7 ms·

Tesla Roadster reaches the end of the line

113 points by jkuria 15y ago

checker 15y ago
Quoted from comments and decided to analyze: "A family sedan for $80,000. That will work." At an average of 15K miles/year, 30mpg, and $3/gal of gas, that's $1500 in gasoline a year. Over 5 years, that's a savings of $7500 ($10000 for $4/gal). We're not quite at that point where it offsets completely from a pure 'gas vs electric' POV (I'm not sure if the car has a Mercedes-comparable interior or a Toyota-comparable interior). I don't think this means it won't work, but I was interested in the gas savings over time. I would buy one if I could afford an $80000 car.
- MikeCapone 15y ago
  If you really wanted an EV now, you could get a Nissan LEAF for a lot less than a Tesla Roadster. But if you want a couple generations, you should get a pretty decent price and a much bigger range (not to mention that by then fast charging stations should be more common).
- pitdesi 15y ago
  The Tesla model S is supposed to be similar in dimension to the last 7 series BMW... which retails for about $80k. I believe fit and finish is to be up to that par as well. http://autos.yahoo.com/bmw/7-series/2012/ http://autos.yahoo.com/bmw/7-series/2012/ It's not close on a gas savings level, but you don't buy a Tesla for the gas savings... You buy it because it is a different type of car and to make a statement.
  - vaksel 15y ago
    frankly I don't see why they need to make it so big. Weight is one of the biggest problems for fuel efficiency, it takes a ton more juice to move a 4,000lb car vs a a 3,000lb car.
    - checker 15y ago
      I find it interesting that they intend to make a wagon/estate version with rear-facing seats (article says 7 passengers, so my best guess is that it has to be a wagon in that form). They must really want to make the 'family' statement, because no other demographic regularly sits 7 people.
      - lutorm 15y ago
        Everyone driving around in an SUV seem to feel the need for seating 7 people, even if a microscopic fraction of them actually do...
  - bh42222 15y ago
    I love the Tesla guys, but I doubt they have the pricing power of BMW. In that price range we're talking conspicuous consumption, and a beamer is definitely conspicuous, but a Tesla? Maybe if you're a gay engineer dude, this Tesla will be a great way to score other gay geek dudes - wait or maybe it's for lesbian geeks... not sure, my point is I doubt this will make people think it can get them laid as much an equally priced BMW will. This is why I think it is overpriced.
  - rdl 15y ago
    I'm hoping to put in a deposit for a Model S Signature as a bay area vehicle (for personal and/or company use). The 300 mile range is perfect for SFBA, and it's big enough for 4-5 people comfortably, or datacenter equipment, and has more novelty value than a lambo among geeks. I wouldn't take an exotic (Tesla, Fiskar Karma, F or L, etc.) on long road trips in the US, especially with a non-standard drivetrain, due to the lack of service options. Within the bay area, especially if you have 240 or 480v charging at home/office, it's perfect. I know a Roadster user who has his mainly because he hates gas stations.
- btilly 15y ago
  Your analysis left out the cost of electricity that has to be used instead of gas. Even so in 5 years you save a maximum of 10% of the cost of the car. This only works if you're put a personal value on not using fossil fuels which far exceeds the cost of gasoline. In return you get a very fast sedan that can't be used for any long road trips. It would be fine for commutes and around town, but even something like a trip from Los Angeles to San Francisco would be a major fail.
  - mixmastamyk 15y ago
    LA to SF is a long drive and not comfortable to do in one day. Yes it can be done if you take i-5 and drive like a maniac for ~6-7 hours. However, I'd much rather take the scenic route via 101 and stop over in Paso Robles and get the car charged up while at a nice B&B, wine tasting, etc. ;)
    - ChuckMcM 15y ago
      Must be a perception thing. One way isn't "long" in the sense that its only 300 miles. Its 'long' to drive SF to Las Vegas. Basically any drive over about 480 miles of freeway starts getting long. That being said, the 'long trip' scenario is somewhat of red herring. If you regularly travel several hundred miles a day then an all electric car is probably unlikely to meet your vehicle requirements. If its an occasional (once a year) kind of thing then creative solutions might arise to address it. Were the Tesla guys willing to put a high power plug in the back I could imagine a 'trailer' which held a generator and a gas tank and provided power all the way there.
      - yosh 15y ago
