5 ms·

I wonder if there is a plan, likely in a later future, in which SpaceX and Tesla merge. Like Tesla and Solar City I could see Elon blurring the lines between Sp

I wonder if there is a plan, likely in a later future, in which SpaceX and Tesla merge. Like Tesla and Solar City I could see Elon blurring the lines between SpaceX and Tesla on various projects.

Florin_Andrei 10y ago
There doesn't seem to be an obvious synergy there yet. Unless I'm missing something.
- freehunter 10y ago
  Are there any lithium asteroids we can mine to make batteries?
  - ktta 10y ago
    Or possibly researching new avenues of energy generation? I see potential for nuclear energy in the future, and spaceships will have to resort to nuclear energy because fuel isn't going to cut it for energy intensive long term missions. And if they figure ways to do it with minimal risk, we wouldn't have to depend on solar energy and hope it gets more and more efficient in the future. I feel like the risks with nuclear energy are overhyped. With proper security precautions, nuclear plants wouldn't be so dangerous are many think. Except unexpected natural disasters of course. But is it really that hard to reconcile the advantages vs. disadvantages? Many coutries aren't low on space like Japan and can handle things going wrong in the nuclear plant area. This wouldn't be a problem if nuclear fusion is achieved of course, but I waiting for someone to make a law related to "It'll be there within the next decade". Net positive energy nuclear fusion will nicely fit in with quantum computers that exhibit quantum supremacy.
    - Florin_Andrei 10y ago
      > spaceships will have to resort to nuclear energy because fuel isn't going to cut it for energy intensive long term missions To conquer low Earth orbit, chemical engines have been enough. To conquer the solar system, we'll need nuclear. To go much further beyond, we'll need total mass conversion.
      - ktta 10y ago
        >total mass conversion. That sounds cool, are there any links you'd suggest reading up on that? Are you talking about mass-> energy conversion in general or something specific which has already been theorized successfully? And I was thinking not just exploration, but sustained energy intensive missions. Chemical energy will be enough for entry to space, but solar energy might not be sufficient for long term missions. If heavy machinery needs to be operated (like space mining) we need nuclear energy, and this can happen soon enough that humans haven't yet figured out complex energy production measures like the 'total mass conversion' you mentioned.
- BinaryIdiot 10y ago
  There wasn't much between Tesla and Solar City until Tesla brought out the battery. Elon has used one of his factories for the other company before for some part (if I remember the story correctly) so I always got the impression he may fold everything together if or when it makes sense. Not today for sure. But who knows just me thinking out loud.
- yessql 10y ago
  The only thing I can imagine is the Internet constellation. If retail consumers will be subscribing, then SpaceX doesn't really have a consumer presence yet. Seems like you could use Tesla to be the consumer facing company for the Internet. But Tesla could just buy exclusive access with resell rights...
whiskers08xmt 10y ago
I think Musk will keep them separate for now. This pure speculation, but I have the feeling that Tesla is a company Musk will feel comfortable relinquishing control over as it grows, while SpaceX is his baby.
- carleverett 10y ago
  Agreed. Also, given the nature of his lofty goals at Spacex, they're going to take a huge amount of his time to make happen. Musk is very much motivated by progressing humanity. At this point, the electric car and solar revolutions are well underway (thanks in part to him). But if he were to die tomorrow, it's very possible that a lot of his dreams for space travel would die with him. The industry just hasn't reached the same level of competitive self-sufficiency.
- carleverett 10y ago
  Agreed. Also, given the nature of his lofty goals at Spacex, they're going to take a huge amount of his time to make happen. Musk is very much motivated by progressing humanity. At this point, the electric car and solar revolutions are well underway (thanks in part to him). But if he were to die tomorrow, it's very possible that a lot of his dreams for space travel would die with him. The industry just hasn't reached the same level of competitive self-sufficiency.
labster 10y ago
While rockets do need lots of energy to make thrust, and both companies are built around smart people there's really nothing else in common between SpaceX and Tesla. SpaceX is high-risk shipping, Tesla makes consumer goods. SpaceX makes vehicles with hydrocarbon propellants, the whole point of Tesla is to remove the hydrocarbons from vehicles. And there's no reason to put Tesla at risk if SpaceX runs into a string of bad luck.
- BinaryIdiot 10y ago
  Fair enough. It was mostly a "feeling" I had but your points are beyond rebuttal. At least for now.
- jonwachob91 10y ago
  Elon wants to commercialize Mars (SpaceX), he'll need renewable energy to do it (Tesla). His end goals warrant a strong partnership between the two.
- dechov 10y ago
  Both built around not just smart people but increasingly smart machines. The manufacturing processes and the autonomous vehicle products themselves are cases of state of the art robotics at scale. Some of this overlap is perhaps embodied by SpaceX's VP of Software Jinnah Hosein doubling as Tesla's VP of Autopilot Software before Chris Lattner's arrival.
- Symmetry 10y ago
  I'd like to see the day when the methan and oxygen propellants for the ITS are synthesized from water and atmospheric CO2 by Tesla solar plants. But SpaceX could just buy the methalox from Tesla, there's no complicated partnership that would benefit from merging them.
extrapickles 10y ago
ITAR is a good reason to keep them apart for now. Do to SpaceX making rockets, they can only hire US citizens and a bunch of other annoying requirements by ITAR are needed to be met. Its easier to keep the companies separate just from a compliance standpoint as what would otherwise be a minor issue can turn into a hundred million dollar fine (eg: someone accidentally given access to the wrong file server). If everyone in your company is a US citizen its much harder to accidentally create an issue under the eyes of ITAR.
- planteen 10y ago
  One of the best things about no longer working in space is not worrying about ITAR anymore.

