Seeking Alpha

An opinion piece titled "The Other Government Motors" from the WSJ isn't too subtle about taking...

An opinion piece titled "The Other Government Motors" from the WSJ isn't too subtle about taking apart the Q1 profit Tesla Motors (TSLA +1.4%) reported as it hitched a free ride with U.S. taxpayers. The zero-emission tax credits Tesla can sell to other automakers and the generous $7.5K federal tax credits to motivate buyers are the big two complaints. But what isn't entirely clear is why other car companies selling EVs aren't lumped into the same discourse?
Comments (75)
  • SharkDude
    , contributor
    Comments (553) | Send Message
     
    Insane. People comparing this to GOOG and AAPL. Really??? They touch and affect over a billion people. TSLA? Tens of thousands. Incredible. You would like to think this country got smarter after Internet and housing bubble. Oh we'll. wishful thinking. It is a math problem people. Curb your enthusiasm.
    24 May 2013, 10:48 AM Reply Like
  • joenjensen
    , contributor
    Comments (637) | Send Message
     
    You should be aiming your disgust to the shorters in tsla, they are looking to make a killing without using much of their money, just a loan or two.

     

    Tesla is selling or leasing their technology to other car makers like Daimler, or Toyota and maybe BMW not sure, but other car makers have realized that they have been caught flat footed, so they have to get in the EV market with Tesla or stay out of it and not sell EV cars, that's just not acceptable to them.

     

    You were right about one thing though, the comment about wishful thinking......
    24 May 2013, 11:09 AM Reply Like
  • Steve Funk
    , contributor
    Comments (574) | Send Message
     
    joen,
    "other car makers have realized that they have been caught flat footed"
    You keep saying this long enough in the hopes that it will be true. All the major manufacturers have active R&D in EV's, all have built an EV, all have built battery packs, and there are more EV patents by manufacturers OTHER than Tesla. I dare you to spend some time on Google Patents and learn the truth that many of the Tesla patents were bought from others, including Daimler (that was probably part of their equity buy in). Tesla is not going to win on technology, the car business is a fashion business.
    24 May 2013, 01:31 PM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    Steve,

     

    You are wrong about everything you wrote except one: car business is a fashion business and TESLA is Armani.

     

    Everyone else is GAP.

     

    This is the hottest car in the world. Best performance. Best service. Free gas.

     

    Keep pi$$ing into the wind and tell everyone how it will never work.
    24 May 2013, 02:02 PM Reply Like
  • chfp
    , contributor
    Comments (531) | Send Message
     
    Funk -- "All the major manufacturers have active R&D in EV's, all have built an EV, all have built battery packs, and there are more EV patents by manufacturers OTHER than Tesla."

     

    A patent is not technology. It doesn't necessarily even have to exist in prototype. It's an idea protected by a legal framework. Those R&D depts at the established auto makers didn't put anything on the market until Nissan's Leaf and Chevy's Volt. I would have expected someone of your stature to understand the chasm that separates ideas and execution. Tesla is successful because it has executed Musk's vision incredibly well. Pooh-pooh it all you want, just don't sulk when you finally realize all that you'll have missed out on.
    25 May 2013, 01:13 AM Reply Like
  • Steve Funk
    , contributor
    Comments (574) | Send Message
     
    "A patent is not technology"
    Actually it is. You can't patent theory. The USPO used to require models for that very reason. A person skilled in the arts needs to be able to build the "thing" from the patent description (and it must work).
    7 Oct 2013, 04:17 PM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1798) | Send Message
     
    Steve,
    There chfp is correct, patents don't have to show existing prototypes or even show that they work. Patents are essentially a clerical function. There are many perpetual motion machines that are award patents each and every year.

     

    Please google Stanley Meyers patent for proof.
    22 Feb, 04:10 PM Reply Like
  • Steve Funk
    , contributor
    Comments (574) | Send Message
     
    Dan,
    "Patents are essentially a clerical function. "

     

    This is not really true either. Getting a patent might be a clerical function but in order to prosecute a patent it needs to be "useful". In order for it to be useful it needs to be operative. Check out the legal requirements: http://bit.ly/1cFkup4

     

    I just glanced at several Stanley Meyers patents. You are going to have to explain how these several patents prove anything. Just because someone is issued a patent does not mean it is legally binding if they did not adhere to all the legal requirements above.
    23 Feb, 05:57 PM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1798) | Send Message
     
    Essentially your statement was the the USPO requires models and a skilled person should be able to build it from such models.
    Stanley Meyers "patented" a perpetual motion machine. There are quite a number of these that get patented every year.

