Tesla Truck will need power of 4,000 homes!

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
Originally Posted By: Mr Nice
UncleDave, How much money did you loose on GM stock ?
Enough to remember the pain the whole ride down. . UD
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2017
Messages
24,853
Location
...
Uncle Dave, I hope you don’t have everything riding on TSLA. Sorry to hear about GovMo, that was a travesty of mega proportions. I have been investing since 1986 and never put money into companies that don’t make a profit. That’s just my stance. Some mutual funds or ETFs will but if they are closely watched and with very small percentage of assets then it can work. Right now I like income which means boring companies.
 

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
Nope got on and off Tesla early. I could have ridden it higher, but I never got burned taking profit. I completely understand the reticence to put money into them. UD
 
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
6,762
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Bashing and calling the ball are two different things. GM stole my money when it BK'd - hows that bashing? Please - The oil industry and its military protection are the real welfare kings. I wellI understand the profit part of the equation, and I don't think things will be truly "great" until profits realize. The big thing to note is that this car/space company is spending money developing infrastructure alongside products in the form of massive battery creation, a prior weak link in delivery - and cost- as well as a coast to coast charging network to insure viability. Infrastructure is some of the most heavily subsidized component in any countries economy. the real welfare kings are the oil, gas and military industry. IF they only had one or the other burden to bear the profits would realize sooner - but to make it all work and be viable you cannot separate the two until the charging is ubiquitous. UD
Whether it's personal or not is not relevant to the discussion. Tesla commits just as much theft, just with greater approvals. The best you can do here is compare one thief/welfare king to another thief/welfare king. You cannot argue one of them is clean any more than I can. There are two reasons why Tesla developed the network: 1. There was no money in developing a charging network for electric cars. Sound business minds realized that if most people had to pay for this network, they weren't going to use it, and probably not buy a Tesla. They were right. The network is still a money loser. Not as big a loser as "battery swapping", but still pretty bad. 2. FREE energy sells. Why does the Model S outsell the other luxury full sized cars? Benz, BMW, Lexus, and Audi aren't giving away FREE UNLIMITED FUEL with your purchase. The only reason he's stuck having to subsidize his own network is to give his cars an advantage over the competition. Otherwise, he could pay for the network with profits from charging cars. There has never been a subsidy of fuel that resulted in free fuel. Want to undercut the competition? You're going to pay.
 

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
Diogenes - Once he saw the officials of a temple leading away some one who had stolen a bowl belonging to the treasurers, and said, "The great thieves are leading away the little thief." Theft is taking your money and leaving you with nothing - Telsa shares - have lots of value. GM took shareholders money and left them with nothing. Nothing is "free" charging is built into the price for a limited number of clients. UD
 
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
6,762
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
You can't have it both ways. Either Tesla is bleeding cash in creating the infrastructure, or he's paying for it by selling cars. It's not both at the same time. But it's definitely not the latter, because one cannot accurately figure the cost of a lifetime of power usage to be able to bundle it into the price tag. If it were hh You're comparing the thief with his bread in his jacket to the thief with his bread outside of the store. The only reason you can't call Elon Musk a thief is because he hasn't exited the store yet. He definitely has the bread in his jacket as evidenced by the saccharin lies he keeps spreading to keep the cash running into his Madoff-like enterprise.
 
Joined
Oct 10, 2008
Messages
19,707
Location
Sunny Florida
Sad to see many here who still somehow believe GM did them wrong. All that BK nonsense was simply a gift to the unions that helped get someone elected. I'm sure a lot of folks got caught in the market as it dumped. IMO the SpaceX program is potentially one of mankind's greatest achievements, and could be the absolute greatest thing to ever happen. But Tesla is not. Selling tax credits to other companies is a Ponzi type scheme that may not support Tesla long enough to really come up with a viable concept.
 
