Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LoArmistead

How 'Bout That Tesla S?

Recommended Posts

Absolutely nuclear power is magnificent, and it doesn't contribute to GLOBAL WARMING!!!1111!1 But... the greenies still won't have it. Oh well, our loss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol: I'll support nuclear power when they get fusion working properly...

 

Still gotta figure out what to do with the byproducts in the meantime. <_<

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:lol: I'll support nuclear power when they get fusion working properly...

 

Still gotta figure out what to do with the byproducts in the meantime. <_>

governments say they won't build fast breeders but then they do cuz it's easier...that's why the greens can't get behind it...my preference is to not leave greenhouse or nuclear wastes for my granddaughter to live with....there are off the shelf solutions available right now...! that are renewable...solar, wind, geothermal and others (hydrogen for example)...electric cars are cool...!! anybody here ever race slot cars...??...ride on electric powered trains...??....europeans have been using electric trains for decades and improving mass transit systems while we americans have been trying to hold onto our cars/independence ...seems like it's about time we took the initiative and put our energy freedom at or near the top of the national priority list...green power means freedom from bondage to other governments and interests...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem we in the US have is that we've let our ability to build and maintain any new nuclear power plants atrophy since the 1970s scare, and now any new nuclear technology we delve into will have to be imported from other countries who are smarter and more advanced than us in nuclear power. We have a neighbor who worked for Westinghouse as a nuclear engineer his whole life. After 3 Mile Island and all those scares happened, and the idiot Americans decided move away from this type of energy, he was sent to work in Japan and other parts of Asia for the rest of his career, building their nuclear infrastructure. He's 85 years old and retired, and the few nuclear engineers we've been producing have been sent around the world, where people are smarter, and they are building their nuclear power plants. We have no one here to do the job... so if we ever wise up, we will have to import the French and Japanese to build it all for us. It'll be very hard to insert a "Buy America" clause into that bill since there are no Americans to do it.

 

I swear these leftist hippies are going to be the death of us.

Edited by LoArmistead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But that Tesla costs less that $60k right? That's already putting it well within the reach of many people. It costs less than a Corvette and those are everywhere.

You can get a Corvette new off of the showroom floor for barely over $40k. I'd much rather have the 'vette over the Tesla as well. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A bit? :rolleyes:

 

 

Or, we'll see the electric companies find a way to meet their customers' demands, just like in any other market. And if the market can't bear it, supply and demand will suffer and people will stop buying them. The markets can solve these problems, just like they have with every other new product ever made.

That would work if utilities were a free market. But most are regulated and can only raise rates on state utility commission approval. Remember Enron? There is a lot more to that then the media ever told the general public. California "deregulated" the utility market on the condition that a company could either generate energy or sell it to customers. Any company that had both had to split or sell off half their business. Now, the generating companies and the distribution companies started trading energy at whatever the market supply and demand dictated. BUT, the state said "you can't sell to consumers for any more than $X. Enron comes along, buys up some generation and starts selling power to the distributers. Everything is great because the consumer demand is such that the distributers can buy and sell power at a profitable level. Until some at Enron decides they can make more money if they "accidently" have some of the generation drop off grid. Losing that one bit of generation was enough to cause the price of electricity for the distributers to jumped something like 100x. And the distributing utilities HAD to buy it because it's illegal for them to shed load because the price of power went up. So we've got utilities paying $10,000/MWh and only allowed to bill the users for $100/MWh. Big problems ensue. Bankruptcy in a matter of days, even hours.

 

The loss of just a little bit of generation in the grand scheme of things was enough to create an energy shortage. A slight increase in demand from the consumer end will create the same market explosion. Only this time, it will be the consumer paying $10/kWh instead of $0.10/kWh.

 

Comparing plug-in sales to Corvettes is a vast oversimplification. There's a LOT more to selling cars than prices points, and the only other thing I can say there is I think you're wrong and I don't think plug-ins will adopt nearly as fast as you're saying.

 

I just think your doom and gloom of "this will happen buy then" and "this can't happen by then" is a bit unfounded. If there's a way to make plug-in technology work, then companies will jump on it. And if there's not, they won't. I have no problem relying on free markets to solve this "problem". And short of stopping production, which you've already said you're against, what else can you do?

I didn't say anything will happen. I said the potential is there. The conditions are lining up for it. Falling vehicle prices, improving designs (ie functional, good looking) and a consumer that is "environmentally conscious" and blames "big oil" for energy costs instead of themselves. The problem isn't that the "plug-in technology" doesn't work - it does. The problem isn't that we don't have the infrastructure - we can get it there. The problem is that the majority of the population thinks we have the infrastructure.

 

Electric cars don't have to "take off" for major problems to occur. All it takes is a couple million people in California deciding to take that step. No mass adoption required.

