Tesla Roadster reaches the end of the line

http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/21/autos/tesla_roadster_selling_out/index.htm?iid=HP_Highlight

by jkuria • 15 years ago

113 94 15 years ago

money.cnn.com

checker3• 15 years ago

Quoted from comments and decided to analyze: "A family sedan for $80,000. That will work."

At an average of 15K miles/year, 30mpg, and $3/gal of gas, that's $1500 in gasoline a year. Over 5 years, that's a savings of $7500 ($10000 for $4/gal). We're not quite at that point where it offsets completely from a pure 'gas vs electric' POV (I'm not sure if the car has a Mercedes-comparable interior or a Toyota-comparable interior).

I don't think this means it won't work, but I was interested in the gas savings over time. I would buy one if I could afford an $80000 car.

MikeCapone3• 15 years ago

If you really wanted an EV now, you could get a Nissan LEAF for a lot less than a Tesla Roadster. But if you want a couple generations, you should get a pretty decent price and a much bigger range (not to mention that by then fast charging stations should be more common).

pitdesi3• 15 years ago

The Tesla model S is supposed to be similar in dimension to the last 7 series BMW... which retails for about $80k. I believe fit and finish is to be up to that par as well. http://autos.yahoo.com/bmw/7-series/2012/

It's not close on a gas savings level, but you don't buy a Tesla for the gas savings... You buy it because it is a different type of car and to make a statement.

vaksel• 15 years ago

frankly I don't see why they need to make it so big. Weight is one of the biggest problems for fuel efficiency, it takes a ton more juice to move a 4,000lb car vs a a 3,000lb car.

bh42222• 15 years ago

I love the Tesla guys, but I doubt they have the pricing power of BMW.

In that price range we're talking conspicuous consumption, and a beamer is definitely conspicuous, but a Tesla?

Maybe if you're a gay engineer dude, this Tesla will be a great way to score other gay geek dudes - wait or maybe it's for lesbian geeks... not sure, my point is I doubt this will make people think it can get them laid as much an equally priced BMW will.

This is why I think it is overpriced.

rdl• 15 years ago

I'm hoping to put in a deposit for a Model S Signature as a bay area vehicle (for personal and/or company use). The 300 mile range is perfect for SFBA, and it's big enough for 4-5 people comfortably, or datacenter equipment, and has more novelty value than a lambo among geeks.

I wouldn't take an exotic (Tesla, Fiskar Karma, F or L, etc.) on long road trips in the US, especially with a non-standard drivetrain, due to the lack of service options.

Within the bay area, especially if you have 240 or 480v charging at home/office, it's perfect. I know a Roadster user who has his mainly because he hates gas stations.

btilly5• 15 years ago

Your analysis left out the cost of electricity that has to be used instead of gas. Even so in 5 years you save a maximum of 10% of the cost of the car. This only works if you're put a personal value on not using fossil fuels which far exceeds the cost of gasoline.

In return you get a very fast sedan that can't be used for any long road trips. It would be fine for commutes and around town, but even something like a trip from Los Angeles to San Francisco would be a major fail.

mixmastamyk• 15 years ago

LA to SF is a long drive and not comfortable to do in one day. Yes it can be done if you take i-5 and drive like a maniac for ~6-7 hours.

However, I'd much rather take the scenic route via 101 and stop over in Paso Robles and get the car charged up while at a nice B&B, wine tasting, etc. ;)

hammerdr2• 15 years ago

http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/fuels/electricity_locations....

Every major US city has electric power stations. From that map, you could very easily make a continental road trip in the United States. And, this map is out of date. Chicago alone is building over 250 quick charge stations this year.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-02-10/classified/ct-...

cube13• 15 years ago

Let's assume that it's a high-end luxury sedan, not a low-end family sedan. Unless gas goes up to $100/gallon, there's no way you'll save money by buying the Tesla over a affordable mid-size like a Honda Accord or Ford Fusion.

So let's compare that to a Mercedes E-class. According to US News(http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Mercedes-Be...), the average price out the door is about $48,000 for the model with the fewest options. Let's round that up to $50,000, because we want alloy wheels or some other additional feature.

