vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"They have a software charging curve that ""increases"" the batteries capacity as it degrades over time. So the end user see's a more stable range over the life of the car rather than a gradual decline from the 60kwh it's rated as.  This is better for the batteries and ultimately the end user."
IIRC correctly there was a report posted to reddit recently that Teslas are  the most popular seller in Norway, which has incentives for the first 50,000 buyers of EVs. They sold 1,493 in one month, which equates to almost 18,000 in the next 12 months in Norway alone.
This impact, at least in the short term, should be regional to China. Once China starts churning out EV that could spill over to the west but China will likely focus on their home market due to severe smog and its threat to the economy. Elon has shown a tenacity to innovate continuously and I doubt his China plant will be used for experiments and tests for new technologies, keeping him ahead of most other manufacturers.
Sort of yes, sort of no. All Teslas actually claim to be completely out of charge while there is actually still a bit of juice in the battery. They do this because fully draining the battery damages it and shortens its life span significantly. But that's just a few percent of full battery capacity, and not what's being discussed in this article.  The thing being discussed in this article is that Tesla used to sell one specific model that had about 15 % of it's normal battery capacity artificially locked away. You could pay Tesla a bit extra at any time and they would unlock the full potential of the battery via a remote software update. That particular model sold pretty poorly, unclear if it's because customers didn't like the artificial restriction or if the range on that model was simply too short, but either way Tesla stopped selling it not long after introducing it.
"You are correct; Nissan's troubles are because they cheaped out and went with an air cooled pack, whereas Chevy and Tesla liquid cool theirs.  Chevy uses about only 60% of the Volt's available battery range (10kWh out of 16).  Torture tests simulating well over 100k worth of charges showed better than 70% range remaining, hardly ""oh you'd better drop a few thou on a replacement pack"" territory."
I work for an auto finance company and have performed some job related analysis looking into this as well. From what I can tell I don't think the numbers are there for a 2008 recession. The loans are smaller, the asset is already known to depreciate, and the auction market is pretty effective at cutting deficiencies even more.   Something to watch out for if you are analyzing this stuff though is the influx of used cars into the market. Remember, more defaults means more repossessions which means more used cars on the market.   I'm curious to see what happens with this influx of used, relatively reliable cars onto the market and how this impacts the constant pumping out of new vehicles  that manufacturers are forced to meet. We've already seen scaling back by some big players. There's definitely something happening in the auto industry but I don't know what to make of it yet and I would hardly say we are looking at Great Recession 2.
All of a sudden having each stall with a charging station is a selling feature and home owners associations will install them to improve resale value.  In theory.  Then again I worry about lithium demand.     That my friend is the long term play.   I think it's still in infancy.
Based on what current Model S owners are seeing in terms of battery degradation, the battery should still have 85% of it's original capacity after 300,000 miles. These cars will last a very very long time compared to a conventional automobile.
When the 2016 models come out, the dealership marks down the 2015 model and then it sells pretty fast.  The process doesn't take that long in the car market because the 2015 models are just as good as the 2016 so if they are just a little cheaper, they will sell quickly.  If you want a 2008 Audi that has never sold, you are going to be looking for a long time. The same thing happens in every industry.  Where are the older versions of digital cameras?  Cell phones?  Blenders?  Digital pianos?  Any item that changes from year to year sits on shelves for a little while after its replacement comes out until the retailer reduces its price by enough and it sells.  The only exceptions are goods that depreciate very quickly or go bad, which are recycled or thrown away (like fresh produce, for example). It seems kind of crazy at first that essentially all goods that are produced by the economy are consumed, but that's the magic of capitalism: prices make markets clear.
Or valued like a company that is likely to lead the transition to EVs.  What most people miss: to make 1M EVs/year you need at least 50GWh in batteries/year. This is an amount you cannot buy anywhere. Not even if you're Mercedes or BMW or GM. The only solution is to build dedicated factories for this, and that takes 3-5 years.  Tesla has the forethought to realize this is the bottleneck and they moved early. So in 2020 each of the other car makers can maybe source enough batteries for 100K cars/year, while Tesla will make their own to the tune of 1M cars/year.  This will change eventually, of course. But not anytime soon.
&gt;Something to watch out for if you are analyzing this stuff though is the influx of used cars into the market. Remember, more defaults means more repossessions which means more used cars on the market.  I think Morgan Stanley said they expect to see up to a 50% decline in used car prices over the next four years.  Edit: [Can't find the report, but here's the Market Watch summary](http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-much-morgan-stanley-thinks-used-car-prices-will-crater-in-one-chart-2017-04-03)
I like this idea. The limiting factor of renewables and EV's is mainly in storage capabilities. It's easy to make a Tesla go 400 miles on a single charge but the weight requirement isn't. We need smaller size, longer life, and greater storage. And today's environment provides a profit incentive to pursue these goals.
