Recommended Posts
kelpdiver***
Then why are we rewarding Tesla? Tesla is primarily carbon-based fuel because electrical generation is still primarily natural gas and coal.
a much more efficient usage of those power types. And of course, can be fueled by solar, nuclear, hydro power sources.
Well, yes. But instead of petroleum, where the carbon emissions come from a tailpipe the carbon emissions come from a smokestack. Perhaps in the future electrical generation will be carbon free. But it isn't that way no. It isn't even close.
I'd prefer that reality and aspirations be treated separately.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
billvon 2,400
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
>I agree...but in order to solve the problems you needn't build a $100,000
>automobile who's target market is overpriveleged douchebags.
The first few gasoline cars were overpriced pieces of shit sold to overprivileged douchebags. Still, I bet you drive a gas car.
>automobile who's target market is overpriveleged douchebags.
The first few gasoline cars were overpriced pieces of shit sold to overprivileged douchebags. Still, I bet you drive a gas car.
airdvr 197
billvon>I agree...but in order to solve the problems you needn't build a $100,000
>automobile who's target market is overpriveleged douchebags.
The first few gasoline cars were overpriced pieces of shit sold to overprivileged douchebags. Still, I bet you drive a gas car.
Did I miss where you bought a Tesla or something?
Please don't dent the planet.
Destinations by Roxanne
Destinations by Roxanne
billvon 2,400
>Did I miss where you bought a Tesla or something?
?? No, I didn't.
?? No, I didn't.
base698 1
If you read through the Tesla forums they seem to be good about fixing the issues. Building any new product takes a while to get the kinks worked out. It's obviously unsustainable if they start churning out 10000 cars a week and haven't fixed the issues leading to a huge backlog of cars to fix. Slow roll out and scale up is the only way to go.
I am dumbfounded by the hate Tesla gets--they make a fun car that creates new opportunities for US car industry, jobs, and they get shit on.
I am dumbfounded by the hate Tesla gets--they make a fun car that creates new opportunities for US car industry, jobs, and they get shit on.
airdvr 197
It's fantasyland. The company can't be profitable without tax credits and green credits. So what we get instead is an overpriced subsidized toy for the few overprivileged douchebags who can afford them. And, as rocket pointed out, it solves nothing. There was an article a while back that said if everyone drove an electric car it would reduce emissions enough to matter.
In reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
In reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
Please don't dent the planet.
Destinations by Roxanne
Destinations by Roxanne
airdvrIt's fantasyland. The company can't be profitable without tax credits and green credits. So what we get instead is an overpriced subsidized toy for the few overprivileged douchebags who can afford them.
The original roadster was a 2 seater car for 100k built on a Lotus frame. Not very practical.
The current S generation is a 4 door sedan starting at 65k, and a range up to 2.5x the roadster. Still not remotely cheap, but far better than the first gen.
They have announced their intention for the E/3 series car that would start at 35k. While that's more than I like to spend on a car (my last two Outbacks were ~24), it's not too high above the national average of 29k. And yes, that's probably still including the subsidy, so it's a bit higher. But again, close to half the cost of the prior generation.
They're basically acting like a start-up. Clearly they're reducing the cost of the technology, so if they wanted to, they could have priced the E car at 45 or 50k and gone for profits rather than growth.
And when one's consider the millions of douchebags in oversized Expeditions and the like, wasting tremendous amounts of fuel, it's hard to take the tesla hatred seriously. When electric cars still had that pathetic 35 mile range like the Volt or the Leaf, it was easy to laugh at it, but now that it's up to 3/4s of my last car (and double most Harleys), it seems like we'll need to go with the rich dbag angle instead.
base698 1
QuoteThe company can't be profitable without tax credits and green credits. So what we get instead is an overpriced subsidized toy for the few overprivileged douchebags who can afford them.
Profitable at this stage means nothing. What matters is they build the infrastructure to solve the problems with delivering an electric car. Elon Musk took his own money and built a car company from the ground up. He used every means necessary to get it off the ground. After IPO and reissuing stock, they've paid back the federal loans and have lots of cash on hand with which to play. That's on top of actually selling a few cars the past two years. They've built a nationwide infrastructure to use quick charging tech to get over the range/refueling issues of every other electric.
I like the idea of an industrialist that's also building rockets having a few billion in capital. I'd not bet against what he'll be able to do with that money. He's risking his neck and getting shit done instead of sitting on it and going the safe route.
QuoteAnd, as rocket pointed out, it solves nothing. There was an article a while back that said if everyone drove an electric car it would reduce emissions enough to matter.
Who cares? The car is fast, fun and creates a desirable product people around the world want to buy. This creates jobs and new industries here in the US.
Quote
In reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
Unrelated. Most of the Tesla drivers are douchebags with money, not tree huggers. You even pointed it out above yourself.
QuoteThey have announced their intention for the E/3 series car that would start at 35k. While that's more than I like to spend on a car (my last two Outbacks were ~24), it's not too high above the national average of 29k. And yes, that's probably still including the subsidy, so it's a bit higher. But again, close to half the cost of the prior generation.
The Model S has parity with a $50K because of the gas savings. There are a few spreadsheets on the forums showing that even with great car depreciation it's still much cheaper than an Audi or BMW 5 series after owning for 6 years.
