Market Currents
The NYT's John Broder takes Tesla's (TSLA) Model S up and down the East Coast from Washington on...
-
Sunday, February 10, 8:00 AM ETThe NYT's John Broder takes Tesla's (TSLA) Model S up and down the East Coast from Washington on Interstate 95, where the company has installed Supercharger stations 200 miles apart. Things start dandily enough, but then the weather cools, and Broder has to endure freezing feet and white knuckles because he has to turn the heating off to preserve power. Eventually, he needs a tow truck to pick him up because the car runs out of juice.
Other date
Latest Consumer Articles
This news story has 182 comments:
I am not even going to go into the indirect benefits, from materials to computing to fuels etc.
Plastics... Did you check the weather this week? That's because of the space program.
http://bit.ly/14LFQv7
Eventually we will all be driving around in EV's powered by solar on our homes...wait and see how Elon's two companies Tesla and Solar City start working together to make this happen in a BIG way...exciting times ahead.
They work fine on the front nine.
You can have them. Why do I have to pay for them?
To save dolphins?
Waitin' and I'm not a patient man.
(insider tip)
"third term."
Green energy is green because...
the bloom is off this rose, I'ts now all about becoming the next Nobel Peace Prize winner...didn't
Arafat win it? No, that can't be right...
still...
Driving around town is a dream...but why do we drive...'cause we ..."
...need permission from Mr. DeMuth.
"'cous we can.."
Vroom, vrooom...
(sorry sir, Ms Obama would object)
(Huh?)
I was just...EPA'n....(OK, why ya trin' huffin and puffin')
The link below is about the line of credit from the John DOE...
http://aol.it/QZOcY1
The link below is about their financial condition...
http://aol.it/VPG0vQ
How does that jive with that fact that well over 70% of the commuting public travel less than 60 miles to work?
Perhaps you want to restate that to read: "EVs with less than Tesla's range of 200 miles will not work well in the north for commuters who need to travel over 70 miles each way to work."
I think we can agree that changes the trajectory of your comment significantly.
Lots of sense and the US Defense department does it ALL THE TIME:
http://read.bi/VeyUUq
I was involved in a program in which three major contractors competed, each using a different design concept.
It is a great idea for the US government to sponsor and support competing ideas. That's basically what the SBIR (Small Business Innovative Research) program is about.
First when he knew was going on a long range trip, he should have charged it in range mode. 240's is NOT range mode, that's standard mode for a complete charge.
Secondly, when he stopped at night, he really should have charged the EV. He would have actually gained miles even if using a 110 over night, even in low temp conditions.
Third, he started a drive with 25 some miles and ONLY waited an hour. That shouldn't have happened, if you don't do it in a normal car, don't do it in an EV. At most after an hour at the other station he would have 39 miles left total. That's not enough- bad planning. on his part and that was exasperated by a poor decision from the second point.
Fourth, he was driving a performance version, it comes stock with the the 21s. As any engineer will tell you, larger tires = higher rolling resistance.
Fifth, why didn't he stop at the Tesla service or show room in NJ or NYC to get a quick charge?
Sixth- it's dependent of driving, but the performance allows more energy draw- don't know his acceleration driving habits, but that could be a potential issue
Seventh, the climate control was bad advice, better advice should have been use the heated seats instead.
Not making excuses, just alot of things don't really pass the a sanity test if you look at them critically. I would go as far as to say the author wanted it to fail on the highway, because you really don't do such things, one or two things could have been recoverable, but there's too many red flags. Also a drive without a hitch does not make a good story, a drive with freezing, uncomfortable, running out of juice does make a good story
I personally have driven my Model S in the dead of winter too and have no problem driving and passing people on 295 going the speed of traffic (speed limit is 65 mph and everyone knows the speed is typically higher than the speed limit) and obtaining 0.29-0.30 kwhr/mile even with the 21 inch rims and the heater on.
That being said, If I was Tesla I would put a charging station in the middle of New Jersey to easy the range anxiety, in either Mercer, Burlington, or Middlesex county. They should overlap more.