        There's actually 5 charging stations that Tesla installed on the 101 between SF and LA. If we got serious about electric cars, higher charging station density would help with long trips. And I agree, SF<->LA is not a long drive.
      - btilly 15y ago
        Until those "creative solutions" have materialized and hit the market, we have to work within the constraints that we have to live with. As someone with a family, my requirements for a family car need to cover the possibility of extended road trips. Sure, I know that in theory I could just rent a gas car for that, but I know in practice that it won't happen. So "able to handle long road trips" is solidly in my personal list of firm requirements for a family vehicle. Sure, I don't need to do it every day. But it is something I need that vehicle to do.
- cube13 15y ago
  Let's assume that it's a high-end luxury sedan, not a low-end family sedan. Unless gas goes up to $100/gallon, there's no way you'll save money by buying the Tesla over a affordable mid-size like a Honda Accord or Ford Fusion. So let's compare that to a Mercedes E-class. According to US News(http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Mercedes-Benz_E-Class/ http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Mercedes-Be...), the average price out the door is about $48,000 for the model with the fewest options. Let's round that up to $50,000, because we want alloy wheels or some other additional feature. The mileage of the car is 24 highway, 17 city, so let's average that to about 20(a bit more city driving than highway). So that's $15,000 in gas over the 5 years(30/20=1.5). So the total cost of the car, not counting other replacements, is around $65,000. That's still $15,000 less than the $80,000 on the Tesla, and you're not going to spend $15,000 on car washes and other parts(brakes, oil, etc.) in that time. It should also be noted that if you need to buy replacement batteries in that 5 year period, the cost increases to $100,000. EDIT: I didn't include the cost of electricity, or the electrical work needed to get the extra 220 volt circuit out to your garage.
  - wooster 15y ago
    The high end Mercedes luxury sedan is the S-class, for which the low end price paid is about $90,000.
  - checker 15y ago
    I agree. The personal carbon guilt price will need to heavily weigh in their favor, as btilly said next to you.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    Most people don't buy luxury vehicles for their economics.
  - nradov 15y ago
    Edmunds estimates the total cost of ownership for a Mercedes-Benz E-class sedan at $77K for five years. http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/e-class/2011/tco.html?style=101350134 http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/e-class/2011/tco.html?s...
bugsy 15y ago
$58,0000 for 160 mile range, $80,000 for extra batteries to bring it up to 300 mile range, which is $22,000 more. The extra weight of the batteries reduces mileage slightly so the extra pack doubles the battery capacity. Now battery cost is the big problem, so the $22,000 pack is being sold at near cost. So a 300 mile range battery pack from 0 mile range is $44,000, this is the cost of the two packs. Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use, so figure $9000/yr battery cost for this machine, not including the $1000 or so fees for disposing of the toxic waste (lithium batteries are not accepted at the dump). So yes, you save on gas driving this machine and save the environment by not emitting as many fumes. But it costs $9000 a year to maintain the batteries, which are a serious toxic waste disposal problem. Not harping on Tesla here though, this is the basic problem with electric cars.
- Kaizyn 15y ago
  Assume: $4/gallon gasoline. 45 miles per gallon for commuter car. The average driver in the US drives 15,000 miles/year. Therefore: $9000 / $4 = 2250 gallons. 2250 gallons * 45 mpg = 101250 miles 101250 mi / 15000 mi = 6.75 You must drive the electric car 6.75 times further each year than the gasoline powered car for your battery costs to break even with gas costs. If you are driving that much, you will wear out the batteries even faster than the norm causing the battery cost to be even higher. Alternately, it's cheaper to drive a fuel-efficient gasoline car like a Volkswagon Jetta until gasoline gets up to $27/gallon.
  - ericd 15y ago
    You should compare it to something that's near its performance class, since people are obviously not going to buy the Model S just to save money. That's going to be a future model. At under 5 seconds 0-60, the Model S sport is supposedly going to have performance in the 500 horsepower BMW M5 range, which gets a combined MPG of 13 (11 city, 17 highway). Besides that, the M5 is more like $90k.
