What If Tesla Took 500,000 Gas-Guzzlers Off the Road?

Photo credit: Tesla Motors.

Last quarter, Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA  ) delivered 5,150 cars, which was well above its expectations of 4,500 deliveries. The company did so by boosting its production rate by 25% to 500 per week. If everything goes according to plan, the company's deliveries for its award-winning Model S could reach an annualized rate of 40,000 by the end next year, which is nearly double this year's expected rate. That's simply stunning growth. However, it's only the tip of the iceberg for where this company plans to be in the future.

The company has a very long road ahead of it to reach its goal to produce 500,000 vehicles annually, which is the rate CEO Elon Musk believes it can eventually reach. To get there, the company needs to capture lightning in a bottle again and produce a car that can be a mass-market success. That will happen only if consumers can drive a car off the lot in the $35,000 range -- something Tesla believes will be possible in as little as four years. While that's a bold dream, if Tesla has taught us anything, it's that it's OK to dream. So let's dream together of a world were Tesla can sell half a million cars each year.

No more pain at the pump?
Americans as a whole are driving less, but we still drive a lot. Last year alone, the average American drove 9,363 miles, which is 7.5% down from the peak in 2004. While there's no telling how much we'll be driving by the time Tesla takes 500,000 gas-guzzlers off the road, we could conservatively assume that each one of those cars would have driven 10,000 miles per year. Even with using 2025 CAFE standards of 54.5 MPG as the average gas mileage of the cars being taken off the road, that's 183.5 gallons of gas being saved per car.

Overall, that's a savings of nearly 92 million gallons of gas each year. For perspective, that's just about a quarter of the 367.08 million gallons of gas Americans use per day. Thought of another way, if gas was $4 per gallon, it would save Tesla owners a collective $367 million, or about $733.94 per year. Swapping in a more gas-guzzling car would certainly boost the savings, so just think of these numbers as ballpark figures.

In fact, let's just say that Tesla was able to replace 500,000 true gas-guzzlers and knock off one day's worth of America's annual fuel consumption, or roughly shave the demand for a million gallons of fuel per day. Let's take a look at those numbers.

*Based on an average of 10,000 miles driven and $4 gasoline

How much of a pinch would that be for refiners such as Phillips 66 (NYSE: PSX  ) or Valero (NYSE: VLO  ) ? In 2012, Phillips 66's refining and marketing segment produced $4.5 billion in earnings on $173.3 billion in revenue. Similarly, Valero's total revenue last year was $139.3 billion and its operating income was $4 billion. Clearly, the $1.47 billion in gasoline that Tesla could save each year won't put either out of business.

Oh, by the way
Further, while taking a million gallons of gasoline per day out of the equation would still have some impact, odds are it would find somewhere else to disappear. In fact, just last quarter, Phillips 66 highlighted that it had increased its refined product exports to 181,000 barrels per day, or more than 760,000 gallons. By the end of this year it should have the capacity to export 370,000 barrels of refined product per day, or more than 1.5 million gallons. That additional capacity means Phillips 66 alone could easily export the amount of gasoline per day that 500,000 Teslas would save.

In fact, the U.S. has now become a net exporter of refined petroleum products because of lower U.S. demand and our competitive advantage in the marketplace. This situation is putting U.S. refiners with a strong Gulf Coast presence like Valero in a key competitive position to take advantage of future demand outside the United States. Tesla might actually be doing these companies a favor, as refined petroleum product exports are more valuable than those sold in the domestic marketplace.

Final Foolish thoughts
Tesla's bold goal to sell 500,000 cars per year is a great dream, but it won't put gasoline refiners out of business anytime soon. Instead, these companies will simply have more gasoline available for the export market, which is a real positive for our economy. That's not to say half a million Teslas won't affect the energy markets, so tune in next week for a look at how that many Teslas could affect the electricity marketplace.

The only problem as far as investors are concerned is that Tesla is currently priced almost as richly as its Model S. That means investors looking to profit from the revolution in the energy markets need to look elsewhere. The good news is that there is still one home-run investing opportunity that has been slipping under Wall Street's radar for months. But it won't stay hidden much longer. Forward-thinking energy players such as General Electric and Ford have already plowed sizable amounts of research capital into this little-known stock -- because they know it holds the key to the explosive profit power of the coming "no choice fuel revolution." Luckily, there's still time for you to get on board if you act quickly. All the details are inside an exclusive report from The Motley Fool. Click here for the full story!


Read/Post Comments (102) | Recommend This Article (10)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:02 AM, amysname wrote:

    The ends is supposed to justify the means! If these cars become AFFORDABLE and IF they are made to last and are not just to satisfy the government's needs then this company can be a success. Until they can prove that their product is worthwhile and can produce them WITHOUT TAXPAYER'S MONEY they are still a huge risk.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, sabebrush6 wrote:

    Our current administration is doing zippo on cutting the fuel prices and is killing the RV group. It's all about buying fuel from abroad to support those who hate us.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:07 AM, GuitarJim wrote:

    Trying to put a dollar amount on the gasoline that would be saved is ludicrous without taking into account the cost of the electricity required to keep those electric cars charged. Trying to assess the impact on fossil fuel dependence is equally ludicrous without taking into account that most electricity in the world is produced with fossil fuels.

    And then there's the problem of what to do with the highly toxic used batteries from that many electric cars.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:11 AM, nanguneri wrote:

    Higher Investment, Higher ROI, Greener Environment in the US, No Pain at Pump, Many More US Jobs, these could be positive developments.

    One aspect that the author Matt Dilallo did not look at is what is the increase in the load on the grid (maybe insignificant). Or the cost of conversion of gasoline stations to electric powering kiosks (maybe it is worth it over the long run).

    How do we recycle the gas guzzlers (or help customers sell them off), maybe take parts that are currently used that function independently of gasoline or electric technology (Door, Brakes, A/C, Ht, Navigation, etc) and use them seamlessly with a low conversion investment worthy in the long run. Thus the selling cost may not be $ 37 K but higher so long as we know ahead of time,

    The home mortgage can be integrated into the auto and priced together.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:12 AM, maddie10 wrote:

    If Tesla takes 500,000 cars off the roadways, the price of gasoline will double. People, you must wake up before it is too late. The gas companies are biting at the bit to double the price of gas. This is why they are investing on energy efficient vehicles that we middle class people can not afford. ANOTHER, GOTCHA!!!!

