Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, you seem to have misread the report you quoted. Germany's not-so-secret is lignite, a dirtier kind of coal supplying 16.8% of its electricity. Lignite together with traditional coal at 7.3% supplied 24.1% of Germany's electricity. [0] [0] https://strom-report.de/germany-power-generation-2020/
And steadily declining year on year. The next government is likely to feature the green party and possibly even a green party prime minister. IMHO that will set in motion an accelerated shut down of lignite and coal, which only narrowly got averted by the CSU in the current government (the CDU looked more likely to compromise on this). Even so, it will likely take a while. Otherwise the headline here is that renewabl…
Tesla Q1 2021 Results
431–440 of 591 posts
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In the European market the range advantage might not be a big deal, It wouldn't be a big deal if charging time was I do occasionally (once per month or two months) go somewhere that's 800km away. Driving at 180-200km/h avg speed and refueling once that's a 5 hour trip. If I have to drive at 120 km/h and charge multiple times I'm looking at > 8h trip or more. I also drive to some places at 300km distance or so for t…
Have you stopped to think about the insane infrastructure that goes into supporting car driving? There are millions of gas stations across the planet, that had to be built, then continually supplied. Not to mention the billions (?) of km of asphalt roads. We did all that in the 20th century. What's so impossible about building chargers? I don't get it. As for driving at 200kph, that's just dangerous (unless you're in…
I never said its impossible, I said that right now they are not there.
In the 18th century, without proper roads, between the choice of a car with wooden wheels and a horse, I'd have 100% of the time would have bought the horse.
---
> As for driving at 200kph, that's just dangerous
No, it isn't. Driving 120kph in the autobahn is more dangerous than driving 200kph. You are forcing everyone that wants to drive at the recommended speed of 130kph to overtake you with 10 kph speed difference, blocking 2 lanes. Add a truck to the situation to block a 3rd lane, and you have just created a big blockage in the highway, which is what causes most autobahn accidents. This makes _you_ one of the biggest dangers to others on the high way.
> Not to mention fuel inefficient.
It is, however, very time efficient.
If you want to trade fuel efficiency over everything else, walking is better than using a car.
The moment you decide that walking is not "fast enough" you are already making a trade-off between time efficiency and fuel efficiency.
Just because your time is worth less than most people's time and you prefer driving at 120kph, 10kph below the recommended speed, does not mean that most people agree with you. The traffic guidelines actually disagree with you, which is why they recommend at least 130kph.
---
> Either way let's assume most people just want to go at 120kph.
The recommended autobahn speed is 130kph. The slowest lane usually goes at 140-150 kph.
I don't see the point of making an assumption that's clearly incorrect.
> By all means, please go ahead and crash your car, that's your risk, I guess.
If you think that driving at 200kph is dangerous, I have to assume that you never took highway driving classes as part of your driving license, most of which force you to drive at high speed. A consequence of doing this is that your comfort speed goes up with enough training, so when you are actually driving at 160kph or so, you are driving 20% slower than what you are trained to drive, which makes it actually much safer.
If you only were trained to drive at 120 kph, and have never received trained to drive substantially faster than that, you are always driving at 100% of your training / skill level, which means small mistakes have larger consequences than if you have a 20% buffer of error.
So arguably, _you_ should be driving at 100 kph through national roads, instead of driving on the highway until _you_ receive proper training.
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#433Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…
But, don't we need less cars ? I'd be happier if Elon would actually be successful at removing cars. Why doesn't he build trains instead.
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think that if Tesla were to go belly-up because of some sharemarket issue, that it'd be very easy for all the other manufacturers to back off their BEV plans. Not necessarily outright cancel them, but just not push for it and possibly let it fizzle somewhat. They'd have the excuse that "Well, Tesla failed, and they were more valuable than all of us combined at one point, so... we'll just be more cautious" One major…
> Europe and the UK have put down standards and basically forced some level of interoperation between charging network systems, which reduced friction for EV owners. They standardized the connector, but the problem (at least in my area in Austria when I looked into it 2 years ago) was that there are so many competing charging networks with different contracts and pricing models that it was basically unusable. Near my…
> The fast charging prices were also so high that I'm not sure it's any cheaper than a gasoline car.