- MikeCapone 15y ago
  "Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use" Please cite your source on this. AFAIK, the batteries in most electric cars are good for the life of the vehicle. They're designed to use only part of their capacity to extend life and then compensate as much as possible for loss of charge over time.. And they pay you to recycle lithium-ion batteries, and they aren't very toxic at all. http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-3-recycling-our-non-toxic-battery-packs http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-3-recycling...
Spines11 15y ago
Tesla's next car, a sedan, will cost $58,000. What is it that makes electric cars so expensive? I don't know much about cars, but I thought electric cars had fewer parts than a gas car. Is it just that the parts for electric cars haven't reached economies of scale yet?
- pitdesi 15y ago
  Batteries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Price http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Price
- MikeCapone 15y ago
  Batteries are still expensive, and there isn't much economies of scale yet.
- btilly 15y ago
  Batteries. In The Innovator's Dilemma there is an analysis from the 90s presented about when pure electric cars would be economically viable for a mass market. Based on then-current technology projections, it would happen around 2020. The critical combination that their analysis found necessary is price below a certain level, sufficient acceleration to merge into an Interstate, sufficient range, and fast enough recharge time. The Tesla currently fails on price and recharge time. It over-delivers on power, and has about the right range.
  - Corrado 15y ago
    OK, but why are batteries expensive? 20 years ago rechargeable AA cells were very expensive, now they are cheap, plentiful, and work better than ever. Will electric vehicle cells follow the same curve? If not, why not? Is it because they contain precious materials? Lack of economies of scale? ???
    - btilly 15y ago
      The long and short of it is, "Moore's law is ubiquitous." In many very different industries for a long time, once there was an agreed upon and measurable criterion for "better" they delivered exponentially improving performance for periods of decades. What is exceptional about transistors is the rate of doubling, but not the general shape of the curve. (More normal rates of sustained improvement are 5-10%/year.) Lithium-ion batteries have been on a sustained path of improvement since the first commercial ones were released in 1991. If that curve is projected forward to 2020, you hit a price-performance point where electric cars are likely to be competitive. Incidentally if the history of innovation is to be trusted, I would not look for the first successful mainstream electric cars to be from major auto makers or from companies like Tesla. Successful disruptions tend to come up from the bottom of the market. Look at companies like Club Car that sell things like electric golf carts that are already appearing on the road. It is much easier for companies to expand upmarket than it is to strip products down. There is no reason to believe that this has changed.
AndyKelley 15y ago
One thing that seems unaddressed is how quickly the car recharges. For example, if I am going on a road trip in a gasoline car, when I run out of gas, I can quickly fill it up and be on my way. With an electric car, an electrical recharge probably takes several hours.
- btucker 15y ago
  Electric swap stations (eg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfdYU7gk8fs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfdYU7gk8fs) strike me as one of the most promising concepts for electric vehicles. Imagine if rather than ever owning a battery you're just perpetually rent the use of one (perhaps with a small per-swap fee). Alas it would seem we're still many many years away from seeing anything like this rolled out in a real way.
  - wmf 15y ago
    Tesla seems to be going in the opposite direction, making the battery pack a structural component.
  - pitdesi 15y ago
    Definitely. Better place does this, and charges on a per mile basis (in Israel) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
RexRollman 15y ago
Something I've always wondered, and I bet someone else here has thought about it, is what happens if electric vehicles do become popular? It seems to me that we would have a huge surge in electrical demand and that would make electricity more expensive. Could the electrical infrastructure even keep up? And wouldn't we just end up shifting where waste comes from (from Cars to power plants). And battery recycling would certainly become a very important thing.
