What Makes the Tesla Roadster Stand Out?

[baywax]

Check it out!

The Tesla... range, 400k, performance 0 - 100k in 3.7 seconds... sleek and wow... re-charge off your regular outlet... or solar or wind...

Electric Tesla Roadster makes Canadian debut
Fri May 28, 3:45 PMThe electric Tesla Roadster is now available to Canadian drivers with a passion for fast sports cars and a concern for the environment.

The Tesla is billed as the only electric, highway-capable, high-performance vehicle in the world.

The Roadster consumes no gasoline and can accelerate from zero to 100 km/h in 3.7 seconds. It has a top speed of 200 km/h, no tailpipe emissions, and sells for $125,000.

What makes the Tesla unique, besides its performance, is its range of nearly 400 kilometres on a single charge. The vehicle can be plugged into any standard electrical outlet or also be charged with solar, hydro or wind energy.

The first Canadian customers took delivery of their Tesla Roadsters this week.

The company is planning on opening a dealership in Toronto.

The whole story...

http://ca.news.finance.yahoo.com/s/28052010/3/finance-business-electric-tesla-roadster-makes-canadian-debut.html

 

[Chi Meson]

What makes the Tesla unique, besides its performance, is its range of nearly 400 kilometres on a single charge. The vehicle can be plugged into any standard electrical outlet or also be charged with solar, hydro or wind energy.

A breakthrough! The Tesla can be plugged into water!

I've got water!

:snarky:

 

[magpies]

Ya and I got a bunch of wind mills...

 

[baywax]

A breakthrough! The Tesla can be plugged into water!

I've got water!

:snarky:

We've got more than enough water here. Haven't seen sun for 3 weeks. Its really hard trying to plug into a rain drop.

 

[Proton Soup]

if they could get the price of these down to a Corvette, i think they'd sell

 

[baywax]

if they could get the price of these down to a Corvette, i think they'd sell

The top package for a Chevy Corvette is something like this

Corvette ZR1 1SD Package

$142,980 MSRP*

Then you add the gas to run the baby.

The Tesla is running now at about $125,000 with no gas required and a recharge costing a few cents. Also, no noise, air pollution.

I wonder though if more people will be endangered by the silent nature of these electric vehicles. As it is you can hear a Corvette or Lambo coming at you... unless you have your ipod earpods blasting in your ears.

 

[mheslep]

The Tesla is running now at about $125,000 with no gas required and a recharge costing a few cents.

$101,500 after the $7.5k tax credit.
https://www.teslamotors.com/own

 

[baywax]

$101,500 after the $7.5k tax credit.
https://www.teslamotors.com/own

A little extra info is that it costs about 5 dollars to recharge the battery and its a 4 - 6 hour re-charge.. but there are ways to shorten that..

And there's more...

If you plan to buy a family car in the near future, Tesla’ Model S, an all electric family sedan might interest you. Tesla Motors CEO, Elon Musk says Model S is cheaper than it looks. It is likely to be priced at $56,400. It can carry seven people and travel 300 miles per charge.

The charger is carried on board, and the recharge can be done from any 120V, 240V or 480V outlet. The Model S is indeed very spacious and it can accommodate a 50-inch television, mountain bike and surfboard simultaneously. In fact, the packaging is done efficiently and it gives Model S more trunk space than any other sedan and more than most SUVs as well. The production for Model S will begin by 2011 and the distribution will start by 2012.

[URL]http://www.greenzer.com/blog/blog_image_store/2009/03/tesla-model-s-sedan.jpg[/URL]

http://trendsupdates.com/tesla-model-s-an-electric-family-sedan-will-be-out-by-2012/

 

[russ_watters]

A little extra info is that it costs about 5 dollars to recharge the battery and its a 4 - 6 hour re-charge...

Unfortunately, there is a pretty enormous hidden cost to operate it not seen there: At $36,000 to replace the battery and a predicted lifespan of 160,000 km, that's $88 per charge. Of course, the cost of the first battery pack is built into the cost of the car, but you could always buy yourself $36,000 worth of gas upfront, when you buy a regular car too.

 

[mheslep]

A little extra info is that it costs about 5 dollars to recharge the battery and its a 4 - 6 hour re-charge.. but there are ways to shorten that..