While it being cheaper than gasoline is a nice perk, I think it's more important to get a wider deployment of fast charging infrastructure (and that is dead easy to use).
Without massive deployments of charging infrastructure, it won't matter what it costs - people will not buy EVs if they've got no way to rapidly recharge.
Governments should also be incentivising deployment of on-street charging infrastructure for areas where off-street parking is difficult or uncommon.
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW, I drove a BMW 328i for 20 years. Paid $39,000 for it. Put 230,000 miles on it. I loved that car dearly. I replaced it with a Model 3 and put 70,000 miles on it so far. Paid $49,000 for it, which is in the mid-point of what you'd pay for a new 328i. It's even more fun to drive, with operating costs at about 1/4 the BMW.
The model 3 looks like a $25,000 car when you buy it new though, and that's my problem with it.
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#436Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…
But, don't we need less cars ? I'd be happier if Elon would actually be successful at removing cars. Why doesn't he build trains instead.
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#437Whatever you may think of Tesla and Musk, you have to agree that they've accomplished something rather incredible. Few would have thought this possible not that long ago: * 185K vehicle deliveries in Q1, +109% versus a year ago [a] * 2.7K supercharger stations, +41% versus a year ago * 24.5K supercharger connectors, +44% versus a year ago * 92 MW of solar generation deployed in Q1, +163% versus a year ago * 445 MWh o…
But, don't we need less cars ? I'd be happier if Elon would actually be successful at removing cars. Why doesn't he build trains instead.
Even then, all those projects are far away from profitability and heavily criticised. His car business offers both a credible option to reduce ownership (with a self-driving fleet) and finances his other ideas. Overall, he’s expressed interest in fast point-to-point transport and realism about how flying would be far more expensive, energy-wise, so I’m sure that, when he has the means, he’ll look into a rail-based option.
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right now Tesla is outperforming competition on three points: * 0-100km/h times * Range * Charging network I believe most people don't care about the 0-100 speed. And most people can live with a little less range. So this leaves the network as a selling point. I believe it depends on the country how important this is. For example in the Netherlands you can cross the whole country on one charge. So you don't need a ne…
> I believe most people don't care about the 0-100 speed. You say that, but almost every single person I've given a ride to in my Model Y has come away from the acceleration portion of the trip amazed and wanting more. Older men, young kids, soccer moms, teenage girls, all get that breathy expression when you effortlessly pass someone on the expressway. And this is a Model Y, one of the slowest Tesla's on the market.…
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we can all infer that when referring to mass market sedans, the super-sport model of one particular BMW is not what is being referred to.
The BMW M3 is a different car than the BMW 3 Series. An M3 is as much a 3 Series as an Alpina B3 is a 3 Series. It is ambiguous in this situation. I had to read the comment several times to figure out if it meant that somehow BMW was selling more M3s than the whole 3 Series lineup.
> I had to read the comment several times to figure out if it meant that somehow BMW was selling more M3s than the whole 3 Series lineup.
The whole 3 Series lineup is not in the same price segment as the M3, is it?
How could BMW sell more M3 cars than the total number of cars they sell in that price segment?
Re: Tesla Q1 2021 Results
#440"Model 3 was the best-selling premium sedan in the world, outselling long-time industry leaders such as the 3 Series and E Class. This demonstrates that an electric vehicle can be a category leader and outsell its gas-powered counterparts." I find this to be a major milestone in the transition to BEV. This is an achievement.
Why is Model 3 even considered as a premium? What makes it premium comparing to established German holy trinity (BMW, Merc, Audi)? It's average car at best, and with its notorious build quality standards it's not even an average.
As for build quality, my maintenance so far is $850 for a windshield. Cuz... I drive it so fast all the time, pebbles chipped away at it until it cracked down the middle. That's it.
I can also attest that operating costs are 1/4 the BMW. Energy costs, yes, but also $0 for brake pads (I'm at 90% after 70k miles), $0 for fluids (no oil, brake fluid, transmission fluid, radiator flush, ...).