syswei

What I think you and the MS analyst are ignoring is how little new electric generation capacity is actually fossil. And what there is (as far as NEW fossil capacity) tends to be natural gas, which produces half the CO2 of coal-fired generating plants):

Here's some data on the sources of new electrical capacity additions in the U.S.:




So basically if the industry sells 1 million EVs over the next X years, or 5 million over the next Y years, ask yourself how much of the new capacity built to serve those cars would be fossil, based on what has happened lately.

syswei

I've posted before that I felt Tesla was taking some chances, and here is a WSJ piece that reinforces that feeling: article (subscription may be required)

hyperion667

This is one hell of a thread

syswei

Due in 2019, Audi's 2nd EV (the first comes in 2018).

C&D article

syswei

German Carmakers Urged to Challenge Tesla by Senior Merkel Aide

The video embedded in the article above is pretty interesting as well, particularly the crash test starting around 1:25.

syswei

Aston Martin says EV due 2019, and forecasts 100% hybrid/EV by mid 2020s

Wolfman

Whoa! All 5000 of them

It'll be good for them, lower manufacturing costs likely equal better margin...

lolachampcar

I agree that Tesla is taking some huge chances. They are playing all in Monopoly (or Risk,,,) but then isn't that the point of creating a new market. They have proven that an electric car can be appealing (to some) and works. Other manufacturers have not bothered even though they were more than capable. Anyone think the I3 is THAT ugly by accident? They just stick with their bread and butter and do not "take chances".

What most have not realized is that Tesla is a battery company and not so much a car company. To push it even further, Tesla is an engineering entity that is almost entirely focused on producing better battery factories (and by extension better car factories - its Musk's the machine that builds the machine mantra). Battery storage is now cost competitive with peaker power plants. Displace peakers with batteries and now the problem of renewables not being available all the time is diminished. It becomes easier for utilities to bring renewable sources on line without the cost of batteries. The market for batteries dwarfs that of cars.

Our focus (on the business side) has degraded from twenty years out to quarterly. Our politics have degraded from long term vision to fundraising for the next election. It is no surprise to me that most people to do appreciate what Tesla is doing and how they are rolling the dice to do it. Most have never seen this value add approach to life.

syswei

Lola,

I'm totally supportive of companies taking business risks and applaud a lot of what Tesla has done. They've definitely advanced the state of the industry. But I don't want to see them taking chances with people's lives.

syswei

2018 Jaguar I-Pace

lolachampcar

I hate making assumptions, but given the crash test results I'm guessing you are talking about autopilot.

If you are, I drive about sixty miles a day and use it for about half the drive. Even with AP1 (the MobileEye version), it works just fine so from a user standpoint, it works for me. I've not scared anyone nor run them off the road so I suspect it works for those around me as well.

On the business side, it took something like ten years for Google to put a million miles on their technology. A quick Google search (kinda ironic ) has Bloomberg saying Tesla has 1.3B miles of data as of December last year.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-miles-of-data
They likely have much more now. If you are going to convince NHTSA using something other than alternative facts, you really do need data.

Once upon a time, data survived vested interest attacks. If you are facing a technology deficit, you go to work like mad to quietly close the gap while loudly throwing mud at the competition. At least this seems to be the current corporate play book. Hopefully hard data's advantage remains for just a tad longer as we are all likely to be safer when the car is doing the driving we do not care to do. Of course and as always, this is just my opinion.

syswei

My wife probably puts more AP1 miles on her car than you do. Don't get me wrong, I like Autopilot a lot, and it is one of the top features of the car...a feature that helps balance out deficiencies (to me) like (lack of) interior luxury, too-firm ride, fit and finish, etc. It is a big plus when used as intended (meaning, while still paying attention to the road).

BUT I think Tesla takes chances with it, and it could have been safer or more fully developed before release. From the WSJ article I had linked to earlier (here):

"Weeks before the October 2015 release of Autopilot, an engineer who had worked on safety features warned Tesla that the product wasn’t ready, according to a resignation letter circulated to other employees and reviewed by the Journal.

Autopilot’s development was based on “reckless decision making that has potentially put customer lives at risk,” the engineer, Evan Nakano, wrote."

AP2:
"In October 2016, Tesla announced an upgrade of Autopilot....
For another $3,000, drivers get the right to activate the rest of the cameras when Tesla enables a full self-driving system....
The announcement shook up some engineers, because they believed that the product that was released wasn’t designed to be self-driving, according to several people interviewed.