Well a full charge requires 53 kW-hrs of electricity. The average US rate of $0.10/kWh does give ~$5 per charge, but in Ca where most of the Roadsters are sold the rate is http://www.eia.doe.gov/electricity/epm/table5_6_b.html" , or closer to $8 per charge. Anyway the energy cost per mile for EVs generally runs about 3X less than gasoline, and it is fair to assume that margin will grow, not decrease.

 

[mheslep]

Unfortunately, there is a pretty enormous hidden cost to operate it not seen there: At $36,000 to replace the battery and a predicted lifespan of 160,000 km, that's $88 per charge. Of course, the cost of the first battery pack is built into the cost of the car, but you could always buy yourself $36,000 worth of gas upfront, when you buy a regular car too.

Yes, though 1) that limited lifespan is due to Tesla's use of traditional laptop style Li-ion batteries providing ~400 full discharge-charge cycles, and 2) seven years from now a 53 kWh battery will likely cost much less based on current trends, maybe $20,000.

Make that same 53 kWh battery from the LiFePO battery chemistry used in the Nissan Leaf or the Chevy Volt and the lifespan would be a minimum of 790,000 km (http://www.a123systems.com/a123/technology/life" charges * 395 km), with many batteries living past 1,100,000 km. In that case we would have the reverse problem of how to decouple the remaining battery value from the end of life vehicle value, which leads to battery swaps, battery leasing, etc, etc.

 

[baywax]

Unfortunately, there is a pretty enormous hidden cost to operate it not seen there: At $36,000 to replace the battery and a predicted lifespan of 160,000 km, that's $88 per charge. Of course, the cost of the first battery pack is built into the cost of the car, but you could always buy yourself $36,000 worth of gas upfront, when you buy a regular car too.

After the gulf spill I'm not going to even attempt to calculate the cost of a litre of gas in terms of environmental, economic and other upheavals... please feel free to work in those expenses... my guesstimate is that $36,000 worth of gas = about 1 litre. : ' •

 

[baywax]

Yes, though 1) that limited lifespan is due to Tesla's use of traditional laptop style Li-ion batteries providing ~400 full discharge-charge cycles, and 2) seven years from now a 53 kWh battery will likely cost much less based on current trends, maybe $20,000.

Make that same 53 kWh battery from the LiFePO battery chemistry used in the Nissan Leaf or the Chevy Volt and the lifespan would be a minimum of 790,000 km (http://www.a123systems.com/a123/technology/life" charges * 395 km), with many batteries living past 1,100,000 km. In that case we would have the reverse problem of how to decouple the remaining battery value from the end of life vehicle value, which leads to battery swaps, battery leasing, etc, etc.

I like the battery leasing idea that Nissan came along with... as long as they don't round up all the EVs and trash them like they did in the 70s/80s. (see: "Who Killed The Electric Car")

 

[russ_watters]

After the gulf spill I'm not going to even attempt to calculate the cost of a litre of gas in terms of environmental, economic and other upheavals... please feel free to work in those expenses my guesstimate is that $36,000 worth of gas = about 1 litre. : ' •

Well that's just utter crap. The Gulf of Mexico produces some 500 million barrels of oil a year at a value of $40 billion. The spill will end up costing probably under $10 billion to fix. It's barely a drop in the proverbial barrel.

You think that those lithium batteries carry no environmental cost of producing them? How much of that $36,000 battery cost do you think is to pay for the gas/oil it takes to produce it?

It's nice to be an environmentalist, but environmentalism has to be rational, otherwise you risk ending up doing more harm than good.

As much as it costs, I'd be shocked if there actually was any environmental advantage to driving a Tesla over a Prius.

 

[mheslep]

I like the battery leasing idea that Nissan came along with... as long as they don't round up all the EVs and trash them like they did in the 70s/80s. (see: "Who Killed The Electric Car")

Nissan decided against battery swap and leasing. It is Nissan's sister company, Renault, that is coming out with a battery swappable vehicle, the Fluence, next year along with the swap station operator Better Place. Renault is the only company doing swap so far, aside from a few niche fleet van and truck makers. Swap appears hard to do well technically, but I see no other choice to make pure, non-hybrid, EV's feasible in the large scale.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Well that's just utter crap. The Gulf of Mexico produces some 500 million barrels of oil a year at a value of $40 billion. The spill will end up costing probably under $10 billion to fix. It's barely a drop in the proverbial barrel.

There is no evidence available yet about the extent of the damage, both short and long-term, to the ecosystems of the gulf, so your claim is completely unsupportable. In short, it is utter crap.

