Slashdot Mirror

Ah-bullshit.
https://service.teslamotors.co...

I get it now. You talk like a commuter who wants a cheap reliable daily driver.

Wrong.

First off, the model 3 is $70k to get the top end model 3 not 59k.

Wrong. You can order one today (deliveries in a few weeks) for $64k and that includes the $5k Premium Upgrades Package, so be sure to add any premium upgrades to your competing gasoline car. PUP will be made optional early next year.

Yes taxes count on top of that.

I don't know about your environment, but where I am, there's no taxes on EVs, while a BMW M3 would have about 40% taxes. So that's probably not the argument you wanted to make. I deliberately omitted incentives, but hey, if you want to introduce them!

Second, your city driving only plan is ridiculous

It's not a "plan", it's the EPA numbers. Model 3 city range (usable pack size divided by measured city energy consumption) is longer than M3 city range (tank size divided by city mpg). Given typical fill levels - 90% daily for EVs, and an average of 60% for the M3 (with a great deal of variation) - the Model 3 goes further (well further) in combined cycle as well.

I am going to make up an equally silly scenario where we drive from San Francisco to LA and back every other day

You're right. That is a silly scenario. Which serves to illuminate how pointless these range discussions are in people's everyday lives. In your everyday life, the gasoline car has to regularly detour to gas stations, and the EV doesn't. Which makes the comparison obviously "winner: EV".

But in case your - I quote, "silly scenario" - matters to you: it's 383 miles between LA and SF. If you were driving there in the morning and back in the evening, you'd need a nominal 73 miles range added during the drive (plus whatever "buffer" you want - say, 30 miles). That's a 13 minute stop on each of your 5 1/2 hour drives. That's 13 minutes with the current V2 superchargers - should be under 10 minutes on V3.

Thirdly, my ICE car (msrp 65k, pre-tax, a bit less than your model 3), can be repaired anywhere over night. Parts are available RIGHT NOW.

Apparently you're unaware that anyone can order Tesla parts now. No wait times. By the way, I have two vehicles, one of which is a pickup truck which has been in the shop for much of a month - first waiting on a replacement bearing, and then when they tore it down, they discovered that they needed a second bearing replaced as well, and now I'm waiting on that. But I guess wait times only ever count when the vehicle under discussion is a Tesla?

Fourth, the build quality on the model 3 is random

Consumer Reports rates it as "average" - which for a car in its first model year, is quite good.

Fifth, the batteries in model 3 are toxic as fuck

You have no bloody clue what's in a NMC battery.

The cathodes are metal oxides. Inert. Non-soluble. The anodes are graphite. Lithium is intercalated, not bound, into both. The electrolytes decompose rapidly on exposure to water, with the most meaningful decomposition products being lithium ions (same as can leach from the electrodes) and fluoride ions. Excepting in abnormally high quantities, both lithium and fluorine in groundwater are good for peoples' health - to the point that we fluorinate our drinking water and lithium spring waters have long been used as health baths and drinks (7-up was initially a lithiated soda). Places where the groundwater is naturally richer in lithium have lower rates of violent crime and suicide than places where the groundwater is poor in lithium. This shouldn't come as a surprise, as high doses of lithium are used to treat mood

The New York Times lied about Tesla car. They got caught red-handed by the telemetry. "When the facts didn't suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts," Musk wrote.

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

A Times spokeswoman reiterated that its story was "fair and accurate."

This is like when the New York Times lied about the Tesla car. "When the facts didn't suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts," Musk wrote. A Times spokeswoman reiterated that its story was "fair and accurate."

The New York Times does this kind of stuff all the time. It's just that nobody calls them out on it, and anyone who does is ignored. It's part of how they keep their reputation. The New York Times lied about the Tesla car. "When the facts didn't suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts," Musk wrote. All backed up with telemetry from the car.

A Times spokeswoman reiterated that its story was "fair and accurate."

Glenn Thrush, the former senior staff writer at Politico who found himself in hot water when a WikiLeaks dump in October revealed that he ran an article by Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta prior to publishing, thought the Georgia results were lackluster. Thrush is now a political correspondent for The New York Times.

I provided you with a whole page of links and quotes where the NYT lied. WTF more is it going to take? Did you even read what Elon Musk wrote? "When the facts didn't suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts." They have the in-car telemetry that contradicts what the New York Times printed. There are tons of graphs with the source data. The Times lied again and again in the article.

