Tesla Model 3

[an]

Another advantage of FC over battery is its ability to be used in many more applications. There’s current development for plains, busses, tractors, etc. So, FCEV would ultimately make a bigger dent in CO2 emission if it can replace all the 18 wheelers, busses, and heavy machineries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_cell

[FlyerInHi]

It’s funny how everyone is falling all over tesla. Back in 2012 they were the losers like solyndra. Tesla got Nevada tax incentives to open a battery factory there

Bill O’reilly said everyone should support tesla

[ocrenter]

[quote=AN][quote=ocrenter]3. if we can actually remove all subsidies to Big Oil I would personally fly back to DC and hand deliver my solar and my EV rebates directly back to the IRS with a big bow on top.

4. That’s great, thanks for the link. I’m open to any alternative to fossil fuel. Any idea when the production version of solid oxide fuel cell will be hitting the streets? As for battery, battery density is getting incredibly good in extremely short period of time. As for degradation, aside from the first gen LEAFs in extreme weather locations, degradation has been minimal.

5. Agree about incentivizing walkability, much healthier and will help with the obesity epidemic. Not only that, cities don’t have to pay for maintenance of huge number of roads. Once the oil subsidies are gone, we would have plenty of funds to consider the all of the above strategies.

6. If there comes a time when the batteries are fully exausted, as in down to less than 30% capacity, the lithium is recyclable.[/quote]
3. It’s funny you say that, but then you fully support the creation of the next “Big Oil”. As we’ve seen, once money have been doled out, it’s hard to close the spigot.
4. I saw them on 60 minutes many years ago. They at the time were promising residential units, but I think for financial reason, they’re concentrating on business first. Although as you can see, I hate crony capitalism, but if we must dole out government subsidies, I rather it be dump into these Fuel Cell companies to help them reduce the size and have these units be put in every home. That would make a much bigger dent in CO2 emission than BEV IMHO. This is why I don’t believe in crony capitalism. I want want one possible new technology to get unfair advantage over another, when we don’t really know which technology is the right technology. Maybe they all are and all are needed at different time for different purpose.
5. Totally agree.
6. Studies have shown a 70% capacity battery have about 10 years life served as grid storage. We’re talking about about 15-20 years life span. Nickel-metal hydride batteries are better for recycling because of the Nickel. The advanced lithium batteries in most plug-in cars today are more difficult to recycle, in part because automakers use various chemistries, and the several chemical components have different recycling values. However, lithium-nickel-manganese-cobalt batteries found in many modern plug-in cars are better because of the nickel. But I don’t think the lithium, manganese, and cobalt are easily recyclable.[/quote]

Everyone is anti-crony capitalism. So propose a way to make the fight a fair fight and we are all good. And that includes finding a way to prevent the Koch brothers from launching their multi-million attack on EVs.

As for battery recycling, the tech for lithium recycling is here and present, it is doable.

[an]

[quote=ocrenter]Everyone is anti-crony capitalism. So propose a way to make the fight a fair fight and we are all good. And that includes finding a way to prevent the Koch brothers from launching their multi-million attack on EVs.

As for battery recycling, the tech for lithium recycling is here and present, it is doable.[/quote]1st step would be, not help creating the next “Big Oil” and expand even more crony capitalism.

If you really hate oil, you should be encouraging fracking and have natural gas replace coal and also support Fuel Cell to use that natural gas to generate electricity. I think between just those two things will make a much bigger dent on CO2 than BEV ever can.

As for Lithium… http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/04/14/tesla-tech-icons-scramble-lithium-prices-double/83034300/
Supply is already at a constraint and BEV aren’t even scratching the surface yet.

[livinincali]

[quote=AN]
As for Lithium… http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/04/14/tesla-tech-icons-scramble-lithium-prices-double/83034300/
Supply is already at a constraint and BEV aren’t even scratching the surface yet.[/quote]

I’ve done a little bit of research into the lithium production problem and it does seem like it’s going to be an issue at some point. I thought maybe it wouldn’t be an issue since I really don’t expect Tesla to get to it’s lofty annual production numbers, but if they do then it’s a real problem. Of course if the demand goes up rapidly before mining investments can be made then prices of Lithium will soar. At least until it becomes so uncompetitive that nobody is willing to buy EVs at that price point.

If you really believe in the EV future and want to profiteer a bit take a look at stock ticket LIT (ETF for lithium prices). Doesn’t look like a great buy right now, because you’d probably like to see it pull back a bit first but who knows.

