back to article Tesla vs Media AGAIN as Model S craps out on journo - on the highway

Californian electric car maker Tesla Motors - well known for tangling repeatedly with the BBC (and the Register) over coverage of battery vehicles which it did not deem positive enough - is now in a row with the New York Times after one of the paper's journalists wrote a stinging review of its new Model S. Tesla Model S sports …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Re: Cold weather and cold batteries

Batteries work best at a relatively constant warm temperature, cold will kill the charge, heat will kill the battery itself.

Which is why they're pretty much doomed as a reliable energy source for vehicles sold anywhere other than SoCal.

0
0
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Cold weather and cold batteries

EvilGav 1 asked: "...what do we do about the excess heat we have when the temperature is at the other end of the scale?" having skipped over the cooling concept already described thus:

"Add controlled air ducts for infinite air cooling when required..." (<- copied and pasted from my previous post),

In other words, a thermostat. Controlling the air ducts (with tight little doors). Thermostatically controlled air ducts just a little bit like those in an air cooled engine found in a 1957 VW Beetle.

Good insulation to keep the battery pack warm with insignificant power, but (as was already described) open some air ducts if it needs to be cooled.

Rocket Science this is not. Sometimes I wonder about you humans.

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Cold weather and cold batteries

Opening air ducts does not constitute "infinite cooling".

0
0
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Cold weather and cold batteries

AC: "Opening air ducts does not constitute 'infinite cooling'."

What is this? ...'Failure of Imagination' Week?

The car designer, assuming that he/she has obtained a brain and had it installed, could EASILY arrange for the battery pack to be both highly insulated (so that it would require only a few watts of power to keep it toasty warm on a dark and stormy night), and equipped with selectable air ducts (with uC controlled doors) that could provide effectively ten times more air cooling than would ever be required (effectively "infinite", same as if the battery pack were not insulated at all). The concept of a controllable air system in no way impedes the required cooling. Not even close. 30+dB margin.

The fact that a cold battery pack in the frosty morning is a apparently a real world problem when the electric car is ***still connected to the National Electric Grid*** is crystal clear evidence of just how f-in stupid these car designers really are. Perhaps they all live in Southern California and don't get out much... Daft.

Cold batteries in electric cars is a stupid design flaw that is trivial to fix for 90% of the cases.

Battery temperature should *only* be a limitation in the remaining extreme case where the car is parked away from commercial power for extended durations and there's no sunshine. For example, parked at in the distant cheap parking lot at an Alaskan airport in the dark dead of winter for six weeks. There's nothing much that could be done in such extreme cases, except perhaps to deploy a little windmill, or include a radioisotope thermal generator.

0
0
Thumb Down

Re: Cold weather and cold batteries

The problem with the little doors is that they only work whilst the vehicle is in motion. Whilst it is not in motion, there is little to no air-flow and little to no cooling.

Those air-cooled Beetle engines are notorious for over-heating unless the later model fan is fitted.

If we fit a fan to cool the battery pack, we've now introduced something that will deplete energy whilst the car is stationery.

0
0

Hatchet job

This really looks like it is a NYT hatchet-job for short-interests in TSLA stock. The NYT article is probably the dishonest side of capitalism. Established industries like gas-powered vehicles and oil companies hold sway over advertising outlets like NYT that happen to be in real financial trouble since their print business is killing their profitability. The truth about Broder's trip will be shown in the vehicle logs. Broder probably wasn't counting on his journey being logged. If this ends up proving he's falsified his report, I hope he never gets another journalist job again.

2
8
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hatchet job

"Established industries like gas-powered vehicles and oil companies....."

So your new to this electricity generating concept.

<Whisper>

they are also established industries, been around a few years now.

</whisper>

0
1

Can you see how easy those big oil and big auto can use the media to kill the electric cars again and again? The media made you think Tesla is the best, then the media made sure investments to it are growing, and then the media trashes it by exposing crappy Tesla's test data. The principle is easy, they first push you to capitalize on this expensive one and you neglect technology development from others, then they focus on destroying what you are capitalizing on and you'll give up on innovations and being cornered back to their business traps.

0
8
Bronze badge

Why not take this info and create a freelance article on the electric vehicle of your choice.