Glenn Thrush of Politico was exposed seeking Podesta's approval of articles about Clinton. Even Thrush wrote "please don't tell anyone" and "I'm such a hack". The smoking gun: https://wikileaks.org/podesta-...

The consequences for Thrush? He was hired by the New York Times after the election. What does it say about a company that it does these kinds of things? How does a person like that ever find a job in journalism, much less at the NYT? What the hell?

Paul Krugman Lies. Gets 8k+ retweets. . . "Ok, It's not true". 160 retweets. It's a simple matter of psychology: post misleading news, wait for people to react, it's something known as "impression formation". Once an impression has been formed, it sticks. This is how they psyop the masses. This is how they persuade people. A lot of these people will never check the news, they'll never check the sources, they'll never look for the original testimony, and they'll never see the truth.

Too often we label whole groups from a perspective that uncritically accepts a stereotype or unfairly marginalizes them. As one reporter put it, words like moderate or centrist "inevitably incorporate a judgment about which views are sensible and which are extreme." We often apply "religious fundamentalists," another loaded term, to political activists who would describe themselves as Christian conservatives.

We particularly slip into these traps in feature stories when reporters and editors think they are merely presenting an interesting slice of life, with little awareness of the power of labels. We need to be more vigilant about the choice of language not only in the text but also in headlines, captions and display type.

-- Source: New York Times

You can put that "New York Times was not reporting false news or outright lies" idea to bed because they absolutely do. Why don't you hear about this all the time? It's huge news when they do it, and they do it often.

They lied about Tesla car. "When the facts didn't suit his opinion, he simply changed the facts," Musk wrote. A Times spokeswoman reiterated that its story was "fair and accurate."

Last year, 35% of colleges saw international student numbers go up, 26% saw no change, and 39% saw them go down. New York Times publishes this with the headline "Amid Trump Effect Fear, 40% of Colleges See Dip in Foreign Applicants"

Glenn Thrush, the former senior staff writer at Politico who found himself in hot water when a WikiLeaks dump in October revealed that he ran an article by Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta prior to publishing, thought the Georgia results were lackluster. Thrush is now a political correspondent for The New York Times.

"We don't want to hear anything - we've long said this about this about the Right - but I think the Left, we don't - I'm not 'we,' I'm a journalist - but the Left as a rule does not want to hear thoughtful disagreement."
http://www.newsbusters.org/blo...

New York Times says Trump's tweets incite violence, yet published an image of Stephen Miller's severed head on a pike.

The same people criticizing Trump for his WWE tweet had no problem with the New York Times sponsoring a play that depicted Trump's assassination.

New York Times lies about Trump's almost 40% figure

New York Times quotes a fake twitter account, publishes fake news.

The New York Times Misquoted Trump's Charlottesville Remarks In Five Different Reports

A New York Times reporter called Melania a hooker and they wouldn't even release the name of the reporter that said it, let alone fire her.

"Without your help," a beaming Fidel Castro said while nodding at Herbert Matthews during a visit to The New York Times's offices in April 1959, almost exactly a year after he'd visited Marquez-Sterling, "and without the help of the New York Times, the revolution in Cuba would never have been."

"Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is."
--Source: New York Times

Your first link is a dead link.

Your second link was for "theoretically" if you drove a Roadster (which never had a 300+ mile range) full out on a track. And guess what, if you drive a gasoline car full-out on a track, it will also have terrible range.

I'm sorry, but EVs do average their EPA ranges in real-world highway driving. This isn't a hypothetical, it's a fact. Slowing down makes you go much further than that - as mentioned, 670 miles for a Model S 100D. If you want to see how speed will affect your range, go here and scroll down. And yes, that is accurate. Or you can use this or this rangefinder, both independent projects unconnected by Tesla, based around real-world collected data in different conditions downloaded straight from the vehicles.

Tesla has finally released the results of what happened in Pennsylvania.. It seems that the autopilot warned the driver because his hands were not on the steering wheel. The car warned him repeatedly and it was the driver who grabbed the wheel and caused the crash.

In another accident, the driver was driving the car on an undivided mountain road which is not recommended. The driver's hands were not on the steering wheel. The car alerted the driver repeatedly to put his hands on the wheel. The driver claims it's because the alerts were given in English whereas he spoke Mandarin. Autopilot is supposed to be used on divided roads with clear visibility and the driver is supposed to keep their hands on the wheel.

Maybe they should require drivers to take an autopilot test to show that they understand it before enabling it. Like autopilot on a plane it still requires that the driver pay attention and have their hands on the wheel and be ready to take over.

