vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Wherever you park right now.  It’s relatively simple to run electric lines and install chargers.  I’m doing that to my house right now.  Well, not installing a charger yet, but the box and everything is right by where I park.  We’re upgrading the electrical system and it’ll be ready for it.  I have gasoline cars now and am eager to go electric.  I’m putting a few thousand into my daily driver so it’ll be good for another 8-10 years.  I think electric cars will hit their stride somewhere around 2025.  I’m going solar before next summer and will put away a few thousand a year towards an electric car.  Better than car payments on something that will be obsolete soon.
Yeah, it's going to happen a lot faster than that.  Today we're starting to see the 2nd generation of modern electric cars becoming available at $35K price and 200+ mile range.  It was only 7 years ago that the first generation started becoming available.  If progress continues at the pace it has up to now, then by 2025 we might see the 3rd gen EVs appearing and I expect they'll have 300+ range starting around $25K.  EV infrastructure is easy peasy to install.  All you have to do is pick an electrician out of the phone book.  Apartments, parking garages, and hotels will all have to start installing level 1 and level 2 chargers, if they want customers.
I'm more interested in how they react in December when Tesla is supposed to making 10,000 units a month? If they can't hit production targets to clear out their backlog of sales orders then people will be waiting 4-5 years for their car. By that time other companies will have made big strides in electric vehicles and Tesla will begin to lose the prominence it has built which has caused it's shares to be so overvalued.
ITT: People who didn't read the article.  This has nothing to do with battery longevity, it removes a software lock that intentionally reduces the amount of battery the car will use despite shipping with the same battery pack in the longer range model.
The ""range anxiety"" is closely tied to the charging concerns, and with the Tesla Supercharger network doubling by year's end and continuing to grow (both Tesla's 480v charging network, as well as other plug-in options like Chargepoint, Blink, EV-GO, etc), charging is less of a gamble and more of just simple planning. Apps like ""PlugShare"" allow you to see crowd-sourced reports of EV plugs, what types they use, type of charging available, cost, availability, and more. You can plan your drive to use Superchargers on the road, and then plan your destination or evening stop in a place with charging capability. I think it's only a matter of time before destination chargers develop a valet system like what Tesla does at many Superchargers. Otherwise, by the end of 2017, you should never be too far from a Supercharger, an EV charging station, or even some kind individual who will ""lend you some juice"" to get you where you're going."
I'm no expert but I don't think it'll take to 2040 will have 54% of sales.. Once full EV's cost 25k there isn't any reason to buy a gasoline car, the gas savings alone will be cheaper let alone repairs, oil change, filters, and they're already at 35k.
Yes, Better Place was a massive failure, in Israel (also Japan).  As an Israeli I can tell exactly why: greed, and unreasonable prices and charges (literaly, charges of electricity and money.)  The fact that Tesla is trying the SAME thing is showing you that this is the only way to have an electric car drive for a long distance.  Personally, I think that also Tesla will fail with this battery exchange program.  Only what happened with Standard Oil will work: a government mandated ONE standard for how to refuel a car (i.e. standard size and design of batteries to be exchanged for any Electric car.)
Consumers got what they paid for and Tesla put better equipment than necessary inside to A. Assist with resale value and B. Lessen manufacturing costs. The side effect is longer battery life and the option to upgrade without needing service. It's kind of a win win win win.
Well first, this is a very small proportion of teslas that can do this, it was only one model that is discontinued and was a cheaper alternative to the 75. Any person who bought that car knows that they can upgrade to the 75 at any time by paying the difference. They did this so more people have access to a Tesla and just didn't design a whole new battery to reach some people. This is not bad at all, you get what you pay for and it's the same thing as just buying a smaller battery. If it was only 60 kWh you couldn't unlock it for emergencies, so it's an added bonus, not a bad thing.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://about.bnef.com/blog/electric-vehicles-accelerate-54-new-car-sales-2040/) reduced by 92%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; London and New York, 6 July 2017 - Electric vehicles will make up the majority of new car sales worldwide by 2040, and account for 33% of all the light-duty vehicles on the road, according to new research published today.  &gt; The team now estimates that EVs will account for 54% of all new light-duty vehicle sales globally by 2040, not the 35% share it forecast previously.  &gt; BNEF sees them accounting for nearly 67% of new car sales in Europe by 2040, and for 58% in of sales in the U.S. and 51% in China by the same date.   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/6p1zel/electric_vehicles_to_accelerate_to_54_of_new_car/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~173744 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **New**^#1 **vehicle**^#2 **BNEF**^#3 **Energy**^#4 **Bloomberg**^#5"
It's really not DRM, it was never intended to be. It was their one lowest price model, to offer something more affordable before the model 3 release. No other models are affected, and the expected market size was so small it was cheaper than designing one more lower capacity battery. Everyone knew what they were buying, and can upgrade to the next model up at any time. I don't see how this is possibly a bad thing, that model is already discontinued as well and this will never be a thing again. Remember the alternative is for those few owners to just have a 60kwh battery, and not be able to do this, this was not possible on any other models.