&gt;Tesla also markets [electric powertrain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_powertrain) components, including [lithium-ion battery](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery) packs to automakers including [Daimler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler_AG) and [Toyota](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota). Tesla's [CEO](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CEO), [Elon Musk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk), has said that he envisions Tesla as an independent automaker, aimed at eventually offering electric cars at prices affordable to the average consumer. &gt;==== &gt;[**Image**](https://i.imgur.com/RLy3cLu.png) [^(i)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tesla_Motors_logo.svg) --- ^Interesting: [^Tesla ^Roadster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Roadster) ^| [^Tesla ^Model ^S](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_S) ^| [^Elon ^Musk](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elon_Musk) ^Parent ^commenter ^can [^toggle ^NSFW](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot NSFW toggle&amp;message=%2Btoggle-nsfw+cjiyvz8) ^or[](#or) [^delete](http://www.np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=autowikibot&amp;subject=AutoWikibot Deletion&amp;message=%2Bdelete+cjiyvz8)^.
i haven't done the precise math to update with the latest call, so you might be right about that.  I will do it some week next time.  As to the other questions:  1.  Every major car company is doing research.  There is going to be massive competition.  2.  Your last sentence confirms my view that you don't understand the issues.  In the real world there is specialization.  Some companies design cars, others design batteries.  So of course the car companies don't have the good battery tech, because they are not battery companies.  The rest of the industry isn't stupid.  Battery companies don't try to make cars, and car companies don't make batteries.  Musk has jumped into an industry he is not a specialist at.  It just so happens I know something about batteries.  The simple fact that Musk is talking about Lithium Ion batteries proves that his tech is no good.  the ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANIES declined to spend massive capital for a plant to supply TSLA cars.  That is why he has to make his own.  Committing huge amounts of capital on old technology is a frightful idea.  THE ACTUAL BATTERY COMPANIES wouldn't do it.  But you think Musk knows more about batteries than the actual battery companies.
&gt; Once full EV's cost 25k there isn't any reason to buy a gasoline car  Only range convenience (basically when we can recharge or replace fully charged battery with the same convenient that we can currently do a gas fillup). That's a hugely annoying disadvantage in a culture which has a big emphasis on driving for recreational purposes.
They have great cars but really with gas under 2 dollars per gallon in the US why would anyone switch? I actually believe electric motors are better suited for most passenger vehicles with its great inherent torque, but the battery tech still needs around a 50% improvement to match gas vehicle driving flexibility that most consumers demand.
This is a tech company where they are doing stuff for future, when elect cars become popular tesla will skyrocket and dominate the sector, think of how much cash they will make if they dominate the car market. Only logical way to criticize the situation of Tesla is to assume electronic cars wont make it and never be used otherwise comparing to companies who make extreme profits is stupid.
Looking at auto sales report released today it was up 1.5% for all car sales, including used. No clarity on new sales. The sales data I cited was for July, so the bottom end of the market -- as you say -- is not doing well.
The short answer is yes, electrical vehicles make logistical sense. The batteries aren't quite where they should be to really push the market, but the lifecycles are high enough, and the batteries themselves can be recycled.   There are two major advantages that electric has over oil. The first is that electricity is abundant and can come from many sources. This means that a car can be running on power from coal, wind, solar, hydro-electric, or any other source of electricity. This also means that the cost per mile driven is generally lower than the cost of a gas driven car.   Another big advantage is the national security it offers. If electric were to really enter the consumer market in a big way, the dependency on countries in the Middle East and Africa would be lessened. It would also ease some of the competition between nations like China and the United States over natural resources.   Of course their are problems with electric cars as well, and they aren't even close to replacing gas for use in heavy machinery.
No, I did not get upset or went overboard. Sorry if you got that impression.  I am discussing this topic with you.  To summarize: the future is exchangeable battery because no battery today and in the near future can be used for a very long drive.  You will pay only for the electricity you consumed from the battery. You will pay more per KW than you pay for KW consumed at home because you have to pay for additional costs and profits by Tesla.  You will not pay for the battery because you don't own the battery. It's exchanged every time.  If you want, and you mostly do short drives, you can buy a car with a fixed set of batteries, costing a lot of money, but you will not have to pay the fees for KW you charge into it at your home.
It's an early adoption situation, Tesla's approach is pretty brilliant. Serve the high-end niche markets with a design and performance at the high-end and work your way down in affordability over the long term. Many products have followed this overarching strategy. BTW that includes the early combustion cars which were playthings for the wealthy, and pretty unreliable at the time compared to horse and buggy.  As an aside, all those batteries are recyclable into new batteries. Solar panel costs are dropping rapidly and if we can get to the point that investment in industry R&amp;D is self sustainable we will continue get price drops similar to Moore's law in computer speeds.
