The Tesla Roadster - Electric Car
The Tesla Roadster will be unveiled tomorrow. It is an all electric vehicle (EV) that can go 0-60 mph in 4 seconds. It has a range of 250 miles on a single charge and the electricity cost will be less than 2 cents per mile. Oh yeah, it will cost around $100k. The company, Tesla Motors, will start taking orders tomorrow and hopes to begin delivery by mid 2007.
IMO, this is a very significant vehicle, far more than the niche status its limited production will indicate. The manufacturer hopes to sell around 4,000 in the next few years. Not even a blip on the radar when it comes to total US car sales but that's not the point. It will be a high profile vehicle that will generate a lot of buzz. Primarily it will dispell the misconception of EVs being nothing but glorified golf carts. I think the other most notable feature about this car is its battery pack. Compared to GM's EV1 of 5 years ago the batteries weigh 20% less, have 3 times more energy storage and can re-charge in half the time. Pretty rapid advancement in a fairly short period. Why again are we wasting time with hydrogen fuel cells?
http://www.teslamotors.com
Take a look at the management and board of directors before you dismiss this endeavour as "pie in the sky" from a bunch of fringe whackos.
IMO, this is a very significant vehicle, far more than the niche status its limited production will indicate. The manufacturer hopes to sell around 4,000 in the next few years. Not even a blip on the radar when it comes to total US car sales but that's not the point. It will be a high profile vehicle that will generate a lot of buzz. Primarily it will dispell the misconception of EVs being nothing but glorified golf carts. I think the other most notable feature about this car is its battery pack. Compared to GM's EV1 of 5 years ago the batteries weigh 20% less, have 3 times more energy storage and can re-charge in half the time. Pretty rapid advancement in a fairly short period. Why again are we wasting time with hydrogen fuel cells?
http://www.teslamotors.com
Take a look at the management and board of directors before you dismiss this endeavour as "pie in the sky" from a bunch of fringe whackos.
0
Comments
seriously though, batteries are not the solution. Its like running from a ghost (oil) and stumbling over the coffin (batteries).
Use of batteries and pure electricity in automobiles brings its own very large set of problems, one of which would be the disposal of said batteries from x million of cars once they arent good anymore.
It will be interesting to see if Tesla can repeatedly live up to the numbers listed (ie 250 miles per charge). Electric vehicles are a great idea if the power plants in a country are non-hydrocarbon based (ie hydroelectric, nuclear, wind). Otherwise, one is simply transferring pollution from one location to another (although even this may be beneficial in reducing smog).
From the oil dependence perspective it is a solution, or partial solution. We have dirty domestic coal that can be used instead of dirty imported oil.
From a forward looking perspective we (US) have the potential to produce abundant domestic, green, clean electricity. The average homeowner has far more solar energy hitting his property than he will ever need to use. Within 10 years many experts believe that electricity generated through photovoltaic cells will be cost competitive with grid electricity. At this point, for those that choose to take advantage, no more need for gas stations. This will be the mother of all disruptive technologies. I can't wait.
I seem to remember essentially that same statement in a Popular Science article circa 1978.....
Meet the Tesla Roadster.
Here's how it works, performance numbers, and of course Tesla Roadster pictures
They also do a nice job of spelling out environmental impacts, etc. in the more section of their web site.
Let's not just talk about this car - let's celebrate it!
Maybe I am misinterpretting your post but it sounds like you believe the promise of solar energy will always be something in the future. While the PS prediction of 1978 didn't come to fruition the fact is we have come a long way since then. Advancements are currently happening at a rapid pace fueled largely by nanotechnology breakthroughs and thin film manufacturing processes. My estimate of 10 years for cost competitiveness is probably conservative. More like 5 years.
I'm curious about how fun a sports car can be with an automatic transmission. Based upon the comments, a clutch appears to be unnecessary due to the immediate torque output. What about the sound? Will it be a high whiny sound like a Honda CBR motorcycle, no sound, tire roll sound? Will there be an ozone smell at hard launches from arcing of the electric motor?
As fast as this car is reported to be I hope the company spends some of its efforts trying to make it faster. The electric motor has performance capabilities that an ICE will never be able to touch. I don't think that is even debatable. I would like to see The Tesla Roadster be the ultimate performance machine, hands down. People currently driving Ferraris and Lamborghinis are making the statement that they are rich and they can afford to spend extravagantly for top performance. The statement they will now be making is that they couldn't get a Tesla.
Unfortunately I can't quite afford the Tesla Roadster but nonetheless I don't think that I've ever been this enthused about a vehicle. I wish it wasn't almost a year off before actual owners take delivery.
