Tesla to build $35K Model 3 for 2017

[Ice]

We got an electric vehicle (inexpensive Chevy Spark) a year ago to see if it would suit our lifestyle. It doesn't have the range the Tesla does, which is why we have to have gas vehicles for back up. We get max 88 miles, although that goes higher or lower depending on how we drive or if we're using the heater, etc.

Stop and go traffic does not adversely affect the battery, just the opposite. If you're low on charge, it is recommended that you take city streets because stop and go traffic regenerates the battery. I can drive 24 miles to work, half of which is surface streets. I only use 16 miles worth of charge. I'm stuck with the EV I have now for two more years. Then I would easily commit to being a two Tesla family. My electric bill has gone up $12 per month but we are saving about $400 average because we aren't buying fuel.

A 200 mile range with more charging stations would make it possible to unload gas cars altogether, even in Southern California. I'll take two. One white and one silver. Sign me up.

Oh, I forgot one of the best things about driving an EV! Driving solo in the carpool lane. BAM!

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Ice

We got an electric vehicle (inexpensive Chevy Spark) a year ago to see if it would suit our lifestyle. It doesn't have the range the Tesla does, which is why we have to have gas vehicles for back up. We get max 88 miles, although that goes higher or lower depending on how we drive or if we're using the heater, etc.

Stop and go traffic does not adversely affect the battery, just the opposite. If you're low on charge, it is recommended that you take city streets because stop and go traffic regenerates the battery. I can drive 24 miles to work, half of whichmm is surface streets. I only use 16 miles worth of charge. I'm stuck with the EV I have now for two more years. Then I would easily commit to being a two Tesla family. My electric bill has gone up $12 per month but we are saving about $400 average because we aren't buying fuel.

A 200 mile range with more charging stations would make it possible to unload gas cars altogether, even in Southern California. I'll take tw o. One white and one silver. Sign me up.

Oh, I forgot one of the best things about driving an EV! Driving solo in the carpool lane. BAM!

Regen does give back but only 20 to 15 percent back. Stop and go has no effect on range with regeneration braking. What stop and go does have an effect on tho is overall life of the battery. Like I said before battery's are like a muscle. Putting High current through it constantly will weaken it.
Your spark is going to have its pack last longer then Tesla cels because as I mentioned multiple times is using the lifepo4 cells will last 4-6 times longer. Your chevy spark is using the A123 systems 20amp prismatic cells. The same cells I have posted the data sheet for .

[Neeper]

I have been following Tesla and Elon Musk for the last 6 years or so. I have been waiting what seems like ages for this car. I really wish I could afford a Model S, but I knew this model was coming out after the S. As soon as they are accepting deposits for this car, I am putting money down for it for sure. I am so done with being gouged at the pump.

Tesla is the future here in North America. The bad thing for Calgary is, this could be the beginning of the doom that Calgary will for sure experience, if we don't wean ourselves off oil money.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

The coal argument that always gets thrown out is ridiculous.

What do you think is more efficient? A power plant that a company makes direct profit off of its efficiency, or Joe Blow's 2002 2.0L Honda Civic with a check engine light on?

What do you think is a more dangerous polluter, a coal power plant with a sophisticated scrubbing system in a rural area, or cars with 80% functioning catalytic converters exhausting 2m away from pedestrians?

Who are you responding to? I've not seen many coal comments other than my one question.

What do I think is a more dangerous polluter? No idea, but it would be nice to see some documentation saying using a primarily electric vehicle charged via Alberta's electrical generation system is X% more efficient than the supply chain of oil - > gas consumable by the comparable brand new average vehicle sold in 2015.

You can't compare a brand new Tesla to Joe Blow's 13 year old vehicle. It would have to be Joe Blow's options of other new vehicles to which he's comparing buying a Tesla.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by Neeper

The bad thing for Calgary is, this could be the beginning of the doom that Calgary will for sure experience, if we don't wean ourselves off oil money.

Except that synthetic crude is used for a lot more than just cars.

