Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

theunderstatement.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 284 posts

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#271

Post by runako »

Dinoguy1000 wrote: post #269
jdietrich wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First, before Tesla people thought of electric vehicles as ridiculous DIY golf carts driven by treehuggers. They were utterly uncool and stupid. Post-Tesla, electric cars are among the very coolest cars in the world. GE didn't do that. Nissan didn't do that. Toyota didn't do that. Tesla did. I think fundamentally changing people's perceptions of what an electric car is and what it can do is the single most impactfu…

Depending where in the US you look, the price of gas has done anything from less than doubling to increasing more than five-fold over the past decade.* It's not $8/gallon, but there are definitely places where you'd have to pay $4-6 per gallon, and it's only becoming more widespread. If there's one thing US citizens have shown, though, it's that they're perfectly willing to continue shelling out more and more money t…

This doesn't really match with the data collected in the 2007-2008 price spike. While the price of oil was peaking, US drivers demonstrated that they will change their behavior somewhere on the curve. Notably, miles driven started dropping well before the recession hit. I'm not sure what the breakpoint was, but I believe it was around $4/gallon. (Yes, gas cost much more in some places and is still above $4 now, but the relevant number is the national average, currently about $3.60).

So you're right that the rise in prices from ~$0.90 in 1999 to multiples of that do not impact demand significantly. However, there is a threshold above which American drivers will react.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#272

Post by yardie »

njharman wrote: post #270
yardie wrote: post #175

I'm more impressed by people that spend $100k on a car and then don't know how to take care of it. Do you know what happens when an ICE engine is left to sit for months? First the oil runs out to the pain and slowly evaporates. The cylinders might suffer some sticktion and possibly rust. And you've probably got small animals that have made a home in your engine block. The rubber in the tires will have deformed and ev…

> people that spend $100k People who spend that kind of money generally don't expect to have to do anything for themselves. That is why they pay 10x more.

You can't get anymore minimal maintenance than an electric car. If you're not using it leave it plugged in...and make sure your electric bill is paid up.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#273

Post by rue »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #179
rue wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might have to read that at some point. Offhand, it would seem that carpeting Sahara and comparable areas would give quite sufficient yields of solar energy, especially combined with nuclear. Feasibility is another matter, naturally.

The book suggests it might, but in general getting sufficient quantities of energy from renewables would require country-sized facilities.

There's a lot of unused land around, if circumstances ever get that dire.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#274

Post by rwallace »

cobrausn wrote: post #249
rwallace wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which makes it all the more important to find a way to get the Hummers and Escalades off the bloody roads.

Then the same roads as 18-wheelers and buses. Good luck getting those off the bloody roads.

18-wheelers and buses are fewer in number, highly visible and driven by professionals. They're a much smaller problem in practice.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#275

Post by stretchwithme »

rdl wrote: post #76
stretchwithme wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'd be far better off if government weren't subsidizing the automobile at all. Subsidizing mass transit to ameliorate the effects of subsidizing the automobile makes no sense. I don't think it needs to promote walking either. Most people are perfectly capable of understanding their own situations if we don't hide the costs and if they are allowed to learn from their own mistakes. It would be proper to tax things tha…

The main government subsidy for efficient automakers that I'd like to see is a commitment to purchase certain numbers of vehicles for federal fleets if they meet specific performance goals (including price). Same thing with state/local (possibly with some federal subsidy of local purchases of more efficient vehicles). Ideally without specifying how to make them more efficient, just overall cost per expected miles/yr…

And I'd be opposed to that. The federal government is so bloated, they probably have enough vehicles for the next ten years if they were to stop doing all the things not authorized by the Constitution.

Efficiency is not the only consideration when buying a vehicle. I, personally, don't want a vehicle that sacrifices safety for efficiency.

The government shouldn't be using pork or other inducements to bias the market towards one consideration. Consumers knows their own needs.

