Although Tesla did get a $450 million DOE ATVM loan approved (and has taken part of it; the loan is released in stages according to strict criteria for performance), Tesla doesn't get any extra "tax breaks" or "carbon credits" from the US government. Carbon credits don't even exist (the legislation failed because of Republican opposition).
And on the ATVM loan, that was approved by the Bush Administration to build advanced technology vehicles in the USA. Nissan and Ford (which everyone seems to love around here, as opposed to GM) were the other large recipients (they got even more: 1.6 billion and 5.9 billion respectively).
Given they are the only American company that's building EVs from the ground up, I say they deserve the loan. Also I wanted to add, the main condition of the loan is you have to have matching capital to get it (that means you have to have a matching amount from private investors before the DOE will even consider you as a candidate).
Wrong logic. Nothing would have stopped Canada from shipping the oil to China (even out from the Gulf coast through that pipeline) even if we built it, because there is no binding agreement that says all oil through the pipeline must remain in the US (much less a binding agreement that Canada will never sell oil to China if the pipeline is built). That's just a fairly empty threat to pressure the US to build the pipeline.
The DOE reports state with or without the pipeline the amount oil from Canada in the next 20 years would be the same, because there is plenty of excess capacity in other pipelines. In fact one of the biggest attractions of XL is it heads directly to tax-exempt Foreign Trade Zones in the Gulf, which makes it easy for Canada to export oil to countries other than the US (selling to the US is not as profitable). It doesn't really help the oil situation of the US.
"Eh, maybe a little, but a true visionary (in the mold of Jobs, for instance) would create an electric car that could be bought for under 15K (no incentives), have a 400-mile range, and recharge in 1/2 hour."
Have you looked at the cost of an Apple product recently? Visionaries rarely create cheap products. It's up to the rest of the market to create those. The visionaries create the first version that wows all the early adopters and gets the process of commoditization started.
And Tesla is the closest in all your criteria besides cost (the Model S is 300 mile of range, 320 if you buy the aerodynamic wheels, no other EV is even close; Tesla's "supercharger" can also recharge that huge 85kWh battery from 10-90% in 45 minutes).
And the Roadster is ending production soon (not sold in US anymore, but still sold in Europe). But people still like to call any future products by Tesla vaporware.
This is just a continuation of a suit Motorola started before the acquisition (read the article). Not exactly the same as Google starting a suit.
To be a patent troll you need a history of starting such suits, which currently Google doesn't have yet, nor does Motorola (the only suit they started is with Apple; the Microsoft suit was retaliatory). On the other hand, both Apple and Microsoft have a history of going around suing companies on patents. I think you have to look up the definition of patent troll (you aren't one if you just started on suit).
The Volt's batteries aren't actually state of the art in density (in fact, the battery wasn't designed for max density because it has a gas engine as a "range extender"). The Tesla Model S's batteries are (the 85kWh one providing 300 miles of range, which was unthinkable just a few years ago esp. in a car of that size).
There is no need for batteries to ever beat the energy density of gasoline (consider this: almost all EVs can go more than 100 miles on an equivalent gallon's worth of energy; that's about 3-4x the efficiency of most cars).
And your price equivalency is false (because you are trying to compare a one time cost to the recurring cost of gasoline). And never say never, because we made much more progress in the last 20 years than in the 100 years before that just based on Nimh and lithium-ion batteries. For example, a car like the Leaf ($35k price tag for a 24kWh of batteries) wasn't possible just 10 years ago. Another example is just to look at how batteries in the consumer electronics market (for cellphones, laptops, media players, etc) progressed in the past 20 years. These batteries were non-existent before then.
I think BEVs are pretty much there already in terms of technology. Just the price has to come down and the charging (and/or battery swapping) infrastructure has to be built to support them.
Personally I don't think the exclusion of Google Wallet necessarily violates keeping Android "pure". It's not part of the AOSP, but rather an additional service provided by Google. As long as the Galaxy Nexus on Verizon still supports NFC, I don't see that as a huge loss. I'd be more worried if Google allowed bloatware that can't be disabled or uninstalled (the one on the Verizon Galaxy Nexus looks like it can't be uninstalled, only can be disabled).
With that in mind, it's still pretty hard to have no carrier influence when you are selling a phone that will be carrier subsidized. It's obvious the American market is not receptive to a model of buying an unlocked phone (as the earlier plan was). I'm not optimistic that will ever change, even if Google decided to go all in. There's just virtually no incentive in the US to buy an unlocked phone when you can't easily move to a different carrier with that phone and when it doesn't save you any money on your phone bill.