You obviously know nothing about testing a product to any meaningful extent.

You do not test a products range by fully charging it and driving it 10 miles. You need to try to simulate the worst most grueling days of a year in just the testing time you have, perhaps a few days. Otherwise you're producing a sweet heart piece of promotional literature, not a serious journalistic report.

You seem to know words, so why not take that info and create a freelance article on the electric vehicle of your choice.

I'm sure there are plenty far better than the Tesla and it would be nice to read about them too.

But you do have to admit, by attacking journos Tesla is grabbing media attention. Attention seeking might be part of a deliberate PR campaign to raise their profile and get more subsidies from taxpayers, or it might be an honest mistake.

I can see subsidizing electric cars, but why should middle class taxpayers subsidize an car in the luxury price range that is created for wealthy people to show boat an image of being "green"?

5
0
Mushroom

No Surprise Here.

I am an Electrical Engineer and I don't trust battery powered things of any kind because they always run out of power just when you need them most. All my power tools have cords and my car runs on gasoline ("petrol" for our friends in the UK). I don't even like hybrids because those who own them tend to ignore the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) under the hood when they are bragging about their clean air vehicle. Now if someone wants to build an atomic powered car, which like the ship I served on in the US Navy (GGN-9) ought to go 20 years or so on a refueling, I would finally be willing to buy an "electric" car. Of course with a reactor under the hood it could also be steam propelled (like my ship) or perhaps with an improved version of a Stirling engine. You British chaps would probably like that last idea just for the name. But that's the only way you'll get any decent range out of an electric vehicle, US President Obama notwithstanding. IMO, Battery powered Electric Vehicles are just toys for rich folk who like to pretend they care about the environment. I'd rather drive a FIAT 500.

8
1
Bronze badge
Mushroom

Electric vehicles are a joke until storage density and infrastructure get MUCH denser.

Tesla is a state funded White Elephant because the technology is not even close to good enough; electrical storage technology and charging capacity needs to be an order of magnitude better to really be practical.

Potential Mechanical energy and especially Chemical energy are much quicker to refuel with, and have much lower cost infrastructure than electricity; that's just the way it is, due to current materials and infrastructure limitations. Basically to refuel, say a car, should take no longer than fuelling a big lorry with diesel, excluding the time connecting and removing the refueling gear.

The real solution for longer distance will probably be Hydrogen or Natural Gas vehicles; Gas is easy to transport or make on site (for H), and it will be very fast to fuel a vehicle with; you could even have swappable tanks, which is vastly more practical than then the silly idea of swapping huge, very costly and slow to charge batteries. With some careful design Gas tanks don't even have to be dangerous.

For shorter distances mechanical energy in high pressure compressed air could be more sensible, and much much cheaper, even with advanced high pressure, light weight, composite tanks.

Electric vehicles make no sense without beefy distributed power generation infrastructure (e.g. many commodity Thorium reactors), and seriously high power 'flash' charging cables.

2
4
Silver badge

Re: Electric vehicles are a joke until storage density and infrastructure get MUCH denser.

" Gas is easy to transport or make on site (for H)"

This hydrogen, if you make it on site presumably by electrolysis the efficiency is poor. Electrolysis generates a lot of waste heat. If the electricity is generated by coal/gas/oil the overall efficiency is likely to be < 20%.

How are you going to store it in the vehicle ? Either compression or cryogenics requires a large amount of energy and each has it's own problems anyway. The overall efficiency is now ~~ 5%

2
0
Gold badge
Thumb Down

Re: Electric vehicles are a joke until storage density and infrastructure get MUCH denser.

"Gas is easy to transport or make on site (for H), "

The fact you prize that over anything else suggests you really have no idea what you're talking about.

1
0
Bronze badge
Boffin

Overly electric proven harmful

I'm not going to slag electric cars in general - I think there's tons of potential (if not always potential ENERGY) and even if they never entirely take over transportation, they'll push battery research, which is always a good thing.

That said - some of the complaints about how electric vehicles handle problems are spot on. My 2010 prius (I drive about 60 miles a day, it's usually worth it) had a total drive system failure a few weeks ago, and it made a lot of weird shit happen!

The prius has quite a large battery, called the traction battery, that runs the hybrid system, charged off of the gas engine (in varying amounts depending on speed) and from regenerative braking. Silly me thought this was THE battery. It turns out that the traction battery is hooked up to a traditional car battery through an inverter, and all of the equipment in the car (the power steering, brakes, dashboard, etc) are hooked up to that smaller battery. In normal operation, the traction battery is constantly refilling the car battery, so you have lots and lots of power available.

That is, until the inverter fails. Then, because things that are normally driven by the gas engine via belt, are all draining the car battery, and when you're on the side of the road, you drain it pretty fast. When the hybrid system crashed (on an ON RAMP. I do not recommend this experience unless you like the idea of your testicles retracting into your body in terror), the whole car just died. I hit the start button while grappling with the steering wheel and managed to get brakes and steering back for a few moments, and could even limp by on electric for about a thousand feet. Then the car battery ran out of power, and it was like the car was nailed to the ground. The brakes were engaged, the steering locked at the wheel position it was in, and the dash did a little "daisy daisy" kind of flip out and then died too.

I called for a tow and got a flatbed, which was unfortunate, because the front wheels would not turn. With no power, you can't shift out of park! He ended up simply dragging the car onto the bed (he didn't tell me that, I was in the cab getting warm after sitting in a cold car for a half hour). Fortunately it didn't totally mess up the tires, but there's a bit of odd wear on them. And then when we got to the shop it was really hilarious - he ran the bed up to maximum tilt, and the car hardly moved. He had to rock it up and down, making the car hop a bit each time, to get it on the ground. I had it towed to the dealer the next day, and told them to please send a normal towhook truck.

In the end, everything was on warranty (they even paid for one of the tows), but I don't look at the car quite as friendly as I used to (it did go 3 years without a single day in the garage other than oil changes and normal preventive maintenance). One thing I definitely learned - if the hybrid system crashes, do NOT run on automatic. Just stop and turn the car off, leaving power to get into neutral. It WARNED me that it was going to go into this mode by making a kind of off-key bell noise, but I didn't know what that meant. Toyota whould license the tardis cloister bell sound, I wouldn't ignore that!

4
0

Roll on..

Hydrogen Fuel cell cars : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21234234

0
2
Bronze badge
Megaphone

Re: Roll on..

Pft. Never gonna happen. Hydrogen is a terrible transportation fuel, unless weight is your sole determining factor (like a rocket). And ... hydrogen is made from natural gas - if you want to drive on natural gas, convert your car to that!

3
0
Bronze badge

Re: Roll on..

Hydrogen Cars? Where to you top up? How much inefficiency in the fuel chain to you think there is? Hydrogen is produced commercially by reforming natural gas. It's much more efficient to just use the natural gas. Honda has had a hydrogen fuel cell car for years, the Clarity. They cost about US$2.5million each to make. Sure, the price would come down in production, but it would still be several hundred thousand dollars at best. The fuel cell makes lithium-ion batteries look cheap. What happens if your fuel cell goes wrong out of warranty? How many miles can you go before you have to replace the fuel cell?

Hydrogen for transportation is a low probability concept. The technology is not even close. The reason you hear so much about it is because politicians think it sounds very futuristic and we all know how, ehem, smart, cough, politicians are. It also makes for good articles in Popular Science. It's just not ready for the masses and may never be.

3
0
Bronze badge

Meanwhile, 120 years earlier...

Gasoline Powered Automobile Fails to Impress

A reporter for the New York Times was nearly able to make a round-trip from Washington to Boston during a recent "test-drive" of a new gasoline powered horseless carriage. However he required stopping for additional fuel two times, and that was only possible due to the contraption's manufacturer's special "gas-stations" which were built specifically for this test.

All was well on the first leg with the contraption making it to the first "station" without issue. However, on the return leg of the journey, the device suffered a mechanical fault needing to be towed into town by a mule team. "I was going past fields of hay, but I was not smiling" the reporter was heard to have quipped. Horse sales remain strong as people avoid automobiles for fear of running out of fuel far from the next fuel depot.

6
1

Srs?

Does anyone still seriously consider an EV to be a primary vehicle? The electric car will be a luxury 2nd car for the environmentally conscious (hah don't start) well-heeled individual for a good long while.