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:16 AM, linkshander wrote:

    electric cars a toys for the rich. end the subsidy and watch what happens.

    the highly hyped ~1000 lbs telsa battery holds the energy equivalent of 2L of gasoline. See how far you go in stop and go traffic on a warm humid day.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:21 AM, bobthegoodone wrote:

    Until this BS with ETHANOL is eliminated gas prices will never go down ! ETHANOL currently is adding 1.40 to each gallon of gas , the less gas we use the higher the price goes thanks to our Government mandate of them using 15 billion gallons a year, That's the whole reason why they want this 15 % in our gas to keep the corporate welfare to huge farms going

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:25 AM, ImtheBaldEagle wrote:

    I've noticed there is no place to plug them up around here. Also what are we going to use for a power source. Obama is taking coal powered plants away, our rivers are being over used now, so Obama where is the power source going to be and better yet - what will it cost us to power up.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:27 AM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    What if 500k people could actually afford a Tesla? What if Tesla actually had a car that could travel more than 200 miles? What if the taxpayers weren't still supporting Tesla with a $7500 per car subsidy? I'll bet lunch with anyone that Tesla won't actually sell and deliver to the end customer 40k cars next year.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:27 AM, MrBluefrost wrote:

    Inflation going up like always and when folks like telsa can bring there price down to meet in the middle people driving a fuel less car is only the first step of a 1,000 mile journey enough people will get fed up with pain at the pump when paying for goods as well this will make a niche /opening for new business to grow using telsa tech because there will always be a want for the same goods cheaper Ha arabs can buy back there own crude in form of gas and then we vote e-mail and protest peacefully on how to spend surplus arab tax dollars

    in this County

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:40 AM, Franklin69 wrote:

    Isn't Tesla an electric car? Gasoline?

    Consumer reports said it is the best car ever tested at any price. Repeat "Best Car Ever". And it seems to have been developed by Tony Stark.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:43 AM, cslobo wrote:

    I came here to point out the many flaws in the author's math but it seems the comments are even more grossly in error.

    @amysname, Tesla has zero taxpayer debt. Taxpayers made about $12 million profit from Tesla's brief loan

    @guitarjim,your first points I agree totally, but li-ion isn't highly toxic and it is recyclable. The likely 2nd life for these batteries will be grid storage.

    @maddie10, you don't understand economics whatsoever. Less demand equals lower prices.

    @linkshander, EVs consume little to nothing at a standstill. AC motors draw very little. You'd run out of gas before I ran out of charge. Oh and that 2 L of gas equivalent(which is wrong) takes me an EPA 265 miles. Meeting Tesla's quoted 300 can easily be done.

    @bobthegoodone, a gallon of pure ethanol costs less than a gallon of pure gas, making it impossible to increase the cost of gasoline.

    @the author, your gross error is assuming Tesla makes 500K cars once. They will do this annually, meaning the number of EVs will get larger by 500k each year from Tesla alone(not accounting attrition). That and assuming that no other manufacturer is producing EVs. And as guitarjim said, you HAVE to account for cost of electricity for dollars saved. However, based on average electricity prices, your dollars saved should still be 60-80% of your number.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:46 AM, comosichiam wrote:

    HOW ABOUT WE ADD THE AMOUNT YOU STATED OF BIG SUVS THAT WOULD BE GREAT AND ALL WE HAVE TO DO IS GET RID OF THE ENVIRO KOOKS AND GET OUR OWN OIL WHICH WE HAVE IN ABUNDANCE. THE SOLUTION IS TO DEFEAT THE SOCIALISTS WHERE EVER THEY SHOW THEIR STUPID FACES JUST MAYBE WE CAN GET OUR COUNTRY BACK ON THE RIGHT TRACK.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:50 AM, cslobo wrote:

    @jacklyndenise, the current model s is EPA rated at 265 miles. I've easily done 280 while averaging over 70mph. The article's 500,000 car production is largely referencing Tesla's $35k car that they will produce in 3 years.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:12 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    cslobo, I'll bet you lunch that Tesla won't assemble and deliver to the end customer 40k $35k cars/yr beginning in 3 years, much less 500k cars/yr, even if Tesla manages to hold onto the $7500/car subsidy. Tesla is a dream which may come true one day, but we're not there in 3 years and we're not there in 5 years.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:12 PM, peterwolf wrote:

    'No more pain at the pump' ?? How about 'pain at the electric bill' every month?? Do you think keeping the Tesla charged up at home is cheap?? Not in California where electricity prices are about to go through the roof because of AB32.

    No, I'll take 'pain at the pump' any day because gas prices (minus the taxes) are determined more by competition than electricity prices are by Sacramento.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:16 PM, CALNNC wrote:

    Only in America can an Executive Order command the use of ethanol in gas, which uses more energy and creates more pollution to make than it saves, not including lowering gas mileage by 10% in all vehicles. Everybody in this country just only owns a car, they own other vehicles, trucks, 4WD's, and SUV's and have a specific purpose for their use, and not just to drive tree huggers and Prius drivers insane. They don't yet make vehicles that you need to do work with, only to move you from here to there, a job better suited to mass transportation. My 'gas guzzler' as this article insults, will still be on the road when you have spent thousands of dollars replacing batteries, or replacing whole vehicles, and it will still be cheaper in the long run that one of these, IF, you consider the fact that folks just don't move themselves around with no additional baggage, and actually need a vehicle that will haul something other than a Big Mac inflated butt..

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:17 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    cslobo, oh forgot to mention, your figure of a "$1.2m taxpayer profit" on the Telsa loan is total bollicks. Please post your facts that show the profit you claim and don't forget to include ALL costs associated with the loan.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:18 PM, rednalbo wrote:

    Have I missed any article's showing the cost to power electric cars per mile v/s gasoline or diesel? I do not like the Oil & Gas Industry, it's people or what they stand for (their own greed). But before I jump on the band wagon for electric powered auto industry, I would like to see the comparison. All the articles I see and read look like Electricity is free. Would all this change or just shift profits to different corporations and Oil & Gas still making gobs of money selling Oil & Gas to Electric Companies?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:23 PM, RustySlade wrote:

    It seems one of the misconceptions with electric cars is the assumption that you can have an electric car for every person who owns a car. . . .Meaning the market cap is the same as gas burning autos. . . . .That is not the case.

    The market cap for electric autos is based on how many people have the ability to charge them.. . . Not by the amount of people who can buy a car.

    For instance. . . People in Apartment complexes cannot charge them because they do not have the ability.

    If you rent a home, your not going to spend the money to install a 220v outlet in your garage. . . .Let alone the 3 phase 480 required for the supercharger.. . Yes I know, people who can afford a $70k car don't have these issues.

    There will be competition in the $35k range.

    There will be people who for whatever reason can't buy one because of snow, they need a truck, its not big enough, not enough range. . etc. .

    You cannot assume that people will have two electric cars in the driveway.

    If you start with the number of households, and then start eliminating potential customers by criteria listed above, (and there are more reasons than I have listed) you end up with a total of around 1.5 million cars sold by Tesla before there are no more people left to buy them in America.

    1.5 million is COMPLETE market saturation by Tesla to America customers.

    The added problem of electric grid capability will also be an issue as we currently already have brown outs in my area. . . .

    Additionally, the state is already finding ways to figure out how to tax electric car owners because they do not generate gas tax revenue... .