The marketing [decision by Elon Musk] was a factor in the decision by Mr. Anderson and at least two other engineers to leave the company, according to people familiar with the matter."

AP2 still has only a single radar. I've read that some other companies believe 4 should be used for full self driving.

"Tesla said the vehicle hardware unveiled in October will enable “full self-driving in almost all circumstances, at what we believe will be a probability of safety at least twice as good as the average human driver.” The self-driving feature is subject to software development and regulatory approval, and “it is not possible to know exactly when each element of the functionality described” will be available, Tesla noted."

Twice as safe as a human alone is imo not a very high hurdle. I'd expect MB, Volvo, and some others to be engineered toward higher targets...and I trust them to do so. 5 years from now (or whenever) if MB, Audi, Volvo, and Tesla are making equal claims for their self-driving capabilities, I would trust Tesla less than the others as far as safety, unless there is hard data (for instance, from insurers) that proves otherwise.

lsdreem

This is one hell of a thread.

syswei

excerpt from this article:

This July, all of Germany’s motor-sport icons— Audi , Mercedes-Benz, Porsche and BMW —said they would soon join Formula E, the electric-car equivalent of Formula One.....

Many see Formula E as a proving ground for vanguard electric vehicle technology...

“You can tell something is changing when the car manufacturers start piling in,” says Zak Brown, executive director of McLaren Technology Group, a U.K.-based maker of supercars and Formula One mainstay. “Formula E provides a great technical laboratory.”

davidjohnbamber

I don't own a Tesla, or TSLA. That said, I applaud anyone who wants to own one. Recently a SuperCharger station opened within a half mile of my house, so it was time to do a little research. Myself, Im not ready yet to take the plunge. But, I am interested, so time will tell in my situation (my current KW rate is .09 after taxes, etc).

syswei

"according to researchers at the International Monetary Fund and Georgetown University...more than 90 per cent of all passenger vehicles in the U.S., Canada, Europe and other rich countries could be electric by 2040." -article

Interesting reading, imo.

Wolfman

I have no issues with a fast adoption rate but find the assumption highly unlikely.

First off, their horse and buggy replacement by cars was a dramatic upgrade for the user. This is definitely not the case with EV's. Unless there is a driver for faster adoption, like a longer range and cost savings over an ICE, adoption rates will be much lower.

I am also curious oh how people assume the public charging infrastructure will be paid for, not only the initial installation but also the power consumption.

A single shopping mall would likely need over a 100 charging stations with ongoing consumption.
In the end the costs will be transferred to the consumer indirectly...

syswei

I basically agree that their high case is unlikely. But adoption could still be reasonably rapid, and I see the primary driver being total cost of ownership (initial purchase + fuel + maintenance). Once battery prices come down further the initial purchase price should be similar for EVs vs ICE (if not lower for EVs), while fuel is less expensive generally (how much so depends on where one lives) and maintenance lower (far fewer moving parts).

Public charging ultimately will offer higher voltages and hence much faster charging than what is common today, so the number of chargers needed per EV won't be as high as it might be with current, slow chargers. And I see more charging being done at home anyway. Public charging can be paid by the user, or by the car company (meaning it gets embedded into the car price). It isn't normally going to be free in the future.

syswei

California considering eventual ban on ICE cars: article

Fly by night

In a straight line 1/4 mile nothing faster than the TESLA

these aren't to be played with from a stop

syswei

So Dyson, the vacuum and fan company, is working on an EV for 2020...article. At first when reading the article I was sort of chuckling, but it actually seems to be a pretty serious effort.

syswei

Pretty cool video, thanks for sharing.

Wolfman

The acceleration gives the Tesla bragging rights to be sure but primarily because it's a party of one. As in the only EV in the field...

The attributes are due to the EV's instant torque advantage which will be something that will be shared in time with a number of other EV's.

UrBusted

Teslas are rapid, and the Model S would be able to beat most of those cars from a dig but there are a few things wrong with that race, including the 911 Turbo S first shown out launching all the other cars, and then a second view where the 911 Turbo S disappears and the Model S out launching all the cars. Also, the 488/911 Turbo S don't appear to be gaining at the end of the race despite higher trap speeds. Regardless, that shouldn't take away how insane the performance of this 7 seater is.

syswei

This article from Automotive News says Cadillac's "Super Cruise is as, if not more, advanced than any technology available to consumers today. That includes Tesla Inc.'s Autopilot." ...despite some shortcomings. Interesting reading.