8 ms·

Is this what passes for clever? It's hardly a "tech" article, that's for sure. >The engine was also extremely hot, we burned ourselves when we touched it. El

Is this what passes for clever? It's hardly a "tech" article, that's for sure. >The engine was also extremely hot, we burned ourselves when we touched it. Electric motors run cold, I guess? >We started calculating price versus consumption and came to the shocking conclusion that a petrol car costs unimaginable €12 per 100km! Sure, electric cars could also theoretically come up to these amounts if they quick charged at one of the most expensive charging stations in the country – but for petrol cars there are no cheaper alternatives! You can buy a $12,000 gas car, but for electric cars there are no cheaper alternatives. Work that into the cost vs a $100,000 Tesla. The 99% of the world are not complete idiots; electric cars aren't mainstream yet.

nemo 11y ago
"Is this what passes for clever?" Swedish humor is no laughing matter.
reitanqild 11y ago
remember -around here(Norway, next to Sweden) taxes on gas and gas cars make Tesla prices look very reasonable. A brand new Tesla is about half the price of a similar (>400hp) car I guess.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  That's what happens when externalities are properly priced into vehicles using taxes. Nicely done Norway/Sweden.
  - maxerickson 11y ago
    That's a pretty huge assertion you are throwing in there. I think there is a fair chance that some of the tax there is just a simple luxury tax, with accidental relief on the Tesla side (as opposed to a proper pricing of externalities).
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      The tax incentives in question the remove a fair portion of the tax penalty apply to all electric vehicles, not just Tesla. The "relief" for Tesla isn't accidental. I would say you'd be correct if the benefits applied solely to Tesla vehicles, but not in this case.
      - maxerickson 11y ago
        My meaning was more that it depends on how well the laws captured the intent of the societies. The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is).
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is) I could not find the answer to this with some quick googling. I too would be interested in the answer.
  - hnnewguy 11y ago
    Costs aren't being added to the gas cars, which would make sense. Instead, normal people are subsidizing luxury cars. That's stupid.
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      The costs are added to all gas cars, and "normal people" are subsidizing all electric cars. The cars that are selling just happen to be the most expensive electric car.
  - smackfu 11y ago
    When you just set a bunch of taxes to zero for a few years, it's hard to argue that is "proper pricing."
    - toomuchtodo 11y ago
      If the externalities they're pricing in are oil consumption in the vehicle, and the vehicle doesn't burn oil, setting the taxes to zero is "proper pricing".
      - _delirium 11y ago
        That's not the only externality; another one is wear-and-tear on roads. In most countries, fuel taxes are used in part to pay for road and highway maintenance [1]. Certainly Norway's extensive, mountainous highway system is not free to build and maintain, and imo all road users should pay their share to fund it. You could have a direct per-km tax enforced via some kind of GPS unit, but that has privacy implications. Traditionally the fuel tax was a reasonable proxy, since vehicles used fuel in rough proportion to the amount of road traversed. [1] In the U.S. the link is explicit: almost the entirety of the fuel tax is earmarked for highway construction and maintenance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund
        deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
        toomuchtodo 11y ago
        The vast majority of road wear and tear is caused by trucks, not cars: "Heavy trucks obviously cause more road damage than cars, but how much more? According to a GAO study, Excessive Truck Weight: An Expensive Burden We Can No Longer Afford, road damage from one 18-wheeler is equivalent to 9600 cars (p.23 of study, p.36 of PDF)." http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776/776-roads-handout.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776... With regards to your point to taxes, remove the per-milage tax and charge a flat per-vehicle rate based on vehicle class, distributing the cost to trucks more than to passenger vehicles.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
amalag 11y ago
You can buy a 2013 used Nissan Leafs with under 10k miles for under $12k. That is comparable to a gas car. The low range on the Leaf really affects their value.
- jaxbot 11y ago
  I drive a Leaf. It's actually a really great city car. I use it for all my driving (commute, shopping, exploring the city) except for one trip a month I make in my old gas car. The car basically pays for itself compared to what I paid in gas in my old car. It's also almost zero maintenance, which is a huge plus coming from my old under 12k gas car which needed oil, random part replacements, cooling system issues, etc. Worth considering if you drive less than 60 miles a day, imo.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - crusso 11y ago