- jamesbkel 15y ago
  One thing to bear in mind is that energy production is MUCH more efficient when done at scale (i.e. power plant) than having lots of little power plants (i.e. internal combustion engines). There's still the issue of transporting the energy, but the waste/consumption to output ratio definitely favors generating power at large scale. [edit: Another thought. I'm not sure about this and can't find a quick reference, but I would guess that scrubbing the emissions at a coal plant can be done more effectively than at the per-internal combustion engine level.]
  - bonzoesc 15y ago
    > …scrubbing the emissions at a coal plant can be done more effectively than at the per-internal combustion engine level. This is true, especially because you can put a fence around a coal plant, while you can't always put a fence around your catalytic converter to keep meth-heads from stealing it for the platinum[1]. 1: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=catalytic+converter+meth-head https://duckduckgo.com/?q=catalytic+converter+meth-head
- JL2010 15y ago
  The hope is, on the utility side, that the introduction of "smart grid" and "smart metering" technology will help to introduce staggered scheduling of smart appliances and devices such that they do not add significantly to peak times. For example, if your car has implemented the ZigBee Smart Energy Profile it will connect to your smart meter (HAN network) and will know to start charging only over night (or only if it absolutely has to) when the demand for electricity is far less and most likely cheaper - after the utility implements more levels of peak pricing. We're probably a decade away from such things.
csomar 15y ago
Electric cars doesn't solve the problem if we are using oil to produce electricity. That is, we need to solve that problem first. Actually, by replacing oil with some sort of renewable energy or safe-to-use nuclear energy is already a step to reducing oil consumption. I'm not here saying that Tesla cars are useless. I didn't try them, but from the design, speed and mileage they seem pretty decent. They are the future, but it's important to look at the energy that runs them and get to solve that problem first.
- sixtofour 15y ago
  Electric cars are one step in the direction of reducing oil use. And, we cannot solve the oil problem by solving the oil problem first. The great thing about electric anything is that it's a flexible energy source. You can generate electricity with many different fuels. So you can work on the end user energy needs a bit at a time, without requiring the entire economy to shift all at once.
- nradov 15y ago
  In the US only 1% of electricity comes from oil. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/2008_US_electricity_generation_by_source_v2.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/2008_US_electr...
mkramlich 15y ago
nooooo! I had a personal goal of buying a new one in the next few years. Hopefully they bring it back and/or a similar all-electric sports car comes out.
mmphosis 15y ago
Here are the three primary components of my future electric car, ordered by the most costly first: 1. Power generation: lots and I mean lots of cheap solar panels on the roof of my home, and a small wind turbine. $25000 2. Power storage: compressed air tanks. $10000 3. A light weight vehicle that meets my own specifications of a small but practical delivery vehicle. $5000
shawnbaden 15y ago
Breaking into the automotive industry is tough. Tesla (or any new manufacturer) should expect to slog along for 10+ years before seeing any significant sales and impact.
HoyaSaxa 15y ago
The number one thing Tesla has to do if they want to become part of the mainstream is to get the United States Government to establish standards for car batteries. The downside to this is that it limits innovation. However, without the ability to swap batteries at "battery (gas) stations" electric cars will stay in the "early adapters" phase indefinitely. The alternative is to develop a cost effective battery that can last for a very long time (read: 500+ miles) which actually might be in the near future. On a side note, I wish Tesla sold gas hybrid cars because I love the design.
Machine1962 15y ago
Innovation would cease to exist if all we did was figure out how/why NOT to do something. Most have not had the pleasure of experiencing the thrill of this technology before commenting. Tesla's real issue is that Musk is really only interested in developing, selling his technology and driving their stock price up so he can get out of the car biz. NOT saving the world, one car at a time. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

113 points by jkuria 15y ago

Quoted from comments and decided to analyze: "A family sedan for $80,000. That will work." At an average of 15K miles/year, 30mpg, and $3/gal of gas, that's $1500 in gasoline a year. Over 5 years, that's a savings of $7500 ($10000 for $4/gal). We're not quite at that point where it offsets completely from a pure 'gas vs electric' POV (I'm not sure if the car has a Mercedes-comparable interior or a Toyota-comparable interior). I don't think this means it won't work, but I was interested in the gas savings over time. I would buy one if I could afford an $80000 car.

MikeCapone 15y ago
If you really wanted an EV now, you could get a Nissan LEAF for a lot less than a Tesla Roadster. But if you want a couple generations, you should get a pretty decent price and a much bigger range (not to mention that by then fast charging stations should be more common).
pitdesi 15y ago
The Tesla model S is supposed to be similar in dimension to the last 7 series BMW... which retails for about $80k. I believe fit and finish is to be up to that par as well. http://autos.yahoo.com/bmw/7-series/2012/ http://autos.yahoo.com/bmw/7-series/2012/ It's not close on a gas savings level, but you don't buy a Tesla for the gas savings... You buy it because it is a different type of car and to make a statement.
- vaksel 15y ago
  frankly I don't see why they need to make it so big. Weight is one of the biggest problems for fuel efficiency, it takes a ton more juice to move a 4,000lb car vs a a 3,000lb car.
  - checker 15y ago
    I find it interesting that they intend to make a wagon/estate version with rear-facing seats (article says 7 passengers, so my best guess is that it has to be a wagon in that form). They must really want to make the 'family' statement, because no other demographic regularly sits 7 people.
    - lutorm 15y ago
      Everyone driving around in an SUV seem to feel the need for seating 7 people, even if a microscopic fraction of them actually do...
- bh42222 15y ago
  I love the Tesla guys, but I doubt they have the pricing power of BMW. In that price range we're talking conspicuous consumption, and a beamer is definitely conspicuous, but a Tesla? Maybe if you're a gay engineer dude, this Tesla will be a great way to score other gay geek dudes - wait or maybe it's for lesbian geeks... not sure, my point is I doubt this will make people think it can get them laid as much an equally priced BMW will. This is why I think it is overpriced.
- rdl 15y ago
  I'm hoping to put in a deposit for a Model S Signature as a bay area vehicle (for personal and/or company use). The 300 mile range is perfect for SFBA, and it's big enough for 4-5 people comfortably, or datacenter equipment, and has more novelty value than a lambo among geeks. I wouldn't take an exotic (Tesla, Fiskar Karma, F or L, etc.) on long road trips in the US, especially with a non-standard drivetrain, due to the lack of service options. Within the bay area, especially if you have 240 or 480v charging at home/office, it's perfect. I know a Roadster user who has his mainly because he hates gas stations.
btilly 15y ago
Your analysis left out the cost of electricity that has to be used instead of gas. Even so in 5 years you save a maximum of 10% of the cost of the car. This only works if you're put a personal value on not using fossil fuels which far exceeds the cost of gasoline. In return you get a very fast sedan that can't be used for any long road trips. It would be fine for commutes and around town, but even something like a trip from Los Angeles to San Francisco would be a major fail.
- mixmastamyk 15y ago
