Thank You for sharing your opinion on the Volt, very informative. Congratulations on your engineering office in Michigan, and that work on White Star is progressing.

Martin—I and I think all the other Teslafiles could read your and other Tesla blog entries for hours of enjoyment.

BUT–where is the Tesla Store to buy our STUFF?? Ha—you could get another 60 million in “VC” with sales of T-Shirts, Hats, “Electric”–Tesla Roadster Toys, Jackets, bumper stickers and key chains…just to name a few.

GM will get their 500,000,000.00 “VC” from their friend BIG GOVT.

Yea—as you have found out BIG OIL/CAR/GOVT all use Your/Our hard earned money to fatten themselves up, kill us as startups and competitors and keep us addicted to their petrolium/war-industrial complex produced drugs.

I’m glad to see Tesla investing in America and Americans.

I just hope that the tide is changing and Americans start to value their citizenship and divorce themselves away from the globalists/corporatists who have no country other than what the resources they can sell from/to it.

All of us look forward to your progress and can’t wait to see the 1st “100″ driving amongst us everyday.

I hope you can attract some top design talent and produce a classic iconic sports sedan that will have a design language up there with BMW, Mercedes and Porche - noting too quirky, exotic.

Extend that design language to the four door hatchback Prius, Golf, A3 class. I hope I can buy a tesla one day!

Design-that’s the KEY factor for the Whitestar. Don’t ask me how to do it, but I hope it’s a stand-out, fun design with a lot of personality-and unlike anything out there (to match its technology: the best of both worlds). Apple & Starbucks both use it to enhance their product :”The (design) medium is the message”-so does Frank Gehry, though his product is the product ( ?? -at least that’s what Yogi Berra thinks). E.L. Cord would definitely agree as well. One thing’s certain, the Whitestar design will be “happening” one way or another-the roadster being the proof of that pudding. Hope it comes out at no more than $50,000 ($45,000, maybe, hopefully…cheaper batteries by then?). Guess Tesla will be looking at using Whitestar parts also in the later family sedan. Tesla needs to do a real job with the seats, for tall people like me particularly (and Martin perhaps?) -need to make seats that can raise up high, like a truck-as in Chrysler Aspen I sat in at auto show. With long legs it’s a lot more comfortable to be up high. Also need to have a bench front seat option, with big fat armrest you can fold down-like on older Durango my brother owns. That seat is very comfortable, especially for long drives . With no Tesla transmission tunnel, this should be an easy option.

So far Tesla Motors positioned itself as car maker company for rich people only. At least to me all the talk of Tesla Motors as future mass market cars manufacturing sounds like a marketing deception to get better publicity.

In reality I think company would service only rich enough people. Whole phylosophy of cars building I read on this site from Martin Eberhard is tailored to expensive “fun to drive” vehicles which only affluent people could afford. May be this would be what electric cars exist for, but this I think will solve nothing about U.S. oil addiction or ecology problems.

—–

Martin Eberhard is obviously correct in his technology observation about batteries. It surely requires better battery technology to make a plug-in hybrid car under ~$30000 like GM Volt than to make full electric roadster for ~$90000 like Tesla Roadster.
But I do not believe that cars for $50000 and above are real solution for a massive switch of U.S. transportation into renewables fuels. May be Martin Eberhard consider that cars and car buyers dealing with cars below $50000 are not important and sort of should stop driving cars completely to avoid contribute to global warming. If this is the case it would be very elitish.
But if we consider realistic conversion to electric cars for masses I believe that target price range should be $15000 - $30000. Also this should be considered to be universal car capable of driving short every day commute and long road trips for thousands of miles with no electric infrastructure to charge. Also people who rent for a long time would not have ability to change vehicles by electricity.
Having expensive battery pack Tesla Motors have today is not an option for mass transportation I believe. Battery pack targeting cost $3000 - $5000 is needed. With current battery technology used by Tesla Motors this would correspond to 40 to 60 miles electric range. Sounds pretty similar to GM Volt concept in capabilities.
It is correct that with typical 500 times recharge cycles it will not be practical because battery replacement would come too frequent. Basically battery depreciation cost of ownership of plug-in hybrid or full EV is independent on battery size and is limited by technological factors.
So without dramatic improvements at least on recharge cycle count mass transition from oil to electricity for transportation is impossible. But it is claimed by A123 and AltairNano compamies to provide big improvement on recharge cycles. If this would be proven by practical use it opens the road to have 3000 to 4000 recharge cycles. In this case for mass market GM Volt serial plug-in hybrid concept characteristics are much better on target compared to published so far Tesla Motors plans.