    I am not against electric cars, but people need to wake up to the reality about the market of electric cars... i.e. How many people can buy them and what it means to the state and electric companies.

    I own a 2 bedroom 1 car garage home. . . And even If I wanted to buy one, I will have to figure out a way to store it inside for protection from the weather and incur the cost of getting 220v power to it.. . .As I am not going to plug in the car in my driveway while it is raining.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:35 PM, Lobologic wrote:

    Why do experts always forget to factor in some portion of our military spend when calculating the cost of oil-gasoline needed to ensure constant flow of Middle East oil for our insatiable appetite for oil?

    Haven't seen an F-16 engaging an threat in the USA corn belt recently.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:35 PM, ckgod wrote:

    @linkshander Matter of fact stop and go is where EV are most efficient. Gasoline car will still burn gas at stop light but the Tesla consumes zero energy.

    And where did you get the idea the battery holds energy only equivalent of 2L gas tank? The Tesla can go 250+ miles at highway speed before charge. You need to get 500mpg for that range with a 2L tank, BTW at .09c per kWh it costs only $8 to fill up the "tank" in Tesla.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:45 PM, MizSchmidlap wrote:

    I can't wait. Just make one as safe as my Volvo and I'm there! We so desperately need to get away from our dependency on petroleum products and the sooner the better.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:47 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    ckgod, average cost of electricity in the US per kw is between 12-15 cents/kw. Since you're more than 30% off 0n this number, I must assume your other calculations are also in error.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:49 PM, lmcginnis3540 wrote:

    The biggest problem that no one points to is that the electric it is going to take to power these cars. Since the closing of coal, gas, and nuclear plants we produce less electric than what we did in 2008. Electric bills have gone up in the last five years because of the lower production and the unrealistic EPA standards. Now you want to take that electric that feeds our homes and businesses to use on cars, don't complain when your utility bill triples and there are rolling blackouts like in California in the late 1990s. Also power producers would make a great legal argument about not being regulated on the price they charge.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:50 PM, Rifleman1776 wrote:

    Always overlooked in these pro-Tesla articles is the fact that no road taxes are being collected from the all-electric cars. Very soon the States and Feds will have to find another way to tax these cars so as to be able to afford road maintenance and building. The economy of driving an all-electric will be impacted since taxes make up a large percentage of the cost of a gallon of gasoline.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 12:58 PM, cslobo wrote:

    @jacklyndenise, http://money.cnn.com/2013/05/22/autos/tesla-loan-repayment/i...

    Granted the twelve million dollar taxpayer profit I referred to was the amount of interest earned on the loan so maybe "profit" was the wrong word to use. That number is what Musk has stated and it's obvious you won't believe it so I'm not going to bother finding an article where It is quoted. I really don't know what "costs associated with the loan" you're after. The facts are taxpayers earned interest and it's paid back in full as opposed to losing billions on bailouts to the other automakers.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:00 PM, cslobo wrote:

    Geez jacklyndenise, "average" means some numbers are higher and some are lower. Ckgod's 9 cents are higher than mine.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:01 PM, AlaaSadek wrote:

    Are you trying to scare us? Just how many employess does these oil ccompanies have?

    Just let us take some numbers here. How much does a widows face cost to you when she learns that her husband died in some kind of a war for a refined tank of gas? Why do you want to export oil to other nations? Why can't they use the sun like the US? All these people that you are worried about can work in other industries that provide power from renewable energy. Or would you like us to use coal like we did before to travel?

    Tell us in the next artical just one number; how much is your son's life worth?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:13 PM, tigerade wrote:

    The Tesla Generation 3 car (the 35K car) will likely be the next car I own. I plan on getting a solar array for my home so that I can charge using just solar power. It would be wonderful to tell the oil companies to screw off for once and for all.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:20 PM, tigerade wrote:

    You know what I love most about Tesla Motors? It's not the car itself, which is beautiful and amazing. It's not the revolutionary technology, which is equally impressive, It's not the sense of quality I get from the company either. It's the fact that there are people on here, reading this right now. They have spent decades denying climate change, bashing electric cars, lobbying hard to keep America dependent on fossil fuels, and are heavily invested in fossil fuel companies. They are starting to know the jig is up, and their deception may finally be unraveling. The sense of fear I get from them on here is truly close to my heart. It's not just Tesla either, more Americans and people in the world are buying solar power, more wind power is installed everyday, and more energy efficiency and renewable technology becomes a reality everyday. It's not the end of the fossil fuels by any means, but it's a small bit of light in what has been a long, dark tunnel.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:27 PM, 34kw wrote:

    Even though the author and Obama are giddy at the prospect of pollution free cars, so far we only have coal powered cars. I'm not so sure that these are much if any cleaner.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:39 PM, cslobo wrote:

    @34kw, http://www.teslamotors.com/goelectric#electricity

    Even from coal these cars are cleaner. WA is 70% hydro. Don't forget that power plants are converting to much cleaner natural gas at a rapid rate. And then we have nuclear, solar, wind, etc.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:46 PM, JayTor2112 wrote:

    ...and replace them with coal guzzlers. Wait, they're at war with coal so electricity prices are going to skyrocket (along with our healthcare costs), so that's not going to improve anything. Never mind, they will be wind and solar guzzlers. No.. wind and solar doesn't produce a drop of what we would need if they are successful at destroying coal. Anyway you look at it, electricity costs are going to become unaffordable under these people, and hence, these cars will be unaffordable to drive while the charge lasts and you have to go to the backup gasoline anyway...

    Am I illustrating this absurdity well enough?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 1:48 PM, kkrimmer wrote:

    Recent News: States to charge more tax on hybrid and electric vehicles because the states are losing gas-tax revenue.

    F THIS GOVT.

    $1-2 Trillion Bush War for Oil in Iraq

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:05 PM, luckyagain wrote:

    Sure a lot of comments about electric cars and what will happen when there are more. In the grand scheme of things, it will take many years before enough enough electric cars exist in order to have much of an affect upon gasoline/electricity consumption.

    Electricity cannot be stored to any degree today. So it is made based upon demand. The electric companies do this most by buying and selling it over the electric grid. When demand gets large enough, then the electric company fires up another generating plant usually a natural gas turbine. The biggest cost of electricity is during so-called peak demand which happens in the afternoon on hot days due to air conditioning. When the sun sets, air conditioning demands is reduced. At night, there is plenty of electricity production that is idle. So electric cars will use a small fraction of this idle electricity production at night to recharge the car's batteries.