  LA to SF is a long drive and not comfortable to do in one day. Yes it can be done if you take i-5 and drive like a maniac for ~6-7 hours. However, I'd much rather take the scenic route via 101 and stop over in Paso Robles and get the car charged up while at a nice B&B, wine tasting, etc. ;)
  - ChuckMcM 15y ago
    Must be a perception thing. One way isn't "long" in the sense that its only 300 miles. Its 'long' to drive SF to Las Vegas. Basically any drive over about 480 miles of freeway starts getting long. That being said, the 'long trip' scenario is somewhat of red herring. If you regularly travel several hundred miles a day then an all electric car is probably unlikely to meet your vehicle requirements. If its an occasional (once a year) kind of thing then creative solutions might arise to address it. Were the Tesla guys willing to put a high power plug in the back I could imagine a 'trailer' which held a generator and a gas tank and provided power all the way there.
    - yosh 15y ago
      There's actually 5 charging stations that Tesla installed on the 101 between SF and LA. If we got serious about electric cars, higher charging station density would help with long trips. And I agree, SF<->LA is not a long drive.
    - btilly 15y ago
      Until those "creative solutions" have materialized and hit the market, we have to work within the constraints that we have to live with. As someone with a family, my requirements for a family car need to cover the possibility of extended road trips. Sure, I know that in theory I could just rent a gas car for that, but I know in practice that it won't happen. So "able to handle long road trips" is solidly in my personal list of firm requirements for a family vehicle. Sure, I don't need to do it every day. But it is something I need that vehicle to do.
cube13 15y ago
Let's assume that it's a high-end luxury sedan, not a low-end family sedan. Unless gas goes up to $100/gallon, there's no way you'll save money by buying the Tesla over a affordable mid-size like a Honda Accord or Ford Fusion. So let's compare that to a Mercedes E-class. According to US News(http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Mercedes-Benz_E-Class/ http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Mercedes-Be...), the average price out the door is about $48,000 for the model with the fewest options. Let's round that up to $50,000, because we want alloy wheels or some other additional feature. The mileage of the car is 24 highway, 17 city, so let's average that to about 20(a bit more city driving than highway). So that's $15,000 in gas over the 5 years(30/20=1.5). So the total cost of the car, not counting other replacements, is around $65,000. That's still $15,000 less than the $80,000 on the Tesla, and you're not going to spend $15,000 on car washes and other parts(brakes, oil, etc.) in that time. It should also be noted that if you need to buy replacement batteries in that 5 year period, the cost increases to $100,000. EDIT: I didn't include the cost of electricity, or the electrical work needed to get the extra 220 volt circuit out to your garage.
- wooster 15y ago
  The high end Mercedes luxury sedan is the S-class, for which the low end price paid is about $90,000.
- checker 15y ago
  I agree. The personal carbon guilt price will need to heavily weigh in their favor, as btilly said next to you.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  Most people don't buy luxury vehicles for their economics.
- nradov 15y ago
  Edmunds estimates the total cost of ownership for a Mercedes-Benz E-class sedan at $77K for five years. http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/e-class/2011/tco.html?style=101350134 http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/e-class/2011/tco.html?s...