 

[russ_watters]

There is no evidence available yet about the extent of the damage,both short and long-term, to the ecosystems of the gulf...

Well that's completely wrong. There is lots of evidence - I'll bet you read a news article every day that discusses it! And there is a week old thread in P&WA with much relevant discussion/evidence: https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=418994

I seriously doubt that BP will provide ongoing cleanup at a high burn rate for an extended period of time because the oil is disappearing. Right now, it is looking like the actual cleanup cost will end up well under $10 billion.

As of about 1 month ago, they hit $3 billion, including financial damages (payouts so far have been small, so it isn't a substantial fraction of the cleanup costs yet): http://www.aolnews.com/article/bps-spill-tab-tops-3-billion-as-cleanup-picks-up-again/19541845

...and the cleanup cost was $10 million a day at least in May: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/bp-says-oil-clean-up-costs-10-million-per-day-2010-05-09

With the oil disappearing, there isn't much left for cleanup crews to do. So actual cleanup costs will probably end up well under $10 billion. Economic damage will be tougher to gauge, but the evidence so far points to well under the doom-and-gloom initial predictions. I'd be surprised if BP ever has to fill up that escrow account it opened.

In short, it is utter crap.

Um, well, ok - are you saying then you agree that the environmental cost of gas production is $36,000 a litre? Interesting choice of which cart to hitch your wagon to, Ivan.

Could we please stop with the rediculousness in here? I know this is just GD, but this thread was actually semi-technical/factual a few days ago.

 

[mheslep]

As much as it costs, I'd be shocked if there actually was any environmental advantage to driving a Tesla over a Prius.

I believe just the opposite. We've been through this in other threads. The overall environmental impact of the energy and materials used in constructing a vehicle is smaller than the energy and emissions expended during operation over its life. They'll be some exceptions, maybe SOx emissions from electric power plants for instance, but overall it is no contest; the pure EV is much cleaner. I'll run it down again if you like.

Note: this is not to say that I look at the Gulf spill and conclude oil transportation must end immediately; I do say that I'd put a heavy environmental finger on the oil side of a cost balance between oil and electric transportation.

 

[mheslep]

See here: http://web.mit.edu/sloan-auto-lab/research/beforeh2/files/kromer_electric_powertrains.pdf"

A recent study out of Argonne National Labs (ANL) [Moon et al 2006] modeled the embodied energy and GHG emissions for a range of vehicle technologies. Their results estimate that vehicle embodied energy accounts for about 21% of total lifecycle GHG emissions and 18% of total energy use in a conventional spark-ignition vehicle – a sizeable piece of the total. However, the difference between different powertrain technologies is only a fraction of this amount.

Kromer et al goes on to state that GHG emissions and energy used in making the vehicle ('embodied' as they call it) increase 1-2% for an HEV like the Prius, and 2-2.5% for a PHEV like the Volt.

 

[baywax]

As much as it costs, I'd be shocked if there actually was any environmental advantage to driving a Tesla over a Prius.

I think if we stacked up the number of birds killed by wind power generators, loss of agricultural land to dams, loss of agricultural land to solar power farms and the potential damage posed by nuclear power generators all used to provide the electricity that charges the Tesla...

we might be even steven with the enviromental damage oil brings with it..., the wars, the economic downturn for the marine industries etc... etc... the 32 billion in the bank for compensation... the 17 billion on clean up...

 

[russ_watters]

I believe just the opposite. We've been through this in other threads. The overall environmental impact of the energy and materials used in constructing a vehicle is smaller than the energy and emissions expended during operation over its life. They'll be some exceptions, maybe SOx emissions from electric power plants for instance, but overall it is no contest; the pure EV is much cleaner. I'll run it down again if you like.

While I agree that that is typically true, the difficulty I see here is that the Tesla is extremely expensive. So where does that money go? Is the fraction of a car's cost that is used to pay energy bills fixed or is the cost itself fixed?

Kromer et al goes on to state that GHG emissions and energy used in making the vehicle ('embodied' as they call it) increase 1-2% for an HEV like the Prius, and 2-2.5% for a PHEV like the Volt.

Ok - and the Prius uses probably half the gas of a typical car, while only costing a small amount more, so the "embodied energy" would be about 40% of the total lifecycle emissions, right? And a Tesla is around 5x the cost. So the question I asked above has a big impact on whether the Tesla is really better than the Prius.