Last edited:

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
You can't have it both ways. Either Tesla is bleeding cash in creating the infrastructure, or he's paying for it by selling cars. It's not both at the same time. But it's definitely not the latter, because one cannot accurately figure the cost of a lifetime of power usage to be able to bundle it into the price tag. If it were hh You're comparing the thief with his bread in his jacket to the thief with his bread outside of the store. The only reason you can't call Elon Musk a thief is because he hasn't exited the store yet. He definitely has the bread in his jacket as evidenced by the saccharin lies he keeps spreading to keep the cash running into his Madoff-like enterprise.
You can't have it both ways - Trillions sent away with no ROI vs. billions to build factories and infrastructure here. Which is the better long term spend for the US economy and industry ? In that nearly all project of this scale are subsidized which countries to you want to enrichen ? Ours or someone elses? Creating infrastructure is more than just the charging network, remember the battery gigafactory in the desert? infrastructure spend continues. Focusing on the few cars that have "free charging " which gets offset by solar is a mcguffin. Merry Christmas Everyone! UD
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
6,762
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
You can't have it both ways. Either Tesla is bleeding cash in creating the infrastructure, or he's paying for it by selling cars. It's not both at the same time. But it's definitely not the latter, because one cannot accurately figure the cost of a lifetime of power usage to be able to bundle it into the price tag. If it were hh You're comparing the thief with his bread in his jacket to the thief with his bread outside of the store. The only reason you can't call Elon Musk a thief is because he hasn't exited the store yet. He definitely has the bread in his jacket as evidenced by the saccharin lies he keeps spreading to keep the cash running into his Madoff-like enterprise.
You can't have it both ways - Trillions sent away with no ROI vs. billions to build factories and infrastructure here. Which is the better long term spend for the US economy and industry ? In that nearly all project of this scale are subsidized which countries to you want to enrichen ? Ours or someone elses? Creating infrastructure is more than just the charging network, remember the battery gigafactory in the desert? infrastructure spend continues. Focusing on the few cars that have "free charging " which gets offset by solar is a mcguffin. Merry Christmas Everyone! UD
Are you understanding that there is literally no logical way nor any science fiction way to drop oil because of the aviation, marine, construction, stationary engine, rail, long haul trucking, mining, logging, heating, and other industries? Are you not understanding that 5 seconds after we abandon petroleum, the production of every car, gas or electric, screeches to a halt? Round here, if you order a Tesla, a Ford pickup truck shows up to deliver it. MacGuffin my Duff. The reason there is not trillions being poured into battery electric vs. petroleum is because it's not a proven technology, and it's not a total package problem solver. That's why there's no similar investment. The money is not there, the solution is not there, and the money cannot be redirected. Problem is that people forget where petroleum got its start: Keeping people from freezing to death. When petroleum was starting out, there was no car, no airplane, and Boats were fueled by coal or wind. That initial investment was solely to give people heat and light. The alternative was to travel thousands of miles to harpoon a friggin whale. Once the Wright Brothers proved their concept of flight, the rest was firmly set in stone. There is a reason so many early cars were powered by engines built by the aviation companies. Petroleum was a "no reasonable alternative" aka "do or die" situation. Battery/electric? Not even close. Musk could probably do a lot better getting investment in infrastructure, except he has zero interest in doing anything that is not purely proprietary, benefitting only himself. I don't care what was done in the past. If he wants to go lone wolf, let him figure it out himself. And that free charging gets offset by solar when Hades freezes over. Which is exactly why Musk has already talked about pulling the plug on free charging. There's a supercharger station nearby, and it works off of a huge transformer with FPL's logo slapped right on it. Solar indeed.
 

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
53,937
Location
Ontario, Canada
In Ontario, all of the SuperChargers are, realistically, powered by Nuclear and Hydro-Electric, which make up 60% and 25% of our generation mix respectively. Solar does nothing but power our inflated rates via obscene rate subsidies paying it 10x what other sources get paid for the same kWh.
 