bugsy 15y ago

$58,0000 for 160 mile range, $80,000 for extra batteries to bring it up to 300 mile range, which is $22,000 more. The extra weight of the batteries reduces mileage slightly so the extra pack doubles the battery capacity. Now battery cost is the big problem, so the $22,000 pack is being sold at near cost. So a 300 mile range battery pack from 0 mile range is $44,000, this is the cost of the two packs. Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use, so figure $9000/yr battery cost for this machine, not including the $1000 or so fees for disposing of the toxic waste (lithium batteries are not accepted at the dump). So yes, you save on gas driving this machine and save the environment by not emitting as many fumes. But it costs $9000 a year to maintain the batteries, which are a serious toxic waste disposal problem. Not harping on Tesla here though, this is the basic problem with electric cars.

Kaizyn 15y ago
Assume: $4/gallon gasoline. 45 miles per gallon for commuter car. The average driver in the US drives 15,000 miles/year. Therefore: $9000 / $4 = 2250 gallons. 2250 gallons * 45 mpg = 101250 miles 101250 mi / 15000 mi = 6.75 You must drive the electric car 6.75 times further each year than the gasoline powered car for your battery costs to break even with gas costs. If you are driving that much, you will wear out the batteries even faster than the norm causing the battery cost to be even higher. Alternately, it's cheaper to drive a fuel-efficient gasoline car like a Volkswagon Jetta until gasoline gets up to $27/gallon.
- ericd 15y ago
  You should compare it to something that's near its performance class, since people are obviously not going to buy the Model S just to save money. That's going to be a future model. At under 5 seconds 0-60, the Model S sport is supposedly going to have performance in the 500 horsepower BMW M5 range, which gets a combined MPG of 13 (11 city, 17 highway). Besides that, the M5 is more like $90k.
MikeCapone 15y ago
"Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use" Please cite your source on this. AFAIK, the batteries in most electric cars are good for the life of the vehicle. They're designed to use only part of their capacity to extend life and then compensate as much as possible for loss of charge over time.. And they pay you to recycle lithium-ion batteries, and they aren't very toxic at all. http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-3-recycling-our-non-toxic-battery-packs http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-3-recycling...

Spines11 15y ago

Tesla's next car, a sedan, will cost $58,000. What is it that makes electric cars so expensive? I don't know much about cars, but I thought electric cars had fewer parts than a gas car. Is it just that the parts for electric cars haven't reached economies of scale yet?

pitdesi 15y ago
Batteries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Price http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Price
MikeCapone 15y ago
Batteries are still expensive, and there isn't much economies of scale yet.
btilly 15y ago
Batteries. In The Innovator's Dilemma there is an analysis from the 90s presented about when pure electric cars would be economically viable for a mass market. Based on then-current technology projections, it would happen around 2020. The critical combination that their analysis found necessary is price below a certain level, sufficient acceleration to merge into an Interstate, sufficient range, and fast enough recharge time. The Tesla currently fails on price and recharge time. It over-delivers on power, and has about the right range.
- Corrado 15y ago
  OK, but why are batteries expensive? 20 years ago rechargeable AA cells were very expensive, now they are cheap, plentiful, and work better than ever. Will electric vehicle cells follow the same curve? If not, why not? Is it because they contain precious materials? Lack of economies of scale? ???
  - btilly 15y ago
    The long and short of it is, "Moore's law is ubiquitous." In many very different industries for a long time, once there was an agreed upon and measurable criterion for "better" they delivered exponentially improving performance for periods of decades. What is exceptional about transistors is the rate of doubling, but not the general shape of the curve. (More normal rates of sustained improvement are 5-10%/year.) Lithium-ion batteries have been on a sustained path of improvement since the first commercial ones were released in 1991. If that curve is projected forward to 2020, you hit a price-performance point where electric cars are likely to be competitive. Incidentally if the history of innovation is to be trusted, I would not look for the first successful mainstream electric cars to be from major auto makers or from companies like Tesla. Successful disruptions tend to come up from the bottom of the market. Look at companies like Club Car that sell things like electric golf carts that are already appearing on the road. It is much easier for companies to expand upmarket than it is to strip products down. There is no reason to believe that this has changed.

AndyKelley 15y ago

One thing that seems unaddressed is how quickly the car recharges. For example, if I am going on a road trip in a gasoline car, when I run out of gas, I can quickly fill it up and be on my way. With an electric car, an electrical recharge probably takes several hours.

btucker 15y ago
Electric swap stations (eg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfdYU7gk8fs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfdYU7gk8fs) strike me as one of the most promising concepts for electric vehicles. Imagine if rather than ever owning a battery you're just perpetually rent the use of one (perhaps with a small per-swap fee). Alas it would seem we're still many many years away from seeing anything like this rolled out in a real way.
- wmf 15y ago
  Tesla seems to be going in the opposite direction, making the battery pack a structural component.
- pitdesi 15y ago
  Definitely. Better place does this, and charges on a per mile basis (in Israel) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