     

    So long and short of it, Perpetual motion does not exist. If it did, say goodbye to gasoline.

     

    He received quite a number of patents. There are also others that have done such patents.

     

    https://www.lhup.edu~dsimanek/museum/paten...

     

    I'll give you a current case; EESTOR, they say they have an ultracap. Well, no one has been able to mimic it as of yet and most capacitor people say it is impossible, sure the theory is there, but even EEstor has yet to publish findings.
    24 Feb, 05:29 PM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1032) | Send Message
     
    Cause the Tesla shorters probably didn't short the other companies - don't complain if your not losing money, right? - and the fact that people believe Musk and the things he says, that must really stick in a few people's craw -
    24 May 2013, 10:49 AM Reply Like
  • nigebj
    , contributor
    Comments (45) | Send Message
     
    The article includes all the normal rants, and the typical level of partial information. Seems like being a successful business or business owner is something to be vilified in today's America.

     

    That government is investing in trying to change the direction of an industry which is outdated and self-serving is a good thing - that so many seem to consider this more scandalous than other massive waste in government is truly sad.

     

    The government is outspending income by much more than the whole TSLA loan on a daily basis and THIS is the fiscal focus that WSJ wants to highlight ... hmm.
    24 May 2013, 10:56 AM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2482) | Send Message
     
    And right on cue, a bunch of people holding Tesla stock jump to the company's defense. Don't love your investments, it makes you less objective. Tesla had a good quarter, but they aren't going to get bought by Apple, or Google, or any other flashy tech company. They get government money, but so what? Cash is cash.
    24 May 2013, 11:13 AM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    Mike,

     

    1. Agree that Tesla will no be acquired by Apple or Google b/c Musk controls the largest block of shares and he won't do anything until after GENIII launch.

     

    2. They get gov't money? Huh?

     

    Can you please explain what GOVT money you refer to?
    25 May 2013, 11:31 AM Reply Like
  • Think-before-you-type
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    The article is moot, because the high-end model would still have as many sales with or without the subsidy.
    24 May 2013, 11:20 AM Reply Like
  • terraine
    , contributor
    Comment (1) | Send Message
     
    Don't bet against Musk. He's the next Henry Ford and Steve Jobs all wrapped into 1 person. Or maybe he really is Tony Stark...
    24 May 2013, 11:22 AM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    I... am... Li-Ion Man!
    24 May 2013, 01:48 PM Reply Like
  • ying778
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    I am confused, I thought Americans like "Made in America" and "Jobs in America"? Keep spending $$$ at the pump every couple of weeks, I'm waiting patiently for my Model X in the great white north.
    24 May 2013, 11:22 AM Reply Like
  • Steve Funk
    , contributor
    Comments (574) | Send Message
     
    ying,
    This will confuse you more. The US and Canada bought several car companies (GM and Chrysler) and are now subsidizing Tesla. Why subsidize one company to take business from another company that you and your friends (UAW and Canada) own? When you get government involved in production planning you are bound to get confused.
    24 May 2013, 01:07 PM Reply Like
  • oldpartsnrust
    , contributor
    Comments (284) | Send Message
     
    Steve, this is due to the investment in the future, while still supporting the existing jobs during the change.... Think bigger.
    24 May 2013, 02:04 PM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    Or they aren't in "production planning" but in "give everyone money, the bankers busted the financial system".

     

    Bush put the ATVM program in to disrupt FORD, GM and big labor.

     

    The fact that it is backfiring on a Democrat is only amusing as a side note.