[Knalus]

Originally Posted by Neeper

I have been following Tesla and Elon Musk for the last 6 years or so. I have been waiting what seems like ages for this car. I really wish I could afford a Model S, but I knew this model was coming out after the S. As soon as they are accepting deposits for this car, I am putting money down for it for sure. I am so done with being gouged at the pump.

Tesla is the future here in North America. The bad thing for Calgary is, this could be the beginning of the doom that Calgary will for sure experience, if we don't wean ourselves off oil money.

There is more gas than oil in Canada. Gas markets have a bigger effect on Calgary than domestic oil use.

[Neeper]

Originally Posted by Knalus

There is more gas than oil in Canada. Gas markets have a bigger effect on Calgary than domestic oil use.

I admit, I don't know a heck of a lot about Oil & Gas in Calgary because I have never worked in the sector. I am just worried that when the world starts using less oil, what is going to happen to our economy?

[MolsonInBothHands]

Originally Posted by T@T

Normally 200 miles is plenty and even overkill but when buying a car personally I need more if needed, what if you needed to drive to Edmonton for a last minute meeting? In no way would I want to stay there even an extra hour to recharge.

No good.

Let it charge, while in the meeting?

[Coach]

Originally Posted by Neeper

I admit, I don't know a heck of a lot about Oil & Gas in Calgary because I have never worked in the sector. I am just worried that when the world starts using less oil, what is going to happen to our economy?

The world has to move away from both oil and gas eventually, it's inevitable. Likely in the relatively near future (I'm thinking/hoping within the next 30 years) and personally the sooner the better.

Unless Alberta can find something else to wrap itself in, it'll be a tough go.

But the world economy in general would see some major shifts in the event of a substantial movement to renewables. The places that generate it will boom. The places that don't adapt will suffer.

Biggest bonus would be not having to accept human rights transgressions in certain oil producing nations. Maybe then actual change will happen, but who knows.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Knalus

There is more gas than oil in Canada. Gas markets have a bigger effect on Calgary than domestic oil use.

That used to be true, but isn't any more. Canada produces more energy in oil than it does in gas, and the energy in oil is worth much more than the energy in gas.

Plus, oil development is more "people dense" than gas development, especially the way we do it here, with giant oil sands projects.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by ranchlandsselling

You can't compare a brand new Tesla to Joe Blow's 13 year old vehicle. It would have to be Joe Blow's options of other new vehicles to which he's comparing buying a Tesla.

This is incorrect.

My whole point is a 13 year old Tesla still generates zero emissions locally, and remote emissions will be largely the same.

With internal combustion engines, emissions typically degrade as the vehicle ages. Emissions control systems on passenger cars are incredibly complex.

There are tons of cars out there with faulty EGR valves, idle control valves, exhaust leaks, head gasket or valve cover leaks, all with owners having no clue and still driving them around. Then add people that will ignore a check engine light, and you have people with failed MAF sensors, O2 sensors or catalytic converters. Internal combustion engine emissions systems are highly complex now. On VW diesels I think it's about $4,000 when the Diesel Particulate Filter needs replacement. Most people just remove them instead, and more polluted air for all of us.

At a power plant there are regular maintenance checks and heavy regulation. I'd rather a plant technician be responsible for my clean air than anyone I've seen in charge of maintaining their car besides a select few.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by MattyC

The world has to move away from both oil and gas eventually, it's inevitable. Likely in the relatively near future (I'm thinking/hoping within the next 30 years) and personally the sooner the better.

Unless Alberta can find something else to wrap itself in, it'll be a tough go.

But the world economy in general would see some major shifts in the event of a substantial movement to renewables. The places that generate it will boom. The places that don't adapt will suffer.

Biggest bonus would be not having to accept human rights transgressions in certain oil producing nations. Maybe then actual change will happen, but who knows.

Petroleum products are a key source valuable chemicals. In addition Natural gas is used in the production of Ammonia which is important in the production of fertilizer. So even if oil and gas ceases to be a key source of energy there's going to be demand for oil and gas.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Petroleum products are a key source valuable chemicals. In addition Natural gas is used in the production of Ammonia which is important in the production of fertilizer. So even if oil and gas ceases to be a key source of energy there's going to be demand for oil and gas.

