Analysis: Tesla may have made over $100 million off the CARB enabled battery swap ZEV credit scheme

Guest essay by Alberto Zaragoza Comendador

In the past I’ve provided estimates of the money Tesla has made off this mysterious feature enabled by credits authorized by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). These estimates were very simplistic: basically I multiplied their ZEV revenue by 0.35 or a similar number.

Now, I have something more precise with references to back it up.

Key data points:

  • The 85 kWh version of the Tesla Model S, called simply “S85” from here on, was reclassified from a Type III zero-emissions vehicle to a Type V on October 12th 2012. The previous official document, dated June 15, showed it was a Type III vehicle. This reclassification increased the number of ZEV credits Tesla got per car from 4 to 7. Of course, there is the possibility that the car had already been earning these extra credits days or weeks before October 12, but there is no way to know. (I will call the original 4 “standard credits”, while the additional 1-3 will be “extra credits”).
  • The 60kWh model, or “S60”, was reclassified on December 20. No sales took place in 2012, so for this version all units produced benefited from the battery swap.
  • Therefore, Tesla started gaining ZEV credits thanks to the battery swap in 2012Q4.
  • Tesla’s car deliveries and much more info can be seen here. I got the numbers from their letters to shareholders: 2012Q4, 2013Q1, 2013Q2, 2013Q3 and 2013Q4.
  • ZEV credit revenue is available in the same Excel as their car sales. There are some small doubts about their 2012 revenue. This is a more in-depth look at their financials.
  • Tesla’s sales in California can be seen in the same document. The data comes from Green Car Reports, which in turn got it from the California New Car Dealers Association (CNCDA). I’ve been unable to obtain their numbers for 2012.
  • As for its sales mix, Tesla has been vague. Although it’s well-known that the S85 sells more than the S60, I cannot find a definitive statement from them about the issue.
  • There are 12 states with a ZEV mandate, but California dwarfs them all (1.7 million car sales last year). The difference is even more lopsided if we talk exclusively about Tesla sales, as in the period studied the state made up about half of all deliveries in the US. And California’s ZEV program is far more advanced than the others, having begun in 2006.
  • From 2012Q4 to 2013Q3, Tesla sold 1,311.52 NMOG credits. For some reason CARB reports transfers in these terms, however, at the bottom of the page you can see that the denominator to convert these credits to ZEV is 0.035. Therefore 1,311.52 / 0.035 = 37,742.
  • In the same link too, you can see that at the end of 2013Q3 Tesla still had 276.080 NMOG credits, or 7,888 ZEV credits.
  • Only 250 Model S were sold in 2012Q3, and basically zero before that. Previously they had obtained credits through the Roadster, but only about 2,000 were sold worldwide and Tesla had already generated revenue from those in 2008-2011.

Key assumptions:

  • For simplicity purposes, I assume all S85s sold in California since and including Q4 benefited from the ZEV reclassification. That is, they moved from 4 to 7 ZEV credits. I’m including 12 days’ worth of sales in 2012Q4, but they were still ramping up production then so it must be less than 10% of the quarter’s sales. In any case it does not affect the overall math.
  • In 2012Q4, 1,500 Model S were sold in the state.
  • 90% of Tesla ZEV revenue comes from California.
  • In 2012Q4, ZEV revenue was $35 million. We know that for all of 2012 it was $40.5 million and it was concentrated in Q4 (they didn’t even mention it in the other quarters). We also know that the $40.5 million figure includes undisclosed but small revenue from GHG credits.
  • Tesla had 0 ZEV credits as of October 1st, 2012. Very small room for mistake here, as they could have a tiny quantity left over from the Roadster or the few Model S deliveries earlier in 2012.

If you think some assumptions are unrealistic or whatever, fine. The Excel document is free for anybody to download and tinker with.

So how much is the battery swap worth?

There are two questions here: how many of those extra credits they have sold, and how many they have earned but not sold.

One can envision any number of scenarios, but as you’ll see, no matter how you square the numbers Tesla stands to make a lot of money off the battery swap.

· Assuming a 60% S85 mix, Tesla earned 51,029 ZEV credits from 2012Q4 to 2013Q3. Of these, 32,148 were standard and 18,881 were extra. Since Tesla transferred 37,742 credits to other manufacturers in the same period, the conclusion is that they sold their entire standard allotment, and then an extra 5,594 credits. So the extra ones made up 14.8% of their sales. With ZEV revenue in California at $148.3 million for the period, this would mean the company got $22 million it wouldn’t have gotten without the battery swap.

· Under the same 60% mix, Tesla would still have 13,287 credits in its balance at the end of 2013Q3, all of them extra. (CARB’s website says they had 7,888, which suggests they transferred credits to other states). When adding those they earned in 2013Q4, the number rises to 24,404, of which 17,772 were extra.

· So in this period they sold 37,742 credits for $148.3 million, which gives a per-credit price of $3,929. If Tesla just manages to get the same price it has gotten so far, their remaining extra credits will be worth $69.8 million.

Yeah. More than $90 million in total. And that’s only the ones they got before January 1st, 2014. With about 1,800 Model S sales in California, the value of their remaining credits grows by about $15 million – every quarter.

It happens that the fine for not meeting ZEV requirements is $5,000 per credit (see slide 93), so that’s about the maximum other carmakers are willing to pay for these things. Our $3,929 figure is therefore in the right ballpark, and it shows Tesla’s revenue from California ZEV credits couldn’t have been much lower than the figure I offered ($148.3 million).

In the Excel I’ve uploaded, I assumed a 60% mix. But you can just change the numbers to see what happens. Keep in mind that sales mix does not affect the number of standard credits they earn, because both the S60 and the S85 get 4 of those: it only affects the number of extra credits.

Even so, I offered an absurdly high estimate of Tesla’s California sales for 2012Q4 (2,400, which were in fact their global sales), so as to increase their standard credits. Assuming 80% of Model S sales were S85s, the results would be:

· 35,748 standard credits earned in 2012Q4-2013Q3, plus 24,196 extra ones

· So if they sold 37,742 credits, that means they sold their entire standard batch and 1,994 extra ones. In turn, that means 5.3% of their ZEV revenue was thanks to the battery swap.

· That’s “only” $7.9 million. But if they sold so few extra credits…

· …the result is they had 22,204 in balance at the end of 2013Q3. Remember CARB’s website says they had 7,888, so either they transferred massive amounts to other states or there’s something else I’m missing.

· Add in their numbers for 2013Q4 and they have 34,038 in the bank, of which 26,866 were extra.

· And which, at a selling price of $3,929, would be worth $105.6 million.

Yikes.

“But they won’t be able to sell so many credits! The market will get saturated!”

Really?

Here’s a reminder of how the ZEV mandate works. It requires every major manufacturer to sell a given percentage of zero-emission vehicles, and by 2025 it will reach 15% Even if the state as a whole passes that threshold (EV sales were 1% of the market last year), many manufacturers no doubt will fall below and will need to buy credits. And if history is any guide, the program will not be withdrawn in 2025. EV advocates will say the technology still hasn’t reached critical mass, whatever that means.

It’s true the market is oversupplied right now. But starting in January 2018, all credits will be allotted according to range alone, not refueling time – this will effectively close the battery swap loophole. More importantly, the number of credits per car will be drastically reduced, as 3 will be the maximum – no matter if your electric car goes 300 or 500 miles. See slide 66 of the previous document.

Get this: right now, Tesla gets about 6.5 ZEV credits every time it sells a car. The market cannot buy all those credits so they keep thousands in the bank and transfer thousands more to states other than California.

Then comes 2018, the ZEV requirements have gotten much stricter, and every car gets 3 credits at most. Meaning there will be no manufacturer with an excess of credits it can sell. And there will probably be many with a deficit. And Tesla will have a huge balance of credits from the good old battery swap days.

Tesla is playing the long game.

Oh, and the company may have the opportunity to stockpile even more credits before the supply gets tight, because Type V ZEVs will get 9 credits instead of 7 in the 2015-2017 period. It’s unclear whether regulators will allow this, as CARB has stated it intends to exclude battery swap from the fast-refueling category at the end of this year; that would bring Tesla back to 4 credits per car. Other carmakers are going to sell hydrogen vehicles in that period which also qualify for the 9 credits because of their range and refueling time, and they’re probably protesting the privileged treatment Tesla gets.

But if the loophole isn’t closed, the company will be getting an average of about 8 credits per vehicle: twice what they would get without the swap.

Even if you assume the price of these credits will crash, the sums are still substantial. For $1,000 per credit, in the 60% mix Tesla would get an additional $17.8 million for the extra credits it had in balance at the end of 2013 – plus the $22 million in extras it had already sold. Remember that’s only from those they had earned before 2014. So a price collapse will mean they’ll only get $39.8 million from this once-demoed-and-never-heard-of-again feature.

Let’s use the same price with the second scenario: 80% S85 mix and 2,400 California sales in 2012Q4. Their 26,866 extra credits are now worth $26.9 million, which combined with the $7.9 million they had already earned gives us $34.8 million. Again, that doesn’t include any credits they earn in 2014 and beyond.

And all of the above assumes there is a mega-crash in the price of ZEV credits – a 75% decline. Need I remind you that electric cars have never broken into the mainstream, and in theory every manufacturer must get 8% of its sales from these vehicles? And if they don’t reach that figure, their only way to avoid $5,000 fines is by buying those credits?

There is no question Tesla will sell all of its credits. The only question is for what price.

Final thoughts

Some will argue that the credits they have already sold aren’t worth that much – about $20 million. But that’s missing the point. Tesla faces no penalty for stockpiling these credits forever. Even if the regulation changes the minute this article is published, and the battery swap loophole is closed, Tesla will get to keep the credits it has in the bank.