    Most electric company generating plants can burn either coal, oil or natural gas depending upon which is the cheapest. In the current economy, natural gas is cheaper than oil or coal. So effectively, electric cars will be really burning natural gas most of the time.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:10 PM, deadbrokeII wrote:

    As the usage of petroleum products decline, the taxes will go up and up and up. Even now fees/penalties are added to hybrids/electric vehicles for their lower fuel consumption. What needs to be done is to wean the politicians from spending/subsidizing the industries that elect them.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:17 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    cslobo, don't know where you live, but you're obviously at the low end of the scale as is ckgod, but he and you are applying your low rates across the country where according to the BLS, http://www.bls.gov/ro9/cpilosa_energy.htm , for more than 4 years the average cost of a kw is more than 30% above his claim. Further, ckgod's claim that a Tesla at a stop light "consumes no energy" is a further lie. Obviously the electronics and the a/c, heat, fan and other accessories are consuming plenty of energy. Tesla has promise, but the hype you and ckgod are trying to sell is just not reality.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:20 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    cslobo, the fact that you have no clue what "costs" are associated with a loan speaks volumes by itself. It's not my job to teach you finance, but let's just say at a minimum there are administrative costs and the value of money over time which are must be deducted from gross profit to arrive at a net number.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:20 PM, AsokAsus wrote:

    What if pigs had wings?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:23 PM, EdwardInFlorida wrote:

    @RustySlade

    I think some of your assumptions, and calculations are wrong.

    The electric car market is much bigger than you suppose.

    One flaw in your logic is that only people who can charge an electric car are exclusively well to do HOMEOWNERS.

    Let me ask you this...how many apartment or condo dwellers can refuel their gasoline powered car? Answer...zero!

    You seem to conveniently forget that the charging infrastructure is in constant growth every day. One day, they will nearly as ubiquitous as gas stations.

    With new charging technology, getting one's electric car "filled up" will be a matter of only a few minutes. Almost as quickly as someone filling their gas tank on a fuel driven vehicle.

    And your assumption that the "absolute max of the market is 1.5 million electric cars" holds no water. How did you come up with that one?

    Here's a word of friendly advice. Please post actual statistics instead of personal conjectures next time. That would give your credibility a boost.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:27 PM, Subluxator wrote:

    It's to bad that energy has become a political football. No need to argue with the pro oil people, change is coming and there is nothing they can do about it. Your problem is while your sitting at home cleaning your guns, or sitting in church on Sunday's worshipping medieval fairy tales, the world is passing you by.

    The good news is your breed is dying off faster than they are being replaced. Good luck ever having a Republican president ever elected again.

    You can't use logic to argue with people that have clearly demonstrated they don't let facts get in the way of their opinions.

    I'm a conservative, but would never claim the republican party as mine. This isn't just about the costs.

    As for electric costs, mine are zero. it's called solar and it's on my roof.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:31 PM, jamesdan567 wrote:

    500,000 cars is inevitable by Tesla, who just bought 31 acres next to their plant in Fremont for future expansion. 500,000 cars is far short of Tesla's stated goal to convert the global transport system to sustainable basis.

    The EV is 400% more efficient at moving the car forward than an ICE vehicle so any claims gas is better is trumped.

    Electricity can be produced at $0.10 per kilowatt using cheap solar panels. I am doing this for over 4 years. Electric cars will not hamper the grid since they will largely be charged at night when utilities have plenty of excess capacity.

    Tesla will sell 100 million cars by 2030. or more...

    2013 production rate will likely end up at 22,000 units a year, 2014 production rate, with the new Model X introduced after July 1 will be around 44,000 a year. In 2015, with both models cranking worldwide and a fully built out supercharge network in Europe and USA, 88,000 a year. In 2016 with the new Gen 3, 175,000 units a year.

    Tesla has publicly stated its ramping up production slowly to ensure maximum profit margins and maximum quality. Once this is done, they will add new production lines fast and easily, thus,

    in 2017, 350,000 units a year

    in 2017, new battery packs will be available. Remember, these plug into the cars in 90 seconds. The new battery packs opens up a giant new division of manufacturing and sales as 6-8 other auto manufacturers standardize on the Tesla battery. Customers who trade up will leave Tesla their old batteries that can then be sold to utilities for grid balancing efforts.

    in 2018, 700,000 units a year

    in 2019, 1 million units a year

    in 2020, 1.5 million a year

    Tesla sales $ of cars will be exceeded by Tesla sales $ of batteries...

    Can't you all see it?

    I can.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:33 PM, EdwardInFlorida wrote:

    @JacklynDenise

    Is common sense really that rare now a days?

    What "cslobo" was referring to is that the energy consumption of a Testla Model S standing at a stop sign or red light, is obviously far lower than if it were traveling on a highway.

    A gas car on the other hand, is less efficient with it's motor running while standing still in the same circumstances.

    One more thing, Tesla doesn't own the US government a dime! But I bet GM, Chrysler, and Ford do.

    Costs related to the loan granted to Tesla were already factored in the last (second) payment. That's why whenever someone is going to pay off a car or home loan early, there is what is called, a "payoff balance". Oh, and I'm a finance guy. I know what I'm talking about.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 2:47 PM, cslobo wrote:

    @jacklyndenise, no kidding. I know that. There's no way a few years of admin costs would exceed $12 million for one loan so I found it odd and wondered what all these significant costs were.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:04 PM, cslobo wrote:

    Even at Hawaii's high of 35 cents/kWh, it would be $30 to "top off". Still beats gas. Ckgod being 3% off equates to about $2.50(or $10.50 total. Are you saying his argument is no longer valid over $2.50 as you pump $50 in your tank?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:06 PM, cslobo wrote:

    My math was 30% but wrote 3%. Don't jump me on the error

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:09 PM, SammyDBBQ wrote:

    "What If Tesla Took 500,000 Gas-Guzzlers Off the Road?"

    Easy. If Tesla is purely electric, then that would mean 20-30 new nuclear power station will need to be built across the US and billions spent on upgrading the US powergrid and installation of recharge points.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:14 PM, patmyass wrote:

    The term "gas guzzler" is such an outmoded term. It's designed from the title of this article to prejudice you against gasoline. True, there are some vehicles on the road today that get pretty crappy mileage but overall most cars get 2 to 3 times the mileage of their 1970 and 80's ancestors. And the stuff coming out of the tailpipe? You'd have a hard time trying to commit suicide with it. This is all in line with the administrations hatred of coal and oil. They can't be happy with a gradual change to other form of fuel. It has to be now, my way, at the point of a gun if necessary.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:16 PM, Threemagisteria wrote:

    @RustySlade

    "For instance. . . People in Apartment complexes cannot charge them because they do not have the ability."

    Anywhere you can have parking, you can have charging facilities. As EV use increases, landlords will face an economic decision: add charging facilities (which cost less than installing a washer/ dryer and hookup) or turn away prospective tenants because you have nowhere for them to plug in their cars. Just like getting rid of hitching posts and adding parking spaces ninety-odd years ago, only cheaper. Once there are cheap EVs that work, the market will dictate the adoption of accommodations for them.

    "There will be people who for whatever reason can't buy one because of snow, they need a truck, its not big enough, not enough range. . etc."