My car is an early model S before the hardware for Autopilot was available.

The Tesla has an AC induction motor (invented by Nicolai Tesla) which is just steel and copper. No rare earth magnets... no magnets at all.
It's about time the rest of the auto industry woke up and started putting some "advanced technology" in their fossil fuel powered cars.
https://www.teslamotors.com/bl...

https://www.teslamotors.com/pr...

In their marketing, I've only seen it described as an intelligent cruise control. What have you seen that contradicts? Unrelated blogs talking about it?

Why on Earth was this modded up? To date Tesla has sold less than 100,000 cars. In 2014 GM sold over 3.4 MILLION. Instead of focusing on the fact that these incidents were notable because of Tesla calling their adaptive cruise control tech "autopilot", which mass-media picked up on, or the fact that it involved a car that typically cost over $70,000 US, you jumped straight to conspiracy.

Not to mention that the other car makes DO get media attention...I guess you can ignore that to because consipracy and Elon Musk.
http://blog.caranddriver.com/m...

https://forums.teslamotors.com...
http://media.gm.com/media/us/e...

*I know that safety can be determined through a number of different ways, such as deaths per miles driven, but I don't think that's applicable when talking about why journalist would pick up a story.

I think it was Mercedes or maybe Audi who commented that the Tesla system uses cameras and computer AI to determine if something is in the car's way. Their system used radar in conjunction with cameras, which sounds superior to me.

Well, they're wrong to imply that it only uses cameras and AI. From Tesla's autopilot press kit:

The latest software update, 7.0 allows Model S to use its unique combination of cameras, radar, ultrasonic sensors and data to automatically steer down the highway, change lanes, and adjust speed in response to traffic. [emphasis added]

Do you have an example of such marketing? I've never seen it.

Read *between* the lines like an actual human being. Not like a pedant trying to win an argument on a technicality.

https://www.technologyreview.c...

http://electrek.co/2016/04/20/...

"During a presentation following the release of the system, Musk said that in good road conditions âoepeople may [remove their hands from the steering-wheel], but we donâ(TM)t advise that.â "

In other words, you can do it, but we don't advise it. "wink wink [cough]lawyers made us say this[cough]".

That is generally the message they are broadcasting.

http://gizmodo.com/elon-musk-c...

" Even with this early version, itâ(TM)s almost twice as good as a person."

He doesn't say, it makes a human driver safer by acting as a useful failsafe. He specifically says it drives better than people do.

Read between the lines.

http://wccftech.com/tesla-auto...

" The feature itself has gained a lot of fame in the recent months thanks to its obvious novelty value and the fact that it is the first hands-off, self-driving technology on the market today."

Ah, but some of this is journalism and press coverage not actually marketing from Tesla. Right. So what? You think Tesla isn't loaning the cars and press kits to journalists? You think they aren't leveraging that mis information...

https://www.teslamotors.com/en...

They fucking link to it right from their own site. This link is on that page:

http://www.cnet.com/roadshow/v...

And this is the caption:
"Tesla doesn't have a fully autonomous car yet. But, with the addition of Autopilot mode, cruising down the highway is now a hands-off affair."

You can't credibly claim that Tesla isn't spreading the word that autopilot allows for 'hands off driving'; despite the disclaimers here and there.

https://www.teslamotors.com/en...
'What we know is that the vehicle was on a divided highway with Autopilot engaged when a tractor trailer drove across the highway perpendicular to the Model S. Neither Autopilot nor the driver noticed the white side of the tractor trailer against a brightly lit sky, so the brake was not applied. '

If you read the Tesla blog post that the (biased?) article is talking about, instead of the (clearly biased) summary, you'll see that Tesla actually points out that the US fatality rate is 1 per 94M miles (though the blog post does also mention the 60M worldwide number). Blame CNBC for picking the worse comparison point (and the submitter for choosing that article, I guess), not Tesla. What "they" are you talking about here?

From the tone of the article, I think Elon Musk might be involved behind the scenes, pulling the strings.

Only time with tell.

Seems that investors are quite concerned with this deal. Musk is the kind of person that plans is moves very far in advance. It's just not obvious why he is doing this.

He's also talking about that one incident where a Tesla ran over a chunk of metal on the highway, resulting in a horrible fire that was isolated to the engine compartment, and required that the driver pull over and shut the car down. (Rather than the much safer standard vehicle alternative of exploding, crashing, and suddenly ceasing to have a working engine while driving at high speeds on a crowded highway). Tesla's total dismissal of the incident is just typical of their head-in-the-sand tactics to ignoring real problems.

