko Willink

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:05 pm

jdb wrote:
Jfet wrote:I wish I had purchased a short position, but I am scared of the big hedge funds..they can manipulate for years.

You should be glad that you didn't. Lots of them have lost lots of money.


Oh for sure. I saw the same thing with Salesforce and even Amazon. These runs can go on for years, without the company generating any profit. Getting out in front of that as a small retail investor and trying to short it, you get run over.

But then again, you can also protect yourself from getting burned if you stay away from buying a long position too.

User avatar
TomatoTomahto
Posts: 6594
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:48 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by TomatoTomahto » Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:21 pm

I'm neither short nor long (and won't be, BRK is my only individual stock), but on today's 11 minute drive on relatively sparsely driven roads, I saw 3 Tesla Ss. In fairness, it's a "car-forward" area of NJ, but still. FWIW, guess what I saw in my neighbor's driveway when I pulled in? Yup.

Anecdotal evidence to be sure, but my next vehicle will be a Tesla X; I got the all-important spousal approval :D

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 5:38 pm

I have played a lot with the lithium battery technology Tesla is using. I have experimented with cobalt, iron and manganese types. They all decline in capacity if you use them or not. I guess this isn't a huge issue though when the car is $90,000.

I can agree the acceleration is there. I made a dual hub motor bicycle that gets up to 40mph in about 3 seconds. Quite fun but scary. I keep the battery pack in the garage on concrete though because of the fire danger. That one is using the higher energy density LiPo.

nonnie
Posts: 1943
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:05 pm
Location: Northern California

Re: Tesla S

Post by nonnie » Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:25 pm

Watch-- Humans and Robots Dancing in the Tesla Model S Factory. Tesla employs 3,000 humans and 160 robots.

http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2013/07 ... ctory.html

Nonnie
This post may be monitored for quality assurance purposes.

User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 40421
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Tesla S

Post by LadyGeek » Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:35 pm

Watched, thanks.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.

User avatar
ryuns
Posts: 3456
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA. Age: 31

Re: Tesla S

Post by ryuns » Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:56 pm

Jfet wrote:I have played a lot with the lithium battery technology Tesla is using. I have experimented with cobalt, iron and manganese types. They all decline in capacity if you use them or not. I guess this isn't a huge issue though when the car is $90,000.

I can agree the acceleration is there. I made a dual hub motor bicycle that gets up to 40mph in about 3 seconds. Quite fun but scary. I keep the battery pack in the garage on concrete though because of the fire danger. That one is using the higher energy density LiPo.


There's enough fire danger that you leave it on the concrete in your garage when it's NOT being used, yet, while it's in use, generating heat while being discharged, it's on the bike somewhere between your legs while you're traveling 40 mph. This seems like a strange assessment of the risks involved. What am I missing?

FWIW, you can pre-buy a replacement battery for when the 8 year/unlimited mileage warranty is up for $8-12k depending on capacity. Also, it seems like a lot of the batteries in the old Tesla Roadsters are still holding up pretty well, though they're all seeing some degree of degradation. http://www.plugincars.com/tesla-roadste ... 27733.html
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

User avatar
ualdriver
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:07 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by ualdriver » Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:11 pm

In 2011, there were 1,389,500 fires reported in the United States. These fires caused 3,005 civilian deaths, 17,500 civilian injuries, and $11.7 billion in property damage.

484,500 were structure fires, causing 2,640 civilian deaths, 15,635 civilian injuries, and $9.7 billion in property damage.
219,000 were vehicle fires, causing 300 civilian fire deaths, 1,190 civilian fire injuries, and $1.4 billion in property damage.

I don't worry about electric car fires any more than I worry about gasoline car fires. That statistic above shows that there are many gasoline car fires.

http://thelcn.com/2012/05/23/driver-plo ... NiOXu.dpbs

Check out the car accident linked above and the picture of the absolutely mangled Chevy Volt. 3 cars were involved. Guess which car caught fire? (It wasn't the Volt)

jdb
Posts: 1208
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:21 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by jdb » Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:39 pm

Meaty wrote:There is only 1 company that manufactures the battery. Good luck if they go out of business (the battery is the entire floor of the car)

Yes, the company is Panasonic. Better if Tesla produced its own batteries but nice to give a tiny Japanese start up some business.