    EVs work in snow, unless you mean that you want to mount a snowplow. The Model S is not designed for that, nor is it a truck, and Tesla has not released details on when they will enter the pickup market. Even then, there are plenty of households that use a truck for hauling cargo and a passenger vehicle for transport.

    "You cannot assume that people will have two electric cars in the driveway."

    Not everyone, but if you don't travel more than 250+miles daily, your long holiday trips are along highways, and your family cargo needs would be served by an SUV, then a Model S and a Model X would serve you just fine. That covers about all of suburban America.

    "1.5 million is COMPLETE market saturation by Tesla to America customers."

    Get rid of the decimal point and then double it and you are closer to being right.

    Who can't use a (current tech) Tesla? People who need a heavy duty working vehicle and don't need a fuel-efficient alternative for when they want to move people instead of cargo, and people who routinely need to travel several hundred miles of back roads a day. I have a cousin in Alaska who fits that description, and he won't be going EV any time soon. Fair enough. But rural Alaskans don't make up the majority of the US car market.

    Also: people who don't need cars at all, like Manhattan loft-dwellers and the Amish. Almost forgot them.

    "The added problem of electric grid capability will also be an issue as we currently already have brown outs in my area. . . ."

    Cars charge at night, when utilities run surpluses, and brownouts are a distribution problem, not a capacity problem.

    "Additionally, the state is already finding ways to figure out how to tax electric car owners because they do not generate gas tax revenue..."

    I will concede that the government could start taxing EVs. The more EV users there are, the less popular that will be, so although I wouldn't be surprised by future taxation attempts, I doubt that EVs will get taxed off the roads.

    "I own a 2 bedroom 1 car garage home. . . And even If I wanted to buy one, I will have to figure out a way to store it inside for protection from the weather and incur the cost of getting 220v power to it.. . .As I am not going to plug in the car in my driveway while it is raining."

    Umm, huh? The Nissan Leaf's cheap crappy cooling system causes the battery to lose capacity in weather over 90-95 degrees, but a Tesla does not need to be stored in a garage 'to protect it from the weather'. As for charging, look at the roof of your house. See those black wires running out of it? They carry electricity. Does your house short out when it rains? No. Power lines work in rain; they have done so for over 100 years.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:19 PM, vet212 wrote:

    If Tesla takes 5 of anything else off the road it will surprise me as the range is short payload low price too high and its being overhyped

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:25 PM, ace1g wrote:

    The number 1 car sold in the US is the Camry and it doesn't even have sales of 500,000 units. I love Telsa, but at some point these stories need to have some reality in them. Telsa is having problems with even getting 20,000 batteries for their cars. At some point you have to start thinking about power grid problems and toxic old batteries. Telsa valuation is getting close to $700,000 per car. I have a feeling some people are going to get burned with this stock when reality sets in.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:25 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    edwardinflorida. he stated "no energy consumption". He didn't say "lower consumption". If you read the posts by shills for Tesla, you see continuous and purposeful misrepresentations of facts. Look at the other exchange I have on the forum, where 2 posters who apparently live in the cheapest electrical cost areas in the country are trying to equate their costs to that of other people in the country. I only ask that the information posted by Tesla and its cabal be accurate, nothing more.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:28 PM, drax7 wrote:

    EVs are the future. Tesla has a first mover advantage with a commanding lead. Their mkt is gigantic and disruptive. The market cap should exceed $100 billion when gen 3 takes off.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:34 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    cslobo, I see you continue to refuse to give us the math. Tell us, oh wise one, if inflation averaged 2% over the life of the loan, 3 years, what did that cost? Subtract that number from the "profit" you claimed was earned by the taxpayers and what have you got? The more you Tesla shills argue your bad math and mistaken facts, the more it seems Tesla is going to turn into another Solyndra.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:35 PM, cslobo wrote:

    @ace1g, the Camry may not have 500k sales but be assured Toyota as a whole has many times that. The article is talking total TeSLa sales as they introduce more models. High end cars like the Model S will never see that mark, true. Also, Li-ion is not lead acid. It's an ionic form of lithium at that. The conversion to EVs will likely be slow enough to give the grid time to adjust if needed but since the majority of charging is done off-peak, it won't be a concern for a long time.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 3:37 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    EdwardinFlorida. Since you're a "finance guy", how much value did the loan lose to inflation over the term of the loan? Subtract that from the "profit" claimed by Tesla and its fans. What number have you got? It seems among "finance guys" in Florida, there is a lack of "common sense".

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:03 PM, cslobo wrote:

    Jacklyndenise, You calls us shills over a $2.50 deviation from the average. Give me a break. I even went to the high end of cost and proved it comes out ahead. The math since you can't figure a thing out without being spoonfed: an 85kWh battery using national average 12 cent/kWh electricity.... 85 X $.12 = $10.20. Ckgod said $8, the liar!!! What a shill huh?

    And did you think they got a 0% interest loan?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:23 PM, jacklyndenise wrote:

    cslobo, either you're willing to deal with reality or not. ckgod's numbers were 30% off, whether its a penny or a billion, the error was 30%. You're claiming some 25% better mileage than Tesla advertises, why should I believe that after you've already admitted a 30% error is nothing. You're claiming a "taxpayer profit" but won't provide the math to support that claim. One cannot make a 30% error and simply fluff it off and expect people to believe your other statements. I've already shown the "profit" claim is a lie, because it does not factor in administrative costs, the value of money over time or even inflation. What is Tesla hiding that its fans are so willing to lie for it?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:26 PM, peteysa wrote:

    Tesla is doing crazy awesome with selling an all EV car that blows the doors off the hybrids from the big name car manufacturers. Thankfully Tesla was backed by big money to prevent the purchase of the company.

    We have a bright future if we can keep producing full-sized cars that are EV and 40mpg and get commercial vehicles onto Natural gas. Price of gasoline may stay higher than we like with exports rising, but that keeps Americans working while the industry adapts.

    Along with traditional power plants, more windmills and solar farms can help pick up the power grid demands. We need another person similar Mr. Tesla (cant remember his name) to get behind home power generation along with conservation and lower powered solutions for heating and cooling.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:41 PM, duuude1 wrote:

    Sheeesh jacklyndenise, I'd happily take your bet that Tesla will deliver in excess of 40k vehicles by the end of 2014.

    But - I'm not sure I want to have lunch with you even when you inevitably lose.

    There is something called "credibility" that some people earn after risking a forecast or promise in risky businesses - and then meeting them. Elon Musk's track record might not give him enough credibility (for me) to make the Hyperloop believable. But his track record is more than enough for me to judge his forecast of 40k Model S units per year by the end of 2014 as highly believable.

    So yes, I'll take his side over yours all day long.

    And I'll pass on the lunch, thanks.

