Would you have bought your Model S if it wasn't electric?

[Seven7]

No, I would not have bought another ICE car. The model S is what I have been waiting for since gas prices went up and it met all of my requirements.

Had to be made in the US

Runs and handles as well as a new (C6) Corvette

Uses NO gas, diesel or anything other than electricity.

 

[Falcon5]

No. We were hoping for an all electric car for a long time. Model S is our dream car.

 

[bareyb]

It's hard to say. The first time I saw one on the highway I noticed the styling first. When I saw it was made by Tesla, I fell instantly in lust. I'd read about the Roadster and already knew how cool they were.

 

[mknox]

One of the things about the gas dryer is that it costs extra upfront -- at my prices for gas and electricity, that wiped out any potential operational savings. (This of course only applied when I had to replace the dryer anyway)

My replacement gas dryer was a bit more expensive, but it was very simple to connect (the gas line was nearby) and part of my motivation was to free up some panel capacity for my Model S charging. I am finding it considerably cheaper to operate... but haven't worked out any kind of break even point yet.

For the stove, gas cooking is qualitatively different from electric cooking, and I prefer gas cooking, so I'm kind of stuck with it regardless of price.

Agreed. My crusty old built-in electric will be giving way to (an already purchased) gas range soon. I too prefer gas cooking plus it will also free up a bit of capacity on my electrical panel.

Switching from propane to electricity is usually economically wise...

Not always. I have a friend that is converting heat and water from electricity to propane simply because of costs. He is in rural Ontario where delivery charges are higher. His "all in" electricity rates are 20.56 cents / 25.12 cents / 27.57 cents (Off / Mid / On-Peak).

 

[fastcars]

I keep saying the same to many people who argue but don't accept that eletric at his heart is the mantra for tesla success otherwise you have plenty of luxury cars in market.

BTW: tesla model s interior is not superior to many luxury car maker but other topic of discussion.

 

[Gear]

I think what you meant to ask was who would buy the car if it weren't "green" rather than electric. I personally would have bought it even if it weren't considered a "green" car, although it seems it's never really been proven that making all those li-ion batteries combined with the electricity production (depends where you live) is better for the environment than burning gasoline or diesel. I'd love to be proven wrong. I would not have purchased it, however, if it weren't electric, as that's a huge part of what is cool about Model S.

 

[ChadS]

although it seems it's never really been proven that making all those li-ion batteries combined with the electricity production (depends where you live) is better for the environment than burning gasoline or diesel.

This "uncertainty" is a pretty persistent myth.

Yes, EVs are way cleaner (though of course exactly how much depends on the electricity source; but using average US electrical source, they are responsible for about half as much as a gas car - and using electricity gives both the utility and the owner a chance to improve it). The DOE, Sierra Club, Plug In America and Union of Concerned Scientists have gone over all the lifecycle studies and are very firmly behind their environmental benefits.

The problem is that there have been four "papers" (not peer-reviewed studies! they made many bone-headed mistakes; they have been dissected on these forums) that have been cited in blogs and editorials hundreds of times, as opposed to the several dozen good studies that you almost never see in the media. So if you just scan the media rather than read the studies (which of course is what almost everybody does), it's easy to think "gee, I guess they're not really sure". They are sure, there's just a calculated campaign to keep people confused. It has picked up (Plug In America follows media hits) since Tesla started getting accolades; that's because it's getting harder to convincingly say that electric cars are ugly, unsafe, no fun to drive and nobody wants one and it's impossible to make a profit selling them. So they have to concentrate on the most complex area that few people will bother to check out - lifecycle impact.

The really ironic thing is that so much attention is focused on this issue when, as Gear notes, it hardly matters - very few people base their car buying decisions on whether the cars are cleaner or not.

 

[Gear]

This "uncertainty" is a pretty persistent myth.