 

And you're right, what else can we do? Well...not much. I guess all I'm getting at is be prepared for your electric bill to skyrocket to the point where gasoline cars are still cheaper to drive than electric vehicles. That's most likely how the free market will solve this "problem."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem we in the US have is that we've let our ability to build and maintain any new nuclear power plants atrophy since the 1970s scare, and now any new nuclear technology we delve into will have to be imported from other countries who are smarter and more advanced than us in nuclear power. We have a neighbor who worked for Westinghouse as a nuclear engineer his whole life. After 3 Mile Island and all those scares happened, and the idiot Americans decided move away from this type of energy, he was sent to work in Japan and other parts of Asia for the rest of his career, building their nuclear infrastructure. He's 85 years old and retired, and the few nuclear engineers we've been producing have been sent around the world, where people are smarter, and they are building their nuclear power plants. We have no one here to do the job... so if we ever wise up, we will have to import the French and Japanese to build it all for us. It'll be very hard to insert a "Buy America" clause into that bill since there are no Americans to do it.

 

I swear these leftist hippies are going to be the death of us.

:withstupid:

And you know how we are trying to figure out what to do with the "nuclear waste"? As luck would have it, the stuff is recyclable and can be used in certain types of reactors repeatedly. And the portion of the "waste" that is left over from recycling has applications in other fields, including medicine. In fact, France does this and has virtually no radioactive waste.

Why don't we follow suit you ask? Surely if France can do it we can. Well, the recyling process is the same one that used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons. And that process is banned under executive order in the United States. Jimmy Carter strikes again.

 

 

You can get a Corvette new off of the showroom floor for barely over $40k. I'd much rather have the 'vette over the Tesla as well. :lol:
:blink: Wow where do you live? A stripped base model runs at the MSRP of $50k around here and optioning it will put it to $58k or so. And then there's the Z06 in the $70s and the ZR1 in the $100s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:blink: Wow where do you live? A stripped base model runs at the MSRP of $50k around here and optioning it will put it to $58k or so. And then there's the Z06 in the $70s and the ZR1 in the $100s.

You can walk into any dealer in the country and get base model for ~$41k.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you're right, what else can we do? Well...not much. I guess all I'm getting at is be prepared for your electric bill to skyrocket to the point where gasoline cars are still cheaper to drive than electric vehicles. That's most likely how the free market will solve this "problem."

We agree here. I do see that as the market's "solution". I think the difference between you and I is that I'm making note of just how dynamically electricity prices would have to change to be worse than gas. With rough numbers I've run in the past, we're talking about electricity prices increasing about 1000% before they're worse than gas given the capabilities of current plug-ins. Let's say just 5x though, in case that's changed. Personally, I see it unlikely that power prices will double or triple, let alone quintuple. Especially when most of the draw will come at night during the current "downtime" for the system. Sure, maybe in Cali where they already have power problems, but other places could handle the load much more reasonably.

 

Just like your apartment comment... Yes, maybe Cali will have trouble. So will apartment dwellers. That will stem the growth, just like you desire. But just because some people will have trouble with it doesn't mean everyone will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we're on the subject... nuclear power is making a comeback, but regulation is going to slow us down a bit.

 

Thirty years after the accident at Three Mile Island, the nuclear power industry is moving ahead with plans to build a string of new reactors in the U.S., though the revival faces many uncertainties.

 

The crisis that erupted in the predawn hours of March 28, 1979, when a combination of worker mistakes and equipment malfunctions triggered a partial meltdown in the core of one of two reactors at a power plant near Harrisburg, Pa., was long thought to have sealed the fate of the industry in the U.S.

 

But rising concerns about global warming have set the stage for a comeback. Nuclear power can generate electricity without producing the greenhouse gases associated with energy sources such as coal.

 

The partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant, shown this month, set P/>This green dimension is a surprising shift from the past, when nuclear power was widely demonized by environmentalists, and is one reason public acceptance of the technology appears to be growing. A Gallup poll released last week found 59% of people favor its use, including 27% strongly in favor./P> back nuclear power in U.S. for decades.

Associated Press

 

The partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island plant, shown this month, set back nuclear power in U.S. for decades.

This green dimension is a surprising shift from the past, when nuclear power was widely demonized by environmentalists, and is one reason public acceptance of the technology appears to be growing. A Gallup poll released last week found 59% of people favor its use, including 27% strongly in favor.

 

The U.S. has 104 reactors from the earlier wave of construction, which generate about 20% of the nation's electricity. Utilities have applied to build 26 new reactors, often at or adjacent to existing plants, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which has to approve the plans, says the first approvals could come by 2011. Given how long it takes to build a plant, the first wouldn't come on line until later in the decade.

 

But the revival faces tough barriers, including high costs. Jone-Lin Wang, managing director of the global power group at Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a consulting firm, says estimates "have gone up substantially, compared to just a few years ago." A 1,000 megawatt unit could cost $6 billion to $8 billion, she says, adding that since many plans call for building twin units as part of a single project, that could push total price tags up to $16 billion.

 

"For some of the companies going through the licensing process, that's the same size as their entire market cap," she says, and it remains unclear whether they can secure financing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yeah...that's below dealer invoice.

:shrug: May or may not be. I've seen multiple brand new 2009 'vettes for $45k and under in the showroom.

 

EDIT: Now that I think about it they might have been 2008s...

Edited by Waco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×