    Duuude1

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:44 PM, FAWLTYTOWERS44 wrote:

    My advice as a 40 year investor is to short Tesla and wait for the reality storm to hit. The company will survive and prosper, but at a far more sober level of expectation.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:52 PM, phillipzx3 wrote:

    60% of the electrical energy on the west coast is produced via renewable sources. About 25% of California is via renewables (hydro, wind biomass) the rest is natural gas, no coal.

    The State of Washington over the last year, 8,800 GW from hydro, 255 GW, from NG, 255 GW from our one remaining nuclear plant and over 750 GW from our wind farms. Oregon is roughly the same.

    The places where these cars are being bought and used ( left west coast) has electricity that is, on average, ~60% renewable.

    This "coal" that you people keep yapping about, generates less than 45% of the nations electricity. Natural Gas has made coal obsolete. You can that the supporters of "fracking" for that. NG prices have dropped, while coal has stayed the same.

    Why build a coal plant, when you can build a (much) cleaner NG plant.

    Coal is dead. Get over it and move on. Natural Gas, Hydro, Wind, Solar and geothermal will supply all the electricity our hearts desire.

    As for gas; it takes (roughly) 7.5-12 kw of electricity (depending on who you ask) to produce ONE gallon of gas. With that same energy, you can move an EV down the road at 70 mph for 33 miles...assuming 300 watts per mile at 70 mph.

    Coal and the gasoline powered internal combustion engine are obsolete. Electric motors and bio-diesel powered vehicles are the way of the future. Audi has proven their diesel is capable of sending home the gas cars crying like school kids.

    These two transportation technologies (bio-fuel powered diesels and electric cars) will remove us from the need to ever start another stupid war for easy access, sweet crude oil.

    Love them or hate them, they're on the way. And no amount of crying over coal will stop it.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 4:57 PM, cslobo wrote:

    My god jacklyndenise, He was stating HIS PERSONAL electric rates. He didn't say they were the national average so there was no "error". Google the loan your own self to fulfill your he!! bent quest at proving an some kind if "loss". I'm sure we could spin this 1000 different ways to come up with whatever result you want. FACT is it's paid in full. Why don't you try to factually counter something that isn't trivial. 30% of $8 is trivial. Getting all in a wad when Someone states no energy usage at a stop when it is very little usage is trivial(enviros and computers use very, very little. Far less than an ICE). Don't ask me to find you proof, go find Tesla's energy usage charts yourself. I've done it, if you want to call their charts lies then we're done here. Then go look at the inefficiencies of an ICE. You don't know the first thing about this car nor the company so why are you trying to argue with your own facts? Go drive the car. It's free to do. You might understand what all the fuss is about.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:03 PM, Grendal007 wrote:

    And for those that are harping about "subsidies" and taxpayer money, Tesla receives NO taxpayer money. Tesla paid off its federal loan, with interest. The same cannot be said for Ford, GM, and Chrysler. Those that buy an electric car receive a tax credit. That means that you get to keep your hard earned money. That means that you aren't giving your money to the government to spend. When did that become a bad thing? Why are some of you fighting for giving the government more of your money? A tax credit is not a subsidy unless you think the government is entitled to your hard earned money.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:06 PM, FAWLTYTOWERS44 wrote:

    Phillipzx3's rant is at least amusing.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:13 PM, FAWLTYTOWERS44 wrote:

    Grendal007 is another amusing soul. She believes that tax credits are not subsidies. I suppose that the various tax credits (not tax deductions) received by oil companies and other major corporations are not subsidies either, which means that her radical enviro. associates are all wrong.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:13 PM, duuude1 wrote:

    Go phillipzx3!

    I'm particularly psyched by the technology being developed by this company here:

    http://www.jouleunlimited.com/

    "the times they are a changin' "

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:13 PM, cslobo wrote:

    @grendal007, according to Jacklyndenise we taxpayers lost out big time on Tesla's loan because of inflation, accountant salaries, and circus animals. I'm sure Tesla adding thousands of employees does nothing for increasing payroll tax income and reducing unemployment payments. No we can't factor those numbers or the multitudes of other benefits because that would go against her need for the loan to be viewed as a negative.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:22 PM, phillipzx3 wrote:

    "Easy. If Tesla is purely electric, then that would mean 20-30 new nuclear power station will need to be built across the US and billions spent on upgrading the US powergrid and installation of recharge points."

    Not true. The electricity needed to refine the gas for those 500,000 cars would no longer be wasted making gas. It could now be used to charge cars.

    And if you think it would take 20-30 nuclear power stations to charge 500,000 electric cars (with the Tesla's range) you know absolutely nothing of the EV's efficiency.

    I suggest you look on the website "Recargo.com" and you'll see where the charging stations are. In my neck of the woods (Portland, Oregon) you can't throw a rock without hitting one. We have EV's all over the place. Some doing 10 second 1/4 mile drag racing with 0-60 times of 1.8 seconds.

    It's the future. Deal with it.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:24 PM, phillipzx3 wrote:

    "Phillipzx3's rant is at least amusing."

    It might be an amusing rant, but it's a true amusing rant. ;-)

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:29 PM, tigerade wrote:

    I love rubbing salt on the wounds of fossil fuel zealots. The renewable energy/EV revolution is already under way and they are still clueless, and crying louder than ever. Please keep up with the rants, I am enjoying your grief. I will do everything possible to accelerate this transition to solar, wind, geothermal, natgas, energy efficency, and electric vehicles.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:31 PM, clutch1958 wrote:

    Pain at the pump will be replaced with pain at the meter. Those of us that can't afford electric cars, and still have to buy gas and pay higher electric rates are the ones that will suffer.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:50 PM, genefromeriepa wrote:

    Jacklyndenise,

    You asked about what the net cost is of the loan (the extra paid back vs administration and loan cost in terms of inflation), implying that there is a net loss. Not sure if you aren't seeing the big picture or just "anti-government/Obama. Since the government makes money on the workers (income taxes) then if you really want to find out the value of the loan, you have to factor in all the taxes paid from everyone employed at Tesla during that time as well. Tesla would have most likely gone under during that time without funding and during the financial crisis, credit wasn't easy to obtain, and if it would have gone under those workers not only wouldn't have been paying taxes, but most likely would have been recipients of governmental assistance.

    You have to look at the big picture here to really understand the value of these loans.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:52 PM, clutch1958 wrote:

    News flash, kkrimmer-the cost for both Iraq and Afghanistan barely hit $2 tyrillio0n.

    And your tired "Bush's war for Oil" is more liberal garbage.

    The Iraq war was to enforce UN Resolution 1440 against Saddam for kicking out the IAEA inspectors.

    So, do some research before you come off as a screeching parrot.

    BTW-almost all Senate Democrats and almost 140 countries agreed with Bush.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 5:53 PM, clutch1958 wrote:

    trillion.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 6:00 PM, clutch1958 wrote:

    I want to be around when three is standing in a puddle plugging in a wet power cord with 220 volts going to it.

    That comment about the wires going into the house don't short out in the rain had to be part of a comedy routine.

