Elon can’t sell his cars – so he is suing to make people buy them.
Or at least, suing to compel the government to keep on paying people to buy them – if that distinction amounts to any meaningful difference.
Canada had a law – like the one in the U.S. – which greatly subsidized the individual purchase of Teslas and other electric cars via rebates bestowed upon those who did buy them. These purchaser subsidies amounted to several thousand dollars each, and worth a lot more to Tesla, et al, since without them the incentive to buy an electric car dims considerably.
When the subsidies dried up in Denmark, so did Tesla’s sales – by 94 percent. That’s not a typo. With the subsidy in place, 2,738 Teslas were sold in 2015. With the subsidies gone, 176 Teslas were sold the following year.
Elon has admitted openly that he can’t do “business” without these subsidies: “Clean energy vehicles” – as he styles them – “aren’t attractive enough to compete without some form of taxpayer-backed subsidy.”
Elon’s language is always a little fuzzy. The subsidies are not “taxpayer-backed,” which implies something akin to consensual approval. They are government enforced transfer payments, the funds mulcted from unwilling taxpayers. What the government “gives back” – i.e., the subsidy – is taken out of the hide of some other victim. And the receiver of the subsidy is artificially advantaged at the expense of someone else.
In any event, when the government of Ontario, Canada announced this week that it planned to eliminate the subsidies for EVs – at least, those which pay people with other people’s money to buy Teslas – Elon and his lawyers ran to the courts for succor. Time to call Saul!
“The decision has already inflicted substantial harm on Tesla Canada in the form of lost sales,” the brief contends.
And, it’s true – in the same way that’s it true a burglar is harmed by a homeowner with a baseball bat, who successfully runs the burglar out of his house before the burglar can make off with the TV set.
The real harm has been caused by Elon.
He has singlehandedly perverted the market for electric cars – which aren’t an intrinsically stupid idea – by stupidly building them to be high-performance and luxurious, which has made them much too expensive to be anything other than low-volume indulgences for the virtue-signaling affluent. And – because of the Lemming Effect – steered almost every other car manufacturer in the same stupid direction.
There is only one electric car on the market which stickers for less than $30,000 – and only does so by $10. It is the $29,990 Nissan Leaf.
The next most “affordable” electric car is the $36,620 Chevy Bolt.
In both cases, this is at about twice as much as an IC-engined economy sedan such as the Hyundai Elantra I am test driving this week (base price $16,950).
But electric cars don’t have to cost twice as much as IC economy cars.
They cost as much as they do only in part because they are electric cars. The other part is the cost of Me-Tooing Tesla’s electric cars. Because Teslas are quick and slick and full of gadgets, the manufacturers of other electric cars feel compelled to compete with Teslas, by designing their cars to a similar standard.
They must also be quick – or at least not be “slow” – regardless of the efficiency/cost benefit of slowness, which after all is what electric cars should be about, assuming they are about costing you less to drive than an IC-engined economy car or at the very least, not twice as much.
And if they aren’t about costing less, then why bother? 
Or rather, why subsidize?
One can make a blanket moral indictment against any subsidy for anything since a subsidy is by definition the giving over of money not earned by free exchange to a thief-by-proxy – in order to benefit him at the expense of unwilling victims.
But subsidizing high-performing/high-cost electric cars for virtue-signaling affluent people who ought to be buying their own cars is a species of obnoxiousness akin to rent-controlled luxury apartments in Manhattan. Marie Antoinette is said to have suggested that starving Parisians ought to eat cake – but she at least had the decency not to insist they pay for her cake, too.
. . .
Got a question about cars – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!
If you like what you’ve found here, please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: EPautos magnets are free to those who send in $20 or more. My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here. If you find it useful, consider contributing a couple of bucks! 
Good article from NYPost that is now linked on DRUDGE. It was posted on NYPost last night.
https://nypost.com/2018/08/23/tesla-insiders-say-its-a-s-tshow-under-beleaguered-elon-musk/
What happen to the ApeMan and the Model 3 is #7 selling pass vehicle. In the industry we have what is called the ORDER BANK. Someone can be #1 today by be #0 tomorrow if the ORDER BANK dries up and is not backfilled with new orders. WILL ELON show the ORDER BANK status???
I lived and worked thru the up and downs of this, especially class 8 trucking. Today it is 9 months but I lived thru times when it wasn’t even 2 weeks. OUCH!
Toasty, interesting link. Cannot wait for this freak show to collapse and the real truth comes out. No doubt a good book or two will be forthwith.
Let’s see…when he was able to extract these subsidies out of the government, he knew that they were limited to a maximum number of cars before these subsidies expired. At least, that was the rule in the United States. During the time he could benefit from these forced transfer payments, he should have been developing vehicles that could sell at full cost without legislated theft from the rest of us. In other words: When you are able to master production, your cost of production should be going down. It’s all about efficiency and quality control–two terms Elon never learned.
Now he decides he needs the government-legislated theft, just as the government decides to do what they always do without notice: Change the rules. Suing the Canadian government to force it to not change their own rules is either a loser’s game or a publicity stunt.
There are some people that consider Mr. Musk to be one of the most intelligent businessmen on the planet. Yet it seems the only thing he has figured on his own is how to steal from the people while making it appear he’s doing everyone a favor. There is a word for that: Evil.
My original assessment of Tesla Motors was that Musk didn’t even know how to hire the right people. Their first model if left unused would go below minimum charge level and brick. The BMS if they even had one lacked the simple feature of preventing power draw below minimum charge. This is something I knew from the battery powered product I’ve worked on but Musk couldn’t hire anyone who knew that? Anyway that’s why I knew TM was nonsense from the get-go… well someone wrote an article on that very point of Musk being a single point of failure without the right people to make it all work:
https://www.theinstitutionalriskanalyst.com/single-post/2018/08/20/Teslas-Single-Point-of-Failure
Morning, Brent!
Yup. And the original “Tesla” was just a converted Lotus.
Hi Brent,
Think about the fatuity of the whole thing. This Elon character had no background or experience in the car business. He’s a PayPal lottery winner. The idea that a guy who knows almost nothing about cars as such or how they’re manufactured is going to reinvent the business is as arrogant and preposterous as me announcing that I am going to revolutionize heart surgery.
Let’s not forget Musk was actually dumped from PayPal too….
Everyone should drive an electric vehicle.
After all, the electricity is produced by the flapping of butterfly wings and contributes nothing to increased environmental impact.
Lithium mines are also completely devoid of any environmental impact.
It’s funny to me how Musk is compared to Tony Stark- at least Stark redeemed himself at some point, Musk has yet to do that IMO.
Amen, Jim!
But tell it to our newest Clover… Ape Man!
Just reading through the comments…. this ape guy is reinforcing a lot of your classic points Eric via his low-info/misinformed arguments. The government propaganda has really gotten to some people, but I think most Americans are starting to wake up. David Knight’s show from Infowars led me to you and now I read just about every article. I wonder how clovers discover this site? These comments sections make for the best lunch breaks. I always find something either entertaining or informative from your readers.
Hi Mark!
I also love the comments – both the good and the bad. The good, because they keep me from being too depressed about things. The bad – because it reminds me how shabby the opposition is.
Glad you found us – and thanks for the kind words!
I have another idea for how to give California’s Air Resources Board (who determines smog requirements for automobiles) the ‘finger’, but I’ll have to win the lottery to finance it, as I don’t see how I could get investors interested. The idea is THIS: Design my OWN “hybrid” car, a DIESEL-electric, with a 30 hp. 3-banger stationary diesel, a synchronous generator, a 20 hp DC motor, and a small bank of Li-Ion batteries, mounted in a pre-1976 small car chassis, like an old Toyota Corona or Datsun 510. Would it be a hot rod? No, it’s be a dog, barely able to get out of its own way…but a well of a contraption to make a run to the store, or get to work, or Church, or other short trips. If this vehicle could sustain 65 mph, it’d be ok for short runs to the Bay area.
Assuming that I could put together such a rig for fairly cheap…want to take bets that my main obstacles would be the bureaucrats that would find all sorts of lame excuses to prevent my licensing this thing for the roads?
Hi Doug,
Without question your main obstacle would be the regulatory apparat. Backed up by the car industry, unfortunately – because they have embraced the concept of regulatory capture as a way to keep upstart rivals out while charging customers more.
It’s enraging.
Because there is no legitimate reason why a $10,000 car that averages 60-100 MPG isn’t available right now…
Doug, aside from the fact that they’d outlaw anything that actually makes sense; anything normal, in that communist country known as CA.- and that the only way to give them the finger is to remove one’s self from their jurisdiction….
Why on earth would you want to gimp yourself from the git-go, by creating an inefficiency of having to convert already-produced usable energy into electricity and then again into usable energy, as opposed to just running the car off of the little diesel directly and skipping the electricity?
I often think about that very scenario when I’m using my little tractor with it’s 27HP Mitsubishit diesel. Tractor weighs 2K lbs (About what a li’l Datsun would weigh) and of course is geared way lower than a car, and pulls a load….and only uses about 0.6 gal/hr. I could only imagine the kind of mileage that would translate to in a car!
It would probably be feasible too, if not for the Nazis who don’t want us to have it. Gear the car right…and with a 5-speed tranny, it might not be a rocket, but I’ll bet it could do a decent speed.
And just think: No electronics; you could run it even with a dead battery; simple as all get out; would last forever; no delicate stuff to break……
Ever drive an 1974 vintage Mercedes 240D with the 64 horsepower 4-banger diesel engine? Your Mistubishit would make that ol’ smokey ‘Benz seem like a hot rod! The idea behind a diesel-electric is little different than how it’s done for a locomotive. However, build the circuitry so I can recharge from household current and/or the few EV receptacles, and I’ve got one versatile ride.
I have a 1982 240D 4-speed that runs much better than some newer cars. In fact, in traffic, I can easily overtake 90% of the cars on the road. Lifter adjustments (solid lifters) every 15,000 miles insure that it is in top running shape. I have approximately 370,000 miles on it and the engine has never been disassembled. Damned good car.
I’m envious. Hope that the bureau-rats don’t find a bullshit excuse to regulate it off the road. Ron Offer (the Sham-Wow! guy and the world’s BEST pitchman, ever) said it best, “Da Goi-Mans (Germans) make real good stuff!”
I had a drag race with one in ’73……from a stop light in Roby Texas. I was on my Schwinn 10 speed after coming off the road in a big rig. It was a real release for me after being cooped up in a big rig for 6 days. We were neck and neck for over a block. I was rolling sweat and he was rolling coal. The great thing about it was the people in the car looking at me and me looking at them. We were all laughing. If I’d been in my truck I’d have blown his doors off but the thing was, I loved racing cars and people in cars seemed to love racing a cyclist. And people back then were careful to not endanger a cyclist.
Please….let us turn back that chronological clock(I forget how it was couched in an earlier comment). Oh, I know it won’t happen….and one big reason is nobody is willing to die for it!! Seriously, is there nothing worth fighting for? I’m not speaking of going fisticuffs with your neighbor but going round for round with the govt., whichever one it is or how many you have to fight.
My best friend told me a couple days ago that when I went WACO(We Ain’t Comin Out), I’d lose my life. Please, tell me something I don’t know. But the pussies in SWAT armor will get a comeuppance.
I will be in Realtree, in the pasture, with a RealTree camo rig. With the scope cover that stops reflection of the objective lens (https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1784241403/tenebraex-tenebraex-sunguard-killflash-ard-anti-reflection-device).
And looking just to my right……won’t Mike Valentine ever change photos? It’s been the same one since 1980. I understand him not wanting to post a pic of a 100 year old guy(just kidding), but please, I ain’t the same at all from 40 years ago.
I’m sorta amazed no one ever speaks of defending themselves(and their loved ones).
Does nobody else think the badged crowd will come for you? There is a good reason everything we type is kept in the Georgia and Utah NSA databases spyware. Places that use millions of gallons of water per day for cooling ain’t just fuckin around. They want to know where to go and remove guns or anything else.
EHhhhh, I dunno, Doug- Those Mercedes weighed over 3K pounds, didn’t they? Seems they either had automatic trannies, or just standard-issue standards, too. Imagine a 2000 lb. car with more gears, and a rear-end specifically geared for the set-up.
Or what they hey, just bring back a clone of the 80’s 300D’s- Nice solid do-anything comfortable car that was no slug…built like a tank; nice and safe; last forever; and gets 30MPG- which could probably be improved on quite easily with a few simple mods.
Damn thing would cut right through a li’l Datsun.
Eric, i think the worst thing about Musks racket is that as you say he is actually perverting the whole market for electrics.
Having spent most of my grown up/adult life in mega cities (on holiday in Karachi at the moment) I really see a market for EVs. Even as a car guy since i was a kid, i was always fascinated by them as well. The current crop is absolutely useless in so may ways. I mean a 300 mile range – why? Its too much for the school/supermaket run or even commute for most people, but too little for the cross country run (even in a relatively small country like the UK). For that you are carrying weight reducing actual efficiency, and paying a fortune. Teslas cars are too big for city cars – i think they are wider than a Range, but without the high up view, making them hard to drive and park particularly during the school run. And at 100k, i think most people (even those who are well off) would never keep it as a second car at home for the wife…. in third world countries – well forget it.
Said it before and will say it again, if they ever do a sensible electric, light, cheap, simple, just enough for a run around town – I would definitely get one despite my love for the ICE…I dont think ill be the only one. but till then its just a waste of resources….. unfortunately it seems my resources as I have to pay for the mess 😛
You might enjoy owning an EV hobbyist car. My first EV was one of these, I found it on eBay for under $2000. It required some fixup and new batteries (it used golf-cart style lead-acids, about $800 for a set.) Max range was about 40 miles. Most hobbyist cars are conversions.
I had a lot of fun with that car, it was fine for commuting and shopping. I drove it in the Woodward Dream Cruise (Detroit) every year.
As toys – and golf carts – EVs make sense. As practical/economical replacements for IC cars? Nope.
Hey, in Detroit, one of those little electric hobbyist cars could truly be advantageous! Even a nigger ain’t gonna steal the damn thing! You could leave the keys in it…
Hey Nunz,
This Ape Dude has to be getting checks from Elon…
Or Uncle….. (And the M.O. is always the same: Undeterred by facts/logic; spew half-truths & facetious arguments; endless time; think they will accomplish something vs. people who have figured out the scam long ago….)
Hi Nunz!
Yup. But I am just as relentless. Especially now that I am single. I have all the time in the world to battle these Clovers… and nothing to lose by going balls deep, if need be.
Running out of other peoples money is a common trope of all Ponzi schemes. Not only has Elon fooled those who handed over their hard earned cash for shares in his company, he has also extorted money from all of us, all of those who were not willing to fall for this fraud. Madoff does jail time for the Ponzi he ran. Will we see Elon doing the same?
While I agree the stench of desperation is on Tesla right now, that’s a function of their having screwed up so badly on the manufacturing of the Model 3.
Subsidies come to Tesla in several ways, many many ways in fact.