Personally, I want one. But only for CONSTANT TORQUE from 0-100. Woosh!

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Srs?

I have an Electric Car. An Ampera and yes the constant torque is great 0-60 in 8 and silent and smooth and no gear changes. It's funny when someone races from the lights as soon as they change gear they drop away.. oh and I have a petrol engine for those freezing cold days and longer runs. So I've got real world driving 110mpg lifetime in 10k miles in 9 months, with NO compromises, best everyday car I've owned (not as fun as my MK Indy toy car though).

3
0
Thumb Down

He did not "follow their advice"

Here is what he said he did after he went to the last charging station:

"I should have bought a membership to Butch’s and spent a few hours there while the car charged. The displayed range never reached the number of miles remaining to Milford, and as I limped along at about 45 miles per hour I saw increasingly dire dashboard warnings to recharge immediately. "

The displayed range never reached the number of miles to Milford.

let me state that again

The displayed range never reached the number of miles to Milford.

...And so he decided to drive to Milford -- with not enough range to get there.

He may have followed their advice on how to maximize range during that final leg. But nothing was going to change the fact that he knowingly left on his final leg without enough charge for said leg.

3
2
Gold badge
Facepalm

Re: He did not "follow their advice"

"The displayed range never reached the number of miles to Milford.

...And so he decided to drive to Milford -- with not enough range to get there."

OK That shifts it from a WTF to a "D'oh"

Or as some would call it "Doing a Clarkson."

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: He did not "follow their advice"

You have missed the bit where he followed Tesla's advice. Let me add it for you:

"When I continued my drive, the display read 185 miles, well beyond the distance I intended to cover before returning to the station the next morning"

...

"I drove, slowly, to Stonington, Conn., for dinner and spent the night in Groton, a total distance of 79 miles. When I parked the car, its computer said I had 90 miles of range, twice the 46 miles back to Milford. It was a different story at 8:30 the next morning. The thermometer read 10 degrees and the display showed 25 miles of remaining range "

...

"After completing the battery conditioning process, the estimated range reading was 19 miles; no way would I make it back to Milford. "

...

" After making arrangements to recharge at the Norwich station, I located the proper adapter in the trunk, plugged in and walked to the only warm place nearby, Butch’s Luncheonette and Breakfast Club, an establishment (smoking allowed) where only members can buy a cup of coffee or a plate of eggs. But the owners let me wait there while the Model S drank its juice. Tesla’s experts said that pumping in a little energy would help restore the power lost overnight as a result of the cold weather, and after an hour they cleared me to resume the trip to Milford.

Looking back, I should have bought a membership to Butch’s ..."

...

If you read the article for yourself (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highway.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0) you will see that it was Tesla that cleared him to resume the journey. He only had 46 miles left and despite parking it overnight with 90 miles of charge remaining and despite charging it for an hour in the morning, the car still couldn't make it to Milford.

1
0
Facepalm

The writer's story matches what Elon Musk said

Elon Musk said that the NYT writer left w/o a full charge. The writer did that twice in his story. Check. (In addition, he didn't plug it in overnight in a cold climate where he should have known he would lose some of his charge.) He said the driver drove in excess of the speed limit. Everyone knows that "keeping up with traffic" is code for speeding. Check. He said the writer took an unexpected trip in heavy traffic. The writer said he took "a short break in Manhattan.." Check.

THOSE are the facts of the story and they match what Elon Musk said. You can do one or these things, but you can't do ALL of those things and not expect a reduction in range.

1
1
Bronze badge

Musings from a self-confessed wet liberal

Robert Llewellyn drives and electric car and loves it.

http://llewblog.squarespace.com/

He also writes much better than I do.

0
0

Still on the Top Gear theme

We all know about the cars *driven* by cocks...is there a new category for cars *made* by cocks?

Your car didn't do well in the real world...again...no point being a cock about it.

On the upside...damn, this is a good looking car.

2
0
Unhappy

Why does the choice of electric cars seem to be between 'city' cars that look like they were designed for Noddy and friends (that is, cars basically designed only for how well they work in London), and high-spec 'sports' cars like Tesla seems to be concentrating on? I'm sure I can't be the only prospective electric car driver who doesn't give two battery-powered hoots about whether the car can do 0-60 in three nanoseconds, or reach a top speed of 378mph into a headwind?