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
I understand there is no "elimination" of petroleum - Where did I say that? It took decades of subsidy to oil and auto industry to get to where we are today - and it will take equally long to convert a significant % of transportation to electrical. There is no "switch flipping" here only gradual conversion from one form of energy to another. - but where to invest that can offset the zero ROI oil and military spend? What direction to take today and now? Tesla already pulled the plug on free charging with the model 3 and or leverages it going forward. They point out when it was built in to the price of the S and X and cannot be simply included with the 3. The "legacy" free charging on a limited life auto will come and be gone as a flash in the pan in a few more years. Every home already has a fuel station with some size pipe in it - something oil can never do making commuting level charging completely viable to day and now. Where do you prefer to invest your subsidy money- At home or abroad? UD
 
Last edited:

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
Originally Posted By: 4WD
Now which are oil tankers … we certainly know Maersk runs cargo ships in/out
Knowing these countries have really one major export product that gives you a good idea of whats coming out of the area. Whats going in is steel and infrastructure components their oil pays fo so they can build skylines larger than anywhere in the world and ski slopes in the desert. All protected free of charge by the US's 5th fleet which is assigned here to protect this commerce. But pay no attention to this - move along please nothing here to see...... UD
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2002
Messages
43,666
Location
'Stralia
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
But pay no attention to this - move along please nothing here to see...... UD
Funny, but that's exactly the attitude when musk says his truck fleet and mega chargers are going to be solar powered. It's certainly not on top of the charging stations...and even the scope for the "vast" space on top of Walmart is tiny. But he says it, so it will happen. (I've scoped a 4MW solar farm before on some otherwise vacant but we'll connected land...can't get it to fly without someone else's money)
 

UncleDave

$50 Site Donor 2023
Joined
Jun 2, 2014
Messages
7,738
Location
Ca.
Happy Birthday BTW I enjoy your posts and dialog. You're Australian right? So you get the free oil protection without the taxation - great deal. Id be pulling to keep that going if I were eon the benny end of it like that. Nope no way solar can be local- we can all do the math on site - but I don't recall him saying the solar would be onsite? Can you link me to where he said that? He knows better than that, but the guy has put his foot in mouth before. Im pretty sure he's saying that battery plant 2 has a theoretical capacity of 2 GW per year. in that he can actually product than many panels from one factory he can create a tremendous of electrical capacity. Solar can grow and grow and grow and become a significant % of the grid offset. In that the grid is net metered he absolutely could make the power and put it on the grid somewhere- put in it somewhere and zero it out by charging a flat fee competitive to the grid. Road Runner was 40 MW of simple panels and 210 acres years ago. solar density is better now. Watching ivanpah flounder vs a static collector field has been interesting. His solar roofs products (overpriced and over rated imo) are sold out for all of 2018. 4MW farm is substantive indeed- cool project to work on. I have electric and water solar on my house and Rv' Im not ditching my genset or natural gas heater any time soon but enjoy the offset. UD
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 5, 2009
Messages
28,049
Location
Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
It was the 51st SpaceX launch.
I'm no rocket scientist, as it were, but it seems to me we have a different focus here. In rocketry, he's taking tried and true principles and technology and going to work with them, with evolutionary advances. With vehicles, he claims to be able to upset the apple cart and turn his back upon and improve over the hundred years of automotive technology in one giant leap, with no logistical hurdles. I don't see, for his space launches, any warp drives, space elevators, Gauss gun launches, or anything like that. He seems to use what's been being used for the past several decades.
 
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
6,762
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
I understand there is no "elimination" of petroleum - Where did I say that? It took decades of subsidy to oil and auto industry to get to where we are today - and it will take equally long to convert a significant % of transportation to electrical. There is no "switch flipping" here only gradual conversion from one form of energy to another. - but where to invest that can offset the zero ROI oil and military spend? What direction to take today and now? Tesla already pulled the plug on free charging with the model 3 and or leverages it going forward. They point out when it was built in to the price of the S and X and cannot be simply included with the 3. The "legacy" free charging on a limited life auto will come and be gone as a flash in the pan in a few more years. Every home already has a fuel station with some size pipe in it - something oil can never do making commuting level charging completely viable to day and now. Where do you prefer to invest your subsidy money- At home or abroad? UD
I prefer to invest in something solid, and necessary. Not in a pipe dream just because it sounds and feels good. Every home has a really slow fuel station for an electric car, and only the electric car belonging to the owner.
 
Top