Apple is different. Their phone has extreme branding power already (everyone recognizes the iPhone). Google's Nexus series is not a household name yet and in general isn't the most successful Android phone (that would be Samsung's Galaxy series). And I don't think Google has the time to wait for the Nexus series to build up its brand (Apple, on the other hand, build up the iPhone brand while the smartphone market wasn't so hot).
I think the end decision boiled down to whether to not release the phone at all on Verizon or to release it with this feature missing. I think the outcry would be a far greater if the phone was not released, esp. with Verizon being the biggest carrier.
With that in mind, it's still pretty hard to have no carrier influence when you are selling a phone that will be carrier subsidized. It's obvious the American market is not receptive to a model of buying an unlocked phone (as the earlier plan was). I'm not optimistic that will ever change, even if Google decided to go all in. There's just virtually no incentive in the US to buy an unlocked phone when you can't easily move to a different carrier with that phone and when it doesn't save you any money on your phone bill.
Apple is different. Their phone has extreme branding power already (everyone recognizes the iPhone). Google's Nexus series is not a household name yet and in general isn't the most successful Android phone (that would be Samsung's Galaxy series). And I don't think Google has the time to wait for the Nexus series to build up its brand (Apple, on the other hand, build up the iPhone brand while the smartphone market wasn't so hot).
I think the end decision boiled down to whether to not release the phone at all on Verizon or to release it with this feature missing. I think the outcry would be a far greater if the phone was not released, esp. with Verizon being the biggest carrier.
The X prize counts MPGe. Given Diesel has about 15% more energy content than gasoline (and thus roughly that much more emissions too), it'll be penalized by that much.
I doubt a 0-60 run will drain the battery that much. A higher average speed will do a lot worse (because of wind resistance).
Do you know what part of the FMVSS or other federal law/regulation that states manufacturers have to maintain 10 years of parts and after sales support? I did some research and it seems to point that no such law exists (no source out there can point out the specific law). Then other sources say it is a California requirement. I've looked up California law and the closest thing I found only applies to electronics or appliances for a 7 year period (Civil Code 1793.03, part of the "lemon law"):
[www.leginfo.ca.gov]
It appears to me no such law exists, and it may have been purely made up by GM. I find it hard to believe if such a law exists that no one can find the specific reference to it.
[www.leginfo.ca.gov]
It appears to me no such law exists, and it may have been purely made up by GM. I find it hard to believe if such a law exists that no one can find the specific reference to it.
They could use biodiesel if they wanted, and it might still be cleaner than towing.
89 vehicles at 25 miles each is only 2225 miles. Given Nissan sold more than 3000 Leafs at launch, that's pretty negligible in terms of impact compared to how many all electric miles have been driven already.
89 vehicles at 25 miles each is only 2225 miles. Given Nissan sold more than 3000 Leafs at launch, that's pretty negligible in terms of impact compared to how many all electric miles have been driven already.
Only 1% of our electricity is made from oil...
It can be charged in 45 minutes. Hydrogen is the "future" alright, and it'll also always remain the "future". So far there's not production hydrogen car available for sale and I doubt we'll see one soon.
Wha? When did Nissan allocate 50k Leaf's for 2011? Nissan always said the total world production was going to be 20k. When they launched pre-orders, they had only 20k spots world-wide.
And very car selling metric (like days on the lot, dealer markups for cars that are not pre-ordered) says Nissan is not demand constrained at all (neither is the Volt).
And very car selling metric (like days on the lot, dealer markups for cars that are not pre-ordered) says Nissan is not demand constrained at all (neither is the Volt).
Actually I feel this style looks fine, but the chrome lip does kind of give off cheapness.
Maybe because I see BBS rims frequently on civics too and there are plenty of knock off ones, that makes chromed out rims look cheap to me.
I personally feel stock/understated rims look a lot classier. A lot of custom rims just don't match the car (really, really looks added on).
Maybe because I see BBS rims frequently on civics too and there are plenty of knock off ones, that makes chromed out rims look cheap to me.
I personally feel stock/understated rims look a lot classier. A lot of custom rims just don't match the car (really, really looks added on).
They can choose to move to manufacturing companies (Foxconn isn't the only one and it seems they have a repeat history of issues) and countries (China isn't the only country that manufactures things) that treat workers better. There's plenty they can do if they really want to, esp. with billions in profits and cash reserves.
An easier route is to at least hire inspectors to inspect the factories (how much can it cost?). Obviously Foxconn isn't doing the job right.
An easier route is to at least hire inspectors to inspect the factories (how much can it cost?). Obviously Foxconn isn't doing the job right.
Actually if you compare workplace suicides (not just any kind, like the teen suicides other people tried to pull out), Foxconn's suicide rate is quite high.