     

    Tesla WILL disrupt organized labor. But most likely Bush will get blamed.
    24 May 2013, 02:05 PM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Ying,

     

    Yeah, it's confusing to me as well. However what really confuses me is how energy independence achieved by raping our country to obtain every bit of petroleum and natural gas, no matter how dirty and poisonous to our environment, is great, yet finding the investments for achieving energy independence through the use of renewable resources (solar, wind, hydro, wave, etc.) is like puling teeth... could it be that once the renewable plant is set up, the "fuel" itself is free? I'm sure that scares the crap out of petroleum companies.

     

    Tesla stock is way overpriced right now based on conventional thinking, no argument there. But it's the intangible, the disruption that the Model S, X, and Gen III will bring to transportation industry that is driving some, if not most, of this increase, and that's not going to stop. Yes, other big traditional auto manufacturers have EV's in the works, but if you think that Musk and Tesla are going to be sitting on the hands in the interim, you're deluding yourself.

     

    Barring some catastrophe (or setup), Tesla will continue to be the model to which all will aspire for some time to come. After the Gen III, Musk may sell, probably to Daimler, but I don't believe his exit strategy will be achieved until EV's are no longer the exception, but the rule... in fact he's said as much in earlier interviews.

     

    I'm long Tesla and Solar City and I wouldn't bet against Musk... not only is he a genius, but he's built a team with awesome credentials and he has more than a few friends in high places...
    24 May 2013, 02:28 PM Reply Like
  • ying778
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    Agreed on your points. Not smart to bet against great leadership, although I am concerned Musk isn't travelling with security detail or in an Ironman suit...

     

    Tesla should be celebrated as everything good about the US of A. Hooray for living the American dream and making a very expensive product that people actually want to buy right?

     

    Hey shorts, keep shorting and spreading FUD. Thanks in advance, you're paying off my Model X.
    25 May 2013, 03:29 AM Reply Like
  • ying778
    , contributor
    Comments (66) | Send Message
     
    Not sure what my friends in Canada are doing with my tax dollars, but I'm sure a lot of jobs were saved... I'm also one of those tree hugging hippies from the west coast, I like fresh air and greenery... and the smug satisfaction that I can out muscle almost anything else on the road :)

     

    Long $TSLA.
    25 May 2013, 03:32 AM Reply Like
  • clarkhenry
    , contributor
    Comments (2) | Send Message
     
    Think of WSJ as a prime media outlet and lobbyist for "The Establishment".
    Think of Tesla and it's shareholders, fans and supporters as the spiritual equivalent of the anti war movement in the 60's/70's.
    Taking this further, WSJ becomes Dow Chemical, the Chicago Democratic National Convention, the Selective Service System.
    The Tesla Movement represents Peace, Make Love Not War, Youth, Change For The Better, Flower Power.
    And the youth that participated in the Peace Movement in the 60's and 70's are the middle age and older individuals who are investing considerable amounts in Tesla stock right now because it's something they believe in and they believe that Elon Musk believes in. They're doing it for altruistic reasons and because they have an overwhelming feeling/belief that what he is doing is not only right, but it's brilliant, open, honest and will change the world.
    24 May 2013, 11:25 AM Reply Like
  • Continental Kid
    , contributor
    Comments (197) | Send Message
     
    Yeah right.....
    25 May 2013, 09:55 AM Reply Like
  • cjanvrin
    , contributor
    Comments (6) | Send Message
     
    Whats wrong with having a good business plan that is profitable, produces a quality product and creates possibly thousands of jobs.

     

    I just don't get why everyone wants Tesla to fail, or maybe its those who didn't get in while the getting was good!
    24 May 2013, 11:25 AM Reply Like
  • RUCE88
    , contributor
    Comments (51) | Send Message
     
    I'm an electrical engineer and thus familiar with the TESLA approach.
    I read the other day a piece criticizing TESLA due to the added electrical power generation needed for all these EVs. Naturally the writer chose nuclear generation as an example of how polluting TESLA is. Conveniently forgotten is the chain of solar charging stations TESLA is building. Electricity (unlike combustion engines) can be generated in a renewable, clean way (solar, wind, hydroelectric to name a few). Get used to the future.
    Yes, I own a few TSLA shares (disclaimer).
    24 May 2013, 12:19 PM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    @Ruce88,

     

    The grid has gotten cleaner in the past, and plans are to replace the dirtiest (CO2 & emissions) with renewable, natural gas & nuclear.