Dude, buying a tesla in the first place doesn't really pass the sanity test.
D
Wow. It's the driver's fault for not devoting a comparable amount of time "planning" this test drive as NASA did on the Apollo 11 mission or Eisenhower spent on the Normandy invasion.
Did you not read the part where this driver was constantly on the phone to Tesla and they (mis)advised him what to do?
Did you not read the part where the brakes lock when power is almost out, there is no emergency release, and the car has to be put on a flatbed? It seems that the Tesla design is such that when electric energy is almost out the car turns into a two ton ROCK.
This story is already old and I've forgotten some of the details, but it's interesting how some will blame the driver and not the car's inherent limitations.
It is the liberal dogma to blame others for the failings of their misguided policies and favorite pet projects.
It's all Bush's fault.
NO, It is not.
I've started many long distance trips with less than a quarter tankful of gas, stopped to fill up in less than 5 or 10 minutes, and continued for another 400 miles. With the current gas station infrastructure it is reasonable to assert that (except for special cases) there is no range limit on ICEs.
Not so with even the long range Tesla BEV. Even with the envisioned infrastructure of Superchargers every 100 to 150 miles, a long trip in a Tesla has the potential to be a LOOONG Trip. First, if you are unfortunate to own and drive the 40kWh model you can't use superchargers and, therefore, spend hours recharging. With the 60 kWh model you would have to stop at every supercharger station along the route. Even with the 85 kWh model you would probably have to stop at every supercharger station for fear of having happen to you what happened to Broder. By the way, the cost of retrieval after running out of battery power must be huge; especially that flatbed tow truck.
" It's almost as if he planned this trip to fail.... "
The Tesla appears to be a good car, even a great car. But to assert ulterior motives to anyone raising legitimate question about Tesla only blemishes ... Tesla.
It is at least partially the drivers fault . I ask the questions:
Why did he NOT charge in range mode? When you plug it in it gives you an option- he had to select non- range mode.
Why did he NOT spend the 15 seconds at his hotel to plug it in?
Why did he NOT charge at a non fast charger in NJ and take a bathroom break? There's plenty of free, public ones in NJ. Wall greens, ikea, and even a pizza shop, just off the top of my head. He WAS on the NJ turnpike so he had to pass the Ikea in Elizabeth
Why did he only wait 1 hr for it to charge to gain a marginal amount of miles, and not enough miles to make it to the fast charge station?
Why did they not advise him to stop at the Tesla store for a quick charge or gain some mileage?
Those are all questions that must be answered, and you can't blame a car for the inactivity or ignorance of an individual.
More or less what this author did was comparable to "last gas station for 50 miles" stops at that gas station and puts 1 gallon in and the complains when he doesn't have enough gas
Got in the car, drove to destination.
Doesn't make a good story, so they picked the weak point of electric vehicles and told that story instead. They would have pushed it till it failed in order to get that story. Everyone already knows the weak point of EVs, so it's a cheap shot.
(second thoughts)
Tack is right.
This is asinine.
Ignorant people keep bringing up the "taxpayers money" issue...wrong Tesla has a loan that they are ahead of schedule on paying back...the taxpayers will make money after Tesla pays off it's loan with interest...try again.
By the way, our country is already broke - it's better to at least try to help with something that could jump-start our economy now than wait for it to grind to a total halt without a way to move our vehicles.
One day, July the 4th will be called, Dependent Day...
With the way that the "free enterprise" system is now - with the super-large corporations controlling so much of the money and power, about the only way that a new energy structure can get a foothold is by the government giving that nudge, and then getting out of the way to allow the successful company to move forward.
The only other option, as I see it, is to wait for the present oil/gasoline structure to collapse as it gradually - or suddenly - falls from lack of supply or embargo or some calamity. Is that what you want? There needs to be some flexibility here.
Most of the "super-large" corporation where not hear 100 years ago, nor 50 years either...Just allow free enterprise an environment to grow without restrictions and you will see innovations and $50 light bulbs...
BTW, Ms Fight, we are in a new era of record goo production, either domestically and or world wide...
EEK, Peak EV is here...