Diogenes
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:58 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Diogenes » Wed Oct 02, 2013 8:53 pm

Is it true Tesla is on track to sell only 21,000 vehicles by the end of the year? Toyota sold 9.7 million in 2012 for context.

Seem best to wait a few generations and see if they last and get the price way down and the volume way up to compete with any of the mainstream auto manufacturers. The latest next generation technology that just came out from another company has wireless charging via street installed devices. Very interesting!
http://smallbusiness.foxbusiness.com/en ... ging-cars/

Until then, it is nice to have expensive toys, to be an early adopter. If you can take a possible $85K loss, go for it!
Truth and clarity are important in all things...

Jfet
Posts: 1081
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2010 7:20 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jfet » Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:05 pm

Diogenes wrote:Is it true Tesla is on track to sell only 21,000 vehicles by the end of the year? Toyota sold 9.7 million in 2012 for context.

Seem best to wait a few generations and see if they last and get the price way down and the volume way up to compete with any of the mainstream auto manufacturers. The latest next generation technology that just came out from another company has wireless charging via street installed devices. Very interesting!
http://smallbusiness.foxbusiness.com/en ... ging-cars/

Until then, it is nice to have expensive toys, to be an early adopter. If you can take a possible $85K loss, go for it!


Yep, but Toyota is ten times the market cap of Tesla, so it would be expected to sell more cars.

linuxizer
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:55 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by linuxizer » Wed Oct 02, 2013 9:35 pm

Two thoughts:

- Amazon makes lots of money per service line, they just plow it back into creating new service lines.
- Read the other day that from Jimmy Carter's era to today, the price of solar panels dropped 99%. That's a technology that was ridiculed for decades. How much faster would price have dropped if we had provided incentives for its early adoption?

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4421
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by FrugalInvestor » Wed Oct 02, 2013 10:06 pm

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelan ... ice-drops/

A Tesla Model S all-electric luxury sedan caught fire outside of Seattle after a collision with an unknown object, AutoblogGreen.com reported on Wednesday, the first such incident recorded to our knowledge. The exact cause of the fire is unknown, but the ensuing blaze was limited to the car’s front trunk space and nobody was said to be injured....


Also...

http://www.autoweek.com/article/2013100 ... dailydrive
Last edited by FrugalInvestor on Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

Diogenes
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:58 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Diogenes » Thu Oct 03, 2013 12:15 am

linuxizer wrote:Two thoughts:

- Amazon makes lots of money per service line, they just plow it back into creating new service lines.
- Read the other day that from Jimmy Carter's era to today, the price of solar panels dropped 99%. That's a technology that was ridiculed for decades. How much faster would price have dropped if we had provided incentives for its early adoption?


Perhaps not the best example as solar panels are still far too expensive for most of us to put on our houses. As such it is still not ready for prime time. If it were virtually all new homes would be built with them standard. They are not, all these years after Carter spent public money. Economics don't cut it. Usually far better when government doesn't try to subsidize a private idea. Tesla must make it or not based on the value of their product to the consumer in a free market, without loans, subsidies, or anything else artificial. Not sure it will, but wish the technology well.

Valuethinker
Posts: 32901
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by Valuethinker » Thu Oct 03, 2013 2:08 am

Diogenes wrote:
linuxizer wrote:Two thoughts:

- Amazon makes lots of money per service line, they just plow it back into creating new service lines.
- Read the other day that from Jimmy Carter's era to today, the price of solar panels dropped 99%. That's a technology that was ridiculed for decades. How much faster would price have dropped if we had provided incentives for its early adoption?


Perhaps not the best example as solar panels are still far too expensive for most of us to put on our houses. As such it is still not ready for prime time. If it were virtually all new homes would be built with them standard. They are not, all these years after Carter spent public money. Economics don't cut it. Usually far better when government doesn't try to subsidize a private idea. Tesla must make it or not based on the value of their product to the consumer in a free market, without loans, subsidies, or anything else artificial. Not sure it will, but wish the technology well.