"&gt; Literally not a single word of this comment is true.  Every word is true.   &gt; 1) 26.9 gross margins just got posted, with zero ZEV revenue.  I'm not talking about their posted numbers.  Taxpayers get tax credits for buying them.  If taxpayers didn't get those tax credits then TSLA would have to lower the price of the car and they would be a loss.     &gt; 2) Your 11,000 number is completely made up, particularly given that they had zero ZEV revenue.  See above.   &gt; 3) What competition? Name a car. There's nothing.  I said competition is ""coming"", not that it's here.   &gt; 4) Again, literally on that very same call, they said they've shaved hundreds of pounds off of the Model S since it started production due to improvements in battery technology. Batteries improve 8-10% every year. Everyone knows this.  1.  TSLA has worse battery tech than the cutting edge battery companies whose batteries are coming in the new competition.  2.  If you believed everything that companies said in conference calls you would be leveraged long every company in the world."
They could have just lowered the price of the car. They were selling a 75 battery at this price with just some digital handcuffs added so that the previous 75 battery people wouldn't get sour that the car they had bought at a certain price was now cheaper. It's DRM. If the hardware can do more but the software deliberately won't let it, it's DRM. If you're fine with this practice then you're fine with it. I don't like it at all. You don't have to agree with me.  P.S. Will space ships from SpaceX in the future be like this too? I used to want a Tesla model S, but now I don't. I don't want a car that someone else controls. Unfortunately many cars today are like that.
Of course, but the idea that you can simply use a supercharger and always get the battery back to X% in 30 minutes isn't accurate due to those limitations right now. It doesn't take that long before that 30 minutes becomes 35, then 40 and so on to prevent the battery from wearing out prematurely. BMW and Toyota have been working together on solid state batteries and (toyota) expect to have a production battery out in ~5 years. So the change is coming, but they still need solve the engineering problems that come with mass production and reducing costs of solid state batteries.
We'll see. There are about 10 battery breakthroughs announced every month. None of them has broken out of the lab yet.  Plus Elon makes a valid point: If you have a breakthrough tech, you'll probably try and sell it to the world's largest battery manufacturer: Panasonic/Tesla. Plus, they both have teams dedicated to mapping and pursuing all supposed breakthroughs and advances. While all this does not 100% guarantee that Toyota's boast is bullshit, it makes it likely.
haha, what now? They are constrained by Panasonic. If Panasonic can give them more batteries, they can make more cars. Their NUMMI plant is 370 acres and most of it is currently sitting empty. I suspect that they worked in some language with their new battery factory deal with Panasonic that also included Panasonic getting off their ass and making more batteries right now.
I think this has been clearly explained to you already.  I agree with others that you are hating on Tesla because you need to hate someone and it's been all of five minutes since you last raged.  BUT... In case that's not the case and you really just don't understand let me try and explain it.  The batteries are exactly the same, yes.  The difference between them is one is limited by software and the other is not.  There are trade offs to each choice.  Limiting the battery to 20% of it's capaciy means you can recharge to full every day and do little to no harm to your battery.  You will of course have a limited range.  With the unlocked you 75kwh battery, you get more range.  Now Tesla warns you not to charge beyond 90% of the battery capacity or you begin to damage the battery.  However you get more range.  Let's also be clear here.  The battery packs limited to 60kwh have a REDUCED price of 8500 for the vehicle.  If you want to upgrade you pay the 8500 difference, but you are also woke for tax rebates and incentives which make the upgrade cheaper.  The short: the 60kwh version is cheaper, you'll get a longer life out of your battery, and if you decide to unlock the full battery capacity, there are tax incentives making it cheaper in the long run.  Finally, your reference to this being a pay to win business model couldn't be more wrong.  From just what I've said here you're wrong.  This gets more cars into people's garage's and driveways as well as simplifies production reducing production costs.  It also provides more options to the consumer at a reasonable price.  Source: https://electrek.co/2016/06/09/tesla-60kwh-pricing-option-software-revolution-exclusive-details/
[Chevy Bolt](http://www.chevrolet.com/bolt-ev-electric-vehicle) 238 miles range. You can buy it NOW, instead of waiting until next year. I would rather buy from GM than from Slick Muskie.  Parking problem is syndrome of dysfunctional management. I don't trust a place that can't even fix their parking problem could build a good car.