A $35000 car with no gas would be much, much cheaper to operate than a $25K outback over 6 years. I think Elon said this week that'd be $35000 without subsidy.
[Reply] Most of the Tesla drivers are douchebags with money, not tree huggers.
The two aren't mutually exclusive. I think Tesla appeals most to the wealthy tree hugger.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
billvon 2,400
>It's fantasyland. The company can't be profitable without tax credits and green credits.
That used to be true of Internet service companies as well; the first ARPANet networks were built with government subsidies. Turned out to be a good investment.
> There was an article a while back that said if everyone drove an electric car it
>would reduce emissions enough to matter.
True, especially since EV's are charged during times when we have a problem using surplus power. In other words, those nuclear plants that have no markets for their power at 2am are going to be able to run a little more efficiently.
>In reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction . . . .
We do - to the tune of about $200 million annually, via the Price-Anderson act.
That used to be true of Internet service companies as well; the first ARPANet networks were built with government subsidies. Turned out to be a good investment.
> There was an article a while back that said if everyone drove an electric car it
>would reduce emissions enough to matter.
True, especially since EV's are charged during times when we have a problem using surplus power. In other words, those nuclear plants that have no markets for their power at 2am are going to be able to run a little more efficiently.
>In reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction . . . .
We do - to the tune of about $200 million annually, via the Price-Anderson act.
normiss 622
Telco's are still receiving government subsidies.
Apparently, it's important in our society for everyone to have access to telephones, 911, TV, and the internets.
Apparently, it's important in our society for everyone to have access to telephones, 911, TV, and the internets.
billvon 2,400
>Telco's are still receiving government subsidies.
True.
>Apparently, it's important in our society for everyone to have access to
>telephones, 911, TV, and the internets.
From the government's perspective it's mainly 911 access.
True.
>Apparently, it's important in our society for everyone to have access to
>telephones, 911, TV, and the internets.
From the government's perspective it's mainly 911 access.
base698
The Model S has parity with a $50K because of the gas savings. There are a few spreadsheets on the forums showing that even with great car depreciation it's still much cheaper than an Audi or BMW 5 series after owning for 6 years.
A $35000 car with no gas would be much, much cheaper to operate than a $25K outback over 6 years. I think Elon said this week that'd be $35000 without subsidy.
I'm driving 5-6k miles per year, so it would take a bit longer for me to get there. But besides the point - whether or not they hit that 35k target without the tax subsidy, they're still marching rapidly forward. Not quite Moore's law, but halving the price every 3-4 years is pretty awesome in the car world.
grue 1
airdvr
I agree...but in order to solve the problems you needn't build a $100,000 automobile who's target market is overpriveleged douchebags. If this had been a Volt you'd be howling.
Yes, but everyone knows GM can't consistently build cars that aren't pieces of shit and the company is a sinkhole.
Tesla, on the other hand, gets to have a more or less tabula rasa when it comes to reputation. If there must be subsidies, I'd much rather they go to companies without a history of incompetence and low quality.
cavete terrae.
grue 1
airdvr
In reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
Not only nuke plant construction, but working with the entire nuclear fuel cycle so we can reprocess fuel on our own soil and maximize efficiency.
That said, it's not all left leaning tree huggers who love Tesla. I, a fairly hardcore libertarian, think Elon Musk is doing a lot of amazing things between SpaceX and Tesla, and I'll gladly buy a 35k Tesla when they come to market if it fits my needs at the time.
cavete terrae.
Tink1717 2
QuoteIn reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
No we didn't. Three Mile Island, Chernoble and Fukushima dug the grave and buried atomic power.
Skydivers don't knock on Death's door. They ring the bell and runaway... It really pisses him off.
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717
-The World Famous Tink. (I never heard of you either!!)
AA #2069 ASA#33 POPS#8808 Swooo 1717
jgoose71 0
Tink1717QuoteIn reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
No we didn't. Three Mile Island, Chernoble and Fukushima dug the grave and buried atomic power.
And yet France gets 75% of it's energy from nuclear power and is building more reactors.
What does it say about the US when France passed us up?
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-A-F/France/
Our Nuclear reactors are over 40 years old. Geez, I wonder why they might now be safe...
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything
Life, the Universe, and Everything
billvon 2,400
>What does it say about the US when France passed us up?
That we care about different things that France does? "We have to be just like France!" has never been much of a priority for the US.
That we care about different things that France does? "We have to be just like France!" has never been much of a priority for the US.
jgoose71
And yet France gets 75% of it's energy from nuclear power and is building more reactors.
What does it say about the US when France passed us up?
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-A-F/France/
It says they're 1/5th our population, as we produce 60% more power than they do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country
grue 1
Tink1717QuoteIn reality we should be subsidizing nuke plant construction but alas, the same left leaning tree huggers who love the Tesla today put a stop to that back in the 70's.
No we didn't. Three Mile Island, Chernoble and Fukushima dug the grave and buried atomic power.
It's pretty sad that nobody judges automobile safety by examining a Model T, but we judge nuclear power safety based on 60 year old reactor designs.
WELP.
cavete terrae.
a much more efficient usage of those power types. And of course, can be fueled by solar, nuclear, hydro power sources.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites