4 ms·

If that were truly the case they’d have started with plug-in hybrids.

Turskarama 3y ago
The one bit of credit I will give Tesla is proving to the large manufacturers that pure EVs can have mass market appeal. I think for the stated goal, skipping right past hybrids was a great idea.
- AtlasBarfed 3y ago
  I strongly disagree that skipping hybrids was a great idea. IMO a 40-50 mile PHEV would have effectively electrified 60-80% of car trips by 2020 if the US had mandated their use in all cars back in 2002 (about 5 years after the Prius and Insight were introduced). I think carbon emissions could have been greatly reduced by 2015 with good foresight. Of course we're talking the Bush Administration in 2005, so that wasn't happening, and Obama didn't have the political firepower either. Really within a year of the viability of the Prius Congress should have passed CAFE laws that basically forced hybrids in every consumer car segment as soon as possible, and then followed up 5 years later with a PHEV requirement, and then 5 years later with a 40 mile all electric requirement. Why is that such an amazing idea? Simple, it maximizes the impact of the battery manufacturing supply. Instead of a Tesla Model S with a 350 mile range toting around 85% of its batteries daily for no reason, all of those batteries would have gone to actual daily use. But now the industry is not going to do that, everyone is replatforming or replatformed for pure EVs.
  - Turskarama 3y ago
    Sure, the government should have done a lot of things. But we weren't talking about government, we were talking about Tesla. I don't think Tesla releasing a plugin hybrid instead of the Model S would have led to everyone having a hybrid today, much in the same way everyone doesn't have a BEV today. I think ironically PHEVs (or more realistically, range extended BEVs) will actually gain popularity as the proportion of people with BEVs begins to cross the 50% threshold. For them to really make sense to sell there needs to be a big enough market that making the low power engines required becomes dirt cheap per unit. As it stands the difference in cost between a pure BEV and a PHEV is so low that paying that little bit more for the BEV makes sense basically every time.
    - jfengel 3y ago
      The problem for PHEVs is that as BEVs cross 50%, there will be more electric vehicle infrastructure, and the hybrid becomes moot. Either you have access to cheap (overnight, at-home) charging, or you don't. The hybrid extends the range of batteries, but the use case is small and becomes smaller. The vast majority of people will plug in overnight. Very long trips use quick chargers. The hybrid case is reduced to places where you don't think you can plug in (which will be few when BEVs become the majority). There are corner cases: "Yes, I like to haul my enormous boat to the lake hundreds of miles every single week and so the quick chargers still require hours". But in the end I think that such corner cases will be reduced to "Fine, go buy an old ICE car, and plan your trip around the diminishing number of gas stations".
      - AtlasBarfed 3y ago
        Yeah, which is why now the play is full EV. But 10-15 years ago there is a generation or two of ICE still to go. Making all those PHEVs would have been a massive improvement to emissions.
ChatGTP 3y ago
Maybe trains?
- aerio 3y ago
  Musk hates trains. https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-awkward-dislike-mass-transit/ https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-awkward-dislike-mass-t... Both hyperloop and underground tesla tunnels were both just a means to an end to stop California/US from focusing more on trains/public transport.
signatoremo 3y ago
Because they considered anything short of pure electric was net negative emission wise: [0] The CO2 content of any given source fuel is well understood. Natural gas is 14.4 grams of carbon per mega-joule and oil is 19.9 grams of carbon per mega-joule. Applying those carbon content levels to the vehicle efficiencies, including as a reference the Honda combusted natural gas and Honda fuel cell natural gas vehicles, the hands down winner is pure electric [0] - https://www.tesla.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me https://www.tesla.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-j...
- cramjabsyn 3y ago
  And? A plug-in hybrid runs from electric the vast majority of the time.
CyrsBel 3y ago
They succeeded, I'm not about to argue with Elon Musk's business muscle or American tech muscle lol. You can if you wanna! But he succeeded in a way that Chevy failed when they had a huge head start with the ev1. With less money. That's amazing and maybe plug-in hybrids matter or maybe they don't. He kept stating even in really early interviews what the goal is and they made it - massive charging network and now everyone will have standard connectors to it. And most of it is solar powered. Come on man.
adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
bad take. hybrids make a lot of sense but they are way harder for a new company to design.