What I'd like to see from an electric car is one that will allow me to commute to work (thirty miles for the round trip - yes, I know your commute's far further than that) plus allow for social use outside of work; reach and maintain a comfortable 70 mph on the motorway; carry up to three passengers; and ideally let me listen to my crappy music all the while. And I'd like to be able to do all this in the reasonable expectation that my car will keep going at least for the day, or - in the event of a protracted journey - that I won't be significantly disadvantaged by the need to stop regularly and recharge over a long period of time. An hour for a fuel stop is not practical, however you slice it.

Didn't I hear something about fuel stations proposing to simply swap out the battery, or something? I was always a bit sceptical, mind: how many cars stop into the average petrol station every day? Not to mention HGVs? Where are all those batteries going to be stored?

Believe me, if I thought for a moment electric cars were more than just an expensive gimmick I'd be all over the idea. But no-one seems to be taking it very seriously: it's all flash and shine, and no sense of practicality. And yes, before anyone says it, I know that a few high-performance cars can generate technologies that can then trickle down into cheaper designs at my plebbish level - but even allowing for that, I think the whole thing's scuppered by the vicious circle of "infrastructure needed before cars are developed but cars need to exist before infrastructure can be justified".

Seriously - I'd be delighted to find I'm wrong.

1
0
Silver badge
Stop

"Why does the choice of electric cars seem to be between 'city' cars that look like they were designed for Noddy and friends (that is, cars basically designed only for how well they work in London), and high-spec 'sports' cars like Tesla"

Umm... you did look at the picture at the top of the article, right?

http://www.teslamotors.com/

It's got 4 doors and stuff.

1
0
WTF?

"It's got 4 doors and stuff."

So it has. Oh, cool. I'll buy one, then, since it's got enough doors to be cheap.

1
0
Silver badge
WTF?

Well, in two entire paragraphs of your desired specifications you never bothered mentioning price, so I assumed that wasn't a major factor.

Obviously my fault for not reading your mind for further information.

0
1

I recommend

A Nissan Leaf. If used correctly it should be able to provide for your requirements. Unfortunately, the first thing most people seem to want to do with EVs is take them on long journeys, quite why I have no idea when Diesel cars are already perfected for that task.

0
0

Doomed to fail....for now.

It's obvious to anyone with an ounce of technical savy that electric cars dependent on batteries are currently, at least, doomed to be short distance only.

Mobile phones, laptops, cars...we have all known for a while now that battery technology is not moving at the same pace as the technology it is expected to power. 10 years ago a mobile phone could last 4-5 days on one charge, now you are lucky if you get more than 1 day. Tesla is a victim of this, and I admire them for trying to push for EV's despite the uphill struggle.

There are some promising breakthroughs on the "battery" horizon such as Boron-Hyrdogen batteries (promise to be safe and store plenty of hydrogen) that could at last mean that there is a viable alternative to the well established and refined Petrol/Diesel engines.

Until this new battery tech comes out though, electric will never have the range or charge time to make it a fully viable alternative.

0
0
Facepalm

But does it blend?

While it is highly suspicious that Tesla attacks every bit of bad press, suggesting it feels everyone is out to attack it, it's equally suspicious that every test seems to be about it's distance capabilities. I was the skinniest person on my college rugby team, so my coach never wasted me as a forward. Why aren't journalists praising it as a practical vehicle? Why would anyone EVER drive from Washington to Boston? Ever? That just happens to be the only journey in America that's more convenient without a car. We have planes, $1 buses, and even a high-speed train -that's our ONLY high-speed train. My family and friends are spread along this route: Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, and Boston. These are all major whistle stops. Can the car easily make daily 50-60 mile commutes? THAT is the distance test for an American. Main Line, Virginia, New Jersey, and Long Island are short distances from the cities they serve.

2
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: But does it blend?

That route was chosen because that is where the super charging stations have been installed.

Unless electric cars can complete long distances they can not compete. It doesn't matter if the majority of time you will only be driving short distances, you still need it for the occasional long distance journey. Not everybody can afford to run a second car "just in case".

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Car runs out of fuel..

what a story!?!