Yes, EVs are way cleaner (though of course exactly how much depends on the electricity source; but using average US electrical source, they are responsible for about half as much as a gas car - and using electricity gives both the utility and the owner a chance to improve it). The DOE, Sierra Club, Plug In America and Union of Concerned Scientists have gone over all the lifecycle studies and are very firmly behind their environmental benefits.

The problem is that there have been four "papers" (not peer-reviewed studies! they made many bone-headed mistakes; they have been dissected on these forums) that have been cited in blogs and editorials hundreds of times, as opposed to the several dozen good studies that you almost never see in the media. So if you just scan the media rather than read the studies (which of course is what almost everybody does), it's easy to think "gee, I guess they're not really sure". They are sure, there's just a calculated campaign to keep people confused. It has picked up (Plug In America follows media hits) since Tesla started getting accolades; that's because it's getting harder to convincingly say that electric cars are ugly, unsafe, no fun to drive and nobody wants one and it's impossible to make a profit selling them. So they have to concentrate on the most complex area that few people will bother to check out - lifecycle impact.

The really ironic thing is that so much attention is focused on this issue when, as Gear notes, it hardly matters - very few people base their car buying decisions on whether the cars are cleaner or not.

Thanks for the post! And yes, I agree that it hardly matters. If it were to cost more per mile to drive an EV than an ICE, far fewer people would be interested. The financials have to work out in people's favor for it to have mainstream success. You make a good point about the source of electricity. It's a lot easier to make more clean electricity sources than to improve the emissions of the millions of cars on the road.

I, personally, would never have bought any other EV currently on the market as it wouldn't meet my needs in terms of range or driving enjoyment. I also would have never bought any other car in the Model S' price range as they are too expensive to run. The MS hits a sweet spot in that regard and that's one of the coolest things about it. Many different types of people with many different viewpoints are interested, whether it's because of the technology, the performance, the low expense to operate, or the green factor.

 

[bareyb]

I think what you meant to ask was who would buy the car if it weren't "green" rather than electric. I personally would have bought it even if it weren't considered a "green" car, although it seems it's never really been proven that making all those li-ion batteries combined with the electricity production (depends where you live) is better for the environment than burning gasoline or diesel. I'd love to be proven wrong. I would not have purchased it, however, if it weren't electric, as that's a huge part of what is cool about Model S.

Even at worst case scenario with Coal burning power plants it's still twice as clean as Gasoline. Also doesn't concentrate and distribute the smog over our cities and highways nearly as much as cars.

 

[bcimae]

No, not a chance, I would have kept my Prius!

 

[neroden]

Not always. I have a friend that is converting heat and water from electricity to propane simply because of costs. He is in rural Ontario where delivery charges are higher. His "all in" electricity rates are 20.56 cents / 25.12 cents / 27.57 cents (Off / Mid / On-Peak).

Yow. Ontario electric prices are way high. That's pretty close to solar panel grid parity. I don't know how much sun he gets (this being rural Ontario), but one levelized cost estimate (run for Kingston ON) says he should *already* be installing solar panels. Review of solar levelized cost - Appropedia: The sustainability wiki

----
By way of contrast, my "all-in" electric price -- after the fixed cost of the connection -- is 11 cents / kwh, and I'm paying extra for renewables. My all-in natural gas price is almost exactly a dollar per therm. Propane in this area runs $2.40 (summer) - $2.90 (winter) per gallon. Propane is *never* cost-effective here.

 

[mknox]

Yow. Ontario electric prices are way high. That's pretty close to solar panel grid parity. I don't know how much sun he gets (this being rural Ontario), but one levelized cost estimate (run for Kingston ON) says he should *already* be installing solar panels. Review of solar levelized cost - Appropedia: The sustainability wiki

Solar is actually a pretty sweet deal in Ontario. We have a Feed In Tariff program that pays 54 cents / kWh for roof-mounted solar. (They are connected in parallel with the home's electrical service and are metered separately).

 

[Trnsl8r]

Didn't we have this poll sometime last year or year before?