No doubt they hope to wait and sell them when everybody has forgotten about the whole battery swap charade.

So don’t forget. Don’t let them get away with this. Spread the message, and next time the company comes up in a conversation, remember to politely direct the other speakers to this post. And this one, too.

Next time you hear about these guys, remember.

About these ads

83 thoughts on “Analysis: Tesla may have made over $100 million off the CARB enabled battery swap ZEV credit scheme

  1. At the beginning you say you used to multiply the ZEV by 0.35 (so a bit more than 1/3).

    In your calculation later going the other way, you divided by 0.035. Is one of these a typo?

  2. Being a Brit I can look at this with a certain detachment. From my viewpoint here, as long as a chunk of this cash ends up getting us to Mars via Spacex then that’s fine by me.

  3. And this is how a clever corporate crony monetizes his “campaign donations” to the California Legislature.

    See??? The System Works!!!!

    (you just have to realize who the system was built for. Hint: it’s not you)

  4. I calculated battery output compared with petrol cost of the equivalent energy, and also divided the results with typical efficiencies of them both. I also repeated the calculation for several far off countries just to make sure. Well …There is no way to make a battery worth it’s lithium … unless of course you dump a lot of incentives to it.

  5. Has anyone done the math on what these credits cost the average car buyer of a small crossover vehicle like a strictly gasoline powered Ford Escape?

  6. So what? Private company employs a purely legal scheme to make some money. Personally I think the scheme is nuts but that is a question for the politicians, not the company. Deal with it.

  7. Tesla isn’t really a car company, it is a Ponzi scheme that uses cars as a hook. Luckily Tesla cars are good markers, it marks the driver as someone with bad math skills. They say sport cars are penis extenders, these trinkets are dildo transporters.

  8. What a boondoggle… making fortunes as rent-seekers.

    And the money has to come from somewhere, no matter how hard politicians try to hide that fact.

  9. Amazing how much money can be made from someone else’s good name. Nikola Tesla must be turning in his grave … pity he didn’t have himself buried with magnets on, he could have generated a bit of useful power with which to zap this lot.

  10. Environmentalism – the play toy of the rich

    Global warming – their mansion

    The Tesla – their car

  11. That must leave a very bitter taste in the mouth of CA leaders now that Tesla is snubbing them in the competition among states for the giga battery plant site competition.

  12. Ed_B says:
    March 12, 2014 at 5:18 am
    So what? Private company employs a purely legal scheme to make some money. Personally I think the scheme is nuts but that is a question for the politicians, not the company. Deal with it.
    ==========================================================================

    Truth: they are subsidy farmers. This article and their financial statements prove that they are very much aware that their financial reason for existence is rooted in mandates, credits and politicians. And the car is not as cheap as the price they charge their customer with enough disposable income to afford the image toy. That customer is buying his toy with the money that Tesla helped take from somebody else.

  13. This post could benefit by a short and highlighted (colored box) explanation of what is meant by “battery swap” — someone new here might not be aware and the story is buried elsewhere. A link to someplace else is less helpful than stating the issue here. If a person tries to search, one of the stories that comes up is about “Better Place” rather than Tesla.

    Anyway, Elon was named Fortune Magazine’s businessperson of the year for his insights. This was somewhat of a low hurdle. He only has had to be smarter than the politicians.

  14. I think everyone is saying the same thing: dismantle the subsidies by dismantling the regulations that make the subsidies necessary. I agree with that. There is reason to think that Tesla would too.

  15. The rooster is in need of some additional feed. The previous “economic development” efforts the state of CA provided Tesla to assemble their vehicles in Freemont, at the old NUME plant, aren’t enough to keep the rooster home……

    http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-tesla-battery-factory-20140307,0,3104476.story#axzz2vl6DAr87

    I wonder if Tesla will get some carbon credits for the energy storage batteries they plan on making at the new battery factory.

  16. It was a legal route to keep his business profitable, so Musk worked it into this business plan. If it wasn’t in place, he would have gone another route. I can’t blame Musk for working within the law to build a strong company.

  17. Bill_W: sorry for the confusion, the two numbers are unrelated. In the past what I did to estimate the money Tesla makes off the battery swap was to multiply its ZEV revenue by 0.35, because about 35% of its ZEV credits were obtained thanks to the swap. (I could as well have said 37% or any other similar number).

    0.035 is a denominator CARB uses. For some reason they don’t report ZEV credits as such, they use NMOG credits. To go from NMOG to ZEV, you divide by 0.035. So if a company for example sells 1,000 ZEV credits, that will only be 35 NMOG credits.

    Sean: honestly very little. The ZEV program is nonsense, but small nonsense at least – a few hundred million dollars a year, which is a drop in the bucket for the car market. It’s not like the ethanol vs gasoline debate (refiners had to blend 10-15% of ethanol into their gas).

    Ed_B and Jake2: what the law says is that Tesla should get 4 ZEV credits per car, whereas it’s currently getting 5-7 (and stands to get 5-9 in 2015-2017). The only way to access these extra credits is by going 190/285 miles a 15-minute refuel. Their car isn’t even close to meeting this requirement.

    The law in question is the California Code of Regulations 1962.1. See page 13:

    http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/zevregs/1962.1_Clean.pdf

    Man Bearpig: I think I cannot use the FOIA as I’m a Spanish citizen. However, you can try to use the FOIA to get info on why the Model S was reclassified as Type IV/V ZEV – this is the key action that allowed Tesla to collect more ZEV credits. Here you can find who is who in CARB:

    https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=421620264767529536#allposts

    John F. Hultquist: a battery swap consists of changing a depleted battery for a charged one in 90 seconds. Tesla demoed it last June in a very flashy event. The videos are actually funny once you know the truth.

    Everybody: at one point in the text I say by 2025 ZEVs must make up 15% of all cars sold in California, while at other point I say 8%. The 15% figure includes plug-in hybrids like the Chevy Volt (CARB estimates it will be 15.4%); this in turn will be split around evenly between pure ZEVs (battery and fuel cell cars) and plug-in hybrids. So for pure ZEVs the number is about 8%.

  18. Tom J says:
    March 12, 2014 at 5:57 am

    Environmentalism – the play toy of the rich

    Global warming – their mansion

    The Tesla – their car

    I have not seen a Tesla car, but my guess is that is not their car, not their principal car, anyway. My guess it that their principal car is a Mercedes, BMW or Rolls Royce, or something along those lines.

  19. If I understand this right, the effect of this isn’t just financial. Tesla resells those credits to makers of conventional vehicles so that they can meet Corporate Average Fuel Economy targets. Thus, each Tesla sold (with a $10,000 direct taxpayer subsidy plus ZEV credits plus other subsidies) means that GM can sell a couple of Escalades or Yukons – with the totally perverse result of lowering the national fleet’s fuel economy, increasing total oil burn, and increasing CO2 emissions. I’m not convinced that we should care about those last topics, but it’s crazy that taxpayers should subsidize this madness.

  20. Alberto, just want to cheer you on in your work. This stuff is so corrupt it’s disgusting, all the while the stock price goes up and up and up. The media’s infatuation with Tesla and all it’s glory is truly bizarre and needs to be called out.

  21. How absurd is this?! Not only are we paying people to buy Tesla’s, we are back-end funding the company to stay afloat AND this makes us pay more for every vehicle we buy!

    How is this not RICO?

  22. At the time of the battery swap announcement and demo, Tesla mentioned pricing for a battery
    swap. While I can’t remember the exact figure, I did do some calculations and discovered that
    cost per mile driving the Interstates (which is where these battery swap driving typically occurs)
    was not going to be cheap – considerably more expensive than gas powered travel . Tesla supercharger stations provide “free” charging, But we can probably assume, based on Tesla’s previous and current behavior, that Tesla makes money off these stations, thru the kickbacks from motels where they are located, or the sale of “premium priced” eats and goods sold to customers waiting to have their batteries charged. They also use solar panels, govt subsidized , of course.
    The problem I have with Tesla Motors has nothing to do with electric cars. They are the future, for a variety of reasons. Excluding battery costs and their current limitations, electric cars are ridiculously more efficient, reliable and economical than gas powered vehicles. California, in its infinite corruption of the English langage and logic,calls these vehicles “zero emission.”
    My main gripe with Tesla Motors is that it is not a reliable source of information, particularly about anything it is trying to sell the public. In particular, Tesla promised early on (and in print) that their Model S would sell for under either $40K or $50 (can’t remember the exact figure). Then the actual pricing came out, and all those interested parties thinking they might find more economical means of transportation, suddenly lost interest. (Tesla generally quotes prices that include tax credits, whether the buyer can take advantage of them or not) Tesla also promised one hour recharging at his superstations and a 300 mile driving range. Even after numerous
    improvements, the fastest charge available still requires over 75 minutes.
    For some (not so strange reason) the Feds feel the need to sue Ford for advertising xx MPG,
    when the xx is for highway driving, as published by the Fed’s own testing, while Tesla continued to claim 300 miles per charge, even after the DOT testing showed the range to be far less.
    The Model S has to be the most proprietary vehicle on the planet. Anything it needs, be it parts or service (or even fast recharging) can only be gotten thru Tesla Motors, and priced by Tesla Motors (and Tesla prices are not cheap). It is a monopoly on wheels. For that reason alone (amongst many, many others) I would never have anything to do with Tesla Motors.
    Using driving range graphs provided by Tesla Motor’s website which show ranges as a function of speed, and comments from their engineers concerning battery detioration rates, and the penalties for heating and cooling, I arrived at the following estimates for the 85Kwhr Model S:
    Tesla claimed 300 milesdriving range only under the most favorable driving conditions and only for 55 MPH (there are no rural Interstates with a 55 MPH speed limit). One wonders where Tesla thinks their customers would ever encounter such driving conditions. When it comes to driving ranges of electric cars, speed and HVAC kills. There are stories of New York cabbies driving
    electrics turning off all HVAC while in service. Another Bloomberg bright idea gone awry.

