Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Short-Term TSLA Price Movements - 2014

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Status
Not open for further replies.

NHTSA Still Studying Tesla Fires, Departing Administrator Says

Strength of Lower Shielding on Model S Questioned After Two Fires

Mike Ramsey
connect

Jan. 10, 2014 5:22 p.m. ET
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration continues to study Tesla Motors Inc.'s Model S on whether the shielding underneath the vehicle is strong enough after two vehicles in October burned after running over road debris.
David Strickland, the departing NHTSA administrator David Strickland, in an interview Friday, said "Tesla has been very helpful in providing information" and that the investigation continues.
Tesla Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk has said the vehicle is safe, but took action to cover any fire damage under the vehicle warranty and is installing software that raises the vehicle at highway speeds to avoid similar accidents.
In both cases, the driver of the vehicle had time to park the car and get out before the fire spread to the rest of the vehicle.
In separate news, Tesla is attempting to remedy problems with in-home chargers that could overheat. Tesla says poor wiring could cause overheating and in December sent an over-the-air software update to address the problem. The company said Friday it was sending owners a new wall charging adapter with a thermal fuse over the next few weeks to fully correct any issue.


April 20, 2010 - An explosion occurs on board the BP-contracted Transocean Ltd. Deepwater Horizon oil rig, spilling approximately 210 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico.

September 2, 2010
Venable and Jones Walker deliver another deepwater drilling win for Hornbeck Offshore Services

Venable partner John Cooney, along with co-counsel from Louisiana-based firm Jones Walker, secured a favorable decision for their client, Hornbeck Offshore Services, in U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Louisiana when Judge Martin Feldman refused an Obama Administration request to throw out a lawsuit challenging the legality of the Administration's first deepwater drilling moratorium.

The Administration argued that the case should be thrown out because a second ban on deepwater drilling was enacted on July 12, replacing the original ban that was enacted on April 20.

The second moratorium affects “precisely the same rigs and precisely the same deepwater drilling in the Gulf of Mexico as did the first moratorium,” Feldman said.

The judge ruled Venable's client would have likely been able to prove the government acted arbitrarily when it shut down deepwater drilling for six months. He also stated that the second moratorium “arguably fashions no substantial changes from the first moratorium.”

Today, David Strickland joins Venable LLP.

President Obama,

I want to know why the director of the NHTSA, who resigns to take a position with a law firm that defends deep-water oil drilling, is waffling on the resolution for electric vehicle fires, when 400 people burned to death in ICE automotive fires last year.

Jack leonard


 
Last edited:
The NHTSA is only interested in "safety for humans" - they could care if the car burns to a cinder after occupants have secured the car so that it's not a danger to other cars (i.e pulled off the road), and gotten out.

My prediction is, the NHTSA will require no changes... concluding that Tesla has already successfully designed the Model S to delay battery fires for enough time that occupants are able to get out... thus they are totally safe for humans.

I believe the two fires are excellent demonstrations of this built-in safety. No-one in their right mind would set up an event of this sort... way too dangerous. Drivers were not warned about metal getting under their car. But we still got to see the demonstrations of Tesla's design strengths. Sure, the cars started to burn, but only after occupants had gotten out.

Compare this with combustion cars, which typically don't offer that level of burn delay - there is a good chance the occupants could be breathing poisonous fumes before they've had a chance to pull over in a controlled way and get out.

What is also worth pointing out is that only the fronts of those Model S burned... the back of the cars were pretty recognisable and unburned afterwards. Victim #2 was able to get unburned papers out of his glove box afterwards.

Somewhat like their fixes recently, Tesla might proactively offer additional shielding on the bottom of the battery, with the obvious caveat that acceleration, handling and range will be impacted. (a la armored cars, basically) This could make the battery swap infrastructure more complex. (another thread)
 
It doesnt matter what is right or wrong. This is taking too long because of the politics in this country. Yeah its a cynical view, but thats how this place works. If they come out with some big change and it hurts Tesla, you know the oil industry will love that. Its a setback to everything related to EVs.
 
I don't know about anybody else but, I'm am very bullish about the next few weeks. With short interest where it's at, 40% of float almost all time high, ( Tesla Motors, Inc. (TSLA) Short Interest - NASDAQ.com ) I think with NHTSA, Model X, Q4, Giga factory, AWD, high demand. We will see huge stock gains, 20-30% over next few weeks. Today was great opportunity with it at $142. Let me know what you guys think, with short interest it doesn't take much to start something big!
 
