Tesla absolutely set a fire under some folks...let’s see some now... Image Unavailable, Please Login I’m just kidding, but batteries are dangerous, so we may have to have a new idea, would this work... Image Unavailable, Please Login All kidding aside, to power a vehicle comes the need to have a high power energy release that can be controlled. Physics only gives us a few ways to do this, especially safely or efficiently. It’s not that we are not smart enough, it’s that it all comes down to Physics.
This, plus Tesla also disrupted the traditional car dealer model. Its cars are rolling iPads and its stores are like Apple. While I’m not in love with the cars, they do point to a better automotive world. I expect solar and battery technology will continue to improve, to the point where fuel and service costs will plummet for daily drivers. I’m hopeful we’ll get a new generation of sports cars with no $5000 major services, and for which odometers aren’t all that important. Buy a Ferrari once, upgrade it for the next 30 years… Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Future, future, hopey, changey -- just give me more of that sweet, sweet other people's money! OK, Nostradamus, please state WHEN this will occur so that we can do an ROI analysis. Oh, forgot there for a second -- the faux-green religion is never held responsible for their predictions and failures. (The real answer is that the faux-green religion just shifts, and increases, civilization's fossil fuel use and CO2 emissions to ****hole countries.)
On the solar panels I bought for my new house, the ROI break even point is 4.1 years based on average electric consumption. Without the tax break, it would be 6 years. This is with 2020 technology. Not sure how much solar will improve so it may be better for future adopters. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Way to ignore the increased costs that other ratepayers pay: 1) to supply you electricity when your solar panels aren't producing, and 2) to buy very expensive electricity from you. Also, electricity costs in CA are stupidly high (so benefits your ROI calculation). You have learned your faux-green religion lessons well Grasshopper... And why are you deflecting (and not answering)? Your claim was about BEVs -- not solar PV. I'm willing to admit that using large scale solar PV in the Desert Southwest does maybe merit investigating as a possibility (but individual ownership is stupid unless transmission costs are high).
My Orange County house (built 1926) lacks solar, so I’m on both ends of the conventional/green rate equation. Solar is new for me, but in the desert we get 330 days of sun, so It makes sense out here. Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app
A Tesla that charges using fossil fuel power clearly doesn’t help the environment much, though it may save the owner money. I’d agree it’s more symbolism than a solution. All the inconvenience, with little or no net benefit. At the other extreme, or second scenario, a BEV that charges during the day in a solar-equipped garage or parking facility could ultimately be run on free energy with little long term impact on the environment. But, unless there are BEVs to enable centralized clean power generation, we’re stuck in the hundred million tailpipe model that defies anything more than tinkering at the edges — like when we removed lead from gasoline. Good, but we’re only improving on 1880s technology. Two problems… the second scenario is rare now, and the BEVs available now are pretty mediocre. But we’re getting there, slowly. Storage/battery tech may decide the future of energy capture/transmission. Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat.com mobile app
Still think that you are being too future-future over-optimistic. Best case, substituting a BEV-based transportation system for an ICEV-based transportation system is just an equal substitution of evil. Would agree that paying a few researchers to try to find some actually better storage/battery technologies is a worthwhile investment; however, what's completely ******* crazy is paying huge amounts of money to support the widespread adoption of something more inefficient (i.e., more costly) with only the hopeful prayer that "someday it will be better".
I really want electric to succeed as I want an electric wake boat that isn't $300k and has more than 45 minutes of range for wake sessions (Nautique GS22e has those specs/price). Entire pleasure boat industry would have a game changer with electric if you could have an entire day out with it on one charge. No more needing to pull the boat out of the water for service every 50 hours. No more needing to get fuel and refill it when you just charge overnight. And more importantly you can get rid of the loud engine sound when going at 17+ mph and be able to talk to the person on the wake or listen to only the music you want without a droning engine. Pretty awesome stuff.
You guys are so old. But I'm not young either and I see what's coming. I may not like it, but I will adapt and control it so it works in my favor. Capitalizing while you can would be very wise. I used to laugh at people who had the old plug in ones..but now? When my gas one craps out, I will replace it with electric. They are incredible to use and so much lighter. Between it and my lawnmower, they are the last 2 peices of lawn care equipment I own that are gas powered.
That would be awsome wouldn't it? I love boats but the cost of operation has kept me away from ownership. I just cannot justify spending 500-800 in fuel every weekend. But I really want nice boat you can ski behined but also use as a pleasure boat.