Solar panels cost one half per kw in Germany what they do to the US, due to a better functioning system of approval and installation, economies of scale, etc.

http://www.samefacts.com/2012/10/climat ... the-world/

if you read down, it has the link to the paper on installation costs.

One can name lots of examples of governments 'kick starting' private sector technology and development: for example the Internet. Or shipping containerization (one of the biggest improvements in productivity in the last half of the 20th century-- it was military demand for Vietnam that made it a success, because its another chicken and egg problem: you needed the ports which could handle the containers *at both ends*).

So it is not as simple as 'private good' / 'public bad'.

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:25 am

Diogenes,

Diogenes wrote:Perhaps not the best example as solar panels are still far too expensive for most of us to put on our houses. As such it is still not ready for prime time.


If all environmental costs of fossil fuel generated electricity were priced in, nobody could afford NOT to put solar panels on their roof.
In many places, grid electricity rates are expensive, but there is an abundance of sun.
In California, local solar generation is already cheaper than consuming electricity from the grid for most homes. The payback period is quite short.
PG&E are already complaining about this, but they are not lowering their rates - quite the opposite, they are increasing rates. Utilities cannot compete with solar.

See http://theenergycollective.com/douglas- ... fall-solar

If it were virtually all new homes would be built with them standard.


Maybe not in your neighborhood, but it's certainly happening here.

http://digitaljournal.com/article/359355

Solar does have an upfront investment, it is still not free, just like a hybrid car costs more but gets you better fuel economy and ends up costing you less if you keep it long enough.
With homes, this gets more complicated as the property owners aren't always the ones paying the energy bills, for example for investment properties. The tenants (whether residential or commercial) pay the energy bills, so there is less incentive for the property owners to make their properties energy efficient. But of course tenants can decide to move to more energy efficient properties. It will ultimately sort itself out, but it the problem is significantly more complicated for rentals and short-term homeowners.

They are not, all these years after Carter spent public money. Economics don't cut it. Usually far better when government doesn't try to subsidize a private idea. Tesla must make it or not based on the value of their product to the consumer in a free market, without loans, subsidies, or anything else artificial. Not sure it will, but wish the technology well.


This is all wrong. The solar prices could never have come down to what they are now if not for previous subsidies. Now there is actually oversupply of solar panels, the panel prices are already competitive with the grid utilities, and the solar subsidies are essentially no longer needed, the math still works out without them - the payback period is just a few years more.

The same thing may well happen with EVs over time, but we have not yet seen anything close to 99% price reduction in the battery costs. It could take several decades, or maybe just a few years. A lot is up to the researchers and scientists to find ways to improve the manufacturing costs.

Diogenes
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:58 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Diogenes » Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:29 am

Many of the examples you cite resulted from a byproduct of a legitimate government need, such as a system of highways needed to move war materials or secure communications during the Cold War period. None of these resulted from a huge loan given to one company in which there was no urgent government need.

Again, solar is a poor example otherwise a large percent of U.S. power needs some 30 years later would be met by solar. In the U.S. at the moment solar is 2/10 of one percent. That is failure even after years of subsidies, rebates, loans, grants and so on. Even Germany, which you use an an example, which does not have huge reserves of coal and natural gas like America today gets only 7 percent from solar generation. Houses here can be heated and powered far cheaper by our well developed infrastructure of fossil fuel generation and delivery which is why they do not get built with solar systems. People don't wish to pay a huge premium, and it cannot yet support the needs of business.

Tesla is light years away for being a useful purchase for most of us at the moment but is a fun car for a rich person to play with. Nothing wrong with that. However, having the government support it will do little to make the real economics make sense. To look at it another way, and cut out the middleman, the current Tesla is actually powered by coal and natural gas.

Market forces will decide as they have thus far with solar. Perhaps some day the technology will pay off but not today. People will buy cheap and reliable transport, but it must be both.

We must always continue to look for ways to build a better mouse trap, but it is important to realize the path to success is the free market and self interest of the end user.
Truth and clarity are important in all things...

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:33 am

Jfet wrote:
Diogenes wrote:Is it true Tesla is on track to sell only 21,000 vehicles by the end of the year? Toyota sold 9.7 million in 2012 for context.