Yeah fair enough. Taking it out as an energy source is going to be a major hit on the industry regardless, and it would be nice if alternatives to what you mentioned (and others) could be founds, maybe with even a smidge of appropriate research resources something could have been found already.

Either way, as an energy source, non-renewables have to be replaced. ASAP.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Petroleum products are a key source valuable chemicals. In addition Natural gas is used in the production of Ammonia which is important in the production of fertilizer. So even if oil and gas ceases to be a key source of energy there's going to be demand for oil and gas.

2.7% of US oil and 1.7% of US gas are used annually to make plastics.

About 1.5% of US gas goes to fertilizer production.

Once the stuff stops getting burned for everything we are at least temporarily screwed.

Electric cars could see a shift to a gas economy for a while. Natural gas is a crappy fuel for passenger cars, in my opinion, but a great source of generation and a good stepping stone to cleaner energy.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

At a power plant there are regular maintenance checks and heavy regulation. I'd rather a plant technician be responsible for my clean air than anyone I've seen in charge of maintaining their car besides a select few.

I've worked in industry long enough conclude that most companies care about maintenance and regulations in plants about as much as the average driver cares about their faulty MAF sensor. Anywhere I've been it comes down to the almighty dollar, regardless of what the mission statement says about the environment.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by hulkrogan

2.7% of US oil and 1.7% of US gas are used annually to make plastics.

About 1.5% of US gas goes to fertilizer production.

Once the stuff stops getting burned for everything we are at least temporarily screwed.

Electric cars could see a shift to a gas economy for a while. Natural gas is a crappy fuel for passenger cars, in my opinion, but a great source of generation and a good stepping stone to cleaner energy.

I honestly don't understand the need for a stepping stone. It is the right direction, no question, but when you know you're going to have to move on from that as well, why not go all out with research into renewables?

Pull tax exemptions for oil and gas companies, and funnel the funds into renewable research if the companies arent going to do it themselves. I know some of them do have renewable sectors, but they don't get even remotely close to the funding of fossil fuel sectors. A switch to much cleaner gas is nice, but still behind the curve IMO.

I'd like to see Calgary and AB take an attitude of being an energy producer and innovator, rather than just ride out the fossil-fuel wave until an inevitable crash. We have to get ahead of it.

[DownhillGoat]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Pull tax exemptions for oil and gas companies, and funnel the funds into renewable research if the companies arent going to do it themselves.

Sounds like a great way to cripple the nation's economy overnight.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by kunkstyle

Sounds like a great way to cripple the nation's economy overnight.

Mhmm. The slow burn is much easier to swallow I guess. Not as noticable.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by Knalus

There is more gas than oil in Canada. Gas markets have a bigger effect on Calgary than domestic oil use.

Ummm.... Are you talking about Natural Gas? Which has nothing to do with gasoline... other than it might be used as a fuel to run camps and equipment to generate power to extract oil which can then be turned into gasoline to fuel vehicles.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I honestly don't understand the need for a stepping stone. It is the right direction, no question, but when you know you're going to have to move on from that as well, why not go all out with research into renewables?

Pull tax exemptions for oil and gas companies, and funnel the funds into renewable research if the companies arent going to do it themselves. I know some of them do have renewable sectors, but they don't get even remotely close to the funding of fossil fuel sectors. A switch to much cleaner gas is nice, but still behind the curve IMO.

I'd like to see Calgary and AB take an attitude of being an energy producer and innovator, rather than just ride out the fossil-fuel wave until an inevitable crash. We have to get ahead of it.

There is a big need for a stepping stone.

Every single good you consume has transportation costs.

Food is one such good that has a massive portion of it's overall cost to produce coming from transportation.

It's pretty easy when almost every single person here is in the top 5% of wealth in the world to say that you're willing to pay more for energy and goods because the environment is important to you.

The reality is that a bump of 10% in energy costs causes a large segment of the world's population to go hungry.

This is not the place for an abrupt change, but rather a measured one with a lot of foresight.

I agree I'd love to see Calgary become an energy hub and not just a fossil fuel hub. But to get money for research you need people to have a profit motive. Right now renewables don't look to hold an impending solution to world energy demand, so it's difficult to drive much investment there.