     

    By scrubbing the grid 10%, you are cleaning the emissions of every car on the road.

     

    If you own solar or there is solar power at your work, then your miles are carbon-free.
    24 May 2013, 02:10 PM Reply Like
  • moto head
    , contributor
    Comments (137) | Send Message
     
    If the solar charging stations are solar, why are they connected to the grid?
    25 May 2013, 09:49 AM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    Solar charging stations are grid connected because that is the law.
    25 May 2013, 11:34 AM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Plus the money made by Solar City through selling the power back to the Power Company... probably quite a batch right now with the current amount of Teslas on the road!
    25 May 2013, 04:05 PM Reply Like
  • Upyourassets
    , contributor
    Comments (267) | Send Message
     
    Moto,

     

    Not only because of the law. They also help stabilize the grid.
    26 May 2013, 12:30 AM Reply Like
  • hsimlexx
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    Actually, the demographics of Tesla buyers are people who put solar on their roof.
    24 May 2013, 12:19 PM Reply Like
  • hsimlexx
    , contributor
    Comments (4) | Send Message
     
    Actually, the demographic that buys Tesla cars also purchases solar installations on their homes.
    24 May 2013, 12:19 PM Reply Like
  • Randy Carlson
    , contributor
    Comments (1247) | Send Message
     
    Of a time the WSJ was the ultimate source of thoughtful, dispassionate, insightful discourse on financial, economic and investment matters.

     

    Unfortunately that time is long past.
    24 May 2013, 12:37 PM Reply Like
  • tech01x
    , contributor
    Comments (639) | Send Message
     
    Continental Kid, I assume you haven't followed the sometimes extensive conversation with respect to Tesla, EV's, and emissions. Most of us here fully understand the level of pollution that still exists in electricity production. This has been discussed at great length.

     

    It is however, still better to burn fossil fuels at a power plant than burn it in your car. BEV's provide the freedom to obtain electricity from many sources including sources that do not burn fossil fuels and from largely domestically produced energy. Even if 100% of your electricity comes from the dirtiest of the major electricity production sources which is coal, the overall pollution level is still lower for the equivalent car and therefore is still worth it. Tailpipe emissions is not the whole story, but that doesn't mean that it isn't worth it to shift from gasoline powered cars.
    24 May 2013, 12:39 PM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    @continental Kid

     

    You and the rest of your navel gazing brethren are confused.

     

    There are greenhouse gasses which will eventually kill everyone and there are emissions from your tailpipe that will kill you in 15 minutes if you turn your car on in a garage.

     

    You really need to understand the difference between those.
    24 May 2013, 01:59 PM Reply Like
  • oldpartsnrust
    , contributor
    Comments (284) | Send Message
     
    It's funny to see the newer commenters come on with their "where do you think the power comes from", "government subsidized toys for the rich" and other un-educated/un-informed repeated statements. Power plants are more efficient, can be cleaned up somewhat, and can use domestically produced fuel. Don't be afraid of change, embrace it.... You'll be able to breathe easier (literally).
    24 May 2013, 02:15 PM Reply Like
  • azgog
    , contributor
    Comments (157) | Send Message
     
    Tesla is a disruptive technology that represents a huge threat to both oil companies and ICE auto manufacturers. These are very powerful industries and they have lots of money to spend trying to make Tesla fail. Same reasons that the EV1's were taken out to the desert and crushed while leaseholders offers to purchase them were refused. The status quo and financial interests of the 1% have overcome the innovative, inventive side of the American people and so damaged our democracy.
    24 May 2013, 02:31 PM Reply Like
  • Glenn Abrett
    , contributor
    Comments (1371) | Send Message
     
    No -- the 1% now want to own Tesla's!! Musks plan was brilliant -- the silicon valley tech titans rule the planet and they say let Tesla prosper. Nothing the old oil and auto companies can do except watch as the new tech juggernaut which is tesla turn them into roadkill on the technological highway to the future.
    24 May 2013, 05:13 PM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Kid,

     

    My power comes from about 98% renewable here in the Pacific Northwest, counting hydroelectric... even with that I'm considering building a Solar array in the third of an acre in my back yard I'm not using, especially when I buy my Tesla.