This is a calculation I did back in Jun 2010, exactly from mediajerk's linked article:
251 workplace suicides in 2008 (a peak year)
[www.bls.gov]
137 million, nonfarm payroll employment in 2008
[www.bls.gov]
This means
0.000183% rate
or 0.0183 out of 100k people
For Foxconn 13/800k from all their factories:
0.001625% rate
or 1.625 per 100k
Or about 90x higher than the workplace suicide rate of the US. Of course, they live in the factories too, so it's not exactly the same thing. To get an apples to apples comparison, you would have to look at other factories in China, but given the media attention, I think other factories probably have lower suicide rates, or there would be reports on those too.
This is a calculation I did back in Jun 2010, exactly from mediajerk's linked article:
251 workplace suicides in 2008 (a peak year)
[www.bls.gov]
137 million, nonfarm payroll employment in 2008
[www.bls.gov]
This means
0.000183% rate
or 0.0183 out of 100k people
For Foxconn 13/800k from all their factories:
0.001625% rate
or 1.625 per 100k
Or about 90x higher than the workplace suicide rate of the US. Of course, they live in the factories too, so it's not exactly the same thing. To get an apples to apples comparison, you would have to look at other factories in China, but given the media attention, I think other factories probably have lower suicide rates, or there would be reports on those too.
It's amazing how unclear this article is on this subject, although that's par for the course for most of the articles I have read on this subject.
This vulnerability is exactly the same as Firesheep (stealing session tokens), which affects all devices that can access http over an unencrypted network (includes all computers, smartphones, etc.). Twitter and Facebook only recently (in Feb/March of this year) patched this up by having an "always use https" option. There are plenty of websites still vulnerable to this, given the standard practice of authenticating using HTTPS and then continuing the session using session tokens passed using HTTP.
Most articles don't make this clear and makes it sound a lot worse than it actually is.
This means Google can fix it on the server side just by forcing HTTPS on the servers that the various apps communicates with. That's why there is no need for any kind of change to the software on the Android devices (and thus no action required from users or carriers).
This vulnerability is exactly the same as Firesheep (stealing session tokens), which affects all devices that can access http over an unencrypted network (includes all computers, smartphones, etc.). Twitter and Facebook only recently (in Feb/March of this year) patched this up by having an "always use https" option. There are plenty of websites still vulnerable to this, given the standard practice of authenticating using HTTPS and then continuing the session using session tokens passed using HTTP.
Most articles don't make this clear and makes it sound a lot worse than it actually is.
This means Google can fix it on the server side just by forcing HTTPS on the servers that the various apps communicates with. That's why there is no need for any kind of change to the software on the Android devices (and thus no action required from users or carriers).
Anyone with half a brain would have called ahead or went online to first see if there was a public charging station first. That's what a normal consumer would have done. But Top Gear obviously doesn't want to approach it from that perspective: it's obvious their goal is lampoon EVs and make them seem as undesirable as possible. They also have a huge fetish for pushing them (whether they are truly out of juice or otherwise).
Hydrogen I see a conflict of interest. One of the huge sponsors for their events is Shell, and Shell is a huge backer of hydrogen (just look at their Clarity video, it was fueled at a Shell station). Hydrogen is the only alt fuel that oil companies can maintain control of given they currently are the biggest consumer of hydrogen (used in refining).
And as long as you don't dig any deeper, hydrogen sounds like a very good pitch (but I'm sure you know there's lots of pitfalls that go unmentioned).
Hydrogen I see a conflict of interest. One of the huge sponsors for their events is Shell, and Shell is a huge backer of hydrogen (just look at their Clarity video, it was fueled at a Shell station). Hydrogen is the only alt fuel that oil companies can maintain control of given they currently are the biggest consumer of hydrogen (used in refining).
And as long as you don't dig any deeper, hydrogen sounds like a very good pitch (but I'm sure you know there's lots of pitfalls that go unmentioned).
EV supporters have this figured out more than the naysayers who like to only point out there are powerplants, but don't bother to do the calculations to see which is better. Everyone knows electricity comes from powerplants, why do people like to point this out and act like nobody knows? This annoys me to no end, esp. when the person thinks they are so smart for bringing it up.
As for the Leaf itself, I calculated it to be equivalent to a ~50mpg car in CO2 output on the average US grid once you factor in the charging losses, electricity distribution losses and gasoline refining/distribution losses. Some areas do worse than average, but some do significantly better (like California).
As for the Leaf itself, I calculated it to be equivalent to a ~50mpg car in CO2 output on the average US grid once you factor in the charging losses, electricity distribution losses and gasoline refining/distribution losses. Some areas do worse than average, but some do significantly better (like California).