Would GM really push plug-in hybrids like Volt into production remains very unclear especially taking into account GM track record so far. But aside of GM behavior the GM Volt concept itself to me makes perfect sense for mass market cars $15000 - $30000 price range assuming A123 or Altairnano batteries would be really 3000 to 4000 recharge cycle count and would cost similar money to up to date Li-ion batteries.

Martin,

I admire Tesla’s technology and the hard work of its employees. However, I have to say, for a 2010 sports sedan, Tesla or Chevrolet, I’m happy with any car that gets either 7 or 8.5 seconds in a 0-60mph contest. I’m happy if the motor is either A/C and 90 pounds or D/C brushless and 140 pounds. What will make the difference for me is, how much will it cost? And will I have to write a check for the full amount a year in advance? Or to fight global warming, can I get financing for a useful car for a normal guy with normal kids who has a normal wife looking over my shoulder at big purchases?

As one of your own bloggers stressed recently, don’t make perfect the enemy of good.

This is one of the best blogs yet. I feel more optimistic the more information you guys reveal. Please keep it coming and keep up the good work.

Congrats on the new office. You seemed to get it going and staffed rather quickly.

I have this thought that there is some sense of wonder and accomplishment that went on with the original roadster being done by a bunch of computer engineers breaking into the car business. Now that you have seasoned big industry car engineers working on the next gen, I wonder if things are more “business as usual” with a bit less of the experimental wild passion going on there? Hopefully your new staff hasn’t gotten too jaded from working for the established giants already.

================================

Martin said:

“a smaller, 40-mile pack. The lifetime range of this pack is only 500 X 40 = 20,000 miles! To get the same lifetime range, a Chevy Volt with a 40-mile driving range would need batteries that are roughly six times as good (3,000 cycles) as those in the Tesla Roadster. ”

Is that really correct? With the gas motor doesn’t the hybrid have the luxury of not running the pack down as often? For instance, the Prius has a wimpy little battery pack, yet Toyota guarantees it for something like 150,000 miles of use, and it seems they are proving to work that well in practice. They have the luxury of turning on the gas motor and saving the battery life for just the right moments when they need it. For instance, they typically keep the battery pack between something like 50 and 80% of charge, and use the gas motor to keep if from falling to a damaging level of undercharge. It seems to me the whole battery lifespan equation is a different story if you have a gas motor and generator on-board.

My wife just bought a Highlander hybrid and it is amazing (and scary) how much technology goes into making that all work. There is something beautiful about the basic simplicity of a pure EV as compared to the hybrids, but still it is sortof neat the way the gas motor can work when the batteries need help, and the electrical motor can ease burdens from the gas motor (like not having to idle, or shift gears, or work as hard when passing acceleration as needed). She needed a 6+ passenger vehicle, so waiting for Whitestar wasn’t an option.

I gather you guys didn’t show up at the SJ auto show? It is sad with a city as big as San Jose that their auto show pales compared to LA, Chicago, Detroit, NY and even SF.
One of these days the SJ auto show needs to move to the big leagues. I wonder if we could get a Tesla to be a pace car for the SJ Grand Prix?

Hi Martin,
Another good blog. I live in Switzerland and I think we should have your cars as soon as possible available here. We’re having the warmest January since a long time (today app. 14degC), and this comes not only from burning X-mas trees in the backyard. I want you to have (also oeconomical) success with your cars and I hope I’ll see your car(s) at the 2008 Geneva Auto Show.
Patrik

“The GM spokespeople say that they will launch the Volt when they can get 3,000 to 4,000 cycles out of their battery system.”

I won’t hold my breath.

Been reading……

www.batteryuniversity.com/parttwo-34.htm

How does the Roadster deal with the “digital memory” issue mentioned in the above link - or is this not a problem in EV applications?

Dear Martin,
Who the “halibut” drives a 4 door sedan? Maybe it is popular in the US, but in my country, Sweden, we all drive Estates, Combis or whatever you wanna call them. I hope you will make a “sports combi” also out the sedan before Volvo builds it’s first EV V70…
Is this possible you think?

