Brief news by Ryan Maue
The recent oil price shock likely hasn’t figured into the February sales numbers at GM or Nissan, which announced their electric vehicle sales numbers for the month. Actually, there wasn’t an announcement, but you can find the information buried in a PDF file:
GM “delivered” 281 Volts in February, which is a function of the extremely slow nationwide roll-out of the newfangled buggy. This is clearly the window of opportunity with the much higher gas prices to take advantage (of) consumers who may spring the cash for an electric car. Then, they can watch their new PG&E Smart Meter spin wildly in delight. Either way, it’s very early in the game.
Indeed, with gasoline prices soaring past $4 a gallon in California and elsewhere, the demand for the Volt and Nissan Leaf should continue to soar. Coupled with generous government subsidies provided by Uncle Sam, a new Volt may provide quite a charge to the US economy, or not. With the announcement of Ipad 2.0 yesterday by Steve Jobs, early adopters will be lining up again to buy a thinner, better version of favorite toy. It’s early in the game for the Volt, Leaf, and other electric buggies, but when supply ramps up to meet the burgeoning demand, we can expect the marketplace to expand with many more options. However, until then, outfits like Consumer Reports aren’t exactly enthused with the efficiency of the Volt of the Leaf, considering the sticker.
It gets worse. CR figures the cost of recharging the Volt would work out to about 5.7 cents a mile for electric mode and 10 cents a mile for gas. Yet a Toyota Prius, which gets about 50 miles a gallon, would cost 6.8 cents a mile to operate. A Prius costs half as much as a Volt.CR seems to feel a little better about the all-electric Leaf. It borrowed one from Nissan while it awaits delivery of its own. The $35,270 electric car had its range severely restricted by the cold weather that has gripped the East, much like the Volt. The range has been averaging 65 miles, not the 100 miles that Nissan bills. Plus the mileage gauge isn’t that accurate in the cold when electric heaters gobble up kilowatts. Instead of the 36 miles of range that the car said it had, one tester got 19.
Yet CR said other than range, it liked a lot of things about the Leaf. It accelerated rapidly and climbed hills well. It said it would be a good second car in urban area if it is in “a temperate climate.” Guess that rules out the Northeast, Midwest, deserts and a bunch of other places.
Brian H, “For longer trips, owners plan their hookups; the “connect points” map is filling in fast. Early days, like when the first gas pumps were being put in place. “Range anxiety” fades very fast in the real world of real owners.”
Except I don’t have to plan anything as every major highway in the U.S. has a gas station available. According to your map, there are 837 charge stations heavily concentrated around major cities. While I have access to 121,446 gasoline stations. In the real world I can fill up in 2-3 minutes, where it can take you 8-32 hours.
“As for the “bailout”, it’s a LOAN to speed up development and production of the ‘S’ and the advanced battery packs. It is planned and on course to be repaid with interest on an accelerated schedule. That’s REAL repayment from revenues, not using one bailout to pay off another, like GM’s little (big!) shell game.”
No if it was from a bank it would be a loan, it is a bailout. The reason they got money from the government is because no banks would lend them the money nor could they get any private investors for something that is not economically viable.
Brian H, “That’s a 5-yr old posting, before the first car had ever been produced. The current estimate is 30% after 100,000 miles or 10 yrs. And owners are finding declines are actually about half that — Tesla issues very conservative figures, a unique characteristic in a car company!”
I could find no data to support your claim nor am I interested in what those hyping the car claim. I did find that the Expected Battery Life is Seven-years or 100,000 miles. My gas tank does not need to be replaced in seven years or 100,000 miles.
The Battery Replacement Cost is $30,000 or $12,000 if you pre-pay within the first 3 months of taking ownership of your Roadster.
If I did have to replace my gas tank it would be a couple hundred dollars not $30,000!
If you’re thinking of getting an electric vehicle, here is a good community with news and info: http://www.energyinyourlife.com/article.php?t=100000210
Poptech;
It’s early days, so the data is necessarily rather anecdotal, but:
Someone else (looking for the posting, can’t see it just now) said they’d seen no range reduction after 2+ yrs of use. No one has reported more loss of range than projected.
