Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by CoolHand on Thursday November 02 2017, @10:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the elon-watchers dept.

Auto production is hard:

Having racked up its first quarter of burning through more than $1 billion of cash in the three months ending in June, Tesla topped that with $1.4 billion of negative free cash flow in the third quarter. In the past two quarters, therefore, Tesla has burned through more cash than the previous six combined. More importantly, it has burned through roughly four out of every five of the $3.2 billion dollars it has raised since late March through selling new equity and convertible debt and its debut in the high-yield bond market.

Consequently, debt has soared. Even just using debt with recourse to the company, on a net basis it has almost tripled since the start of the year to $3.36 billion.This would matter less if the primary objective of sucking in most of that external funding -- mass production of the Model 3 -- was fast approaching. Instead, it has receded further.

When Musk first talked about production targets for the Model 3 in 2016, they implied Tesla would be producing roughly 3,800 to 7,600 a week in the second half of 2017. By July of this year, Musk was guiding toward production hitting about 5,000 a week by the end of December. I estimated at the time that this implied a second-half average of maybe 1,400 a week.

Now, Musk estimates production might hit 5,000 a week by the end of the first quarter of 2018. As for this year, it might be in "the thousands" by the time New Year's Eve rolls around. He refused to say what the current run rate was. But I would estimate Tesla will be lucky to produce 10,000 Model 3 vehicles in total this year, or an average of 400 a week for the second half -- roughly 5 to 10 percent of the original guidance. As for the earlier target of 10,000 a week in 2018 ...

Also at NYT and MarketWatch.

Previously: Tesla Adds Lots of Certified Pre-Owned Model S Vehicles for Under $40,000 with New Warranty
Time to Bash Tesla Model 3
Tesla Reportedly Teaming Up With AMD for Custom AI Chip
Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees


Original Submission

Related Stories

Tesla Adds Lots of Certified Pre-Owned Model S Vehicles for Under $40,000 with New Warranty 31 comments

Tesla holds a tight grip on its used vehicle market through its certified pre-owned program. As previously reported, it resulted in the Tesla Model S retaining its value better than gas-powered cars in its segment – losing only 28% after 50,000 miles, according to an Autolist report.

Unfortunately for people looking to get a cheap second-hand Tesla, it wasn't the easiest thing to find a good bargain... until now.

The automaker is now listing a lot of new Certified Pre-Owned Model S vehicles for less than $40,000.

While you could sometimes find a used Model S in the $40,000 price range from different resellers or directly from the owners, it was rare to find a used Tesla Model S for that price in Tesla's Certified Pre-Owned program.

Under the program, the vehicles receive a full inspection and a four-year, 50,000 miles limited warranty with 24 hour roadside assistance on top of the remaining years/mileage of their battery and drivetrain warranty.

But now Tesla is introducing a new version of the program for high mileage cars. They added dozens of them to their list and several are just over $30,000

Though one could argue it's just another auto company pushing its wares, there is the impact that having more Tesla cars on the road increases the incentives for building out more charging stations. With more stations, there is less range anxiety, so more people become willing to buy an electric car, and so the positive feedback loop continues. Those the actual numbers in this case are relatively small, consider that Tesla is on the cusp of rolling out the Model 3 in the near future, as well.


Original Submission

Time to Bash Tesla Model 3 46 comments

Tesla is beginning to deliver a small number of Model 3 cars, but there are concerns that Tesla will not be able to produce enough cars to meet demand:

Wall Street finally got to see all the details of the Tesla Model 3 during the car's launch event Friday. So far investors have given it the thumbs down with the electric car maker's shares down more than 2 percent midday Monday.

"We believe the Model 3 was as good as or better than expected, and pricing was as expected with considerable initial upsell. That said, the rubber now hits the road, and the fundamental questions remain unanswered," Bernstein's Toni Sacconaghi wrote in a note to clients Monday. "CEO Elon Musk sounds increasingly squeamish about the production ramp." The analyst cited how the $35,000 Model 3 car will not be available until early 2018 with only a higher-priced $49,000 model available this year. He also noted Musk's comment to employees to prepare for "production hell."

Speaking of "production hell", Tesla employees in California are threatening to unionize:

Employees at the electric automaker's factory in Fremont, California, have been agitating for a union since Jose Moran, a production associate, wrote a Medium post in January detailing difficult work conditions at the flagship plant. The bulk of the demands has since centered on improving equipment to reduce workplace injuries.