    Interstate highways speed limits :
    12 states 65 MPH, 20 states 70 MPH,
    14 states 75 MPH, 1 state 80 MPH(Texas)

    Ideal driving conditions : no AC/heat, level terrain, 300 lbs aboard,
    windows rolled up, constant speed, no wind.
    MPH 65 70 75 80
    New 262 241 222 200
    9.5 years 220 203 187 168

    Assuming 15% additional energy consumption due to heating/cooling, driving conditions and/or weight – this is by no means the worst performance possible, or even typical
    MPH 65 70 75 80
    New 197 181 166 150
    9.5 years 165 152 140 126

  23. I still maintain that this is a matter for the SEC, in particular if carbon credit income was used to lift them from an operational loss into profitability.

  24. The guy got rich before EV because he was smart enough to know how to play the market , so now he carries on with the same just a different market.
    His worked out how to get free and easy money while at the same time getting to play ‘good guy ‘

  25. Tesla’s windfall is a perfect example of how taxes and regulatory BS act to redistribute wealth from low- and middle-income people to super-rich elitists. Buyers of Escalades get a break, in effect, on the backs of people who can’t afford Escalades, and Tesla gets $100 million of taxpayer money for producing nothing (“good feelings” don’t count).

    None of these cockamamie contraptions like Tesla’s would have a snowball’s chance in hell in a truly free market. Bassackwards.

  26. I’ve written to CARB and to California governor Brown to point out that there is neither a logical nor a scientific basis for regulation of CO2 emissions by the state of California. Neither of them has responded. I’ve offered to meet with my representatives in the California legislature to go over my peer-reviewed article on this topic. Both representatives have spurned my offer. Meanwhile, my tax money flows unabated to Tesla.

  27. This is quite the racket! The dude who repeatedly sold the Brooklyn Bridge
    could learn a thing or two from Tesla.

  28. Doug: seriously, don’t read Technology Review. It’s got the name and that’s it – I’ve never read anything insightful over there. Most articles are just propaganda about whatever “revolutionary” technology a company is pushing. (Oh, and they also had a feature or two about the non-existent battery swap.)

    Kaboom: trust me, I’ve told every government agency that could be related to this case but they just don’t want to touch it. I’ve tipped SEC, the California General Attorney and a bunch of others. The only things I haven’t done are using the FOIA and filing a lawsuit.

    Terry Oldberg: that reminds that California is about to implement a many-times-bigger-and-complexer CO2 trading scheme. Basically ZEV squared or cubed.

    If something relatively small and simple like the ZEV system could be gamed and corrupted from the start, then the California scheme is going to be one giant loophole. Just to five some perspective, Tesla makes up a majority of all ZEV credits earned in California, so if 35% of theirs are due to the battery swap, that means 20-25% of all credits in the state are given for a non-existent feature. Yeah.

  29. The effort and time involved in swapping the batteries on a Tesla is about the same category as doing an engine swap in a conventional car. Tesla mecanics will laught at you if you tell them the battery can be swapped (easily like intended by the credit gurus).

  30. RE Tom J says: March 12, 2014 at 7:48 am
    and
    Col Mosby says: March 12, 2014 at 10:27 am
    From “The Gasoline Automobile”, Hobbs & Elliott, McGraw-Hill, 1915:
    [begin quote]
    Chapter I
    2. The Electric Car. – The advantages of the electric car are similar to those of the steam car inasmuch as it is very flexible and can be controlled entirely by the controlling levers. By cutting out or in resistance, more or less current is supplied to the motor and the power of the motor is proportional to the flow of the current. The electric car is especially adapted to the use of women and children in cities. It is easy riding, clean, and very quiet.
    The disadvantages are that it is not suitable for long drives, heavy roads, or hilly country. On one charge of the battery the average car will run from 50 to 100 miles, depending on the speed and condition of the roads. If the car is run at high speed, the battery will not drive the car as far as it will when running at moderate rate. This car is also limited to localities where there are ample facilities for charging the storage batteries.
    [end quote]
    Not much progress has been made in 99 years.

  31. How many commercial battery swap stations exist?
    It is not that I begrudge Tesla for 7 ZEV credits per battery swap vehicle. But if no customer can actually use a built-in feature, then it does not really exist, and then the 7 ZEV is ill gotten gains.

  32. So . . . in conclusion, buy Tesla (TSLA on the Nasdaq), wait for meteoric rise due to swap (ZEV) appreciation, sell before AGW is pronounced dead, CA goes bankrupt or congressional investigation begins into Tesla’s gerrymandering of the credits.

    Simple as pie.

  33. The libz will never call Tesla to account for this obviously shady and fraudulent scam. Tesla by their very sympathetic standard is the green economy’s sole “success story”. It is quite likely that the CA bureaucracy and Tesla worked this hustle out together to help out Tesla. If Tesla went out of business it would be the ultimate black eye for the green “economy.”

  34. Man Bearpig says: March 12, 2014 at 5:58 am
    If this money is paid by the govt a FOIA request should get the exact amount, no ?

    Sorry MBP, like so many of these scams the Government doesn’t pay the money directly, it just decrees that Tesla gets so many of their fake commodity for every car they make, then mandates the other successful car manufacturers have to buy so many of them each year or pay a fine.

    like with Obamacare, you don’t need to raise a new tax when you can just make it a law that everyone has to buy your product or pay a fine.

  35. looks like a perfect business opportunity for a startup electric car company … build cars, slap a big three logo on them, sell them in the big 3 showrooms in Ca. and the big three stop paying blackmail money to Telsa … and the electric car company just has to build cars, no marketing, no sales … and the big 3 don’t need to make a dime on the cars … just breaking even works for them …

  36. I saw some idiot on TV talking up the stock of Tesla as they claimed they were doing so well:
    A company that’s based on a government supported carbon fraud scheme that builds cars that not many people want and even fewer people can afford. What’s not to like?

  37. What battery swap payout? The credits apply on payout from the customer. A single payment of $2000). There are no battery swap stations because the owners don`t want nor need them.

    People have now crossed the USA using their standard and free for life rapid charging facilities.

  38. Andyj is as confused as in the last thread.

    The credits I’m talking about are ZEV credits, bought by other carmakers (not by customers). They get credits thanks to the battery swap.

    The credit you’re talking about is probably the federal tax credit for green vehicles, which is worth $7,500. Perhaps $2,000 is the rebate in some state and you’re talking about that.

    In any case, your message is interesting because it offers the excuse Tesla will use: that people don’t need battery swaps.

  39. @Andyj at 1:41 am
    People have now crossed the USA using their standard and free for life rapid charging facilities.
    Yes, but how long did it take them?
    People crossed the USA in Conestoga Wagons, too, but their sustainably green mules took overnight to recharge.

    The Tesla team of 15 people in two Model S, a balky sleeper van, and another swag wagon traversed 3,464.5 miles in 76.5 hours [=45.3 mph avg] via a wormlike pattern of superchargers that connect the spaces between major cities. …. Telsa says you can get over 300-mile range at 55 mph.

    Tesla used two Model S P85, nicknamed Thunder and Lightning. Supercharger fuel [??] costs nothing extra to owners of the Model S 85; supercharger access can be upgraded for $2,000 on the Model S 60.

    It takes 40 minutes to charge a Model S at 80 percent, which provides enough charge to make it between superchargers, even in the cold.

    A half-charge can be completed in 20 minutes, and the Tesla team took full advantage of the technology in a Model S to plot their course, which included more than a few detours

    Ok. They earned a Guinness Book of World Records. Doesn’t mean it’s ready for the family vacation.

  40. 1) I don’t understand why the blame is getting placed on Tesla when it’s CARB that came up with the ridiculous scheme, Tesla is just savvy in taking advantage of it. Do I need to bring up how much government assistance other automakers got a few years back?

    2) They are trying to break into the auto industry which is notoriously difficult even for conventional vehicles, much less electric ones. It’s hard to blame Tesla for taking every advantage they can get.

    3) Lots of companies take advantage of government schemes, it’s the nature of business, be like water and change with the regs and incentives.

    4) While many companies fail despite government incentives, the reason Tesla is doing well is because their product also happens to be very good. I’m far from a greenie, but their cars have been almost universally lauded as not only competitive with similarly priced luxury cars, but in many ways superior in performance, comfort, safety, and utility. This is not a goofy Chevy Volt that was ultimately a bailout on wheels.

    5) Some people may buy Teslas for the cause, but the reality is that’s not enough to keep a company afloat.

  41. Most companies will take advantage of Govt welfare if and when they can. Some companies are forced to take Govt money with all the strings attached. Some other companies (Tesla) wouldn’t and couldn’t exist without milking the tax payer for everything they can.

    In today’s PS landscape i wouldn’t trust the credibility of a review of the Tesla. No more than I’d believe in Gore’s No Bell Piece prize.

  42. Anthony,

    Please review this website and the VERY RELEVANT content.

    He contends that because there really aren’t any publicly accessible battery swap stations (or not enough of them), that the higher credit value per car is undeserved and possibly illegal.

    More here:

    http://doubtingisthinking.blogspot.com/

    He’s asking for FOIA help with CARB.
    .

  43. Several people above seem to think that Tesla is just taking advantage of a government program and has done nothing wrong, and if they were just receiving and selling the 4 ZEV credits each car would get for being a Type III ZEV then I would agree. but they are receiving several additional credits for being a Type V ZEV because of the battery swap that they cant actually do. No cars have been sold that can do this, and no battery swap stations have been built.