     

    Not everybody in this country uses fossil fuels for their electrical needs and as the technology advances, even fewer will (if we can fight the coal and petroleum lobbies more effectively).

     

    The farther west you come in the US, the cleaner the power becomes... do a search for the Antelope Valley project and you'll see a part of the future. It's just a part of the solution, but the technological advancements are very encouraging. There are many potential answers that will eliminate the need for the power plants that burn fossil fuel in the foreseeable future. Hopefully the US will be a major exporter of this clean tech. We need comments like yours to alert people to how dirty their power currently is and that it can be replaced by methods that don't pollute, can't run out of fuel, and will ultimately be less expensive.
    24 May 2013, 02:53 PM Reply Like
  • Ed Lewis
    , contributor
    Comments (62) | Send Message
     
    Right on, but you don't have to go farther west than Colorado to find one of the fastest growing, per population, amounts of solar power installations (residential and industrial) being undertaken in the US.
    24 May 2013, 11:02 PM Reply Like
  • Tesla Revolution
    , contributor
    Comments (136) | Send Message
     
    That's where Natural Gas comes in. It's much cleaner than oil or burning coal. Yes, fracking is dirty but it's already done and we have enough LNG for a long long time.
    24 May 2013, 02:55 PM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Rev,

     

    Natural Gas is great from a powerplant perspective and if no more fracking is required, we might as well take advantage of what has been done. But I am 100% against any more fracking being done in this country or any others. I don't think we've even begun to experience the consequences of what's already been done to some of the most pristine parts of our country. There are better, cleaner, and soon to be less expensive ways of obtaining the power we need and people need to know about them before any more toxic chemicals are pumped into the ground.
    25 May 2013, 03:17 PM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Kid,

     

    One more thing... if all you used to charge your Tesla was a Supercharger, then your Model S for all intends and purposes would be solar powered because the Supercharger themselves are... even in the areas that have coal burning plants.
    24 May 2013, 03:01 PM Reply Like
  • Glenn Abrett
    , contributor
    Comments (1371) | Send Message
     
    wsj ownership is the same as fox news -- Rupert Murdoch. New Corportation. Its pretty sad. Talk about the government rolling over to large enterprise -- we are supposed to have laws against foreign (australian) ownership of major us media but in the case of the WSJ the government made an exception. Murdoch probably had some dirt on some high ranking us official gotten from hacking their cell phone like they did in UK.

     

    If that piece wasn't the pot calling the kettle black I don't know what is.
    24 May 2013, 05:10 PM Reply Like
  • Joe Dirnfeld
    , contributor
    Comments (1128) | Send Message
     
    Glad government got ithe money back, so now by can invest it in Iraq and Afghanistan
    24 May 2013, 05:34 PM Reply Like
  • Jim 1776
    , contributor
    Comments (23) | Send Message
     
    Well my electricity here in Seattle is 96% hydroelectric and wind. Less than 1% is from fossil fuels. It is also some of the cheapest electricity in the country. Is that OK with you or do we all have to live like you? Tell me an EV doesn't make sense for people in PNW and we will see who's the dummy?
    24 May 2013, 05:35 PM Reply Like
  • pat45
    , contributor
    Comments (292) | Send Message
     
    U guys funny. TSLA gets totally funded by government--other car makers do not get their biggest carbon incentives yet--but will soon--wish none got it--I hate paying for the rich peoples cars--especially when they create as much or more pollution than normal cars--you should too. When TSLA available I will short it..now only up due to squeeze
    24 May 2013, 06:25 PM Reply Like
  • dennisg13
    , contributor
    Comments (129) | Send Message
     
    No clue.
    24 May 2013, 06:35 PM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    pat45,

     

    1) It was a loan, not a grant

     

    2) THEY JUST PAID IT OFF, WITH INTEREST, LONG BEFORE IT WAS DUE!

     

    I hate to yell, but as Dennisg13 just wrote, you have no clue. Maybe when you learn how to write you'll get one, but unfortunately I highly doubt it.
    25 May 2013, 12:00 AM Reply Like
  • chfp
    , contributor
    Comments (531) | Send Message
     
    Continental Kid -- "a gallon of gas work will take a 2500 pound car 25 miles or more with the radio on.....
    so get to work...and let us know how its going....dummy"

     

    Your overconfidence in your misinformation is telling of your ignorance. Ironic how you insist on calling others "dummy".