/ The Swedish Tesla Fan

Another good blog. I was looking at the BMW Series 1 four door hatchback & couldn’t help but think THAT’S what the White Star should be. Soccer moms need to get out of their SUVs and I see the market forces moving towards cross-over/hatchback/sport wagons. That extra load space would be handy.

Moderator — looks like my < whacked my comment — is this any better?

I think what you’ve managed to demonstrate is that the batteries you are using are inappropriate for a hybrid vehicle.
That much seems obvious — there are tradeoffs in energy and power density between technologies. A123 or Altair have something like half the cell energy density, but much better cycle life (thousands, not 500), and much better power delivery (which you’d need when downsizing the pack). Pricing is an issue, of course.

EEStor just did a press announcement as well, so, there are about to be more power sources than just cells (15kwh, less than 100 pounds, deliverable 2007).

www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=204515

Are you aware of the major advances in auto air conditioning using the CO2 trans critical cycle? It operates as a heat pump and can provide instant heat when starting.
Lots to tell you guys about this if you don’t already know.
Thanks,
Butch LaFonte
The LaFonte Group
Birmingham, Alabama

—

Editor’s comment: Thanks for the update. Check out the blog, Blowing Hot and Cold, for info on instant heat it in the Tesla Roadster.

> And of course, at that time, Tesla’s commensurate battery pack will last for between 750,000 and 1,000,000 miles. Or at least 25 years of heavy driving (25,000/year).

Of course they will probably improve power density as well.

So basically it appears that before GM can produce the VOLT Tesla should be able to put a car in production with a 500+ mile range ( good enough for 90% of the population) as well as enough lifespan to keep people very happy for many years.

Tesla will need to have amazing upgradable computer hardware and software in these cars to handle future advancements and make sure to have a revenue stream after they have displaced all other manufacturers cars, leaving them little to produce except to handle attrition Of course all wreck cars should be completely recycled at that point

If you can release it, I’d love to hear more about what Tesla will look like in 5-10 years. When you start selling mass market, the 2nd and 3rd models, will you partner with any financial institutions to offer financing? How many “tesla centers” can we expect? How will the business model change? And for pete’s sake, when can I buy a hat?

Another vote for Tesla-branded hats, shirts, mugs, etc. Let’s work the math. If you sold 220 Roadsters @ $100k each, that grosses $22 million. As you say, the point of selling the cars is entirely to provide cashflow for additional development.

Now, if you can provide Tesla gear, you could probably net AT LEAST $10 per reader here (there must be at least several thousand, I should think). Not an insignificant number by itself, but it also lets you identify a cadre of consumers who have already bought into your concept and have become enthusiastic advocates for it. This will be invaluable for market projections, marketing drives, etc.

People need a way to demonstrate commitment in order to stay committed. You guys seriously need to provide swag!

1) Yes, definitely sell t-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.

2)To the Europeans: Hahahaha! To bad, they’re not coming there soon…

3)I agree that a small lower-performance city car is the logical 3rd model. But I think you always have to get a triple-digit top speed to get any respect at all. Shouldn’t be tough to get it to 105, right?

4)On the Volt: Some people have said you missed the whole hybrid concept, that the engine could “help out.” This is not my read of things…I understood this model to be functionally different from other hybrids, in that it used a fully-electric drive. That is, the gas engine only functioned as a generator, and did not have a mechanical connection to the transmission. Am I right, or are your detractors? Either way, hybrids seem to take all the complexity of both systems, and as such I feel they blunt the advantages of the electric technology they bring to the table.
5)I’d love to hear your opinion of the recent battery developments and those that you think will be forthcoming. Not only the altair stuff, but also Li-polymer and Chromium-based cells, etc. Or I guess more specifically, do you figure energy density will be much better by the time you’re building Whitestar? Surely by then you won’t be using the same cells you’re using now, right?

Thanks

—

Editor’s response: Martin’s blog, Balance, addressed some alternate technologies.

I definitely agree with the merchandise, though I think you should have had it by december 1, so that people could give it as christmas presents. And if you laugh at that, honestly, how many shirts and other clothes have you gotten for christmas? Way too much? Yeah, me too. This stuff would be in the lonely category of “would actually wear.”

