Tesla co-founder says car wastes energy while parked

Tesla co-founder Martin Eberhard has never been one to mince words about the company or car he helped create, and it doesn't look like that's about to change, with him now taking advantage of his blog to spread the word about "one little thing wrong" with the car. Apparently, like some other Tesla drivers, he noticed that the ESS coolant pump seemed to be running all the time, even when it had been parked and left off for a long time. After a bit more investigation, Eberhard determined that the coolant pump and support electronics drew a hefty 14 kilowatt-hours in four days just sitting in his garage, which translates to 1,278 kWh per year, or the rough equivalent of two large refridgerators. As Eberhard points out, that could also have some pretty severe implications for the life of the pump and battery, and even the car's stated watt-hours per mile. For Tesla's part, it says the pump will shut off, but only when the battery is half-way discharged, which is a state that some with a short commute, like Eberhard, may rarely see.

[Via AutoblogGreen]

[NHAnimator @ Oct 16th 2008 11:42AM]

Busted.

But seriously folks, I expect that Tesla is either working on a solution, or the technology just doesn't allow for it considering the car's design.

[ishism @ Oct 16th 2008 2:18PM]

M$FT, YOUR MOM'S TITTIES.
P.S. Vista is actually a good OS. Let's see what windows 7 brings to the table.

Back on topic. I hope there is a fix for this problem. This car is way to expensive for these kind of kinks.

[iEye @ Oct 16th 2008 4:26PM]

"If you are not going to use your device for an extended period of time ex. 30 days, it is reccomended to remove the Batteries"

Ah ha ha ha ha!

[Harkonian @ Oct 16th 2008 11:42AM]

It's refreshing to see honesty in an exec.

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 12:04PM]

No this isn't the same thing. Apparently these fans need to run constantly and it must be to keep the batteries cool. No gas engine car does this.

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 12:05PM]

Dammit I hit the wrong reply. That was for Ryan Trevisol below.

[tom @ Oct 16th 2008 12:19PM]

@happy_penguin

Shouldn't the fan/coolant's on and off be determined by the battery's temperature. I.E., based on a termostat.

Even my fridge at home isn't gonna stay on 24x7, it only turns on when the temperature rises above certain threshold.

[Ridgecity @ Oct 16th 2008 12:30PM]

He is saying this, so the new CEO appointed yesterday can't sell just like that.

[Victoid @ Oct 16th 2008 1:06PM]

Facts not in evidence. Eberhard doesn't work for Tesla anymore. He was forced out by Musky Musk in 2007. A quote:

"Yes it is true - I am no longer with Tesla Motors - neither on its Board of Directors nor an employee of any sort. I have also signed a non-disparagement agreement with Tesla, so I must. by contract, be a bit careful about how I word things."

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/tesla-motors/756-martin-eberhard-still-tesla-motors-2.html

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 1:45PM]

"tom @ Oct 16th 2008 12:19PM

@happy_penguin

Shouldn't the fan/coolant's on and off be determined by the battery's temperature. I.E., based on a termostat.

Even my fridge at home isn't gonna stay on 24x7, it only turns on when the temperature rises above certain threshold."

That's what I would want to know. Perhaps the design of the car is such that the batteries generate heat which needs to be dissipated continually. Regardless, this isn't a good thing, to have a fan running on a constant basis drawing energy when the whole idea is to conserve energy.

[thedesolate1 @ Oct 16th 2008 5:38PM]

He's not doing it for his health. He is pissed at Tesla thats why. They had a fallout last year when Musk and him no longer shared the same vision.

[Boarderwoot @ Oct 16th 2008 11:44AM]

If you can figure out how to build an electric car, then you must surely be able to figure out a way to shut off the pump once the car reaches a certain time/temp after the car's been powered down.

[Ryan Trevisol @ Oct 16th 2008 11:56AM]

Isn't this what the fans in regular cars have been doing for years?

[Joe @ Oct 16th 2008 1:36PM]

Seems as though the fan would eventually drain the batteries to 1/2 charge - then it will shut off....

[sip @ Oct 16th 2008 11:44AM]

This seems like it would be an easy fix, just upgrade the car's firmware.