I don't know about anybody else but, I'm am very bullish about the next few weeks. With short interest where it's at, 40% of float almost all time high, ( Tesla Motors, Inc. (TSLA) Short Interest - NASDAQ.com ) I think with NHTSA, Model X, Q4, Giga factory, AWD, high demand. We will see huge stock gains, 20-30% over next few weeks. Today was great opportunity with it at $142. Let me know what you guys think, with short interest it doesn't take much to start something big!

+1

i don't know how much TSLA will rise, but I certainly think there's going to be positive news flow next week.
 
I don't know about anybody else but, I'm am very bullish about the next few weeks. With short interest where it's at, 40% of float almost all time high, ( Tesla Motors, Inc. (TSLA) Short Interest - NASDAQ.com ) I think with NHTSA, Model X, Q4, Giga factory, AWD, high demand. We will see huge stock gains, 20-30% over next few weeks. Today was great opportunity with it at $142. Let me know what you guys think, with short interest it doesn't take much to start something big!


Not to mention TSLA closing above 145, which is a good thing in terms of holding that support level. Though, I was a little concerned when I saw it dip to 142 that I nearly liquidated my position. Nevertheless, glad to see 145 hold into the close.

Technicals are all over the place with the stock and patterns/setups have not played out recently so it's hard to say where TSLA is headed based on technicals. The only thing worth taking from a technical chart is the fact that TSLA is moving towards oversold while support areas like 145 hold. With short interest being as high as it is along with the oversold signals, I think we can expect to see a move upwards next week. Without catalysts like clearance from the NHTSA, TSLA will probably see a lot of resistance in the low-mid 150s, say 150-152.
 
NHTSA Chief David Strickland Gets Caught in the Revolving Door | Streetsblog Capitol Hill

David Steickland as automotive industry lobbyist, evaluating the two Tesla fires. That is a conflict of interest.

I suspect that Tesla Motors will not receive a decision from the NHTSA until after Strickland leaves on January 17. That could avoid accusation of conflict of interest. It might also prevent upsetting his new employer. The final decision would likely be made by his temporary replacement, who comes from the Clean Vehicles Program at the progressive Union of Concerned Scientists. That looks good for Tesla.

In any event, I'd be very surprised if the NHTSA does anything to make its 2013 and quite recent 2014 safety assessments appear faulty, along with its lack of concern after the Washington State incident. I doubt it would want to make its German counterpart's clearance of Tesla appear foolish. Personal safety is what matters to the NHTSA, and the Model S provides it far better than any ICE vehicle. Any moves that might interfere with the viability of Tesla Motors would actually be contrary to public safety.
 
I suspect that Tesla Motors will not receive a decision from the NHTSA until after Strickland leaves on January 17. That could avoid accusation of conflict of interest. It might also prevent upsetting his new employer. The final decision would likely be made by his temporary replacement, who comes from the Clean Vehicles Program at the progressive Union of Concerned Scientists. That looks good for Tesla.

In any event, I'd be very surprised if the NHTSA does anything to make its 2013 and quite recent 2014 safety assessments appear faulty, along with its lack of concern after the Washington State incident. I doubt it would want to make its German counterpart's clearance of Tesla appear foolish. Personal safety is what matters to the NHTSA, and the Model S provides it far better than any ICE vehicle. Any moves that might interfere with the viability of Tesla Motors would actually be contrary to public safety.

Too bad politics always has to play a part in everything. Well, at least the new head is very likely to be EV friendly. Just wish they would release the 'clean' report this week and someone from the white house would get off their butts and respond to the petition.
 
Personal safety

. Personal safety is what matters to the NHTSA,

With regards to the fires and personal safety... What if a driver has a wreck and is unable to exit the vehicle, either because of personal injury or being knocked unconscious or unable to open the doors. It seems like because no one has been injured by the fires that there is a reluctance to acknowledge it is a personal safety risk. Am I missing something?

I am long Tesla but I have scaled back my position significantly due to concern over the fires.
 
With regards to the fires and personal safety... What if a driver has a wreck and is unable to exit the vehicle, either because of personal injury or being knocked unconscious or unable to open the doors. It seems like because no one has been injured by the fires that there is a reluctance to acknowledge it is a personal safety risk. Am I missing something?

I am long Tesla but I have scaled back my position significantly due to concern over the fires.

As far as I remember the fires never reached the cabin (Apart the accident in Mexico that was not due to a road debris and that is not under NHTSA investigation. Also in that case the persons inside the cabin managed to exit without any injure). So no risk also in case for any reason the driver is unable to exit the vehicle.
 
I suspect that Tesla Motors will not receive a decision from the NHTSA until after Strickland leaves on January 17. That could avoid accusation of conflict of interest. It might also prevent upsetting his new employer. The final decision would likely be made by his temporary replacement, who comes from the Clean Vehicles Program at the progressive Union of Concerned Scientists. That looks good for Tesla.

In any event, I'd be very surprised if the NHTSA does anything to make its 2013 and quite recent 2014 safety assessments appear faulty, along with its lack of concern after the Washington State incident. I doubt it would want to make its German counterpart's clearance of Tesla appear foolish. Personal safety is what matters to the NHTSA, and the Model S provides it far better than any ICE vehicle. Any moves that might interfere with the viability of Tesla Motors would actually be contrary to public safety.

Yesterday, David Strickland acting as Director of the NHTSA made material comments regarding the Tesla fire investigation. Prior to making those comments he had accepted and publicized his new lobbying position with Venable LLP.

Venable LLP is an oil industry, and automotive manufacturing lobbyist.

I am not a conspiracy guy. I just believe that the oil industry, and the automobile manufacturers will push back against Tesla with tremendous amounts of money. They just bought and paid for David Strickland.

Conflict of interest. Damn straight.
 
I would recommend to open up a thread dealing with the present honourable Director of the NHSTA.

The oil industry and the automotive manufactoring industry just hired a gentleman with utmost insight into Tesla Motors.

He did not apply for that new position just a few days ago, neither did Venable LLP offer this position to him just a few days ago.

My personal opinion.
 
Am I missing something?

Yes, apparently. You're missing that along with lower risk of the thing you're worried about, the car in question has the lowest chance of occupant injury ever tested. Not to mention that, so far, the cabin has never been anything but intact after a wreck. So this is the one car where the scenario you laid out is least likely to happen. You could not possibly have a more irrational accident-related fear than the one you just described.

I am long Tesla but I have scaled back my position significantly due to concern

Shrug, your loss.
 
With regards to the fires and personal safety... What if a driver has a wreck and is unable to exit the vehicle, either because of personal injury or being knocked unconscious or unable to open the doors. It seems like because no one has been injured by the fires that there is a reluctance to acknowledge it is a personal safety risk. Am I missing something?

I am long Tesla but I have scaled back my position significantly due to concern over the fires.

Yes, apparently. You're missing that along with lower risk of the thing you're worried about, the car in question has the lowest chance of occupant injury ever tested. Not to mention that, so far, the cabin has never been anything but intact after a wreck. So this is the one car where the scenario you laid out is least likely to happen. You could not possibly have a more irrational accident-related fear than the one you just described.



Shrug, your loss.
Thanks for your generous gift, andrewt3000.
 
I am long Tesla but I have scaled back my position significantly due to concern over the fires.
I'm genuinely puzzled by your POV, Andrew. All heavy machinery poses risks to the operator. Compared to the gallons of gasoline/diesel fuel that can burn easily, the relatively lower energy density in the Model S battery makes it intrinsically safer. People don't short/sell Daimler when people die in its cars; why is Tesla held to a different standard?
 
Compared to the gallons of gasoline/diesel fuel that can burn easily, the relatively lower energy density in the Model S battery makes it intrinsically safer

The gasoline car fires that kill 4 Americans every week are bad enough...
BMW car catches fire at Hyderabad outer ring road, one dead - YouTube

But this is what a fire in a Compressed Natural Gas vehicle looks like:
Fire turns CNG bus into lethal Flamethrower on Prochan.com

Or this:
CNG Honda Civic: Car Fire/Explosion - Dialup Warning, many photos - CleanMPG Forums
 
Last edited:
Yesterday, David Strickland acting as Director of the NHTSA made material comments regarding the Tesla fire investigation. Prior to making those comments he had accepted and publicized his new lobbying position with Venable LLP.

Venable LLP is an oil industry, and automotive manufacturing lobbyist.

I am not a conspiracy guy. I just believe that the oil industry, and the automobile manufacturers will push back against Tesla with tremendous amounts of money. They just bought and paid for David Strickland.

Conflict of interest. Damn straight.

If the upcoming acting NHTSA administrator who will soon replace Strickland wants to be appointed permanently, I doubt he will do anything to impair the president's poster child for vehicle electrification.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.