    Tesla is simply stealing these credits. They’ve done nothing to earn them except produce a ‘demo’ video of a feature that so far doesn’t exist (and probably never will)

  44. Why are you purposefully trying to confuse “battery swap” (the ability to physically swap batteries) with “ZEV reclassification”?

  45. Not sure if serious or trolling…

    The Model S was originally a Type III ZEV. Then it was reclassified as a Type IV/V which is why it gets 5-7 credits instead of 4. It was reclassified because of the battery swap: one thing led to the other.

  46. What was Tesla supposed to say? No please don’t give us more credits as part of your arbitrary scheme, CARB!

    You are barking up the wrong tree here. Getting angry at companies that take advantage of goofy government programs is silly; get angry at the government for giving away tax dollars.

  47. Obviously what Tesla was supposed to do was NOT LIE. When a company LIES about a feature that their product doesn’t actual have, whether for more money, ZEV credits, or any other form of profit, then they have committed fraud. And while the government should be actively looking into this instead of letting Tesla get away with it, trying to say it’s not Tesla fault because the government hasn’t yet caught on to the fraud is madness.

    That would be like saying Enron did nothing wrong just because it lied about it’s profits because it was the governments job to make sure it was being honest.

  48. Wow. You guys really don’t like Tesla Motors, do you?

    OK. If I get this correctly, the author is saying that incentives, subsidies, loans, and credits for companies producing Zero Emissions Vehicles are patently unfair and grossly corrupt in concept and execution. Right?

    Further, you believe that having programs in place, supposedly to support and encourage the expansion of lower and zero emissions efforts, are likewise unfair, etc. Fine.

    Honestly, there is nothing wrong with having those feelings. Too many things in government are set up to offer back-room deals and kickbacks to some. Too often there are licensing criteria that are very obviously designed to encourage monopoly and eliminate competition. Way too much of what is put into legislation at the national, state, and local level has a stated purpose that is the exact opposite of the actual purpose. I get it. That sort of thing really gets on your nerves. It should.

    Here the thing is, though… Unlike you, I have long thought that having electric vehicles would be a good thing. Going back to the TYCO slot cars I got for Christmas as a child, I was amazed by the ‘scale speed’ of those tiny replicas of track racers. I took them apart and examined the mechanisms that powered them. I realized then that having such a high percentage of the cabin occupied by the motor was far too large to be of practical use in full sized vehicles.

    I’ve been an automobile enthusiast since childhood too. Like many my age, I was greatly inspired by the television show ‘Speed Racer’. My favorite vehicle in the real world is the Chevrolet Corvette, precisely because of its resemblance to the fictional Mach 5 from the television show.

    Because of my enthusiasm over cars, I am aware of the myriad of improvements to Internal Combustion Engine vehicles since the early 1970s. I also know full well that the grand majority of those improvements came about as a direct result of rulings by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), legislation by the Great State of California, and the regulations put in place by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Thus, I know that every single American automobile maker for over 40 years has fought tooth and nail against making the innovations that have allowed their vehicles to improve in that time frame. The whole time they claimed it was ‘unfair’ and that it placed too heavy a burden on them, and that the public didn’t want ‘any of that stuff’.

    General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler would have been perfectly happy to keep pumping out Pony cars that got 3 MPG city and 5 MPG highway. They would have been giddy to continue making luxury vehicles that moved like a comet, steered like a cow, and hoped to reach 12 MPG on the highway. They would have been ecstatic to be able to count on being able to crank out the exact same pig iron based engines and spare parts with wide tolerances that could be, and needed to be, removed and replaced every three to six months. They would not mind in the slightest if everyone in Los Angeles had to wear a gas mask and oxygen tank everytime they ventured outside today.

    In only ten years Tesla Motors has caught up to US manufacturers that are at least 80 years older than they are. The Tesla Model S is not perfect. It is lightyears ahead of what those other manufacturers claimed was possible. It is in my opinion precisely the car that Detroit should have been able to deliver twenty years ago.

    It is in fact, every bit as good in terms of range, 0-60 speeds, and 1/4 mile times as those Pony cars from the early 70s. All that while being made to:

    1) Seat 5 or 7 (instead of being a 2+2);
    2) Having the comparative carrying capacity of a station wagon (instead of a duffle bag)
    3) Being the safest vehicle on the road (instead of a deathtrap)

    Now, imagine what Tesla will be able to accomplish in the next five years. With luck, they’ll go beyond the need for incentives, rebates, credits of any sort. They might deliver the prerequisite 22 cupholders, 8 coat hooks, and 4 map pockets that nitpickers have complained over the absence of so far… They might be able to push the automobile industry another fifty or so years into the future.

    Personally, I think those are good goals. I don’t mind a relatively microscopic portion of my tax dollars going toward such an endeavor. And if Tesla Motors is profitable as well, that is something I can heartily live with as well.

  49. Stephen Rasey noted, “Ok. They earned a Guinness Book of World Records. Doesn’t mean it’s ready for the family vacation.”

    This was early in the distribution of the Supercharger network. There will likely be much more direct routes within the next 18 months or so.

    Once again, people seem to forget how often they used to stop for gas. There was a time, not even 25 years ago, when it was simply unheard of to achieve 25 MPG on the highway with a V8 vehicle. Until the Chevrolet Corvette C4 hit that mark on the highway, pretty much any vehicle with a 1/4 mile time of under 13 seconds likely had a highway MPG of between 5 and 12 at best. Assuming a 25 gallon tank, that means you could maybe get 300 miles on the high end. With spirited driving you would likely need to fill up again after only 125 miles. Spend a bunch of time busting donuts, burning rubber, and

    I drove my Brother’s Nissan Sentra about 2000 miles one way around 20 years ago. It barely got 25 MPG and due to it’s small tank, I had to fill up every 250 miles or so. Yeah, that was a pain. But that was a coupe that weighed under 2800 lbs and had no creature comforts whatsoever. I think I’d have been happier with a Tesla Model S, even if it ended up being a 36 hour trip instead of 28.

    Stephen Rasey inquired, “Supercharger… any trade off on battery life?”

    According to Tesla Motors, the battery power is evenly distributed automatically by the computer system during the direct DC-to-DC recharging process. The system automatically slows to allow for that battery balancing as it nears completion. That’s why the charge from below 50% to 80-90% is so much faster than from there to completely full. So no, there is no significant, measurable, or real world degradation in battery life as a result of using a Supercharger. Should this prove wrong, there is that 8-year warranty on the battery pack that comes standard with the vehicle.

  50. Red Sage,

    The Tesla is a nice car. But the basic objection is to the enormous rent-seeking by Tesla.

    By all accounts, Russia produced high quality nuclear submarines. But that was at the expense of its entire economy and just about all its citizens. The Soviet Union eventually collapsed as a result.

    Soviet citizens may have agreed, since it was a perception of national defense. But it sapped the entire economy, and eventually led to bare shelves in the stores. In the end, the Soviet Union imploded, and now it’s population is only a fraction of what it was.

    This is no different. The Tesla may be top quality, but at what price? Certainly not at a price I would be willing to pay. This article makes it very clear how favored folks on the inside suck unearned capital out of the citizens’ pockets. Saying that you think it’s a great car is not the point. It is massive insider trading that is completely self-serving. An unholy conspiracy between CARB and über rich people angling to get even richer, at the expense of hard-bitten taxpayers.

    You may like the car, but the price is way too high. Furthermore, the reasons given are bogus. CO2 is a net benefit, so that argument is out. And all EV arguments flow from the false conclusion that “carbon” is a problem. It is not; it is harmless, and beneficial to the biosphere. More is better. It is greening the planet and keeping people from starvation. Once you accept that, then you have to accept that fossil fuels are simply not a problem.

    If Tesla can’t produce cars without all these excessive subsidies and shenanigans, then I do not care how fancy it is. All I care about is that I am being made an unwilling sheep to be sheared, in order to make rich folks even richer. If they can’t do it on their own, to hell with them. Don’t know about you, but I want their fingers out of my pockets.

  51. @Red Sage at 2:25 pm
    Stephen Rasey noted, “Ok. They earned a Guinness Book of World Records. Doesn’t mean it’s ready for the family vacation.”
    This was early in the distribution of the Supercharger network. There will likely be much more direct routes within the next 18 months or so.

    It was January 31 to February 2, 2014.

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/cross-country-rally-across-finish-line

    This IS early in the distribution of the Supercharger network.

    Superchargers, which are free to use for Model S owners, are situated in more than 85 locations worldwide, with many more due to come online in the next couple of years.

    I have not found a map of this record breaking route, have you?
    Google says the route from Los Angeles to New York is 2808 miles and 43 hours (in current traffic)
    Tesla took 76.5 hours and a route thet traversed 3,464.5 miles, 656 extra miles to connect the supercharger dots.

    I’ll give the Tesla team this. A cross country trip in that icy and snowy weather is a feat in whatever vehicle you choose. Look for them to break the record again real soon in better weather.

  52. On Battery life: from http://www.plugincars.com/tesla-roadster-battery-life-study-85-percent-after-100000-miles-127733.html

    After 300 to 500 cycles at 100 percent depth of discharge, a lithium-ion cell’s capacity will drop to 70 percent. But partial discharge “reduces stress and prolongs battery life.” Drain the batteries consistently to only 50 percent, as is often the case with electric cars that get plugged in frequently, and life expectancy of a healthy battery zooms up to 1,200 to 1,500 cycles. That, of course, translates to 366,000 miles, but don’t expect numbers like that on your odometer. Other wild cards such as frequency of fast recharge can also affect battery life.

  53. Stephen Rasey chastised, “It was January 31 to February 2, 2014. … This IS early in the distribution of the Supercharger network.”

