-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I don't see why Tesla would pass that on for a vehicle they are selling themselves. They can make whatever contract they want when selling a CPO car which I doubt will included free unlimited charging.
It's different if you're buying from a private party because you're buying their contract and if it doesn't state "original owner" or something like that, then if Tesla tried to remove that option after they discovered that the car traded hands privately, it would be removing a feature of the vehicle that was paid for by the previous owner.
Tesla can do anything that want with CPO cars including adding unlimited supercharging to cars that didn't previously have it like the first S60. Heck, they can even turn an 85 into a P85 with a software update just so they can sell it for more.
As I keep pointing out, a number of you are posting links to articles you clearly haven't actually read. Yes, it's very clear that the PV industry as a whole is now net energy positive. Which says little or nothing about whether any individual panel or installation is. Put a panel on a fixed mount in the shade, and of course it's a loser. Or are you going to suggest that keeping a solar panel in a dark closet has some kind of magical energy-generating properties too?
The article you quote below is not on this point, but it also is not a peer-reviewed article and (unsurprisingly) is far more equivocal than you suggest. Did you read it? Carefully?
Dispute it? It disputes itself! Here is a quote from the fourth paragraph:
"Purifying and crystallizing the silicon are the most energy-intensive parts of the solar-cell manufacturing process."
Here is a quote from the sixth paragraph, the one discussing that bar chart you attached:
"To calculate payback, Dutch researcher Alsema reviewed previous energy analyses and did not include the energy that originally went into crystallizing microelectronics scrap."
In other words, that bar chart is a fantasy: it represents how good PV could be if only in the real world one could omit "the most energy-intensive part" of the manufacturing process!
But that's hardly the issue, is it? As the article itself says in the third (italicized) paragraph, "Based on models and real data, the idea that PV cannot pay back its energy investment is simply a myth." Of course that is right. Many papers, some cited here, clearly establish that fact. However, it goes absolutely nowhere to establish that some particular PV installation does pay back its energy investment; certainly not that every PV installation necessarily pays back its energy investment, which seems to be what you're arguing.
It's not black and white. Why do you have such a problem with grey?
:roll eyes: Yes, I'm sure there are companies chomping at the bit to build a network of fast chargers for free.
ToddRLockwood
Active Member
I think this is a good move for Tesla. The charging revenue will enable them to build many more Supercharger stations. This will be particularly important when the Model 3 hits the road.
Another big-picture benefit of this change is that it will encourage other companies to get into the high-speed vehicle charging business—a missing piece for buyers of other brands of electric cars. From the beginning, Tesla’s mission has been to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy and transportation, and they know it will take more than one company to accomplish that. Tesla will be better off as a small piece of a very large pie, than a big piece of a very small one.
Another big-picture benefit of this change is that it will encourage other companies to get into the high-speed vehicle charging business—a missing piece for buyers of other brands of electric cars. From the beginning, Tesla’s mission has been to accelerate the transition to sustainable energy and transportation, and they know it will take more than one company to accomplish that. Tesla will be better off as a small piece of a very large pie, than a big piece of a very small one.
Mihai
Member
1000miles a yer is peanuts.
I live in Europe and have to travel on bi-wekley basis one way 500km, I am never going to make that without superchargers.
I live in Europe and have to travel on bi-wekley basis one way 500km, I am never going to make that without superchargers.
A thought. The 400kWh/year still adds up. Especially if it stays with (comes back to) the car after resale.
How long would an average Tesla chassis+drivetrain live before being scrapped? If you take 15 years, 6000kWh could become a significant amount when power ceases to be abundant. Especially looking at commercial on the fast road side chargers rather than the slow home outlets. I now feel the cars don't really need a price adjustment. Tesla is an established car maker with favorable reputation. Buying a 2017 Tesla is not the same commitment as doing so in 2012. Not even a new fully loaded one vs a base 2012 one.
How long would an average Tesla chassis+drivetrain live before being scrapped? If you take 15 years, 6000kWh could become a significant amount when power ceases to be abundant. Especially looking at commercial on the fast road side chargers rather than the slow home outlets. I now feel the cars don't really need a price adjustment. Tesla is an established car maker with favorable reputation. Buying a 2017 Tesla is not the same commitment as doing so in 2012. Not even a new fully loaded one vs a base 2012 one.
That's not quite true. The P cars have different hardware including motors and battery interface. That's a hardware upgrade, if Tesla were willing to bill and perform it. Unlimited supercharging though, is simply a matter or black or whitelisting the car within their internal database and can be done within software at their end, no different from a cellphone unlock.
Nope, they can update an 85 to a P85. It's not different hardware or motors. It's software.
If I remember correctly (and if not, please someone correct me) wk057 (here on TMC) has taken out a 60kwh battery out of a car, put in an 85kwh battery and through software enabled the 85 to be a P85. So if you start with an 85, a software flip of the switch gets you a P85.
Nope. Same motor. Same battery. It's already been done. Just ask wk057. Even the first S60 has the same motor but that would require a battery upgrade.
Perhaps you're confusing the D cars which do have a smaller rear motor than the S85 and P85.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I remember that discussion, but if I recall correctly the 85 and P85 have different inverter part numbers. It's unknown if doing the software switch will run the 60/85 inverter beyond the specified power (which it likely tolerates as there is likely some headroom, but it might wear faster). I don't believe the inverters were ever dissected to see if there are any actual physical differences.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Tesla said early on that motors/batteries are exactly the same, but the inverter was different. I don't believe the inverter was taken apart to see if it was actually different (esp. across generations, as they might have switched to a uniform inverter later on). I believe there was only speculation that they stuck a different part number on it, but inside it's the same.
I thought the part numbers for the DU's were the same. Are they in fact different??
hmmm
Member
I think someone mentioned it on this thread many pages ago, but I think it would have been nice to use some sort of geofencing,, ie SC access is free if you're more than n miles from your home/garage/whatever, with n being high enough to deter local/abuse charging.
I am looking at this purely from a consumer perspective though, I am all for Tesla generating $$ to keep on expanding the SC charger network.
I am looking at this purely from a consumer perspective though, I am all for Tesla generating $$ to keep on expanding the SC charger network.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Part numbers are different. That's why if you have a Performance model it takes longer to order. The ones for the Performance model have "sport" in the description:
Prekių katalogas - Partiki
There was speculation this was all a farce (only difference being the sticker), but then Tesla's service procedures does not allow a non-sport drivetrain to be installed into a P model.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Yes, I remember reading it performs the same after applying the same software, but that doesn't necessarily tell you if the parts are the same inside (the difference may not be found out easily, for example one unit might wear out more quickly because it has less headroom, but you won't find out until years, maybe a decade later).
Similar threads