[Precurse @ Oct 16th 2008 12:02PM]

assuming you don't brick it.. A little bit more of a loss than a Linksys router =P

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 12:07PM]

It's probably not that simple. The cooling is probably needed for the batteries or it wouldn't be running in the first place.

[michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 12:13PM]

Tomato firmware?

On _my_ Tesla?


It's more likely than you think.

[ByronGman @ Oct 16th 2008 12:53PM]

You jump into your car to head off to work...


"Configuring Updates (Stage 2 of 3): 23%
Please do not turn off your ignition..."

[Johan S @ Oct 16th 2008 1:55PM]

Good thing I won't have to turn off the ignition, since I'm sure I'll have trouble finding the IGNITION switch on my ELECTRIC car.

[centinall @ Oct 16th 2008 2:58PM]

All we need now is a JailBreak for Tesla and then we can start issuing our own fixes ;-)

[raging_hamsterx @ Oct 16th 2008 11:48AM]

but can the car run Mojave?

[Thi mam(kris120890) @ Oct 16th 2008 12:42PM]

No because Mojave is not real.

[whatishalo? @ Oct 16th 2008 11:52AM]

So what custom color of Tesla did he order? Sour Grapes is my guess.

[John @ Oct 16th 2008 12:40PM]

That was so funny, I forgot to laugh!

[bobartig @ Oct 16th 2008 3:02PM]

I saw a tesla just the other day. It was this horrific bright orange color. We were impressed by how ass-ugly it was for what amounts to an ultra-exotic sports car.. then we saw it was a Tesla, and we almost cried.

[PuBeLeSs @ Oct 16th 2008 11:56AM]

put solar cells on the car?

[Frankenstein Black @ Oct 16th 2008 2:15PM]

EXACTLY! Add solar panels for the fan to the removable roof section (or on the hood) and problem solved!

[think about it @ Oct 16th 2008 2:26PM]

Solar panels don't work at night, or in garages. Plus the aerodynamics and weight of the panel do not make practical sense for a moving application.

[Frankenstein Black @ Oct 16th 2008 3:12PM]

Yea, nice try...
http://www.autoblog.com/photos/fisker-karma-1/583326/
Now you "think about it"...

[bandigolo @ Oct 16th 2008 11:58AM]

uh, fix it? Seriously, you built an entire car, how hard is it to teach it how to shut off a coolant pump when the power is off?

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 12:01PM]

Strike another blow against Tesla. This just demonstrates one more reason how infantile electric cars are and WHY they are not prolific. People need to stop slamming the major car companies and looking for conspiracies to explain why we aren't all driving electric cars. Yes, I do believe it's the direction to go but battery technology is not up to par. Electric is not a panacea for all our transportation problems.

The facts are out there if you care to listen.

[Stu L Tissimus @ Oct 16th 2008 12:07PM]

Wow. I had no idea there were people out there who hated electric cars as much as you do.

[bandigolo @ Oct 16th 2008 12:11PM]

dude, the electric car has been around for years. If the government and auto manufacturers spent 1/100th of the resources devoted to Big Oil on alternative cars, we'd have 'em in a week. The limitation is not technology, it's money. If you disagree that, you're either a corporate slug or an idiot.

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 12:12PM]

Where did I hate? I'm tired of people insisting that we should be already in electric cars, how they were made 100 years ago, how there is a conspiracy between oil companies and the auto companies, how the Volt is a POS but Tesla is brilliant even though the goddamned thing costs $120,000 and they have produced nary a car...

Electric cars are part of a short term answer and perhaps will become more prolific as the technology catches up. The one big thing holding up progress is batteries. Batteries are heavy, expensive and costly.

What I hate is the ignorance I keep reading on the subject. Go back and read what I said.

[michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 12:15PM]

@happy_penguin:

I did go back and read your first comment and I still disagree.

Your username is awfully misleading; you seem to be an unhappy penguin.

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 12:17PM]

"bandigolo @ Oct 16th 2008 12:11PM
dude, the electric car has been around for years. If the government and auto manufacturers spent 1/100th of the resources devoted to Big Oil on alternative cars, we'd have 'em in a week. The limitation is not technology, it's money. If you disagree that, you're either a corporate slug or an idiot."