The other problem for Tesla and the model 3 is that the federal tax credits for EVs manufactured by Tesla are going to expire fairly soon (Federal tax credit for EVs are limited to the first 200K units produced by an auto maker). Tesla already close to 100K vehicles produced so only another 100K of their units are eligible for a tax credit. Congress could extend the tax credits but I don’t know that they will. I don’t know about any sort of CA tax credit for EV. That might have different parameters.

[spdrun]

If you really hate oil, you should be encouraging fracking and have natural gas replace coal and also support Fuel Cell to use that natural gas to generate electricity.

No. We should encourage nuclear and have nuclear electricity replace coal. French have the right idea. Vive la France!

[LAAFTERHOURS]

[quote=livinincali][quote=AN]

The other problem for Tesla and the model 3 is that the federal tax credits for EVs manufactured by Tesla are going to expire fairly soon (Federal tax credit for EVs are limited to the first 200K units produced by an auto maker). Tesla already close to 100K vehicles produced so only another 100K of their units are eligible for a tax credit. Congress could extend the tax credits but I don’t know that they will. I don’t know about any sort of CA tax credit for EV. That might have different parameters.[/quote]

The tax credit does not end (drop from 7500/10k to 50% of that value) on car number 200,001. It ends two quarters after the 200,000th vehicle is delivered. This was covered at length in the past few weeks. Assuming there is no extension of the credit, expect Tesla to hold inventory to maximize credits for as many people as possible. They could arguably hold inventory from release prior to hitting the 200K and flood the market to fill as many deliveries as possible to allow for maximizing benefit to the buyer. I am not saying that will happen but its one play to benefit the consumer.

https://forums.teslamotors.com/zh_MO/node/61087

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]

If you really hate oil, you should be encouraging fracking and have natural gas replace coal and also support Fuel Cell to use that natural gas to generate electricity.

No. We should encourage nuclear and have nuclear electricity replace coal. French have the right idea. Vive la France![/quote]

How about limiting large auto engines like the rest of the developed world has been doing?

Would it really affect our standard of living driving small cars? We can save a lot of gas that way. Oil not used today is saved for the future.

[spdrun]

Large engines aren’t necessarily much less efficient anymore.

[an]

[quote=spdrun]Large engines aren’t necessarily much less efficient anymore.[/quote]
Especially when large V8 can shut down 4 of its cylinder when cruising.

[an]

[quote=spdrun]

If you really hate oil, you should be encouraging fracking and have natural gas replace coal and also support Fuel Cell to use that natural gas to generate electricity.

No. We should encourage nuclear and have nuclear electricity replace coal. French have the right idea. Vive la France![/quote]
We should encourage both. I don’t want to be heated in my home by nuclear? Right now, the most efficient fuel source for heating a home and water is either coal or natural gas. The technology is already there. If we just frack a lot more, encourage China and India to switch from dirty coal to natural gas and you’d greatly reduce CO2. We also have an abundant supply of natural gas as well, so if we increase frack, we’ll get an economic boom as we sell it to China/India and the rest of the world.

[spdrun]

(1) Fuck our economy. I don’t give a flying flip about an economic boom if it comes at the cost of our drinking water and environment. In the end, human health is more important than money.

(2) Heat pumps driven with nuclear-derived electricity are a perfectly good way of heating homes. Though the way the Russians/Swiss do it isn’t bad either. Use waste heat to produce steam, pipe it under the street to towns near the power plants, and heat homes directly. The steam circuit is isolated from the cooling circuit of the power plant, so the steam is non-radioactive. It’s called “district heating.”

(3) China and India should be encouraged to switch to clean nuclear, hydro, and renewables. Not fossil farts.

[ocrenter]

[quote=AN][quote=ocrenter]Everyone is anti-crony capitalism. So propose a way to make the fight a fair fight and we are all good. And that includes finding a way to prevent the Koch brothers from launching their multi-million attack on EVs.

As for battery recycling, the tech for lithium recycling is here and present, it is doable.[/quote]1st step would be, not help creating the next “Big Oil” and expand even more crony capitalism.

If you really hate oil, you should be encouraging fracking and have natural gas replace coal and also support Fuel Cell to use that natural gas to generate electricity. I think between just those two things will make a much bigger dent on CO2 than BEV ever can.

As for Lithium… http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/04/14/tesla-tech-icons-scramble-lithium-prices-double/83034300/
Supply is already at a constraint and BEV aren’t even scratching the surface yet.[/quote]

I don’t think a quantity and time limited consumer centric incentive will recreate the Big Oil monster. And what is your proposal on how to fight people like the Koch brothers pledging and planning millions of dollars to fight alternative energy source?

