Slashdot Mirror


Tesla CTO Talks Model S, Batteries and In-car Linux

angry tapir writes "The IDG News Service recently had a chance to speak to JB Straubel, chief technology officer for Tesla, about the Model S all-electric car, its design and technology, and his outlook on electric vehicle technology. He also shed a little light on the car's Linux-based software system."

19 of 181 comments (clear)

  1. range by William+Robinson · · Score: 4, Funny

    300 miles is impressive, and probably because they are using Lithium Ion batteries, it should weight less. With gas prices touching sky, I would certainly be interested in this kind of researh ongoing. Some interesting add-ons to this could be PV cells embedded in the body to charge batteries while driving and add couple of hundred miles on the fly.

    1. Re:range by Woek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think you are overestimating the yield of PV cells...

    2. Re:range by ledow · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Hell, Europe is "closer" to the oil-producing countries and we're still paying £1.30 / 1.30 Euro a LITRE which is 6 $USD for a US gallon. And you know what? People still pay it, because there is still no viable alternative. Drive anywhere in Europe, it's all the same.

      I sat down, did lots of calculations and set my own limit a while back - at £2 per litre, that's $12 for a US gallon, I have to *start* reconsidering the amount of driving I do. Chances are that by the time it hits that, interest rates will have risen to match, salaries will have risen to match, fuel efficiencies will have risen to match, I'll need a new car anyway, and public transport prices will still be as ridiculous as they are now.

      And my reconsideration might just be "Well, nothing I can do about it" or even just "Actually, the relative value is still the same". It's not going to be "Oh, wow, I have to go out and spend tens of thousands on a new car with a new fuel, the money for which I'll have "saved" before it ends up as scrap metal." without some hugely drastic amount of physics being changed so that it's viable.

      Until anything approaching 60 mpg can be gotten out of a *SECONDHAND* car with ranges of 400-500 miles, where I can fuel up ANYWHERE without having to consult lists of stations and maps, where I can repair the car for no more than an ordinary one and where I can trade in that car for some decent percentage of the original price I paid, then every other technology is going to lose out.

      Hell, I did some maths the other day. If you add up the price of every car I've ever owned, every repair I've ever done (not including my own time), and fuel for several years, it *STILL* doesn't come to the price of one of the fancy hybrid cars that they want me to buy. Hell, for some models I wouldn't even get the second-hand price. In the face of such economics, it's no shock that the people who actually travel a lot aren't buying alternative fuel cars.

      For £300, I have a car that's lasted 4 years with me and required about £300 of repairs and parts in all that time. It burns £400 a month in petrol but I get 50mpg (UK gallon!). That's almost impossible to compete against with such technology. A complete engine replacement for my car? About £300 off the scrap heap or a grand or two for something "newer".

      When alternative fuel will honestly cost me more money than I've ever spent on my current car + fuel for a year before I even start driving it, it's hard to pitch those technologies. And replacing one hundred granny's cars who do 10 miles a month is pointless if you could replace just one heavy road user with a decent car.

      Hell, I don't even care about speed, I'd poodle along in the slow lane quite happily, so long as it was motorway-capable (which means at least 60mph by law in my country). But you just CANNOT get close to anything the petrol offers at the moment, and petrol can quite literally double in price and STILL it would be more worthwhile. It would have to literally quadruple or more in price to actually price myself out of using it, and then things like LPG conversion (was quoted £800 for a full conversion last year) would probably get me another doubling of price before I was priced out again.

      Petrol is amazingly cheap for what it gives you compared to EVERYTHING else that's at the cutting edge of research.

    3. Re:range by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Get your units in order, man! An amount of energy is given in kWh. Watt is a unit of power (as in unit of energy per unit of time). To get the amount of energy, multiply by the time, hence kWh.

      28kWh is enough to power 1000 houses for a very short time or 1 house for a thousand times longer.

      This stuff matters if you want to discuss matters on a level above "it's got electrolytes" (which it does, btw).

    4. Re:range by MMC+Monster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Someone has to buy these first models, so that less expensive ones can be made in the future.

      The Tesla models are for those people. And people with that sort of money tend to want the amenities seen in more expensive cars.

      In a decade these things will trickle down in price and become more common.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    5. Re:range by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So what? Because you don't want one you think the whole electric car industry should pack up and go home? Every time electric vehicles are discussed around here, somebody always pipes up with this sort of calculation, as if their personal needs should dictate the use of a technology. Yes, if you were not going to buy a new car, then one of these models is not for you. Yes, if you don't drive much then there won't be any fuel savings.

      There are nearly 150,000 new cars sold in the UK every month. You might not want to buy a new car, but a lot of other people do. Those are the people who it is hoped will head down the alternate fuel route.

    6. Re:range by SydShamino · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is the opposite of trickle down economics. Trickle down says that you should give money to rich people first, so that eventually it finds its way to poorer people.

      Tesla's model is to take money from rich people first, to fund research that eventually helps poorer people too. That sounds a lot more like a progressive stance when put that way, right?