Seem best to wait a few generations and see if they last and get the price way down and the volume way up to compete with any of the mainstream auto manufacturers. The latest next generation technology that just came out from another company has wireless charging via street installed devices. Very interesting!
http://smallbusiness.foxbusiness.com/en ... ging-cars/

Until then, it is nice to have expensive toys, to be an early adopter. If you can take a possible $85K loss, go for it!


Yep, but Toyota is ten times the market cap of Tesla, so it would be expected to sell more cars.


Indeed, it would be expected to, yet Toyota actually sold far fewer battery electric vehicles than Tesla.
They only have one model on the market, the RAV4 EV, which is available only in California, with a limited annual production of 2000 units - only enough to meet CARB compliance - and most of those cars actually unsold.

Toyota doesn't really believe in EVs and is sending very mixed messages.
Tesla is more focused and much successful at making and selling them.

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Thu Oct 03, 2013 6:59 am

Diogenes wrote:Many of the examples you cite resulted from a byproduct of a legitimate government need, such as a system of highways needed to move war materials or secure communications during the Cold War period. None of these resulted from a huge loan given to one company in which there was no urgent government need.


I feel the need to point that the health of all citizens is clearly a legitimate government interest, and solar PV and EVs certainly help towards the goal of reducing air pollution and improving health. That goal easily justifies past investments, but they do take a long time to pan out.

Houses here can be heated and powered far cheaper by our well developed infrastructure of fossil fuel generation and delivery which is why they do not get built with solar systems. People don't wish to pay a huge premium, and it cannot yet support the needs of business.


There is no need to pay a premium, when you can already have both cheaper and cleaner solar power vs expensive and dirty fossil fuel power.
Businesses are certainly investing in solar. Even Wal-mart has already put solar PV on its stores in many states, and rapidly adding more. I don't believe they are doing it purely because they are good corporate citizens, I think it makes business sense for them, just like it already makes sense for me as a homeowner.

the current Tesla is actually powered by coal and natural gas.


Actually, the Tesla is powered by electricity, and nobody is forcing you to use coal or natural gas to generate that electricity. The Tesla superchargers are actually using solar energy.
Most Tesla S owners who have a suitable property are also installing PV solar generation.
Most Tesla S drivers are also located in California.

Here is the mix of the California power grid for the most recent year 2011 :
http://www.energy.ca.gov/sb1305/labels/index.html

Coal accounts for a whopping 0% of the actual PG&E power. It's 2.7% for SDG&E and 8% for SCE.
NG is 25%, 42.5% and 27% respectively.
Taken together, coal & NG already account for less than half of the California power generation.
And those numbers will only shrink.

People will buy cheap and reliable transport, but it must be both.


Are you saying that a market for luxury vehicles of any type doesn't exist, regardless of the fuel source ?

eucalyptus
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by eucalyptus » Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:28 am

Re the fire: it doesn't matter whether the fire really tells us anything meaningful about Tesla safety. Perception is everything. Just ask Audi and Toyota.

User avatar
TomatoTomahto
Posts: 6594
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2011 1:48 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by TomatoTomahto » Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:34 am

eucalyptus wrote:Re the fire: it doesn't matter whether the fire really tells us anything meaningful about Tesla safety. Perception is everything. Just ask Audi and Toyota.


OTOH, Tesla's perceived (and actual) performance in a crash is among the very best. I worry much more about that than a statistically smaller threat like fire. I see crashes all the time, very seldom fires.

gerrym51
Posts: 1679
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 1:44 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by gerrym51 » Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:38 am

having a car start on fire can't help sales

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:04 am

gerrym51 wrote:having a car start on fire can't help sales


Used prices might go down though, which could be good for consumers :).

linuxizer
Posts: 1553
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:55 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by linuxizer » Thu Oct 03, 2013 8:25 am

If you think market forces should subsidize solar r and d, you should support Pigovian taxes or Coasian bargaining (cap and trade). Not clear that's less economically damaging than government-funded research with lower gas taxes.