Wake up sheeple!

Not until they are facing losing said IP.

No corporation has ever given anything except at gunpoint.

Think about all the open source that is released by good-willed corporations. Even IP is given away Tesla's "All our patent are belong to you". [1]
There are corporations who believe in the commons. Even Apple, who legislates on design patents contributes to open source.

That said, the gist of what you said is true, and the only fix is to demolish the "corporations are people" legal construct (mostly because it's bullshit - corporations live forever and have no morals by default - it's simply legally convenient).

Fight against our corporate overlords!

[1] https://www.teslamotors.com/bl...

Tesla disagrees with the claim about the NHTSA investigating them... https://www.teslamotors.com/bl...

Oh, of course that is "just Tesla's word" and we shouldn't believe it. Right, got it.

By the way, the article you linked in no way contradicts the Tesla blog -- you just have to pay attention to what is actually being said. The Tesla "agreement" did not attempt to gag the failure, but the replacement. Of course, this is being widely misrepresented so the USA Today report that says NHTSA told Tesla that restrictions on reporting failures would be unacceptable? Sure, they were being misdirected by the misrepresentations. Tesla will of course agree that it will not put any such restrictions in agreements -- and in fact can leave the present one in place. Because the NHTSA is utterly unconcerned about this complete non-event do not expect to hear anything more about it from the NHTSA.

(wouldn't post anonymously, but I'd rather not undo moderation)

They just responded to this issue on their blog:

https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt

Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.

As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

Will

Yeah, disparaging the guy complaining and attacking his credibility while threatening legal action and gag orders. That makes Tesla look like a bunch of total saints compared to this guy.

This is in the Silicon Valley playbook: publicly condemn and personally malign any individual who tarnishes your image, and it works really well when you're covering up how bad your tech is and how little substance is to your hype claims. It worked really well for Theranos too.

Tesla has a slightly different take on this story which is worth reading. I\m not saying they are necessarily right and the customer is necessarily wrong, just that it could be useful to hear both sides of the story:

- They haven't seen this problem on any other cars (and they would know as they own all service centers).
- The car in question experienced a very unusual use case, it was regularly used on a long dirt road and was caked in dirt (it took two tow trucks to retrieve it, one to get it to the highway and another to get it to the service center)
- The NHTSA has not actually opened even a preliminary evaluation
- Their document would not prevent the customer from talking to the NHTSA.
- Tesla regularly meets with the NHTSA and has often issued recalls for defects before they ever became anything close to an actual safety issue
- The blogger who fabricated this issue (sic) is the same person who previously wrote a blog titled "Tesla Death Watch", starting on May 19 2008.

(Those are just a few highlights, read the to make up your own mind)

Tesla has a slightly different take on this story which is worth reading. I\m not saying they are necessarily right and the customer is necessarily wrong, just that it could be useful to hear both sides of the story:

- They haven't seen this problem on any other cars (and they would know as they own all service centers).
- The car in question experienced a very unusual use case, it was regularly used on a long dirt road and was caked in dirt (it took two tow trucks to retrieve it, one to get it to the highway and another to get it to the service center)
- The NHTSA has not actually opened even a preliminary evaluation
- Their document would not prevent the customer from talking to the NHTSA.
- Tesla regularly meets with the NHTSA and has often issued recalls for defects before they ever became anything close to an actual safety issue
- The blogger who fabricated this issue (sic) is the same person who previously wrote a blog titled "Tesla Death Watch", starting on May 19 2008.

(Those are just a few highlights, read the to make up your own mind)

They just responded to this issue on their blog:

https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt

Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.

As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.

Will

It's a tar file. Instructions for downloading the logs manually here:

https://upload.teslamotors.com/

I wouldn't be so sure...

https://www.teslamotors.com/ab...

Telematics Log Data: To improve our vehicles and services for you, we collect certain telematics data regarding the performance, usage, operation, and condition of your Tesla vehicle, including the following: vehicle identification number, speed information, odometer readings, battery use management information, battery charging history, electrical system functions, software version information, infotainment system data, safetyârelated data (including information regarding the vehicleâ(TM)s SRS systems, brakes, security, eâbrake), and other data to assist in identifying and analyzing the performance of the vehicle. We may collect such information either in person (e.g., during a service appointment) or via remote access.