But seriously, I think The Volt, Ampera and Karma are the only way Electric Cars (with range extending engines) can work well for us, at this time.

1
0

Re: Car runs out of fuel..

Yes on paper an REV seems to be the perfect compromise for the range anxiety thing. So why was the Volt such a flop, even with govt funding?

They must have REALLY cocked it up, no?

0
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Measurement unit?

I wanted to check what battery capacities the Tesla Model S offers to find out how quickly my mains (400V, 70A) could fully charge it. And I found an answer. Tesla: "The battery stores energy. Model S can be configured with one of three batteries: 85 kWh, 60 kWh, or 40 kWh. Kilowatt hour (kWh) is a measure of electrical storage capacity."

It's been a while since I studied this stuff but as far as I remember electrical capacity, or capacitance, is not measured in kWh (which would be energy) but in farad. When taking about batteries, the electrical charge might be more interesting but it's still not kWh but Ah.

I'm sure someone here, maybe a Tesla employee, with more up-to-date knowledge can enlighten me on the matter of measurement units.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Measurement unit?

kWh is actually a conversion of Joules (energy stored).

1 kWh = 3600000J

Its just a bit more user friendly to say 85kWh than 306MJ as it indicates that a using 10kW will last 8.5 hours where as 306MJ does not give any clues about how much power for how long.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Measurement unit?

You are looking at power not energy. power is instantaneous, if how much is coming out of the tap, energy is capacity, how much is in the tank.

0
0
Boffin

Re: Measurement unit?

kWh is also available in J (Joules) or eV (electron Volts) or cal (calories) or even kg·m^2 s^−2 (Si Base) - feel free to choose.

1
0
Gold badge

capacity <> capitance

And KWh is a measure of capacity.

Power (Kw) would be how much the motor takes in any one second.

1
0
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Measurement unit?

@Evil Auditor "...it's still not kWh but Ah..."

All the other replies were correct, but failed to address your embedded query about amp-hours.

You are correct that battery capacity has traditionally been rated in amp-hours. But amp-hour ratings are only comparable for a given voltage.

When designing an electric car, the designers are not limited to any particular voltage. They can choose 140 volts DC, or they might choose a different voltage. Higher voltage with the same amp-hour rating fails to capture the energy density. Since nobody really cares about the car designers choice of battery pack voltage, it's much better to define the energy density in terms of watt-hours (watts being volts time amps, for those that didn't know that already).

Question for the crowd - how many litres of gasoline contain the same energy as "85 kWh" ?

1
0
Boffin

Question for the crowd

Gasoline is typically 36MJ per Litre - meaning 85kWh = 8.5 Litres

But 8.5 Litres would typically only get you 70 miles in a gasoline car (37mpgUK 29mpgUS)

In the Tesla 85kWh will get you 300+ miles

So a gasoline engine runs at 4.3MJ per mile, whereas the Tesla uses 1MJ per Mile.

Gasoline engines usually max out at 35% efficient. Whereas an electric motor is more like 90%.

The interesting point is when you bring in Hydrogen in at 5.6MJ per litre (compressed at 70 MPa) and run it through a fuel cell at 50% efficiency to drive a 90% efficient Motor, it becomes obvious how stupid Hydrogen is as a fuel compared to battery EV.

1
1

Re: Question for the crowd

Just to continue that hydrogen point: 85kWh in hydrogen is 55 Litres, as fuel cell is 50% efficient to match the Tesla's 300 mile range would be 110 Litres. At 70Mpa in a pressurised Round Tank, Which goes where exactly? its a 24" diameter sphere, or you could squash it to a 40" diameter rounded pill.. So how much space did you need in the car?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Measurement unit?

Gasoline is 44MJ per Kg, therefore 306 MJ (at 710g per litre) means that your Tesla has a massive 9.8L of fuel inside, 2.16 Imperial or 2.7 US gallons.

Still thinking conspiracy or media Hijack or something simpler. As they say YMMV but expecting a 4-seater to get >100 MPG (equiv) to make it viable seems a bit like sending a red-head called Ginger to primary school and being aghast at the name-calling

http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2003/ArthurGolnik.shtml

0
1
Silver badge
Pint

Re: Question for the crowd

Parax, thanks.