User avatar
Dan-Fl
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 9:06 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by Dan-Fl » Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:25 am

I have followed this Automobile for a very long time. I am increasingly excited about it. No doubt with the rating and evaluations it is a fine automobile. I meet a man who owns one on Long Island and is very excited about it. Wife has not gotten to drive it. That is meaningful I think. This article about a mansion burning due to Tesla in garage is interesting. First, I didn't think the house was a mansion, rather a nice home. Therefore, who knows what the cause was.
Another battery pack fire in a Tesla was reported yesterday and drove the stock down.
There will be glitches and problems with this as with any new car. I think Toyota has done a great job with their Prius.
Tesla is addressing charging station problems, battery replacement instead of recharging and repair centers. The repair center for the entire state of Florida is less than 20 miles away from me.
Now, the cost of most of these cars is very high. I would want bigger batteries so range could be maximum. I only want to have to own one car!
I could afford this car but am not mega wealthy. I have owned a Porsche in the past and found it was just another vehicle. I found I spent a lot of time at the dealer trying to keep it running perfectly.
For me, a car is only a means of getting places. Although, I love quality, I do not and will not spend this amount of money for a car that does no more than my current one. It will depreciate, and of course, wrecks and door dings happen. Insurance cost would concern me.
I will stay with my two+ year old Acura TSX Sport Wagon. I will continue to follow this reports on this excellent vehicle.

Jack
Posts: 3254
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:24 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by Jack » Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:28 am

linuxizer wrote:Read the other day that from Jimmy Carter's era to today, the price of solar panels dropped 99%. That's a technology that was ridiculed for decades. How much faster would price have dropped if we had provided incentives for its early adoption?

Just for the record, the solar panels Jimmy Carter installed on the White House were thermal for hot water, not photovoltaic.

nhdblfan
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:33 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by nhdblfan » Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:41 am

"Actually, the Tesla is powered by electricity, and nobody is forcing you to use coal or natural gas to generate that electricity. "


And that comes from .............Coal and Nat gas-both of which we have plenty of thankfully!

electric vehicles will never be make much of dent in real world transportation use,the best fuel will nat gas,look at companies like WSPRT (http://www.westport.com/).Just in todays WSJ we are overtaking Russia in world production of Nat gas and Oil

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 76476.html

scouter
Posts: 657
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:24 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by scouter » Thu Oct 03, 2013 11:59 am

We may not hear much about car fires but:

In 2003-2007, U.S. fire departments responded to an average of 287,000 vehicle fires per year. These fires caused an average of 480 civilian deaths, 1,525 civilian injuries, and $1.3 billion in direct property damage annually.

I saw a quote by the Pres. of Toyota about their reluctance to start using lithium batteries for the plug-in Prius. He said (paraphrasing) "There are thousands of Internal Combustion Automobile fires every year with hundreds of deaths and injuries, but if just one electric car catches fire, we're toast."

User avatar
FrugalInvestor
Posts: 4421
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 12:20 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by FrugalInvestor » Thu Oct 03, 2013 1:17 pm

scouter wrote:We may not hear much about car fires but:

In 2003-2007, U.S. fire departments responded to an average of 287,000 vehicle fires per year. These fires caused an average of 480 civilian deaths, 1,525 civilian injuries, and $1.3 billion in direct property damage annually.

I saw a quote by the Pres. of Toyota about their reluctance to start using lithium batteries for the plug-in Prius. He said (paraphrasing) "There are thousands of Internal Combustion Automobile fires every year with hundreds of deaths and injuries, but if just one electric car catches fire, we're toast."


No pun intended, I'm sure. :D
IGNORE the noise! | Our life is frittered away by detail... simplify, simplify. - Henry David Thoreau

User avatar
Ged
Posts: 3266
Joined: Mon May 13, 2013 1:48 pm
Location: Roke

Re: Tesla S

Post by Ged » Thu Oct 03, 2013 4:35 pm

Valuethinker wrote:
Solar panels cost one half per kw in Germany what they do to the US, due to a better functioning system of approval and installation, economies of scale, etc.



It's perhaps not well known in the US, but European coal consumption is increasing. And it's rather nasty brown stuff too.

http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/ ... enaissance

User avatar
LadyGeek
Site Admin
Posts: 40421
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Philadelphia
Contact:

Re: Tesla S

Post by LadyGeek » Thu Oct 03, 2013 4:50 pm

Please stay on-topic (Tesla S). Cimate policy is off-topic.
To some, the glass is half full. To others, the glass is half empty. To an engineer, it's twice the size it needs to be.