Remember, most of those other discussions we had focused on whether a Prius was better than normal cars in lifecycle emissions. I don't have any trouble accepting that it is. But Prius vs Tesla would be an entirely differerent issue.

The Tesla gets a lot of hype probably largely for the coolness factor. But the Volt is really the car to watch.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

Ok - and the Prius uses probably half the gas of a typical car, while only costing a small amount more, so the "embodied energy" would be about 40% of the total lifecycle emissions, right? And a Tesla is around 5x the cost. So the question I asked above has a big impact on whether the Tesla is really better than the Prius.

My wife has an '06 VW Jetta TDI (turbodiesel engine), and that car is very sweet. On top of that, it gets very similar mileage to my friend's Prius (38-42 for the TDI, 40-45 for the Prius), a lot better pickup, and no battery pack to boot. After driving the TDI I would have a tough time ever buying a Prius, the VW is a much more fun car (and a lot better looking than a Prius IMO).

That being said, if I was millionaire I would buy a Tesla Roadster in an instant just for the cool factor. I wonder what a 10 year old one will cost down the road...

 

[Topher925]

While I agree that that is typically true, the difficulty I see here is that the Tesla is extremely expensive. So where does that money go?

It goes into the car and the batteries. You have to remember that this thing has as much carbon fiber as an A380 in order to keep the weight down. Plus its using other exotic materials all over the place such as very expensive rare Earth metals in the motor to keep the power density up. During the prototyping phase, Tesla had a lot of troubles dealing with the weight of the batteries and not having the car fall apart when it took a hard turn.

One thing to keep in mind that this thing is a very expensive and streamlined golf cart, not a race car. [/QUOTE]

The Tesla gets a lot of hype probably largely for the coolness factor. But the Volt is really the car to watch.

Absolutely.

the VW is a much more fun car

I'll keep my opinions of VW's to myself, but excluding the battery the Prius will outlast the VW. Well...assuming the brake pedal works and you don't drive the thing into a wall.

 

[mheslep]

While I agree that that is typically true, the difficulty I see here is that the Tesla is extremely expensive. So where does that money go?

For the most part I expect it goes to the overhead of running a manufacturing rate of some ~800 vehicles per year (vs a big three 2-400k per year per model) The Tesla Roadster is a stunt, great for demonstrating technology, not for demonstrating that we've worked out all the problems with wide spread EV use.

 

[mheslep]

... Plus its using other exotic materials all over the place such as very expensive rare Earth metals in the motor to keep the power density up. [...]

While the Prius uses permanent magnet motors (i.e. rare Earth Neodymium or Dysprosium), the Roadster's motor made by AC Propulsion is variable frequency 3-phase induction, all induction with no permanent magnets. Motor power density is about 4kW per kg.

One thing to keep in mind that this thing is a very expensive and streamlined golf cart, not a race car.

A 0-60mph in 3.7 secs golf cart.

 

[Mech_Engineer]

I'll keep my opinions of VW's to myself, but excluding the battery the Prius will outlast the VW. Well...assuming the brake pedal works and you don't drive the thing into a wall.

Well, the important thing to keep in mind is that regular maintenance makes a big difference in a car's lifetime.

Overall driving feel matters to me as much as any any vehicle trait. We shopped for a car for about a year, and test drove Priuses (Prii?), Toyota Corollas, Ford Fusions, VW's, Subarus, Chevys, etc. etc. In the end we decided the Prius is about as fun to drive as a golf cart (that is, not fun at all), and the Ford Fusions are surprisingly good. But, it was hard to beat the bargain of a used '06 Jetta TDI in terms of mileage, price, driving feel, and interior aesthetics.

But that's just us, your results may vary

 

[baywax]

But the Volt is really the car to watch.

I'd agree that the Volt is the more affordable and therefore the car that will perhaps begin a popular change toward alternate energy sources.

The Jetta TDI really is economic on fuel and is pretty cool.. as far as der folksenvagon goes.

 

[Jasongreat]

But the Volt is really the car to watch.

Lucky for us we can grab a pair of binoculars and watch them all the way from when they take off on a full charge until it runs out of juice.

Imo, the tesla is the more realisticly priced of all electrics. Atleast the two tesla's have a decent range, look good, and are exciting to drive. It will take atleast a 300 mile range, at a minimum, before an electric car can be sold to the masses. That is sold without massive government coersion/extortion.