Also, they’ve been workin on the sedan for a while now. They’ve been saying “4-door” for a while. If they’ve locked that in, it’s probably not going to change at this point, though I would be surprised if they didn’t make a 2-door version at some point in the future. Just, not car number 2, since they already have one 2-door car, may as well go in a different direction, right?

Last question: How many service centers to you expect to be adding per year? I know where they’re going to start out, just wondering if you have the slightest clue on when (even if the “where” is undecided) they well start sprouting up?

Just off the EESTOR shelf:

www.greencarcongress.com/2007/01/eestor_announce.html

“The resulting parallel configuration of components has the capability to store electrical energy in the range of 52 kWh, according to the document, with weight for a unit of that capacity in the range of 336 pounds (152 kg). ”

Lets hope this is true……..Tesla go hunt them down for some Engineering Samples you can try out.

To TEG:

1. GM Volt concept is a serial hybrid. In this case almost all the energy used for driving have to go through the battery. This is probably biggest drawback of serial hybrid prevented it from entering the market so far.

2. Toyota and Honda hybrids are variations of parallel hybrid. In this case most of sustained energy for driving goes directly from ICE to wheels via transmission. As a result battery life and associated cost is saved dramatically. The drawback of this scheme is mechanical complexity. Apparently Japanese car companies have big mechanical reliability edge versus GM and Ford. As a result GM and Ford have to resort to serial hybrid but need better batteries than available today to do so practically.

Have to respectfully disagree with Olof, and T.J. Marketing a 4-door sedan provides a huge market. Sports Sedan or not, a 4-door, preferably with a trunk (not a hatchback), will be popular. According to NADAguides.com, analysis based on shopper’s research 4-door sedans were the most visited category in Q2/2006. This translated into almost 1/3 of the traffic to that section of the site. The information was then cross referenced with auto industry statistics, which showed a correlation between consumer research and actual sales.

Olof, I currently drive a Volvo 4-door sedan

Martin et al…

Nice article, the explanation of battery-readiness for the Volt was much appreciated.

Any thoughts on the EEStor press release claiming a successful production operation for a 15kWh ultracap found at www.marketwire.com/mw/release_html_b1?release_id=204515 ? Could this potentially validate their claims, or do you think it’s some lip service for the VCs?

On the VOLT: My impression is that GM has produced a car that will be a platform for exploring the realm of series hybrids. My thought was that if the VOLT gets 50 MPG when the batteries are depleted, then why not just run the car with the ICE running all the time, sans battery? Of course you’d need some energy storage for needed surge power, under acceleration. 50 mpg is alot better mileage than any other GM vehicle. GM could even leave the battery connections and bracketing so that purchasers could have the option of adding the amount of pure electrical range they want, 10, 20, , 30, or 40 miles depending on their budget and needs. The VOLT just seems well designed for modular upgrades. I think big dum GM is smarter than we think.
Just think about the aftermarket implications. Higher output electric motors, rotary ICE’s for more power and less weight, higher output generators, modular battery range extenders to put in the trunk, etc, etc… The VOLT could be set up for high performance or high efficiency, and possibly, swap back and forth with a simply change in computer programing. With the VOLT, I’d pay less attention to the component technology and focus more on the total platform, we will see it again.

This company is great and will revolutionize the world.Iwould like to know where to buy stock for this company?

Iz wants a “Whitestar” trunk, I like a hatchback, so: open the hatchback and on floor is lid for a deep trunk below it. Hatchback & trunk-you get both in one car.

Proper battery management can greatly extend battery life. The Toyota Prius keeps its NiMH traction battery between 85% and 40% of full charge, avoiding overcharging and excessive discharge. The result is a lifespan exceeding 10 years or 200,000 miles.

Like the Prius, the GM Volt avoids excessive discharge to maximize battery life. The GM Volt uses a 16 Kwh battery, but uses only half the battery capacity for the 40 mile “electric only” range, the remaining reserve is used only to supplement power from the generator when accelerating.
.
Laptops, cell phones, and other small battery powered devices often go from fully charged to almost totally discharged to maximize run-time. This makes for a relatively short lifespan. Experience with laptop batteries is not applicable to EV batteries - battery managemen is not the same!

Ironically, GM designers had made preliminary plans for a hybrid successor to the EV1, expanded to carry 4 passengers and using NiMH batteries and a small gas turbine generator for a range extender. It was canceled when the EV1 was canned.