The mileage of the car is 24 highway, 17 city, so let's average that to about 20(a bit more city driving than highway). So that's $15,000 in gas over the 5 years(30/20=1.5). So the total cost of the car, not counting other replacements, is around $65,000.

That's still $15,000 less than the $80,000 on the Tesla, and you're not going to spend $15,000 on car washes and other parts(brakes, oil, etc.) in that time. It should also be noted that if you need to buy replacement batteries in that 5 year period, the cost increases to $100,000.

EDIT: I didn't include the cost of electricity, or the electrical work needed to get the extra 220 volt circuit out to your garage.

wooster4• 15 years ago

The high end Mercedes luxury sedan is the S-class, for which the low end price paid is about $90,000.

checker3• 15 years ago

I agree. The personal carbon guilt price will need to heavily weigh in their favor, as btilly said next to you.

burgerbrain• 15 years ago

Most people don't buy luxury vehicles for their economics.

nradov2• 15 years ago

Edmunds estimates the total cost of ownership for a Mercedes-Benz E-class sedan at $77K for five years. http://www.edmunds.com/mercedes-benz/e-class/2011/tco.html?s...

bugsy4• 15 years ago

$58,0000 for 160 mile range, $80,000 for extra batteries to bring it up to 300 mile range, which is $22,000 more. The extra weight of the batteries reduces mileage slightly so the extra pack doubles the battery capacity. Now battery cost is the big problem, so the $22,000 pack is being sold at near cost. So a 300 mile range battery pack from 0 mile range is $44,000, this is the cost of the two packs. Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use, so figure $9000/yr battery cost for this machine, not including the $1000 or so fees for disposing of the toxic waste (lithium batteries are not accepted at the dump).

So yes, you save on gas driving this machine and save the environment by not emitting as many fumes. But it costs $9000 a year to maintain the batteries, which are a serious toxic waste disposal problem.

Not harping on Tesla here though, this is the basic problem with electric cars.

MikeCapone3• 15 years ago

"Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use"

Please cite your source on this. AFAIK, the batteries in most electric cars are good for the life of the vehicle. They're designed to use only part of their capacity to extend life and then compensate as much as possible for loss of charge over time..

And they pay you to recycle lithium-ion batteries, and they aren't very toxic at all.

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/mythbusters-part-3-recycling...

bugsy4• 15 years ago

Ok, no problem. Please state the "life of the vehicle" that you mention in miles driven and years of ownership. Also state whether this figure is backed in a legally binding warranty on said batteries. Then we'll figure the cost of maintaining the batteries.

Also, to be fair, we should note that the tesla.com link you give is to a program they are hoping to implement in the future and which does not actually exist in real life. Also note that they themselves in the link which you yourself provided state "Aside from the cells, most components in our ESS are designed to last the life of the car." Note the "aside from the cells". The lithium cells are the main cost of the battery. Without them the car does not work. Tesla specifically states there that the cells are not designed to last the life of the vehicle, which you had claimed.

sixtofour2• 15 years ago

What would an owner do at his car's end of life if Tesla has previously gone out of business?

stan_rogers• 15 years ago

The legacy of the Roadster won't be its practicality, it'll be that it divorced the terms "electric car" and "golf cart" in a way that something like the ZENN (or the old EVO) never could. If all it ever did was to keep people from thinking about zero-to-sixty times in weeks (downhill and with a following gale force wind), then the car has done its job. It's proven the concept well enough to generate some excitement around storage technologies -- and now we wait for the next generation. (Well, I do -- electrochemical research is not my forte.)

wisty3• 15 years ago

There's two ways to disrupt a market - starting at the top, and starting at the bottom. Electric cars can't disrupt from the bottom, because the regulatory burden is likely to be too high. Cut too many costs, and the car will be banned.

Starting at the top means that rich idiots who want to pretend to save the earth can buy it, and you can then look at moving down.