One of course is the ZEV mandates inflicted on automakers by California and others that created the ‘compliance car’ class of EV like the Leaf but had little to do with Tesla.
Then the emissions trading programs that allowed Tesla to sell ZEV credits to other automakers. This effectively kept Tesla afloat.
Another was the sweetheart deal Tesla got on the Fremont NUMMI plant. This may in the end sink Tesla because, since Elon’s automated-assembly deathmarch for the Model 3 failed so badly, they have been having to hire vast amounts of labor at inflated Bay Area prices to build the Model 3. They lose money on virtually every one they sell.
Most importantly for most California EV buyers is the solo-driver access to HOV lanes which is only indirectly monetary (it saves time, and it takes a resource away from others).
Then there’s the direct tax breaks and subsidies handed out to purchasers, which matter a lot at the $30K compliance-car Leaf/500e segment but almost not at all for a $100K Model S. If you can afford a Model S the US Federal $7500 means very little.
Going for the high-end market was absolutely the right thing for Tesla to do. You have a car with limits and the potential to be troublesome, you want to make it a shiny bauble that’s a third car for people who already have a Merc GL and a minivan to drive if the Model S goes back to the dealer on a flatbed. And they succeeded wildly.
Elon is always sure he’s smarter than everyone else around him, and so it went with implementing the production for the Model 3. He ignored the experienced people around him, things went badly wrong, and rather than backing off and getting the production glitches smoothed out they’ve basically gone back to 1970s manufacturing with lots of hand labor in order to ship product. This is costing them big sums on just about every Model 3 that goes out the door.
So this is why Tesla is fishing around for money and market advantages under every rock they can look.
The Model 3 is a very good product. Perhaps they’ll get the manufacturing sorted out and be able to make money on it before the company goes off the cliff. The competition is getting better, though, the Bolt in particular (and maybe the new Leaf, the old one was underwhelming) is an excellent product.
Only a madman [or crony] would start a manufacturing business in the US today.
Only a madman’s madman would start a manufacturing business in CALIFORNIA!
Only an insane lunatic of a madman would start a business in the Gay Area!!!!!
NOTHING that E-loon does makes any sense. Guess that’s why he loses 100’s of millions per year…..
Exactly – is there a worse place on the planet to place a business that makes real things? I mean, if your goal is VC funds and virtue signaling, there is,no better place, but making a real think you have to sell?
Musk will probably end up getting some kind of covert gov’t bailout – his company aligns all too well with their agenda & they aren’t about to let Tesla go BK. I’d be damned careful about shorting the stock; I remember getting burned on the short side going against worthless banks about 8-10 years ago.
Vince, you need to see the movie “The Big Short”….unless you already have. It’s based on a true story. When the credits rolled at the end I got mad all over again.
Only ones who win with stocks, are the brokers and the IRS. Win, lose or draw, the broker makes money. Lose, and you’re on your own. Win, and your silent partner, Uncle, takes his protection-racket money.
But I agree with you, Vince- Tesla is their sweetheart- unless E-loon has done something to get out of their good graces, they’ll likely keep propping-up his losing charity.(Can’t call it a business…it never makes a profit).
Of course the Canadian suit Tesla is bringing is about fairness; the law initiating the phaseout of the subsidy was written to specifically exclude Tesla. If you want to buy a Nissan Leaf or Chevy Bolt, you can still get a subsidy during the phaseout – but not if you buy a Tesla. It’s hard to see any purpose behind this aside from an irrational and specific hatred of Tesla.
As for “Elon can’t sell his cars”, it’s hard to reconcile that belief with the fact that Model 3 is now on the Top-Ten Best-Selling passenger car list, ranked at # 7 as of July (numbers from goodcarbadcar.net.) That’s quite extraordinary considering the $50k price of the car, not made that much more affordable even by the subsidy.
The site you link has its facts wrong. For starters, the top 20 selling vehicles are mostly not cars – they’re trucks and SUVs and crossovers. But even if we move the goalposts and count only passenger cars, Tesla doesn’t make the top 20 list at any other site I looked at.
Taking a deposit on a car that hasn’t been built and maybe never will be built isn’t a sale. A sale is the customer takes delivery of the vehicle and drives off in it. Tesla is largely doing the former.
I specifically said passenger cars. On a list that includes trucks, Tesla Model 3 is at #20 for July. Looking at cars only, Tesla Model 3 is at # 7. Yes, of course this is cars delivered and paid for, Goodcarbadcar.net has done auto sales stats for years.
RE: other sites, remember this stat applies to July sales, most articles I’ve seen on sales stats aren’t current through July.
Screengrab of top-ten cars list:
https://insideevs.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Tesla-Top-20-Sales-July-Cars-898×526.jpg
Here’s sales stats source for all vehicles, including trucks. Click on “Month” to sort by July sales. Tesla Model 3 is at #20:
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2018/08/july-2018-the-best-selling-vehicles-in-america-every-vehicle-ranked/
Here’s source for passenger car sales ranking. Click on “Month” to sort by July sales. Tesla Model 3 is at #7:
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2018/08/july-2018-ytd-u-s-passenger-car-sales-rankings-best-selling-cars-in-america/
*”Of course the Canadian suit Tesla is bringing is about fairness; the law initiating the phaseout of the subsidy was written to specifically exclude Tesla. “*
Was it? Or is it that Tesla’s unique business model prevents it from taking advantage of the full scope of a law which was written with the traditional car stealership model in mind?
“Fairness”- how ironic, considering that subsidies are inherently UNfair. The taxpayers are the ones who should be suing for having to subsidize the car purchases of some.
And speaking of “fairness”, other US automakers should be suing the US government and state of CA. for the “carbon credit” scam, which unfairly penalizes them, while rewarding companies like Tesla. You don’t E-loon complaining about THAT unfairness!
You mean only the state of California, the US government had no hand in creating that program. And Tesla is hardly the only beneficiary. Many other automakers have used this program for EVs, hybrids and Fuel Cell cars.
I understand your point, I just think the citizens of a state have the right to try and solve their air quality problem. Breathing dirty air isn’t “fair” either.
How is air polluted by the generating of electricity magically any cleaner than the air produced by internal-combustion-engined cars?
I think what you’re saying is that people who live in densely-populated areas have a right to breathe air that is not contaminated by their own pollution; while that pollution is inflicted upon other places and people who did not cause it.
“…How is air polluted by the generating of electricity magically any cleaner than the air produced by internal-combustion-engined cars?”
The only fuel source dirtier than petroleum is coal. But EVs do not increase coal pollution. Because coal plants are BASELOAD. Baseload plants run all the time at full output, no matter what’s plugged in. Plugging in a few thousand EVs can’t make them run any harder. Instead, increased load is dealt with by medium and peaking plants. Coal pollution is baked in at a fixed level and does not change.
EV use will certainly increase electricity from peaking natural gas plants (relatively clean), but not from coal. And some of the grid mix makes no air pollution at all (hydro, solar, wind, nuclear.) Meanwhile petroleum pollution decreases. this is how the air gets cleaner.
Clover,
Gas-burning cars are not “dirty” – and haven’t been for decades. The general public has been deliberately misled as regards this fact. They do not know that when the EPA starts babbling about a “50 percent reduction” in X they mean 50 percent of 1 percent. More like 3 percent of 1 percent, actually. Not whole numbers.
Many new IC cars meet the EPA’s own Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle (PZEV) standard. Other cars are within a hair’s breadth of PZEV status.
The Mission has been Accomplished.
EVs are being pushed because the EPA has been unable to regulate IC cars out of existence. So they came up with zero emissions… because no IC car can meet that standard.
And neither can any EV, by the way.
EV’s emit no pollution while driving, so critics point at the pollution made before the car is driven. Well, you have to do the same with gasoline. Gas doesn’t appear from thin air.
It takes roughly 6 KWH of energy to refine a gallon of gasoline from oil. That energy comes from fossil fuel or from electricity. So you have to add pollution from that to whatever the car makes while driving.
An EV, incidentally, could drive about 24 miles just on that wasted refining energy.
Clover,
Pollution, eh?
How about the several hundred pounds per car of toxic elements in the battery pack?
How much in the way of “harmful emissions” have been emitted by Tesla car fires?
RE: “toxic” batteries. People making this point are remembering older battery types like NiCD, NiMH or Lead-Acid. These all used large amounts of heavy metals.
Modern EV battery formulas are more like your coffee table. You shouldn’t eat your coffee table, but it doesn’t rise to the level of “toxic”.
Burning batteries are no joke, but these are far less common proportionally than gasoline fires. Carbon monoxide is quite poisonous.
Clover,
Lithium Ion is nasty stuff, too. And dangerous stuff. More so than gas. Gas can spill and not burn. But if the contents of a lithium-ion battery come into contact – as when the case is damaged in a wreck – then you have a big problem.
“…Lithium Ion is nasty stuff, too. And dangerous stuff. More so than gas. ”
Not so. It’s not “battery acid” like in the lead-acid days.
Here’s a Chinese battery executive DRINKING li-ion electrolyte to prove it’s not dangerous:
https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1020092_byd-ceo-drinks-battery-fluid-from-companys-own-environmentally-friendly-battery
Now, show me an oil executive drinking gasoline.
Clover,
You have a talent for half-truths, I’ll give you that!
I could post a video of me drinking distilled water… before adding it to a lead-acid battery.
The problem with lithium-ion batteries is that when the elements within the battery are combined, they become dangerous – explosive. And that is much more likely to happen vs. gas because gas does not necessarily become fire if the tank is damaged and there is a leak.
If an EV battery is damaged and the materials within contact one another, a fire is almost certain.
And EVs get a pass on the saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaafety standards which IC cars are obliged to meet; they can get away with building cars like the Model S which are inherently more dangerous, as regards fire in the event of a wreck, than a gas-engined car.
And don’t get me started on the “auto pilot” stuff.
Apeweak,
It also takes much energy to mine, refine and transport the fuels used to generate electricity- be it coal, gas, oil, uranium, etc.
Ditto to build and maintain the electric infrastructure….
Again, no advantage over burning the fuel directly at the point of use (the car) other than to relocate the emissions to another locale……
Instead of electric cars, they should call them “electric brooms”, because all you’re doing is sweeping the pollution under the rug.
It’s environmentalism for dummies: Out of sight, out of mind.
“…It also takes much energy to mine, refine and transport the fuels used to generate electricity- be it coal, gas, oil”
You forget those are the exact same fuels used to refine gasoline. So whatever steps you are referring to are in BOTH cars backgrounds. But oil refining is specific to gasoline, AND very energy intensive. It must be counted.
*”You forget those are the exact same fuels used to refine gasoline…..”*
But that was my point: You were trying to say that IC vehicles had an inherent inefficiency due to the costs/consequences of refining gasoline and diesel; and I was merely pointing out that EVs in-fact suffer the very same detriment, because ultimately, the same fuels (or at least fuels which also necessitate similar costs/consequences) power them.
Nunzio – EVs do use all the same fuels to make electricity that gas refining uses to refine gasoline. So if you like, you can declare that BOTH cars use equivalent upstream energy.
But then, the EV makes no emissions while driving, while the gas car DOES create emissions. Gas makes more emissions overall.
Clover,
Yes – and these “emissions” are so negligible as to be immaterial – as far as air quality is concerned.The only “emission” that IC-engined cars produce significantly more of is C02 – which isn’t an “emissions,” except in the fevered minds of those who pray at the church of “climate change.”
Eric – anything emitted is an “emission”. You are free to argue about the harm or harmlessness of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, but these are still “emissions”. And that was what this argument was about.
Plus – even if the upstream energy input is the same, gas refining uses ALL fossil fuels in this process. Electricity generation at least has some non-emission sources mixed in.
Clover writes:
“…anything emitted is an “emission.”
Certainly. The question is – is it harmful? If the standard isn’t that – if it’s merely that it’s an “emission” – then a law will just have to be passed mandating catalytic converters for our mouths and other orifices.
The fact is that IC emissions are at the point of being almost zero emissions – in terms of harmful emissions. Things which create smog, affect air quality.
So EV people had to invent a fictitious harm – the carbon dioxide “emissions” coming from IC cars…
*” Plugging in a few thousand EVs can’t make them run any harder. “*
True- but who’s talking about only plugging in “a few thousand” EVs?
In many places there are already more than “a few thousand” EVs on the road- and since you say that the Tesla Model 3 is selling better than sliced bread, wht happens when there 10’s or 100’s of millions of EVs on the roads? -When we already have an infrastructure which in many places is stressed on a hot summer day from a few more people running their A/C units?!
EVs charge overwhelmingly off-peak, overnight. So there’s plenty of excess generating capacity for now. I saw a study that suggested 80% of drivers could switch to electric before this creates any kind of problem. We’ll have a few decades to solve this.
Clover,
Another very disingenuous argument. If EVs are ever mass-produced, they’d be in use all the time, just like IC cars… and would need to be recharged just as IC cars need to be refueled – at various times, not just “off peak.”
And – again – you continue to evade the fundamental issue: Why? Why bother with EVs at all? They are not cheaper to buy/drive. They cost more to buy/drive. They aren’t more convenient than IC cars. They are much less so. They have significsnt functional limitations that IC cars do not have.
They require subsidies and mandates to “nudge” their manufacture and sale – at a loss per car.
So, again… why?
EVs charge principally off-peak and will ALWAYS do so because this is one of their principal advantages – fueling at home. Overnight is when this happens because it’s when people aren’t driving.
“…Why bother with EVs at all?”
Not much point going over EV’s advantages with you, you will simply mock me and fail to understand my reasons.
Tesla Model 3 is the #7 best selling car for July. Many people share my automotive values, whether you grok this or not.
“…They require subsidies and mandates to “nudge” their manufacture and sale…”
EV tax credit is a tax break. Do you take no tax breaks at all? Do you take the IRS tax break for owning a home? Do you take an exemption for having children?
Both of these are unfair tax reallocation to people without homes or families.
How about the Diesel Tax Credit? Have you ever written articles fuming about that tax break? Or are you only against tax breaks for things you personally don’t like?
Clover,
It is a defining characteristic of your kind that you respond with disingenuous half-truths and evade/ignore facts presented.
EVs are subsidized at the manufacturing and retail level; their manufacture is mandated via “zero emissions” and CAFE regs.
I oppose all taxation and wealth redistribution (subsidies) – because I oppose theft.
Ape, all of those subsidies and tax breaks are one and the same. No one here is defending such things – except for you. And that is why you are a Clover.
Clover,
At least you admit the for now part! But what happens if/when EVs constitute 50 percent of the cars on the road? Then it will have a very different effect, eh? And what then? Who is going to pay for the additional generating capacity which will be necessary? It won’t be Elon – and it won’t be voluntary.
“…Who is going to pay for the additional generating capacity which will be necessary?”
Electric utilities are businesses. They will jump at the chance to create additional generating capacity if they have waiting consumers to buy it.
Utilities LOVE electric cars. Mine actually bought me a free charger.
Yes, Clover – they will “love” charging us more… lovely. More expensive to buy an EV – and more expensive utility bills.
