4 ms·

I have been skeptical of the whole electric car movement because of 6 reasons. 1) Running the AC heat or cooling really sucks that longevity. 2) Car wrecks coul

I have been skeptical of the whole electric car movement because of 6 reasons. 1) Running the AC heat or cooling really sucks that longevity. 2) Car wrecks could become more horrendous because of the acid. 3) Battery pack replacements are extremely costly. 4) Need more tow trucks fitted with charging kits to help out. 5) The entire economics of the thing just isn't worked out. 6) Are these cars actually green, or would they, in whole, including their destruction, cause more harm to the environment then help? However, I believe in Elon Musk, an incredible guy, have a desire at least to see this company succeed, and Tesla's goals are noble goals. So, I'm very happy that Toyota saw the benefit and decided to invest. This means that Tesla will succeed for sure.

frankus 16y ago
Point 2 isn't really that big of a deal, unless you're using old flooded-cell lead-acid batteries. Newer lead-acid batteries have the electrolyte absorbed in fiberglass mats, so it won't spill or splash, even in a collision. An lithium-ion electrolyte is about as harmful in terms of skin and eye contact as petroleum fuels, except that it won't catch fire nearly as readily. All in all liquid fuels are much more hazardous than batteries. In an alternate reality where electric cars were the norm, I doubt you could get a liquid-fueled car past the safety regulators. Point 6 is a valid question. An electric car is still a car, and comes with all the negative externalities of a car, with the exception of local air pollution and petroleum dependence. Greenhouse-gas-wise, they are somewhere between "about the same" and "much much better" than internal combustion powered cars, depending on your assumptions.
anigbrowl 16y ago
re. 2), while car don't blow up as easily in real life as they do in the movies, when they do catch fire it makes for quite a bang. I'd rather be next to a wrecked electric vehicle than a gasoline-powered on. re. 6) manufacturing externalities for any vehicle are significant, but burning fossil fuels in a power station (to generate electricity to charge batteries) is vastly more efficient and cleaner than doing so in a vehicle engine. Thus, I think the overall level of pollution is likely to be lower. It's good to see this partnership; everyone likes what Tesla are about and their vision that green doesn't have to mean weak performance. But the high cost of their early offerings made a lot of people skeptical about the realistic future of electric cars. However, now that so many companies are committing to an all-electric paradigm (Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt) there's enough competition to really drive innovation and offer customers a good value proposition.
volomike 16y ago
Really informative answers, guys. Thanks!

frankus 16y ago

Point 2 isn't really that big of a deal, unless you're using old flooded-cell lead-acid batteries. Newer lead-acid batteries have the electrolyte absorbed in fiberglass mats, so it won't spill or splash, even in a collision. An lithium-ion electrolyte is about as harmful in terms of skin and eye contact as petroleum fuels, except that it won't catch fire nearly as readily. All in all liquid fuels are much more hazardous than batteries. In an alternate reality where electric cars were the norm, I doubt you could get a liquid-fueled car past the safety regulators. Point 6 is a valid question. An electric car is still a car, and comes with all the negative externalities of a car, with the exception of local air pollution and petroleum dependence. Greenhouse-gas-wise, they are somewhere between "about the same" and "much much better" than internal combustion powered cars, depending on your assumptions.

anigbrowl 16y ago

re. 2), while car don't blow up as easily in real life as they do in the movies, when they do catch fire it makes for quite a bang. I'd rather be next to a wrecked electric vehicle than a gasoline-powered on. re. 6) manufacturing externalities for any vehicle are significant, but burning fossil fuels in a power station (to generate electricity to charge batteries) is vastly more efficient and cleaner than doing so in a vehicle engine. Thus, I think the overall level of pollution is likely to be lower. It's good to see this partnership; everyone likes what Tesla are about and their vision that green doesn't have to mean weak performance. But the high cost of their early offerings made a lot of people skeptical about the realistic future of electric cars. However, now that so many companies are committing to an all-electric paradigm (Nissan Leaf, Chevy Volt) there's enough competition to really drive innovation and offer customers a good value proposition.

volomike 16y ago

Really informative answers, guys. Thanks!