People said the same thing when Priuses came out.  Consumer Reports did a test after 200k miles and found basically no degredation:  http://autos.aol.com/article/toyota-prius-reliability/  The chemistry and pack usage characteristics, plus addition of dedicated cooling systems, make comparisons to cell phone batteries completely invalid.
I'm simply pointing out that most automakers (successful and not) have primarily focused on how to build their companies, gain market share, and try to anticipate consumer wants and trends.   You are correct in saying, by definition the successful ones have done better.  As well, yes, Tesla is not catering to the minivan users of the world at the moment (although it's expanding into SUVs). But it has no reason to, that's not it's market at the moment.   I'm saying that it's impressive that the company knows it's market and is willing to sacrifice profits to a degree to make it more attractive to its market. Ironically, what it's doing is actually using something that is generally appreciated by the majority of consumers.
"It's a fair complaint to have. People have grown accustomed to road trips needing only 5-10 minutes to refuel and continue on. That's currently a problem in the EV market, and one that lots of manufacturers are working hard to try and fix.   Porsche just unveiled their 800 volt, 350kW charger that's 2-3 times faster charging (on paper) than the Tesla Superchargers (which operate at 480 volts, max 120kW). For example, a 75kWh battery on a Tesla can ""supercharge"" from 0 to 75kWh ""full charge"" in 37 minutes (although the battery should never be fully depleted). With Porsche's supercharger, a 75kWh battery could charge ~13 minutes. Tesla is expecting to upgrade their supercharger technology to match or exceed Porsche soon.  However, the addressable component to ""range anxiety"" in EV's is recharging, and as more companies are focusing on the EV market, addressing that problem will become first priority. Further, the batteries being used will increase in density and capability (therefore, increased range), so charging a battery will become even more important. The goal is that, in the future, you can have a 500+ mile battery and still charge it in &lt;10 minutes. If a 500+ miles battery, or a 150kWh battery pack, had access to 350kW chargers, the charge time would be ~25 minutes."
Something tells me the people buying Tesla aren't doing it because they care about the environment... It's more of a side effect.  There's definitely a subset that do but everyone I know around DC who's on the list (and it's at least a few dozen) want the status symbol.  Tesla is an icon at this point and if it was a $20k, 500mi range econobox, I guarantee none of these people would be buying despite how much better that would be as a car.
You know how your cell phone battery gets shittier and shittier over time until you either get a new phone or buy a new battery? Well the same thing will happen to your car. And a new battery will cost $10k. And what will we do with the old one that's full of toxic chemicals?  There are still many challenges for electric cars.
"&gt;The Chevy Bolt has a 50% larger battery for practically the same price.  As far as I can tell, the Chevy Bolt has a 60kWh battery and 238 mile advertised range, and it's base price is more expensive than the Tesla Model 3. Further, no other ""available"" electric vehicle has a 200+ mile range. BMW i3 has max 114 miles on a charge, Fiat 500e is 87 miles, VW eGolf with range extender 125mi.   Further, nobody else is offering an ""affordable"" EV with that range AND self-driving capability."
I'm being realistic. They're dumping tens of millions of dollars into an operation that shows no real signs of earning any kind of profit in anything that approaches the short or medium term. They're making expensive cars at Ferrari volumes for BMW prices in limited markets while the major automakers introduce more and more electric and hybrid cars. Once Mercedes and Ford and Honda have full electric cars on the road, serviced and backed by their huge network of dealerships, what does Tesla offer anyone? Toyota is happy, they pumped a relatively small amount of money into Tesla and have all but locked up rights to their IP should the company go bust.  Tesla is trying to capitalize on being first to market, but they're in a kind of catch 22: there isn't huge demand for electric cars right now, which means they won't be able to sell the volumes they need to grow their business and return a profit. As soon as the market is large enough for them to make a profit, the big guys are going to catch up and run them over. Who'd buy a Model S when they could get an electric 5 series for the same money? Who'd buy a Tesla Roadster if they could get an electric Boxster or 911?
Well, it was a 3 wheeler and looked too funky for current tastes and without mandates or complete revolution in infrastructure and so forth it's sad to say it won't work here. And again, you can buy many cars that get 40+ MPG without being hybrid....when I look at the Volt I ask, why, if the avg. MPG is 42....build something more like an Accord or Civic that gets 40+ mpg...  I'm looking ahead when battery technology will make the breakthroughs for mass scale, much more durable, longer charge and life times such as this, in maybe 2017;  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15735478  We just need to be patient, make heavy investment in R&amp;D...and focus it on the areas that will make and break us.
I like those links you added. The first one is highlighting that most of the issues of manufacturing of electric cars are shared by their non-electric counterparts. Plus if you live in a clean energy area (I do at least) then the impact is even less than typical. So it is something that is dependent on other eco-friendly movements. The more we push towards sustainable tech and energy, the more Tesla and electric vehicles will benefit.  Also, good on you for keeping up on maintenance. It's not too common a thing for people to take good care of their cars.