Bullshit bullshit bullshit. The reason we use oil is because it's cheap. Even at $4/gallon gas is cheap. Where did you get this 1/100th number from? Have them in a week? Everyone knows the electric car has been around for years, more than a century... but the viability in the face of cheap oil has just not been there. People want real cars with real room in them. The only reason people drive tiny econoboxes is because they have to.

I hate to stoop to your level so I'm not going to call you an idiot.

[michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 12:31PM]

@happy_penguin:

Crude oil/gasoline has to remain at a high cost because if it ever fell, people would lose interest in alternative energies. That would strike disaster for those that invested heavily in said alternative energies.

My five-speed Pontiac Vibe is a real car with real room and it's one of the most fuel efficient vehicles GM (read: Toyota) has every built. Does it use an exotic drivetrain? No, it runs on gasoline. Did I have the choice to purchase a larger vehicle? Of course, but I didn't; I don't want to spend enormous amounts of money on what you call a "real" car.

Electric cars are one of the answers to our energy issue. There are many other things that can be done to help, but electric cars a definitely a step in the right direction.

[John @ Oct 16th 2008 12:45PM]

Yeah, let's keep using gasoline. Combustion engines are the wave of the future. In 100 more years maybe we'll get 21% efficiency out of them!

[Juaquin @ Oct 16th 2008 1:05PM]

"Happy Penguin": The most ironic username

[chris fredette @ Oct 16th 2008 1:08PM]

Agreed. The eviro freeks think if they have enough will power electric cars will be a reality but they are trying to fight physics.
You should also mention the price of the car is up to $109k some $10k more than the origional price and they just mentioned a push back of the "$60k" car I don't think is possible unless it has very bad performance.
I mock this thing yet again.

[BigD145 @ Oct 16th 2008 1:08PM]

We don't have 100 years worth of oil. Aw, too bad.

[PixelFactory @ Oct 16th 2008 1:11PM]

Happy_penguin has a pint. Electric motors have been around since the 1800's. There are other factors that have to happen before it become viable for mainstream use. First is battery technology. Try taking a Tesla on a cross country trip. Not gonna happen. The tech is improving but it is not there yet. Second is infrastructure. Our current power grid would come to a screaming halt if we all went electric. We need to upgrade the whole country's power grid and invent either a battery that can store a whole lot more energy or be able to be charged much faster. Plus, while the car itself would have no emissions, the power it uses has to come from somewhere, be it coal, nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, solar... as of right now the US uses coal, oil and natural gas for about 70% of its energy needs.

[michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 1:40PM]

@PixelFactory:

True, the electricity would come from power plants that still use fossil fuels and such, but it's easier to regulate emissions at a single source (a power plant) than a million little sources (vehicles).

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 1:58PM]

"michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 12:31PM

@happy_penguin:

Crude oil/gasoline has to remain at a high cost because if it ever fell, people would lose interest in alternative energies. That would strike disaster for those that invested heavily in said alternative energies."

I have no argument with that. I believe it goes hand in hand with what I'm saying.

"My five-speed Pontiac Vibe is a real car with real room and it's one of the most fuel efficient vehicles GM (read: Toyota) has every built. Does it use an exotic drivetrain? No, it runs on gasoline. Did I have the choice to purchase a larger vehicle? Of course, but I didn't; I don't want to spend enormous amounts of money on what you call a "real" car."

I agree, the Vibe is one good answer from current technology and it's a fine car. It still isn't the size that all people want. That's why there are choices. And, what I call a "real" car is apparently not what you think. I believe the Vibe is a real car. But the Vibe is not built by Toyota, it's built by NUMMI which is a joint venture between General Motors and Toyota.

http://www.nummi.com/

"Electric cars are one of the answers to our energy issue. There are many other things that can be done to help, but electric cars a definitely a step in the right direction."

I agree 100%. Electric cars may become ONE answer in the short term and may be a step in the right direction. But again they are not a panacea. There is no magic in electricity and you can not change the laws of physics. No matter what you do you are going to give up something and people aren't always willing to do that.