Remote vehicle analysis: We may be able to dynamically connect to your Tesla vehicle to diagnose and resolve issues with it, and this process may result in access to personal settings in the vehicle (such as contacts, browsing history, navigation history, and radio listening history). This dynamic connection also enables us to view the current location of your vehicle, but such access is restricted to a limited number of personnel within Tesla.

I wouldn't be so sure...

https://www.teslamotors.com/ab...

Telematics Log Data: To improve our vehicles and services for you, we collect certain telematics data regarding the performance, usage, operation, and condition of your Tesla vehicle, including the following: vehicle identification number, speed information, odometer readings, battery use management information, battery charging history, electrical system functions, software version information, infotainment system data, safetyârelated data (including information regarding the vehicleâ(TM)s SRS systems, brakes, security, eâbrake), and other data to assist in identifying and analyzing the performance of the vehicle. We may collect such information either in person (e.g., during a service appointment) or via remote access.

Remote vehicle analysis: We may be able to dynamically connect to your Tesla vehicle to diagnose and resolve issues with it, and this process may result in access to personal settings in the vehicle (such as contacts, browsing history, navigation history, and radio listening history). This dynamic connection also enables us to view the current location of your vehicle, but such access is restricted to a limited number of personnel within Tesla.

I wouldn't be so sure...

https://www.teslamotors.com/ab...

Telematics Log Data: To improve our vehicles and services for you, we collect certain telematics data regarding the performance, usage, operation, and condition of your Tesla vehicle, including the following: vehicle identification number, speed information, odometer readings, battery use management information, battery charging history, electrical system functions, software version information, infotainment system data, safetyârelated data (including information regarding the vehicleâ(TM)s SRS systems, brakes, security, eâbrake), and other data to assist in identifying and analyzing the performance of the vehicle. We may collect such information either in person (e.g., during a service appointment) or via remote access.

Remote vehicle analysis: We may be able to dynamically connect to your Tesla vehicle to diagnose and resolve issues with it, and this process may result in access to personal settings in the vehicle (such as contacts, browsing history, navigation history, and radio listening history). This dynamic connection also enables us to view the current location of your vehicle, but such access is restricted to a limited number of personnel within Tesla.

I wouldn't be so sure...

https://www.teslamotors.com/ab...

Telematics Log Data: To improve our vehicles and services for you, we collect certain telematics data regarding the performance, usage, operation, and condition of your Tesla vehicle, including the following: vehicle identification number, speed information, odometer readings, battery use management information, battery charging history, electrical system functions, software version information, infotainment system data, safetyârelated data (including information regarding the vehicleâ(TM)s SRS systems, brakes, security, eâbrake), and other data to assist in identifying and analyzing the performance of the vehicle. We may collect such information either in person (e.g., during a service appointment) or via remote access.

Remote vehicle analysis: We may be able to dynamically connect to your Tesla vehicle to diagnose and resolve issues with it, and this process may result in access to personal settings in the vehicle (such as contacts, browsing history, navigation history, and radio listening history). This dynamic connection also enables us to view the current location of your vehicle, but such access is restricted to a limited number of personnel within Tesla.

My understanding is that your car is always transmitting all this to Tesla, all the time...

https://forums.teslamotors.com...

This isn't something they "pull" only when you come in for service, they can track and monitor their cars in the world.

I did some Google searching and couldn't find much one way or another...

Putting a Powerwall in every home should help.

The range of the Model S with the largest battery option is 294 miles according to the EPA. The projected range of the Model 3 is 200 miles; there will be no official EPA estimates until the car is ready for sale.

The actual range of an electric car varies with speed, outside temperature, terrain, battery condition, and whether the heat or AC is on. Tesla has a range estimator on their web site that lets you see the effect of some of the variables: https://www.teslamotors.com/mo... - scroll down a while to get to it. Slowing down can extend your range by a LOT - one car has a range of 275 miles at 70 mph (temperature 70F, no AC) but it increases to 443 miles at 45 mph.

They did:

https://www.teslamotors.com/en...

http://www.roadandtrack.com/ne...

I was explaining (which you appear to be saying now aswell) that one fast charger is the same watts as 10 slow chargers.

Hmm... Since we're getting nitpicky, you were the one to pick the 10:1 example. I'm not going to say that 'one fast charger' is the same as '10 slow chargers' because that's all up to whatever implementation of a theoretical standard we're looking at.

I merely mentioned that superchargers - which I've mentioned are installed in groups of 2-6, are pushing the capacity of local switching yards. okay, it seems that 4-8 is a better answer.