I just returned from a 1500 mile trip, in these electric cars my trip would have went from a 24 hour drive each way to a one week trip. Stopping every 5 hrs for 4 hrs to recharge, doesn't sound very fun to me. I think for people in cities, who don't travel, never have to carry a load, pull a trailer,or drive off road, the current crop of electrics may make sense, for the rest of us they have a ways to go yet, but the tesla's are the closest attempts so far.

 

[mheslep]

I just returned from a 1500 mile trip, in these electric cars my trip would have went from a 24 hour drive each way to a one week trip. Stopping every 5 hrs for 4 hrs to recharge, doesn't sound very fun to me. I think for people in cities, who don't travel, never have to carry a load, pull a trailer,or drive off road, the current crop of electrics may make sense, for the rest of us they have a ways to go yet, but the tesla's are the closest attempts so far.

This might speed things up a bit in the future. 60 seconds and you are on your way again.
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2009/05/better-place/

 

[dilletante]

I have owned a Tesla roadster for about year now and would like to throw in my two cents. Most of the opinions expressed here have merit, but different people have different reasons for buying cars.

Russ is correct that the total operating costs for the Tesla, especially considering battery replacement, are high. But people don't buy $125,000 cars to save money. I thought it was cool that a bunch of geeks in silicon valley could beat the big automakers to the punch, and I like to support innovation. There is a cost associated with early versions of products, and these costs tend to come down over time. I can buy a computer today for $500 that would run rings around a $3000 computer from days past. I don't think it is fair criticism to say the car is overpriced -- of course it is, they have only made 1,000 of them. Chances are they will go out of business, but without Tesla you would probably be waiting a long time for the Volt and the more practical cars that will succeed it. They embarrassed the big automakers into innovating.

As for the environmental aspect, perhaps the first electric cars will not be champs but later ones will be. Like it or not, gasoline-powered vehicles are on the way out. Oil will eventually run out, whether in 50 years or 500 is not so important. My feeling is that while cars can run without oil, airplanes cannot, so as a practical matter it would seem wise to save oil for things that have to use it.

I doubt that anyone owns a Tesla as their primary vehicle. As a mode of transportation, it is a novelty. It isn't going to solve the world's environmental problems, and it isn't a luxury vehicle. It is difficult to get in and out of, isn't all that comfortable, has a barely adequate sound system, a weak air conditioner, and doesn't go very far. But it is a lot of fun, is paving the way for the future, I suspect is a lot cheaper to operate than a Bentley, and when you hit the "gas", you go very fast.

 

[mheslep]

I have owned a Tesla roadster for about year now and would like to throw in my two cents. Most of the opinions expressed here have merit, but different people have different reasons for buying cars.

Russ is correct that the total operating costs for the Tesla, especially considering battery replacement, are high.

Could you in what way operating costs are high, aside from battery replacement?

As for the environmental aspect, perhaps the first electric cars will not be champs but later ones will be.

Why do you suspect even the first EVs are not great environmental improvements?

My feeling is that while cars can run without oil, airplanes cannot, so as a practical matter it would seem wise to save oil for things that have to use it.

Airplanes can also run on biofuels, and maybe fans/batteries if the batteries improve sufficiently some day.

 

[dilletante]

Could you in what way operating costs are high, aside from battery replacement?

Why do you suspect even the first EVs are not great environmental improvements?

Airplanes can also run on biofuels, and maybe fans/batteries if the batteries improve sufficiently some day.

I think I expressed myself poorly. The day-to-day operating costs are very cheap, and the car gets a perfect score on emissions so the environmental cost of operating the car is small also. I love driving by gas stations.

There is the matter of battery cost and replacement to consider, however, in lieu of fuel. The Tesla battery is rated for about 100,000 miles. In a normal car which gets perhaps 25 miles per gallon, at $3.00 per gallon you would spend about $12,000 for fuel over that period. With the Tesla you need to add the electricity cost to the cost of the battery, so one could say that costs to operate are higher.

On the other hand, I would expect far fewer things to go wrong and fewer repairs over the lifetime of the Tesla as compared to a normal car. The transmission is just a one-speed, and even the brakes are used sparingly since regenerative braking slows the car without using the brakes. It is really a simple vehicle and I anticipate few problems. So perhaps that makes up for battery cost.