My dear, you must leave the old Arabia Oil embargo days, as the hills of North Dakota and Texas are bubbling with millions of barrels of oil...
Can you not see, that most 98% of government programs are a failure.
BTW, can you produce a link that Herr Musk pay-off the loan?
might want to check yer premises...
Lefty oil-haters are just precious. I'd love to see any of them try to live in a world that never had it.
Wanting to change from an existing fuel source doesn't mean we intend to erase the past. It's no secret that oil use came with a huge negative burden attached, trying to lessen that burden seems to be a sensible goal.
Love your comment,!
We can curse the dark, or lite candle.
Elon is the new Steve Jobs! What don 't you understand?
Here are the numbers:
Coal 42%
Natural Gas 25%
Nuclear 19%
Hydropower 8%
Other Renewable 5%
...... Biomass 1.38%
...... Geothermal 0.41%
...... Solar 0.04% <<< VERY IMPRESSIVE AMOUNT :-)
...... Wind 2.92%
Petroleum 1%
Other Gases < 1%
Source: http://1.usa.gov/TasNhy
So, and by far, coal is the biggest source of electricity, and dwarfs the other sources.
" if you are so inclined you can put up solar panels on your roof and get most of your electricity from the sun. "
Except at night, or, if you are in New England today, have two feet of snow on your ($10,000 - $20,000) solar panels.
http://1.usa.gov/12huSui
http://1.usa.gov/LD9d6x
Coal generation dropped 19% in a single year. Not because the US is lacking in coal (it has more than anywhere else in the world). This has more to do with coal based energy projects having recouped their costs and nearing the end of the useful life-cycle.
Coal use is on the decline in nearly EVERY nation (yes even India and China as a % of the total grid).
Solar and other renewables make massive leaps forward every year..the trend is clear for those we can see. Not overnight but inevitable nonetheless...our grid gets cleaner and thus so do our EV's.
Deep drilling tech (one good thing about the oil industry) is making geothermal energy more feasible...this and tidal would be the best form of renewable energy because it is constant and unlimited...not intermittent like wind and solar...the breakthroughs will be made...EV's put us on the right track to use a cleaner grid...the ICE will never put us on the right track.
With the exception of damns, redoables are economic failures; much the same with leftwing economic science...
It for a parrot ?
only a moron could have the issues this guy did
>>>
Before you label every potentially undecided customer like that,
you ought to read that other people are having issues with
the Model S that go beyond temperature changes:
http://bit.ly/VSEUiP
EXCERPT:
"We drive to Dubuque, Iowa ... another point on our trip where I had figured we would stop to charge for 2-3 hours. Eric had talked to the service center at the Chevrolet dealership who had indicated it would be fine to charge there for a few hours. We found the Chevrolet, plugged in, no problem. Obstacle 3 -- Their charger is only 15amps and less than 200 volts... We were only getting about 6mph of charge. At that rate it was going to take all night.
"I quickly found a Nissan dealership in the area and we headed over there to try our luck. Their charger was outside, covered in icicles, clearly not having been used in a while. Although hesitant, they were willing to help us out and they moved some vehicles out of the way, so we could park by the charger.
"Unfortunately, when we put the adapter on the charger, it wouldn't fit. It was about 1-2mm short of latching and without latching the electrons won't flow. Obstacle 4. We tried to enlist some of the techs to help us force it on there, but they were unable.
"They shrugged their shoulders stating it was probably the wrong adapter, even though it had worked at the other Nissan dealership a few hours beforehand. I chalked it up to the fact that it was still barely over zero degrees outside and their charger was sitting outside in ice. Nevertheless, it wasn't going to work...."
I suspect some hardcore EVangelicals will try to convince me
that somehow, *I JUST DON'T GET IT* -- but I *DO* get it. These vehicles are not ready for prime time.
I'm glad to see the technology developing - but right now it's an expensive 3rd car.
The company is giving 100 shares and a Blackberry with each purchase..
