What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$52 and Up—Airlines Slash Fares On Peak Holiday Flights. view!
travelzoo.com - This year, waiting until the last minute is NOT the best strategy. See why.
131 Comments
- castevens, on 05/07/2008, -2/+31I should put myself on the 1 1/2 year waiting list. Maybe by the time I'm #1, I'll have enough money to buy it . . .
- jonnymj, on 05/07/2008, -4/+29yeah... I'm going to pay 100,000 for a car to save on fuel costs...
Wake me when these types of cars hit the mid 20k - 30k range. - rom2062, on 05/07/2008, -2/+18Great car, great idea, make electric sexy!
- Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+11You've never seen the studies that shown that even with the additional steps it is still more efficient and more environmentally friendly to use electric cars right? I bet you haven't seen the study that determined that America currently has enough spare electricity to power 85% of all the cars in America if they were all prototype plug in Prius'. This can be done without additional power plants or coal consumption, this is from idle electricity generation during off peak hours.
So we're not quite there yet, there are tons of improvements we should make, but we're all that far. Really, the big big big hurdle is still the batteries. They are still expensive and they still suck. - SeventhSon, on 05/07/2008, -1/+12Tesla made everything.
- Anevilweasel, on 05/07/2008, -1/+12Yes, Great Car and great idea but I'd prefer if they made electric affordable over sexy.
- ecomod, on 05/07/2008, -1/+12Tesla = awesome! I can't wait for this.
- cha5e, on 05/07/2008, -0/+8It's in the works, but they need to sell the expensive car to gain capital first. For more info see my posts above, or look up WhiteStar and BlueStar on Wikipedia.
- LoudMusic, on 05/07/2008, -1/+8I believe the point has eluded you, as this $100,000 to $120,000 electric sports car competes with similarly priced gasoline sports cars.
It's not about cheaper transportation. It's about proving that electric cars can be just as powerful, beautiful, useful, and reliable as gasoline cars.
Zero to sixty in 4 seconds is Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini territory. And their cars that can do that cost a lot more than $120,000 and don't offer a lot more in features. About the only thing they do that this doesn't is a higher top end, which is pretty useless since most of our roads, even illegally, can't sustain a high speed run for very much distance without having to deal with traffic or bends. - tschau, on 05/07/2008, -0/+7A power plant produces energy much more efficiently than everyone having their own internal combustion engine doing it. It more than balances out.
- cha5e, on 05/07/2008, -1/+7The idea is for sales of the Roadster to pay for development of a luxury sedan (code named WhiteStar), and for sales of WhiteStar to finance development of a car that is more affordable (codenamed BlueStar). As of 7/30/07, BlueStar is projected to go on sale in 2012 for $30,000. Obviously that is VERY speculative...but if it's true, and if my beater lasts that long, I'll be first in line to get one.
- mvanhorn, on 05/07/2008, -0/+675k deposit.. It's not even a deposit, it's a "reservation payment"
- deviationer, on 05/07/2008, -2/+8nice sports car, but hey tesla, why don't you take your tech and make a compact car, and sell it for 10-20k
- cadmiumpaint, on 05/07/2008, -1/+6there's this thing called the big picture that you don't seem to get. They are proving that you don't need to sacrifice performance and drive a wimpy prius to go green. its a big deal. You have to come out with a flagship first that gets you noticed. They have to build the brand.
This isn't a run of the mill V8 supercar that just guzzles gas. It can actually raise the bar of what alt. fuel cars can be. Judging from your comment, that means nothing to you as you proudly drop a benjamin whenever you fill up your hummer. - InvisibleMan, on 05/07/2008, -0/+5Who cares about the enviorment, electric cars help lower the United State's dependancy on forieng oil. Thats more important in the sort term.
- inactive, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4You dont know a whole lot about cars do you?
- inactive, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4In two years they will be successful and then diggers will have another company to call an EVIL CORPORATION with a CEO who gets paid too much.
- Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Are you actually going to support your arguments or are you just going to insult people who disagree?
- crapmatic, on 05/07/2008, -3/+7I'm looking forward to their acoustic version of "Signs".
Imagine that, huh, me working for you! - Bulletbillx, on 05/07/2008, -0/+4Thats why we should try to fully switch to nuclear power and other technologies that don't use fossil fuels.
- Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I wouldn't expect these batteries to be capable of much more than 100,000 - 150,000 miles. They're still usable after that, but you won't have the range you had when you first bought the car.