    I’m pretty sure that March 2014 is after February 2014. So, it WAS in the early development of the Supercharger distribution. And yes, it still IS… ;-)

    Stephen Rasey noted, “I have not found a map of this record breaking route, have you?”

    I think there may have been a graphic that showed the path during the official video of the event you can find on YouTube. I’m not certain though, it’s been over a week since I last watched it. I got the impression they took a rather Northern route, rather than what some would have preferred in a typical trip in an ICE vehicle during winter. There is a map on their site that shows the rollout schedule for current and potential Superchargers: http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

    It is an interactive map with a slider. If you leave the slider at ‘TODAY’, on the far left, I believe it shows the Northern route I was speaking of before. I believe there are definitely more Superchargers on that route currently than there were during this Cross-Country Rally.

    Stephen Rasey predicted, “Look for them to break the record again real soon in better weather.”

    I concur. I think this was more to show that the trek could be done during inclimate weather if necessary. Marketing and promotion, donchaknow! Looking at the map again, and moving the slider to ‘END OF 2014′, it looks like they’ll have a better route that goes through St Louis MO if they try it again early next year. That’ll likely knock off 4-8 hours.

    Unfortunately, the path I typically take on cross country road trips, US HWY 10 to US HWY 20, looks as though it will be rather bare for some time to come. I really don’t like taking US HWY 40, unless there is really good weather.

  54. dbstealey resorted to flag-waving with, “By all accounts, Russia produced high quality nuclear submarines.”

    Man. It really gets me when people do this. It happens on the Internet all the time. Never ceases to amaze and surprise me.

    The truth of the matter is that the Soviet Union failed at least fifteen years ahead of schedule. A lot of people were rather perplexed, because they really, truly wanted to ‘prove’ that a Nuclear War could be ‘won’. Personally, I’m rather glad that I don’t have to wear Sunblock 10,000,000 today.

    The Soviet Union failed for two main reasons: 1) The people in charge forgot how important GREED is to the human psyche; and 2) President Ronald Reagan played the greatest game of high stakes Nuclear Poker known to mankind — GOD BLESS HIS SOUL.

    The only reason we have sent troops to Iraq — TWICE — and for way too darned long in Afghanistan, is that somebody wanted to test all the pretty new highly destructive weaponry toys they didn’t get to use against the Soviet Union.

    But none of that has the slightest anything whatsoever to do with the debate over alternative means of propelling vehicles over streets, roads, and highways in the United States of America.

    PERIOD.

    The Russkies are not coming for you. EVER. Neither are the Chinese. Or the North Koreans. Or the French. Or the Canadians. Or the Mexicans. Trust me on this. Really.

    “If Tesla can’t produce cars without all these excessive subsidies and shenanigans, then I do not care how fancy it is. … If they can’t do it on their own, to hell with them. Don’t know about you, but I want their fingers out of my pockets.”

    Tesla paid back a ten year loan to the United States government in full — NINE YEARS EARLY. Tesla barely has the tip of a fingernail near the stitched seam of your pockets. They can’t get their hand in there, because the megacorporations they are fighting against for market share have THEIR HANDS stuffed into your pockets up to the ELBOWS. No matter how much Tesla ‘rakes in’ from the Government, it will be dwarfed by what the other manufacturers get on their own.

    Even in the article above, the writer basically admits there is a strong likelihood Tesla won’t need any of these credits, for themselves, AT ALL within three years. But they are a commodity that was developed for Ford, Chrysler, and General Motors to take advantage of… Something like 25 years or more ago. They didn’t. At least, not the way that the regulatory changes intended. Tesla Motors is only ten years old for criminysake!

    Please turn the telescope around and take another look. This is like crying foul if someone who is on Public Assistance and gets Food Stamps actually has a home with a refrigerator to put that food in… Oh, wait…

    http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/03/14/watch-jon-stewart-eviscerate-foxs-poor-shaming/198485

  55. Stephen Rasey quoted PluginCars.com with, “That, of course, translates to 366,000 miles, but don’t expect numbers like that on your odometer.”

    Hmmm… Let’s see… 366,000 miles… divided by, say: 25,000 miles per year… uhm… carry the two… comes to… 14.64 YEARS worth of driving!

    Waitasec… I mentioned above there was an 8 year warranty on the battery pack in a Tesla Model S. Also, I did this calculation based upon my own driving style, which can easily exceed 25,000 miles per year. For some reason, automobile leases and insurance rates are typically based upon someone driving no more than 12,000 to 15,000 miles per year.

    Hmmm…. With those parameters then… 366,000 miles… divided by, say: 12,000 miles per year… uhm… carry the two… comes to… 30.5 YEARS worth of driving!

    C’mon, MAN!

    Dude, even if we presume these are the WORST batteries known to mankind… If we presume a battery drain due to continued EXCESSIVE use of the Supercharger network… If we presume that Tesla Motors engineers are idiots, forgot to carry the two, and their battery balancing algorithms are incorrect… If we presume that the batteries are at best ONLY 25% as efficient with ridiculous amounts of charging… That still gets you 7.625 YEARS of life out of a battery back that is warranted for 8 years!

    From my point of view, that means a Tesla Model S owner is… WINNING!

  56. Red Sage is arguing with everybody. He says:

    dbstealey resorted to flag-waving…

    My comment flew right over RS’s head. It had nothing to do with international politics or flag waving at all. It was just the first analogy that occurred to me. I was making the point that no matter what the quality of a product, if you’re going to acheive it at the expense of others, most off whom will never own a Tesla but all of whom are expected to pay, then the sheep don’t care how great the car is. Build it without getting your paws into our pockets, and we’ll be impressed. Otherwise, do it with your own money. It’s not like Tesla’s billionaire backer Elon Musk can’t afford it.

    And FYI, the “greed” RS mentions here is exemplified by Tesla’s backers and car buyers. The rest of us just do not want to be forced to subsidize your toys.

    RS continues: But none of that has the slightest anything whatsoever to do with the debate over alternative means of propelling vehicles over streets, roads, and highways in the United States of America.

    Exactly right. The article explains the ravenous greed of Tesla’s backers. That is the point. It is pure rent-seeking. And of course, just because Tesla repaid a loan is nothing to admire. Loans are supposed to be repaid. That’s the deal, see?

    If, as RS says, “there is a strong likelihood Tesla won’t need any of these credits”, then why do they want them? Answer: they want them because they are a money equivalent. Money they did not earn, and which should be in taxpayers’ pockets, not Tesla shareholders’ pockets.

    Just pretend that the product is bicycles instead of Teslas. Why should one bicycle maker get special treatment at taxpayer expense?? The whole thing is just a giant episode in political back-scratching. But no one is scratching the backs of the people paying the freight. So leave us taxpayers out of it, and we will cheer you on. Do it on your own, without our unwilling and forced assistance.

    But the vast majority of us are having our labor expropriated for these toys for no return, and I have yet to see a credible argument justifying all the Tesla subsidies and credits. We aren’t even getting the crumbs. And yes, that goes for all businesses that cash in via who they know in government. There is way too much of that going on. Tesla is just one of the more egrigious offenders.

    Finally, RS says: From my point of view, that means a Tesla Model S owner is… WINNING!

    Yes. The owner. By stacking the deck. That’s cheating to win. And I note that RS never responded to my decisive point that CO2 is a bogus reason to make EVs. They may be fun and all, but it’s just one more example of taking any profits, but laying off any losses onto the public.

  57. dbstealy stated, “My comment flew right over RS’s head.”

    No. Your comment didn’t go over my head. You were doing what too many people do these days… You compared anything that has to do with alternative fuel consumption to Communism. That amused me.

    dbstealy protested, “The rest of us just do not want to be forced to subsidize your toys.”

    Pretty much every single major company, in every single major industry there is, lobbies to get some kind of subsidy in their favor at every level of government. They do it because they know it can be done. I don’t understand this incredible sentiment of protest being directed at Tesla Motors in particular, when literally every other automobile manufacturer that has a plant on North American soil has received incentives and subsidies of some sort. Many of them have received those benefits literally for decades.

    You make it seem as if these subsidies were invented specifically for Tesla Motors and no one else. You make it seem as though Tesla Motors is the sole benefactor of those subsidies. Every automobile manufacturer in the United States of America has the same level of regulation they must meet in terms of production of clean air vehicles. All of them have access to incentives to subsidize movement in that direction. They were put in place beginning at least two decades ago — before Tesla Motors was even in existence!

    Really, it seems the reason you ignore all that is because rather than building an ‘economy car’, a cute little deathbox on wheels that nobody wants… Tesla went high end instead, and built a fully functional ‘luxury car’ that can only be attained by ‘rich people’… Basically, your complaint is that even if there are good reasons for subsidies to exist, they should not apply to something of this dollar value.

    Dude. Call your local Congressman and get your Senators on the line and let them know what you think. Make sure they know precisely why you think it is so important to single out one particular automobile manufacturer for actually doing what dozens of others claimed was impossible for the better part of 35 years.

    The way you phrase it, the United States of America should have worked on providing personal jet packs for every single tax paying man, woman, and child within its borders before launching the Apollo missions to the moon. That isn’t the way it works. Technology trickles down — we are able to communicate with each other today via the internet because the government ‘wasted money’ on the ARPANET decades ago. Because Tesla Motors is able to sell fully functional luxury electric cars today, every manufacturer will be able to offer affordable electric cars tomorrow.

    The Ford Model T was developed from the outset to be a mass market vehicle. When it was first introduced, it was too expensive to meet that mark. But with improvements in the assembly line and techniques to build them, the price dropped rapidly.