There's one other thing that I wish. I wish I could invest in this company. Unfortunately they state on their website that they aren't interested in investors. That's got to tell you something.
Looking like an Elise doesn't hurt either
Tesla Motor's website has a blog going on and the number of people providing input is impressive. I'd say that 95% of the respondents are totally onboard with what this company is doing. There's a small group that makes comments like, "it needs to be a four door for people with kids", "it needs to be in the $25k price range", etc.. Are people really that stupid? Maybe this is the group that GM and Ford has been listening to.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=J2DGfisAndI
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wrightspeed_X1
BTW, Tesla was somewhat of a stealth program and caught people off guard. They aren't the only ones. There will be more. Mitsubishi has some interesting cars in the works, and has moved up their timetable form 2010 to 2008. Search on Mitsubishi MIEV, it's pretty cool. Altair Nanotechnologies has made some very intriguing claims with their Li-ion batteries, and has signed an agreement to provide batteries for a fleet pickup truck being developed by Phoenix Motorcars. Wrightspeed. Tzero. The EV is gaining momentum, and Detroit is insignificant.
I agree. I just hope that gas prices remain high so that this momentum keeps building.
I also agree that Detroit is insignificant and getting more so every year. I believe that Tesla Motors will make money for its investors. The fact that a few entrepreneurs with zero experience in auto manufacturing can do something that the major manufacturers couldn't speaks volumes. Or maybe they could have but deliberately chose not to.
I was on another thread expressing my opinion that EVs are the future. A common response was that the executives at Toyota and Honda have clearly demonstrated themselves to possess a savvy business sense. If there was money to be made manufacturing and selling EVs these people would be the first to realize it. We'll see. Like you said, Detroit is insignificant and the fact that they aren't pursuing EVs kind of validates the idea in a backhand way.
Although not directly stated, I inferred from the movie that specific members from the state level of government were the primary contributors to burying the EV1. Clearly, "big oil" is not completely innocent, however, their role seemed to be reasonably minor compared to the egos at GM and state and federal politics. Presumably, the loss of gasoline taxation revenue was the motivating factor. I assume this tax money is already spent up to 2050.
Clearly neither of these cars will have mass appeal at the present time given their price tag. The rational is that with advancements in technology and economies of scale the prices will come down. Let's say the price needs to be around $25k in order for either of these cars to be mainstream vehicles. So the fuel cell vehicle needs to go from $1,000,000 to $25,000 and the EV needs to get from $50,000 to $25,000. And this doesn't take into account the massive infrastructure that will need to be built to support fuel cell vehicles.
It really seems like a no-brainer when it comes to which path should be taken. Its like having to go from California to Arizona and wondering whether you should head east or west. Both directions will eventually get you there but one is considerably shorter.
Currently I am most intrigued with Mitsubishi. They are ideal in some ways, because they are a major auto manufacturer, but have had some image problems and have lost market share. They are in need of an image boost and they need to take chances, but they still have the manufacturing capability of a large automaker.
They originally were to come out with all electric cars in 2010, but supposedly have moved it up to 2008. They are doing what you suggest (an electric motor for each wheel) and they are doing the hybrid the right way (gas generator and an all electric drive unit) I will be interested in when they come out and what the price point will be.
One criticism I have heard (which was in theory against the MIEV, not actually haven driven one) is that putting a motor on each wheel adds to much unsprung weight and will kill the handling characteristics.
http://www.motortrend.com/auto_shows/coverage/detroit/112_2006_detroit_auto_show- - _coverage/mitsubishi_ct_miev_concept.html
When I first heard about the Tesla I speculated that it must have 4 motors. They had published the total hp (248) so I was curious what four 62 hp electric motors would weigh. In reality the rear motors would probably be more powerful then the front. There is a company, UQM Technologies, that makes electric motors for vehicles. Their 100 hp motor weights 89 pounds. So to use 4 of these would be quite a bit of weight but can you imagine a 400 hp AWD vehicle that probably had 800 ft-lbs of torque!!
There is a company in Ojai, Phoenix Motorcars, that is quietly putting together a fleet pickup truck using a UQM propulsion system and Altair Nanotechnolgies new Li-Ion battery. I will be curious to see what they come out with (and when).
The founder of Tesla Motors is a self proclaimed car guy that wanted a performance vehicle that he didn't need to feel guilty about driving. The philosophy behind this car has as much to do with its environmental impact as it does its performance. When discussing the Tesla Roadster the two are inseparable. Now if we want to create a more specific thread that precludes discussing this vehicles environmental impact the question would be, why?