Many of the battery components can be recycled, it's not usually done now because it's too expensive to sort and transport all these tiny batteries around, but if the batteries were worth more, and the sizes were standardized it would much much easier and more profitable. Even the stuff that can't be reused is perfectly safe to dump in a landfill since li-ion batteries contain no toxic substances. - cha5e, on 05/07/2008, -0/+31) Economies of Scale. More efficient to have your "heat" step done in one central location than in thousands of (mobile!) locations.
2) Not all power plants run on coal. Sure, most do. But that's slowly changing. They're putting in a wind farm in a county adjacent to mine. And in much of the world people aren't terrified of nuclear power as we in the US seem to be. - Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Damn it, wrong link
http://www.slate.com/id/2179609/fr/flyout - Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3IronDonut, you're an idiot. Please do some basic research into these matters because you're grossly wrong. For one thing, numerous studies have shown that electric cars are cleaner than gasoline cars even when the electricity is generated exclusively from coal. Heck, only 50% of our electricity actually comes from coal, and that makes it even more clean.
Please read this article. Unlike your trollish, idiotic comments it actually has sources and contradicts practically everything you've said.
http://www.slate.com/id/2179609/fr/flyout - RealmDown, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Not really, but what he didn't make he thought of before anyone else. AND did it better.
- themarq, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I think that is their business plan for the future. They're going to sell enough of these $100K cars to the Jason Calicanis' of the world to fund the company long enough to start mass producing these cars for the "regular" market. We'll see a $60K four-door car by 2010 probably and likely less and less $ not long after that.
- diggit83, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3*Used
***** Ferrari - cadmiumpaint, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3they are building a brand so they can start to mass market a more accessible product. you have to take it in steps.
- inactive, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I wonder what is the environmental impact of manufacturing all these massive batteries.
- lightslights, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3It isn't that large of a company and they don't have the means to mass produce these cars at a rate to sell the cars at $30k yet. By buying the car you are also investing in the technology and making it possible for the company to bring costs down. That's probably the reason that the first model is a sports car, because people are more willing to pay that price for a sports car.
- jothaxe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I think your last point is key - electrically powered motors have the possibility of coming from clean sources. Given the right sorts of demand we could replace coal/gas plants with nuclear, or wind, or solar, or hydroelectic plants.
The same can not be said for gasoline powered engines. - Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Here's one:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2006/12/06121 ... - Bulletbillx, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3Couldn't they just use nuclear power instead?
- LoudMusic, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3You COULD give a *****? Or you could NOT give a *****? Or you ARE a *****?
What is your bias toward electric motors? Are you aware that so-called 'diesel locomotives' are actually moved by electric motors? The diesel engines just generate the electricity. There is nothing weak about an electric motor. And this Tesla Roadster will out perform the vast majority of Ferrari you could buy for $100,000. - Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3I think you've grossly underestimated just how inefficient gasoline engines are at turning chemical energy to kinetic energy.
Read this article
http://www.slate.com/id/2179609/fr/flyout
Unlike your gut feeling way of treating science this article actually has sources that are real studies done by real scientists. - inactive, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3With a lot more Horse Power, more weight, a ton more features (that all sap power), and far better emission standards.
- burningmanstan, on 05/07/2008, -0/+3In addition to the comments above. It is easier to measure and control emissions from a sign source (power plant) instead of regulating millions of little engines that may not be meeting emissions standards at any given time. And in the case of plug in hybrids that use a gas generator to charge batteries it is easier to make a fuel efficient engine if it is not connected to the cars drive train.
- coleki, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I haven't seen the studies. Why don't you link them for us?
- Logicexe, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Yes, they really are something to look forward to. However, I'm much more excited about electric-gas plug in hybrids. It's the best of both worlds. You don't have to buy several thousand dollars worth of batteries just to have a decent range, and if ever you need to drive a long distance you have a "gasoline" battery that can be quickly charged. Electric cars are exciting, but they've got lots of disadvantages as well, this is where true hybrids really shine.
It's actually significantly more efficient to have the gasoline motor do nothing but generate electricity for the electric motor than to have the gasoline motor directly move the car. If you know a lot about cars you probably already know that engines are far less efficient when accelerating at different RPMs. By keeping the engine turning at a stable, optimum rate you can increase it's efficiency to a large enough degree to counter the decreased efficiency introduced by adding increased steps in converting the energy. Even if your battery completely dies, you would still be using less gasoline than a regular car.