    Same here. We've had a leaf for about 8 months now and love it. We're in a suburban setting where most of our mileage is shuttling teenage kids to/from school and other activities. If your range needs are a match, it's a fantastic run-around car. With a 240V/30A charger in the garage, we can get much more than 100 miles out of it on busy days. If you need more range, there's a pricier BMW that get's almost twice as far on a charge.
  - amalag 11y ago
    Once a week we go somewhere which is a 50 mile round trip. I thought the 70 mile range was cutting it too close. Otherwise the price is very attractive now that I will move to a place with an actual garage so I can charge it.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago
  Wait, you're comparing a NEW ICE car with 200+ range, warranty, etc to a tiny ~40 mile range USED EV with a battery pack on its last legs (battery pack capacity drops begin at around 10 to 15k and continue from there). Real world range in traffic, climate control on, etc is not the advertised number. Its not even close. Search the Leaf forums if you don't believe me. Not to mention, after Fed and State rebates, there's $10,000 off the cost, which is affecting its resale value. Give me $10,000 for an ICE car and I'll show you a near free car with 4x the range, a warranty, etc. Come on.
hahainternet 11y ago
> Is this what passes for clever? It's hardly a "tech" article, that's for sure. I read it with a smirk, I thought it was a nicely done parody. In a few decades when your average 25 year old has never known a petrol driven car (yes yes this might not happen) it is a believable experience.
- mikeash 11y ago
  Is it even a parody? It's written from the perspective of somebody who doesn't yet exist: a person who has only known electric cars for their whole life. But aside from that, it does a pretty good job of imagining what that person would think the first time they're exposed to a "normal" car.
  - hahainternet 11y ago
    It's both parody and satire isn't it really. It's a deliberately absurd take on a car review so I feel both are appropriate.
ebbv 11y ago
> for electric cars there are no cheaper alternatives Not true at all. I traded in a Subaru WRX and pay less for my Leaf every month than I did for the Subaru. Not to mention the savings on the costs of driving it around. > The 99% of the world are not complete idiots; electric cars aren't mainstream yet. These two phrases don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. It's true, there are good reasons why EVs aren't mainstream. One is that if you're in an apartment or condominium EV ownership is pretty much out the window unless you can get your property managers to install charging stations. Another is that you can't get one with 200 mile range for under $60k right now, and that's a big hurdle for most people to get over mentally. Even though most people don't drive more than 80 miles in a day, and a Leaf WOULD do just fine for them, they can't bring themselves to act rationally about it. Being that close to their limit is a mental block. That's why it's important that Tesla delivers on the promise to offer a $30k 200 mile range car in 2017. Now, all of that has nothing to do with the original article. The point of which is really that EVs are way, way nicer than petrol cars, for a variety of reasons. Which is something that most people just don't get yet.
- toomuchtodo 11y ago
  > It's true, there are good reasons why EVs aren't mainstream. One is that if you're in an apartment or condominium EV ownership is pretty much out the window unless you can get your property managers to install charging stations. State laws are coming online that require property managers to install charging stations if they're above a certain size. California's law is already in effect with regard to this.
- SteveGerencser 11y ago
  Range is why we don't have an electric car yet. They are great for urban dwellers but for people that live out 'in the country' range is a serious issue. We only go in to town once a week or so and that is a 50 mile round trip if we make no extra stops. To go to the 'city' which happens once a month or so a round trip easily crosses the 100 mile range and can top 150 miles with dinner added in. A trip to a real metro area would easily cross the 250 mile mark. If Tesla can deliver a 'real' 200 mile car for a reasonable price it would be worth considering. But for a significant percentage of the rural population EVs are simply not an option at this point.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
mikeash 11y ago
Electric motors don't need much service (and when they do, it's highly complicated) so there's no need to provide access to it. People occasionally ask to see the motor in my Model S, and the best I can do is point to the rear seats and say "it's under there." There's nothing on the car that you can burn yourself on that you can get to without tools. And did you really say that there are no cheaper alternatives for an electric car than a $100,000 Tesla? You might want to have a look at what's actually available, if that's what you actually meant to say.
- hnnewguy 11y ago
  >And did you really say that there are no cheaper alternatives for an electric car than a $100,000 Tesla? You might want to have a look at what's actually available, if that's what you actually meant to say. If you want an electric car with 200+ mile range, what are the alternatives?
  - mikeash 11y ago
    You didn't specify that. :P

nemo 11y ago

"Is this what passes for clever?" Swedish humor is no laughing matter.

