-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla BEV Competition Developments
- Thread starter uselesslogin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- TSLA
Exactly: Tesla stands for no emissions, while Ford stands for reduced == definitely not zero emissions!
adiggs
Well-Known Member
Am I the only that reads stuff like this and just laughs, at least to themselves? I mean, yeah - Tesla doesn't stand for reduced emissions, it stands for no emissions.
Which I suppose excludes Tesla from the first category, but um ... "Ford is the only company standing for 2nd best - everybody else (1 company) stands for better or stands for less". I guess that doesn't have quite the same ring to it.
Jim Farley's statement is correct. This isn't a joke. Ford but not Tesla signed an agreement with CA to support and not contest CA emissions standards that were tighter than federal standards at a time when the administration was trying to end California's right to establish any standards. Trump saw this as defiance of him and the federal government. He was angry and DOJ opened an anti-trust investigation against Ford and the other automakers (since closed). The emissions standards don't mean much for Tesla except for EV credits, but they didn't sign on in defiance of the federal government and Ford did.
So Tesla didn't sign on to support a bill allowing a greater than zero level of emissions? (Even though that bill was a lower level than federal)
Works for me.
(Thanks for the clarification)
adiggs
Well-Known Member
That is an excellent point, and makes Ford's contribution significantly more significant (the grammar there may not be the best
).Thanks for the clarification - this makes the stand that Ford is taking very important indeed. If enough companies make a similar commitment, then it doesn't matter what regulatory action is taken(*) - it's all private actors getting to the end result, and that to me is FAR more valuable than regulation to get there.
(*). Unless the regulatory action is to FORCE more ICEV into a company's sales mix.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Lucid just tweeted out a video (below) showing this upgraded tri-motor Air covering 1,320 feet of drag strip in a mere 9.245 seconds at a breathtaking 157.26 miles per hour.
Tri-Motor Lucid Air Is Nearly As Quick On Track As Tesla Plaid Claim
Yep,Tesla says Max Plaid S will do 1/4 under 9 seconds.
Tri-Motor Lucid Air Is Nearly As Quick On Track As Tesla Plaid Claim
Yep,Tesla says Max Plaid S will do 1/4 under 9 seconds.
RobStark
Well-Known Member
RobStark
Well-Known Member
RobStark
Well-Known Member
Yes, it is a joke! Ford may talk the cheap talk , but they are still delivering a lot more emission via their F150 trucks and all other ICE vehicles than pretty much any other OEMs. If you sum up the total emission of all vehicles of each company, I bet Ford is either on top #1, or maximum 2nd after GM. Even the emission cheater VW is much lower in total damage done to California! So, no Ford does not deserve any praise for lowering emissions, and definitely not the title of "leaders" in low emission when there is Tesla standing there with zero emission quietly and unmentioned.
You egregiously missed the point, which was not about praising Ford for lowering emissions via their production lines.
Perfection is the enemy of good in the transition to lower emission standards. It’s shameful Tesla didn’t join Ford imo, and corporate greed got the better of them imo. Tesla doesn’t benefit from the defiance, and they don’t benefit from companies like Ford being forced into their space.
Can you explain this? The clean car plan has to do with reducing vehicle emissions. If you're a ZEV company, it's a little self-serving to put your name on a list that doesn't apply to you. How is it shameful that they didn't agree to do something that has nothing to do with them?
You can put it into even better light: how shameful it is that they did not sign onto a an agreement that ALLOWS many tons of CO2 and other harmful emissions, when their mission is to deliver ZERO emission cars. I bet they would be happy to sign on for any plan that sets the limit of emissions to 0.
This is all political, and there is arguably no bigger player now in the politics of vehicle emissions.
That’s not an explanation. Can you please be clearer about your argument?
Only supporting Utopian solutions is obstruction too. The “ if it’s not perfect we won’t support it” policy is shortsighted at best, self-serving at worst imo. In the transition to lower emissions, only supporting that being a step change isn’t actually expediting the movement imo
It seems plain that Tesla would and should support tighter emission standards.
However, signing on to a lawsuit against the federal government seems like a good way to directly antagonize the current occupant of the White House and his supporters. At a time when Tesla probably had challenges already in certain political groups and parts of the country.
So the question is, take a stand on principle, sign on to the lawsuit, and take what comes?
Or let it go, don't ruffle anybody's feathers, and know that the world will assume Tesla supports tighter standards.
Seems like Tesla picked the latter, leaving Ford to be the only US automaker supporting the lawsuit, for better or for worse.
However, signing on to a lawsuit against the federal government seems like a good way to directly antagonize the current occupant of the White House and his supporters. At a time when Tesla probably had challenges already in certain political groups and parts of the country.
So the question is, take a stand on principle, sign on to the lawsuit, and take what comes?
Or let it go, don't ruffle anybody's feathers, and know that the world will assume Tesla supports tighter standards.
Seems like Tesla picked the latter, leaving Ford to be the only US automaker supporting the lawsuit, for better or for worse.
It isn’t? I’ll try to be clearer, but it would help if you could elaborate on why you don’t think it’s an explanation.
You posted “How is it shameful that they didn't agree to do something that has nothing to do with them?“
I dispute it had nothing to do with them. Is this not emission policy and politics? Does Tesla not have a huge interest in those? Imo the policy faced by ICE manufacturers is of critical importance to both Tesla’s bottom line and mission to reduce/eliminate energy consumption emissions.
Whether the policy was good enough, both to Tesla’s business and mission, to have Tesla join Ford is one thing, but nearly all car emission politics has more than nothing to do with Tesla.
Similar threads