Ah, no. He drove it like a normal person would drive a car with an ICE, expecting to reach his destination in comfort, and in a timely manner. In fact, he took many EXTRA precautions particular to EVs, and he STILL had a bad experience. Simple conclusion: Tesla is just not ready for prime time. Doesn't mean it won't be at some point in the future, but not yet.
You can't trust any e-vehicles range indicator because the discharge rate is dependent on more factors than just distance. Things like temperature, whether its night or day, or if its raining affect range. In this situation, the car was just sitting there and it reported a loss of 72% in range. On top of this, really hot and cold temperatures also affect the batteries charge acceptance.
My guess is that 'charge anxiety' increases as some non-linear function of the vehicles range. If you need to regularly drive distances in excess of something like 70% of the vehicles range you will probably always be looking at the range indicator. On top of this, the larger the number of deep discharges, the less the life of the battery pack.
It's a nice vehicle, but it is certainly not going to replace the ICE for most people with the state of current battery technology. I wonder what is going to happen to the company when the waiting list is exhausted? Long term survival depends on a willingness of people to switch from ICE to e-vehicles.
Reliability is a big issue. If you were driving your family on a lonely inter-state and adverse weather hit, what kind of vehicle would you want to be driving?
I say...give it a chance. If it has real value to mankind, we will adopt it.
And this from someone who uses a sundial to tell time......grin
The vehicle told him he had 90 miles of range remaining. Twice the 46 miles he needed to travel. He gets up in the morning, and now the car reports 72% less range.
>>>
Did I just read that right? The car lost 72% of its remaining range
overnight? 90 - (90*72%) = 25.2 miles of range. How reliable is this technology? My old Hyundai didn't just lose 72% of its gas overnight....
>>>
An experienced e-vehicle owner knows never to trust the vehicle's range figure.
>>>
In other words, an experienced EV owner has been STRANDED enough times to realize he might need an extension cord that runs from his house to his destination? Didn't Fred Flintsone have one of those?
This is a damning confession about this cutting edge technology. Those of us who are still addicted to oil don't sit around wondering if our gas gauge is betraying us....
Actually, I had an 83 pickup that was only right when the tank was full. Not sure if that counts.
>>>
Well, everyone's input counts in this matter, I think...
I suspect it would cost a modest amount to fix your gas gauge. Jalopnik, in its article on "bricking," suggested that a new Tesla battery would cost upwards of $30,000 plus installation.
http://bit.ly/12zGhpb
Musk fan here, at least for the stocks if not the products.
As the article says, "....it needs some work".
Yes, but there is NO ICE car that tells you your range is 80 miles when you go to bed at night and 15 miles when you wake up. This is the core of the problem anywhere away from the subtropics.
You can imagine the number would be a lot less than 200 miles so this artificial test is not reality if more "pumping stations" are added for electric vehicles. That is the reality.
I am not a Tesla owner or driver, just a wannabe-Trader trying to make some money in the market.
fwiw: TSLA posted a red inverted hammer on Friday so expect some downside in the stock. Due to this story or the NYT article?
Don't know, but the run-up in the stock price did not make sense either.
How far down? How about 5-7% from Friday's Close or about the $37'ish area to start.
Driving the car is a dream, and this is by far and away the best car I have ever owned (including Audi/ MB/ Porsche). However, I am a pioneer when it comes to long distant driving (for now). When going on longer trips you need to plan more time and ensure you know where charging options exist. The fun part is every time we stop to charge the car we always end up talking about the car with admirers and the time flies by.
yes nothing like talking with admirers every 200 miles about the fun time owning no driving no sorry charging your Model S, yes its sounds wonderfully time consuming
(Maybe, the Model S should come equipped with a complementary Glock.)
hahaha..that was so funny. They should also put these charging stations close to theme parks, movie theatres, bowling alleys etc so time can really fly while charging your car.
For the few times the average Joe does drive over 200 miles in ONE day (maybe three or four times per year) there is the free supercharger network. 200 miles = nearly 3.5 hrs of driving...I don't know about you but even in an ICE car after that much driving I want to stop and take a break, eat/drink something, use the bathroom, etc. This usually takes about 25-30mins so is a perfect time to supercharge (you can get 150 miles of charging done in 30 mins so not sure where the "hour wait" you claim comes from?