    I don't plug and unplug my house on a daily basis.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 6:03 PM, clutch1958 wrote:

    And there's no way I'm going to drive an expensive car like this in snow and ice.

    I see enough slide offs and accidents every winter.

    I'm not going to risk it by getting nailed when a car slides through a stop sign and T-bones me.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 6:10 PM, clutch1958 wrote:

    And-when you can drive a Tesla 1100 miles in 22 hours, call me. Until then-enjoy your new technology. Just don't treat us like dirt because we don't want it.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 6:22 PM, kholmann wrote:

    The problem with electric cars is that darn battery. I suggest that service stations all carry a standard sized battery that all cars will be equipped with. If you are low on charge or, for some reason can't charge your battery, them just drive down to the nearest station and do a quick exchange. If all batteries are are the same size a QCB (quick change battery) could be done in less time than it takes to get a tank of gas. The station master will sell you a fully charged battery for the price of the charge. (exchange of course) Your old battery will be charged and ready for the next customer. The service station would have to have several batteries on hand but that is no worse than having several hundred thousand gallons of gasoline standing by. (Just an idea)

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 6:26 PM, rotorhead1871 wrote:

    ROFL.......there isnt enough battery production for any impact....and there isnt enough electrical generation/infrastructure to support the 500K vaporware electrics you speak of....

    ROFL..........................

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 7:56 PM, Grendal007 wrote:

    Wow. The amount of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt being created over electric cars. Wow. Fear that the price of electricity will go up. Do you really have an control over the price of oil? Hasn't it gone up quite a bit during your life? Electricity comes from a lot of sources. It's possible to put solar panels on your roof (what I'm planning on doing) and you will not have to pay a cent no matter how much the electric company raises its rate. Uncertainty over recharging time and where to find a charge. Tesla has had their car out for one year and they've already shortened the charge time to 100 miles for 10 minutes of time. And for those that are really scared they showed you can do a battery swap in half the time it takes to fill your tank. And lastly doubt about the life of a battery pack, and Tesla gives you a lifetime guarantee on your pack.

    Fear! Uncertainty! Doubt!!

    Change is frightening. But don't be too afraid. The reality is that no one is telling you that you have to buy this or any electric car. The gas car will be around for many many years to come. If an electric car scares you then stick with your gas car and keep shelling out that green stuff at the pump. The oil companies will continue to enjoy your payment and are very happy that you are fighting for them and spreading your FUD.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 8:00 PM, dannystrong wrote:

    A half-a-million Teslas would cause the electrical generation infrastructure to collapse. Waving your hands and announcing that solar power would do everything, while simultaneously telling people they have to charge their vehicles at home (after work, at night, with no solar power -- and, if you drive too far, at work as well) is really just expecting power generation and distribution to grow by about 30 percent at the wave of a magic wand. Ain't gonna happen. (And let's not ever go to the battery problem(s), because batteries are the silliest thing to base any propulsion system on since the horse.)

    Well, it might be possible to grow the infrastructure, if nuclear power were allowed to grow by the same people who will no doubt eagerly by teslas to replace their priuses -- who campaign so zealously (and alas, effectively) to destroy it.

    As "South Park" said, the real problem with pollution is excess "smug".

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 8:29 PM, naterstg wrote:

    Addressing electrical consumption: in the US total electrical consumption in 2009 was around 25,155 TWh (according to Wikipedia). If there was 500k 85KWh batteries (same type used in Tesla's Model S) and they were all charged from empty once a week the total consumption would be about 2,210 TWh/year or in other words an increase of 8.8%. Interestingly total consumption is down from the peak in 2004 by about that much indicating we should be able match the increase in consumption.

    That doesn't seem like too much to worry about. Keep in mind that the first 500k cars will be sold all over the world not just in the US and over the next 4 to 5 years.

    I'm no expert though, and I can only assume Wikipedia is accurate, but some of the fear mongering going on is irresponsible.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 9:07 PM, speculawyer wrote:

    Let me handle a few EV myths.

    1) Automotive Li-Ions are not very toxic. The CEO of BYD even drank his automotive Li-Ion's electrolyte to prove it. It depends on the chemistry. The Tesla battery is slightly toxic due to Cobalt but the batteries will be recycled anyway.

    2) Your electricity bill will NOT go up as much as your gas bill goes down. EVs are VERY efficient and cost pennies per mile to drive. Look it up at fueleconomy.gov or edmunds calculator.

    3) They are not 'coal-powered cars'. Coal only makes up 40% of the grid. In the places where EVs sell well like the west coast there is almost zero coal generated electricity. The electricity grid gets cleaner every year with more wind and solar whereas the gasoline is getting dirtier every year because we are switching from conventional crude to more dirty tar-sands and fracked shale oil.

    4) EVs will not require lots of new power plants. The DoE already had the PNNL lab study this. We could add some 70 million EVs without a single new power plant as long as we charge them at night . . . you know when people are sleeping and thus not driving their cars!

    5) There is not a lack of charging infrastructure. The only charger that you really need is the one at your home. If you have a short commute, an ordinary 120V outlet will do just fine. But 240V EVSE is desirable and it will cost about $1000 to pay for it and get it installed. It will then work for decades.

    But what do I know? I've only been driving an EV for more than a year and I'm now installing a solar PV system on my roof so I won't ever have to pay for home electricity or gasoline again. It feels real good to never have to worry about gasoline price increases or even electricity price increases (which are less volatile) again. I've got my transport fuel for the next 25 years already paid for. Try that with your gas car.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 9:09 PM, speculawyer wrote:

    Dannystrong . . . you really have no idea what you are talking about. Go read the paper "IMPACTS ASSESSMENT OF PLUG-IN HYBRID VEHICLES ON ELECTRIC UTILITIES AND REGIONAL U.S. POWER GRIDS PART 1: TECHNICAL ANALYSIS"

    Science . . . it works. B!tches.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 9:12 PM, tigerade wrote:

    Speculawyer - THANK YOU. That sums it up pretty much. EV's are the future. Nothing the oil propagandists can do about it at this point other than get angry and promote misinformation.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 9:55 PM, GDPerks wrote:

    The 500,000 car sales would be spread worldwide. They wouldn't all impact the USA's grid. Nor does it make sense to compare the 500,000 number to US-only Camry sales.

    A Model S uses about a dollar a day in fuel costs (my personal experience). A dollar a day on your home electric bill isn't much - an AC unit costs far more.

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 10:55 PM, woodgoat wrote:

    Man, this is great for the coal industry! I worried coal was dead in the U.S., but these coal-powered cars have come to the rescue! (That is, after all, how most electricity is generated.)

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:33 PM, abbagguya wrote:

    A Tesla S probably does not need to be recharged every night. Anyone know how often, and when the frequency is factored in, what is the true load on the grid per day?