    The Tesla Model S is not this company’s mass market vehicle. It is the custom horseless carriage that is meant to impress the bigwigs and gain their investment dollars. It is the marketing device that will keep the company afloat long enough to complete the design/build process for their mass market vehicle. As impressive as it may be today, it is certain to be eclipsed by the vehicles that follow.

    The Tesla Model E may well follow the same path as the Model T. Hopefully before long our streets will no longer smell like exhaust, just as they stopped smelling like horse manure. I would welcome that eventuality, whether you do or not.

    REFERENCES:

    How much did it cost Henry Ford to build the Model T automobile?

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100107160657AAbnlO9

    Henry Ford and the Model T: A Case Study in Productivity (Part 3)

    http://www.econedlink.org/lessons/index.php?lid=692&type=educator

  58. dbstealey protested, “Answer: they want them because they are a money equivalent. Money they did not earn, and which should be in taxpayers’ pockets, not Tesla shareholders’ pockets. … I have yet to see a credible argument justifying all the Tesla subsidies and credits.”

    Holdonasec… Really? Tesla Motors DID earn those credits. They earned them by designing, building, and offering for sale a vehicle that meets, and exceeds, the requirements set forth by CARB, NHTSA, and EPA to qualify for these incentives. If you don’t like that ‘justification’, take your complaints to your friendly, neighborhood, local representatives in government. When you do, specify that you want those ‘useless, unfair, unwarranted’ incentives removed for ALL manufacturers — not just Tesla Motors!

    dbstealy spied, “And I note that RS never responded to my decisive point that CO2 is a bogus reason to make EVs.”

    Why should I argue to support someone else’s claim? Carbon Dioxide is good for trees and plants. I’m pretty sure that people who complain are talking about the production of Carbon MONOXIDE instead. That’s CO, not CO2, man. Burning what are termed fossil fuels is a known, proven, absolute, undeniable contributor to the destruction of our planet’s Ozone layer. The loss of the Ozone layer leads to increased exposure to ultraviolet light… Ah, hell. Why bother. You already know all this, and you are already going to deny it. Apparently that is the whole purpose of this website anyway. Enjoy the view with your head in the sand.

  59. Red Sage,

    Really, you are just arguing without even reading what anyone wrote. You say: specify that you want those ‘useless, unfair, unwarranted’ incentives removed for ALL manufacturers — not just Tesla Motors!

    What I wrote: “And yes, that goes for all businesses that cash in via who they know in government. There is way too much of that going on. Tesla is just one of the more egregious offenders.”

    I don’t like any subsidies. But Tesla is one of the worst offenders. And of course, they have the bureaucracy in their pockets.

    I also said nothing about carbon monoxide. As far as I know, that is at most a minor problem. That makes it a strawman argument, which seems to be your kind of debating style.

    You are at odds with most commentators here, while I agree with most of them. Most folks here strongly disagree with you. Here are some comments from this thread:

    It is quite likely that the CA bureaucracy and Tesla worked this hustle out together to help out Tesla. If Tesla went out of business it would be the ultimate black eye for the green “economy.”

    And:

    …(Tesla) wouldn’t and couldn’t exist without milking the tax payer for everything they can.

    And:

    Yes a giant fraud. That pretty much also sums up the government (State too) of California

    And:

    A company that’s based on a government supported carbon fraud scheme that builds cars that not many people want and even fewer people can afford.

    And:

    This is quite the racket! The dude who repeatedly sold the Brooklyn Bridge could learn a thing or two from Tesla.

    And:

    I’ve written to CARB and to California governor Brown to point out that there is neither a logical nor a scientific basis for regulation of CO2 emissions by the state of California. Neither of them has responded. I’ve offered to meet with my representatives in the California legislature to go over my peer-reviewed article on this topic. Both representatives have spurned my offer. Meanwhile, my tax money flows unabated to Tesla…

    And:

    Tesla’s windfall is a perfect example of how taxes and regulatory BS act to redistribute wealth from low- and middle-income people to super-rich elitists… Tesla gets $100 million of taxpayer money for producing nothing (“good feelings” don’t count).

    And:

    So gaming the system and committing fraud gets you lauded.

    And:

    How absurd is this?! Not only are we paying people to buy Tesla’s, we are back-end funding the company to stay afloat AND this makes us pay more for every vehicle we buy! How is that not RICO?

    And:

    This stuff is so corrupt it’s disgusting…

    And:

    Truth: they are subsidy farmers. This article and their financial statements prove that they are very much aware that their financial reason for existence is rooted in mandates, credits and politicians. And the car is not as cheap as the price they charge their customer with enough disposable income to afford the image toy. That customer is buying his toy with the money that Tesla helped take from somebody else.

    And:

    …making fortunes as rent-seekers. And the money has to come from somewhere, no matter how hard politicians try to hide that fact.

    And:

    Has anyone done the math on what these credits cost the average car buyer of a small crossover vehicle like a strictly gasoline powered Ford Escape?

    And:

    …this is how a clever corporate crony monetizes his “campaign donations” to the California Legislature. See??? The System Works!!!! (you just have to realize who the system was built for. Hint: it’s not you)

    I understand that you like the Tesla. I would like it too, if I could afford one. But like other commentators here, I am too busy paying high California taxes to join the Tesla set.

    Wake me when Billionaire Elon Musk pays out of his own deep pockets, instead of laying off risk onto the public, while cashing in on his no-risk scheme. That will be the day.

  60. dbstealey relented, “Tesla is just one of the more egregious offenders.”

    Geez. A few years ago the Los Angeles Times published an article that stated the Mayor of Compton was “one of the highest paid” in Los Angeles County. That is true, if you consider that he was a Mayor of a City within the County of Los Angeles, who had a paid position. In fact, the Mayor’s annual salary was only $60,000 per year. Most other Mayors in the County were paid over $100,000 per year. One, in the City of Bell, was paid about $500,000 a year. Your statement reminds me of that sort of ‘fairly unbalanced’ journalism.

    Once again… When I say that any of the other automobile manufacturers could have built their own Electric Vehicles, it isn’t [BOLSHEVIK].

    General Motors released the EV1 through Saturn Dealerships nearly a decade before the first Tesla Roadster was on the road. They sold exactly zero of them. All of them were three year leases. When those leases were up, and ‘owners’ wanted to either extend the lease, or buy the cars at remaining market value, as they would with any other lease? They were told, “No. These cars belong to General Motors.” Then they were (almost) all destroyed*. At some point afterward, GM claimed there was some type of horrible mechanical problem that was dangerous and couldn’t be fixed, that’s why the cars had to be done away with… Strange, seeing as none of the Owners who wanted to keep them could testify as to any problem whatsoever with the cars they loved so much.

    They have teams of experienced engineers and automotive designers at their disposal. They have the technology — I remember it being demonstrated to Tennesse Tuxedo on the Three Dimensional Blackboard back when I was a kid watching cartoons. They could have built something like the Tesla Model S anytime they wanted. They didn’t want to. They preferred to add electronic drive assistance to their gas guzzlers and call them ‘hybrids’ instead. Why? Laziness.

    I really don’t care about the regurgitated tripe you listed from other contributors to this lengthy thread. Most of it is nothing but basic, unfounded rhetoric disguised as clever discourse.

    dbstealey issued a dare, “Wake me when Billionaire Elon Musk pays out of his own deep pockets, instead of laying off risk onto the public, while cashing in on his no-risk scheme. That will be the day.”

    “Wake up! Take the pillow from your head, and put a BOOK in it!” — KRS-ONE

    Elon Musk is a billionaire, today, on Wall $treet Bucks — (C’mon, we all know that’s Monopoly Money) — not cold hard cash. He already has laid his own, cold hard cash on the barrelhead to support Tesla Motors. He was down to his own available funds and dropped around 80 million of his remaining 100 or so directly into Tesla’s coffers to keep the company afloat — long before the IPO and these ‘egregious’ offenses you have in mind. This was before the Roadster was officially launched ‘wide’. Before that, he made a similar move to support SpaceX, putting $100,000,000 of his own dough (from prior ventures, PayPal & zip2) at risk to send up what would have been the fourth, and final flight had the launch failed.

    Elon Musk puts his money, and his reputation, on the line for what he believes, every time it is required of him. He is at the very cusp of ‘risk’. Surprise! Each of those risks paid off for him. It will “be the day” when the CEOs of Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors similarly put it all on the line. That’s one you can sleep on, Brother.

    Hey, what’s that smell? Ah! Early morning Reality Coffee. Enjoy.

    ——–
    [* Apparently about 40 of the EV1 in the US survived for 'research'. One is at the Smithsonian Museum and is intact. The others had the drivetrain removed and are at colleges & universities, not allowed to leave campus, or go on public roads at all. Some very few others, which had been in service in Europe, survive to this day -- though GM originally intended to crush and shred those as well.]

  61. “Holdonasec… Really? Tesla Motors DID earn those credits. They earned them by designing, building, and offering for sale a vehicle that meets, and exceeds, the requirements set forth by CARB, NHTSA, and EPA to qualify for these incentives. ”

    They didn’t. The law is very clear: a Type V ZEV must go 285 miles after a 15-minute refuel. The Model S goes 265 miles after 75 minutes, or about 90 miles after 15 minutes. It isn’t even close to the requirement. The exploited the battery swap loophole, which isn’t really a loophole but a hoax: the car cannot actually swap batteries in 90 seconds, and there are no swap stations anyway.

    Tesla deserves 4 ZEV credits per car, not 7 as they’re currently getting, or 9 as they might in 2015-2017.

    Btw, that is THE ONLY paragraph of your messages that stayed on-topic. The rest simply says that you really, really like Tesla very very much.

    Look, you can like Tesla all you want. But doing a good thing one day does not give you a license to break the law other days. If you save a hundred people and then rob a bakery, you’ll get arrested for robbing the bakery.