The one bit of credit I will give Tesla is proving to the large manufacturers that pure EVs can have mass market appeal. I think for the stated goal, skipping right past hybrids was a great idea.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago
I strongly disagree that skipping hybrids was a great idea. IMO a 40-50 mile PHEV would have effectively electrified 60-80% of car trips by 2020 if the US had mandated their use in all cars back in 2002 (about 5 years after the Prius and Insight were introduced). I think carbon emissions could have been greatly reduced by 2015 with good foresight. Of course we're talking the Bush Administration in 2005, so that wasn't happening, and Obama didn't have the political firepower either. Really within a year of the viability of the Prius Congress should have passed CAFE laws that basically forced hybrids in every consumer car segment as soon as possible, and then followed up 5 years later with a PHEV requirement, and then 5 years later with a 40 mile all electric requirement. Why is that such an amazing idea? Simple, it maximizes the impact of the battery manufacturing supply. Instead of a Tesla Model S with a 350 mile range toting around 85% of its batteries daily for no reason, all of those batteries would have gone to actual daily use. But now the industry is not going to do that, everyone is replatforming or replatformed for pure EVs.
- Turskarama 3y ago
  Sure, the government should have done a lot of things. But we weren't talking about government, we were talking about Tesla. I don't think Tesla releasing a plugin hybrid instead of the Model S would have led to everyone having a hybrid today, much in the same way everyone doesn't have a BEV today. I think ironically PHEVs (or more realistically, range extended BEVs) will actually gain popularity as the proportion of people with BEVs begins to cross the 50% threshold. For them to really make sense to sell there needs to be a big enough market that making the low power engines required becomes dirt cheap per unit. As it stands the difference in cost between a pure BEV and a PHEV is so low that paying that little bit more for the BEV makes sense basically every time.
  - jfengel 3y ago
    The problem for PHEVs is that as BEVs cross 50%, there will be more electric vehicle infrastructure, and the hybrid becomes moot. Either you have access to cheap (overnight, at-home) charging, or you don't. The hybrid extends the range of batteries, but the use case is small and becomes smaller. The vast majority of people will plug in overnight. Very long trips use quick chargers. The hybrid case is reduced to places where you don't think you can plug in (which will be few when BEVs become the majority). There are corner cases: "Yes, I like to haul my enormous boat to the lake hundreds of miles every single week and so the quick chargers still require hours". But in the end I think that such corner cases will be reduced to "Fine, go buy an old ICE car, and plan your trip around the diminishing number of gas stations".
    - AtlasBarfed 3y ago
      Yeah, which is why now the play is full EV. But 10-15 years ago there is a generation or two of ICE still to go. Making all those PHEVs would have been a massive improvement to emissions.

ChatGTP 3y ago

Maybe trains?

aerio 3y ago
Musk hates trains. https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-awkward-dislike-mass-transit/ https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-awkward-dislike-mass-t... Both hyperloop and underground tesla tunnels were both just a means to an end to stop California/US from focusing more on trains/public transport.

signatoremo 3y ago

Because they considered anything short of pure electric was net negative emission wise: [0] The CO2 content of any given source fuel is well understood. Natural gas is 14.4 grams of carbon per mega-joule and oil is 19.9 grams of carbon per mega-joule. Applying those carbon content levels to the vehicle efficiencies, including as a reference the Honda combusted natural gas and Honda fuel cell natural gas vehicles, the hands down winner is pure electric [0] - https://www.tesla.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me https://www.tesla.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-j...

cramjabsyn 3y ago
And? A plug-in hybrid runs from electric the vast majority of the time.

CyrsBel 3y ago

They succeeded, I'm not about to argue with Elon Musk's business muscle or American tech muscle lol. You can if you wanna! But he succeeded in a way that Chevy failed when they had a huge head start with the ev1. With less money. That's amazing and maybe plug-in hybrids matter or maybe they don't. He kept stating even in really early interviews what the goal is and they made it - massive charging network and now everyone will have standard connectors to it. And most of it is solar powered. Come on man.

adgjlsfhk1 3y ago

bad take. hybrids make a lot of sense but they are way harder for a new company to design.