Clover entirely misses the point in his “Et Tu” argument that his stumping for EV tax credits has as much moral bearing and justification as, say, your home mortgage deduction or the personal exemptions for your spouse and/or child(ren). They’re separate issues, but all point to an simple EVIL…actually several of them. The greatest is the overall level of taxation, period, regardless of the method by which it’s “mulcted”. Presuming to offer ‘tax breaks’ for ANY behavior, whether it’s the purchase versus rent issue on housing, or having kids, or what type of car you buy…that’s a default admission that taxes are TOO HIGH. As for using these tax schemes as a tool of “social engineering”…it’s one of the oldest methods by which the big government statists “divide and conquer”. Furthermore, AFAIK, the free market hasn’t found a way to charge more based on income for a product, or by race, etc. THere was a hilarious example of a cafe owned by some black ‘activists’ that charged white customers higher prices…and surprise, surprise, they had NO white customers! In effect, things like favoring one type of vehicle over another constitutes the same thing on Government’s part. Finally, there’s the one problem with Government subsidies…it pushes up the PRICES, ultimately to consumer detriment. I can see this, for example, just in California, where an ordinary thing like milk costs about 2.5x in the once “Golden” State as it does where #2 son lives (Iowa)…both for the state subsidies and the onerous restrictions to keep California solely for California dairies, something the US Constitution’s commerce clause was SUPPOSED to prevent! Please tell me how California’s working families are being “helped” by paying 2.5x for mil for their children than Iowa families do for theirs! In the same vein, please tell me how some single mother who just needs basic, reliable transportation benefits from Clover’s pie-in-the-sky ideas regarding “sustainable” automotive technology when the industry could, if not restrained by bureaucracy and political skulduggery, provide a $12K new car that would be not unlike the Plymouth Valiant or Ford Falcon of some 55 years ago…BASIC transportation, and nothing but! That would do more for the “working poor” than all of Clover’s moronic ideas!
Ape, “Utilities LOVE electric cars. Mine actually bought me a free charger.”
And there it is. Nothing is “free”. So you are part of the problem – you want to live off of others.
Ah, the classic liberal fantasy of “for now”!
So what happens as EVs become ubiquitous? Suddenly everyone’s charging at home, overnight, and POOF! There is no more off-peak, because that becomes the peak time for charging…..
Well, you won’t like this answer, but if EVs truly become dominant, gasoline usage will decrease. This means the associated refining energy (6 KWH per gallon) can be repurposed for additional grid capacity.
EVs will only become “dominant” if IC cars are outlawed or effectively outlawed via regulations designed to achieve that.
It’s all about CONTROL…
I’ve seen all kinds of these arguments about reducing pollution, urban “sprawl”, “smart” urban development, getting people to “eat smarter”, and so on…there seems to be some manner of mania to CONTROL the private decisions of the PEOPLE…where they LIVE, in what they LIVE, how they GET AROUND, what they EAT and/or DRINK, and so on. It’s either over some self-righteous and superior notions of how people out to live, or of misguided “environmentalism”(which just about qualifies as a religion of itself), and, of course, they, the “Enlightened”, want to be the ones in charge, not unlike Soviet Commissars of the 1920s or Nazi Gauleiters of the 1930s! Furthermore, I seem to notice how so many big multinational corporations sponsor these mutton-headed fools, not the least of which it’s an easy means to raid the Federal treasury!
If Henry Ford or Thomas Edison had to live in our times, they’d have said “Fuck it!” and given up in disgust long before the light bulb or the Model T came out.
Ape,
I find that hard to believe, 80%? Many people live in apartments, how do they charge their car?
Run a extension cord out their third story window down to the street? If you lived in a “home” with a garage or at least a driveway, then an electric could be reasonable, it will never be a car for the average person.
Hi Ape,
Tesla is the exclusive beneficiary because it is the only company selling nothing but EVs. Other car companies are forced to either build EVs and give them away at a loss – or buy “carbon credits” from Elon in lieu of actually building their quota of give-away EVs.
And in re: “…the citizens of a state have the right to try and solve their air quality problem. Breathing dirty air isn’t “fair” either.”
Who are these “citizens,” exactly? You imply a kind of collective approval when in fact the “citizens” are actually a handful of regulators and politicians, who imposed their fatwas on the citizens.
And “dirty air”?
It’s not 1970. Or even 1990.
Nothing being sold today emits any meaningfully harmful pollution. The lie being peddled now is that carbon dioxide is a “pollutant,” but even if you buy into the “climate change” religion, C02 has nothing to do with air quality at all. And as far as C02 – do you know where the electricity which powers your EV comes from?
The citizens of California elect their local leadership who enacts programs like these. The majority of California citizens support this program and other clean air initiatives.
RE: the electricity that powers my EV – of course there is no free lunch and EVs by themselves aren’t the solution to pollution. They are merely an important component, and a way to REDUCE pollution, not fix the entire problem. See my other comment on the page about coal. EVs do not increase coal pollution.
Clover,
You mean some of the citizens – a minority of the population in every election – elected proxies to supposedly act on their behalf.
Coercive collectivism.
And based on either ignorance or contempt for facts.
You aren’t going to return the Earth or the air to the state it was in prior to the industrial revolution, not without shutting down technological society. Or at least, making it into a technocracy in which only the affluent can afford technology and the rest suffer a diminished standard of living for the sake of “conservation” and “the environment.”
There is no air quality problem today. It was solved decades ago.
We are now at the point of debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, as far as meaningful exhaust emissions are concerned.
No, I mean not just the voters of California, but the opinions expressed in numerous opinion surveys of citizens.
I support the rights of the people of California to elect who they please, and support whatever law they decide for themselves they want.
If you don’t support that, give YOURSELF a clover.
Clover,
Stop being evasive and disingenuous. In fact, some people imposed their desires upon others; even if it is a majority,” that does not make it legitimate. If it did, then three wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner is legitimate, too.
Pollution is a public safety issue, not “what’s for dinner”.
Clover,
There no longer is a “pollution” issue as regards IC cars. The air has been “clean” for decades. Your standard is an impossible standard – a pre-industrial standard.
Ape, “I support the rights of the people of California to elect who they please, and support whatever law they decide for themselves they want.”
I do not support any group of people anywhere passing unjust laws no matter how many of the them want it.
BTW, part of the definition of a Clover is someone who supports unjust laws. Clearly Eric does no such thing. But it is apt for you.
*”“I support the rights of the people of California to elect who they please, and support whatever law they decide for themselves they want.””*
And thus you support the right of those people to trample the rights of others who do not agree with them.
How did those people acquire such a superior right over others? If they voted for slavery, then is slavery legit?
Oh…wait..they did essentially vote for slavery….and you are saying that it’s legit.
I like this discussion, but I shouldn’t have stepped in this particular minefield, as this topic requires a very long discussion. Eric has blocked one of my responses in this thread already, so I’m not prepared to type out a long reply that won’t even appear here.
No, Clover – it requires a very short and simple discussion!
* There is no natural market for EVs. If there were, mandates and subsidies would be unnecessary. QED
* Current IC cars are very close to being “zero emissions” as far as any meaningful effect on air quality. Gas is cheap and abundant. There is no need for EVs.
* EVs have serious functional drawbacks as well as significant “environmental” problems that IC cars do not have.
* Elon Musk’s business depends entirely on government force; remove the subsidies and the mandates and there is no Tesla.
All the above are factual statements. Not opinions.
Apereek 😉 I doubt that Eric blocked one of your comments…. Libertarians/Anarchists generally don’t believe in censorship.
More likely, it was Turdpress(WordPress) glitch- we all experience them from time to time.
Heck, I have to input my name and email and check “subscribe” every time I post now, for the last several months, as it will no longer remember me…..
I think all here would agree with the sentiment that while we might not agree with what you say, we’d defend your right to say it.
Nunzio says: “…Libertarians/Anarchists generally don’t believe in censorship. ”
How about this Eric? Will you release the withheld comments from me? Or turn off the comment screening?
I’m polite. I don’t call people names (Clover), curse or insult people. I just like debate.
Ape, you wrote,
“I support the rights of the people of California to elect who they please, and support whatever law they decide for themselves they want.”
Do you support the people who have decided that they don’t support whatever law that you have decided you want? Is it ok for these others to opt out? Or do you believe in mob rule?
And as if four terms of “Moonbeam” haven’t inflicted enough harm, we can look forward to Gavin Newsome and his own brand of idiocy. Any man that’d cheat on a stone hottie like his ex, Kimberly Guilfoyle, is a grade-A moron.
Hence why my son and I spend most of our free time restoring a ’66 Plymouth, to make it a DRIVER…so we can give presumptuous assholes like you the finger!
The issue is the same one that came up in Michigan. Michigan had a law that prevented car companies creating dealerships that competed against existing independent dealerships.
When Tesla came to open a dealership, Michigan changed the wording of the law to remove the reference to competing with existing dealerships. Nobody doubted this was aimed right at Tesla.
Same with the Canadian phase-out language. They added a reference to “franchised” dealerships only. This was aimed right at Tesla, because their dealerships are the only ones affected.
The “fairness” of subsidies is a separate discussion, one that should encompass a lot more than just Tesla or EVs. The argument today is whether laws should apply evenly, or be designed to punish individual companies.
Hi Ape,
Elon is a fraudster – that’s the issue. He has been promising the “affordable” Model 3 for literally years… but the only Model 3 he’s “selling” (in quotes because he’s actually giving them away at a net loss per car) is the much more expensive version which starts around $40k.
Many of the victims of his fraud put down deposits on the promised $35k car….
Oh, its not a fraud, just a headstrong CEO who thinks he can wave his arms and make magic happen.
Hes learning that cost efficient manufacturing of 500k units a year is harder than rocket science.
Hi Jem,
I call him a fraud because he repeatedly makes promises not kept – and uses these promises not kept to extract money from marks. I also call him a fool because he does not understand the car business and is too arrogant to listen to people who do. The fact that he pinned the success of Tesla on the Model 3 proves my point.
It is a $40,000 compact sedan… anyone who knows anything about what’s happening in the cart business right now will know why that is a problem.
I agree he runs his mouth when he shouldn’t. I agree he pulls some stuff out of his backside and throws it against the wall to see if it’ll stick, and while the price and sales targets for the Model 3 were typical olden-days Elon executive management (staff says X, Elon says X+25% now get out and do it), some of his recent crap (the Thai sub?) has been embarrassing.
Companies like Ford might be betting the company on little SUVs but we’ll see how long that trend lasts. The problem with doing the same thing the competition is doing is that you end up competing with twenty other models and ten more three-year-old used models of the next level up. It might be a big pie, but there’s a few big slices and everyone else gets crumbs. And that’s where the toy crossover space is heading now.
The Model 3 is (per its name) selling into the A4/3-series/C-class size arena and there’s still plenty of room in that market. Going forward they needed the smaller, cheaper platform to be able to do a little Model X.
As far as I can tell the two visible and obvious places they took money out of the Model to have a shot at the $35K price point is the instruments/controls and the lack of the Model S hatchback. There’s cheaper materials in the structure here and missing trim on the body there but the gauges and the trunk are the two that stand out as “this is where we took money out”.
There are Model 3s all over the road around here, they’re definitely selling. And it’s definitely in terms of platform and ambition a step up over the Bolt and the Leaf. Now Tesla has to figure out how to make money on them.
Jem, “Now Tesla has to figure out how to make money on them.”
What Musk needs to figure out now is how to make a car without using stolen money.
The affordable Model 3 have never been promised by this specific date.
Indeed, the original plan for Model 3 had full production not occurring until 2020. Elon revised that when he saw the unexpected demand (reservations), and has been unable to meet his hoped-for rate of production. But he is well ahead of his original projection.
It’s a midsize, not a compact. And despite some thinking the price is a problem, it’s the #7 best selling car, as of last month (July.)
Clover,
It’s a compact.
184.8 inches long. A Civic sedan is 182.8 inches long.
A Camry is a mid-sized sedan. It is 192.7 inches long. It has 38 inches of backseat legroom. The Tesla 3 has 35.2 inches.
I can’t find any article or source that refers to it as a compact. It’s always compared to mid-size cars. Show me a source calling it a compact.
Clover,
Whether you “find any article or source” is irrelevant. What is relevant is the car’s physical dimensions, exterior length and interior space. And by those metrics, the Tesla is not a mid-sized car.
The Camry, Honda Accord and Hyundai Sonata are examples of mid-sized cars. They are much larger – and much roomier – than the Model 3. The Model 3 is about the same size as compact sedans like the Civic.
By the way, another of Elon’s lies – used to inflate the “success” of the Model S – is to compare it with full-size cars like the Mercedes S and BMW 7. In fact, the Tesla S is a mid-sized car and should be compared with mid-sized premium sedans like the Benz E and BMW 5.
I did a little research on this. It’s fuzzy because the US Insurance Institute for Highway Safety defines car size classes using a combination of size and weight.
An EV will be heavier than a similar size conventional car, which is what might allow it to jump classes.
In defense of this, however, is the fact that the much smaller motor allows extra interior or storage space for a given size. Model 3, for example, has a trunk in the front and rear both. And no “hump” on the floor despite being RWD.
Clover,
I’ve been a professional car journalist for 25-plus years; a passenger car is considered “compact” or “mid-sized” (and so on) according to its dimensions, not its weight. And the Model 3 is a compact-sized car.
Most states have franchise laws specifically formulated for car dealers that prohibit manufacturers from owning dealerships. These laws were written some time ago at the behest of dealers who wanted to control the geographical location of dealerships as well as not having to compete with factory-owned dealerships.
Dealerships were so jealous of their power, quite some time ago, here in Michigan, they actually battled each other to keep enterprising dealers from having Saturday hours. There was much vandalism of cars and facilities directed at the dealerships who chose to keep Saturday hours. They lost…today, most dealerships have Saturday hours.
Since Tesla only has only factory-owned dealerships, they are effectively shut out of the same market as traditional auto dealerships.
Good summery, yes, I live in Michigan and remember those “wars”. I made sure to patronize the dealers who had the courage to do something consumer-friendly (open on Saturday.)
Those same dealers have paid off local politicians to rewrite the law keeping Tesla out of the state. I drove to Ohio to buy my Tesla.
Ape, so you admit to crossing state lines to purchase stolen goods?
Ape, “The ‘fairness’ of subsidies is a separate discussion, one that should encompass a lot more than just Tesla or EVs. The argument today is whether laws should apply evenly, or be designed to punish individual companies.”
No it is not a separate issue. Musk is complaining that an unjust law is not being applied “fairly” to him. It is like a thief complaining that his stolen goods are not being fenced “fairly” like the other thieves’ stolen goods.
Hi Ape,
“Fairness”? Nothing the government does is fair – because everything the government does it does using coercion.
There is therefore plenty of rational reason to despise Tesla – a company which exists solely because of government force (mandates, subsidies – paid for using money taken by force from unwilling victims).
Your claim that the Model 3 is the “#7 best selling car” on the market is preposterous. Just for openers, no $50k car is among the top sellers because cars in that bracket are by definition high-end cars and no one sells high-end cars in volume.