OK, there's electric motorbikes at the bottom, and three wheeled cars classed as motorbikes, but they will struggle to bridge the legislative gap between cars and motorbikes.

wmf3• 15 years ago

Nobody should be under any illusions that Teslas save money; they're trying to use the luxury "conspicuous conservation" market to fund enough R&D to get to the point where electric will be cheaper.

scott_s• 15 years ago

bugsy was talking about the Model S sedan, not the Roadster, which is a step in the direction you're talking about. His point, I believe, is that the economics of generation two still don't work if your intention is to save money.

wooster4• 15 years ago

  not including the $1000 or so fees for disposing 
  of the toxic waste (lithium batteries are not 
  accepted at the dump)

Not in the US, at least according to the info I can find:

  "Lithium Ion batteries are classified by the 
  federal government as non-hazardous waste and 
  are safe for disposal in the normal municipal 
  waste stream," says Kate Krebs at the National 
  Recycling Coalition.

http://blogs.computerworld.com/node/3285

Tesla also has a battery recycling program, but I'm not familiar with the specifics.

IgorPartola4• 15 years ago

I'm pretty sure you save nothing by driving this car. Think about this:

1. Energy and materials for manufacturing the batteries

2. Energy for recycling the batteries

3. Energy to charge the batteries

4. Energy to mine the coal (most common fuel in the U.S.) to produce the electricity

5. Energy losses on the power lines, transformers, etc.

If you are after saving the environment, buy a used Geo instead. However, Tesla makes damn cool cars.

SoftwareMaven• 15 years ago

This is a really good point: if you are going to buy a car anyway, it might be better to buy an electric car (though I, personally, doubt it, and would love to see the actual environmental impact), but if you want to help the environment, buy a used car. Almost any used car will be better for the environment than the best new car.

ugh2• 15 years ago

Electronic cars are about large scale infrastructure change.

lallysingh• 15 years ago

There is the advantage that the pollution coming from this car is from fairly centralized sources. The power pollution is at the plant, not the tailpipe, and you're not building a car that inherently depends upon coal. It could run off any power source you can attach to the grid.

The battery pack stays with the car until you're in EOL mode for it, which can then likely be recycled reasonably.

rwmj• 15 years ago

Don't forget the environmentally destructive mining of rare earth metals in China.

sonnekki• 15 years ago

This sparked a thought experiment in my mind.

Let's assume that we are in an age where the grand majority has an electric car which is charged from home. Let's also assume that the electrical consumption of all other electrical devices (appliances, electronics, lights etc) stays constant.

What extra load will electric cars add to the power grid?

Would the extra power plants required to meet this extra load add up to a relatively equal waste output as today's cars?

e: grammar, clarity

ugh2• 15 years ago

If those lithium-ion batteries are about as good as the batteries in laptops they should be good for about 300 to 500 cycles. After those 300 to 500 cycles laptop batteries are typically expected to retain between 80 and 70 percent of their charge.

That would be about 130,000km to 210,000km (assuming a linear decline in battery capacity – which might very well be wrong) with the 483km range battery.

That’s about 60km to 96km per day (and between 83km and 134km per day if the car is only used on weekdays, e.g. for commuting) if you want to get by with the battery for six years.

Retric• 15 years ago

If you have 2 battery packs you would still have a longer range at 70% charge than a single battery pack roadster. Still let's call it ~100k miles. Assuming 30mpg and premium gas (this is a sports car) your saving ~4$ every 30 miles by using electricity or ~13.3k. Drop that to 15MPG and your saving ~28k which is about what one pack cost.

KaeseEs• 15 years ago

Lithium ion batteries, such as those in laptops, don't degrade based on charge/discharge cycles the way that older generations (NiCd, NiMH etc) did, but rather lose permanent capacity mostly as a function of time and temperature (although discharging below 20% or so exacerbates this).

VladRussian• 15 years ago

9K/yr during first 3-6 years is in the range of typical depreciation for an 80K car

Kaizyn• 15 years ago

Assume:

  $4/gallon gasoline.
  45 miles per gallon for commuter car.
  The average driver in the US drives 15,000 miles/year.

Therefore:

  $9000 / $4 = 2250 gallons.
  2250 gallons * 45 mpg = 101250 miles
  101250 mi / 15000 mi = 6.75

You must drive the electric car 6.75 times further each year than the gasoline powered car for your battery costs to break even with gas costs.