  62. Well, whuddayaknow? It seems that Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are even OLDER than I thought they were… Elon Musk was still in Grade School in South Africa when they were enacted. Me? I had just been exiled to Elementary School in Mississippi. President Obama was probably just about to finish Middle School in Hawai’i.

    Here, have a look:

    “The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) are regulations in the United States, first enacted by the U.S. Congress in 1975, in the wake of the Arab Oil Embargo and were intended to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks (trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles) sold in the United States. … The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulates CAFE standards and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) measures vehicle fuel efficiency.” — per Wikipedia

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy

    So, how exactly are you going to blame Tesla Motors and President Obama for this, again?

  63. Alberto Zaragoza laid bait, “They didn’t. The law is very clear: a Type V ZEV must go 285 miles after a 15-minute refuel. The Model S goes 265 miles after 75 minutes, or about 90 miles after 15 minutes. It isn’t even close to the requirement. The exploited the battery swap loophole, which isn’t really a loophole but a hoax: the car cannot actually swap batteries in 90 seconds, and there are no swap stations anyway.”

    I’m pretty sure that 90 seconds is considerably less than fifteen minutes… Let’s see… 60 seconds per minute… Times fifteen… Carry the two… Hmmm… Yup! 900 seconds! Seeing as the video Demo that Elon Musk offered did not one, but two Tesla Model S vehicles in a handful of ticks over three minutes, I think they’re fine.

    In terms of range… Meh. I seem to remember a voiceover that goes ‘Your Mileage May Vary’. That’s why the mileage numbers are called ‘EPA Estimates’ instead of ‘EPA Certified’ or ‘EPA Guaranteed’. There have been independent road tests that exceeded the 285 mile barrier with the Tesla Model S… If not necessarily the 300 mile distance their marketing material hopes for in that magical world where you coast downhill on a 6% grade for 20+ miles near the end of a course.

    In terms of the battery swap being staged… Uhm… It was on… a stage.

    Look, I know what you mean. The production version of the Tesla Model S has protective barriers that cover the entire underside of the vehicle. That stage demonstration seemed to presume that the parts that cover the battery pack had already been removed. But there are perhaps 8 – 12 bolts that secure those panels in place. Someone working alone, with a standard issue airgun and bit, in a grease pit would still be able to remove the panel in less than two minutes. They might need help moving it out of the way, of course.

    The likelihood that the battery swap would be done automatically, in the wild, at charging stations, anytime you entered the option into an automated drive through valet…? Not likely to happen. Ever.

    That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be able to get the battery changed, in under fifteen minutes, at a Tesla Service Center though.

  64. 90 seconds is the time Tesla “demonstrated” on stage. 15 minutes is the time required by CARB. Your attempts at confusing readers are quite amusing as this has been clear from the beginning, in fact I explain it in my first article – yeah, the one I link to at the beginning of this one.

    “That doesn’t mean I wouldn’t be able to get the battery changed, in under fifteen minutes, at a Tesla Service Center though.”

    Find one person who has done it. Somehow they all say it took several hours.

  65. Sorry, I didn’t notice the link to another article. I went straight through to the comments below. I’ll let you know what I think about that one when I get a chance, OK?

    Here the thing is… Do you really, truly believe that CARB, EPA, and NHTSA allowed the Tesla Model S to be reclassified to Type V ZEV status based upon that stage demonstration alone? I would expect that, just as they do with all the other mileage estimates, this would be something they would want to test themselves for verification. If it is instead, just a checkbox on the qualification form that reads:

    >>> CAN THE BATTERY BE REMOVED AND REPLACED? (Mark ONE) [YES] [NO]…

    Well, that’s another thing entirely.

    The claims of falsehood, hoax, lies, and especially ‘stealing’ by Tesla Motors are all rather sensational from my point of view. I believe that President Bush may have been misquoted as saying, “The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”, or something to that effect. Perhaps there is a way to contact the regulatory bureaus directly to learn what criteria they used to reassign the Tesla Model S to Type V ZEV status?

  66. I’ve emailed CARB three or four times. The last email is the only response I’ve gotten so far, from Annette Hebert, division chief at the agency (there are only nine divisions so she’s one of the top people there). She says Tesla did demonstrate the battery swap to the agency, back in 2012…

    …but the details are confidential. How convenient!

    Her email is ahebert@arb.ca.gov, perhaps somebody else can get a more meaningful response.

    As for the EPA and NHTSA, I don’t think they would be involved in this issue. AFAIK the ZEV system is managed by CARB alone, certainly I found all the documents and references in their website.

  67. Alberto Zaragosa wrote elsewhere, “Translation: we know Tesla is a scammer, but we don’t want them to go bankrupt so we’ll let them milk the battery swap cow for another couple years.”

    ~*YAWN*~ Sorry, I should have been asleep five hours ago. Well, based upon your own numbers and estimations… It seems as if Tesla Motors may be banking the very credits you dispute, ‘just in case’ they are forced to return them to CARB at some point, rather than selling them on the CAFE credit trading market. Apparently they get to hold them for up to five years before they disappear into the ether anyway, expiring automatically.

    Alberto Zaragosa noted, “She says Tesla did demonstrate the battery swap to the agency, back in 2012…

    “…but the details are confidential. How convenient!”

    OK… Nice to know you have done your own due diligence in this regard. Perhaps it is time to resort to the good, old-fashioned Freedom of Information Act? You might need to know the form number, or case number for the test to verify its existence though, and have it pulled for confirmation.

    Alberto Zaragosa continued, “As for the EPA and NHTSA, I don’t think they would be involved in this issue. AFAIK the ZEV system is managed by CARB alone, certainly I found all the documents and references in their website.”

    These ‘extra credits’ are from CARB, but the whole program is apparently managed by the big boys:

    CAFE credit trading provisions (Wikipedia)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_Average_Fuel_Economy#CAFE_credit_trading_provisions

    Well, it helps to have a more solid understanding of your position on all this. There is certainly enough to keep looking for evidence. I don’t think there is a ‘smoking gun’ yet. I believe the fires are elsewhere in the Automotive industry.

    Ultimately, I am a car guy. Yes, I really do like the Tesla Model S a whole lot. I’ve given a bunch of the reasons why above. That’s saying a lot, because typically I despise sedans, and barf when they are called ‘sports sedans’. I see this as the perfect family car. And I hope that at some point before too long, there is a version with an easy 450+ mile cruising range — just in time for me to take delivery of my very own.

    I honestly do not believe that Tesla Motors is a Ponzi scheme, or any other type of scam. I do believe that the other US Auto Manufacturers wish like hell it was, so they could get them off their back, for good. If you can prove your suspicions, more power to you. Take care, and good night (morning).

  68. If I were a betting man, I would wager that Red sage is either:

    • a Tesla employee, or

    • angling for a job there, or

    • a shareholder

    Or maybe more than one of those. His cheerleading is excessive.

    Labeling the comments of many others here as “regurgitated tripe” indicates RS’s frustration that his rah-rah message is falling on deaf ears. I only posted a partial selection of those responses, which make it clear that people are getting very tired of the Big Government/Big Money conspiracy to make the average taxpayer pay any losses, while the conspirators collect the payoff if/when there is one.

    Finally: if Tesla is such a wonderful invention and as amazing as RS says, then it is certainly a better mousetrap, and the public would flock to it without needing subsidies and special arrangements.

    So explain for us why already hard-bitten taxpayers should subsidize yet another government/industry scheme, where said taxpayers do not get a cut of the winnings — but they must cover the losses if the project doesn’t sell enough cars to stay in business?

    Take your time, and stay on topic. This should be good.

  69. dbstealey ventured, “…I would wager that Red sage is either:”

    I’m a guy who really likes science and technology. I am also really impatient. I like the Tesla Model S, but honestly don’t understand why it didn’t exist 25 years ago. I feel that today, rather than a marvel, it should be instead, to quote a co-worker from an Architectural firm I used to work at, “…an ordinary $#!+ car… Like a Chevy.” What I really want to see is flying cars with Mr. Fusion in the back. 2015 is only a year away, Doc Brown.

    I’ve been writing and debating a variety of technological issues in various forums on the Internet since 1995. I do so because from my point of view, it is important to understand that others have other points of view. That is, just because we disagree with each other, doesn’t mean I don’t want to fully understand your position on the issue at hand.

    I literally do not know everything. I know just enough to understand there is more to learn. I’m just smart enough to appreciate there are people in this world who are a whole lot smarter than I am.

    In any case, like most people on the Internet, I have a strong tendency to state my opinions as fact. The quotes that you posted before, are opinions that differ from mine. I recognize that the people who said those things consider them factual… I disagree.

    It’s a shame that you and I don’t seem to fully understand each other here. This is one of the pratfalls involved with attempting to communicate with people through a keyboard on the Internet. But even so, if you look at what was said between myself and Alberto Zaragosa last night, I finally developed some insight as to his intention in writing the original article. He is really just one solid piece of evidence away from proving all his suppositions absolutely sound.

    “…people are getting very tired of the Big Government/Big Money conspiracy…”

    My point, pretty much from the outset stands. The Tesla Model S is a really nice car. Even if there is some sort of conspiracy involved in its existence and profit/sales model (I really don’t think so), there are far more profitable ones out there, that are much more obvious, and more easily proven.

    “…the public would flock to it without needing subsidies and special arrangements.”

    I believe they will. The difference though, is that other auto manufacturers for decades said it was ‘impossible’. They all said it would ‘never happen’. Those statements never rang true for me. Not once. No, it won’t happen immediately, or overnight. But Tesla Motors will be fully weaned off all of these incentives, rebates, tax breaks, whatever… and will never need them again.