Honda sells a lot of Civics and Accords. Toyota sells a bunch of Corollas and Camrys. That’s four of the top ten best-sellers… you perhaps see where I am headed…
“…a company which exists solely because of government…”
This actually describes GM and Chrysler who wouldn’t be here without their bailouts. Arguably Ford too, who took $6 billion from ATVM in 2009, still not repaid.
Tesla was founded in 2003, and was selling their first car, Roadster by 2008 with NO government help.
Tesla’s subsidies pale in comparison to any other automaker. You guys want to apply a standard to Tesla no other automaker would meet.
Not only did GM take auto company bailouts, it changed GMAC from a finance arm to a bank (ALLY) so that it could take advantage of the bank bailouts as well. This change took place AFTER the bank failures–sort like buying fire insurance AFTER the fire. GM got away with it…
Hi Anarchyst,
Yes, absolutely. Everyone here knows how I feel about GM. But GM and IC cars are not the same things – as Ape seems to be suggesting. The fact hat GM is cretinous in no way impugns the soundness of IC cars. EVs, on the other hand, are all economically and functionally unsound; would not exist at all were if not for the “help” provided by the government – the purpose of which is to undermine IC cars, because IC cars are affordable and under our control; not gimped by major functional issues nor tied into a Hive Mind collective – as all Teslas are.
And imagine how MORE economically sound IC cars would be if not for all of the government mandates hobbling them?! -Mandates which largely don’t apply to the EV’s.
The EV would be completely dead in a world where once could buy a $7500 new car that gets 40MPG….
You are correct. IC cars are not only practical, the automakers KNOW how to build cars that don’t fall apart under normal use.
I think part of Elon Musk’s “problem” is he is using silicon valley (groupthink) engineering processes instead of tried and true mechanical engineering processes to build cars.
The only way for electric cars to become practical is to have a 300 mile range and a 15 minute charge (refueling) time–not possible with today’s battery technology.
In addition, the infrastructure for IC cars is already well established and isn’t going anywhere.
Hi Anarchyst,
I submit that even 15 minutes is impossibly long. Would you wait 15 minutes to charge when you could refuel in 5? Now imagine hundreds of thousands of EVs… and the back-ups and queues at charging outlets… the country would grind to a halt.
We live in a right-now/fast-food society. I cannot grok how tripling the time to “refuel” constitutes progress… and keep in mind that EVs cannot be recharged when the temperature falls below freezing… and that freezing cold temps significantly affect their range. . . .
Which all brings me back to… why?
Gas is cheap and abundant. IC cars emit almost no harmful byproducts. They are inexpensive, practical. Why would anyone who isn’t just doing it because he has a boner for the electric car want an electric car?
Eric,
You make a good point. I was thinking of long trips, not the local commute to work, where 15 minutes would be a bathroom “pit stop”.
You also bring out a good point about battery technology being quite deficient in range in cold weather, especially in northern states (like Michigan).
From a technological standpoint, there is much that could be done. In Russia, diesel electric locomotives utilize supercapacitors as well as storage batteries to start their diesel-electric locomotives. Supercapacitors are able to provide large amounts of energy instantaneously while the storage batteries are used for long-term energy storage and release.
It would seem that supercapacitors, in conjunction with storage batteries could be used to extend range by using the supercapacitors to provide instantaneous energy for passing while the storage batteries are used for constant-speed operation.
Hi Anarchyst,
Sure, yes… but… why?
I mean, it’s all very technologically interesting. But does any of it make practical or economic sense?
Exactly, Eric!
What’s the point to all of the technology, if it doesn’t make things BETTER; MORE RELIABLE; MORE CONVENIENT; MORE EFFICIENT; etc.?
It’s kinda like NYC metro area mass transit: The commuter railroad there (LIRR) back 100 years ago, used to run through blizzards and hurricanes with no trouble at all- even back when I was a kid and they ran diesel locomotives…..no stopping ’em!
Today? LOL!!!! Get a few wet leaves on the tracks (literally), much less a little rain, and there are system-wide delays of many hours, and many canceled trains, and havoc in wreaked! -And this with state-of-the-art computerized signals and electric trains and computerized switching, etc. to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars of taxpayers money that has been spent over the last 15 years to “modernize” the system.
And don’t even MENTION snow! A little snow will cripple the whole system indefinitely. Yet the steam trains 100 years ago- of which some were still running into the 1950’s never had a problem.
And the NYC subway? Same thing.
But the average hipster-foofus is glad that the trains are no longer covered in graffiti, and that they look modern and have cool digital signs, etc. Never mind that the express trains that once sailed along at over 50MPH now creep along at 25 or 30….when they come; and that the system is in such disarray, that the routes change on almost a minute-by-minute basis….
Same deal with EVs- The people who desire them don’t seem to care that they are functionally inferior, and economically ridiculous…just as long as they are “cool” and showcase the very latest technology.
Seems to take me about 15 minutes to fill the 44 gallon tank on my Excursion…
But then, at least I get to drive a hulking truck! Would I wait that long for a stinking electric car? AHAhahahahah…yeah, right!
Hi Nunz,
Well, sure.. you have a 30 gallon tank! Most current cars have tanks that hold about 15 gallons. Regardless, the best any EV can do is achieve 80 percent charge in about half an hour…. who is going to put up with this? I mean, other than the fanbois?
Heck, Eric, even if it were only 30 gallons, I’d still have more range than a Tesla!
Morning, Nunz!
Yup. My TA has a 22 gallon tank. Even at 15 MPG, that means about 300 miles before I need to refill… and I can do it in a fraction of the time our friend Ape must wait for his taxpayer-financed EV to rejuice!
Nun, use the truck lane. Those pumps are 20 gallons/minute. I always did on my diesel and would be gone toot sweet. Took me a lot longer to clean the windshield than fill up.
That would be great 8, but she’s a gasser!
Actually I usually do charge in about 15 minutes. That’s enough to add about 100 miles of range at a Supercharger.
What might not be obvious is that I don’t typically have to fill my whole “tank” at a public charger. I just need enough to finish my trip, where I can finish my charge while I sleep.
So, Clover – let’s see…
You have to wait three times as long as I do to put 100 miles of range back in your EV. Actually, it’s more like five times as long, since I can put 100 miles of range back in my car in two minutes, since that’s as long as it takes to pump 3-4 gallons of fuel, about a third of a tankful.
This is progress? How?
“…You have to wait three times as long as I do to put 100 miles of range back in your EV. Actually, it’s more like five times as long…”
It’s not directly comparable. Remember that 90% of the time I charge while sleeping. This involves zero “standing around” time to fuel.
The only Supercharger use is for long trips, perhaps a half-dozen times per year. Six 15-minute charges is 90 minutes total of “standing around” time per year.
If you fuel up every week or two for 5 minutes apiece, that’s 150-250 annual minutes of “standing around” time for you.
Much worse than mine. And you pay much more for your fuel, too.
Clover,
Of course it is “directly comparable.” The fact is you have to plan your life around limited range and long recharge. I can just go wherever, whenever – without having to think about it.
Again – for the umpteenth time – if your EVs made sense, they would not have to be subsidized and mandated.
But the fact is, they do need to be subsidized and mandated; otherwise, they would not be made.
The market for both 100% electric and hybrid vehicles are by definition LIMITED, the former by technology (range and recharge limits as compared to conventional cars) and the latter by price. You only see loads of “Priii” (Priuses?) in CA b/c of the state and federal TAX CREDITS. Without them, it’s a heavier, slower, and more expensive Yaris that happens to get higher overall CITY fuel economy (the hybrid design actually costs on highway mileage due to higher vehicle weight), which doesn’t demonstrably make up for higher purchase cost and less ability to maintain in the long run (e.g. when the battery pack goes, the car isn’t worth replacement).
If the Government weren’t giving tax-favored status to the Prius and cars like it, it wouldn’t exist, period. You don’t see Apetalk and Clovers like him volunteering to spend their OWN money to “save the planet”. Libtard jerks like him measure their “compasssion” or their “environmental concern” by how generous they are – with OTHER people’s money!
Of course I spent my own money on my Tesla, and I don’t appreciate the accusation. Also, I’m a technologist, not an “environmentalist”. Don’t make up stuff about people you don’t know.
This has nothing to do with “other peoples money”. Michigan has no tax incentives like CA does. The federal credit will apply to me at tax time, but is limited by my tax liability (tax breaks only apply to the extent you owe taxes.)
To be clear – any tax break lets you keep YOUR OWN money, not someone else’s.
If you’re against tax breaks, that’s a pretty big fight.
Clover,
You are a “technologist”? Where does one go to school to obtain this credential? The same ones people attend to become “environmentalists”?
In fact, you are a fan of electric cars. Which is fine, as such. I am a fan of battleships. The difference between us is that I don’t expect you or anyone else to “help” me buy a battleship. You, on the other hand…
And yes, it has everything to do with other people’s money – as has been elaborated at length, numerous times.
Your EV would not exist without the massive transfer of other people’s money toward the manufacturers of EVs, for which there is no natural market. The fact that you spent your money on the car itself is beside the point. It is exactly the same as me paying my own money to buy a stolen car.
Douglas, emissions are one time for ICE vehicles. WTF are they gonna do with thousands of dead L/Ion batteries from a single vehicle?
And that’s the same problem with nuclear. It just keeps on giving. 10 years ago there was a notice in the Andrews(county), Tx. paper of intent to put a nuclear waste disposal/storage there and those who opposed could express their opposition. Not “enough” opposition….so we’re all being poisoned by their leaking containers atmospherically and via the water table. It’s just a great deal for the company and the govt. which owns much more of the site than the company.
Ape, being against tax breaks is moral while supporting tax breaks is immoral because tax breaks are social engineering.
Hi Ape,
That’s disingenuous in the extreme. Here’s why: The IC car is economically and functionally sound. The EV is not. If GM went out of business due to poor management, that would not affect the sale of IC cars by other manufacturers, such as Toyota for instance. EVs exist only because of “zero emissions” production mandates, “carbon credits,” CAFE and subsidies. IC cars would flourish – have flourished – absent any of that.
And “selling cars with no government help”?
Really?
And what would you all the “zero emissions” electric car quotas in CA – which can only be satisfied by building and selling EVs at a loss or via “carbon credits” purchased from Elon?
“…The IC car is economically and functionally sound. The EV is not.”
This statement is based on your own opinions and values. But not everyone shares the same values.
“…IC cars would flourish – have flourished – absent any of that.
You guys have your OWN versions of subsidies – lots of them. “Good Jobs First”, an organization that tracks corporate subsidies, put out their list of the 100 most subsidized companies. Tesla didn’t make the list. GM was there, at over $50 billion. Ford at $30 billion. Even foreign automakers like Toyota were there. Not Tesla.
“…“selling cars with no government help”? Really?”
This referred to Tesla’s first car, built and sold before any EV incentives existed. Tesla needed no government money to “exist” like GM did. Tesla would be smaller but still here without government money. GM would be gone.
Ape,
Then why the production quotas, mandates and subsidies? Take these away and let’s see how many EVs sell on the merits.
And in re GM: That is a dodge. By which I mean what GM does right or wrong says nothing about the economic and functional soundness of IC cars, which flourish despite the obstacles thrown in their path by the government.
Do you have any idea what IC cars would cost – and how far some could travel on a gallon of fuel – were it not for all the government crap that cars are forced to comply with?
There would be $10,000 economy cars capable of averaging 100 MPG.
No subsidies or mandates.
Hey, I can agree with no subsidies or mandates. But of course I would insist that apply evenly to ALL companies.
I can see you’re screening my posts now, so my welcome is being worn out. Thanks for letting me post on your page.
Clover,
If you agreed to it – and if the subsidies and mandates were taken away – there would be no electric cars. Elon is a con man, but not an idiot.
*”Hey, I can agree with no subsidies or mandates”*
That is something we can ALL agree on!
*”I can see you’re screening my posts now”*
We voted on it, and there were a few surveys…..you lost. 😉
Ape, “Tesla was founded in 2003, and was selling their first car, Roadster by 2008 with NO government help.”
If Musk could build and sell the Roadster with no gubmint help then why does he need gubmint help to build the rest of his cars?
In the beginning of autos IC cars received no gubmint help to get built even though there were no support systems (gas stations etc.) in place. Now in order for EVs to be “functional” gubmint interference (AKA putting a gun to peoples’ heads and stealing their money) is mandatory. ICs are organic while EVs are demonstrably not. That is the unforgivable difference.
And Skunkz, it’s bad enough when such coercion is used to pimp any product or service….but it’s even more egregious when such tyranny is used to pimp something that is INFERIOR!
From about 120 to 90 years ago, the car market was a hodgepodge not only of hundreds of different manufacturers, but even different types. Believe it or not, the first production vehicle to exceed 100 mph was a STEAM powered car – a Stanley touring coupe – which did 114 mph on Daytona Beach, FL, in 1906! There were quite a few electrics, the Ryker being the most popular. But gradually, both as the Petroleum industry, seeing the huge profits to be made in what had been a fairly worthless refinery byproduct (“stove naptha”), and with Kettering developing, in a joint effort with Standard Oil of Indiana (“Amoco”), tetraethyl lead (hence why premium grades of gasoline were commonly referred to as “ethyl”) to increase the octane rating of gasoline, enabling higher-compression and therefore more powerful and fuel-efficient engines. There was the initial push of Federal Highways, which were largely two-lane affairs and went through every town, and many states pushed their own highway and road programs, most notably the “Farm Roads” in Texas, all financed by fuel taxes, an early form of “user tax”. But the choice of makes and technologies were purely market-driven. Just imagine if Uncle Sam had tried to favor one particular type, say in a misguided effort to keep Stanley Motors in business. I’m glad the PC industry never had this sort of interference…we’d still have the Apple II and the aptly-named IBM 5150!
Interesting to note even in Science Fiction how this is explored..in SM Stirling series “The Domination” (about an alternative history which sees a sort of South Africa on steroids, the Domination of the Draka, come to dominate world politics and ultimate take over, many despise it, IMO, because the “white boys” win this one!). In this alternative timeline, among other changes is the migration in the early 1800s of one Richard Trevithick, who develops his high-pressure steam engine in the Draka country instead of the UK, and they take the lead in development of steam propulsion; as a result, steam-powered vehicles are the dominant automotive technology due to their durability and inherent multi-fuel capability, gasoline engines being considered more applicable for sports cars and/or aircraft where power/weight ratio is more a factor. The inherent problem of firing up a boiler is considered no issue for the Draka as 90% of them are effectively slaves (“Serfs”, the Draka don’t officially condone ‘slavery’, though the distinction is obviously farcical), most free Draka have at least a few Serfs, including a driver, whom would attend the Kellerman steamer (the most popular model of the Drakian Ferrous Metals Combine, think of what if the Florida Orange Growers Association ran all of Florida and you get a synopsis of the Draka economy and politics, only a hundred times larger) and have it ready to go from a cold start in five minutes.
