Tesla defies its roots, plans gas-electric car for 2009

We're not exactly sure what to make of this one -- the auto maker created to show up gas guzzlers and prove that electric whips could indeed prove viable in a society helplessly addicted to gasoline is apparently gearing up to turn a blind eye to its original mantra. According to a report over at CNET, the firm is planning to unveil not one, but two editions of its forthcoming Whitestar sedan. Although one will indeed cruise sans fuel, the other will be a gas-electric REV (range extended vehicle), purportedly designed to entice buyers who would typically be concerned about the range (or the lack thereof) of a purely electric vehicle. So, let's get this straight -- rather than holding true to its original rallying cry, Tesla's deciding to just a build a car that it knows will actually sell. Right-o.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 3rd 2008 5:05AM]

HumanYawn, your sophomoric insults only accentuate you utter lack of scientific knowledge.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 3rd 2008 1:25PM]

lets just hope for a diesel for the greezel option

[jakey Posted Feb 3rd 2008 6:14PM]

Sigh, look, using big words doesn't mean you are smarter. Many of the things you are saying is factually incorrect so HumanYawn has a point. I've talked about this before, but even using 100% coal generation (arguable the worst in pollution), factoring all manufacturing, including battery, an EV still pollutes less than a gas car (though only marginally); with other forms of generation, pollution is decreased dramatically:
http://www.ilea.org/lcas/taharaetal2001.html

Keep in mind, the place that uses the most coal is only 73% (west virginia) and the number for the US is 49.7%. California uses only 16%, so people in California can stand to benefit from EVs and PHEVs the most. Not to mention private installed solar panels, and off-peak energy that is just wasted anyways.

Many people just pull in the automatic assumption that because of coal and the battery, EVs MUST be worse than gas cars, but that is not true. While it IS important to consider that as a factor, just try not to make too many assumptions.

Also electricity has been shown to be cheaper than gasoline time and time again. At 8.3 cents per kWh (US average) the 75kWh (due to charging inefficiencies in thermal management of the battery which is only 53kWh in capacity) needed to charge the roadster would cost $6.23 for 200+ miles. Let's say you had a 50MPG sports car that could get 0-60 in 4 seconds (yeah right). At $2.977 per gallon average right now, it would cost you $11.91 to go 200 miles. It's quite obvious electricity is not only cheaper, but likely much cheaper than gasoline. The high cost in EVs comes from the battery not the electricity. The PHEV should be able to remedy some of that.

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 29th 2008 10:43PM]

Feb.27,2008
Gentlemen; Please check these web sites;

http://globalsys.topcities.com/electriCar.html

http://globalsys.topcities.com/dualmodemaglev.html

Sincerely, jack marchand [e-mail]

[(Unverified) Posted Feb 3rd 2008 10:24PM]

Great points everyone. I love the idea of using electricity to drive our cars. It's the cleanest power source we have and it's cheap. The rub is that it's really hard to store it onboard a moving vehicle.

Ok, rough estimates here...

Li-ion electric Diesel

captured and useable 52kwh 10.6 gal @ 41.42kw/gal = 439 kwh
motor/drive efficiency 90% motor/drive efficiency 30%
power available to move car 46.8 kwh power avail to move car 131 kwh
battery 900lbs and $20000 fuel tank 150lb $200
electric drive 100lbs and $10000 Engine 400lb and $5000

So basically you get to pay $15000 extra, add 450lb to your car and you lose 60% of your range. That isn't a proposition for everyone but Tesla has shown that some people do want it.

Doubling the energy density of the batteries would make their performance competitive. That may be achievable with new technologies in the relatively short term. The cost is a bigger issue. Economies of scale can reduce the battery manufacturing costs but lithium prices could rise under increased demand. Cost will prove problematic for some time.

For now, an REV with a 40-50 mile battery is a really nice compromise. You save ton of money and weight by installing a smaller battery. You have enough battery to run on electric power during your normal commuting and when you want to take a 1000 mile trip, you can!

Tesla isn't the only company to have figured this out. Just look at this year's crop of concept cars.

[xbird22 Posted Feb 3rd 2008 11:10PM]

I don't get the negative crap! This is the only startup that just might make it and you crap on it just because it will do something that will only help to legitimize their ability to challenge mainstream vehicles and help secure the huge R&D finances?

Not only that.... Who the hell said that these will be same half-ass hybrids like the Prius? 45 mpg for a gas-electric hybrid? That's freakin' pathetic! What if Tesla bonded a 1.2L diesel with their superior electrics and actually put solid engineering into making them truly complement eachother?

Yes, even pathetic hybrids like the Prius get 30% better economy than just gasoline power. Even if Tesla half-asses as much as Toyota (which they MOST definitely WON'T), starting from a 45 mpg diesel, a 30% improvement is already 60 mpg; tell me a 4 door sedan that does this today...