If you are driving that much, you will wear out the batteries even faster than the norm causing the battery cost to be even higher.

Alternately, it's cheaper to drive a fuel-efficient gasoline car like a Volkswagon Jetta until gasoline gets up to $27/gallon.

ericd• 15 years ago

You should compare it to something that's near its performance class, since people are obviously not going to buy the Model S just to save money. That's going to be a future model.

At under 5 seconds 0-60, the Model S sport is supposedly going to have performance in the 500 horsepower BMW M5 range, which gets a combined MPG of 13 (11 city, 17 highway).

Besides that, the M5 is more like $90k.

ImprovedSilence• 15 years ago

I agree with you that you are not exactly saving the environment by rollin on Lithium. Heck, you didn't even take into account the environmental damage of mining it in China, talk about an environmental disaster.

I think the point of Tesla is more to push the technology of electric cars forward, to a point where someday it reaches a critical mass, or proper economy of scale, to the point where it is efficient.

Also, I was strolling around Montreal the other weekend, and saw a Roadster at a red light. Me being the drunken asshole that I am yelled "yo tesla dude, gun it". And let me tell you what, that car takes off like a friggin rocket, but quiet as hell, all you hear is the tires begging for grip. I want one.

jasonmcalacanis• 15 years ago

I've had my roadster (#16) for almost three years now.

It's the most exciting car driving experience I've ever had.

http://green.autoblog.com/photos/jason-calacanis-tesla-roads...

I've done over 10,000 miles and it is my daily driver (i'm four miles from my office). I drive about 20 miles a day.

The batter charge is the same as when I got it.

I'm serial #1 and #85 of the sedan. I sent two full deposits the day they announced the price.

The top Tesla engineer and the top designer walked me through the design, drawings and I've driven in the prototypes. Model S is AWESOME. It's got something like a 24" computer monitor flipped to it's side as the center console. It's got not engine so there is storage in the front and the back. It's UBER fast.... similar to the roadster in the prototype i drove in.

The model S will be the best car on the road--hands down--next summer.

Was the Roadster ready for prime time? No. It is a very raw proof point along the way to non-carbon based transportation.

The price is going to keep getting cut in half, and thanks to home solar plummeting in price, I'm predicting we're going to see many homes have one plug-in hybrid for long-range, one EV for daily driving and solar panels.

When gas hits $6-8 a gallon, and that will happen over the next five years, folks will really start embracing solar and EVs. Just like they embraced hybrids when gas hit $4-5 a gallon.

To think that 10 years from now the concept of smog clouds over Los Angeles and other cities will start to go away... is... just.... mind blowing.

petewailes• 15 years ago

(Not being snarky, serious question) - I do your three year milage every 20 weeks. Any idea how well the battery would hold up to that?

Also, what's the range if you hold it at a steady 110-120kph?

forgottenpaswrd• 15 years ago

"Batteries need to be replaced every 3-6 years depending on use, so figure $9000/yr battery cost for this machine, not including the $1000 or so fees for disposing of the toxic waste (lithium batteries are not accepted at the dump)."

Batteries are going to be way more cheaper when you give the old battery, in fact as technology improves, they even can give you money if you replace the battery( when nano materials improve, you need way less lithium and other raw materials that will be more expensive as demand grows up).

"which are a serious toxic waste disposal problem."

You will be stupid if you throw them away "at the dump": (Those people extract lithium, watch the tendency)

http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:SQM

http://www.google.com/finance?q=NYSE:FMC

Recycling batteries is very easy to do, compared to extracting it from the earth.

Spines11• 15 years ago

Tesla's next car, a sedan, will cost $58,000. What is it that makes electric cars so expensive? I don't know much about cars, but I thought electric cars had fewer parts than a gas car. Is it just that the parts for electric cars haven't reached economies of scale yet?

pitdesi3• 15 years ago

Batteries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car#Price

MikeCapone3• 15 years ago

Batteries are still expensive, and there isn't much economies of scale yet.

btilly5• 15 years ago

Batteries.