     

    A gallon of gasoline burned in a CCGT to create electricity will move that same car over TWICE the distance compared to an ICE. Small gasoline engines (a V8 in a car is considered miniscule compared to a power plant) are 10-15% efficient. In other words, they lose up to 90% of the energy in gasoline to heat and other inefficiencies.

     

    But forget about gasoline for a minute. The average US electrical production is comprised of less than 50% coal. That means over 50% is NOT generated by coal, and the contribution from renewable sources grows every year. How is it so challenging to understand that a 100% dirty energy source (gasoline) is far worse than electricity that's <50% generated from coal?
    25 May 2013, 01:24 AM Reply Like
  • Continental Kid
    , contributor
    Comments (197) | Send Message
     
    What did I state that was not fact...or was misinformation as you put it...?....a gallon of gas will take the average car 25 miles with the radio on.....it has a great distribution network....it works night and day....what was not FACT!
    25 May 2013, 10:03 AM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Kid,

     

    While it is a FACT that wind turbines are responsible for the deaths of birds, let's put it into perspective:

     

    Man-made structure/technology - Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)
    Feral and domestic cats - Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
    Power lines - 130 million -- 174 million [source: AWEA]
    Windows (residential and commercial) - 100 million -- 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
    Pesticides - 70 million [source: AWEA]
    Automobiles - 60 million -- 80 million [source: AWEA]
    Lighted communication towers - 40 million -- 50 million [source: AWEA]
    Wind turbines - 10,000 -- 40,000 [source: ABC]

     

    This chart came from http://bit.ly/12EBu6V ... interesting read, I would recommend it. While I don't like any animals being killed for our power needs, the difference here is in orders of magnitude, so much ado about not very much (that seems to be the case with many critics of alternative energy).

     

    And as for your desire for an energy source that's easily stored, that's one of the ways that we use the dams on the rivers... because of our grid, we can regulate the amount of energy from those turbines to take advantage of alternative sources such as wind and solar, so they are in effect our "battery."

     

    Open your eyes Kid, there are much better ways of creating and storing power than the production and use of petroleum... it's only advantage currently is convenience, and even that is changing rapidly.
    25 May 2013, 04:01 PM Reply Like
  • Surf Dog
    , contributor
    Comments (825) | Send Message
     
    What's disgusting is the Oil Subsidies!!!

     

    Compared to them, what Tesla gets is Chump Change!!!
    25 May 2013, 02:45 AM Reply Like
  • antiguajohn
    , contributor
    Comments (72) | Send Message
     
    According to an 2002 DOT study 80% of Americans drive less than 40 miles per day.

     

    lets postulate that Tesla averages at least 200 mile range, now that's a very low estimate and lets further consider that in the next few years, with the trend of battery capacity increasing by 7% per year and battery cost shrinking by 8% per year that Tesla's vehicles will hit 400+ miles range, other manufacturers will have 200+ miles range.

     

    Now assume that when you wake up every morning, solar and wind have provided the the first 200 miles of every EV or PEHV, how much oil will the oil companies sell?

     

    Yup! That's right ............... practically none!

     

    If you are in the fossil fuel business ..... be afraid .... be very afraid!

     

    antiguajohn
    25 May 2013, 02:57 AM Reply Like
  • Continental Kid
    , contributor
    Comments (197) | Send Message
     
    You really think that solar ...which at the best latitudes produces 9 to 10 hours of recoverable light...is going to suffice.?...how many square miles of solar panels would be required to power ....say...LA....the wind can help some...read the Washington Times or USA Today on bird kill counts.....these can help no doubt....but aside from nuclear......which has all sorts of issues good and bad......fossil fuels will still be the largest ...most efficient...energy source in our lifetime....don't hate the player...hate the game.....
    Some people love fashion....some love love practicality.....that's where two sides of this argument differ
    25 May 2013, 10:21 AM Reply Like
  • wipster
    , contributor
    Comments (161) | Send Message
     
    Kid,

     

    Using the Antelope Valley Solar Project as a template, they are able to power over 400,000 residences and they're located on a 3,230 acre site. There are 640 acres in a square mile and ~13, 434,000 homes in CA. That means the amount of land required for enough solar panels to power ALL of the homes in CA would take approximately 170 square miles. That doesn't take the homes that either have or are installing solar panels on their roofs into consideration and it also doesn't include businesses.