Have you *seen* a Model S? Driven one? The car is beautiful even if it was gas. Once they reach production levels I believe it will sell like no other. And do you think Tesla is lacking demand? They have over 6000 PRE-ORDERS (they require a $5000 deposit, too). If this car was available non-preorder, I know multiple people that would be in the market for one (My father, for example, even said he would trade in his 110g+ AMG Mercedes for one, and he lives in Texas! The big oil state!). Not only that, they have drivetrain deals with Toyota and Daimler (maker of mercedes, etc). Who wouldn't get a Model S when the technology in it is far superior to a 5 series or 911 that's just electric. I don't even think electric is the main selling point, but that it's a vastly superior car (speed, handling, technology) than any others in it's price range. Also, a Boxster over a Model S? Really? And do you really think porsche, BMW or GM can catch up to 10 years of research and development by silicon valley engineers by the time they make the Model S and Model X fully available? Be realistic... developing a completely new kind of car takes many many years of development no matter how much money the company has. Everyone has doubted Tesla from day 1 and here we are ~10 years later and they are actually doing it.
"The first one was a summation of the experience at the end of the article. Both were comments regarding reliability which is what each article and respective section was addressing.   &gt;...reliability concerns after unfavourable Edmunds and Consumer Reports long-term use reviews  -  &gt; ""Our car amassed quite the repair résumé during the last 17 months.""  -  &gt;""Consumer Reports' Tesla Model S has more than its share of problems"""
&gt; Perhaps the natural constraints will be useful in toning down the EV exuberance — something both regulators and the industry need to allow more time for research and development. Other solutions, such as hybrid cars with smaller batteries and fuel cell vehicles, don’t deserve to be killed off by a surge in battery-powered vehicle production just yet   Wtf...this guy has a very novel understanding of how the world works
Are you aware of how not environmentally friendly it is to make the batteries?  Plus, there are already so many other options. Chevy Bolt, BMW i3, Focus Electric, Hyundai IONIQ, Soul EV, Mitsubishi i-MiEV, Nissan Leaf, VW e-Golf to name a few.
Range and energy density will keep a cap on electric car growth for a long, long, time. Try to estimate when it will be cheaper for a consumer to buy a certain size/quality electric car compared to a gas car of the same size/quality, and figure in total cost of ownership over 5 or 10 years. It is possible we are headed in that direction, but it is also possible that the time we get there is 50 years from now.
This may be a controversial opinion, but I think this makes great business sense.  They found that the cost of running two battery production lines (60 &amp; 75) exceeded the cost of providing the slightly more expensive battery for every S60 customer.  They also gain the benefit of enriching the resale market and providing customer choice.  I don't think that most people here realize that 'software locking' functionality is a very common practice across manufacturers and industries to reduce manufacturing costs and provide customer options.  What is rare is the ability to 'unlock' after purchase.  For example, my last VW was a golf and it shared the same MCU with several other VW lines, including more expensive offerings with more premium features.  One of these premium features is a package that enables you to roll your windows up and down from your key fob by holding the unlock or lock button, but my car did not come with that option (in fact, no Golf at the time came with it).  The package was not *enabled* but the software and hardware was there.  You can grab yourself a USB-OBDII cable and VCDS software and go enable it yourself (and a number of other nice features).  All of this said, I think we are in the early days of DLC.  Remember when you could by a full game for $50 and play it for a year and *then* some dlc would come out and give you reason to play again for $5 or $10?  Then companies (cough EA cough) came along and started to make the DLC part of what you needed to have the full experience on day 1?  Yea, that is bad.  I am in support of what Tesla has done so far, but the second they (or possibly another manufacturer looking to capitalize on the idea of DLC) starts removing standard bits to make them post-facto addons, we may be getting into a bad place.
EVs aren't perfect yet. The internal combustion engine has had 100 years of fine-tuning.   There are more than enough EV early adopters to satisfy supply. If you're sensitive to the current EV limitations, simply wait. Somebody will love taking your place in the queue.
I agree.   Once it hits the threshold of cost / value it will flip completely in a few years to nearly 100% of new vehicles.   Sometime in 2025-2030 is my prediction - unscientific of course.  I think the question will be do hybrid gas engines stay for longer.  I think they are an ugly stop gap and once cheaper it just won't make sense.   I do think we need at least one more generation of charging capability,  but I think that's doable in that timeframe.
That's not the debate here. I get your point, but the issue was on-the-go charging. It takes time, it's an inconvenience, but it's not insurmountable. Asserting because YOUR use patterns mean you don't need to recharge en-route = it charges in 5 seconds is simply wrong.   Personally I can't wait for an EV. Likely will be a motorcycle for me first, followed by an eGolf / Bolt / etc down the road.