reitanqild 11y ago

remember -around here(Norway, next to Sweden) taxes on gas and gas cars make Tesla prices look very reasonable. A brand new Tesla is about half the price of a similar (>400hp) car I guess.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
That's what happens when externalities are properly priced into vehicles using taxes. Nicely done Norway/Sweden.
- maxerickson 11y ago
  That's a pretty huge assertion you are throwing in there. I think there is a fair chance that some of the tax there is just a simple luxury tax, with accidental relief on the Tesla side (as opposed to a proper pricing of externalities).
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    The tax incentives in question the remove a fair portion of the tax penalty apply to all electric vehicles, not just Tesla. The "relief" for Tesla isn't accidental. I would say you'd be correct if the benefits applied solely to Tesla vehicles, but not in this case.
    - maxerickson 11y ago
      My meaning was more that it depends on how well the laws captured the intent of the societies. The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is).
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        > The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is) I could not find the answer to this with some quick googling. I too would be interested in the answer.
- hnnewguy 11y ago
  Costs aren't being added to the gas cars, which would make sense. Instead, normal people are subsidizing luxury cars. That's stupid.
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    The costs are added to all gas cars, and "normal people" are subsidizing all electric cars. The cars that are selling just happen to be the most expensive electric car.
- smackfu 11y ago
  When you just set a bunch of taxes to zero for a few years, it's hard to argue that is "proper pricing."
  - toomuchtodo 11y ago
    If the externalities they're pricing in are oil consumption in the vehicle, and the vehicle doesn't burn oil, setting the taxes to zero is "proper pricing".
    - _delirium 11y ago
      That's not the only externality; another one is wear-and-tear on roads. In most countries, fuel taxes are used in part to pay for road and highway maintenance [1]. Certainly Norway's extensive, mountainous highway system is not free to build and maintain, and imo all road users should pay their share to fund it. You could have a direct per-km tax enforced via some kind of GPS unit, but that has privacy implications. Traditionally the fuel tax was a reasonable proxy, since vehicles used fuel in rough proportion to the amount of road traversed. [1] In the U.S. the link is explicit: almost the entirety of the fuel tax is earmarked for highway construction and maintenance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - toomuchtodo 11y ago
        The vast majority of road wear and tear is caused by trucks, not cars: "Heavy trucks obviously cause more road damage than cars, but how much more? According to a GAO study, Excessive Truck Weight: An Expensive Burden We Can No Longer Afford, road damage from one 18-wheeler is equivalent to 9600 cars (p.23 of study, p.36 of PDF)." http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776/776-roads-handout.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776... With regards to your point to taxes, remove the per-milage tax and charge a flat per-vehicle rate based on vehicle class, distributing the cost to trucks more than to passenger vehicles.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

amalag 11y ago

You can buy a 2013 used Nissan Leafs with under 10k miles for under $12k. That is comparable to a gas car. The low range on the Leaf really affects their value.