As I’ve posted in other threads, just imagine were I to take an old compact beater and make mine own hybrid out of it, using likely a small industrial diesel 3-banger and a 20 horse DC motor. Assuming that I got the contraption to actually work, one can well imagine the biggest problem in getting this thing on the road would be bureaucratic obstruction, from “regulators” acting on orders from above to quash this “upstart”. Just as Preston Tucker had to deal with Michigan Senator Homer Ferguson, I’d likely have to deal with the next Governor of Cali(porn)ia, Gavin Newsome, and his cronies.
I disagree with one point of your article.
Electric cars have been around for decades. Before Tesla, electric cars were ugly, low performance, goofy vehicles.
And no one bought them.
I would argue that the high performance and coolness factor that Tesla brought is the only reason anyone even considers an electric car now. It certainly is the only reason I bought mine. And the $7,500 tax incentive played no role in my decision to buy a $150,000 vehicle. I suspect at least for the S and X purchasers, the economic calculus is the same.
That is one of the things I don’t understand about Elon’s pricing. He loses about 20% on each car sold. So in principle, he could raise the price by 20% and at least break even. I can’t imagine that price increase would decrease sales that much for the high-end buyers, and he wouldn’t be losing money in the process.
As far as the $7,500 tax rebate, it was around long before Tesla. You should get mad at Congress for ever passing that law in the first place. You should be lobbying congress to get rid of the subsidy.
The only other subsidy that I’m aware of is a low-interest loan Tesla received from the government that I think has been paid back. If you know of any other, I would be interested to know about it.
Hi Interferon,
The fundamental problem – the elephant in the room that very few in the media or anywhere else ever touch on – is this: Electric cars are unnecessary. There is no real market demand for them.
With gas cheap and abundant and IC-engined cars much more convenient and far less expensive… what reason is there to buy an electric car?
I understand some people like the technology; hell, I like steam locomotives and battleships. But they don’t make those anymore, for similar reasons.
And yes, electric cars are quick – in some instances, quicker than IC cars. But they have an Achilles Heel: If you make much use of that quickness, you don’t go very far… and then, you wait…
Your Tesla S can beat my Trans-Am, 0-60 and through the quarter. But I can refuel in 5 minutes and be 150 miles down the road before your car finishes recharging.
Another thing too, (And I know you’ve also made this point before, too, Eric) is that electric car MPGs (MPKWhr’s?) are free or nearly free NOW, because here in the US, EV-owners do not have to pay to use the “public” chargers (Another subsidy!)….but come the day that, as in many places in Europe, you have to pay; AND not just for the electricity, but for a road tax” as petroleum-based fuel users do, the economics of EVs make even less sense.
EV owner here. The free charger at my local shopping center is a “Level 2” charger – this kind of charger is useful for overnight charging, but not powerful enough to add any meaningful range. I might be able to add 10-25 miles to my car while I shop. The purpose of these “free” chargers is just to snag a few customers – the electricity cost to the merchants is negligible.
The truly useful chargers I use – the Tesla Superchargers – do cost me money. A “fillup” of 150-250 miles of range costs me ~$6 – $8.
And of course I pay to charge at home, too (lots less, since I have an off-peak rate overnight.)
As for road taxes, I pay these too, my state adds them to my registration fee. Many states do this now, and they all will soon.
Despite the fact that I do indeed pay for road taxes and electricity, the economics still appear to make sense to me.
Hi Ape,
Well, let’s see.
The $8 you mention buys just under 4 gallons of gas in my area. In the Hyundai Elantra I’m test driving this week – which is averaging 38.8 MPG – that is enough to take me about 150 miles. So the cost to refuel is actually about the same as your cost to recharge.
But the Hyundai costs about half the cost of the least expensive EV on the market – the $30k Nissan Leaf. And the Hyundai can be refueled in less than 5 minutes.
So, I save $15,000 – at least – up front. And I save at least 30-45 minutes every time I have to refuel.
I fail to see how an EV makes any kind of sense at all.
“…the cost to refuel is actually about the same as your cost to recharge…”
Definitely not. The Supercharger cost is a convenience fee, for taking long trips. Like most EV drivers, I do over 90% of my charging at home overnight, at around 2 cents per mile. The $8 supercharger fee would be a big-sized “fillup”, around 250 miles. That’s around 3 cents/mile.
Gasoline is nowhere near this cheap. Even a 39mpg car, with gasoline around $2.75, costs 7 cents per mile for energy.
The other error you make is assuming the Elantra is an equivalent car to a Model 3. It’s not. I think it’s comparable to other premium midsize cars, all close to its price range.
Ultimately value is a subjective thing, which is why we will never agree on this.
Sales and market share is what matters, not our opinions. I personally see zero value in motorcycles, and don’t understand people that drive them. But my opinion is irrelevant. They are made and sold because there are people that want them.
Hi Ape,
Like Elon, you fudge the numbers. What about the $15,000 price difference up front? The Model 3 is a nothing special compact, with significantly less backseat legroom (and very poor ergonomics) vs. a car such as the Elantra. Which you can buy with climate control AC, a great stereo, power everything and all the saaaaaaaaaaaaaafety crap, too – for about $24k, not subsidized. What does the Model 3 do better? The only thing I am aware of is that it’s quicker. Well, so what? Now we’re arguing about mandating and subsidizing high-performance cars… or rather, you are!
Value is subjective – but the objective fact is the Model 3 and all EVs would not be viable on the free market. They exist only because of mandates and subsidies – not because “people want them.”
That is the whole goddamn point!
PS: People ride motorcycles.
“…What about the $15,000 price difference up front? ”
This depend on what you think is a comparable car. But up to $15,000 in price difference can easily be made up over the life of the car in fuel cost savings, lower maintenance, and higher resale value.
RE: “viable on the free market”, the $50k version of Model 3 right now is #7 on the list of top-selling cars (as of July.) No subsidy in the world would get people to spend so much money on something they “don’t want.”
Clover,
A Hyundai Elantra Sport or Civic Si is a superior car. Even as regards performance. Yes, the Model 3 is slightly quicker – but just slightly – and if you use its quickness, you will dramatically reduce its range and now you’ll have to stop and wait for a long time to recharge… whereas no matter how hard you run the Civic Si or Elantra, you can refuel in 5 minutes or less.
The idea that you’ll “save money” by purchasing the $40,000 Tesla is almost too funny. It is making my teeth feel loose…
This again – has to do with values. You would never value an EV highly, no matter the features or performance. It would be a waste of typing to try to win you over, or to compare it to the cars I think its comparable to.
All I can do is point out that not everyone shares the same values.
Clover,
The only “value” at issue here is valuing the free market and non-coercive interactions. You value coercion and wealth redistribution, to advantage and favor the things you favor, such as EVs!
It’s even worse than that. I can buy a decent used car for a couple of grand (or less) that has more functionality than a $40,000 Tesla.
As you say there really is no economic case to be made for electric cars at this point in time. If there were people would be flocking to them on their own, no subsidies or ‘nudging’ needed.
Ape,
What “features and performance” are we supposed to value so much, that it would make us want to buy a ridiculously expensive, glitchy little car with a limited range that takes HOURS to refuel?
What? That can drive away from a traffic light a little faster than the cars around it *for now*?(Once everyone has one, that will no longer even be true)- Who cares? Are we 24 year-olds? Zoom away from that light, and reduce your usable range. Yeah…what a great bonus…
What features? A battery that bursts into flames when impacted? (Or that wears out after a few years, and costs a fortune to replace).
And even if one counted all of the gadgetry and blinking lights and self-opening doors, etc. as desirable (I don’t), all of that crap is available on many current IC vehicles (Which is one reason I don’t buy modern vehicles!).
So what features are we talking about?
And considering the price of that performance (High cost and reduced range)….I don’t see any value, even if you value being a tad quicker than the goober next to you.
EVs are about false values; virtue signaling. Pretend you’re “saving the earth” while riding around in luxury and power, and impressing the Jones’s- while advertising your ability/willingness to waste large sums of money, all the while while being ultimately dependent upon the same fuels and processes that the person in the $20K car IC car uses.
Ape, “No subsidy in the world would get people to spend so much money on something they ‘don’t want.’”
But subsidies are indeed used to force other people like me to pay for the things others do want – exactly as is the case with EVs.
Please try to justify this injustice.
I won’t try to make it “not an injustice” but I’m confused why Tesla would be the target when they are actually the LEAST subsidized of the automakers.
GM’s subsidy total since 2000 is over $50 billion. Ford is over $30 billion. Even foreign automakers like Toyota and Nissan have higher US taxpayer money totals.
Clover,
Tesla is the most subsidized – because all its cars are subsidy and mandate dependent. IC cars exist on the merits, can be built and sold without mandates and subsidies, at a profit.
“…IC cars exist on the merits, can be built and sold without mandates and subsidies…”
If this were true, gas vehicle makers wouldn’t be getting ten times the subsidies Tesla gets. So I’m having trouble making sense of this argument.
Tesla’s tax credits are phasing out right now, and their loan is already repaid. Soon you’ll have to explain why Tesla cars are still selling despite not getting any federal subsidies, while conventional makers continue to get them. Better start thinking up some excuses.
Clover,
IC vars have never been subsidized as such. EVs are all subsidized as such. You deploy the tired, disingenuous argument about the taxes used to subsidize the military to defend the Middle East, etc.
In the first place, most oil does not come from the Middle East; and in any event. it’s Israel and the empire that’s being subsidized.
Henry Ford did not require subsidies. Elon Musk does.
Hi Apeweek,
“If this were true, gas vehicle makers wouldn’t be getting ten times the subsidies Tesla gets. So I’m having trouble making sense of this argument.”
All of the regulars around here are opposed to subsidies of any kind, for any reason. We do not support subsidies for GM, Ford, etc… However, your claim that Tesla receives far fewer subsidies seems incomplete/disingenuous to me.
As of the end of 2017, Tesla had sold a total of about 300,000 cars worldwide. During 2017, GM sold a little over 3 million cars in North America alone. Thus, the subsidies per car sold directed to Tesla dwarf those going to GM.
Also, IC cars would be viable without subsidies, because they once were. They would almost certainly still be viable today without subsidies but, it is possible that any particular company might fail. But,it is not clear that EV’s would exist as anything but an expensive oddity without subsidies.
GM gets subsidies because we live in a world where governments have the power to steal from some and give it to others. GM gets those subsidies because it wields political influence, not because IC vehicles need them to survive.
Earlier you asked why the special ire for Tesla? This is a good question. I think it boils down to the moral unseemliness of forcing average people to help buy expensive toys for rich people. While all subsidies are unjust, those that transfer wealth from average folks to the rich are especially egregious.
Perhaps you are right that EV’s would exist and flourish in a truly free market. Unfortunately, we will never know because most people believe that “democracy” justifies forcing some to help fund the preferences of others.
Kind Regards,
Jeremy
“…your claim that Tesla receives far fewer subsidies seems incomplete/disingenuous…”
I absolutely understand this. You need a source for my claim.
The comment where I gave the link to the “Good Jobs First” report, with the list of top-100 subsidy takers, has so far been blocked by Eric. Perhaps he will release it? It shows that every other automaker takes way more subsidies than Musk does.
Clover,
One of two things is true: Either you are not very bright – incapable of comprehending a simple statement of fact – or you are being deliberately evasive.
Whether GM or any other car company has received subsidies is beside the point as regards the question of the economic and practical viability of the IC car as such. I have parsed this for you several times now – and yet you continue to post non sequiturs about the subsidies received by GM.
Once again: IC cars are viable on the merits. Whether a particular IC car company isn’t or has taken subsidies is irrelevant.
EVs cannot make it on the free market. They require subsidies and mandates, without which they would not exist, except as extremely low-volume curiosities. It’s not just Tesla that’s defective – it’s the electric car as such!
Trying again – here it is:
We are talking about exactly the same kinds of taxpayer subsidies on Elon’s tab – that is, tax breaks, loans, and specific programs like the Diesel Tax Credit, or the Michigan MEGA credits (a bribe not to send more Michigan jobs to Mexico.)
Tesla’s subsidy total is the LEAST of the auto companies.
Here’s the “Good Jobs First” report. They track government subsides. See pages 17-19 for the two “Top-100” lists of federal subsidy hogs.
https://tinyurl.com/k2jzjog
Tesla didn’t make either list. Every other automaker did.
Tesla DID make their top state subsidies list, but well below every other automaker. (I can’t post that list, as the system seems to flag it as spam.)
You guys expect Tesla to follow a standard no other car maker follows. You’re free to hate EVs. But not to pretend Tesla is doing something worse than what any other carmaker does.
Clover,
No one can possibly be this obtuse – so I have to assume you are being purposefully evasive. I have stated the fact (at least a half-dozen times so far) that IC cars don’t need subsidies to make it on the free market; the fact that some automakers receive subsidies is irrelevant to the question of the basic economic and functional viability of IC cars.
EVs cannot exist as other than extremely low volume toys on the free market.
Do you realize that if we had an actually free market – free of government mandates and subsidies – there would be $10,000 IC cars that averaged 100-plus MPG?
And: I don’t hate EVs. Jesus! I hate grift and graft; I despise rent-seeking and wealth transfer payments. Tesla is particularly loathsome in this respect because it bleeds ordinary people – via taxes – to support the manufacturer of high-end exotic luxury-performance cars that happen to be electric, so that affluent virtue-signalers can show how “green” they are without having to drive a slow/ugly car.
My goodness! It has been a good while since we’ve had a Teslavangelist from The Church of Musk preaching here.
Morning, Brian!
This Ape guy has to be on Elon’s payroll. He has his talking points all lined up, repeats them over and over – no matter how many times they are publicly vivisected and shown to be just like Elon himself, breezy promises without substance insisted upon as matters of religious faith.
Probably not paid. Musk’s cult is quite large and they all know the talking points.
Hi Brent,
I wonder… in re Ape Man. The guy was on (while he was here) almost all day. This is my job, so that’s why I am here all day. But if I had a different job, I could not be here all day. What kind of job does Ape Man have that enabled him to be here all day for almost two days?
Also, he used the script. The same talking points Elon himself uses. Almost verbatim.
Hey Eric –
Since you ask, I’m a retired guy. I also have a little software biz that gets me some extra retirement income, which keeps me on my computer all day. So I sometimes get into an online discussion and go down a rabbit hole that takes way too much of my time.
If you check WAY back, you’ll realize I’ve been here before, just not recently.
You guys like battling clovers like me? I could visit more often. If I’m not welcome, let me know.
Hi Ape,
You are tenacious, I will give you that! I just wish you’d acknowledge certain facts about EVs – and IC cars – that aren’t debatable.
The “big one” being that IC cars as such (leaving aside certain manufacturers of IC cars, or the fact that some manufacturers accept subsides) are without question economically and functionally viable – while EVs are not.
At some point, EVs might become viable. But they are not viable now.
If you are willing to concede this fact, I might just take my finger off the “Clover” button!
Hi Eric – sorry I didn’t see your reply until now. I came back to update the Ontario Tax credit story – the Canadian court just ruled in favor of Tesla, agreeing that Tesla should be included with other automakers in the phase-out period.