    See, in the ‘long game’, the changes that have been introduced by Tesla Motors will appear to be ‘overnight’ to auto manufacturers such as the Big Three. Five years from now, electric vehicles with a Tesla badge will be as ubiquitous as compact cars from Toyota, Datsun/Nissan, and Honda were 30 years ago. Ten years from now, Tesla electric vehicles, and derivatives from other manufacturers, will be more than as popular as SUVs were in the early-mid 90s.

    I understand your concerns. Many companies have made big promises and delivered nothing, time and again. Windows 95 was Microsoft’s attempt to match MacOS 89, which was Apple’s attempt to surpass AmigaOS 84… Times change at the speed of technology, but also at the rate of acceptance.

    I… could be wrong. Elon Musk and the rest at Tesla Motors might just be building up a facade, so they can get everyone to go all-in before they pull the rug out from under Wall Street. But… I don’t think so. I believe this is pure, honest, actual change. And it’s beautiful to behold.

    Now, where are my flying cars?

  70. “So explain for us why already hard-bitten taxpayers should subsidize yet another government/industry scheme, where said taxpayers do not get a cut of the winnings — but they must cover the losses if the project doesn’t sell enough cars to stay in business?”

    Ugh. Had you not noticed that I really don’t want to talk about this? This is chock full of assumption, supposition, and innuendo. It is the very essence of a leading, rhetorical question. What’s worse, is that I have probably already answered this somewhere above, or on another forum. This gets really tiring. Strange you want to call me out on this — AGAIN — but haven’t acknowledged the points I’ve already replied to completely on target with evidence to back them up. ~*SIGH*~

    “So explain for us why…”

    OK. What follows is what you have asked for: an explanation. It is NOT an excuse. Please, pay attention.

    “…already hard-bitten taxpayers should subsidize yet another government/industry scheme…”

    This assumes facts not in evidence. You say that it is a ‘scheme’. I say that it is a strategy. We fundamentally disagree on everything listed here. But to take a small nibble… Government and Business have worked together for AGES to develop technologies for the benefit of the populace. Once again, if not for CAFE, CARB, NHTSA, and the EPA instituting standards in testing and regulations for fuel consumption today’s regular Intenal Combustion Engines would not be as good as they are. They would be gas-guzzling death traps instead. The only reason the Tesla Model S does not match and surpass every one of its direct competitors on range is because the US government worked diligently to persuade auto manufacturers to lower fuel consumption. That has had a net benefit to all Americans, and people worldwide as a result. I contend that the same will happen with Electric Vehicles and other means of Alternative Fuel. That is WHY.

    “…where said taxpayers do not get a cut of the winnings…”

    Once again, as is the case with rhetorical questions, you assume I don’t have an answer while asking the question. So, I’ll say again, from a different stance… The American public benefited from the involvement of the US government to create superhighways. The American public benefited from the involvement of the US government to launch manned spaceflight. The American public benefited from the involvement of the US government to regulate auto manufacturers. The American public will also benefit from the continued involvement of the US government to promote the improvement of electric vehicles much sooner than was done with any of the others — because of Tesla Motors. That is WHY.

    “…but they must cover the losses if the project doesn’t sell enough cars to stay in business…”

    And this right here is just a total load of horse hockey. There is no guarantee whatsoever, anywhere, that states the United States of America and its taxpayers will buy out, or bail out, Tesla Motors, or their vehicles to save face. None. That is not a requirement of CARB, CAFE, NHTSA, or the EPA. In fact, the only entity that is currently pledged to guarantee Tesla Motors against failure is… ELON MUSK. He personally guarantees, on the strength of his own personal holdings, to buy back Tesla vehicles should ‘everything go wrong’.

    Remember when you said, “Wake me when Billionaire Elon Musk pays out of his own deep pockets, instead of laying off risk onto the public, while cashing in on his no-risk scheme. That will be the day.”…?

    Well, I responded. Did you read it? Here’s another chance, in case you missed it:

    >>> Elon Musk is a billionaire, today, on Wall $treet Bucks —
    >>> (C’mon, we all know that’s Monopoly Money) — not cold
    >>> hard cash. He already has laid his own, cold hard cash
    >>> on the barrelhead to support Tesla Motors. He was down
    >>> to his own available funds and dropped around 80 million
    >>> of his remaining 100 or so directly into Tesla’s coffers to
    >>> keep the company afloat — long before the IPO and these
    >>> ‘egregious’ offenses you have in mind. This was before the
    >>> Roadster was officially launched ‘wide’. Before that, he made
    >>> a similar move to support SpaceX, putting $100,000,000 of
    >>> his own dough (from prior ventures, PayPal & zip2) at risk
    >>> to send up what would have been the fourth, and final flight
    >>> had the launch failed.

    >>> Elon Musk puts his money, and his reputation, on the line
    >>> for what he believes, every time it is required of him. He
    >>> is at the very cusp of ‘risk’. Surprise! Each of those risks
    >>> paid off for him. It will “be the day” when the CEOs of Chrysler,
    >>> Ford, and General Motors similarly put it all on the line. That’s
    >>> one you can sleep on, Brother.

    And now… I’m waiting.

  71. Red Sage says:

    Ugh. Had you not noticed that I really don’t want to talk about this?

    Sure you do. Your statement is as strange as your many other comments. I have 4 posts on this thread. You have 15. I would hate to see what happens if you did want to talk about this!

    I asked that you stay on topic but as expected, you went off on several different directions. Your comments are emotion-based, that is easy to see because they’re very emotional. As always, it is extremely hard to have a rational discussion with an emo poster.

    So good luck with promoting the Tesla. As a taxpayer, I will once again be forced to pay the freight along with my fellow taxpayers. I don’t like it. But special interest groups like Musk’s have co-opted the legislature, and they all compete with each other to shear the sheep.

    If I can do my part to sidetrack the “carbon” scare, I figure that is about all one man can do. The rest of this EV nonsense feeds off that scare anyway.

    One commenter here asked: “Has anyone done the math on what these credits cost the average car buyer of a small crossover vehicle like a strictly gasoline powered Ford Escape?”

    That’s a good question, no? With harmless CO2 being no threat, and in fact, a net benefit, that’s a very good question. Isn’t it?

  72. @Red Sage (various)
    RE: Stephen Rasey 3/12 2:34 pm and other posts.

    The issue here is that the staged battery swap performance is what allowed Tesla to earn 7 ZEV credits per S85 cars. You don’t have to swap the battery out in 90 seconds, but that is what they demonstrated under ( David Copperfield conditions, I might add). To earn 7 ZEV, you have to recharge/refuel or swap enough battery for 285 miles in 15 minutes.

    RE: Alberto Zaragoza 3/18 at 1:32 am
    The law is very clear: a Type V ZEV must go 285 miles after a 15-minute refuel. The Model S goes 265 miles after 75 minutes, or about 90 miles after 15 minutes. It isn’t even close to the requirement.

    At least, Tesla is not close to the requirement without a battery swap.

    Here is a map of charging stations around the country (40 Amp and SuperChargers)

    http://www.plugshare.com/

    Show me a URL to a map of Tesla battery swap stations.
    or Post for us the address of the station closest to you and it’s telephone number.
    Until you can do either of these things, Tesla is earning 3 ZEV ( = 7 – 4) under false pretenses.

    While waiting for these T-Haul stations to spring up around the country like tumbleweeds,….
    Check out this Q&A from the Tesla Supercharger site, which has the map and plan. http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger

    What should I do if all Supercharger stalls are occupied when I arrive?
    Check to see if current users have left contact information on their dashboard and give them a call. Most customers charge for 20 to 60 minutes.

    There are people waiting to charge, but I am not done charging; what is charging etiquette?
    We ask our customers to use courtesy while charging. Once your Model S has completed charging, we ask that you move your vehicle to make the spot available for other Model S owners.

    A non-Tesla car is parked in a dedicated Supercharger stall, what should I do? [Oh, they come with shade! How nice! ]
    Many Supercharger sites are outfitted with ‘dedicated’ stalls (meant only for Tesla vehicles) and a few ‘enabled’ stalls (which allow for time-restricted general parking). Please be aware of stall signage. If a non-Tesla vehicle is blocking a ‘dedicated’ Supercharger stall, please notify Tesla at (877) 798-3752 (international phone numbers).

  73. I was looking the neighborhood for charging stations. It seems H.E.B. is putting them. A grocery stop is a good turn over time, especially for quick charge.

    http://www.plugincars.com/ultimate-guide-electric-car-charging-networks-126530.html

    Cost Per Charge: Blink fees are priced on an hourly basis. In its Blink Plus plan requiring a $30 annual fee (waived through 2013), charging is $1 per hour. Blink Basic, not requiring a fee, is charged at $1.50 per hour. Blink Guests pay $2 an hour. All of these rates are for Level 2 240-volt charging. Prices have not been established for DC Quick Charging on the Blink Network.

    $2/hour. Some of that is electricity cost, the rest has to go to pay for the station and upkeep. That is when someone wants to plug in. It give a whole new meaning to Trickle-down economics.
    I can pump $30/minute into may car. A pump at Costco can probably rack up $200/hr if used only 10% of the time and rack up more than $2/hr in profits.

  74. Stephen, come on, man… I broke down your extended compound sentence section for section and addressed every single bit of it in its entirety — even though I didn’t want to. You ignored my responses to your lop-sided, convoluted, leading, rhetorical question, act as if I didn’t answer at all, then ask more of them.

    At least you finally did get to the point:

    1) You don’t want to pay taxes and don’t think tax dollars should be used for anything.
    2) You especially don’t want to pay taxes when it comes to the notion of reducing CO2 emissions.

    So now I know what you don’t want to do. What do you want to do?

Comments are closed.