gslippy : I have to disagree with the headline; I think these are very relevant aspects of the Model S.
Agreed. Now that I think about the engineering/performance implications of this sheetmetal, there's a problem: if we are talking about being Green, I don’t know why Tesla would put flash over substance.
If they want to attract investors to their fledgling company, making a fake Aston isn’t a bad idea. It’ll get the checkbooks out.
Tesla ISNT about being green. Its precisely about having your cake and eating it too, Roadster is the living proof of that.
Silent driving, crazy torque from electric motors, no gas costs, low maintenance due to few moving parts ( in theory ), design freedom opened up by electric powertrain : these are the things that Tesla offers first and foremost. Zero tailpipe emissions is just a nice side benefit.
The very first ads of Tesla didnt say "greenest thing on earth", they said "Burn rubber, not gasoline".
That is NOT a green pitch.
@Sajeev
You completely missed my point. Believe it or not, no matter what Tesla does (or claims to do) they cannot disobey the Laws of Thermodynamics.
OK, now you're splitting hairs. You are comparing this vehicle to some theoretically "most efficient" configuration, instead of logically comparing it to the competition in its size class and ownership cost level. In that respect, it totally blows the competition out of the water in terms of energy conversion efficiency for a given level of size and performance, and because it's electric, it's defacto cleaner systemically than equivalent ICE vehicles, and potentially effectively carbon-neutral in operation (as well as other free of other pollutants).
It's the same kind of mistake I see people make with things like electric-assist bicycles. The cycling purists hate them and consider them toys for fat, lazy people. They also think the $2,000-3,000 price tag is outrageous.
What they fail to see is that an e-bike is not a wasteful bike, it's a very efficient substitute for a car for a good chunk of trips. Seen that way, it's incredibly efficient and affordable.
Tesla is taking the counter-intuitive route of constructing luxury playthings for a limited market, but gradually going down the price and luxury level and approaching mass market from the top, not the bottom. Many many EV companies have tried the opposite approach - focusing on being as green as possible, and most times they just end up being 4 wheels of hairshirt.
It remains to be seen if Tesla will ultimately succeed, but they sure have gotten a lot further than any firm that preceded them.
I think some people struggle with all this because they're not aware that, for the most part, the green movement has gotten past the "we all need to sacrifice" stage and moved on to what is commonly called "bright green solutions." Many times these days, things that are pretty far along in terms of sustainable design don't wear it on their shoulders like many people expect them to. I think that's a very crucial hurdle that it's overcome and why so much progress has been made this past decade.
savuporo : The very first ads of Tesla didnt say “greenest thing on earth”, they said “Burn rubber, not gasoline”. That is NOT a green pitch.
I think Tesla's playing both sides: going green for DOE loans, and offering a electric power train for pistonheads looking for the next big thing. Maybe that's not a bad thing, if we ever get verified reports on its range and they pass safety tests without an airbag waiver.
------------------
long126mike :
OK, now you’re splitting hairs. You are comparing this vehicle to some theoretically “most efficient” configuration, instead of logically comparing it to the competition in its size class and ownership cost level. In that respect, it totally blows the competition out of the water...
It’s the same kind of mistake I see people make with things like electric-assist bicycles. The cycling purists hate them and consider them toys for fat, lazy people. They also think the $2,000-3,000 price tag is outrageous.
Fair enough, I see your point. I am speaking completely in theory, and Tesla is doing the same thing: we know nothing about the car's actual performance.
And, correct me if I missed it, but we still don't have verified range numbers on a Roadster with the production one-speed transmission. So everything is still up in the air, and the Model S' merits relative to the competition are entirely theoretical.
Comments
Join the conversation
Tesla ISNT about being green. Its precisely about having your cake and eating it too, Roadster is the living proof of that. Silent driving, crazy torque from electric motors, no gas costs, low maintenance due to few moving parts ( in theory ), design freedom opened up by electric powertrain : these are the things that Tesla offers first and foremost. Zero tailpipe emissions is just a nice side benefit. The very first ads of Tesla didnt say "greenest thing on earth", they said "Burn rubber, not gasoline". That is NOT a green pitch.
@Sajeev You completely missed my point. Believe it or not, no matter what Tesla does (or claims to do) they cannot disobey the Laws of Thermodynamics. OK, now you're splitting hairs. You are comparing this vehicle to some theoretically "most efficient" configuration, instead of logically comparing it to the competition in its size class and ownership cost level. In that respect, it totally blows the competition out of the water in terms of energy conversion efficiency for a given level of size and performance, and because it's electric, it's defacto cleaner systemically than equivalent ICE vehicles, and potentially effectively carbon-neutral in operation (as well as other free of other pollutants). It's the same kind of mistake I see people make with things like electric-assist bicycles. The cycling purists hate them and consider them toys for fat, lazy people. They also think the $2,000-3,000 price tag is outrageous. What they fail to see is that an e-bike is not a wasteful bike, it's a very efficient substitute for a car for a good chunk of trips. Seen that way, it's incredibly efficient and affordable. Tesla is taking the counter-intuitive route of constructing luxury playthings for a limited market, but gradually going down the price and luxury level and approaching mass market from the top, not the bottom. Many many EV companies have tried the opposite approach - focusing on being as green as possible, and most times they just end up being 4 wheels of hairshirt. It remains to be seen if Tesla will ultimately succeed, but they sure have gotten a lot further than any firm that preceded them. I think some people struggle with all this because they're not aware that, for the most part, the green movement has gotten past the "we all need to sacrifice" stage and moved on to what is commonly called "bright green solutions." Many times these days, things that are pretty far along in terms of sustainable design don't wear it on their shoulders like many people expect them to. I think that's a very crucial hurdle that it's overcome and why so much progress has been made this past decade.