She isn't talking about a more specific thread to NOT talk about the environmental aspects of EV's; that thread already exists (THIS ONE). Perhaps what she means is a MORE GENERAL thead about all aspects of EV's (including all the side track issues I brought up regarding the cleanliness of the electic power generation).
The problem is, I'm not aware of any particular GENERAL topic regarding EVs. Is there one?
"Just like discussing the pros and cons of SUVs will always involve their lack of fuel efficiency."
Yes. Which is why there are GENERAL topics involving the pros and cons of SUVs. And the topic involving the Chevy Tahoe IN PARTICULAR would not be the place to start harping about the lack of fuel efficiency of SUVs in general.
She's right. Discussing the general topic of electric production is NOT relevant to a topic specific to the Tesla.
Maybe there does need to be a separate thread for EVs in general. I guess that was my fault since I started this thread and didn't make it clear why I considered this vehicle so worth discussing.
To begin with, I'll move some of the more general EV posts to the new Electric Vehicle Pros & Cons discussion. Then we'll see how things develop. If we need to come up with more discussions for specific EV issues, we can do that!
From what I've read the problem with the everspring product is its relatively slow discharge rate. While that is fine for your typical vehicle it might not work so well for a high performance car like the Tesla Roadster.
Tesla Sells Out its All-Electric Roadsters
REVIEW DATE: 16-AUG-2006
By Errol Pierre-Louis
It seems the Tesla Roadster's hefty price tag hasn't scared away buyers. Less than a month after unveiling its new all-electric sports car, Tesla Motors' CEO Martin Eberhard announced that the company has already sold all 100 of its limited-edition Roadsters.
Tesla Motors introduced the world to the Roadster at its "Signature Hundred Event" on July 19th. The Tesla Roadster reaches top speeds of 130 mph with a 0-to-60 time of about 4 seconds. It travels 250 miles on a single charge of its whisper-quiet electric motor.
Among early buyers were Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin and eBay co-founder Jeff Skoll, all of whom are investors in Tesla Motors. While Tesla has received one-hundred $100,000 deposits, each of which guarantees a Tesla Roadster for the depositor, only a few of these vehicles have been completed.
Someone has lots of cash deposits, now only if they could build them, and get them to perform the same, or better, than the prototypes. :P
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/travel/story/0,,1855609,00.html
The article reveals that Tesla could be sold, for the right offer:
"We have the big guys sniffing around, talking about buying technology, even hinting about buying the whole company," says Harrigan.
Ford, Chrysler and Nissan have all made the visit to Tesla's base in California and expressed an interest in the company.
And the scary quote is here:
"If the cheque was big enough and meant a real commitment from them to build the company then I think that's a good thing," he says.
Automobile manufacturers are in business to make money! If they have the technology, and know there is a real, sustainable market, they will move heaven and earth to sell them!
Hooray for Tesla, I say! Work them against one another, take your huge check and be proud!
The fear is that a big company might simply want to bury the technology - example, Texaco buying the NIMH battery patents, then making the batteries very hard to get, or GM buying up sctreetcar companies to kill them (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy )
In the present environment, I would be less paranoid about this. But you never know for sure what might happen.
Using Wiki for any information is dodgey at best!
You need to know nothing more than in a Free Enterprise system, if there is money to be made, whatever "it" is will be available.
Well, for controversial topics, sure. But I wasn't aware the 1940s GM streetcar fiasco was controversial. What do you find dubious about the story? They were found guilty in court, after all. Here's another account at Answers.com:
http://www.answers.com/topic/general-motors-streetcar-conspiracy
You need to know nothing more than in a Free Enterprise system, if there is money to be made, whatever "it" is will be available.
In an ideal capitalist state, sure. Reality is not that simple. Disruptive technology creates a disincentive to innovate. Large companies can tie up patents or litigate to stifle innovation. Example:
Why is it that EV hobbyists such as myself cannot buy the NIMH batteries that Texaco holds the patent for? They have the batteries. We have the money. There is clearly 'money to be made', as you put it. It may be small change to them, but so what? Why isn't "it" available? Other battery manufacturers are eager to sell to EV hobbyists - often at discounts, because we are a vocal group who promote their products, and many of us are engineers who find other uses for them in our work.
It's not just hobbyists, either. Look at the EV products for sale, like the ZAP, or the Myers NMG vehicles. No NIMH batteries for them either. Give me a plausable reason.
The success of EVs would hurt Texaco. If you ran Texaco, wouldn't you be thinking about this?
Companies should not be expected, and raked over the coals for not providing you or anyone with "niche" materials. It always is nicer to have villains, and bogey-men to explain away these things, I understand. But all experience has shown that money trumps everything. As I said, if there were enough demand, and money to be made, we would have no problem finding the technology.
Texaco, Royal Dutch Shell, BP, are all highly diversified companies, and obviously better versed than most in the finite resources of the planet. Of course they will warehouse technology until it will be most profitable for them. The alternative would have been for others to buy the patents. Oh, no money to do so? Well they had the money, and did. The anger is just sour grapes that those with the resources will not bend to a rather small groups will and provide what you want, when you want it, even if they lose money doing so. Hardly fair, or practical, is it?
I rather think the success Toyota is having with their Hybrid's is speeding up the alternative fuel process, rather than slowing it down. Like most things, it will never be fast enough for the "true believers" or early-adapters.....
Dude, they already MAKE the batteries. NIMHs are used for all sorts of applications. Some hybrids use them. I just want to BUY some of them... you know... here's some MONEY... I want to buy your batteries... anybody there?
Other battery manufacturers DO sell batteries to whoever wants them. After all, this is the way to make the most money, isn't it? Again the central question here is:
Why won't they sell me their product? Why can't EV makers buy them? I can find hybrids with NIMHs, but no EVs. Can you think of a reason?
Here we go with the 'true believer' stuff again... hallelujah!! I see the light! I am recharged by the big battery in the sky!
Lots of products are sold only to licensed electricians, plumbers, etc. Is this the case here? If they are making them, where are they going? Into storage? The Government? :shades:
NIMHs were in GM's EV1, performed well, and were cost-effective. GM sold their share of the patent to Chevron/Texaco after that, and the batteries were never made available (no sales channel, no volume pricing) to EV builders again. I know you're not a Wikipedia fan, but the clearest explanation of this is on their page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle
Here's a quote: "In order to use NiMH batteries without violating Chevron's patents, hybrid automobile manufacturers are required to design vehicles which are at least 50% powered by gasoline; otherwise, they are limited to the use of "D" cell-sized NiMH ("small format") batteries."
The issue is fast becoming moot since newer Li-Ion batteries are superior. Ironically, this hands a big chunk of US EV and hybrid business to the Chinese, who make most of the Li-Ions. A shame, since NIMHs are an American invention.
Rather, I intended this as an example, like the GM/streetcar antitrust case from the forties, of market inefficiencies that can work against the desires and interests of the public, even when there is money to be made.
This story may explain why the EEstor ultracapacitors, another American battery advancement, will be appearing in Canadian cars, not American ones.
Very interesting posts. I do know that Toyota paid a $30 million settlement for NiMH battery infringement lawsuit. It is hard to figure why they will not sell to EV hobbyists. Maybe buy up battery packs from wrecked Prius.
I think however, you made my point. One type of battery is superior to another, and those will become the standard. The patents on those made in China batteries are held by whom? The Chinese? :P Of course not!
And what Canadian automobile manufacturer will be making those advanced battery cars?
Why not?
There are lots of patents held by many countries, including China, for different versions of the batteries. US research played a part, but the first patents were granted to Sony, and nearly all the Li-Ion research and manufacturing - and relevant patents - are Asian (which helps protect this technology from tinkering with by the oil interests.) History of li-ion batteries at this link:
http://www.atp.nist.gov/eao/wp05-01/chapt2.htm
Basically, the US had the chance to develop these batteries, but didn't.
The most advanced Li-Ion battery for electric vehicles is here:
http://www.everspring.net/product-battery.htm
Look at the chart on that page, and how the battery compares with its competition, on both performance and price.
If you click on the "US Patent" link, you will see the inventors are Chinese. (Foreign inventors need US patents to protect their inventions here.)
The Canadian auto company is EV maker 'Feel Good Cars.' Here's a press release from earlier this year:
http://tyler.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2006/3/29/1849708.html
My apologies about my profile here. I hadn't filled it in yet. I just did so. But from what I see, this thread is very interesting to the readers here.
http://www.b2i.us/profiles/investor/ResLibraryView.asp?BzID=546&ResLibraryID=169- 17&Category=856
Simpler chargers are also cheaper to make and smaller to carry around, improving the accessibility of vehicles based on these batteries.
I've been following these issues for a while, and it seems that there are lots more 'new tech battery' stories out there now than I've seen before. That's good news.
I would think the recall of millions of lap top batteries this past month, by Sony and Dell, would give some of you pause about batteries, and their general safety, or lack thereof.....