Anti-Tesla Gibberish

[texex91]

Thanks for another example. I searched Google and there are a ton of articles on it. I really have no idea what that guy was talking about......

They hear what they want to hear.

I was talking with a friend of 24 years--huge car guy, and he was complaining about everything Tesla.

Just the more education we can do the better.

A simple test drive normally shuts them up.

 

[JRP3]

A bunch of negative articles came out today, seems like a bit of a pile on:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...y-california-new-car-dealers-association.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/bmw-...sla-s-competition-etIHqmyoQqyxGtteqmYyPw.html
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1695692-teslas-current-market-price-is-very-much-exaggerated
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323981304579079492902482638.html

 

[texex91]

A bunch of negative articles came out today, seems like a bit of a pile on:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...y-california-new-car-dealers-association.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/bmw-...sla-s-competition-etIHqmyoQqyxGtteqmYyPw.html
http://seekingalpha.com/article/1695692-teslas-current-market-price-is-very-much-exaggerated
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323981304579079492902482638.html

That's a good thing--running scared. Any news is good news.

Dealers are just scared.

Other manufacturers--scared. They say by 2018, blah, blah, blah--no plan in place to execute.

They have to say something to appease shareholders concerned Tesla is kicking their a**

 

[PhilBa]

I think it's actually good that other manufacturers are saying they will compete on Tesla's playing field. The more serious EVs (serious = 200+ mile range with decent performance) to choose from the better. If they are blowing smoke, they are doomed. If they aren't it's good for the electric economy and the environment. Either way, Tesla wins with a solid 5 year head start. Not only that but saying they are going to compete means that they see EVs as viable and are telling the consumers that EVs are respectable choices. This glass is more than half full.

 

[PeterK]

I think it's actually good that other manufacturers are saying they will compete on Tesla's playing field. The more serious EVs (serious = 200+ mile range with decent performance) to choose from the better. If they are blowing smoke, they are doomed. If they aren't it's good for the electric economy and the environment. Either way, Tesla wins with a solid 5 year head start. Not only that but saying they are going to compete means that they see EVs as viable and are telling the consumers that EVs are respectable choices. This glass is more than half full.

Exactly, all this noise from BMW and Audi in Frankfurt will just raise awareness and validate the EV concept - and once high-end buyers are aware, they will look around and see that the Model S is the only real choice if you're not interested in a hybrid or city car. More free advertising...

 

[Grendal]

I don't see anyone beating Tesla to the Gen III/Model E car. No one beat Tesla to the Model S and no one is on track to have something out anywhere near the 2017 time frame. The only compelling vehicles the mainstream manufacturers seem to be capable of building are hybrids. The only car that has a chance of taking even a couple sales (I'd predict less than 100 total yearly sales) from Tesla is the Cadillac ELR. The i3 and the i8 aren't going to touch Tesla in any way. Journalists are just trying hard to create some form of controversy so they can feel useful.

 

[SwedishAdvocate]

Bloomberg really is kind of a mixed bag isn't it?

Tesla Not Much Greener Than a Modern Car: Klein: Video - Bloomberg

Nov. 12 (Bloomberg) -- In today’s “This Matters Now,” Bloomberg View columnist Matthew C. Klein talks with Tom Keene about just how green Tesla’s electric vehicles are compared to offerings from other car manufacturers. Speaks on Bloomberg Television’s “Bloomberg Surveillance.”

This clip has one comment on their site:

WeaponZero • a day ago

He needs to go back to school. First of all, Tesla is more environmentally friendly then a conventional car, especially since the states where most of them are bought have much cleaner grids than most of the US. On top of that California has some of the strictest environmental guidelines.

Second of all, California is not adding provisions for hydrogen. Hydrogen was always there from day 1.

And 3rd of all, Hydrogen cars are in fact also electric cars.

 

[PokerBroker]

It's not Tesla's fault that everyone else in the chain sucks... They can't change the infrastructure. But not giving them credit is just absurd, someone has to step up and change things for the better or things never will.

 

[jeff_adams]

It's not Tesla's fault that everyone else in the chain sucks... They can't change the infrastructure. But not giving them credit is just absurd, someone has to step up and change things for the better or things never will.

There are those who greatly profit from the "status quo". They do not wish for change and will actively fight very hard against it. Lying, cheating (and worse) are simply a way to maintain their comfortable existence.

The revolution will be bloody for Tesla, make no mistake about it. I believe Elon and company are up for the task.

 

[JRP3]

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...rs-dirty-little-secret-is-a-major-proble.aspx

Some TMC members have been trying to counter the FUD in the comment section.

 

[GSP]

http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...rs-dirty-little-secret-is-a-major-proble.aspx

Some TMC members have been trying to counter the FUD in the comment section.