Also, Tesla offers a battery replacement option which is considerably cheaper than the original cost of the battery. I suspect they feel that by the time you have logged 100k miles, batteries will be much cheaper.

From an environmental standpoint, I would like to think that the Tesla is a step in the right direction. It does however use more than 6000 lithium batteries and I do not know what the environmental impact is of producing or disposing of those.

 

[mheslep]

There is the matter of battery cost and replacement to consider, however, in lieu of fuel. The Tesla battery is rated for about 100,000 miles. In a normal car which gets perhaps 25 miles per gallon, at $3.00 per gallon you would spend about $12,000 for fuel over that period. With the Tesla you need to add the electricity cost to the cost of the battery, so one could say that costs to operate are higher.

Sounds right. The Roadster should cost about $1 worth of electricity for the same 25 miles, or 1/3 a gasoline vehicle. The Roadster battery is expensive as Tesla put 220 some miles worth of battery in, and used laptop style batteries. If Tesla had gone with a 100 mile battery (like the Nissan Leaf, Renault Fluence), the battery cost amortized over operation would have run no more than another $2 for 25 miles, breaking even with gasoline at today's price, and saving $ if gasoline goes up, which of course it will.

On the other hand, I would expect far fewer things to go wrong and fewer repairs over the lifetime of the Tesla as compared to a normal car. The transmission is just a one-speed, and even the brakes are used sparingly since regenerative braking slows the car without using the brakes. It is really a simple vehicle and I anticipate few problems. So perhaps that makes up for battery cost.

Yes I've noticed this even in my hybrid with regen brakes - the brake wear is almost nil. So instead of ~3 brake jobs over the life of the vehicle I might need only one, or even none.

Thanks for sharing your Roadster experience. Enjoy the ride.

 

[mugaliens]

Sounds right. The Roadster should cost about $1 worth of electricity for the same 25 miles, or 1/3 a gasoline vehicle. The Roadster battery is expensive as Tesla put 220 some miles worth of battery in, and used laptop style batteries. If Tesla had gone with a 100 mile battery (like the Nissan Leaf, Renault Fluence), the battery cost amortized over operation would have run no more than another $2 for 25 miles, breaking even with gasoline at today's price, and saving $ if gasoline goes up, which of course it will.

mheslep, yours is a very good reminder that market economies will render whatever new technologies at least as expensive as any technologies currently on the market, unless the availability of those technologies are rendered public, vs proprietary (patented).

I'm sorry to break the news, folks, but while the patent system does protect investors, it also hampers progress.

The Tesla remains, however, one very cool car.

I'll never be able to afford it, though. Good Luck, Mr. Leno (he probably already owns one :)

 

[mheslep]

Good Luck, Mr. Leno (he probably already owns one :)

Of course, 1st off the line.
http://www.jaylenosgarage.com/video/2008-tesla-roadster/229378

 

[Sixdeuce062]

Tesla was a very peaceful man and kinda a pacifist but i think he would use some of his more dangerous inventions to keep these guys form ruining his name these nothing special about this car to even earn teslas grace let alone name but it is pretty

 

[mheslep]

... these nothing special about this car to even earn teslas grace let alone name but it is pretty

Using no petroleum is not special? Fastest 0-60mph production electric in the world? Not special?

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

Using no petroleum is not special? Fastest 0-60mph production electric in the world? Not special?

Add to the list this car will blow the doors off everything (straight off the show room floor) except some of the real exotic cars. Yet this is nothing special.

 

[Sixdeuce062]

Ok what I meant was a( an electric motor has been put in a vechicle and functions outstandingly better than an ICE and it has been done for over 80 years B) has nothing to do with tesla or his achivements C) the only thing that sets this above and beyond is the power system and the type of batteries its has have been out for a while in labtops( very expensive). I am not saying its a bad car but its what I have been saying for years electrolyic cell powered cars are not cost effective or practical unless some one stumbles across and compound that holds an awsome amount of power and is cost-effective, its just a pipe dream. Now that's not saying that an electric "driven" vechicle is bad I am all for an electric motor moving my car but not battery powered. I have build two cars like that, you just waste money form start to finish compared to what you get out of them

 

[baywax]

The Tesla company has a rival (history repeats itself)

http://www.sce.com/Feature/Obama-EV-Tech-Center.htm"

 

[OmCheeto]

I have owned a Tesla roadster for about year now and would like to throw in my two cents. Most of the opinions expressed here have merit, but different people have different reasons for buying cars.