Lithium mining will likely keep up with demand, if it doesn’t, then like you mentioned, market forces will work that out.

[an]

[quote=ocrenter]I don’t think a quantity and time limited consumer centric incentive will recreate the Big Oil monster. And what is your proposal on how to fight people like the Koch brothers pledging and planning millions of dollars to fight alternative energy source?

Lithium mining will likely keep up with demand, if it doesn’t, then like you mentioned, market forces will work that out.[/quote]
Whether the subsidies size will be as big as the oil industry will remain to be seen. What I’ve seen in the past though is, once you’re on the government gravy train, you’ll get lobbyists to help you keep them coming.

I don’t propose anything because I don’t want to fight the Koch brothers anymore than I want to fight any other billionaires. They have the right to use their money however they see fit. Just like I do. Just because you don’t agree with how they spend their money doesn’t deminish their right to their money. Same can be said about any other people, rich or poor. George Soros also pump millions into causes that I don’t care for. But it’s not my place to dictate how he use hois money.

Whether Lithium mining will keep up or not remain to be seen. Time will tell. But I don’t want my tax dollar going toward crony capitalism. I rather that money go toward the poor who really need help. Of course market forces will work itself out. So, why waste tax dollar trying to manipulate the market?

I’m pretty sure the tax subsidies that oil company uses to buy their equipments are the same tax subsidies that other companies like GE take advantage of as well. Not to mention small businesses as well. It’s just that those rigs are very expensive, so their subsidies are big. That’s the problem with government trying to manipulate market. There will be unintended side effects. Not to mention the the fail investments of companies like Solyndra. This is why I want to roll back subsidies not add more.

I like to pose some questions for you. How quickly do you want us to stop drilling? After we stop, what will replace jet fuel, diesels for heavy machinery, what will replace plastics, lubricants, and other products that we current depend on that is made from oil? Do you lump coal and natural gas in with the same group as oil as well?

[ocrenter]

[quote=AN][quote=ocrenter]I don’t think a quantity and time limited consumer centric incentive will recreate the Big Oil monster. And what is your proposal on how to fight people like the Koch brothers pledging and planning millions of dollars to fight alternative energy source?

Lithium mining will likely keep up with demand, if it doesn’t, then like you mentioned, market forces will work that out.[/quote]
Whether the subsidies size will be as big as the oil industry will remain to be seen. What I’ve seen in the past though is, once you’re on the government gravy train, you’ll get lobbyists to help you keep them coming.

I don’t propose anything because I don’t want to fight the Koch brothers anymore than I want to fight any other billionaires. They have the right to use their money however they see fit. Just like I do. Just because you don’t agree with how they spend their money doesn’t deminish their right to their money. Same can be said about any other people, rich or poor. George Soros also pump millions into causes that I don’t care for. But it’s not my place to dictate how he use hois money.

Whether Lithium mining will keep up or not remain to be seen. Time will tell. But I don’t want my tax dollar going toward crony capitalism. I rather that money go toward the poor who really need help. Of course market forces will work itself out. So, why waste tax dollar trying to manipulate the market?

I’m pretty sure the tax subsidies that oil company uses to buy their equipments are the same tax subsidies that other companies like GE take advantage of as well. Not to mention small businesses as well. It’s just that those rigs are very expensive, so their subsidies are big. That’s the problem with government trying to manipulate market. There will be unintended side effects. Not to mention the the fail investments of companies like Solyndra. This is why I want to roll back subsidies not add more.

I like to pose some questions for you. How quickly do you want us to stop drilling? After we stop, what will replace jet fuel, diesels for heavy machinery, what will replace plastics, lubricants, and other products that we current depend on that is made from oil? Do you lump coal and natural gas in with the same group as oil as well?[/quote]

Your first paragraph is contradicted by your second paragraph. Again, who doesn’t love the banner of fighting crony capitalism? But under that exact banner, the end result is the status quo and solidifying of the established entrenched energy monopoly. You mentioned you want to roll back subsidies, I agree with you, but the billionaires have a bigger voice in government and they will make sure government will bend to their will. Why do you think congress agreed french fries and kitchup are vegetables?

I don’t want to stop drilling. I want enough market place support for nascent tech until they become self sustainable and they will bring the current energy monopolies to their knees.

Solar is a great example. Prices have come down just absolutely dramatically. Solar use to be President Carter’s pet project in the White House. Reagan ripped that thing out and ridiculed it. Now solar makes so much sense that even red blooded republicans are for solar energy. How did this happen? By not having any subsidies and allowing the electric companies to run the show while telling the public we are protecting them from crony capitalism?

[Author]

Posts