[...] Musk originally called injury allegations at the Fremont plant "disingenuous or outright false" but has since told employees to report injuries directly to him.

Although the base price of the car is $35,000, that can rise to $55,000 or more after options.

Also at MarketWatch, Ars Technica, and CNET.


Original Submission

Tesla Reportedly Teaming Up With AMD for Custom AI Chip 7 comments

According to CNBC, Tesla is teaming up with AMD to develop a custom chip optimized for AI, to be used for self-driving features in Tesla cars. The head of Tesla's "Autopilot" team is Jim Keller, formerly of AMD and Apple, who helped design the A4 and A5 chips while working at Apple and was lead architect on the Athlon 64 at AMD.

Also at Engadget, TechCrunch, and Business Insider

GlobalFoundries, which fabricates chips for Advanced Micro Devices Inc, said on Thursday that Tesla had not committed to working with it on any autonomous driving technology or product, contradicting an earlier media report. [...] The spokesperson for GlobalFoundries said that Jha’s comments at the GlobalFoundries Technology Conference were not reported accurately.


Original Submission

Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees 35 comments

Tesla has fired several hundred of its employees following performance evaluations. Tesla recently conducted the biggest expansion of its workforce in the company's history, and is struggling to increase production of its Model 3 sedan:

Tesla Inc. has fired an undetermined number of employees following a series of performance evaluations after the company significantly boosted its workforce with the purchase of solar panel maker SolarCity Corp.

The departures are part of an annual review, the Palo Alto, California-based company said in an email, without providing a number of people affected. The maker of the Model S this week dismissed between 400 and 700 employees, including engineers, managers and factory workers, the San Jose Mercury News reported on Oct. 13, citing unidentified current and former workers.

"As with any company, especially one of over 33,000 employees, performance reviews also occasionally result in employee departures," the company said in the statement. "Tesla is continuing to grow and hire new employees around the world."

The company has more than 2,000 job openings on its careers website.

The dismissals come after Tesla said it built just 260 Model 3 sedans during the third quarter, less than a fifth of its 1,500-unit forecast. The company has offered scant detail about the problems it's having producing the car. The vehicle's entry price starts at $35,000, roughly half the cost of Tesla's least-expensive Model S sedan.

Also at NYT, Reuters, and The Mercury News.


Original Submission

Tesla Sued Over Alleged Racism; Deliveries Pushed Back; Semi Truck to be Unveiled 28 comments

Tesla has been sued by an employee for alleged racist harassment and termination for complaining:

Tesla Inc.'s production floor is a "hotbed for racist behavior," an African-American employee claimed in a lawsuit in which he alleged black workers at the electric carmaker suffer severe and pervasive harassment. The employee says he's one of more than 100 African-American Tesla workers affected and is seeking permission from a judge to sue on behalf of the group. He's seeking unspecified general and punitive monetary damages as well as an order for Tesla to implement policies to prevent and correct harassment.

[...] The lawsuit was filed on behalf of Marcus Vaughn, who worked in the Fremont factory from April 23 to Oct. 31. Vaughn alleged that employees and supervisors regularly used the "N word" around him and other black colleagues. Vaughn said he complained in writing to human resources and Musk and was terminated in late October for "not having a positive attitude."

Although customers who have reserved a Tesla Model 3 (at a cost of $1000) have seen their delivery dates pushed back, they apparently remain loyal to the company:

Even as the company led by Elon Musk struggles with manufacturing bottlenecks and pushes back production targets by at least a quarter, many reservation holders aren't budging. Bloomberg News contacted 20 consumers who paid deposits for the Model 3 and none had canceled their orders. Regardless of the concerns raised by slower output and an uncertain future for U.S. electric-car tax credits, Nomura analyst Romit Shah predicts the affinity for Tesla Inc. products will prevail. "We believe there is a real passion for the brand," Shah wrote in a report to clients that reiterated a $500 price target for Tesla shares, the highest on Wall Street. "It is bigger than loyalty because much of the enthusiasm comes from people who have never owned a Tesla. The only comparable we see is the iPhone."

Finally, Elon Musk says that the Tesla Semi Truck will be unveiled during a live webcast at 8 PM on Thursday, and that it will "blow your mind clear out of your skull and into an alternate dimension".