&gt; . I mean, they are making a really cheap Tesla S, where are they cutting costs?  Guess you forgot your tax dollars go into that car. We pay a ton of money per car to lower the price. Funny thing is, wealthier people are the ones buying the Model S for example, but tons of poor people are subsidizing it.   &gt; The Chevy Bolt has a 50% 38km larger battery for practically the same price.  I'm not a fan of all the issues with Teslas and there are MANY. But I rather have that than any Chevy.
New cars are sold for about $500 over their blue book value. They drop in value by about 20% their first year. Used cars are sold for about $2,500 above their blue book. They depreciate like normal. My advice based on my personal experience is to get a new car. When buying a used car, remember that the previous owner sold it for a reason. You are buying someone else's problems.  Average car is flipped every 4 years when it takes 5 years to pay it off. Don't do that...keep it for 5+ years if you get a new car. My knowledge comes from being a Chevrolet car salesman. This info is generalized and about 10 years old.
The thing is, this is not the same electrical system that Saab would be employing. I see you guys are saying but it's just not the same. Electric cars require a whole new level of engineering, not just the wiring looms and such. Since it'll be a main focus of the car, they'll be doing things differently than they used to.  And yeah, reliability is going to be questionable up until the cars are released. Tesla motors is a good example of lofty electrical engine goals and unreliability. So I'm not saying it'll be a perfect car, I'm just saying it will most likely be handled in a different way.
"&gt; This is an idea that was actually put into place more than a 100 years ago, in 1896 and even before, when the first electric cars were introduced and they even built ""service stations"" for them so you can swap the batteries. [read it here]  &gt; Even electric cars made by Tesla are nothing new.  &gt; And recently, a company called ""Better Place"", in Israel, produced modern electric cars with automated and robotic service stations that will swap the batteries for them. Read about ""Better Place"".  &gt; Bottom line: nothing new here for more than 100 years."
&gt;Are you aware of how not environmentally friendly it is to make the batteries?  Yes, I am aware of exactly how lame this argument is, and the number of times I've had to listen to it.  Making anything in  a factory has consequences.  Li-ion batteries are no worse environmentally than several dozen other things that go into typical cars.
"Electric does make a difference when considering whether to lease or buy. The make/model is something to consider. The state you live in also makes a difference. If you are purchasing a small electric compliance car (like the Fiat 500e), leasing is almost always a better deal. These cars are often only available in certain states (California and Oregon), and the lease deals available are very enticing. For example, the Fiat 500e is often available at well under $100/mo in a three-year lease with $0 down, while purchasing it would cost far more ($30k, minus credits/rebates = $20k), even when considering the residual value. If you want to own a Tesla Model S, I recommend purchasing a used car -- the market is somewhat flooded with used Teslas because some owners like to upgrade to the latest and greatest features and take a pretty big loss on their ""old"" Tesla. You can save a lot of money on a pre-owned Model S with relatively low miles, and the battery packs have been holding up well. If you have your heart set on a new Model S, I would treat it like any other vehicle and do the comparison of lease vs buy. One thing to keep in mind that buying a Model S before the end of 2016 will grandfather you into the free supercharging for life, which makes the car more valuable in the future. Right now (2016/2017) there is a $7500 federal tax credit when buying an electric vehicle. If you lease, the leasing company gets the credit, not you. The cost of the lease should indirectly reflect this credit, however. Some states have additional incentives. California has a $2500 rebate, for example, that you can receive even if you lease the vehicle. To summarize: a small compliance car often has very good reasons to lease. An expensive luxury car like the Tesla can be looked at like any other lease vs buy decision, and buying a used Model S may save the most money."
They would be making a huge assumption. Like when they thought people would buy Z71 trucks that weren't four wheel drive. And guess what! They were right.   They're only going to be making cars right now I'd almost guarantee. Maybe some light SUV's and maybe a large SUV but only as an option along with combustion engines continuing. EV's are definitely being aimed at urban commuters and are best used for that purpose right now.   But before long they will be making $$$ selling all that torque to workers/enthusiasts.