As for the viability of electric vehicles – if being a Top-Ten best-selling car – in fact, the top-selling American-made passenger car – isn’t “viable”, then I’m curious what your criteria is, and why it’s not sales volume?
Ape,
I’ve explained several times now why the sales of Tesla 3s you claim are false on several levels.
First, these are aren’t “sales” – they are write-offs and give-aways. Every Tesla “sold” is given away at a net loss. It is ludicrous to compare sales with give-aways. You are like the Soviet commissar who bragged about the overfulfillment of his quota for the Five Year Plan.
Second, the figures include cars not even delivered; count orders taken for cars not produced.
Third, they are misleading because not put into context. The Tesla 3 may “sell” well vs. other $40k cars; it does not sell well vs. other compact sedans. Elon uses this same trick to inflate the “sales” figures of the Model S, which he dishonestly compares with sales of full-sized luxury sedans such as the Mercedes S-Class. In fact, the Tesla S is a mid-sized car (albeit priced the same as a full-sized luxury car) and when its “sales” are compared with sales of mid-sized luxury cars such as the Mercedes E-sedan, the numbers are small.
Finally, you once again dodge the fundamental thing – which is that without the mandates and subsidies, EVs are not viable. IC cars do not require them to exist. EVs do.
This is undeniable.
I tire of repeating myself. I’ve stated these facts at least half a dozen times now. I won’t be wasting time repeating them again. You – like most Teslians – can’t be reasoned with because you will not concede the fact that in a free market, EVs cannot compete on the merits. That they are fundamentally artificial things, creations of government, dependent on wealth transfer. If you removed the multiple subsidies – not merely the federal tax credit – the Tesla 3 would have to be priced around $60,00 – perhaps more – in order to be economically viable (to sell at a profit sufficient to justify its manufacture). Very few people except those who are die-hard EV people (like you) would spend $60k-plus to buy a car that is nowhere near as luxurious as a $35k IC car and functionally inferior to a $15k IC car.
Ape, good god man! How many times does Eric have to explain it to you?! Without the subsidies and the mandates there simply would be no Munsk car to be in the “Top Ten” best sellers. What part of that is confusing to you?!
This is what makes you a clover – your inability to accept facts/your deliberate refusal to accept facts. Clearly you must be a Munsk cult member/paid shill.
You blithely make unfounded ASSumptions as to costs to ‘fuel’, maintain, and resale of your purported wunderkar, and conveniently forget ONE wee thing…very FEW, if anyone, actually WANTS the goddamned thing! There’s a REASON that electrics were relegated largely to specialty vehicles like GOLF CARTS..lack of RANGE, which technology hasn’t come close to solving in a reasonable manner that will replace the ICE! My hypothetical working single mother won’t be able to AFFORD your precious electric car, and other statist assholes here in CA usually just retort, “She should RIDE THE BUS” anyway or other Polyanna forms of mass transit! For that $15K, let the automakers produce what the market actually DEMANDS, keep the emissions standards at about the 2003 level, and she’ll have her choice of vehicle types, be it compact sedan, compact truck, or minivan, without a lot of frills, or undeed things in the useless cause of s-a-a-a-a-f-t-e-e-e which she neither wants nor can afford! That’s the trouble with Libtards like yourself…not only do you have no grasp of Engineering nor Economics, you presume the choices of the public whom in your arrogance and pompousness your purport to work in the best interests of. Guess what? We, the People, neither NEED nor WANT the idiotic pie-in-the-sky notions of elitist assholes like yourself, whom have just about ruined the once “Golden” State! i know that when I retire in about 2-1/2 years I’m getting the fuck out and going across the border back to “Murica”! Already looking at properties in NV and UT (Delta or Richfield in the “Latter”, pun intended, are looking good), and I’ll look out West and laugh as I watch Cali(porn)ia implode!
Why would I need to make “assumptions” about things I am experiencing directly? (cost to fuel and maintain.) I know what my own car costs to operate.
My assumption about superior resale value is based on other Tesla models that have been out for a while.
As for “no one wants” one, that’s certainly true of people on this board, but out in the actual world it’s #7 on the best-selling car list. So I don’t need to “presume” the choices of the public (which is what you are doing), I can point to actual sales statistics.
Clover,
Your posts continue to beg the question: If EVs are so got-damned appealing, then why the mandates and subsidies? Not just the individual subsidy to the buyer. The multiple-level subsidies at the manufacturing level as well as the de jure and de facto production quotas (e.g., “zero emissions” vehicle mandates, carbon credits)?
Take them away and electric cars go away. Even with them, the things constitute about 1 percent of the total new car market. Which brings me to . . .
Your nonsense about the Tesla 3’s sales figures is also just that… nonsense. Deliberate nonsense. Like Musk’s claims about the sales of the Model S, which he inflates by comparing its sales with those of full-sized luxury cars like the Mercedes S and BMW 7. These cars sell in small numbers, relatively speaking – because they are very expensive, among other things.
But the Tesla S is a mid-sized car. When its sales are put properly in context with other mid-sized luxury sedans like the Benz E and BMW 5, it all of a sudden doesn’t “sell” nearly as well.
The same shuck and jive is at work with the Tesla 3, which is a compact. You – and Elon – fluff up its numbers by comparing them with sales of mid-sized luxury cars.
And the thing isn’t even particularly luxurious.
Poor ol’ Clover!
“…Your nonsense about the Tesla 3’s sales figures is also just that… nonsense…”
I must stand by the sales figures, they come from respected auto stats websites (see earlier posts with links.)
We can quibble about whether Model 3 is a luxury car, or what size class it belongs in. But the Top-Ten list of best selling cars is ALL passenger cars, no class distinctions at all.
To have a $50k car model appear in the Top Ten is nothing short of amazing.
Clover,
Whether you “stand by” your statement is irrelevant. What is relevant, as far as defining the class a car falls into, is its dimensions – such as length and wheelbase.And by those criteria – which are the criteria everyone in the business uses – the Model 3 is a compact sedan. And this compact sedan is substantially less roomy inside than similarly sized small sedans like the Honda Civic and the Hyundai Elantra I just finished evaluating.
Exactly, Eric. That is WHY car classes are categorized the nomenclature of SIZES.
“Compact”, “Mid-size”, “full-size”, etc. refer to a range of dimensions; sizes. A car is labeled according to the parameters that define a particular size, just like a shirt or pants are labeled as being a particular size based on their measurements.
The clover doesn’t seem to “get” this simple fact. (Or more likely: Doesn’t WANT to “get” it, as it destroys one of the fallacious points he is trying to promote).
Hiya Nunz!
Yup. The Clover uses this shuck-and-jive (as Elon does) to distort reality. Elon will say: “The Model S is a big sales success,” touting its numbers vs. the Mercedes S and BMW 7 and Audi A8 (and so on). Each of these sell in relatively small numbers because – like the Tesla S – they are six-figure luxury cars.
The problem – for Clover and Elon – is that the Model S is not a full-sized luxury car; it’s just priced the same as one.
If you compare its sales with those of size-equivalent mid-sized luxury cars (which cost much less and which therefore sell in much greater numbers) sales of the Model S are terrible.
Hi Apeweek
Tesla’s subsidies, per car sold, dwarf those of any ICE car manufacturer. I thought that was quite clear in my post. Speaking of total subsidies is disingenuous.
In any case, as has been stated repeatedly, we do not support subsidies to any business for any reason. You claim the ICE vehicles need subsidies to survive, which is absurd. In the crony capitalist world we live in, big companies leverage their political influence to get subsidies because they can, not because they are “needed”. History and consumer preference shows that ICE vehicles are viable without subsidies.
It is not at all clear the EV cars would exist absent subsidies, except for low volume exotics. You say that they would, but offer no evidence to support the claim. But, there is evidence suggesting that Telsa vehicles do need the subsidies:
https://www.thestreet.com/story/14248212/1/tesla-is-quickly-running-out-of-government-subsidies-and-it-could-present-a-massive-challenge.html
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-11/its-confirmed-without-government-subsidies-tesla-sales-implode
You are probably correct that the $7500.00 direct US subsidy is not the deciding factor for all Tesla buyers, but it certainly influences the decision. However, that subsidy is only a small part of the help Tesla receives.
I don’t hate electric cars. I hate that our culture has accepted the soft-fascist economic system, replete with rent seeking, regulatory capture, protective tariffs, targeted subsidies, etc… that dominates Western Democracies. It is particularly galling that these transparently corrupt and self serving practices are always dishonestly sold in the name of public safety or protecting the environment.
Tesla makes expensive toys for rich people. There’s nothing wrong with that. There is something especially annoying with forcing average people to help pay for the preferences/virtue signalling of rich people.
Jeremy
Electrics actually enjoyed popularity around the turn of the century, they were favored by WOMEN. Part of the reason? Vehicles with gasoline engines had to be cranked by HAND, which many women simply couldn’t do! Never mind that they were temperamental, smoky and smelly. Steam cars required a fair amount of mechanical knowledge to operate, including that many were capable of VERY rapid acceleration – a Stanley steamer was recorded reaching a top speed of 114 mph at Daytona Beach in 1906! When cars were first getting going, they were considered acceptable for short trips; most people traveled overland by TRAIN and overseas by SHIP. There were very few PAVED roads; most were narrow wagon lanes. The electric car was indeed slow, but when you had to share the narrow streets of most American cities with horse-drawn carriages and street cars anyway, it made little difference.
It was Ford’s Model T that was the “game changer”, because it was reliable for its time, easily repaired, and AFFORDABLE. What’s more, it was durable enough to take the wagon ruts that were called “roads” in largely rural American of 1914. And once Kettering developed the self-starting motor in 1913, that was all for the electric car, which was then technically outclassed and still is.
The future is grim.
The USA was the last free country, but who will
speak up for freedom now that the US is a police state?
How can a country that has regulations, endless wars, increasing taxes, nanny state laws, security cameras, license plate readers, checkpoints, redlight cameras, speed cameras, FBI facial and voice recognition, curfews, gun bans, NSA wiretapping, the end to the right to silence, free speech bans, searches without warrants, private prisons, mandatory minimums, 3 strikes laws, DNA databases, CISPA, SOPA, NDAA, IMBRA, private prison quotas, no knock raids, take down notices, no fly lists, terror watch lists, Constitution free zones, stop and frisk, 3 strikes laws, kill switches, National Security Letters, kill lists, FBAR, FATCA, Operation Chokepoint, TSA groping, civil forfeiture, CIA torture, NDAA indefinite detention, secret FISA courts, FEMA camps, laws requiring passports for domestic travel, IRS laws denying passports for tax debts, gun and ammo stockpiles, laws outlawing protesting, police militarization, chain gangs, boot camps, and Jade Helm take the moral high ground on anything?
Tyranny spreads out from Washington to other countries and down to states, counties, and cities.
Where can you escape to now?
Now you see the danger of an one world government.
Wake up.
Think.
Spread the word.
The freedom you have is the freedom you TAKE. If you like anything or any action that the government has ruled to be illegal, do it anyway, and KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT…
You don’t have to explain yourself to anyone in any way.
Of course, when dealing with intrusions by “law enforcement” (I use that term loosely), you will have to swallow your pride, in order to extricate yourself from the “intrusion” as quickly as possible. Other government minions should be treated the same way…
Of course, one has to be careful when dealing with relatives, friends, neighbors, and other busybodies who may not “approve” of what you are doing, but, it can be done…
What’s scary is how the schools encourage the kids to “rat out” their parents…do they have any “Racist” leanings? Do they talk of being “Sovereign Citizens”? Do they have GUNS? I shit you not, many school boards have become American ‘Soviets’!
IIRC, that was one of the aims of DARE, turning kids into spies who would report their parents for smoking pot, etc.
Ed, you remember correctly. DARE finally lost it’s funding in Tx.. We dont have to look at that bullshit now. But it hasn’t gone away. There are still people(Clovers)who want this shit, to have tiny children who they can take their words….or not even their words, and twist hell out of them to punish their parents.
Douglass, this ratting out has been going on since the 80’s. When it gets right down to it, especially, in a small town, it collapses and goes away. I have seen it happen several times. The POS that want to do this to people are only serving themselves.
I had a friend who had a wife and a young child. He came in from a hard day’s work and was giving his son a bath and trying to catch up on the day when he was assaulted from behind by a local cop, let into his house by his soon to be, ex-wife. She just couldn’t stand he worked all the time even though she sucked up the money and sat on her ass all day when she wasn’t fucking this big overweight pussy local cop. This shit went on for years, costing my friend a great deal of money. He ended up with the custody of the child and his wife went to nefarious means once again to fuck him over.
Eventually, after the former cop had been busted for drug sales and other things, he was an unemployable felon. Now the close to being grown child is doing fine….living with his dad.
But it cost a tiny town a great deal of money since the chief of police defended this POS’s tactics.
It’s just the same story over and over again…at leat in this part of the country, and I expect, most everywhere else
Wake up!!!!!!
8, that DARE crap really pisses the locals off where I live. It’s a farming county and there was a good Sheriff, a cattle rancher, who kept getting reelected. He had a firm rule that nobody employed by the sheriff’s department was allowed to teach that DARE program in schools.
This fat POS retired state trooper ran for sheriff against him on the promise that he would institute DARE programs in the schools. He got a handful of votes and lost big time.
The next election they put those touchscreen voting machines in the polling places and the same fat asshole state trooper won in a landslide. The asswipe newcomers who live in the county seat love him and his skinhead, body armored twits with their m4’s and new unmarked Chargers.
The rest of us out in the county are not nearly as enthusiastic about having a gung-ho, proactive troop of shitasses patrolling the county.
What can I say. Sometimes it looks like life is a shit sandwich and every day is another bite.
Ed, that’s almost an exact copy of how things are here. It’s the dumbass aholes that support it, most of them hispanice and get this, so many have been busted for selling drugs to inmates at the prisons where the idiots work….and sell drugs to people who are in prison for simply doing drugs.
I don’t even know how to square shit like this. a 9mm to the head is the best option I can think of. Of course I’d never advocate killing someone. Ok, I’d turn them into their drug base buddies and let things come out as they may. And here’s the thing, I don’t think any drug should be illegal. I could care less what Chester wants to put in his body or his crazy wife…..or ex wife. Over 50 years I have come to believe the estrogen driven bunch have almost no moral ground. They’ll turn in their husbands….or lovers. mostly because they quit supplying them them.
Now the badged thugs are all for this. They can make a killing(money[wise)off those who get caught with “illegal” drugs and yet they druise the county doing illegal drugs and playing it off onto someone else, anyone else.
These people are simply vermin, lowliife, immoral POS.
Yep, immoral or amoral, or as James Lee Burke puts it, “morally retarded”.
Hi Ed,
The cancer spreads… here in my little county, we used to have a fairly benign sheriff’s department that used old Crown Vics without radar and who didn’t spend their days Hut! Hut! Hutting! Well, they bought a fleet of brand-new Explorer SUVs – and radar sets – and are now out harassing and collecting, just like the rest of them.