Previously: Elon Musk Says Tesla Pickup and Semi-Trucks Are Coming
Time to Bash Tesla Model 3
Tesla Discussing Autonomous Semi Truck Testing in Nevada
Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees
Tesla Burns More Cash, Fails to Meet Production Targets


Original Submission

Tesla Semi Truck Will Have a 500+ Mile Range 28 comments

Elon Musk has unveiled the Tesla Semi Truck. It supposedly boasts a single-charge range of over 500 miles, more than what analysts had expected. Tesla could begin producing the vehicles by the end of 2019 (assuming it isn't delayed):

The truck can go from zero to 60 miles per hour in five seconds without a trailer, and in 20 seconds when carrying a maximum load of 80,000 pounds, less than a third of the time required for a diesel truck, he said.

He gave no price for the truck but hinted that it would be costly. "Tesla stuff is expensive," Mr. Musk said, drawing another cheer from the crowd, gathered at an airfield outside of Los Angeles. But he also said the electric truck would be less expensive to operate, in part because it has fewer components that require regular maintenance (no engine, transmission or drive shaft). Instead, the truck, called the Tesla Semi, is powered by a giant battery beneath the cab. It has two rear axles, each outfitted with two electric motors, one for each wheel. Its acceleration and uphill speeds will allow it to cover more distance in less time than diesel trucks, he added.

As a result, Tesla is estimating it will cost $1.26 per mile to operate, compared with $1.51 a mile for a diesel truck. The cost can fall further — to 85 cents a mile, according to Tesla — if groups of trucks travel together in convoys, which reduces wind drag. "This beats rail," Mr. Musk said.

In typical Tesla fashion, the truck is a sharp departure from industry norms. The cabin is spacious enough for a driver and passenger to stand. The driver's seat is in the center of the cab, not on the left side. It is flanked by two laptop-size video screens providing navigation and scheduling data as well as images of blind spots and other areas around the truck. It will be equipped with radar sensors, cameras and processors to enable drivers to use a version of Autopilot, the advanced driver-assistance system featured in Tesla cars such as the Model S and the new Model 3.

Tesla will also produce a new version of the Tesla Roadster that can go from 0-60 in 1.9 seconds.

Also at BBC, TechCrunch, and Firstpost.

Pre-conference coverage at Bloomberg

Previously: Tesla Sued Over Alleged Racism; Deliveries Pushed Back; Semi Truck to be Unveiled


Original Submission

SpaceX's Reusable Rockets Could End EU's Arianespace, and Other News 12 comments

The German Aerospace Center (DLR) believes that SpaceX will realize significant cost savings with reusable boosters (archive) without needing to launch them ten times each — as bitter SpaceX competitor United Launch Alliance asserts:

Gerd Gruppe, a member of DLR's executive board and responsible for DLR's space program, said the agency has concluded that SpaceX is on the verge of realizing the savings it has promised from reusing first stages. "With 20 launches a year the Falcon 9 uses around 200 engines, and while their cost of refurbishment is unknown, we think SpaceX is well on the way to establishing a competitive system based on the reusability" of the rocket's first stage, Gruppe said here Oct. 24 at the Space Tech Expo conference.

Not everyone is so sure. Leslie Kovacs, executive branch director at United Launch Alliance (ULA), said ULA has concluded that SpaceX needs to refly Falcon 9 first stages 10 times each to make reusability pay. "The question of reusability is not a technical problem. It boils down to an economic problem," Kovacs siad here Oct. 24. "Our internal analysis shows that if you are going to do that [reuse the first stage], the break-even point is about 10 times. You have to bring back that first stage 10 times for it to be economically beneficial for you."

Meanwhile, SpaceX has thrown the future of the European commercial launch provider Arianespace into doubt. Although Arianespace plans to launch its cheaper Ariane 6 rocket in 2020, it may not be able to compete with SpaceX's reusable rockets even with European subsidies (which Germany is reluctant to provide):

Elon Musk's Monstrous, Enormously Large Compensation Package 35 comments

If Elon Musk can increase Tesla's market value 12-fold in the next 10 years, he may be entitled to a maximum of $56 billion in stock awards (likely lower if more shares are sold to the public). This, along with the ballooning of Musk's existing $12 billion share in his company, and his stake in SpaceX and other companies, could help Musk become a Kardashev I trillionaire alongside Jeff Bezos:

A new payment plan for the CEO was approved by Tesla (TSLA) shareholders Wednesday, a spokesperson confirmed. The incentive-based package essentially states that if Musk hits a series of performance milestones between now and January 2028, and he drives his electric car company's market value 12 times higher — taking it from $54 billion to $650 billion — he'll become astronomically rich.