Again more claims from the ignorant who know nothing about how easy driving the Tesla really is if you bother to do a bit of homework and have a brain.
Just think, fuel payback in just nine or eight years!
The short-sightedness of that comment is evident in that it was levied against the Toyota Prius as well, and the fact that car has done a remarkable job of maintaining its value far better than pretty much all its competition.
As in, intelligent investors look at re-sale value too, among multiple parameters of value assessment, not just fuel 'payback'.
Sorry to say I never owned a horseless buggy. And will probably never own an EV. (too old now) Stuck in the middle with my damn combustion engined vehicle....yet still strangely happy. LOL
What we really resent is fake innovation: changing something for the worse and telling me its better.
Were you around in the 1980s when new coke came out? It was overly sweet and lacked the flavourful punch of the classic recipe and it was eventually pulled.
Electric cars are the new coke of personal transportation.
D
There was nothing wrong with the car - it was, rather, someone who didn't understand how to alter his driving habits with the new electric technology.
Thanks for posting the link regarding electricity generation. The data you quoted was from two years ago (2011), however. There was a link with the data on that page with more current usage (2012). What's interesting is that coal is now 36%, a 13% drop in just one year (it dropped 6% the year before). Petroleum has dropped 23% and Nat Gas has increased 26% !! At the same time, wind has increased 14% and Solar/PV has increased 149% !. The trend is clear.
" The data you quoted was from two years ago (2011), however .."
Not to nitpick, but the data from 2011 is, today, only one year old.
" and Solar/PV has increased 149% ".
Wow! Solar has gone from 0.04% all the way to 0.1%. Yes, the trend is clear!
" and Nat Gas has increased 26% !! "
Wooppee! From this site: http://bit.ly/V8OHUA , we learn that when natural gas is burned it produces ONLY 117,000 pounds of CO2 per billion btu compared to 208,000 pounds of CO2 per billion btu when burning coal. An improvement, but still a lot of CO2 produced. Yes, I know, some of the other really, really bad pollutants are very dramatically reduced, still the CO2 overwhelms; as the chemistry requires.
It is certainly not to make enviro statements...
" Typical Zelaza tactic, post outdated information then try to change the subject when faced with current facts. "
Thanks JRP3 for recognizing that I, in fact, try to find and present actual data and information rather than continually insulting from the hip. With regard to the data about energy sources used to generate electricity, I went to the US government site and posted their latest data for the complete year 2011. I didn't click on a small link that provided monthly data (incomplete, not yet for the full 2012) because I'm not writing a thesis (been there, done that almost 40 years ago) and even the latest monthly data makes my point. JRP3, your mind and attitude seems to be too narrow and laser focused to see the bigger picture and understand other people's legitimate issues.
" The real comparison of course is that NG powered EV's are far cleaner than ICE vehicles. "
I certainly know and understand that natural gas burns cleaner than coal and that EVs using that electricity are cleaner than ICE vehicles. However, an increasing amount of natural gas is being extracted by a method called ... let me try and recall ... oh, yes ... fracking. And my understanding is that fracking may introduce undesirable contaminants into our water supply. This site: http://bit.ly/12shiUK
whose credibility and agenda I don't know, discusses the issue somewhat. Care to comment?
Oh, and notice that I am, again, providing a reference source for my remark.
Your link did not comment one word about the bird shredders, did it ?
No problem, you are allowed to shred birds because it is done in a green and friendly manner...
Again you change topic. Yes fracking is a concern, no doubt, but to stay on topic you are trying to compare emissions impacts between ICE's and EV's. Do you have any data at all that fracking impacts, which are also used in oil extraction by the way, significantly change the emissions profile of EV's as compared to ICE's?
life-altering inventions of the past were often doubted. so it was with gas-powered autos, electricity, indoor plumbing, television and even the internet, all of which were predicted failures by many who should have known better (with the possible exception of indoor plumbing). even when louis pasture urged physicians and surgeons to wash their hands and boil their surgical instruments to prevent bacterial infection he was viewed as a fringe lunatic by the medical establishment.
as far as spending public money on private enterprise is concerned, what are you crying about? wal mart won't put a store in any locale that doesn't offer tax benefits to subsidize development. any manufacturer of widgets will demand the same. how about your (not mine) beloved sports teams who demand public financing for their private use stadiums under threat to move the franchise if denied? rarely do public votes on such issues go against the home team.
to the naysayers: remove the blinders.