     

    Regardless, given that CA is 163,707 square miles big, it would take just a little bit more that 1/1000 of their land mass to hold the solar panels required to power ALL of their homes using the technology available today. If we, be it through VC money or government funds, were to put some serious money into both solar power and energy storage, we could probably reduce that amount by 80 or 90% in 10 years or less.

     

    I don't know about you, but I would far rather achieve energy independence for the US using a method where the fuel is free, be it solar, wind, wave, hydro, or any combination of them. That's where we need to put our money, not in giving tax breaks to the petroleum companies.
    25 May 2013, 04:41 PM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1798) | Send Message
     
    Continential kid,

     

    You may be interested to know that there is a "portable" solar charger that is projected to sell for less tha $4,000 that can obtain the daily driving range needed for the average EV ( if you drive, go to work and set it up, you should get 40 miles per day out of it.
    They demo-ed it on a Roadster, it looks like it can barely fit into the Model S trunk, but hey, its self sufficient power, no need to rely on "dirty fuel" as you say.

     

    I'm certain quite a few people who may purchase it just to decrease their grid emissions
    26 May 2013, 05:42 AM Reply Like
  • Michael Bryant
    , contributor
    Comments (5369) | Send Message
     
    Bird kills by wind turbines? I bet more birds die crashing into windows. Think about all those glass skyscrapers. Even the large window in the two story building at my university is known to have several bird kills a year.
    2 Jun 2013, 10:48 PM Reply Like
  • Ed Lewis
    , contributor
    Comments (62) | Send Message
     
    Thousands of birds are killed each year because some large towers refuse to turn off lights at night.
    3 Jun 2013, 11:00 AM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1032) | Send Message
     
    It is already having an impact - SCE and SDGE are changing their rate time structure - from 10am-4pm (peak) to the new 12pm-6pm (peak) - why? -because just the little amount of solar already installed is effecting their bottom line, so they have arranged to rob solar producers of 30% of there peak $$ benefit - it is okay (not really) but they need to increase their revenues so as to cover expenses - the same will happen to EV's as the governement need to cover highway costs - it is the cost of improving the environment, so be it -
    25 Feb, 11:40 AM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1032) | Send Message
     
    and we could save even more money not having to invade other countries -
    25 Feb, 11:41 AM Reply Like
  • Dan Fichana
    , contributor
    Comments (1798) | Send Message
     
    This article was brought to you by the WSJ; the same folks who employ a political scientist, who is a rabid anti-environmentist, who was brought up on scientific dishonesty charges and claimed "mea culpa" and weaseled his way out of it because he had to admit he had no scientific training in hard sciences, yet he still writes books and articles concerning environmental issues, and WSJ still refrences him.

     

    Umm, yeah; good idea to trust anything they say
    25 May 2013, 07:49 AM Reply Like
  • Michael Bryant
    , contributor
    Comments (5369) | Send Message
     
    (TSLA) is not going away. It is not going to die. But both people long and short need to be realistic. How many +$1 billion market cap stocks rise 100% in a month? Did the company's fundamentals improve 100% in a month?

     

    My feeling is that the stock will be flat or have a 20% correction in the next 6 months or a year. Eventually, people are going to take profits.

     

    Any no, it will not reach $100 billion in 10 or 20 years.
    25 May 2013, 08:20 AM Reply Like
  • oldpartsnrust
    , contributor
    Comments (284) | Send Message
     
    @kid... it's called the sun, and it powers the entire planet.
    25 May 2013, 10:22 AM Reply Like
  • ddharriman
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
     
    If Tesla produces 30,000 cars this year how much is Tesla worth?

     

    If Tesla produces 50,000 cars in 2014 how much is Tesla worth?

     

    If Tesla produces 100,000 cars in 2015 how much is Tesla worth?