Now, if Musk does drive a 12-fold increase in Tesla's market value, that doesn't necessarily mean the price of a single share in the company will be 12 times larger. The company can do things like issue new stock that could dilute the value of existing shares. But let's assume Musk's Tesla stock would grow at least 10 times more valuable. That would mean just the shares Musk owns today would be worth $120 billion.

Plus, reaching the agreed upon milestones means Musk would get additional stock awards. According to the new compensation plan, Tesla estimates the value of the stock awards to be $2.6 billion, using accounting methods for estimating the cash value of stock options. But if Tesla's market value balloons just as the payment plan hopes, those stock awards could be worth nearly $56 billion, according to a public filing.

Also at Reuters, Fortune, and CNBC.

Related: Tesla Fires Hundreds of Employees
Tesla Burns More Cash, Fails to Meet Production Targets
Tesla Sued Over Alleged Racism; Deliveries Pushed Back; Semi Truck to be Unveiled
Tesla Semi Truck Will Have a 500+ Mile Range
Tesla Delivers on 100 MW Australian Battery Promise
Elon Musk Vows to Build Tesla Pickup Truck 'Right After' Model Y
Woz Likes his Tesla, Doesn't Trust Elon
Tesla Creating Huge Virtual Power Plant
Elon Musk Expects to Do Coast-to-Coast Autonomous Tesla Drive in 3 to 6 Months


Original Submission

SolarCity Debt: A Problem Tesla Doesn't Need Right Now 17 comments

Elon Musk's Tesla, Inc. has been having some problems recently. But one easy-to-overlook problem is the debt incurred by its SolarCity subsidiary:

But 16 months after Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk kicked up controversy by acquiring the solar-panel installer founded by two of his cousins, its obligations are a strain on Tesla's finances. The $2 billion purchase came with a $2.9 billion debt load, and a chunk of that is soon coming due. That's bad timing for a company churning through about $6,500 a minute and trying to stave off the need for another capital raise. "SolarCity debt may not be the immediate cause of Tesla's problems, but it certainly isn't helping right now," said Alexander Diaz-Matos, an analyst at credit research firm Covenant Review LLC.

[...] Tesla's debt runs the gamut -- convertible bonds, promissory notes, term loans, cash-equity debt, asset-backed securities. Most of the total is tied to Tesla the automaker. But the energy unit, which includes the solar business, accounts for 27 of the 29 maturities set to come due through 2019.

[...] In recent months, Tesla's solar business lost the residential-solar throne to rival Sunrun Inc., a San Francisco-based installer with a market capitalization about half the SolarCity purchase price. Tesla ceded market share as it attempted to boost energy-unit profitability and scrapped SolarCity's costly door-to-door retail sales strategy. That was a smart move, according to Ross Gerber, co-founder of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth & Investment Management, which oversees more than $10 million in Tesla shares and options. He criticized the SolarCity deal but is still bullish on the company and Musk. "SolarCity was probably going to go bankrupt," Gerber said.

[...] For his part, Musk hasn't wavered from his commitment to turn Tesla into a one-stop shop selling solar panels to capture power, devices to store the energy and cars that can be charged in the garage. The company started producing photovoltaic glass tiles in December at a factory in Buffalo, New York, and has begun selling solar at some of its own stores and through retailer Home Depot Inc.

At least Tesla production is higher than ever.


Original Submission

Elon Musk Blows Off Analysts and Media on "Bizarre" Tesla Conference Call 31 comments

Tesla's stock dropped despite "better than expected" quarterly numbers, probably due to either the company posting its worst quarterly loss ever, or a conference call in which Elon Musk complained about "boring, bonehead questions" and much more:

Tesla Inc. Chief Executive Elon Musk held a long, odd earnings conference call Wednesday in which he insulted analysts, the media, federal regulators and people who died behind the wheel of his cars, and then told anyone concerned about volatility not to invest in his company. Unsurprisingly, volatility ensued, as Tesla shares dropped quickly during an increasingly bizarre call with the very analysts and media whom Musk attacked.