So many ignorant comments after that article. The author responds as well (TMFKSpence) and does admit the EVs are better than ICEs. She seem fixated on environmental impact of mining, forgetting that all goods, not just Teslas, require raw materials from mines.

GSP

 

[Discoducky]

At one point she mentions that her husband is a scientist. Wonder who employs him? Also, had to go back a ways, but found an article that says she bet on gas right before TSLA stock went up: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/01/18/time-to-bet-against-obamas-evs.aspx

and the history of her articles is a telling story since, which you don't need to click on, just read the title:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/11/is-this-the-next-big-thing-in-green-energy.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/06/25/is-teslas-battery-running-out-of-charge.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/06/29/why-couldnt-tesla-just-swap-batteries.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/gener...electric-car-just-became-a-major-problem.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/08/24/is-teslas-model-s-bad-for-climate-change.aspx

The smithy commenter is priceless BTW

 

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Is Katie Spence a pseudonym for John Petersen?!

 

[JRP3]

Is Katie Spence a pseudonym for John Petersen?!

I had the same thought. :biggrin:

 

[techmaven]

Ms. Spence, in the comments of that article, point to the EPA study for which she based her commentary:

http://www.epa.gov/dfe/pubs/projects/lbnp/final-li-ion-battery-lca-report.pdf

In that report, we find:

Through the manufacturers, suppliers, and recyclers in the partnership, primary data were obtained for thecomponent manufacture, product manufacture, and EOL stages. Secondary data, needed to supplementdata gaps and protect confidential data, were primarily obtained from the following studies:

• * Contribution of Li-ion Batteries to the Environmental Impact of Electric Vehicles (Notter et al,2010).
  
• * Life-Cycle Environmental Assessment of Lithium-Ion and Nickel Metal Hydride Batteries forPlug-in Hybrid and Battery Electric Vehicles (Majeau-Bettez et al., 2011).
  
• * Comparative Environmental Life-Cycle Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles(Hawkins et al., under review).
  

Ah, the gift that keeps on giving for EV opponents.

Again, from the EPA paper:

Upstream data for the materials used in the Li-ion battery cell and pack were only obtained fromsecondary data sources

So in other words, EPA's researchers here depended on complete garbage as inputs to their paper. They also use an Argonne National Labs paper that is also completely wrong, which is understandable since they were mostly guessing by averaging data that is over a decade old.

This stuff makes some sense in some ways, but not when you then turn around and apply it to Tesla. At that point, you then need to track down the actual data for Tesla's production, specifically the environmental impacts of Panasonic's specific production in Osaka, Japan, not averaging in some European numbers from 10-15 years ago. Matter of fact, the limited information we had from Sanyo's numbers (Panasonic bought Sanyo) on several scales was several times smaller than the European numbers. Again, a careful reading of the Argonne National Labs report would reveal that.

Obviously, someone has to start somewhere with the analysis. It is just unfortunate that some dramatic errors in several key papers keeps coming up over and over again and then lay people then take it all the wrong way.

 

[Lloyd]

Somebody should point them to Tesla's closed loop recycling program!!

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/teslas-closed-loop-battery-recycling-program

 

[Dutchie]

Wow, came across this one This chart says Tesla is cheap | Talking Numbers - Yahoo Finance

This dude on the right hand top side, still maintains that Tesla does not work because the battery technology is not there and he also says that Tesla has a reliability issue.....

 

[Reykjavik]

Pointing to the CO2 emissions during production of an EV is bullshit, and here is why: production is also only as clean as the grid.

Producing things requires energy, and producing batteries takes more energy than producing an ICE, but if the energy to produce them comes from clean sources, both are clean in terms of CO2. There are other impacts, including the impacts of mining (which produces CO2 if the mining equipment burns fuel), and potentially water and air contamination from the production facility, but a an EV plant powered by solar is cleaner than a ICE plant powered by coal.

And even with the current grid, EVs are better. If you have one of the dirtiest grids in the country, it is slightly better to have a hybrid with a small battery, or a highly efficient diesel, but only if you assume that the gird won't get cleaner over the life of the car. But if you have a clean grid, or even the national average, the best car for the environment is a BEV. A Leaf may be better than a Tesla because of battery size and other factors, but the Tesla is better than a dinosaur burner. To top that off, I'm not sure if the analysis I was looking at took into account the energy cost of refining gas.

 

[jerry33]

To top that off, I'm not sure if the analysis I was looking at took into account the energy cost of refining gas.

And for sure it didn't take into account the after-car-use of the battery. Only about 50% of the CO2 used in producing the battery should be associated with the car. I'm also not so sure about the "more energy to make a battery than an ICE". That automatic transmission takes a lot of energy to create all the parts.

 

[Robert.Boston]

Also, the CO2/MWh in California is much lower than in Detroit, Kentucky, South Carolina, Germany, or Japan. CA has closed all its coal plants and relies on a much higher fraction of renewables plus nat gas than other car manufacturing centers.