The trend with coal vs. nat gas IS clear. Thanks for posting the link to the site where I learned a couple of things:
"Natural gas emits virtually no particulates into the atmosphere: in fact, emissions of particulates from natural gas combustion are 90 percent lower than from the combustion of oil, and 99 percent lower than burning coal. Thus increased natural gas use in place of other dirtier hydrocarbons can help to reduce particulate emissions in the U.S"
"Combustion of natural gas, used in the generation of electricity, industrial boilers, and other applications, emits lower levels of NOx, CO2, and particulate emissions, and virtually no SO2 and mercury emissions."
Here's one for you: http://bit.ly/X0tvOf
For example: "The electricity generation process produces less than 100 pounds of pollutants for electric cars compared to 3000 pounds for ICE vehicles."
Thanks,
Jerry
I went to the site you mention and this is what they write:
"... Furthermore, in a study conducted by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, electric powered cars were significantly cleaner over the course of 100,000 miles than ICE cars. The electricity generation process produces less than 100 pounds of pollutants for electric cars compared to 3000 pounds for ICE vehicles."
Well Jerry, there is something terribly wrong with these numbers. A high mileage ICE car getting 30 mpg would consume 3000 gallons of gas to travel 100,000 miles. Burning a gallon of gas produces close to 20 pounds of CO2 (actually, 19# and easy enough to show.) So, that ICE should produce about 60,000# of pollutants (if you include CO2) and not the measly 3000# stated. Unless I totally misunderstand what they are doing or saying, I'de say that this EV fan site has credibility issues. The claim of only 100# of pollutants for the generation for 30,000 kWh (to travel 100,000 miles @ 3 miles/kWh) also seems highly dubious; but I don't really know and don't feel like running the numbers. OK, unless their calculation is based on non-fuel burning electrical generation; so this would be a totally mixed up and meaningless comparison.
Wow thanks for the insight.
Any credible non-biased study has put the EV at over 50% less emissions than an average ICE vehicle even if powered from 100% coal...but we know the US grid is only 40% coal so start there as your worst case. Renewable energy Gen + EV = 0 emissions best case...rare but growing exponentially with companies like Tesla and Solar City.
The ICE will never have this best case...ever...it simply wastes valuable finite resources that we could be using to make recyclable materials (ie plastics)...when we burn fossil fuels we waste them FOREVER...a slap in the face to future generations
95% of all people drive less than 50 miles per day on average.
Tesla is a brand new company who has JUST produced its first car from the ground up. They have EIGHT of their planned THREE HUNDRED supercharging stations in place right now. Give them some time...Jesus...you think it's easy building the first new major auto company in 75 years and not using traditional fuels to power the car?
Tesla was silly not to have educated this reporter on how to properly use the car on long distance trips. Had he simply plugged in the car overnight at a 240v outlet (which will cost motels/shopping malls/ restaurants/ etc only a few hundred dollars to install - so will pop up very quickly as EV's get more popular.)...had he done this instead of losing mileage in the cold without plugging in he would have woken up to a near full battery instead of a near dead one....Tesla's motto has always always been "Plug it in whenever you can!"...even a standard 110v plug and an extension cord could have made this trip an easy success. Instead he looked for failure.
Again Tesla should have explained all this to the reporter, they certainly do with every new owner..a delivery specialist usually spends a least a few hours with the new owner going over all the details of how to best operate and maintain your car.
They are incredibly busy I guess they assumed this reporter might have read up on the $95,000 car he was about to drive..or at least checked out the very simple to use "How far can I go" page on Tesla's website. That clearly shows effects of temperature, etc on range.