There's quite a lot of investment in battery tech right now. Batteries with 2 to 4 times the energy density of Li-ion are now in production, though not for sale yet. People are working on fast charging and long life battery tech too.  And there are a number of flow battery technologies, where the electrolytes are like fuel, and the power extraction unit is like an engine. These may never be suitable for vehicles, but they can store huge amounts of energy for months.   Also there are some very high energy density batteries that are non-rechargeable but where the solid electrolytes are replaceable and recyclable. These have energy density close to that of gasoline.
"The new Tesla car with exchangeable battery means that the battery is not owned by you. How can the batteries owned (and paid) by you if every time you exchange them with batteries of unknown past, owners and quality?  If you want to insist to own your batteries and charge them at home, then, yes, you will have to pay for your set of batteries, but then why would you exchange YOUR batteries for another set with unknown past and owners?  Let me explain it in a different way: Nobody pays their share of the cost of the expensive Electric infrastructure needed to supply their home with electricity. You just pay as you consume. Yes, part of what you pay is to cover the costs of the infrastructure, but big consumers of electricity (factories and businesses) covered much more of that than the individual home owner.  Yes, electric car batteries are expensive but you don't need to pay for them if the arrangement is ""pay as you go"".  With conventional car, would you like to pay $1000s of Dollars for huge tank and fill it with gas, so you don't have to ""pay as you go""?  Also, if we exchange batteries as we go, we don't need such expensive batteries. They can be cheaper (not cheapest) batteries that have less range."
It's still a car with the carbon footprint of a car, except it uses electricity, which still is generated by fossil fuels for the most part   If it's a step in the right direction  And people are only buying it to be cool elitist hippies, deep down  I'd still like to buy one
That's a good question, you should ask the 100,000 current Tesla owners as well as the 500,000 people on this list for a Model 3, why they went with a Tesla instead of another product.   Tesla is THE gold standard for cars. I don't think I need to provide much anecdotal evidence to claim that people in affluent countries are more than willing to cough up $$$ for the prestige that goes with the product.   And America isn't cash strapped. We could be doing better, sure, but we're still affluent. Where are these much cheaper cars you talk about? Anyone in the market for an electric car has $ to spend
Hybrids &amp; electrics are not quite ready for the prime time. The cost of manufacturing the batteries, let alone problems of efficiency, and eventually replacement, means that, without a massive and permanent increase in oil prices, widespread adoption is unlikely. I forget what the gasoline cost per gallon often cited is, for electric and hybrid vehicles to become competitive... I think it was typically north of $8/gallon. Of course, twenty to thirty years out, we quite well may have such. However, the cost of those vehicles won't be coming down without some near technological miracle, in both battery design and production - those who can afford $40,000 for a car will retain the autonomy granted by private transportation. Everyone else will probably clamor for meaningful public transportation options - and /or move to a more dense settlement pattern that does not mandate individual vehicle ownership
Not being able to keep up with demand--for at least a foreseeable 5 years, as you just said--is a pretty huge failure in itself, and I don't see them being able to last. They underestimated the market and I expect some of the big established automakers like Toyota, Ford, and Nissan to swoop down and meet the demand with their own offerings as well as with new models. Tesla, as you just noted, still has yet to be PROFITABLE, whereas Amazon has been around for some 20 years now, and HAS actually turned a profit, and they've had the huge ups and downs of just about any 20-year-old business, so your comparison of Amazon's last-quarter losses to Tesla's last-quarter losses is pretty absurd.
https://qz.com/783314/this-is-what-electric-cars-are-doing-to-the-lithium-market/  Yes lithium is not a rare metal, but when demands rise very fast supply tend to lag. This is why oil price hikes happened historically.  Eventually it would even put but if the production rose as quickly as you describe we would be having Lithium shortage which would translate into price hikes which would then lower to demand of such cars using those batteries
I am currently a college student and as a part time hobby/business I buy used cars from bank repossesions and flip them. In the past three months I have noticed brand new cars (less than 5000 miles on them) flood the local auctions.
&gt;How do we know that's the reason? There's also more used cars in the wild now, and cars tend to last a lot longer than they used to.  Average age of cars on the road also went from 3-5 years to 8-12 years now.  People don't own cars longer because they last longer, they own cars longer because they are not as easily able to afford another.  THAT is the main issue.    GDP has gone up (although this statement is suspicious when you factor in inflation), but median income has actually gone down adjusted for the 1960s/1970s projected rates.  People with more disposable income buy more cars, when there is more $$$ available to the average person they are not frugal and fix up their old car, they go out and buy a new one.  So what we have seen are not only fewer cars being sold every years since 1969 but also that people are forced to own cars longer to save $$.