User avatar
ryuns
Posts: 3456
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 6:07 pm
Location: Sacramento, CA. Age: 31

Re: Tesla S

Post by ryuns » Thu Oct 03, 2013 7:06 pm

nhdblfan wrote:"Actually, the Tesla is powered by electricity, and nobody is forcing you to use coal or natural gas to generate that electricity. "


And that comes from .............Coal and Nat gas-both of which we have plenty of thankfully!

electric vehicles will never be make much of dent in real world transportation use,the best fuel will nat gas,look at companies like WSPRT (http://www.westport.com/).Just in todays WSJ we are overtaking Russia in world production of Nat gas and Oil


Buuuuttt.... they do use natural gas to make electricity.

CNG works well for fleets but it's never really taken off for personal transportation, because the infrastructure for home refueling is not super practical and compressing NG tends to take a while. Lots of opportunities for CNG in certain areas of transportation, but for private vehicle travel, electricity is practical for a lot of people.
An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered; an adventure is an inconvenience rightly considered. -- GK Chesterton

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:09 pm

nhdblfan wrote:"Actually, the Tesla is powered by electricity, and nobody is forcing you to use coal or natural gas to generate that electricity. "


And that comes from .............Coal and Nat gas-both of which we have plenty of thankfully!


Did you actually read the rest of my post, where I went on to describe how Tesla superchargers actually use solar energy, and the California power grid uses very little coal ?

My point was that EV owners have a very practical choice of where they source their electricity from.
You can generate your own renewable electricity cheaply enough, and many EV owners do just that.

ICE vehicle owners cannot mine and refine their own fossil fuels.

Diogenes
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:58 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by Diogenes » Thu Oct 03, 2013 10:41 pm

As there will only be 21,000 Tesla owners in the U.S. by year end, and there are only 23 Superchargers at the moment, perhaps 100 at year end, there is no significant fossil fuel savings - likely a negative.
This is due to a good deal of fossil fuels are spent manufacturing, transporting, and selling the cars and batteries which leaves the car in the hole still at the bottom line even if all owners used a home solar charger. I suspect a small percent of the 21,000 owners will be self generating anyway, for lots of reasons.
Just not a significant argument from that angle.

What IS significant with the car are new technologies that may result in a more viable vehicle in the future. That is the main benefit. Most Tesla purchasers now are in the upper income range where I doubt saving gas is the main motivating factor. Perhaps novelty, being an early adopter, etc. Nothing wrong with that but the car is just not yet a serious contender for the mainstream buyer.

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Fri Oct 04, 2013 12:02 am

Diogenes wrote:As there will only be 21,000 Tesla owners in the U.S. by year end, and there are only 23 Superchargers at the moment, perhaps 100 at year end, there is no significant fossil fuel savings - likely a negative.
This is due to a good deal of fossil fuels are spent manufacturing, transporting, and selling the cars and batteries which leaves the car in the hole still at the bottom line even if all owners used a home solar charger.


This is not true. The energy used to produce the car is a fraction of the energy consumed during its life.
There are definitely fuel savings with EVs, and emission reductions.

This was already studied for hybrids :
http://science.howstuffworks.com/scienc ... nefits.htm

The same will be true for EVs.

I suspect a small percent of the 21,000 owners will be self generating anyway, for lots of reasons.
Just not a significant argument from that angle.


I think you suspect wrong.

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthre ... olar-Power

Yes, it is a small poll, but it is the best data I could find. Certainly anyone who buys a Tesla can afford the upfront solar investment. The main question is whether they own a property with a good location to install solar.

What IS significant with the car are new technologies that may result in a more viable vehicle in the future. That is the main benefit. Most Tesla purchasers now are in the upper income range where I doubt saving gas is the main motivating factor. Perhaps novelty, being an early adopter, etc. Nothing wrong with that but the car is just not yet a serious contender for the mainstream buyer.


