Wrong! "Such a battery does not yet exist." Is just flagrantly Wrong. No qualifiers, exclusions, whatever, no matter how you parse it out, such a battery very much DOES exist. Sorry, ecar. I read a lot of the NYT too. This is terrible and stupid.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
NYTimes blunders again... columnist says 200-300 mile EV battery nonexistant
- Thread starter anticitizen13.7
- Start date
-
- Tags
- News
Wrong! "Such a battery does not yet exist." Is just flagrantly Wrong. No qualifiers, exclusions, whatever, no matter how you parse it out, such a battery very much DOES exist. Sorry, ecar. I read a lot of the NYT too. This is terrible and stupid.
It is true that the Roadster battery had the 200-300 mile capacity. It did prove that lots of LiIon batteries in an array of modules would work.
But I consider the Model S battery to be the ultimate proof of concept viability, because this battery proved that the large skateboard configuration worked, and worked well. It resulted in a car with lots of interior space -- a car that could be useful to almost anyone. Roadster battery was the wrong shape for a mass market car due to packaging geometry. Roadster was a niche car and not practical for people with kids or people needing to haul stuff around.
Similar stuff happened with coverage of the NYC doctor who contracted Ebola while working for MSF. When all the drama was going on about how he had taken the subway and gone bowling, mass media outlets got facts wrong left and right (one news organization said he had a fever of 103, when it was really 100.3, another claimed he was bothering his medical staff with a guitar, when the medical staff had given him the instrument to play while in isolation). The doctor was pretty angry at media treatment.
I generally observe that public media (like NPR and BBC) are less apt to get it wrong than for-profit outlets that have incentive to sensationalize and inflame.
bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
Regardless, a car with a 200+ mile battery has been delivered for approximately eight years, not three. Doesn't matter if you consider the Roadster a niche car or not, it still counts - the reality is that the battery has not been a fantasy.
It was Mr. Nocera's contention that a 200-300 mile battery would transform EVs from niche vehicles to the mainstream. There are 2 factors he's looking for (1) Does the battery have enough capacity for a 200-300 mile range? and (2) will this battery work in a mainstream car?
The Roadster only proved (1): that a long-range EV was possible. It didn't IMO prove the second part of that contention: that a battery powertrain could be used by the mainstream. That's why the niche vehicle issue is relevant. A Model S is for general purposes a car that can meet far more variety of needs than a Roadster. It's not just the capacity of the battery. It's the form factor (skateboard enabling great interior space), and Supercharging too. Fast DC charging makes family road trips possible in an EV. A Model S will work for most people's everyday needs.
Hope that makes my reasoning more clear. I give the Roadster credit for what it proved: a big battery made of many cells could work. It wasn't however the complete solution that the Model S battery is. Edit: Roadster folks had a lot more faith and foresight than I did. I wasn't sold on EVs at all -- until Tesla showed the Model S concept. That's when I thought, "this is really going to work".
Last edited:
An article entitled "Lurching Start for Tesla in China" just appeared on the New York Times website, stating China deliveries of only 3,500. This is before the Q4 '14 earnings release and before any official numbers are out. The article is going to appear in the print edition tomorrow (Feb 11, 2015):
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/b...-seeks-a-stronger-foothold-in-china.html?_r=0
Once or twice might be a coincidence. Three times?
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
Talk about the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing...here's an excerpt from tomorrow's article. Perhaps someone should show it to Mr. Nocera:
--
In addition to building more Supercharger stations, Tesla plans to deliver to China high-power wall chargers for home use in the first half of this year. These will reduce the time it takes to achieve a full charge — which lasts 310 miles — to five hours, from 10.
--
mknox
Well-Known Member
That sounds like a Chinese electric grid-compatible HPWC. Good news!
So NYT Tesla coverage isn't all bad. ;-)
bluenation
Member
this is the same paper that refused to apologize for the Broder scandal, the editor in chief basically was all "let's agree to disagree hee hee"
NYT still pushes great long pieces, but like forbes, it has some truly hilarious opinion writers
NYT still pushes great long pieces, but like forbes, it has some truly hilarious opinion writers
tdelta1000
Active Member
The desire for Tesla Motors to fail is systemic. The fear of a new company changing the age old game strikes so most fear.
William13
Active Member
I just read the article, then the comments. Currently NYT has 15 picks. These are from all 300 comments. Initially it look appropriate, then I noticed they had chosen to do the "fair and balanced" approach. This meant one or two pro Tesla comments followed by every different bit of FUD out there. This is similar to global warming discussions where the 95% and the 5% get equal air time.
Fail NYT.
Fail NYT.
InTheShadows
Active Member
Does that mean they filter the comments?
I skimmed through the comments and left the page feeling that the world is oblivious to Tesla. That not many people even know they exist. My feeling after I read the article was that 70% of the comments would be asking "what about Tesla?"
The cool thing is that most of the challenges he brings up have already been addressed by Tesla.
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Would I be paranoid to think that dark money such as the Kochs or Heartland Institue somehow, indirectly, are funding NYT's bias?
Does that mean they filter the comments?
I skimmed through the comments and left the page feeling that the world is oblivious to Tesla. That not many people even know they exist. My feeling after I read the article was that 70% of the comments would be asking "what about Tesla?"
The cool thing is that most of the challenges he brings up have already been addressed by Tesla.
The NYT actually closed the comment section on that article last night. I think they were getting too many hits and posts making them look bad.
artsci
Sponsor
The worst thing for them is to look bad and it shows in the comments they select for publication. Saving face, not objectivity, is the goal.
If you read the automobile section on a regular basis it would quite apparent that they are addicted to fossil fuel powered cars. In fact, one would conclude that they're junkies. Probably it's advertising revenue driving the editorial, which of course they deny.
Nothing is impossible, but I'd say this is unlikely. Most conservatives I know have a seething hatred of the New York Times because they perceive it as a liberal megaphone.
The author is very aware that Tesla exists and has batteries that meet the criteria described.
Talking Business - Costly Toys, or a New Era for Drivers? - NYTimes.com
On the Electric Car’s Future - NYTimes.com
Pace Joe Nocera Apple's Irish Tax Breaks Do Have A Value - Forbes
Log In - The New York Times
Talking Business - Costly Toys, or a New Era for Drivers? - NYTimes.com
On the Electric Car’s Future - NYTimes.com
Pace Joe Nocera Apple's Irish Tax Breaks Do Have A Value - Forbes
Log In - The New York Times
Similar threads