Tesla on Wednesday disclosed the largest quarterly loss in the history of a company known far and wide for losing vast sums of money, with a net loss of almost $785 million. The numbers still managed to beat expectations that have been repeatedly lowered for more than a year, which led Musk to take a victory lap on Twitter after losing more than three quarters of a billion dollars in three months.

Ford Will Lose $3 Billion on Electric Vehicles in 2023, It Says 3 comments

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/03/ford-will-lose-3-billion-on-electric-vehicles-in-2023-it-says/

There's no doubt that Ford is embracing electrification. It was first to market with an electric pickup truck for the US market, and a darn good one at that. It has a solid midsize electric crossover that's becoming more and more common on the road, even if it does still upset the occasional Mustangophile. And there's an electric Transit van for the trades. But its electric vehicle division will lose $3 billion this year as it continues to build new factories and buy raw materials.

The news came in a peek into Ford's financials released this morning. As we reported last year, Ford has split its passenger vehicle operations into two divisions. Electric vehicles fall under Ford Model e, with internal combustion engine-powered Fords (including hybrids and plug-in hybrids) falling under Ford Blue. The move was in large part to placate investors and analysts, no doubt starry-eyed during a time when any EV-related stock was booming.

Related:
Tesla Exceeded Revenue Estimates in Q4 2021 by More than $1 Billion (20220127)
Tesla Burns More Cash, Fails to Meet Production Targets (20171102)
Ford Investing $4.5 Billion to Bring Electrification to 40% of Its Vehicles by 2020 (20151214)


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @01:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @01:04AM (#591452)

    Looks like this story has been posted for well over an hour with no comments.

    Is the Tesla story worn out?

    Autoextremist has been predicting Model 3 production would be slow for quite a while now, here's one from last week (Tesla mentioned briefly in 2nd paragraph)
        http://www.autoextremist.com/current/2017/10/25/going-nowhere-good.html [autoextremist.com]

  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Friday November 03 2017, @01:07AM (10 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <reversethis-{if.fdsa} {ta} {tnelyos-cp}> on Friday November 03 2017, @01:07AM (#591456) Homepage
    That's not intrinsically a bad thing, it just means you need to invest in improving how you supply, which is what they are doing. If you're cash rich, sure, burn that cash, better to use it all than pay tax on profit distribution. I've seen a lot of anti-Testa news recently, and it all looks lke it's written by someone with shares in F. Were Tesla producing more cars than they could sell, there would be negative remarks made about that state of affairs too - Tesla literally cannot win.

    Of course, Tesla need to pick up production before China dominates the EV market, which will happen RSN. If they're good, they'll corner the market, and if they explode they might even destroy the market (or at least set it back a decade, as consumer safety legislation is written and rewritten).
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @01:18AM (9 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @01:18AM (#591459)

      Very good chance that Chinese companies will dominate the electric car market in China -- with gov't help on all fronts. In part, this is a quick way to do something about the terrible air quality in some of their cities.

      Other than Tesla at the luxury car price point, where is the electric car market in USA? There are models from other companies (including Bolt which is on par with Model 3 in some respects). None are selling well outside a few areas (like Silicon Valley) and the resale value for electric cars (like Leaf) coming off a 3-year lease is terrible. Is it possible that the hype for "electric car future" is just hype?

      One scenario not often mentioned is a regional power outage, as happened recently in the New England states. From a wind storm, a friend outside Burlington VT lost power for 5 days. He has a hybrid, but would have been stuck out of juice fairly soon if that was a full electric car.

      • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Friday November 03 2017, @01:31AM (7 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Friday November 03 2017, @01:31AM (#591466)

        The days of solely-fossil-fuel-powered are very, very limited now. There's just too many problems with them. But you have a point with all-electric cars being vulnerable to power outages. But this isn't something unique to electric cars: gas cars have the same problem to a degree. They're dependent on gasoline supply, and if there's a disruption there, transportation is hit hard. This happened in Phoenix about 6 years ago I think: the main pipeline supplying the city had some problem, and there was no new fuel for a week IIRC. So of course prices jumped. Luckily, gas cars can hold a fair amount in their tanks, so you can stop driving so much and avoid the price gouging and long lines maybe. But you can do the same with EVs, though the caveat there is that you can't easily transfer stored energy between EVs, keep it in a spare tank in your garage, etc.