In The Innovator's Dilemma there is an analysis from the 90s presented about when pure electric cars would be economically viable for a mass market. Based on then-current technology projections, it would happen around 2020.

The critical combination that their analysis found necessary is price below a certain level, sufficient acceleration to merge into an Interstate, sufficient range, and fast enough recharge time. The Tesla currently fails on price and recharge time. It over-delivers on power, and has about the right range.

Corrado• 15 years ago

OK, but why are batteries expensive? 20 years ago rechargeable AA cells were very expensive, now they are cheap, plentiful, and work better than ever.

Will electric vehicle cells follow the same curve? If not, why not? Is it because they contain precious materials? Lack of economies of scale? ???

nextparadigms• 15 years ago

That sounds about right. I think Tesla plans on reducing the price in half for every next models every 3 years. So that would be $120k in 2009 (Roadster), $60k in 2012 (Model S), $30k in 2015 (already announced)...so I suppose a $15k-$20k in 2018. That should make it mainstream enough.

Hopefully, by then we'll also have Li-Air batteries or more viable ultra-capacitors (which Elon Musk thinks are the future for electric cars).

Also, Better Place has an interesting business model, similar to the one of carriers subsidizing phones, by subsidizing electric cars to make them cheaper upfront and then having to pay a few hundred dollars per month to replace your battery at their stations whenever it discharges. I heard it's already gaining traction in some Middle East countries and also in China, and they plan to expand in some European countries, soon.

http://www.betterplace.com/

AndyKelley• 15 years ago

One thing that seems unaddressed is how quickly the car recharges. For example, if I am going on a road trip in a gasoline car, when I run out of gas, I can quickly fill it up and be on my way. With an electric car, an electrical recharge probably takes several hours.

btucker• 15 years ago

Electric swap stations (eg. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfdYU7gk8fs) strike me as one of the most promising concepts for electric vehicles. Imagine if rather than ever owning a battery you're just perpetually rent the use of one (perhaps with a small per-swap fee). Alas it would seem we're still many many years away from seeing anything like this rolled out in a real way.

wmf3• 15 years ago

Tesla seems to be going in the opposite direction, making the battery pack a structural component.

pitdesi3• 15 years ago

Definitely. Better place does this, and charges on a per mile basis (in Israel) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place

RexRollman• 15 years ago

Something I've always wondered, and I bet someone else here has thought about it, is what happens if electric vehicles do become popular?

It seems to me that we would have a huge surge in electrical demand and that would make electricity more expensive. Could the electrical infrastructure even keep up? And wouldn't we just end up shifting where waste comes from (from Cars to power plants). And battery recycling would certainly become a very important thing.

jamesbkel• 15 years ago

One thing to bear in mind is that energy production is MUCH more efficient when done at scale (i.e. power plant) than having lots of little power plants (i.e. internal combustion engines).

There's still the issue of transporting the energy, but the waste/consumption to output ratio definitely favors generating power at large scale.

[edit: Another thought. I'm not sure about this and can't find a quick reference, but I would guess that scrubbing the emissions at a coal plant can be done more effectively than at the per-internal combustion engine level.]

bonzoesc• 15 years ago

> …scrubbing the emissions at a coal plant can be done more effectively than at the per-internal combustion engine level.

This is true, especially because you can put a fence around a coal plant, while you can't always put a fence around your catalytic converter to keep meth-heads from stealing it for the platinum[1].

1: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=catalytic+converter+meth-head

JL2010• 15 years ago

The hope is, on the utility side, that the introduction of "smart grid" and "smart metering" technology will help to introduce staggered scheduling of smart appliances and devices such that they do not add significantly to peak times.

For example, if your car has implemented the ZigBee Smart Energy Profile it will connect to your smart meter (HAN network) and will know to start charging only over night (or only if it absolutely has to) when the demand for electricity is far less and most likely cheaper - after the utility implements more levels of peak pricing. We're probably a decade away from such things.

caf• 15 years ago

My local utility already offers a tariff that includes three price levels, depending on the time of day.

jacquesgt• 15 years ago

If the cars are mostly charged overnight, it won't be a big deal. The biggest strain on the power grid and generation capacity comes in the late afternoon, when people's air conditioners are cranking at full blast. That's when the most expensive and dirtiest energy is generated (coal energy is great at ramping up to meet peaks in demand, and power companies will obviously keep their most expensive generators in reserve for peak loads). Adding more consumption at night is actually a great thing, because it lets power companies get more use out of the big capital expenditure on their power plants. Obviously this depends on people actually charging at night, but that can be handled through financial incentives.