Hi Doug,
Yes. This gives me pause. Several. About kids. Having them. For a long time, I regretted not having had them with my now-ex. But upon reflection, I realize that she would have kowtowed to all the saaaaaaaaaafety (and worse) stuff. I am still open to having kids, but only with a like-minded woman… and that reduces the chances of me having kids to less than 1 percent, probably. I suspect the same reason accounts for so many other men eschewing the whole thing as well.
I would understand the reluctance to hook up with another female and breed with her, given all the legal and financial risks. Still, it comes down to pairing up with the gal that’s “right” for YOU. Patience, Eric.
See, I’m almost 60, and have had more than my share, especially according to all those busybody “Zero Population Growth” and “Smart Growth” advocates, and am “Done” with siring more offspring, though I still theoretically could. The “going away” cost to get rid of my last mistake has proved quite a burden, but far less than having the scheming bitch under my roof. The reality is the legal system and the feminists have made marriage and fatherhood the riskiest and least appealing proposition…hence, we breed our women with males whom they shouldn’t, and the more desirable, responsible, and stable men have the smarts to avoid it. If ever there’s a realm to get the “Gubmint” out of one’s life, it’s in marriage and family relations. Somehow, before all this concern about “child support enforcement”, it seems that kids got fed, clothed, housed, and guided regardless. Sure, there were jerks that abandoned their families, and well deserved the scorn they got. However, marriage and paternity has become a license to loot, and a smart fellow minimizes his financial liabilities.
Finding the woman who’s right for you/like-minded is virtually impossible today, when propaganda from the skools and the media rule most people’s lives. Only a fraction of a percent of men can overcome the indoctrination of living in a society such as this- and the few who do, come to sites like this. Women are even more susceptible to the BS- which is why there are no female regulars here.
This is why the American Communists and other haters of freedom pushed so hard for women to “get the vote” 100 years ago- because women are easily controlled (Except by those by whom they should be controlled- hence all the laws and programs neutralize husbands) and will always tend toward socialistic/collectivist ideals which appeal to their emotion, but which they do not have the capacity to think-through to realize their actual consequences.
Today, a woman will just “be right” for you, as long as it suits her.
And it’s ironic what the state is doing: They’ve made marriage and the maintenance of families so burdensome and unattractive, that birthrates in the developed Western countries are at an all-time low- so in order to maintain an adequate number of serfs off of whose backs the elites can garner their wealth and power, they have had to resort to importing the dregs of humanity, who in turn are destroying the very countries who are relying upon them for their own continuation.
Some believe the spurious “depopulation” propaganda- but in reality, declining population is what the elites fear more than anything else- which is why they allow immigrants to flood every Western country today- and NO ONE can stop it; and why places that have become so egregious, like CA and NY and MA, to the point where massive numbers of traditional long-time residents are fleeing, have become “sanctuaries” for illegals- because they need the bodies to replace those who are leaving; and why the corps who do the bidding of the elite, like Youtube, have deleted virtually every MGTOW channel.
The so-called “elite” don’t want threats to them.
Who are those threats? Those that are being depopulated and are under constant economic attack.
True enough, Brent- but those of us who may pose a threat (By being a bad example to others, and exposing truisms that they would like the majority to be ignorant of; and by not being good slaves, because we don’t participate and are capable of living apart from their system) are a tiny fraction of the population.
The main thing is: They need human capital; worker drones; people who will make babies who will be the next generation to fight in their armies, and pay all their taxes; and build all of their roads; ansd manufacture their goods and provide their services; and be fodder for their social engineering experiments.
Westerners above the very lowest class, are no longer fulfilling those roles en-mass.
Without the influx of foreigners, olaces like Long Island where I used to live; Shitcago (sorry..); and such, would be losing 10’s-100’s of thousands of people per year.
County where I used to live lost 11,000 middle-class residents last year. NY lost 250,000 people in total in that same year.
Get it?
They don’t want to preside over an empty kingdom with few servants, declining prices and declining tax bases; fewer “representatives”.
That is why all such places are being FLOODED with foreigners- legal and illegal- and why it is considered heresy to even mention “immigration reform” in any meaningful way.
Even if Trump can manage to build his stupid wall….it’s not going to stop the flow of new serfs.
Let’s face it: We have not just a few, but MANY cities and states breaking all sorts of existing laws and alienating what’s left of their traditional middle-class, because they so desire the influx of these prolificly-procreating serfs.
It’s not working out as well as they had hoped though- as those dregs are not as easily controlled as they had thought- but it is likely that it is their children whom they are interested in- hence the free edumacation for all- just as with the immigrants of the early 20th century0 it was their children who were assimilated into the compliant “good Germans” through the schools.
Only today, the programming exerted on “the children” is much greater, and from many different angles.
Brent, you really need to disabuse yourself of the notion of a “depopulation” conspiracy. It is pure subterfuge. Disinformation, started to hide the real agenda. If it were true, it would not be so blatantly common; it would be censored.
But look at the reality; Look at the facts- a few of which I have touched upon here. They say the exact opposite.
They SUBSIDIZE the making of babies. Anyone in this country today, can go out and get knocked up, and live for free for the next 20 years (Longer, if the sow keeps on getting bred every few years)
Anyone can come here from elsewhere, and knock someone up or get knocjed-up, and stay here the rest of their life, AND get those same subsidies.
Try doing these things in any of the countries where these people come from, and they’ll point a rifle at you- and rightly so- and in the distant past, they would have here, too.
But now we have a giant neon sign on every shore, saying “WELCOME! Hola! Ahlaah Bik! Swaagat Hai!!”
It’s a country where the cops really believe that it’s “within policy” to electrocute an 87 y.o. woman for gathering DANDELIONS on a neighboring boys/girls club lawn with a Taser, or beat the shit out of a DEAF 76 y.o. woman who doesn’t understand the bellowing of a costumed “hero”. Gone are the days when Officer Clancy, lifting a few with the boys at the cop bar after a long shift of walking his beat, recounts the story of helping a befuddled old lady home.
I’m just waiting for the cops to show up and write up a bunch of citations about that ’66 Plymouth my #1 son and I are restoring…in his GARAGE. Or maybe they’ll bring along Child Protective Services, in some phony allegations that my 4 y.o. granddaughter is somehow harmed by it, and they must do their “Hut-hut-hut” routine to PROTECT, and drag her screaming from her father’s arms.
It’s become more like America…the “FEE…”
@nunzio
Don’t know about that truck but I love, love, love my 86 1/2 Nissan hard body extended cab. Used to be my dog truck when Digs was still around. Paid $1250 for it 6 years ago, maybe put $500 into it over the years. Never let me down. Starts every time. Would I convert it? Maybe but probably not. Love the drivetrain. Just so smooth. I hear it has the frame of the early pathfinders so maybe not so much of a deathtrap. I still get people coming up to me to talk about it. Most say, don’t ever sell that truck lol. Funny enough it looks like a pos and it is but I like it. It fits like an old coat. The founder of my alma mater was RG LeTourneau and he was a pioneer in electric powered vehicles, primarily earth moving machines but even he, drove a VW bug. .? The only person having more patents than him is Thomas Edison. Mover of Men and Mountains is his autobiography. I highly recommend it!
Johnny, my younger brother is a LeTourneau alumnus. Good engineering school there.
Johnny, 86.5 was the new body style, right? Those were nice trucks! That’s when they started getting their act together with little trucks. I actually like that generation of their trucks. But the earlier stuff? 70’s & earlier 80’s…those things were just cheesy.
RG LeTourneau was a devout Christian but also very much a PRAGMATIST….
Off topic, but a great clip of Mike Rowe addressing the “Cult of Safety”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q490iOW_-Lg
Some quick research into the Chinese auto market can show the way for the future of
Electric cars. Chinese car makers actually make affordable electric cars that people
actually want to buy, at least in China. Too bad they will never be available for American
consumers to buy since many of them would never pass all the safety regulations in the
U.S.
Yes, many good points today about the Tesla. Too bad this car is named after a great inventor. The public has been conned into thinking that the juice powering EVs is somehow magically cleaner than the dinosaur juice in your Chevy. More “green” magical thinking and con artistry.
If these things made sense we’d see them first in low income environments overseas or at home. Small cheap vehicles that run off household current and get huge mileage. Eric has probably seen a few of these. Instead as he describes, we get a Jetson imitation that must be heavily subsidized. And even then only appeals to the brainwashed “elites” because they think it’s cool.
Now that this is crashing, even with the subsidy, he’s eyeing even bigger, richer (and dumber he hopes) marks, rich Saudis. True they have more money than brains, but they aren’t stupid, as a rule. So he’s trying to flip his corporation via the “bigger fool” rule now that he needs one. “Sustainable” = profitable. Everything else is hype and ultimately, a con. Eric here is a brave truth teller. Thanks.
Thanks, Muggles!
Musk has done to EVs what CAFE did to passenger cars. The CAFE (fuel economy) regs effectively outlawed large, affordable sedans and station wagons based on them that could serve as family vehicles for average families. So instead, we have fleets of bloated, ill-handling, visibility-impaired “crossover” SUVs – which by the way generally drink about as much gas as the old V8 sedans did – or would have, if they had remained in production long enough to benefit from EFI and overdrive transmissions.
Musk’s overpriced, high-performance luxury EVs have similarly shifted the focus of EV development away from efficiency and economy to . . . performance and luxury. Obviated any rational reason for EVs.
It makes my teeth ache.
If Preston Tucker had tried to develop a practical electric car, Sen Ferguson would have saw to it that he ended up in Federal “Pound ’em in the ass” PRISON…Government serves corporatized interests, not the PEOPLE anymore.
Eric, I just wanted to salute you for having been the early truth teller concerning the fraud known as Elon Musk. I, like you, have no ax to grind against the electric automobile. But the force feeding of it to the people through stealing other people’s money to subsidize it is the most insidious of crony capitalism. No doubt your early calling out of the fraud had some professional costs for you due to not going along with the Gang Green Groupthink.
Thanks, Bill!
And yes, it did cost me – but it was a price worth paying. I would do it all over again without thinking twice.
Musk is probably not as fraudulent as the rest of the so-called carmakers. I think they are worse, actually. Since the of Ralph Nader, they have been supine to government FATWAS instead of standing up against them. They seemingly completley gave up after the Energy Conservation and Policy Act of 2007, which mandated that cars get 35.5 mpg average. I have zero respect for them. There is no amount of performance and potential mileage they are willing to forgo in the name of saaaaaafety, eeeeemissions, and gas miiiiileage. I have no respect for them at all as they develp their electric cars with technology obtained from Musk. I’m not a defender of Musk, but I don’t think he’s nearly the issue that the Big 3 are. Nor the threat.
Eric, Just wanted to thank you for your continued coverage of Musk. You were the only automotive journalist who had the balls to call him out on his fraud early in the game. No doubt this was costly for you to not indulge in the Gang Green Groupthink.
Technically, according to the linked article, Tesla is sueing the Ontario govt because there was a grace period for the rebates for cars ordered before the rebates ended, and delivered to the dealerships and the sale completed by a certain date. Which excluded the Teslas because they sell directly to customers. So Tesla labeled that change as arbitrary discrimination against Teslas. Even though giving rebates to some cars but not to other car makes was arbitrary too. Or giving rebates to car manufacturers but not other industries was arbitrary too.
Hopefully this claim by Tesla gets bitchslapped by the Canadian judiciary.
If only the judge up north had responded to Tesla’s lawsuit with “Boring, bonehead questions are not cool — next”
Elon is behind the times and need a friendly wave from the UPRR as they added the friendly waves to their promotion of their big dog GAS TURBINE locomotive #58.
As they claim, a college coed stopped her electric 1923 Favorite that got 50 miles range at 25MPH top to give her greetings to the screaming turbined fuel thirsty 4500HP puppy racing thru Nebraska. She was waiting for the 8500HP Gen3’s to show up and show off its power. Advertising at its best.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Pacific_GTELs
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/5/51/20121126072223%21Union_Pacific_first_generation_GTEL_locomotive_1953.JPG
Remember that little scene with Leo DiCaprio and Kate Winslow in the car stored in the Titanic’s hold? I’d love to have been able to perform the same feat with that comely coed in that ’23 Favorite!
Some that would work in a time depend show as well:
– Pickups trucks with door to door bench seats, vinyl of course.
– True 2dr coupes (aka CoupeDeVilles, T-Birds, Cougars, Mark III, IV, V’s, etc, etc, etc), side walls for support.
– Buick Duce and Quarters, and Plushmobile 98’s for middle class standards.
– Big old Estate Wagons and Vista Cruisers for full rear spacing,
– LTD’s and Grand Marquis’, and add those TownCars for luxury
and less we forget:
– The outdoor experienced ElCamino and Ranchero.
– GTO’s with their own song piping out of that hi-fi AM radio.
Today’s Minivans and SUV’s just not able to fit into the show list. And forget about those EV’s current and planned future models: S, X, 3, Y, Z, A, ABC, X/Y Chromo, 0, 1, 6, 666.
Back to work on my old ’91 TOY SR-5 ExtCab 5spd V6 4×4 with manual hubs out back with real chrome bumpers.
About fifteen years ago, I handed down a well used but still clean, comfortable, and reliable 1991 Chrysler New Yorker Fifth Avenue. For one of Mopar’s FWD offerings, it was quite roomy, especially in the back! My son nicknamed it the “Shaggin’ Wagon!”.
It gets worse. Andrew “America Was Never Great” Cuomo” used $750 million in taxpayer money to build a solar panel factory in Upstate New York and leased it for $1 to the money-losing Solar City company. Solar City was then purchased by Musk and Tesla, giving Elon control over the taxpayer-funded factory.
The construction contractor who built the factory gave Cuomo $100,000 in campaign money. Both he and Cuomo’s campaign manager were convicted of felony big-rigging in the scam.
Keep payin’ yer taxes, kids…
Where’s the buck stop Andrew? Can’t stand him!
Mass adoption of electric cars might be a great idea if we had the power grid to support them. We do not. Although new power generation is slowly being brought online, it is happening at 4x the rate that transmission line capacity is being upgraded. To make matters worse, much of the existing transmission line system is in poor condition. A serious danger exists for cascade failures as the grid becomes increasingly overtaxed. Even if the cascade failures are averted by power companies, if will only be because they have taken precautions to avoid them by limiting consumption through rationing and price increases to the extent that lawmakers will permit.
Mass adoption of electric cars is literally putting the cart before the horse. Without enough horses to deliver the power – the grid – it is senseless to build a huge number of carts.
Local power generation at charging sites would be a good answer, but the question is how to generate the enormous amount of power that the electric charging stations would need. Very large arrays of solar panels and wind turbines might work up to a point. but the real estate needed for them would likely be extremely cost prohibitive, and would become totally impractical at anything approaching mass adoption. Imagine the total number of gasoline stations we have now being replaced with charging stations that each required 50 to 100 acres of solar panels and wind turbines on site.
Personally, I see small modular nuclear reactor power generation as the only potential solution.
Ken, let’s just go with what works, IC engines for all.