        I think we're going to see more and more uptake of EVs among dual-car households in urban/suburban areas, as they make a ton of sense for commuters who can have a second gas car, and I think we're going to see more penetration of hybrids; it's just slow because hybrids cost more since they have two powertrains effectively.

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday November 03 2017, @02:01AM (6 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday November 03 2017, @02:01AM (#591484) Journal
          The problem is that electricity outages are more common and with the lower range of electric vehicles, don't have to last as long to cause problems.

          For example, in Yellowstone National Park, we have a pretty shifty grid. It's all above ground and bad weather routinely plays havoc with it. For example, twice this year, once in late May and once in October, we had substantial snow storms that shut down the entire park road system and knocked out power for at least a day (two days for the springtime outage). Imagine if the snow plows were electric powered? Where are you going to recharge them (much less run backup power for the lodging infrastructure in the park), if you get rid of fossil fuels?

          During the past nine years I've been in the park, we've only had one genuine gasoline outage. One year was really heavy on the snowfall and it collapsed the gas station canopy over the pumps, taking that gas station out of action for the first half of the season. The rest of time, if you have trouble with gasoline supply, then send another truck. And if your gas truck can't get through, then neither can any other vehicles, which would need gas.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @03:42AM (3 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @03:42AM (#591521)

            > The problem is that electricity outages are more common and with the lower range of electric vehicles, don't have to last as long to cause problems.

            Also takes longer to recover from:
            * If you have enough juice to get your e-car to power, then you have to spend time there while it charges. The first ring of working charging stations (outside the area with the outage) will be heavily oversubscribed.
            * When power is restored, everyone is going to hop on the grid to recharge...and bring down the grid(??) It's going to be awhile before the grid (and individual users) is smart enough to avoid this (and those denied charging for a period are going to complain).

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @08:17AM (2 children)

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @08:17AM (#591582)

              Can you imagine a future where "gas stations" keep a generator on site for electric vehicles? I know it's just blue sky, impossible thinking but dig deep and stretch that imagination.

              • (Score: 1) by khallow on Friday November 03 2017, @12:15PM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Friday November 03 2017, @12:15PM (#591636) Journal
                Can you imagine the prices that a customer would pay for generator-based power? It's a lot cheaper to have a generator around to provide electricity for gas pumps, and a more involved matter to have a generator capable of handling a hundred electric cars an hour.
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @12:15PM

                by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 03 2017, @12:15PM (#591637)

                Please run some very simple calculations to pick a size for that generator. How many cars will it charge at once -- the Tesla Supercharger near me has 8 bays and its own big transformer from the mains. If electric cars dominate, hundreds of bays will be needed (time spent at the charging spot is many times longer than time sitting at a gas pump). What kind of pollution controls will be required?

                Who is going to pay for this monster generator that sits idle 99%+ of the time. Will it even run after sitting for a few years?

                Or, you know, you could have your own generator at home, probably need a garage to keep it out of the weather. At 120VAC 15 amps you can add about 4 miles to an electric car range in an hour. Hope you have a bicycle to speed up the trip to the gas station to get more gas for the generator...

          • (Score: 3, Informative) by realDonaldTrump on Friday November 03 2017, @11:02AM (1 child)

            by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Friday November 03 2017, @11:02AM (#591627) Homepage Journal

            So true. Our national parks are a DISASTER. #Infrastructure in horrible condition. We're raising the entrance fees. So we'll have money to rebuild. And Yellowstone may have oil under it. So we can open it up to our oil companies. They get the oil, we get the money, we rebuild the grid, your electric car gets charged in the park. There you are driving your electric in Yellowstone, looking amazingly environmental, but our great oil industry has a big hand in it. Everybody wins.

            We can do the same thing in Florida, in the Everglades. As Michele Bachmann said. I'll tell you, she would be a terrible President. But she had a very smart idea. Get American oil & gas flowing, so we don't have to import as much from Russia, China and Venezuela.