Brian H, “Someone else (looking for the posting, can’t see it just now) said they’d seen no range reduction after 2+ yrs of use. No one has reported more loss of range than projected.”
I found comments too but I am only interested in what the engineers at Tesla have to say and the only thing I can find it what I quoted which is a 30% reduction after 50,000 miles. If they change it that is fine but it is suspicious to me that they bury these numbers on their web page, especially the battery replacement costs.
The guarantee is 7 yrs. or 100,000 miles.
http://www.teslamotors.com/roadster/specs
I believe that’s based on 30% drop in capacity, but don’t see that spec anywhere.
Poptech;
As for the trip planning, I think you slipped a cog or two. Planning was necessary for the first gassers, and is necessary now for EVs. It changed over time for gassers, and will change for the EVs with time. Get it now?
This subject really gives you brain-burn, doesn’t it? You’re usually pretty rational; this is getting amusing, though, so carry on!
Brian, do you get it that I don’t have to plan any trip to fill up my car? Get it now?
I am always rational which is why I debunked all the propaganda about silly electric cars that are not economically viable nor practical.
Poptech;
Maybe I see your difficulty here.
You just don’t get it that the Tesla Roadster owners really, really, really, like their cars, and enjoy driving them. Some go out for long drives just for the sheer enjoyment of it.
So they’re prepared to do the planning necessary for medium to long road trips. Eventually, as charge points proliferate, that won’t be nearly as necessary.
Capisce?
P.S. Short of some major advances (not impossible, as I read the research), charging will always take longer than pumping gas, so the “fill ups” will cause delays. So then it comes down to whether they’re worth it to you.
Roadster owners generally think it is. Probably you’ll never agree. Unless you drive one.
😉
I have no problem with people owning them as it is their choice to do so, my issues with electric cars and the Tesla Roadster I have laid out in this thread. Yes, it is true that I will probably never accept the charging delay over a gasoline powered car. They are a nice looking car (no surprise so are Lotus Cars) but I would still rather have Porsche.
I do have a problem with them receiving a government bailout just like I did with GM. Both companies should be able to stand on their own or go out of business.
There you go, throwing terms around. The loan is very specific: it must be used only to set up and begin using manufacturing and development facilities for the “Model S” and the ESS battery system. There are stringent accountability standards, notably that Elon Musk must retain majority control and remain CEO for the duration of the payback.
The GM “bailout” was a straight (or crooked?) gift of the shell of the company to the unions, with gross abuse of bondholder and other stakeholder rights. Just another of Obama’s Crimes Against America.
Really it is not? Then,
Why would no private sector bank loan Tesla hundreds of millions of dollars at silly low rates?
It does matter what the “terms” are, the “loan” has nothing to do with the financial markets because no private sector bank would finance something that is not economically viable. Thus it is bailout because it is initiated by the government.
Why do you support corporate welfare?
The Tesla bailout is a crime against the tax payer pushed by those who support corporate welfare. So is corporate welfare only “good” when it benefits a company who’s products your like? The Tesla bailout is just as bad as the one for GM.
Your sense of proportion seems to have gone walkabout.
Tesla had already, with purely private money (every cent Musk owned, included) transformed the EV landscape worldwide with its Roadster, as every major from GM to Toyota and Daimler more or less freely acknowledge. And the loan to TM is a mere small fraction of the money blown on GM. It is likely, based on both track record and plans, to have an actual large employment and multiplier effect, rather than the net economic losses resulting from the GM-prop-up. As a fer-zample, consider Musk’s SpaceX launch and recovery of a superior space capsule (Dragon) for (total cost of creating the company, all subsequent development, manufacture and launch costs included) of <30% of the money written off on the cancelled NASA capsule 'Orion'.
As Tesla CEO, Musk draws $1/yr. salary. The GM CEO $1,000,000.
And so on.
As the street expression goes, get a grip.