I agree that is significant too, and it's not a mainstream car yet, nor is it trying to be. That will be be for Tesla's future less expensive models.

nhdblfan
Posts: 215
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:33 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by nhdblfan » Fri Oct 04, 2013 6:35 am

madbrain wrote:
nhdblfan wrote:"Actually, the Tesla is powered by electricity, and nobody is forcing you to use coal or natural gas to generate that electricity. "


And that comes from .............Coal and Nat gas-both of which we have plenty of thankfully!


Did you actually read the rest of my post, where I went on to describe how Tesla superchargers actually use solar energy, and the California power grid uses very little coal ?

My point was that EV owners have a very practical choice of where they source their electricity from.
You can generate your own renewable electricity cheaply enough, and many EV owners do just that.

ICE vehicle owners cannot mine and refine their own fossil fuels.


Hey Pal,
tone down the "actually read my post" ,we all read it and laughed ! It has NO basis in for instance 40% of LA Power and Water and Power comes from........ Coal

http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011 ... ectricity/

You can NOT generate enough electricity with solar panels cost effectively) you would need to spend more on the panels then the car and the grid in Kalif does indeed use coal along with Nat gas.

I would not short any stock (buying a put is much safer as your risk is limited to the price of the put) but the run in TSLA might well be ending any 22 Billion market cap with losses instead of earnings is questionable

madbrain
Posts: 4505
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2011 5:06 pm
Location: San Jose, California

Re: Tesla S

Post by madbrain » Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:19 am

nhdblfan wrote:It has NO basis in for instance 40% of LA Power and Water and Power comes from........ Coal

http://blogs.kqed.org/climatewatch/2011 ... ectricity/


LA Department of Power and Water is not one of the top 3 California utilities which I listed previously. Your link says it provides power to 1.4 million residents.
That's only 3.6% of the 38 million people currently living in California. The other 96.4% are served by other utilities which use much less coal.

This table has the state data for the year 2012 :
http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/electricity ... power.html

It lists coal generation, both in state and out of state, that contribute to the California power mix.
Fact : coal only accounts for 7.5% of the CA power mix. Almost all of this coal power comes from out of state indeed.

Thus, to get back on topic, Tesla drivers who charge their cars from the California power grid are for the most part not doing so by burning coal.

You can NOT generate enough electricity with solar panels cost effectively) you would need to spend more on the panels then the car and the grid in Kalif does indeed use coal along with Nat gas.


It's spelled California, with a C.
And let's just say the math on the solar panels adds up very well.

My system produced about 15,600 kWh in the last 12 months. That would be enough to drive about 45,000 miles on a Tesla S (which I don't have).
I actually use about 2800 kWh of the generation to drive 10,000 miles a year in my Nissan Leaf . The rest of the PV is for the big house.

The PV system has saved me $12,283.38 in PG&E electric charges so far in the past 3 years that I have owned it.

It's actually 2 systems, one with 28 panels from 2010 for $26k, and a 12 panel addition I made one year ago for $5.5k (see how much prices dropped).
So far $19,300 remain to be amortized. The combined system is currently saving an average of $350 per month, so it will take roughly another 4.5 years to fully pay for itself, assuming grid power prices remain the same. But they are actually going up.

User avatar
ualdriver
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 1:07 am

Re: Tesla S

Post by ualdriver » Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:38 am

http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#electricity

Scroll down about 4/5's of the way down the website. Tesla has a neat map that shows the source of energy for electricity generation in each state in the US. If you click on the subject state, it breaks it down even further. Looks like CA uses nat gas to generate the majority of its electricity- about 55% according to this Tesla website.

User avatar
matjen
Posts: 1672
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 11:30 pm

Re: Tesla S

Post by matjen » Fri Oct 04, 2013 8:41 am

madbrain wrote:It's actually 2 systems, one with 28 panels from 2010 for $26k, and a 12 panel addition I made one year ago for $5.5k (see how much prices dropped).
So far $19,300 remain to be amortized. The combined system is currently saving an average of $350 per month, so it will take roughly another 4.5 years to fully pay for itself, assuming grid power prices remain the same. But they are actually going up.


I am no expert on solar and its overall efficiencies but do believe that most technologies get cheaper and cheaper much more rapidly than many expect. Solar seems to be following that path. IKEA is now selling systems in the UK. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/3 ... 16087.html
A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.

Post Reply