What I'm tired of is the conspiracy theories and the false science from armchair engineers who insist that it's so easy to just replace what we already have. People need to stop asking for magic from the automobile companies. They're not alchemists.

[michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 2:10PM]

@happy_penguin:

Oh, I know that NUMMI in good 'ole Fresno built my car. I thought the way I put GM and Toyota in the same sentence would hint at that, but I guess not. No matter, though.

I think the people that are very vocal about a sudden shift in infrastructure are a sign that something needs to be done and done quickly, but carefully and in a non-partisan way.

[drew @ Oct 16th 2008 4:28PM]

Why all the hate towards the happy_penguin? He's only making a few valid points that most people overlook (including most posters on this thread):

1. It will take longer than 1 week (month, year, 10years, whatever) to develop electric vehicles that will fill everyone's need. Real engineering doesn't work that way and there are significant hurdles, particularly in battery technology, that need to be overcome.

2. We drive gas powered cars because gas is cheap. From an economic standpoint if car companies ditched their combustion development and when full bore at developing electrical cars they couldn't survive. Like happy said, there aren't enough real cars (not big cars, but cars in each category that fill both wants AND needs) at price points people can afford where they can survive as a big time car manufacturer.

3. No where does Mr. Penguin say that he is happy with this situation. He doesn't say he is pulling for big oil like so many of you have assumed. He's just a happy penguin who is upset with all the mis-information people are spewing out. He doesn't insinuate anywhere that he wants to see electric cars fail. I'm sure he agrees with me that he'd like to see small cheap batteries that can store enough power to drive the engines for all types of road vehicles for long distances. It just not as easy as you think. The internal combustion engine is a solid, mature technology. Electric vehicles just aren't there yet.

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 3:30PM]

They're doing a lot already and doing about all they can do given the circumstances which include current scientific knowledge and cost. Here's an article (from last year) which I believe demonstrates where we stand and why it is all so difficult.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9803819-7.html

Even this oil executive from Chevron, Don Paul, CTO, agrees that oil consumption is a problem:

"And we're consuming a lot of fuel: about 3 billion gallons a day worldwide, or roughly a half-gallon for every person on the planet. By 2012, the human race will have consumed 1.5 trillion barrels, Paul said in a hallway conversation. "

Of particular interest to me and why I keep pounding the issue:

"Electric will also come, but batteries need work. "Even the best batteries have 1/10th of the energy density of gasoline," he said. (Others, such as Nobel-winning chemist Richard Smalley, have pointed out how there's no easy alternative when it comes to energy density.)"

[michas_pi @ Oct 16th 2008 3:57PM]

@happy_penguin:

Thank you for the article. I have been spreading the word about oil sands for a long time now. We need to get at this oil somehow.

I think the upcoming Chevy Volt is a slight, but necessary, step in the right direction. What do you think about the Volt and GM's overall direction in this?

[happy_penguin @ Oct 16th 2008 4:27PM]

What do I think?

The Volt will do something that the Prius does not do: It puts an entirely electric drivetrain on the road. If the estimates are correct and I hope they are, you will be able to charge it at home and drive up to 40 miles on that charge. It will cost about $40,000 which is a helluva lot cheaper than a Tesla. It will do one important thing that the Tesla will never do and that's take four people on a trip about as long as they want to go. That's because it has gasoline backup. You will be able to continue to drive even across the country if you desire.

When hydrogen becomes a viable, readily available power source it will be a much simpler matter of exchanging the gasoline/E85 engine out for a hydrogen fuel cell. Hell, if something magic happens and solar cells are suddenly 1,000 % more efficient they could simply slap cells on the roof. The advantages to the design are numerous. General Motors is doing this the right way from a standpoint of available technology and available fuel sources for today and in the future. Watch as the rest of the auto companies follow suit. They may even do it better.

It still will take time for the Volt concept to proliferate because that's a lot of money for a car which won't have the kind of power and room that people really want. But as fuel prices rise, people will be adjusting what they "want" for what they must have. Now it's a matter of execution which is something that General Motors has often and rightfully been berated for in the past. They need to get this car out as soon as possible.