Russ is correct that the total operating costs for the Tesla, especially considering battery replacement, are high. But people don't buy $125,000 cars to save money. I thought it was cool that a bunch of geeks in silicon valley could beat the big automakers to the punch, and I like to support innovation. There is a cost associated with early versions of products, and these costs tend to come down over time. I can buy a computer today for $500 that would run rings around a $3000 computer from days past. I don't think it is fair criticism to say the car is overpriced -- of course it is, they have only made 1,000 of them. Chances are they will go out of business, but without Tesla you would probably be waiting a long time for the Volt and the more practical cars that will succeed it. They embarrassed the big automakers into innovating.

As for the environmental aspect, perhaps the first electric cars will not be champs but later ones will be. Like it or not, gasoline-powered vehicles are on the way out. Oil will eventually run out, whether in 50 years or 500 is not so important. My feeling is that while cars can run without oil, airplanes cannot, so as a practical matter it would seem wise to save oil for things that have to use it.

I doubt that anyone owns a Tesla as their primary vehicle. As a mode of transportation, it is a novelty. It isn't going to solve the world's environmental problems, and it isn't a luxury vehicle. It is difficult to get in and out of, isn't all that comfortable, has a barely adequate sound system, a weak air conditioner, and doesn't go very far. But it is a lot of fun, is paving the way for the future, I suspect is a lot cheaper to operate than a Bentley, and when you hit the "gas", you go very fast.

Something probably lost on people just watching from the outside. I went to an electric drag race last year and was rather ho-hummed by the lack of noise.

For example, listen to this image:

But the following video made me wonder; "How many people under the age of 30 have been in a car that could hit 60 mph in less than 4 seconds?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nxF0-HQB5I&hl
It's no wonder us old people don't think bicycles are the answer to the worlds transportation problems. We need to figure out how to put the big-grin factor into some of these equations.

And as far as future battery replacement costs, bad news for one of my stocks, and good news for EV drivers:

http://www.streetauthority.com/a/5-green-stocks-set-rebound-456659"
Friday, October 15, 2010
...
But A123 has another problem on its hands. A pair of giant lithium-ion battery makers -- Japan's Panasonic and Korea's Samsung -- has recently stated plans to radically boost spending to retain industry dominance. They also plan to cut prices to pursue market share, and that's a battle that relatively tiny A123 is ill-equipped to fight. So even as the company looks set to sharply boost sales in 2011 and 2012, gross profit margins may be so low that the company's operating losses fail to shrink. The key for a turnaround in this stock is a path to eventual profits. And until investors can see that path, shares are unlikely to rebound much.

And there I thought it was going to be China that I was going to have to worry about.

 

[Topher925]

And there I thought it was going to be China that I was going to have to worry about.

Nah, china is turning out to be not such a threat that people thought it would be. A lot of the chinese battery makers tend to exaggerate (or completely lie about) the performance of their batteries and OEMs that build electric cars/hybrids know this. Plus there's the ever concerning factor of safety.

So there's all the hubbub about the Tesla, why is no one talking about the Leaf?

 

[mheslep]

So there's all the hubbub about the Tesla, why is no one talking about the Leaf?

I noticed the EPA just released some new trial EPA window stickers especially for electric vehicles, including one for the Leaf. I was particularly interested to see if the EPA would venture into range estimates; they did, but not with any scrutiny and that smacks of pressure to make EVs look good. The EPA sticker has the Nissan Leaf's range at 100 miles which is nominal but grossly misleading, as the Leaf's battery lacks temperature controls meaning the range can be as low as 50 miles in the cold, which Nissan itself has admitted.

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/label/images/2010/labels-2-electric.jpg

 

[baywax]

I noticed the EPA just released some new trial EPA window stickers especially for electric vehicles, including one for the Leaf. I was particularly interested to see if the EPA would venture into range estimates; they did, but not with any scrutiny and that smacks of pressure to make EVs look good. The EPA sticker has the Nissan Leaf's range at 100 miles which is nominal but grossly misleading, as the Leaf's battery lacks temperature controls meaning the range can be as low as 50 miles in the cold, which Nissan itself has admitted.

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/label/images/2010/labels-2-electric.jpg

What is the temperature problem with batteries anyway. I remember Fuel Cell maker Ballard having to test their vehicles up here in Canuck land (where they were build for busses) to see if they could battle the effects of cold on their cells and there were some problems without any explanation.