And, of course, centralizing the generation of emissions can be a good thing in that you just need to upgrade a few generators to improve efficiency/reduce emissions vs upgrading millions of cars.

wisty3• 15 years ago

I don't think that's really true. I though coal is quite slow at ramp-up. Gas (sorry, UK English, I mean gaseous hydrocarbons like propane) is much more responsive. Coal is cheap (especially if you already have the infrastructure, built when labor was cheaper), that's its advantage.

Anyway, even coal is more efficient than car engines. IIRC, coal is something like 60% efficient (and it really can't get better, due to the laws of physics), cars are more like 30% efficient. OK, coal power still needs to be distributed and then there's some loss in the electric engine, but it's minimal, and petrol also needs distribution. Thus, coal creates less carbon emissions than petrol.

tzs• 15 years ago

> And wouldn't we just end up shifting where waste comes from (from Cars to power plants)

That's something you want to do. Dealing with a big stationary waste source (often that you can locate at a place of your choosing) is a lot easier than dealing with millions of small, mobile waste sources.

jpr• 15 years ago

> what happens if electric vehicles do become popular?

That is a really strange question to ask. I think more appropriate question would be "what does it take for electric vehicles to become popular".

csomar3• 15 years ago

Electric cars doesn't solve the problem if we are using oil to produce electricity. That is, we need to solve that problem first. Actually, by replacing oil with some sort of renewable energy or safe-to-use nuclear energy is already a step to reducing oil consumption.

I'm not here saying that Tesla cars are useless. I didn't try them, but from the design, speed and mileage they seem pretty decent. They are the future, but it's important to look at the energy that runs them and get to solve that problem first.

sixtofour2• 15 years ago

Electric cars are one step in the direction of reducing oil use. And, we cannot solve the oil problem by solving the oil problem first.

The great thing about electric anything is that it's a flexible energy source. You can generate electricity with many different fuels. So you can work on the end user energy needs a bit at a time, without requiring the entire economy to shift all at once.

nradov2• 15 years ago

In the US only 1% of electricity comes from oil. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/83/2008_US_electr...

mkramlich• 15 years ago

nooooo! I had a personal goal of buying a new one in the next few years. Hopefully they bring it back and/or a similar all-electric sports car comes out.

mmphosis• 15 years ago

Here are the three primary components of my future electric car, ordered by the most costly first:

1. Power generation: lots and I mean lots of cheap solar panels on the roof of my home, and a small wind turbine. $25000

2. Power storage: compressed air tanks. $10000

3. A light weight vehicle that meets my own specifications of a small but practical delivery vehicle. $5000

shawnbaden• 15 years ago

Breaking into the automotive industry is tough. Tesla (or any new manufacturer) should expect to slog along for 10+ years before seeing any significant sales and impact.

HoyaSaxa• 15 years ago

The number one thing Tesla has to do if they want to become part of the mainstream is to get the United States Government to establish standards for car batteries. The downside to this is that it limits innovation. However, without the ability to swap batteries at "battery (gas) stations" electric cars will stay in the "early adapters" phase indefinitely. The alternative is to develop a cost effective battery that can last for a very long time (read: 500+ miles) which actually might be in the near future. On a side note, I wish Tesla sold gas hybrid cars because I love the design.

Machine1962• 15 years ago

Innovation would cease to exist if all we did was figure out how/why NOT to do something. Most have not had the pleasure of experiencing the thrill of this technology before commenting. Tesla's real issue is that Musk is really only interested in developing, selling his technology and driving their stock price up so he can get out of the car biz. NOT saving the world, one car at a time. And that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Tesla Roadster reaches the end of the line

Related Stories