 

[Gear]

Even at worst case scenario with Coal burning power plants it's still twice as clean as Gasoline. Also doesn't concentrate and distribute the smog over our cities and highways nearly as much as cars.

That doesn't seem to be true according to Tesla's website. In a coal heavy state like WV (96% coal) a Model S creates 27.35 lbs of CO2 per day (based on 40 mile drive) versus 35.27 for a "gas car." I would assume they're using a 7-series or S-Class for those numbers as well like they do for their fuel economy number comparison to get the numbers more in their favor. That doesn't account for the Li-Ion either.

 

[ChadS]

Yeah, "twice as clean" is a good rule of thumb for the average case, but doesn't apply in the worst case. The closer the numbers are, the harder it is to say for sure which is "cleaner" because of accumulated errors in assumptions. It is possible that an EV in a 100% coal state might be a little dirtier than a good hybrid (i.e. Prius). Especially if the EV is bigger; it's not reasonable to expect every EV truck to be cleaner than every gas micro-car. We can't say with confidence that every EV is cleaner than every gas car.

But we can say with confidence that they are way cleaner on average, and that they will get even better as the grid gets cleaned up (and if that's important to do for EVs, it's important to do for everything else that electricity is used for...odd that so many people are saying we should ignore EVs because of how electricity is made, but they don't recommend we abandon cell phones, refrigerators or TVs), and by using electricity the owner can often source (and perhaps even generate) their own cleaner power if they want to. And as bareyb noted, there are other benefits to getting the pollution out of cities. And energy security benefits, etc.

 

[gtimbers]

No way. Without electric, it is not competitive with the average $40k - $60k Lexus, BMW or Infiniti especially in fit, finish and creature comforts

 

[rcc]

Having driven my S for 12K miles, I'd say that in CA buying the S is a no-brainer if you can afford it and driving in the HOV lanes matters to you.

HOV is why Model S's are selling like hot cakes in the Bay Area.

The S is the first great CA HOV-lane car. Your average plug-in hybrid or non-S electric is either underpowered, handles poorly or both. Think Volt, Leaf, plug-in Prius, Rav4EV, etc. The Roadster is a great car but it's a tiny two-seater. Whereas the S is a big luxury sedan that drives like a sports car and hauls stuff like an SUV. And it's gorgeous looking too. Yes, there's a range limit and recharging/refueling is slow and less convenient but the range is perfectly adequate for Bay Area driving and day trips.

So in CA, the tough question is "Would you buy it if it couldn't drive in the HOV lane?"

Without HOV, it's a compelling car but pretty expensive. I might have saved some $$ and bought another high-end BMW 3 instead. Or not. If my wife and I had decided we needed a larger car like a 5-series, the Model S is really compelling. You can load up a 5-series with enough options to drive the cost right into S territory but the S drives better, seats 5 people more comfortably given the flat floor and has more cargo capacity. Given a choice between a 5-series or an S, I'd go with the S unless I really needed the range.

But with HOV, it's a slam-dunk.

The extra time I get to spend with my family instead of sitting in traffic make the higher cost of the S (compared to a 3) worth it. And when you factor in how well the car works as a family sedan and how much I enjoy driving it, going for the S is a no-brainer.

P.S. -- The ICE manufacturers are looking at a troublesome future because it's really hard to make a car do what the S does unless you use an electric powertrain. You need a small powertrain with instant torque. And the cost of setting up the refueling infrastructure has to be reasonably low. It'll probably be decades before something besides an electric powertrain fits the bill.

 

[Tslynk67]

I'm buying the Tesla primarily because it's an EV. However it needed to suitable for my three kids too as well as a usable range.

But if it wasn't EV then I wouldn't be buying, I would stick with my current Volvo XC90 and I had the intention to purchase their ext generation hybrid or alternatively a hybrid Porsche Cayenne.

But for me it's all about the EV.

 

[rickbecker]

I am buying my Model S because it is an EV. I became addicted after driving my LEAF since April 2011.

 

[jp158]

NO .... Many features missing for such a expensive vehicle.....