"Gasoline engines ... 35% efficient. ...electric motor ... 90%."

It's bit unfair to isolate the vehicle from the end-to-end environment impact of the entire fuel chain. The gasoline powered car contains its own power station. How does the CO2 emissions per unit distance driven compare assuming that the Telsa is recharged at each night from a coal-powered power station (quite a reasonable assumption for many)?

"In the Tesla 85kWh will get you 300+ miles..."

Apparently not under some typical real world conditions (this being the bone of contention).

Where I see hope is that if the Telsa were improved by just +3dB (x2), that sort of e-car would perfectly practical. As it is now, I don't believe that they are.

On top of this though is that some of us need a much larger five seat car. A practical Tesla (if you can call such an expensive sports car "practical") might be just five years away, but a practical e-E-Class might be 20 years out.

As *all* the car shows have concluded, the future does not lie in packing cars full of mobile phone batteries.

0
0
Meh

Re: Question for the crowd

"It's bit unfair to isolate the vehicle from the end-to-end environment impact of the entire fuel chain."

Yes it is isn't it. So here's a really good US govt report on oil refinery energy consumption. That is refining only, when you consider drilling, shipping, and overland transportation to forecourts, the old analogy of 2 barrels in for every barrel out, isn't that far from the truth. So even if you power an EV from a dirty coal power station it's still cleaner than an wheezy ecobox that claims 99g/km but in reality has already burned more than that in refining, production, shipping etc.

As for practical, the Tesla Model S in the story is a SEVEN seater (watch the video here) perhaps you are confusing it with something else?

Oh *all* the car shows? that would be except this one then? what about the papers? Oh.. I don't need to be convinced, I already own one..

0
0
Anonymous Coward

The big problem is

Auto hacks who seem determined to prove that electric cars can't replace petrol/diesel.

Well, screw me, you don't say.

As second cars, cars for local and medium distance journeys, cars for urban running around they are just fine. For long journeys they are not. Not without planning and serious allowance for margins of error anyway

Cold weather, the length taken to fast-charge, all these count against them but as a friend who bought a Nissan Leaf to replace the family second car last year said, that's like buying a VW Up! and complaining it can't carry five fat blokes in comfort or a wardrobe. Of course it can't.

Car hacks have done themselves no favours by in effect cheating for effect - like Top Gear lapping a Leaf around their track before setting out on a journey they then knew the car didn't have the charge to cover.

The NY Times hack seems to have had a torrid time, but without a full journey map and telemetry I'm not sure it's as much the car's fault as he makes out.

Electric cars - not for everyone, get over it.

2
0
FAIL

Re: The big problem is

With the Tesla Roadster, it was obviously meant as a run around, much like the Elise it's styled on cant really be considered a usable car (unless you never need more than 2 seats and don't need and luggage).

But the S (and indeed the Leaf) are being billed as replacements - why else have something of that seating and luggage capacity if not as a replacement?

Neither of these cars are in any way cheap, the vast majority of people don't have 2 cars (not as in 2 in the family, as in 2 cars, 1 for the week and 1 for Sunday best). Most families have 2 cars because 2 or more people need to actually get to different places.

The fact that you yourself have basically said that you need 2 cars to be able to own an EV, means that any savings made are completely negated by the doubling of initial costs - 2 cars, 2 insurance premiums, 2 road taxes, etc etc. Plus there's now double the manufacturing, so any environmental impact is largely if not totally negated by building 2 cars instead of 1.

Right now, today, these sorts of EV are not praticable. The technology simply isn't there to make use of it. There is an argument for electric mopeds for cities, which require shorter charging time (with a lower range to go with it), but you still have the charging issue at either end of your journey.

0
1
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: The big problem is

"cant really be considered a usable car (unless you never need more than 2 seats and don't need and luggage).... But the S... why else have something of that seating and luggage capacity if not as a replacement?

That's your perspective.

The Roadster is plenty practical enough if you don't have a family. And if there's just one person in it, there's space for luggage/shopping, making it perfectly practical.

And the S is practical as well *just not for long distances*. Many, many family vehicles are just used to pick up the kids, drive to work, and do the shopping. It is a perfectly acceptable replacement vehicle for anyone who doesn't drive long distances, it seems.

0
1

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums