I'm not sure when this short video, about 11:27, with Elon was shot, but it contains some interesting comments.
For example on future range. he has no intention, of stopping future range increases:
Feels like last year or early this year. This is before Elon said they aren't going past 100kWh.
So many variables:
- How far 100kWh on a Model 3? (handful of years away, or less)
- How far 100kWh if it is self-driven car that self-charges? It can charge between customer rides, and only long distance would require recharges. Also, a self-driving car can let the passengers do non-driving activities, making their time more valuable, and less costly to be an actual driver, and therefore the car would not have to go as fast, saving energy to go the same distance. (Handful of years away or less.)
- Automatic cars can hook to each other on freeways and expressways that are going the same direction, like train cars: they can reduce total wind resistance in this manner. Also, if the hook has electrical connection, some cars that know they will not need all of their energy can send charge or actively used motive power to other cars in the train.
- How far would the above three cars go if they also had a very high efficiency all-body-panel and all-glass solar collector system above 30% efficiency from any angle? That's only a few % increase in distance -- not much (it would fully charge a single owner single user parked car for regular commutes, but not a full duty self driving car constantly in use). Plus, that's about 15-20 years away, about when we'll start having a colony on Mars and the next evolution of the Human race will already be around, and flying electric planes might be available, so it won't be a very interesting question at that time compared to all the other fantastic stuff going on. Really, since most cars will be full-duty self driving cars, they will use more energy than sun energy that hits them, so it won't make sense to have the extra weight of solar panels attached to them at all; they will rather use other methods I described.
- Maybe they can get +20% capacity in the next 5-10 years, so a 120kWh battery.
Imagine all 4 of the above happening in 20 years: a car that only has to go 40MPH-45MPH because you are doing valuable activity in the vehicle while it drives, 120kWh, lighter car, automatically connects to other cars in car trains on the freeway reducing drag, automatic charging from other cars in the train, from the roadways from embedded electricity transmitters, and from other random ideas that come to be; that car would go very very far compared to current models. Also, if you are just a passenger and it's not your car, you can easily switch to another fully charged car after many hundreds of miles riden, if that is what you want to do. Say, you get in a car in the morning, work, have meetings, then, for break, lunch, and break, you get out, take a walk, and get back in a different car. You could literally go forever using this methodology, even today.
Thus I predict that cars will not need to be able to go as far as they would be able to go if all the above distance lengthening tools are used.
Having said that, I'm about to take delivery of a 60D that I already calculated will slow me down from my usual driving speeds on many of the trips I already am used to taking regularly. To someone like me and you that runs into distance limitations, all of my above calculations seem like pie in the sky future crap that just doesn't make any sense. Well, in 5-10 years, revisit, and distance concerns will probably not matter as much as they used to, for a few (but not all) of the possible reasons above.
Unfortunately, the greatest enabler here is self driving cars, and that will not be unique to Tesla forever. They have a head start, though, so we get to see how much market share they catch.
---
Well, the federal government doesn't tax inventory. *Change* in the value of inventory may be taxable income, but it could also be deductible loss, which is only fair.
The states are another matter. Apparently as of 2011, 11 states had inventory property taxes, and these *are* a terrible idea.
I found this helpful answer from a tax professional on JustAnswer.com
It seems to be down to Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana (with a rebate), Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi (with exemptions), Oklahoma, Rhode Island (with most manufacturers exempted), Texas, West Viriginia. I guess those states want business to locate elsewhere.
They must have fixed it. I wonder where I got the misperception that this was an issue. I've lived in California, Iowa, New York City, Oregon and Puerto Rico, so I don't know where I was at the time that I learned that inventory was taxable. The most accounting and inventory jobs I ever had were in California, Iowa and New York City. Maybe I was fed bad information.