If government wants to promote efficient, it should start by being less wasteful itself. Right now its the worst example in human history.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#276

Post by dnissley »

fryguy wrote: post #259
jdietrich wrote: post #75

Tesla are a sideshow and we desperately need to stop talking about them, because they're harming efforts to improve energy efficiency. Nissan are now in full production of the Leaf, a practical electric car that's half the price of the Model S. Renault have the Fluence ZE on sale in Israel and ready to go internationally this year. Mitsubishi are selling the i-MiEV in quantity in Hong Kong and Japan. All of these big…

I think you're looking at this the wrong way. Let me make an analogy to a different market - hobby r/c aircraft. 10 Years ago, the only practical way to get certain sizes of aircraft was to use gas powered engines. Nowadays most people use brushless motors for everything, not because they think "hey these are better for the environment" or "these are more efficient", but because they are much more convenient and much…

Generating power at a central power plant (which can happen to be solar/wind/other renewable method rather than coal) and using that energy to power cars is much more efficient than having thousands of miniature power plants burning gasoline/diesel carrying people around town.

Here's the thing: this is bullshit.

Did you know that only about a third of the electricity produced at an electrical plant ends up making it to our wall sockets? (And that's not even calculating the efficiency of the appliances that use that electricity!) Compare that to an internal combustion engine (~1/4 of the energy getting converted into a mechanical form) and we're not really looking at much of an efficiency gain.

Proponents of electrical vehicles have simply not done the math.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#277

Post by cobrausn »

rwallace wrote: post #274
cobrausn wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the same roads as 18-wheelers and buses. Good luck getting those off the bloody roads.

18-wheelers and buses are fewer in number, highly visible and driven by professionals. They're a much smaller problem in practice.

In the city I live there have been a number of high-profile accidents involving buses and trains, buses and other buses, and buses and other traffic. The drivers may get an extra couple week course, but they are still driving a giant vehicle, and I don't even think many of the drivers are necessarily 'better' - if your entire population drives pretty much every day, then they are all effectively 'professional'.

The same goes for the 18-wheelers, as we often see quite a few accidents involving those on the highways. Sometimes people even walk away from these accidents when they are driving the bigger cars. The smaller ones... not so much. The fact remains that the larger, heavier cars are much safer when involved in accidents with cars even larger and heavier than they are - in most cases. There exist very well engineered and safe smaller vehicles, but that will only get you so far. I hope it gets better over time.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#278

Post by grannyg00se »

tptacek wrote: post #48
grannyg00se wrote: post #31

This is akin to leaving the headlights on when the car is turned off in a regular car. You're asking for trouble. (though not to the tune of $40,000) When the car is turned off, there should be some kind of indication of how long it will take to brick the thing. If that indication is days rather than weeks, it should yell at you. Loudly. At least that way all owners will know of the threat. The car will educate them.…

No, leaving the headlines on on your car is unlikely even to ruin your $100 car battery. You'll just need a jump start. The two situations are not at all comparable.

They are comparable in that they both have to do with batteries and something you have to think about when you leave your car. In one case the consequences are much worse, but the general idea is the same. When you leave your car, you could mess up your battery if you aren't thinking.

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#279

Post by grannyg00se »

jdietrich wrote: post #75

Tesla are a sideshow and we desperately need to stop talking about them, because they're harming efforts to improve energy efficiency. Nissan are now in full production of the Leaf, a practical electric car that's half the price of the Model S. Renault have the Fluence ZE on sale in Israel and ready to go internationally this year. Mitsubishi are selling the i-MiEV in quantity in Hong Kong and Japan. All of these big…

I don't see how anything you said indicates that they are harming efforts to improve energy efficiency. How is what they are doing harming what others do?

They're hardly a side show. They produced an all electric vehicle that costs over $100,000 to purchase. In decent quantities. With great reviews. And they're still in business.

I see your point about the SUV mentality but it's perfectly reasonable to have some businesses working against that mentality while other businesses try to work within that mentality. I don't think you can call either way The Wrong Way unless you can show persistent failure (or any failure at all).

Re: "It's A Brick" - Tesla Motors' Devastating Design Problem

#280

Post by grannyg00se »

pclark wrote: post #100

My confusion with Tesla is this: around the rest of the world - outside of USA - there are already very fuel efficient automobiles. 60, 80, even 90 miles per gallon are common and applauded in Europe. America has the opposite approach and appears to optimise for size, comfort and perceived safety. (SUVs, Trucks, large saloons.) None of the things American consumers appear to value are correlated in the Tesla. When I…

"None of the things American consumers appear to value are correlated in the Tesla. "

Here are a few: Fashion, Thrill, Exclusivity, Pride, Vanity, Technology.

Post reply on HN