To better define the issue, a supercharger can currently take a Tesla up to 80% in 40 minutes, 100% charge in 75. Note: The last 20% taking as much time as the first 80% is due to LiIon charging limitations.

In order to do this, each charging station is up to 120kW. This is approximately 3 houses at full 'main breaker almost popping' draw. 10 of them would be roughly 300 houses at average expected peak draw.

I worked out or read somewhere once that most of us use about the same amount of fuel in our household as we do in our cars, so even if everyone changed to electric cars right now, we'd only need to double the capacity of the substations. Now since it's going to take a very long time for everyone to change over, I'm sure the substation upgrades can keep up.

When I figured it out, it was 50% - average household miles, using average EV miles per kWh, average household electric usage. High amount of variability, of course.

That means that, statistically speaking, some substations will need upgrades just because, statistically speaking, some will be on the line anyways, but not as much as you might think - they have to be sized for peak load, and the cars can charge off-peak.

Electric cars are cheaper to produce? Why do they cost more then?

See "inherently" above, because of vastly fewer moving parts. Current pricing is mostly about the battery pack, cost of which is falling rapidly. The other big component is the current boutique nature of the market, a chicken/egg thing, but we are already past the tipping point of that.

I'm wondering why I don't see any electric F250s either?

Several factors: price, power density, conservative demographic, lack of charging stations in the woods for those vehicles that actually get out there. This segment will lag but will eventually yield when electric trucks start outperforming gas ones at similar price points. Obviously, truck owners tend not to care much about the clean air argument, but they do care about watching taillights. Electric dragsters are already a thing.

I see Chrysler Fiat has a new minivan coming that will go 30 miles on an electric charge. NOT 300 but 30. It's a hybrid for obvious reasons so it'll have a high carbon footprint. I too think electric vehicles will one day rule but not in a decade.

I think your next car will be at least a hybrid, am I right? I'm pretty sure I will never buy another gas-only vehicle new.

No way, probably not even two decades. Battery improvements are small and incremental and costs are still way high.

Battery cost improvements are dramatic. Energy density improvements are indeed incremental, but it is a safe bet that lithium-air technology will reach commercial production well within ten years. The commercial incentives for it are huge.

When I can buy a car for 30 grand that will travel 300 miles on a charge and recharge in 20 minutes I'll damn sure get it. One caveat, it has to be big enough for my 6 foot frame.

You will see that within five years, not ten. Currently, Tesla talks about 270km charge in 30 minutes.

I thought it hadn't yet gone into production series, so it's still prototypes.

The Model X has been out for a while. It is the Model 3 that is still being developed. The Model 3 is a much more interesting car, because it will be affordable by normal people.

How do you think that'll stack for recycling and what not? You know a shit ton of it will end up in dumps with toxic liquids leaking out.

This bizarre meme just won't die. Lead batteries contain toxic materials. Nickel cadmium batteries contain toxic materials. Lithium ion batteries are not lead or NiCd batteries. They are in no way comparable in terms of toxicity. There is nothing in a lithium battery that is remotely dangerous to you. The compounds in them are biologically inert, either immediately or shortly after exposure to air and water.

And Tesla has no intention of landfilling battery packs. Used battery packs are worth money. Even when they're beyond reuse outside of a car, they're incredibly cheap to recycle. Cheap enough that Tesla already knows when it will be cost effective to recover the materials from out of service packs. TLDR, 1 billion batteries every 10 years NOT bad. Most will be recycled. Why do you pretend that replacing a Tesla battery pack involves flipping the car over, opening up the little plastic door, and popping the batteries out with your hands? That's when batteries get landfilled. And that's not a relevant scenario.

Scroll down for map of free charging stations.
Click here for another map of locations with chargers.

Scroll further for charging times. It's 170 miles range for 30 minutes charging.
With ranges from 237 to 294 miles per charge. Up to 403 miles at 50 mph.

I.e. Your 400 mile trip is either the same 8 hours at same 50 mph you used OR less than 6 hours at 70 mph, including a full 30 minute stop though less would be needed.

Scroll down for map of free charging stations.
Click here for another map of locations with chargers.

Scroll further for charging times. It's 170 miles range for 30 minutes charging.
With ranges from 237 to 294 miles per charge. Up to 403 miles at 50 mph.

I.e. Your 400 mile trip is either the same 8 hours at same 50 mph you used OR less than 6 hours at 70 mph, including a full 30 minute stop though less would be needed.

Scroll down for map of free charging stations.
Click here for another map of locations with chargers.