      --
      It doesn't hurt to be nice.
  2. So I read the article... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are there any regular readers of IDG here? Are their articles normally such total fluff pieces? 'cause that was such a fluff piece I'm still trying to dig out from under all the marshmallows. Seriously, journalism about electric cars is still at the level of "the entertainment console computer is independent of the drive train computer"? Like, I dunno, every OTHER car on the road with a touchscreen in its console? "Ooo. Aaaaaa."

    Yeesh.

  3. Re:Never going to take off by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You have never driven any real sports car have you. Lamborghini, Ferrari,etc. They are not SUV's they sit 2 inches from the ground. The Lamborghini countach could not be backed out of a parking spot without sticking your head out of the window and sitting backwards.

    You dont buy a sports car for ease of visibility.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  4. Eyes on the road by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I wonder what the safety implications are of packing a 17 inch tablet into a vehicle for people to play with when their eyes are supposed to be on the road. Even if Tesla were to disable stuff like the browser, twitter, facebook, videos etc while the car is in motion, what impact does it have on safety if the driver still has to screw around with a large flat glass screen to find the AC control, or to change radio stations, or look down for other reasons? In most vehicles they'd have a physical dial or switch in a fixed position which they could locate without taking their eyes off the road. Here there is no tactile feedback - just glass, no certainty of where buttons are since the screens change or move around. It sounds pretty dangerous really.

  5. My gawd by ballpoint · · Score: 5, Insightful

    FTFA:
    "something called Linux"
    "if the Linux crashes"

    Sigh. I really don't see why an article that clearly addresses a "different audience" is posted here.

    --
    Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
  6. Re:Never going to take off by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 5, Funny

    No. That makes the Roadster off-topic.

    It's no use anyway. Few people will buy Model R anyway, and Model S is going to be quite expensive for normal people. I'm waiting for Model T, something tells me that that could be the one.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
  7. Re:I don't want a linux based "software system" by OlivierB · · Score: 4, Informative

    the article is not that long so you could have at least skimmed through it. The Tesla guy makes a key point in saying that Linux runs the entertainment system and dahsboard (google maps, speedo, etc.). The cars propulsion system (i.e. what runs the motors, battery, brakes, etc..) is completely separate. The linux front-end can crash completely and the car will continue to drive just fine. RTFA

    --
    Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity
  8. Re:I don't want a linux based "software system" by nzac · · Score: 4, Informative

    RTFA...

    For the control and motor and things like that, we don't have operating systems. They run in a lower level and are actually running C code, so we have engineers upstairs writing in the C programming language, building the control loops from scratch.

    Linux is for running the UI. The article covers your concern quite well.

    Calling Linux a desktop kernel does not contribute to credibility of your rant.

  9. Re:Never going to take off by frontiersman · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Model S is actually built on the platform of the Lotus Evora...

    The Model S is actually designed from scratch and has no Lotus heritage whatsoever. The Roadster has 7% of its parts in common with the Lotus Elise and was built on the same production line.

  10. Re:Never going to take off by RaceProUK · · Score: 4, Informative

    Lambos and Ferraris are supercars, designed for people with more money than sense. Sports cars are usually taken to be about $20000-$60000, and usually have pretty good visibility all round.

    --
    No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  11. Re:Can I update the kernel... by RaceProUK · · Score: 4, Funny

    Possibly, though you may still have to close all the windows.

    --
    No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  12. Re:Never going to take off by RaceProUK · · Score: 4, Informative

    Sports cars with good visibility, at least good enough to park without leaning out the door/window:
    Mazda RX-8
    Nissan 370Z
    Audi TT
    Alfa Romeo Brera
    Porsche Cayman
    Any convertible sports car

    I could go on.

    --
    No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
  13. I sooo want one by DCFusor · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I traded my hotrod (2010 camaro SS) in for a Volt, and haven't looked back. Even if I had the money for a model S tesla, I can't have one yet - that's the real challenge Elon's outfit has - ramping up production before the bigger base loses interest.
    .

    FWIW, here in VA, it takes about 200 sq feet of high efficiency solar to charge the Volt once a day. That's around 45 miles worth of range, which gets more than 80% of my own driving done, even though it's a 27 mile roundtrip to the nearest general store for beer/munchies. I can get to the nearest town, do all my errands, come back, still have a little under half my range left. It works for me. Not as sexy as the Tesla, but it's no slouch either and does get a lot of favourable attention.
    .

    Sure is nice to have that unlimited range due to also having a gasoline engine, tuned just for this use so it can be more efficient than just about any other out there. 40 mpg from a 3800 lb car ain't shabby. I don't use it much, but what it does for you is remove worry if you're going to be pushing the battery only range.
    .

    For once, GM really leapfrogged everyone else. The GM haters are out in force to dis this car, but that kinda tells you who isn't doing much critical thinking and saves you from time wasted thinking they are OK (kinda like hank hill's comment about body piercing - you know right off someone "just ain't right").
    .

    I wish Tesla every success, they've "Bet the farm" and gotten a heck of a lot of stuff right. But now they need to transition from a design-only outfit to a major manufacturer - not trivial in real life. Go Elon!

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!