Bottom line is that anyone who knows anything about how EV's work would have done this trip easily and without issue. A total newbie to EV's and one who bothers to do no research should be expected to have issues. This would be similar to someone not understanding how an ICE engine works and running it without oil..or putting diesel in the car instead of gas...people who are ignorant about the very basic operations of ANY vehicle are going to struggle..and they have been with the ICE for many years as well...its not that different. One thing is for sure if he did the same trip over again..it would go perfectly, because now he knows...just like the ignorant ICE owner learns never to put diesel in his gas car again! It's a tough learning curve for those who go in blind...but a very small minority go in this way...but a little practice makes perfect.
Bottom line is that for 95% of people a Tesla would serve their daily driving needs very easily. Most people only travel 200+ miles in one day a few times a year. If you are someone who travels very long distances very frequently..well you are in the 5% of people who do so perhaps wait until the supercharging and 240v charging networks are a little more developed (two years max).
Tesla's next car...the Gen III will have a 200 mile range with supercharging for around $35,000 in early 2016...by then the supercharging network will be fully developed and long range driving issues will be gone. For those who know and understand the basics these issues are gone already with a tiny bit of planning....some ignorant people however expect everything to be spoon fed to them like babies...if that's who you are then wait for Gen III....if you actually have a brain then buy a Tesla now.
There, fixed it.
Unfortunately John Broder acts just like 90% of American consumers. Too "special" to have to alter their behavior and then gripe when everything isn't perfect.
Grow up John, and learn how to use your car before setting off on a trip like this. This piece belongs on FoxNews.
The simple truth is that we will not be driving ICE cars forever. It is not sustainable.
What about us poor 99%ers, workings slobs?
What we need is a massed produced EV, called the VolkVoltWagen!
You will get your VolksVoltWagen...probably about 7-10 years earlier than you would have had Tesla not awoken the giants of the auto industry into actually doing something about the electric car.
Wait and see...everyone will give Tesla credit in the end for showing the way forward...GM already has.
Frankly, rather than a credit, there should be a debit - a bourgeoisie luxury tax...
Oh really? The completely disruptive automobile technology might take some getting used to? Well count me out then! I've got to question the timing of this article with earnings released Monday afternoon.
This is ridiculous. Tesla is still creating the infrastructure to support road trips. In the meanwhile, use your car for committing to work and generally making performance BMW and Mercedes owners want to jump off a bridge. If you're spending $85-$100k on a luxury performance machine than you own another car. Use the other car to get across country until the infrastructure is fully built.
That's about the limit of the issue outlined in this market current. If we could transpose every fossil fuel station with charging stations and vice versa it would make for a far more interesting discussion vis a vis viability of the technology, I suspect.
priceless!
As always, just blame the bankers, as they are on the corner of every street...
He didn't follow the proper procedures of preheating the car and battery while it was charging which reduced his range. He also did not drive the speed limit which reduced his range even further.
The Superchargers are free, so if he could have enjoyed a relaxing drive from New York to Boston, but I don't think he wanted that. Nice drives don't sell papers.
There have been several who have posted of their successful road trips. The best of which is highlighted by a fan-made Tesla commercial called "Gallons of Light".
Did anyone read about the drive on the west coast earlier this year? Is there a link to that road trip? If THAT was a hatchet job too, you might have a more legitimate complaint. But it seems that the first drive was uneventful...
Elon Musk has made a car that only works under optimum lab conditions....
Elon Musk has made a car that works perfectly in many real world conditions when used as designed. No ICE works well if you fail to put gas in it.
However, there are other issues to be raised -- namely, the universality of the chargers.
This link goes to a blog by a self-proclaimed Tesla owner who tries to make a road trip in 16 hours and encounters unexpected difficulties -- among other things, he simply cannot "plug in" his Tesla anywhere because (i) the amperage is too low and (ii) his charger doesn't fit the outlets.
http://bit.ly/VSEUiP
I agree that people misuse technology all the time, often with fatal results. That goes for ICEs too, as you mention. (Have they NEVER heard of carbon monoxide poisoning?)
It is difficult to buy the NY Times as the NP boxes are no longer filled in SF.