jaxbot 11y ago
I drive a Leaf. It's actually a really great city car. I use it for all my driving (commute, shopping, exploring the city) except for one trip a month I make in my old gas car. The car basically pays for itself compared to what I paid in gas in my old car. It's also almost zero maintenance, which is a huge plus coming from my old under 12k gas car which needed oil, random part replacements, cooling system issues, etc. Worth considering if you drive less than 60 miles a day, imo.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- crusso 11y ago
  Same here. We've had a leaf for about 8 months now and love it. We're in a suburban setting where most of our mileage is shuttling teenage kids to/from school and other activities. If your range needs are a match, it's a fantastic run-around car. With a 240V/30A charger in the garage, we can get much more than 100 miles out of it on busy days. If you need more range, there's a pricier BMW that get's almost twice as far on a charge.
- amalag 11y ago
  Once a week we go somewhere which is a 50 mile round trip. I thought the 70 mile range was cutting it too close. Otherwise the price is very attractive now that I will move to a place with an actual garage so I can charge it.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
Wait, you're comparing a NEW ICE car with 200+ range, warranty, etc to a tiny ~40 mile range USED EV with a battery pack on its last legs (battery pack capacity drops begin at around 10 to 15k and continue from there). Real world range in traffic, climate control on, etc is not the advertised number. Its not even close. Search the Leaf forums if you don't believe me. Not to mention, after Fed and State rebates, there's $10,000 off the cost, which is affecting its resale value. Give me $10,000 for an ICE car and I'll show you a near free car with 4x the range, a warranty, etc. Come on.

hahainternet 11y ago

> Is this what passes for clever? It's hardly a "tech" article, that's for sure. I read it with a smirk, I thought it was a nicely done parody. In a few decades when your average 25 year old has never known a petrol driven car (yes yes this might not happen) it is a believable experience.

mikeash 11y ago
Is it even a parody? It's written from the perspective of somebody who doesn't yet exist: a person who has only known electric cars for their whole life. But aside from that, it does a pretty good job of imagining what that person would think the first time they're exposed to a "normal" car.
- hahainternet 11y ago
  It's both parody and satire isn't it really. It's a deliberately absurd take on a car review so I feel both are appropriate.

ebbv 11y ago

> for electric cars there are no cheaper alternatives Not true at all. I traded in a Subaru WRX and pay less for my Leaf every month than I did for the Subaru. Not to mention the savings on the costs of driving it around. > The 99% of the world are not complete idiots; electric cars aren't mainstream yet. These two phrases don't necessarily have anything to do with each other. It's true, there are good reasons why EVs aren't mainstream. One is that if you're in an apartment or condominium EV ownership is pretty much out the window unless you can get your property managers to install charging stations. Another is that you can't get one with 200 mile range for under $60k right now, and that's a big hurdle for most people to get over mentally. Even though most people don't drive more than 80 miles in a day, and a Leaf WOULD do just fine for them, they can't bring themselves to act rationally about it. Being that close to their limit is a mental block. That's why it's important that Tesla delivers on the promise to offer a $30k 200 mile range car in 2017. Now, all of that has nothing to do with the original article. The point of which is really that EVs are way, way nicer than petrol cars, for a variety of reasons. Which is something that most people just don't get yet.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
> It's true, there are good reasons why EVs aren't mainstream. One is that if you're in an apartment or condominium EV ownership is pretty much out the window unless you can get your property managers to install charging stations. State laws are coming online that require property managers to install charging stations if they're above a certain size. California's law is already in effect with regard to this.
SteveGerencser 11y ago
Range is why we don't have an electric car yet. They are great for urban dwellers but for people that live out 'in the country' range is a serious issue. We only go in to town once a week or so and that is a 50 mile round trip if we make no extra stops. To go to the 'city' which happens once a month or so a round trip easily crosses the 100 mile range and can top 150 miles with dinner added in. A trip to a real metro area would easily cross the 250 mile mark. If Tesla can deliver a 'real' 200 mile car for a reasonable price it would be worth considering. But for a significant percentage of the rural population EVs are simply not an option at this point.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

mikeash 11y ago

Electric motors don't need much service (and when they do, it's highly complicated) so there's no need to provide access to it. People occasionally ask to see the motor in my Model S, and the best I can do is point to the rear seats and say "it's under there." There's nothing on the car that you can burn yourself on that you can get to without tools. And did you really say that there are no cheaper alternatives for an electric car than a $100,000 Tesla? You might want to have a look at what's actually available, if that's what you actually meant to say.

hnnewguy 11y ago
>And did you really say that there are no cheaper alternatives for an electric car than a $100,000 Tesla? You might want to have a look at what's actually available, if that's what you actually meant to say. If you want an electric car with 200+ mile range, what are the alternatives?
- mikeash 11y ago
  You didn't specify that. :P