I wonder if there is a plan, likely in a later future, in which SpaceX and Tesla merge. Like Tesla and Solar City I could see Elon blurring the lines between SpaceX and Tesla on various projects.

Florin_Andrei 10y ago

There doesn't seem to be an obvious synergy there yet. Unless I'm missing something.

freehunter 10y ago
Are there any lithium asteroids we can mine to make batteries?
- ktta 10y ago
  Or possibly researching new avenues of energy generation? I see potential for nuclear energy in the future, and spaceships will have to resort to nuclear energy because fuel isn't going to cut it for energy intensive long term missions. And if they figure ways to do it with minimal risk, we wouldn't have to depend on solar energy and hope it gets more and more efficient in the future. I feel like the risks with nuclear energy are overhyped. With proper security precautions, nuclear plants wouldn't be so dangerous are many think. Except unexpected natural disasters of course. But is it really that hard to reconcile the advantages vs. disadvantages? Many coutries aren't low on space like Japan and can handle things going wrong in the nuclear plant area. This wouldn't be a problem if nuclear fusion is achieved of course, but I waiting for someone to make a law related to "It'll be there within the next decade". Net positive energy nuclear fusion will nicely fit in with quantum computers that exhibit quantum supremacy.
  - Florin_Andrei 10y ago
    > spaceships will have to resort to nuclear energy because fuel isn't going to cut it for energy intensive long term missions To conquer low Earth orbit, chemical engines have been enough. To conquer the solar system, we'll need nuclear. To go much further beyond, we'll need total mass conversion.
    - ktta 10y ago
      >total mass conversion. That sounds cool, are there any links you'd suggest reading up on that? Are you talking about mass-> energy conversion in general or something specific which has already been theorized successfully? And I was thinking not just exploration, but sustained energy intensive missions. Chemical energy will be enough for entry to space, but solar energy might not be sufficient for long term missions. If heavy machinery needs to be operated (like space mining) we need nuclear energy, and this can happen soon enough that humans haven't yet figured out complex energy production measures like the 'total mass conversion' you mentioned.
BinaryIdiot 10y ago
There wasn't much between Tesla and Solar City until Tesla brought out the battery. Elon has used one of his factories for the other company before for some part (if I remember the story correctly) so I always got the impression he may fold everything together if or when it makes sense. Not today for sure. But who knows just me thinking out loud.
yessql 10y ago
The only thing I can imagine is the Internet constellation. If retail consumers will be subscribing, then SpaceX doesn't really have a consumer presence yet. Seems like you could use Tesla to be the consumer facing company for the Internet. But Tesla could just buy exclusive access with resell rights...

whiskers08xmt 10y ago

I think Musk will keep them separate for now. This pure speculation, but I have the feeling that Tesla is a company Musk will feel comfortable relinquishing control over as it grows, while SpaceX is his baby.

carleverett 10y ago
Agreed. Also, given the nature of his lofty goals at Spacex, they're going to take a huge amount of his time to make happen. Musk is very much motivated by progressing humanity. At this point, the electric car and solar revolutions are well underway (thanks in part to him). But if he were to die tomorrow, it's very possible that a lot of his dreams for space travel would die with him. The industry just hasn't reached the same level of competitive self-sufficiency.
carleverett 10y ago
Agreed. Also, given the nature of his lofty goals at Spacex, they're going to take a huge amount of his time to make happen. Musk is very much motivated by progressing humanity. At this point, the electric car and solar revolutions are well underway (thanks in part to him). But if he were to die tomorrow, it's very possible that a lot of his dreams for space travel would die with him. The industry just hasn't reached the same level of competitive self-sufficiency.

labster 10y ago

While rockets do need lots of energy to make thrust, and both companies are built around smart people there's really nothing else in common between SpaceX and Tesla. SpaceX is high-risk shipping, Tesla makes consumer goods. SpaceX makes vehicles with hydrocarbon propellants, the whole point of Tesla is to remove the hydrocarbons from vehicles. And there's no reason to put Tesla at risk if SpaceX runs into a string of bad luck.

BinaryIdiot 10y ago
Fair enough. It was mostly a "feeling" I had but your points are beyond rebuttal. At least for now.
jonwachob91 10y ago
Elon wants to commercialize Mars (SpaceX), he'll need renewable energy to do it (Tesla). His end goals warrant a strong partnership between the two.
dechov 10y ago
Both built around not just smart people but increasingly smart machines. The manufacturing processes and the autonomous vehicle products themselves are cases of state of the art robotics at scale. Some of this overlap is perhaps embodied by SpaceX's VP of Software Jinnah Hosein doubling as Tesla's VP of Autopilot Software before Chris Lattner's arrival.
Symmetry 10y ago
I'd like to see the day when the methan and oxygen propellants for the ITS are synthesized from water and atmospheric CO2 by Tesla solar plants. But SpaceX could just buy the methalox from Tesla, there's no complicated partnership that would benefit from merging them.

extrapickles 10y ago

ITAR is a good reason to keep them apart for now. Do to SpaceX making rockets, they can only hire US citizens and a bunch of other annoying requirements by ITAR are needed to be met. Its easier to keep the companies separate just from a compliance standpoint as what would otherwise be a minor issue can turn into a hundred million dollar fine (eg: someone accidentally given access to the wrong file server). If everyone in your company is a US citizen its much harder to accidentally create an issue under the eyes of ITAR.

planteen 10y ago
One of the best things about no longer working in space is not worrying about ITAR anymore.