Scroll further for charging times. It's 170 miles range for 30 minutes charging.
With ranges from 237 to 294 miles per charge. Up to 403 miles at 50 mph.

I.e. Your 400 mile trip is either the same 8 hours at same 50 mph you used OR less than 6 hours at 70 mph, including a full 30 minute stop though less would be needed.

Scroll down for map of free charging stations.
Click here for another map of locations with chargers.

Scroll further for charging times. It's 170 miles range for 30 minutes charging.
With ranges from 237 to 294 miles per charge. Up to 403 miles at 50 mph.

I.e. Your 400 mile trip is either the same 8 hours at same 50 mph you used OR less than 6 hours at 70 mph, including a full 30 minute stop though less would be needed.

So, where do you recharge your H2 vehicle on long trips? I charge my Tesla at Superchargers which are already installed just about everywhere. Drive 3-4 hours, charge 30 minutes (usually ready for some food and a break by then), drive another 3-4 hours, repeat... Tesla Model X can tow your boat (it has a 5000 lb rated hitch).

First, you're mistaken when you say that Superchargers are installed just about everywhere. There are only 624 Supercharger stations in the entire country. There are a few very large states that do not have a single Supercharger. That just doesn't compare to the estimated 126,000 gas stations in the US.

Secondly, I believe that you're missing the point. Batteries are still not the most ideal energy storage mechanism for long-distance travel because of the time required to charge a battery (30-minutes) when compared to a more portable energy storage mechanism that can flow at up to 10 gallons per minute. Your asking where to fuel a hydrogen vehicle on a long trip is disingenuous, because a network does not exist yet. However, with sufficient demand (and technology that does not exist yet on a commercial basis), there is no reason why existing gas stations couldn't update to include hydrogen - and maybe even replace fossil fuels with hydrogen.

Finally, while a Tesla Model X can tow up to 5000 lbs, doing so reduces the vehicle range by 60%. It's great that you have a Tesla and really like it. I'm glad that it works for you. However, the idea that these cars can be all things to all people is incorrect.

To be fair, the employer was the subcontractor of a contractor, and Tesla is committing to setting this straight.

In that case, here you go: https://www.teslamotors.com/mo...

The nice thing with my Tesla is I can charge virtually anywhere there's electricity. Granted, the superchargers take some time, but it's not a huge amount of time. Now, take the amount of time saved by charging every night. It takes only a few seconds to plug in and unplug vs the amount of time spent driving to one of a limited number of hydrogen refueling stations, waiting in line (if they're popular) and filling up. On top of that, the electricity is far cheaper than the hydrogen. Currently virtually all hydrogen is heavily subsidized since the actual price would not be cheap. Currently EVs are over twice as efficient compared to a hydrogen fuel cell car when once considers well to wheel. HFC vehicles aren't much better than hybrid vehicles when it comes to efficiency but they're still a lot more expensive to build. They have a very long way to go. Durability of the fuel cell stacks is currently about half that of a gasoline engine. A fuel cell stack as of the end of 2015 will need to be replaced at 75K miles. I did the math and the batteries in my Tesla will be good for at least double this. See this.

The 2016 Toyota Mirai, a subcompact, is only rated at 66MPG. A Prius is 58 city, 53 highway and costs less than half the price of the Mirai. BEVs are typically over 100 for a similarly sized car. For example, a 2013 Leaf is the equivalent of 115MPG, almost twice as efficient. My 3-year old Tesla, a much larger vehicle with a lot more passenger and storage room, is 89MPGe. The newer ones are even higher. The Model 3 should be considerably higher than that. Long term, I don't see HFC vehicles competing much against pure electric cars. The complexity alone means that they will always be more expensive, especially as the cost of batteries drops. The cost today of a Toyota Mirai is $58,335. This is for a car with 0-60 of 9.4 seconds and a top speed of 108MPH, not much better than a Prius. The Mirai will suffer the same problems as a Prius as well. The Mirai depends on a battery pack for acceleration and regenerative braking, just like a Prius. My last car was a Prius. It does poorly going up mountain grades and the Mirai will suffer the same problem. Unlike a Prius, the power output of the PEM stack will be considerably lower by 75K miles. A BEV car can put out considerably more power for a longer time since it isn't restricted to the limited output of the PEM stack. I've taken my Tesla up a number of steep mountain grades where my Prius would struggle without breaking a sweat. The Tesla Model 3 and other long range BEVs will cost considerably less than the Mirai. The Model 3 will also have considerably more room inside and storage space. The ONLY advantage the Mirai has is that it can be filled relatively quickly. In just about every other metric it falls short. Today I can take my Tesla most places in the country with the number of places I can't drive to without superchargers rapidly diminishing. By the time the model 3 rolls out the entire country will be pretty much covered. As it is, in California where most of them are sold, even out of the way places are getting covered. There's a charging station going in right near the entrance to Yosemite, for example and even highway 395 along the eastern Sierra Nevada mountains is covered.

Let's compare:

Hydrogen filling stations

vs

Plugshare chargers
Tesla Superchargers
Tesla Superchargers by the end of 2016 (click on 2016). This number should double by 2017.

The closest hydrogen fueling station to my house is 15 miles away from my house. My EV charging station is in my garage. This covers over 90% of my driving needs. I pay $50/month for the electricity and drive around 1000 miles/month. According to this article, the Mirai

Those issues are rapidly diminishing in many areas. Charging stations are popping up all over. I've been driving my Model S since 2013, and the number of places I can't take it is rapidly shrinking. I go on an annual camping trip in the eastern Sierra Nevada mountains and this will be the first year I won't need to borrow a gasoline car for the trip since the main highway is now covered (highway 395). As for service centers, those also are popping up in many places, though some states are actively trying to prevent them.

My experience with Tesla service is night and day compared to my experience with Toyota. Toyota always tried to push a bunch of crap on me. They'd try and push blinker fluid if they thought they could get away with it. I'd have to fight with them when my car had common well-known problems. With Tesla there's never any question and they address the problem. My car has had more issues than the newer ones since it is a low VIN number but most of those issues were squeaks and rattles, which is difficult for any manufacturer to get right, especially with a brand new model from a new company out of a new factory. Hell, with Tesla I don't need AAA for towing since Tesla's service is better since there is no limit on distance or the number of times you can use it. I have had to use it once, and it was due to a tire that I bought through Tirerack and had installed by a third party developing a bubble in the sidewall. There were no questions nor was I billed for a tow home where I could go to my local dealer for a replacement tire since they discount the tires.

For those who don't live near a service center, they will come to you for an extra $100 fee.

All one has to do is look at Tesla's upcoming 2016 map of chargers to see how quickly they're planning on expanding it. Tesla has already said that they plan to double the number of charging spots by the end of the year and I expect similar growth in 2017. The superchargers are the big game changer for Tesla. Nobody else can boast having an EV which can be driven across the country without spending huge amounts of time charging. Last September I had no problems or significant delays driving from the Bay Area to Seattle. It took me 2 days and charging only added 3-4 hours to the entire trip. The time often wasn't wasted either. I used it to stretch my legs and grab a bite to eat. If I were driving a gas car I'd also take 2 days for this drive since I'm not about to drive 14-16 hours straight.

However Tesla's promotional material about their system is not suggesting that; their promotions are all focused on technical ability but it's ignoring the fact that if you're in an emergency the system basically tosses control to you, so his argument is that Tesla's promotion of the technology gives drivers and users the wrong impression of what it's really doing.

So, when Tesla's presskit on Autopilot states that "Tesla requires drivers to remain engaged and aware when Autosteer is enabled. Drivers must keep their hands on the steering wheel.", what exactly do you think they're doing besides exactly what you claim they're not?

What the Volve engineer is doing is touting his own system's capabilities over and above the Tesla system. He's saying "look at how much more autonomous our system is!" It's advertising, and not much more. It's yet to be seen whether the Volvo system is actually safer or not in practice. In principle, fully autonomous driving is rather obviously safer than requiring manual intervention in the case of an emergency, but it remains to be seen if the Volvo system will realize that in practice.

The only problem I see is that certain aspects of the design were probably copied wholesale from Tesla. This is bad when you essentially get to steal aspects of a design that cost a fortune to develop and then deploy a copy for a fraction the cost. As long as they pay Tesla some compensation for their technology, this would be fine. .

From Tesla: https://www.teslamotors.com/en...

We believe that Tesla, other companies making electric cars, and the world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform.

Technology leadership is not defined by patents, which history has repeatedly shown to be small protection indeed against a determined competitor, but rather by the ability of a company to attract and motivate the world’s most talented engineers. We believe that applying the open source philosophy to our patents will strengthen rather than diminish Tesla’s position in this regard.

Tesla has open sourced their patents so the liability should be very low.

Tesla opensourced them. Citation: https://www.teslamotors.com/bl...