     

    Start running some simulations and you see that Tesla could be worth a lot. And that's before we go out 10-20 years. You might be underestimating $100B.
    25 May 2013, 11:43 AM Reply Like
  • Michael Bryant
    , contributor
    Comments (5369) | Send Message
     
    @dd:
    "If Tesla produces 30,000 cars this year how much is Tesla worth?

     

    If Tesla produces 50,000 cars in 2014 how much is Tesla worth?

     

    If Tesla produces 100,000 cars in 2015 how much is Tesla worth?

     

    Start running some simulations and you see that Tesla could be worth a lot. And that's before we go out 10-20 years. You might be underestimating $100B."

     

    Why not you run the simulations and post them here?
    2 Jun 2013, 10:50 PM Reply Like
  • Continental Kid
    , contributor
    Comments (197) | Send Message
     
    Dd ...your love of Tesla is blinding you...combined F and GM are not a 100 billion in market cap.....you need to slow your roll...Tesla had one ok quarter....but the market allows for all opinions...so go ahead and scoop up all the tesla you can afford
    26 May 2013, 04:30 PM Reply Like
  • pwwade
    , contributor
    Comments (31) | Send Message
     
    Those who hate EV subsidies need not fear.

     

    1. The subsidies are proportionate to popularity. No one is buying EVs (%.5 of all cars sold this year, as EV haters are eager to point out). So tax payers currently pay very little for the subsidy. Of course this COULD change if someone starts selling an EV that is attractive to the average buyer. Then you would really have to fight the subsidy. Or cash in your princlples and buy the EV yourself.

     

    2. They are freely available. Any clever car maker can have access to this free, government money. All they have to do is make and sell EVs in addition to their regular cars. And if it’s a really good EV, they can grab quite a lot of this free money (see #1, above).

     

    3. Although this EV subsidy seems like a prescriptive, foolish gamble, American governments are in good company. Almost all liberal democratic states and national governments (and even a few non-elected governments, like China) offer similar grants to EV makers. Maybe they are wrong, but these are not “basket-case” nations who don’t understand their own economies. They currently represent the wealthiest, most progressive, modern and powerful nations on earth. Up in Canada, we are a little more used to government prescription. Our governments hate paying for our health problems, so we have huge taxes on cigarettes. Basically, although we love cigarettes, our governments hate them. EV subsidies are a bit like this. Most people hate EVs. Most governments love them. At least we aren’t forced to buy them (although I wish I could afford a model S).
    26 May 2013, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • Michael Bryant
    , contributor
    Comments (5369) | Send Message
     
    Who said we hate EV subsidies? I for one prefer them over oil subsidies.
    2 Jun 2013, 10:52 PM Reply Like
  • Continental Kid
    , contributor
    Comments (197) | Send Message
     
    Israeli electric car company pulled its plug this weekend.....Better Place was the company name.....started in 2007....they had even set up electric service stations all over Jerusalem to help the customers...who never showed up....after spending 200 million ...and unable to find other investors they are now going BK......much like Fisker...or Solendra.....or any of the solar companies that touted revolutionary technologies since the early 80's......again power density and availability is the problem....things will improve in the industry....but til then...keep tight stop limits on your Tesla......we have seen this story before
    26 May 2013, 07:56 PM Reply Like
  • PeterJA
    , contributor
    Comments (2109) | Send Message
     
    You have never before seen an EV win near-universal acclaim as the best car ever, or its maker revolutionize sales and service, build Supercharger stations, and do a capital raise like Tesla just did.
    http://seekingalpha.co...
    This story is new in history.
    26 May 2013, 10:35 PM Reply Like
  • Continental Kid
    , contributor
    Comments (197) | Send Message
     
    Yeah...I know....It's different this time......
    27 May 2013, 08:28 AM Reply Like
  • 123man
    , contributor
    Comments (1032) | Send Message
     
    No, it no different than any other company who defied the "objective" opinions of those who dislike what is actually "happening" -
    27 May 2013, 11:40 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Tools
Find the right ETFs for your portfolio:
Seeking Alpha's new ETF Hub
ETF Investment Guide:
Table of Contents | One Page Summary
Read about different ETF Asset Classes:
ETF Selector

Next headline on your portfolio:

|