 

[russ_watters]

Batteries lose capacity when it is cold. That's a fundamental chemistry problem.

 

[Physics-Learner]

i am not sure why there is so much hype about tesla. there are all sorts of companies coming out with electric vehicles (evs). gas car days are numbered. i think 10 years from now, few new cars sold will be gasoline cars.

 

[Topher925]

The EPA sticker has the Nissan Leaf's range at 100 miles which is nominal but grossly misleading, as the Leaf's battery lacks temperature controls meaning the range can be as low as 50 miles in the cold, which Nissan itself has admitted.

The Leaf does have temperature control for their batteries to an extent. Otherwise I don't think they would be allowed to put the car on the road. The biggest issue with the Leaf is that it uses air cooled batteries and not water cooling/heating.

Why is this a big deal? LiIon batteries have some major thermal management issues, mostly due to thermodynamic effects of the reaction switching between entropic heating and entropic cooling during discharge (it can put out heat or consume heat during discharge and charge). Couple that with the effects that heat has on dendrite formation and SEI formation, an air cooled LiIon battery doesn't seem like a very good idea. I believe one of the big shots and Tesla even stated that Nissan's battery technology is obsolete and outdated by 10 years.

However, by using an air cooled system, you can build a cheaper car. If you look at the design of the Leaf and taking into account things like the air cooled batteries and permanent magnet motor, its obvious that the car was built to a price point. Its also obvious by Nissan's sales demographic that the car wasn't meant to be operated in very hot or cold conditions and only in areas that have a relatively mild and uniform climate.

I remember Fuel Cell maker Ballard having to test their vehicles up here in Canuck land (where they were build for busses) to see if they could battle the effects of cold on their cells and there were some problems without any explanation.

PEM fuel cells will operate just find above 0'C although the power output will be decreased. The issue with PEM fuel cells that when water freezes in side of the cell it damages the internal components, most notably the interface between the catalyst electrode layers and the membrane. After a cell has gone through a freeze-thaw cycle a few times these two components will delaminate from each other and cause the cell to operate with reduced performance and can even completely kill it.

 

[Topher925]

Batteries lose capacity when it is cold. That's a fundamental chemistry problem.

Actually, the capacity remains almost the same. What happens is that the kinetics slow down. In other words processes like diffusion and migration limit the discharge rate of the battery so only the apparent capacity really decreases so its really a transport and not necessarily a chemical problem. The effective discharge capacity is decreased by temperature due to decreased conductivity of the electrolyte (creates more overpotential) but its usually diffusion effects that limit the range a battery has in an EV.

 

[Barwick]

After the gulf spill I'm not going to even attempt to calculate the cost of a litre of gas in terms of environmental, economic and other upheavals... please feel free to work in those expenses... my guesstimate is that $36,000 worth of gas = about 1 litre. : ' •

Do you KNOW the environmental cost to produce those batteries? It's absolutely insane. A Toyota Prius actually does more legitimate damage to the environment through its manufacturing methods than a similarly produced car does through its manufacturing AND entire lifespan of burning gasoline.

Not to mention the gulf oil spill wouldn't have happened if wackjob environmentalists didn't keep coming up with new ways to prohibit drilling in safe waters near shore, forcing companies to move into FIVE THOUSAND FEET deep water.

 

[mheslep]

The Leaf does have temperature control for their batteries to an extent. Otherwise I don't think they would be allowed to put the car on the road. The biggest issue with the Leaf is that it uses air cooled batteries and not water cooling/heating.

Why is this a big deal? LiIon batteries have some major thermal management issues, mostly due to thermodynamic effects of the reaction switching between entropic heating and entropic cooling during discharge (it can put out heat or consume heat during discharge and charge). Couple that with the effects that heat has on dendrite formation and SEI formation, an air cooled LiIon battery doesn't seem like a very good idea.

I was referring mainly to warming the battery in cold weather so that it doesn't temporarily loose capacity and thus limit the vehicle range. Cooling the battery in hot conditions is an issue for the reasons you detail, but then overheating causes a gradual reduction of battery life, and not a wake up one morning in N. Dakota and suddenly your vehicle range is cut in half scenario. Nissan could make good on shortened battery life in 3-4 years by replacing them; it can't help the guy in N. Dakota who came up 10 miles short from work.