As soon as someone comes out with a good quality car of this type, I'm selling my car and getting it, and I know lots of people who feel the same way. - cha5e, on 05/07/2008, -4/+6Ok, wake up in 2012, when their 3rd model, codenamed BlueStar, is supposed to be available. $30k.
Yes, I know that's a very speculative statement, and things may not really happen that way. But that's what the company says it's shooting for. - Buddhaismybuddy, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2A car that performs like a ferrari and is 100% electric. Please tell me how that is not the best car ever.
- Logicexe, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Yes, but the article is specifically dealing with hybrid cars that can drive a significant amount of distance in electric only mode. That means that for all intensive purposes, until the battery runs out is it an electric car. Since the prototype they were referring to has a range greater than the average daily commute done by most people it is safe to compare this to how a pure electric car would function. In fact it may even be better since you wouldn't be lugging around an unused gasoline engine and tank although that could be offset by the need for more batteries so it might even out.
Concerning operation costs (from wikipedia so take it with a small grain of salt)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car
---------
"Electric car operating costs can be directly compared to the equivalent operating costs of a gasoline-powered vehicle. A gallon of gasoline contains about 33.7 kW·h of energy.[22] To calculate the cost of the electrical equivalent of a gallon of gasoline, multiply the utility cost per kW·h by 33.7. Because automotive internal combustion engines are only about 20% efficient, then at most 20% of the total energy in that gallon of gasoline is ever put to use.[23] An electric car's efficiency is affected by its charging and discharging efficiencies. A Typical charging cycle is about 85% efficient, and the discharge cycle converting electricity into mechanical power is about 95% efficient, resulting in 81% of each kW·h is put to use. The electricity generating system in most countries is typically up to 40% efficient, twice as efficient as the conversion in an ICE.
A car powered by an internal combustion engine at 20% efficiency, getting 30 mpg, will require (33.7/30)*0.20 = 0.22 Kw·h per mile. At a cost of $3.50 per gallon, 30 mpg is $0.12 per mile. A battery electric version of that same car with a charge/discharge efficiency of 81%, and charged at a cost of $0.10 for kW·h would cost (0.22/0.81)*0.10 = $0.027 per mile, or would be paying the equivalent of $0.81 per gallon. Other inefficiencies in an ICE not present in electric cars can further reduce these costs. The Tesla uses about 0.21 Kw·h/mile, the EV1 used about 0.17 Kw·h/mile."
-----------
Of course, it all depends on how efficient either car is, and the price of gasoline versus electricity. If you took an electric SUV and compared it to a midsize sedan in an area with very expensive electricity and very cheap gasoline you'd probably end up with comparable operating costs. You really have to stretch the circumstances in order to bring costs within the same ballpark. The big clincher is just how much more effective an electric motor and battery system is at turning chemical energy into kinetic energy compared to a gasoline engine. That's what makes the huge difference. - coleki, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2awesome. i'm excited for electric cars.
i can't believe i didn't check wikipedia myself :P - LoudMusic, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2There are more ways to generate electricity to power an electric car than burning fossil fuels. Solar, hyrdo, wind, and tidal power plants are being built all over now. Those are all forms of energy that you can't create in a car, and none of them produce pollution.
- Fratz, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I'm sure someone will race the Tesla against equivalently-priced gasoline cars at some point, so we can see what the price/performance ratio really is.
- Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2My point was that you wouldn't need to burn more coal than what we're currently burning and we'd still be able to power a whole bunch of electric cars. Even if that wasn't the case, it would still be more efficient.
- Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I read both of those studies a long time ago. Give me a little while to dig those up and I'll provide the links.
- Logicexe, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2It's going to be fun to see lithium ion batteries skyrocket in price once these things become more common. Too many people don't realize that there already exists a huge industry for li-ion batteries (cell phones, laptops etc) so adding more will probably bring prices up. Expecting economies of scale to pop up and decrease prices is wishful thinking.
I am however glad that the first steps are being taken. Adding even more incentive to create a better battery will hopefully encourage even more development. - diulei, on 05/07/2008, -0/+2I believe the thinking is that if they mass produce an affordable electric car - they won't be able to keep up with demand while doing R&D among other things. If they start with a smaller market, they can take the time to streamline things and eventually bring it down to a more affordable level for us commoners.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 133 discussions
Catch all of your favorite Digg shows in one place, including Digg Dialogg, Diggnation, The Digg Reel and More!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is