  • Report this Comment On August 18, 2013, at 11:44 PM, proseiden wrote:

    In order for that to happen, they will require charging. An extra nuke plant would need to come on line. The best way....like the locomotive manufacturers, diesel-electrics. No Batteries required and the engine never has to rev very high.

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 12:19 AM, ckraider118 wrote:

    @jacklyndenise Did you just set up a Fool username just to post negative comments on Tesla?

    Just put your money where your mouth is and short the company.

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 12:28 AM, MotleyFoolStinks wrote:

    I think I'll still keep my fossil fuel investments. If tesla ever gets to the point they don't have to rely on gov subsidies they might do okay. Even solar still relies on gov subsidies, and lately it hasn't been doing so hot.

    BTW, fossil fuels is are least a magnitude ahead of batteries in energy density. So there's still a long ways to go, but it's interesting to see this.

    My credentials: designer of solar equipment and electric vehicles

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 1:35 AM, CrazyDocAl wrote:

    How many cars have they sold that are not sitting in a garage sitting on million dollar property that only get used as a status symbol?

    Anyone else read how hybrid cars are actually better for the environment than EVs? Turns out once you add in all the impacts of building them and where the power comes from it's actually better for the planet to own a hybrid in 37 states.

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 2:22 AM, mmgonline wrote:

    You know, to the idiots who keep asking the question of how much it energy will be wasted making energy....

    If you do not understand common sense at that.. idk what to tell you...

    First off, you take a power plant, making power.... than delivering it to the car....

    Second off, you take the power plant, send power to a refinery, that uses the power to refine gasoline, then gets to your car...

    So to answer the common sense question..

    IT STILL TAKES LESS ENERGY CREATED TO RUN ELECTRIC CARS. BECAUSE YOU ARE USING LESS NOT REFINING GASOLINE.

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 10:25 AM, Grendal007 wrote:

    Since some don't seem to get it. Tesla receives NO government money. Tesla receives NO government subsidies.

    A tax credit is not a subsidy. Do you think your children are government subsidies? You receive a tax credit for your children. Is your mortgage a government subsidy? You receive a tax credit for your mortgage. You receive a tax credit for buying an electric car.

    For those being programmed by what they listen to:

    1. Your employer pays you money for your work.

    2. The government has your employer take money out of your pay and give it to them.

    3. At tax time you list off things that will allow some of your money to come back to you, if you're lucky.

    Unless you believe the government is entitled to the money you earned then a tax credit is NOT a subsidy.

    Is the government promoting the technology? Of course. Why? Because it is in America's best interest to reduce our consumption of oil. I won't go into detail about that since it is fairly obvious.

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 11:23 AM, TMFMarlowe wrote:

    A little perspective: Through July, just in the United States, Ford sold 427,935 of its full-sized F-Series pickup trucks. GM sold a similar amount.

    500,000 Teslas worldwide is really not a lot of vehicles in the grand scheme of things. Let's not declare the world saved from the evils of internal combustion quite yet.

    John Rosevear

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 7:36 PM, borlock wrote:

    "How about 'pain at the electric bill' every month?? Do you think keeping the Tesla charged up at home is cheap?? "

    Yes... my car fuel bill dropped from $400 per/month to $50 per/month. I'd call that cheap.

    If you don't want to be subject to Sacramento influence over electricity prices, give a call to SolarCity. Doesn't cost you anything upfront and you'll pay 15c per kWh for all time - no matter what happens to your local electric rates.

    "Man, this is great for the coal industry! I worried coal was dead in the U.S., but these coal-powered cars have come to the rescue! (That is, after all, how most electricity is generated.)"

    So? Fine, let's pretend I'm using 100% coal (I am on 100% renewals by the way in WA state), but let's pretend... So then my car is only getting the equivalent of 89 mpg equivalence in terms of cost & pollution. Ohhh... that's so terrible. NOT.

    I'll take your coal power plant any day over a 25mpg gasoline car! Heck, I'd take it over a 50mpg Prius!

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 7:52 PM, borlock wrote:

    "The number 1 car sold in the US is the Camry and it doesn't even have sales of 500,000 units. I love Telsa, but at some point these stories need to have some reality in them."

    You know those pictures that you walk by sometimes that's mostly blue on them but with a few blobs of green and brown on them, and some more white blobs at the top and bottom? Yeah, that's called a world map.

    I know you've seen a map of the U.S with 50 states, and you watch some sporting events called a "world series" so you may be confused that that is the entire world, but it really isn't.

    And (I'm afraid that you may have to sit down for this), actually most of the economic activity in the world, happens OUTSIDE the 50 states.

    So I'm sorry to burst you bubble - I hope it didn't hurt much. But the sooner you realize that there are things outside of the U.S. the better it would be for you in the long run.

    The Ford Focus is the single best selling car in the world, and sells more than a million units per year.

    The closest current competitor (price/performance) to the Gen III Tesla is the BMW 3 series, which currently sells about 500'000 units per year worldwide. This is a makeable target considering the Tesla will cost on average about $20'000 less to operate over its lifetime compared to the BMW.

  • Report this Comment On August 19, 2013, at 8:16 PM, borlock wrote:

    "And-when you can drive a Tesla 1100 miles in 22 hours, call me. Until then-enjoy your new technology. Just don't treat us like dirt because we don't want it."

    Challenge accepted! What is your phone number?

    But seriously, you do have a totally valid question there. There isn't enough SuperChargers yet to span a 1100 mile distance. That should be fixed within a year, but it's not there yet. So yes, we still need to call you.

    Once available, averaging 55mph across the SuperChargers is real easy (drive 65mph for 2 hours, stop 20 mins, etc.). That gives you 1100 miles in 20 hours. However, so far you can only do it in a few places.

    However, watch the BC2BC rally next year around this time. A group of us fully intend to enter and drive the entire West Coast I5 (1381 miles) from Canada to Mexico in 24 hours. It's totally doable - would be even MORE doable if you don't have to contend with Oregon drivers, but alas.

  • Report this Comment On August 20, 2013, at 3:06 PM, MrBoylan wrote:

    @MizSchmidlap - "Just make one as safe as my Volvo and I'm there!" - wish granted. http://www.safercar.gov/Vehicle+Shoppers/5-Star+Safety+Ratin...

  • Report this Comment On August 24, 2013, at 1:03 PM, SkepikI wrote:

    <suggest you look on the website "Recargo.com" and you'll see where the charging stations are. In my neck of the woods (Portland, Oregon) you can't throw a rock without hitting one.>

    I live in the same neck of the woods and I CAN throw a rock without hitting a charging station. If you are "Portland-centric" you stand a great chance of finding a charging station.

    If you live in Carlton, Gaston, Burns, Drewsey or Fields... well, your wonderful electric car will be out of luck. Same goes for Seeley Lake MT, Benton City WA and a thousand other places I'd rather travel to than Porkland.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2599530, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/23/2014 4:34:41 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement