froggey77

froggey77
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Dave
    My first post seems to have disappeared so I'll try again.
    Let me say thanks for pushing me.
    Too many times I get posts like Watching just gave.
    I hope he reads my answer to him when I get there.
    As I've responded to that same link a few other times and it's the 2012 version which they replace every year with the same misinformation.

    Unfortunately ORNL also often advocates as opposed to being impartial.
    To start with it is a WTW (Well to Wheels) study rather than a lifecycle study. WTW gets most of the major problems but ignores some large ones as well.

    "The WTW approach differs from a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), as it does not consider energy and emissions involved in building facilities and the vehicles, or end of life aspects."

    You can see where they would come to different conclusions.

    WTW
    "Makes no estimates of overall “costs to society” such as health, social or other speculative cost areas.
    Assumes all plants and vehicles to meet current and incoming future regulations, when considering regulated pollutants."

    This is where ORNL jumped the shark.
    From your link.
    http://bit.ly/1KU0peI

    "National Laboratory (ORNL) has found that, with a high PTW (pump-to-wheels) efficiency and the potential for high electrical generation efficiency with NGCC (natural gas combined cycle) turbines, natural gas currently is best used in an efficient stationary power application for charging EVs."
    ...
    "NGCC turbines are more efficient then most of the NG turbines on the grid.
    The efficiency for combined-cycle natural gas turbines ranges from to 36%-50.7% "
    (actually they now have some that can hit 60%)

    "They used 45% efficiency for the PHEV."

    By going to the ORNL website we find a graphic which says the turbine efficiency used for the EV was 51%.
    Slightly higher than the articles even says was possible.
    Yet the PHEV was only 45%?
    http://1.usa.gov/1RkEnlp

    A simple cycle gas turbine can achieve energy conversion efficiencies ranging between 20 and 35 percent.
    This is what most of the grid is.

    The grid efficiency is better now they used 8% loss and I've recently heard 5% loss for an average. But as it wasn't at the time I'd leave it unchanged.

    Next they used 5% efficiency loss in charging.
    Tesla is 15% loss and the leaf if I remember correctly is 10% loss.

    Cut ORNL turbine efficiency by half, add and remove 5% for charging a Leaf and you will find the numbers are very comparable. You can even add the 3% for grid efficiency if you want to bring it up to date.

    However this still ignores the fact that it is not a lifecycle study.
    Building an EV battery puts it far behind a CNG vehicle.
    Mar 1, 2016. 05:31 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Dave thanks for pushing me.
    Nearly all answers I get are the type Watching gave me.

    The ORNL is a Well to Wheels study
    "The WTW approach differs from a Life Cycle Analysis (LCA), as it does not consider energy and emissions involved in building facilities and the vehicles, or end of life aspects."

    Which explains the difference in CO2 answers.
    ....
    "Makes no estimates of overall “costs to society” such as health, social or other speculative cost areas.
    Assumes all plants and vehicles to meet current and incoming future regulations, when considering regulated pollutants."
    Mar 1, 2016. 03:15 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Car talk: Best cars and brands named by Consumer Reports  [View news story]
    Consumers Reports put out their 2016 Annual Auto issue.
    Tesla MS made the Worst of the Wort list Pg.83
    Years 12- 13- 15,
    2014 still has average reliability record.
    Actually the 2013 MS has only a worse than average rating.
    The 2012 and 15 have much worse than average rating.
    Still rated very high for customer satisfaction generally good ratings.
    Controls were worse than average which surprised me.
    Rear seats average. Front seats better than average.
    Ride noise and handling either better than average to much better than average.
    Feb 29, 2016. 10:14 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Filed Its 10-K - Here Are The First Highlights  [View article]
    SA can you fix the link problem Please.
    Mine are sending me to stock charts.
    Feb 29, 2016. 09:13 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • My Test Drive Of The Tesla Model X  [View article]
    MrBoylan
    "Fortunately the grid is moving away from coal and toward natural gas and renewables, making EV's more environmentally sound every year (coal accounted for 39% of national grid in 2014 and dropping). "
    Yes an EV on the grid will only kill twice the number of people an ICE will.
    "Scenarios with substantially decreased air quality-related health impacts compared with gasoline include gasoline hybrid vehicles (30% decrease) and EVs powered by natural gas or by WWS (50% and 70% decrease, respectively); scenarios with substantially higher damages than gasoline include corn ethanol (80% increase) and
    EVs powered by grid average or coal electricity (200% and 350% increase, respectively). "
    Perhaps now it is less than twice the killer ICE are.
    http://bit.ly/1I3d4wG

    This includes things such as ICE driving down the street and EVs making pollution miles away.
    But it doesn't include coal specific pollution such as airborne mercury, lead. and the like. Check the union of Concerned Scientists page on coal plants pollution.
    http://bit.ly/1Uv888v
    Feb 29, 2016. 07:20 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla: Do You Feel Lucky, Punk?  [View article]
    Jfsacal
    Still posting unsubstantiated clams for Tesla owners using solar panels.
    40% without proof.
    AS if it made any difference for the ones who don't.
    Feb 29, 2016. 06:51 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Dave
    "I do not regard damage to the environment as a showstopper for wind, but it is a substantial consideration and should be addressed as such instead of simply dismissed. The concern may be mitigated with better designs, which will not happen if it is swept under the carpet instead."

    I agree

    "I have responded to your arguments about EVs causing more damage than ICE cars in other threads."

    Yes
    I'm considering only what we have, what is happening with what we have and what is obviously near term. (Projects announced and to be completed in possibly 5 years.)
    What might happen sometime in the future is not to me a good reason to go ahead as if it is the future.

    You said
    "For China by far the biggest renewable energy imput over the next few years is to come from hydro.
    After that they have a the world's most vigorous nuclear program starting to reach critical mass.
    Underground coal gasification and the use of fuel cells can drastically alter the equation where coal use is important."

    At best the firs two fall into maybe someday in the future. The third, while in the future, will require a massive use of water an arid areas. (15 times what is used for coal processing and
    "China’s proposed SNG plants, most of them located in arid and semi-arid regions in Xinjiang and Inner Mongolia, together will consume a total of 500 to 700 million m3 of freshwater annually at full operating capacity. That’s almost 20% of the region’s total industrial water use in 2011. The plants would therefore significantly exacerbate stress in areas already experiencing chronic water shortages.
    http://tinyurl.com/h4u...


    "My own view is that generic positions on a global basis don't work, and one has to consider the precise circumstances of a more local area, for instance the Western USA.”

    Only if you can limit them to the areas which have clean enough grids to support them.
    How do you do this in the US?
    Ignoring the Climate Change NG issue. EVS cause more damage to the rest of the country than they clean up in the west.
    Twice as much using the average at present. How do you justify something to be sold nationally let alone globally that is far worse for pollution than what we have now?
    Elsewhere? Only islands and the rare country can do this. (such as Norway.)
    Also EVs front load pollution. Present grid is what will be making batteries for years to come.
    China’s grid and batteries? Great


    While I agree that your ideas are possible. IMO they are not what is happening or likely to happen in a reasonable time-frame.
    I think you are hoping for the future and I am looking at what is and the damage EVs do now and over this generations likely lifespan.
    Feb 29, 2016. 06:32 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Wired
    and if CO2 were the only pollution involved; that would be a good argument. As it's not even the only GHG involved let alone a host of others it really isn't.

    Please follow the link and read. I have a dozen or so long comments. Several other people have tried to pick it apart. If you have an argument I haven't answered or information to counter what I have said please post it. Or if you have a question.

    http://seekingalpha.co...

    I'm not an expert but I've been looking for a better answer for a while and haven't really found one. I would like to.
    Feel free to contribute. But post it there as others probably don't want me posting the same thing time and time again.
    Feb 28, 2016. 08:20 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Filed Its 10-K - Here Are The First Highlights  [View article]
    Anton

    Did you look at the leaking video?
    Here is the original.
    http://tinyurl.com/hot...

    When the wing is open there is a gap water and anything else laying on the roof, when you are parked, could potentially go through.
    you can see a clear shot of the gap in this video.
    http://tinyurl.com/j25...
    5min and 53seconds you can clearly see through it.
    There is no evidence of a seal of any kind there and its a good clear shot and you can match the colors with the building behind it.

    Here is a 2016 review.
    23 - 26 seconds in you can see a bit of the greenery behind it.
    What you can see changes as the camera moves.
    http://tinyurl.com/gum...

    They have taken something flat (The roof)and put it on its side (And lightly shook it) anything on it will fall on top of the midpiece of the MX. In a rain most of it will end up inside the car. Not to mention you now have approximately a 2ft vertical wall the will catch the rain blowing from the other side of the car. The rain it's self will come inside. in a heavy rain this would likely be a solid sheet of water coming inside and carrying any dirt with it. The rain will land in the middle of the first seat as it does in the original video. Anyone entering or leaving will have to go through a mini waterfall.

    Judging from the first video where it appeared the rain had already stopped the car was just wet.
    Even when you park inside, the likelihood of getting a dripped upon guest is high.
    Nobody will take important guests in this car if it might rain.
    Mom's with babies in the rain? No I don't think so.

    There is no gutter on the top of the MX.
    http://tinyurl.com/gum...
    (59 seconds in.)
    Could "Wings" be glued on? I don't know but I do know Tesla needs a fix and fast. These reports will go Viral.
    Feb 28, 2016. 07:36 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Dave
    Thanks for the link. I'll have to play with it.
    Feb 28, 2016. 05:31 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Bryce
    Pollution from EVs is an interest of mine. So that is where I often end up looking at it.
    Having glanced at the study a bit I have found I still have no idea what the Union of Concerned Scientists was talking about.
    It is a study of CO2 and replacing parts of the present grid with renewable.
    It is not a Lifecycle study as the UCS stated and with the generation of electricity grid claims an 80% reduction of CO2.
    I have no idea what the USC was trying to say then or now. But all I did was quote them.
    Feb 28, 2016. 05:28 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Is Stiffing Nevada On The GigaFactory  [View article]
    Bryce
    "I don't see how you can beat "free" over the long haul."

    I would have agreed with you yesterday or perhaps the day before.
    Here it something I ran into in the Union of concerned scientists 2016 report. As they are very EV and are Activists as opposed to independent scientists. Which leads me to believe they will put pro information for EVs and push Climate Change agenda.

    The first part of the note (Small print at the bottom of the page) was straight forward. In a Lifecycle study on EVs Vs ICE (as far as CO2 is concerned) they did not do a lifecycle study on Electricity which they did on everything else.

    They had this to say:
    "Many studies of the electricity sector’s emissions, including the two referenced in this chapter, are based on combustion emissions from electricity generation rather than full lifecycle emissions that are the focus of this report. They do not consider emissions from mining coal or extracting natural gas, for example."
    (The studies were ones they did themselves and were never published elsewhere.)

    However, the analysis by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory included an appendix that also considered the full lifecycle emissions reductions of their renewable scenario. While these emissions are harder to predict precisely, their analysis found that the level of emissions reductions on a full lifecycle basis were very similar or even slightly higher than emissions from generation (Hand et al. 2012)

    OK this is an 800+ page study, by 4 major national labs, on replacing the present electrical grid with 80% renewable energy and apparently concluded: After building it out it, the grid was maybe slightly cleaner than it is now?

    This doesn't seem possible but I'm going to have to look at it a bit.
    Unless somebody can change my interpretation. They do talk about EVs but not really more than a mention of ICE. I didn't see a comparison and again all they talked about was CO2. Anyway about time to leave.
    Feb 27, 2016. 11:30 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Filed Its 10-K - Here Are The First Highlights  [View article]
    Xonked
    This has been stated from the beginning. No I'm not going to look for it. However when you consider, Musk was looking at years of warranty work, before much of any income.
    Saying they would do off warranty work at cost wouldn't be a big deal for years anyway. Still Roadsters only I believe. They promised $100 ranger visits forever. That was dropped that in a year or two. Why not this?
    Feb 27, 2016. 10:43 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Filed Its 10-K - Here Are The First Highlights  [View article]
    Dave what do you think of Kandi?
    If EVs do well in China (I hope not ) but I like their business model but the possibility of their being a scam I consider real.
    They may do well and the stockholders not.
    I'm considering both calls and puts. Long term and seeing what happens.
    Feb 27, 2016. 10:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Tesla Filed Its 10-K - Here Are The First Highlights  [View article]
    DoubleE

    "With regard to the X dumping water, that is a flawed vehicle. There are many others that work as designed. It is a production flaw on that particular vehicle and not a design flaw like you hope it is"

    That's a possible argument.
    At least, it was good enough to intrigue me.
    Here is the original.
    http://tinyurl.com/hot...

    Notice at 6 seconds the lower part of the door gets out of the way and you can see from the far corner the top part of the door is above the roof line and the angle is downwards towards the middle of the car. At this time there is a gap you can see light through which gets wider for a bit. This gap gets to what appears to be an inch wide. Then gets smaller and the light completely disappears.
    All of this happens in just about a second.
    Before the light disappears the water is coming down in a stream.
    It continues after the light disappears and the crack seems to vanish.
    I would like to see this in close up and from a different angle but that's what we have. Is it possible the angle makes something appear to be true that isn't?

    Assuming what appears to be going on, is accurate, a piece of logic:
    Clearly the person taking the video expected it. Which means It's not an unusual or one off event for that car.
    As every parent knows if a child is sleeping
    "You Don't Wake the Baby." Let alone dump water on their head. My conclusion is that if it was only one side with a leaky gasket, the baby seat would be on the other side.
    Logic suggests the other side leaks as much or more.
    Two leaky seals? or
    is the car seat there as a bucket to keep it from leaking on the expensive seats?

    I went looking for videos to find the gap between the door and the roof.
    Different angle, something.
    http://tinyurl.com/j25...
    5min and 53seconds you can clearly see through it.
    There is no evidence of a seal of any kind there and its a good clear shot and you can match the colors with the building behind it.

    here is another one. a 2016 review.
    23 - 26 seconds in you can see a bit of the greenery behind it.
    What you can see changes as the camera moves.
    http://tinyurl.com/gum...


    This is not a one off problem. It's a mistake.
    They will all do that.
    In a real rain it will be much worse.

    How long did it take them to get the cupholder issue resolved?
    Feb 27, 2016. 10:22 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
3,022 Comments
1,393 Likes