RexRollman 15y ago

Something I've always wondered, and I bet someone else here has thought about it, is what happens if electric vehicles do become popular? It seems to me that we would have a huge surge in electrical demand and that would make electricity more expensive. Could the electrical infrastructure even keep up? And wouldn't we just end up shifting where waste comes from (from Cars to power plants). And battery recycling would certainly become a very important thing.

jamesbkel 15y ago
One thing to bear in mind is that energy production is MUCH more efficient when done at scale (i.e. power plant) than having lots of little power plants (i.e. internal combustion engines). There's still the issue of transporting the energy, but the waste/consumption to output ratio definitely favors generating power at large scale. [edit: Another thought. I'm not sure about this and can't find a quick reference, but I would guess that scrubbing the emissions at a coal plant can be done more effectively than at the per-internal combustion engine level.]
- bonzoesc 15y ago
  > …scrubbing the emissions at a coal plant can be done more effectively than at the per-internal combustion engine level. This is true, especially because you can put a fence around a coal plant, while you can't always put a fence around your catalytic converter to keep meth-heads from stealing it for the platinum[1]. 1: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=catalytic+converter+meth-head https://duckduckgo.com/?q=catalytic+converter+meth-head
JL2010 15y ago
The hope is, on the utility side, that the introduction of "smart grid" and "smart metering" technology will help to introduce staggered scheduling of smart appliances and devices such that they do not add significantly to peak times. For example, if your car has implemented the ZigBee Smart Energy Profile it will connect to your smart meter (HAN network) and will know to start charging only over night (or only if it absolutely has to) when the demand for electricity is far less and most likely cheaper - after the utility implements more levels of peak pricing. We're probably a decade away from such things.

csomar 15y ago

Electric cars doesn't solve the problem if we are using oil to produce electricity. That is, we need to solve that problem first. Actually, by replacing oil with some sort of renewable energy or safe-to-use nuclear energy is already a step to reducing oil consumption. I'm not here saying that Tesla cars are useless. I didn't try them, but from the design, speed and mileage they seem pretty decent. They are the future, but it's important to look at the energy that runs them and get to solve that problem first.

sixtofour 15y ago
Electric cars are one step in the direction of reducing oil use. And, we cannot solve the oil problem by solving the oil problem first. The great thing about electric anything is that it's a flexible energy source. You can generate electricity with many different fuels. So you can work on the end user energy needs a bit at a time, without requiring the entire economy to shift all at once.
nradov 15y ago
In the US only 1% of electricity comes from oil. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/2008_US_electricity_generation_by_source_v2.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/2008_US_electr...

mkramlich 15y ago

nooooo! I had a personal goal of buying a new one in the next few years. Hopefully they bring it back and/or a similar all-electric sports car comes out.

mmphosis 15y ago

Here are the three primary components of my future electric car, ordered by the most costly first: 1. Power generation: lots and I mean lots of cheap solar panels on the roof of my home, and a small wind turbine. $25000 2. Power storage: compressed air tanks. $10000 3. A light weight vehicle that meets my own specifications of a small but practical delivery vehicle. $5000

shawnbaden 15y ago

Breaking into the automotive industry is tough. Tesla (or any new manufacturer) should expect to slog along for 10+ years before seeing any significant sales and impact.

HoyaSaxa 15y ago

The number one thing Tesla has to do if they want to become part of the mainstream is to get the United States Government to establish standards for car batteries. The downside to this is that it limits innovation. However, without the ability to swap batteries at "battery (gas) stations" electric cars will stay in the "early adapters" phase indefinitely. The alternative is to develop a cost effective battery that can last for a very long time (read: 500+ miles) which actually might be in the near future. On a side note, I wish Tesla sold gas hybrid cars because I love the design.

Machine1962 15y ago

Innovation would cease to exist if all we did was figure out how/why NOT to do something. Most have not had the pleasure of experiencing the thrill of this technology before commenting. Tesla's real issue is that Musk is really only interested in developing, selling his technology and driving their stock price up so he can get out of the car biz. NOT saving the world, one car at a time. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.