On the other hand, what would be the purpose of Broder's slamming Tesla.
Appears not to be to his career advantages ,,,
On the other hand, I invite the bears and pessimists to keep shorting and selling this stock; it creates a great entry point for me to buy more stock!
I wonder if the (TSLA) employees he named in the story were disciplined or fired...
There was a photo of the "Brick-lin" (anyone remember that one?) ...
>>>
I had completely forgotten about the SV-1 Bricklin. Fortunately, the "interwebs" have not.
http://ti.me/12JwMUt
And to think we've gotten this far into the mess of the Model S's battery life without even once touching on its still-outstanding debt and its shocking gross margins...
I believe the NYT article is drive-by journalism with the intent of driving page views above journalistic integrity. An unfortunate situation. Certainly a large number of people run out of gas every year. Obviously those people could have taken steps to avoid running out of gas. Given the 90 years of infrastructure build-up and the maturation of ICE vehicles, it makes little sense that so many people still run out of gas. But they do. Obviously the big tradeoff for BEV's right now is being able to obtain energy while sitting at home vs. the ability to add energy to the vehicle pretty much at will within 10 minutes at upwards to 20 times the cost. For lots of people, being able to obtain energy at home would be a far greater convenience 355+ or so days a year than the ability to fully re-fuel in 10 minutes. If you are not one of those people, then there are still plenty of products you can purchase. Don't worry - there are plenty of ICE products you can buy for now.
But the Feds gave just about everyone free land, just ax the Okies...
BTW, 123, are we better off due to our national rail system ?
Just think of the one that the Feds run, never made any money in over forty years....I wonder who are really the Robber Barons?
this makes for illuminating reading too... EV's may be fun, they may be cool, but what they're not right now is reliable transportation over any real distance during real winter.
Maybe Elon can prove that Regina Gasser is lying by tapping into the log of her $100,000 Model S?
Tesla is simply not "there" yet for a lot of situations. Including the INEVITABLE "I forgot to plug it in last night". Gasoline doesn't disappear out of my ICE overnight. People make mistakes, so this *is* a "legitimate" issue.
But it *is* there for a number of situations. It will require a bit of change in user behavior, but that's not wildly unusual for new technologies. It has some advantages and some disadvantages. Very few people drive beyond the range of the car for their total daily commute, even if you gotta run the heater/AC on high. Won't meet every situation, but it will meet most.
It doesn't need to cover every single situation that an ICE Accord/Camry do, in order to be a positive contribution to energy independence. There is no silver bullet for that. Are those of you gleefully pointing out the lack of away-from-home charging infrastructure equally gleeful about the lack of stations for cars that might run on natgas? Why the hyperventilating over ubiquitous charging stations so early in the technology? Sheesh.
Who kilt the electric car, it was a clear case of caracide, it killed itself...
" had the same amount of effort and money been put into clean energy from Carter's time until now then we would more than likely be talking about EV's in the past tense, as in already here and proven"
We did and it was called the John DOE or the Department of Energy...The only difference between death and government is, the latter takes a long time...
Tesla Driving Logs Contradict New York Times Claims
BY DAMON LAVRINC02.14.13
http://bit.ly/VTMoHL
" the EV-1 had about the same range as the Leaf does today, and was adopted early on by the "greenies" who took off their oil stained glasses and could see the benefit -"
Hell, 123, you can convert your current vehicle to an EV by simply watching a You-Tube video...
BTW, did not the oil industry issue a Fatawa on the elderly couple ?
I know, the oil companies also bought out all of those 100 MPG carburetors, as well...
What is going to drive EV sales, will be six to seven dollar per gallon petrol and until then once the hard core market has been satisfied there will be no one left...
You need a payback in about five years, or all the EV's will be referred to as "Old Sparky."
http://bit.ly/12NvCfg
http://bit.ly/11J3U3U
http://slate.me/Z0xRaq
http://bit.ly/11J3T00
http://bit.ly/Z0xU5T
http://bit.ly/XdPIbK
Consumer Report gave the vehicle high marks...I have a high regard for them....