It’s not putting the cart before the horse, the goal is to ration energy. The desire is to have power over people by rationing energy. That’s why wind and solar are promoted. Because the shortages and rationing are inherent. Because they don’t work. And the moment they do work then they will be attacked too.
If I invented a 100% clean zero point energy system that cost $25 retail on the size to power a home or automobile the political class would have it banned and me thrown in prison almost immediately. It’s not about the environment or anything else besides power and revenue. They want what doesn’t work because what doesn’t work brings them power.
BrentP, you are so right. There are over 5,000 US patent applications the govt. has taken and hidden with most of them relating to energy sources. You can see some pretty amazing machines on YT. I wonder how many still exist.
One guy has a water-powered machine. It probably has to be started by hand but once spinning it will continue as long as there’s water in it.
So true. I built a prototype magnet motor myself once, copied a design from some guy who posted it online, it worked. It only costed ~$20 to build with off the shelf parts. So noone can tell me magnet motors don’t work because they do. Heck, Tezluh motors could probly just put big permanent magnets on their electric motors and double their range.
Perpetual motion machines are automatically disqualified from patent protection as I recall. Doesn’t matter if they actually work or not or simply appear to be perpetual motion machines because people don’t understand how they work.
Even if the electric grid infrastructure existed, why would EVs be a great idea? They’d still be a bad idea, because they offer no improvement in economy or convenience or autonomy or efficiency over an IC car.
But good point about the infrastructure not being anywhere near capable. I mean, many places around the country, you can’t even have a hot summer day without a brown-out or threats of such, just from everyone using their air conditioners…..
Since the 1970’s, all *they’ve* been badgering us with is “CONSERVER ELECTRICITY! CONSERVE! CONSERVE!” -and yet every year we’re presented with more and more things which use more and more electricity- often by government mandate. And now they’re promoting and subsidizing electric cars?!
None of this would be a problem if a real-time market existed for the grid with low barriers to entry.
If the grid is over-taxed in a certain area, a massive premium would be charged which would either incentivize someone to add to the grid and make a killing routing some of the power through his line, or incentivize someone to add power generation or power storage closer to the load.
Solar is growing rapidly and is inherently distributed. The only real question is how much energy storage can be economically deployed to smooth out intermittent solar.
Hi Interferon,
I genuinely like the idea of solar; I would like nothing better (well, almost nothing better) than to be able to capture solar energy and never pay a power bill again.
Aber, the math doesn’t work in my favor.
My monthly electric bill is about $70 – about $900 annually. The last time I looked into what it would cost me to install panels, battery storage and the rest of it sufficient to run my needs without having to worry about whether the ‘Fridge or the well pump was going to stop working on account of low juice, the price tag was in the neighborhood of $15,000.
So it would take about 15 years to reach “break even” – before I would save any money on utilities. And that assumes no repair/upkeep costs for the solar array/batteries.
It’s just too steep – and too long.
If the cost comes down to the point I could reach break even within five years, it might be worth considering. But that is a tall order.
Same problem with EVs. They just cost too much to make economic sense given the current economics of IC cars. I can buy a $15,000 Elantra or Corolla or similar that costs literally half what the least expensive EV costs. How long will it take to reach break even at $2.40 per gallon given the $15,000 (at least) I saved by not buying the $30,000 EV?
Solar is very climate-specific as to its practicality. It’s worked in the Negev Desert in Israel, in Arizona, Southern Utah, parts of New Mexico and Southern California, where you need SUNSHINE…LOTS of it! The engineering itself isn’t all that complicated.
Solar Panels have helped primarily because the necessary “infrastructure”, the power grid, is ALREADY there. It’s another matter for a residence or other power demand in a remote, off-grid area…then, even if the climate is favorable, there’s still the considerable expensive of a backup power generation, likely a stationary diesel. However, even the solar panel industry only exists due to Federal and States SUBSIDIES It’s not just solar contractors that lobby, it’s utility companies, in what may seem ironic, to get their customers to in effect provide their own capital investment in power generation…just try getting ANY power generation facility, from a hydro dam, a coal or oil-fired power plant, and don’t even begin to think of what a nuclear plant would entail from bureaucratic and political hurdles! Want a good laugh? Watch the Disney educational cartoon from the 1950s, “Our Friend the Atom”…Disney was fortunate to not live to see the idiocy perpetrated by the likes of Greenpeace, Ralph Nader, Tom Hayden, etc. etc….as the cartoon envisioned, we would have cheap nuclear power, likely for about 2 cents per kWh, and petroleum products would be used more for their worth as chemicals than fuels!
eric, from what I know, companies who push solar panels hook them to the grid allowing you to offset the cost of the grid supplied power by selling the power produced to the electric company negating the need for batteries or generators.
It’s law in Texas the power companies must pay you for the electricity you put into their system.
It’s only been this century I realized what a great thing was produced when ERCOT became the law of the land in this state. Texas doesn’t share power and for the most part, it’s only the Panhandle that isn’t under ERCOT control.
I don’t imagine this will always be the case as other states don’t have enough power while Texas has a glut of it with some wind generating companies selling their off-peak electricity for as much as a negative $8/MWH. Of course this wouldn’t work in a free market where wind generation wasn’t subsidized. I don’t agree with that since there is at least one wind farm in Texas that isn’t subsidized which shows it doesn’t have to be subsidized.
I thought wind generation would fall off when the subsidy was cut back but the highways full of pieces and parts being hauled show it hasn’t. Most of the patch I’ve worked is replete with wind farms and commonly the lease roads are built by the oil companies and wind farms.
I was negotiating one of those roads one day when I saw a bunch of support trucks and the truck crane itself headed at me. The road was one lane so I pulled over close to a wind generator to let them pass since it was very steep and the last thing they needed as to stop and start. While waiting for them, a huge dollop of motor oil hit my windshield. It startled hell out of me since I was looking right where it hit. I had to clean it off before going on. I mentioned it so somebody working on the wind farm one day. He told me they have a self oiling system with a 55 gallon drum of lubricating oil hooked up to it.
When a windmill catches fire it’s quite a thing to see.
Elon’s not going anywhere. Too many people out there who think just wishing will make it so. Too many people out of touch with the reality of the working class. Too many people who are happy to force everyone else to do without so they can do what they want.
Who cares about sea level rise? People who have invested millions in beachfront property that’s who. They know that even with their relatively enormous carbon footprints they alone aren’t going to move the needle on reduction, so better to make massive numbers of people reduce theirs by even a small amount. At least that’s the theory. The reality is when you hand someone a more efficient machine they tend to make up for the gains by using it more.
The insiders with the beachfront property know that the entire CO2 driven “climate change” and impending sea level rise disaster is a fraud. Al Gore bought his after preaching impending doomsday for years.
It is simply the ancient scam of people giving up power over their lives and their wealth over to a ruling elite over the fear of bad weather.
There’s nothing we can do about any sea level rise that may be happening. The idea that we’re going to control the earth’s climate is part of the scam. Not going to happen. All we can do about “climate change” (which is a natural, ongoing process) is adapt to it.
A recent commercial shows a guy driving down the road in his IC car to the tune of the Flinstones. Lo and behold, while stopped at a light, beside him appears an “electric” car to the tune of the Jetsons. I wonder who dished out the cabbage for this commercial?
Fred and Barney shilling for Winston:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc1TBBp4dC8
Which world would you rather be in?
If time travel were possible I’d be running back to 1961 so fast it would make your head spin.
As long as they include the part where, “Jane, his wife!” nabs the bulk of George’s cash to go shopping. At least Wilma had the Bronto burgers ready for Fred when he entered the threshold only to get spear-tackled by Dino…
I thought that the “subsidy” was simply a tax credit (reduction in your tax bill), so that if you paid more in taxes than the Tesla subsidy it wouldn’t be taken from someone else. Outside of this, yes, it’s the government stealing the wealth from someone else. Correct me if I’m wrong about the subsidy. Thanks.
There’s no way Uncle will “go without” because of a revenue shortfall. So he heads out to the bond markets and sells our future labor to the lowest bidder. There’s always a buyer because Uncle can legally shoot people who won’t “chip in” to payback the note.
If the subsidy didn’t exist that revenue would come in and Uncle wouldn’t need to issue 30 yr T-Bills. So yes, he’s not really taking away from us, he’s taking away from our children and grandchildren.
As a normal human being who usually has empathy for the suffering of others I must admit here that I will not be ashamed for enjoying great schadenfreude when – not if – that punk Elon crashes and burns like his cars. I do not care one iota that he conned fools to invest in his quackery but I have nothing but justifiable contempt for Musk and his subsides. I also hate Musk for sullying the name of Nikola Tesla by naming his abomination after the great inventor/innovator.
I have a celebratory jay already rolled and ready to enjoy as soon as it is announced Musk is toast. Coming soon…
Morning, Skunk!
Ditto.
Elon is a prick. He has also sullied Libertarians by asserting that he is one – which is not unlike The Chimp’s avowed reverence for “our freedoms.” In fact, he is a rent-seeking crony capitalist hog-trougher.
I will take the TA out and do burnouts when Tesla folds 🙂
That was a great comment! Thanks.
Well-said, Skunkz!
Elon suffering a few of the consequences of his own actions is NOTHING compare to the evils that the man has wrought and inflicted upon others through his lying and scheming- and not only is he not the least bit repentant, but now he’s even suing the Canookistanian gov’t for not continuing the subsidies which they shouldn’t have given him in the first place; and for which people who have no dealings with Tesla and who will never own a Tesla, were robbed to pay for?! That is like an ungrateful dog suing his master for not continuing to give him steak!
This man who bankrupts and defrauds others, and who uses government to force others to further his schemes, will likely continue to live in opulence and luxury- not on what he has earned honestly on the free market (For then I would have no problem with him doing so) but by being a huckster and using the power of the state, and still not even being able to turn a profit, in a market that he has artificially created to his own advantage. And for this he is rewarded?
So what now? You mugged a blue jay?
Someone should care about Elon here and tell him to nix the Ambien. That stuff is bad and really messes with your mind. It can make you do crazy things.
Hi Joe,
Yep. Found out about that. I briefly dated a woman who was an Ambien Fiend… whooboy! Don’t go down that road…
Was she good in bed at least? lol
Flashlight, I do not know much about Ambien (except to note that it is legal but weed is not!?!) but I do know enough about Musk to argue that no one should care about that crony capitalist huckster. Put that prick in a padded room where he belongs.
If pot fucked with you as bad as Ambien you couldn’t give it away. It’s expensive as hell too. A doc prescribed some for me so I got about 10 of them and wished I’d only bought one. The first one did make me sleep but the way I felt the next day sucked. Knowing how I am, I took 2 the next night, and barely slept at all. I gave the rest to the wife since I didn’t see how bad she could get hurt with 7. Probably I should have thrown them in the burn barrel.
One of the CNBC (or is it MSNBC) news clips also mentioned a whistleblower claiming that a Mexican cartel was dealing drugs at the Tesla battery plant in Nevada. This saga is getting stranger by the day.
lol the whole company is probly just a big drug fence & money laundering scheme.
Joe, I think it’s too late for Elon. He acts as though he’s been on Ambien ever since it hit the market.
Et tu:
“When a self-governing people confer upon their government the power to take from some to give to others, the process will not stop until the last bone of the last taxpayer is picked bare.”
If Elon is indicted for fraud, he will hightail it to Israel, where (only) jew criminals who make it there are safe from extradition. Israel refuses to extradite jew criminals who flee from their criminal activity in other countries.
Hi Anarchyst,
I would rather Elon just pay his own way – that’s my main issue with the guy. If he wants to peddle his overpriced electric cars on his dime, it’s ok with me.
I couldn’t agree with you more. He deserves to succeed or fail on the merits of his product–nothing more. However, I do stand by my statement that there is probably a one-way trip to Tel Aviv in his future.
Regards,
I agree with you both!
They sent Eddie Antar back though…. (“Crazy Eddie”- the NY electronics retailer who fled to Is-ra-hell. Interesting story for anyone who may not be familiar… Goo-ghoul it)
I note of interest how many computer viruses and how much anti-virus software comes from Israel…interesting COINCIDENCE?
Not at all. Israel’s government-paid computer hackers developed the first “hack” specifically infecting industrial process control systems–the “stuxnet” virus. This virus was specifically designed to infect PLCs and other control systems, as used in power plants, nuclear facilities, and anything else that uses control systems…even the controllers in cars (CANbus)
After Tesla crashes, resale value for them will go up right? Right….?
🙁
I’m sure the loan holders for them will be happy about that.
With electric cars not having to meet ANY of the safety standards mandated upon all others, they should be able to put them out for HALF of what any other non-electric automobile costs. Something is very rotten about all this, and it ain’t in Denmark, either!
Electric cars DO have to meet the safety standards in effect…there is no exception for electric vehicles.
Are there any safety standards specific for EVs? Do they have to meet certain crash worthy criteria e.g. the battery has to be able to withstand x amount of force etc? Going by Musk’s cars’ history apparently not.
Yep, that’s part of the problem in making an affordable/low cost electric vehicle for around town use and practicality.
Think glorified electric cart- light, minimum features, but more weather protection, wipers, etc.
That way it’d be light so you could use a smaller and less expensive batter pack, a cheapo motor, etc.
But noooooo….the Feds have regulations that say such a vehicle, sans air bags, 5 mph bumpers, and the rest of the garbage regulations that add weight/cost/complexity can’t be sold for road use here in the “free” United States.
Hi Nick,
Yes, exactly.
I have discussed this with my buddy Tim and another buddy (Graves, poster here) – both of them professional mechanics. We could build a practical and economical electric car. It would not be “high performance” – but that is like an off-road Corvette that also carries a family of seven. It would not have air bags and would not meet the various “safety” standards in effect.
It would, however, cost less than $10,000 (without subsidies) and be capable of getting you to work at normal road speeds and back home again, assuming a 100 mile radius of action. That makes sense – and might actually sell.
But nooooo…
Book from 1993 on a DIY electric car conversion:
https://www.amazon.com/Build-Your-Own-Electric-Vehicle/dp/0830642315/
Probably could be found in public libraries. Also very out of date, but one of the primary tasks when building was to get rid of as much weight as possible. The author recommends using a small pickup platform, like one of the old Datsuns from the 1980s. Then tear out everything that’s not absolutely necessary. Of course the electronics have progressed since the 1990s but the same idea applies.
HAhaha! Gotta love anyone who’d strip down some old Datsun death-trap that gets 40MPG with it’s IC engine…to make a limited-range battery sled!
And Eric, just think how simple that car could be! No touchscreen; no computer-controlled everything; no software. No remote-control self-opening doors…..
Anarchyst. they get a bye because of a law congress passed letting manufacturers sell 25,000 each of EV’s without all the safety equipment of IC cars. Makes a lot of sense eh? Oh, and that was just the first year. After that they could make up to 100,000 per year.
Lobby=bribery. It’s the American way.
Hmmm. I’m not sure where I got that impression myself. I guess emission standards would go without saying, I could be hallucinating. Perhaps I imagined I read it here…..I’m working too hard, day and night are starting to blur. I suppose I need a few weeks off….maybe Thanksgiving, lol!