            And the Grand Canyon has uranium. As you know, Jeff Flake and John McCain are disgusting. I call them traitors to the party. Or maybe they're just morons. To be perfectly honest with you, it's probably both. But they listened to our great mining companies. The mining companies gave some big donations, so they listened. And they said, let our miners get that uranium out. I'm very glad it happened. Because right now, we need all the uranium we can get. For our nuclear, for our nuclear energy & our arsenal. Some people will say, "Oh, no nukes! Please Mr. President, no nukes!" These are foolish people. I am the first one that would like to see nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country. Even if it’s a friendly country, we’re never going to fall behind on nuclear power. It would be wonderful, a dream would be that no country would have nukes, but if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack. The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes. We've fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity. And the Uranium One deal isn't helping. Crooked Hillary really put us behind the eight ball on that one. So uranium is very precious to us right now.

            A couple of years ago, Senator Murkowski, one of our great Republican Senators (with great legs), tried to do something called SA 838. Which had a lot of support in our Senate. And what it would do is, we could sell our national forests, wildlife refuges & wildernesses. SA 838 would let us sell them. For some reason -- very complicated -- we can't sell our national parks, monuments or preserves. But if we do SA 838, we can sell the other. If we have the votes. We will have the votes. We need to get rid of the Filibuster Rule.

            And Senator Hatch from Utah had a very smart idea. We can't sell our national monuments, but I can make them smaller. Orrin comes to me, he asks me to shrink the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments out in Utah. And I approved his recommendation. @SecretaryZinke got some tremendous comments on that. Amazing support from the American people! Who I always, always put first. Grand Staircase-Escalante was created by President Clinton, by Bill Clinton. Not very long ago, not long at all. And Bears Ears was created by President Obama. Last December, right before he quit. Believe me, I stand for protecting our heritage, our history, our beautiful statues and monuments. 100 percent. We must #NeverForget the Civil War. But these monuments aren't very old at all. Not even as old as Ivanka. When she was 17, I made a deal with her. She made me promise, swear to her that I would never date a girl younger than her. And if these monuments were girls, I couldn't date them. They're very new. And they were as big as Connecticut! INAPPROPRIATE. A big mess for me to clean up. #MAGA 🇺🇸

            • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday November 07 2017, @09:30AM

              by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Tuesday November 07 2017, @09:30AM (#593572) Homepage Journal

              Puerto Rico also has a shitty grid. It FAILED before Hurricane Maria even arrived. And it will cost a lot to fix. Thinking of charging an admission fee to Puerto Rico! 🇺🇸

      • (Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday November 03 2017, @06:05PM

        by DeathMonkey (1380) on Friday November 03 2017, @06:05PM (#591781) Journal

        One scenario not often mentioned is a regional power outage...

        Guess what powers gas-pumps....

  • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Friday November 03 2017, @08:33AM (3 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) on Friday November 03 2017, @08:33AM (#591589) Homepage Journal

    n/t

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday November 03 2017, @09:08AM

      by takyon (881) <{takyon} {at} {soylentnews.org}> on Friday November 03 2017, @09:08AM (#591597) Journal

      Elon Musk has deep pockets, and Tesla has benefited from a hypegasm that drove its market value to over GM and Ford. There's also vertical integration with battery production and SolarCity, both of which strike me as more stable pursuits.

      --
      [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday November 03 2017, @09:44AM

      by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Friday November 03 2017, @09:44AM (#591608) Homepage Journal

      It's the Trump of cars. When folks look for condos, hotels, resorts, or golf courses they look for the Trump name. Because it means the biggest and the best. Maybe, probably, the most expensive, but always the best. My motto is NEVER SETTLE. And when folks look for cars, they look for the Tesla name. Because it means the fastest and it means environmental. A little expensive, but always the fastest and always environmental. Let me tell you, I'm a very big person when it comes to the environment. I've received awards on the environment. I've done a lot for the environment, more than Tesla has. Probably a lot more. People don't know that, they just know they're getting the best when they choose Trump. You get your name out there. I'm great at getting my name out. And so is Elon. Believe me, he's a winner.

    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by etherscythe on Friday November 03 2017, @03:11PM

      by etherscythe (937) on Friday November 03 2017, @03:11PM (#591697) Journal

      People are betting long on this company. There's more than a few ideological folks investing simply because they want to see the EV revolution succeed. What I don't get is how Elon Musk has time for all this crazy stuff, even if his cult of personality is the reason any of these ventures got off the ground. Tesla, SpaceX, Hyperloop/Boring Company, Neurolink: huge, ground-breaking ideas - I don't know how the guy has time to eat, much less sleep. Makes me feel positively useless in comparison.

      --
      "Fake News: anything reported outside of my own personally chosen echo chamber"
(1)