Roy, please note that power stored in a capacitor is E = U²C/2, so the linear relationship shown for EEStor on www.plasticlabels.ca/index_files/compareEVbatteries.htm is not entirely correct.
It’s however no problem at all for modern power inverters to step-up motor regenerative AC up to 3.5 kV DC. By the way, already in 1980, German thyristor locomotive series 120 sported a 2.8 kV DC bus. It had a continuous traction power of 4.4 MW and was rated for 125 mph. Of course a modern example of the same is the French bullet train TGV perso.orange.fr/florent.brisou/Fiche%20TGV-A.htm. It has a 1.5 kV DC bus and pulls off around 8 MW of traction up to 190 mph on regular service.
AC motors do not have a mechanical commutator which limits nominal armature voltage of DC motors to approx 1.5 kV. A future ZENN highway-capable car therefore also could employ a motor of so-called medium nominal voltage somewhere at 2…5 kV instead of 220…400 V, thereby reducing wire cross-section, copper mass and resistive losses (pure speculation on my side).

You folks have had me listing pros and cons of life without gasoline powered vehicles, and the con side of the list is growing ever larger. here are a few cons. no annual smog checks (or semi annual), no gas station soil pollution caused cleanups, no storge tanks and their inherit probems, no fiery freeway crashes with loved ones burned beyond recognition, no breathing carbon monoxide fumes in your vehicle because of faulty exhaust systems, no engine compartment fires because of even minor fuel leaks, no gasoline tanker trucks crashing and BURNING, no freeway shut downs while said fuel is cleaned up, no bodies of water polluted with run off from said crashes, no oil changes, no oil filters, no jiffy lubes, no tune up shops, no muffler shops, no tranmission shops, no transmission fluid, no trasmission fluid leaks, the people who serviced the EV1 said they never had to do a brake job on one , no dirty air to breate, suicidal people will have one less way to do it (no tailpipe lol), no drive belts to break, no fuel injector cleaners, no fuel on hands and clothes at seff serves, no obnoxious gas station attendants, one less reason to need a credit card, no anti freeze, no radiators, no radiator hoses, no gas tanks, no gas caps, these are just a few cons, (whew my brain hurts) do i need do list the pros. I may have touched on a few reasons why “someone killed the electric car.”

The Lotus Elise lists for $43K versus ~$90K for the Tesla roadster. That’s quite a price premium for the Tesla. To be taken seriously by consumers beyond enthusiast collectors, you can’t have much of a price premium. You probably know this: the price premium should not be more than the present value of the fuel and maintenance cost difference over the life of the vehicle. Can you show calculations how to achieve this in the future? It seems to me that changing a large battery pack every 5 years kills any financial viability. Regarding green house gas savings: there are many ways to invest ~$50K price premium to reduce green house gases. It would probably pay for preservation of quite a large tract of Amazon rain forest. But, of course, that you wouldn’t be able to show off to your neighbors so easily.

—

Editor’s comment: See the blog, The Secret Tesla Motors Master Plan.

Based on GM’s comments thus far, Anatoly is accurate in his assessment of the Volt’s concept. With only an electric drive, the greatest benefits are to battery only operation. It’s the felxibility that an optimized generator affords, that brings an advantage. The assumption that Tesla is banking on to move down the market pyramid, is improvements in battery technology. Given recent history, it is a reasonable assumption that batteries will improve in all aspects over time. The more debatable issue is how much time to be able to move how far down the pyramid. To get to the high volume, commodity portion batteries have to become a lot cheaper (1/4 to 1/5 of the cost today). So, what should be done in the interim? Are low volume all electric, mechanically driven hybrids, and all ICE vehicles the best option? What happens as batteries do come down in price? Vehicles like the Whitestar come on line in the $50-70K range. When do available plugs start showing up in public areas (Rest stops, restaurants along the highways, parking garages, etc) and the workplace? Plug-ins hybrids can clearly be a stepping stone to get there and if they are mass marketed soon, then the infrastucture to better support electric vehicles will be there sooner. Plug-in and all EV development should be seenn as symbiotic and not conflicting. Available technology, costs, and ultimately user preference will decide what is best at the time. Today, all EV’s are limited to niche markets with the hope that future development will broaden their market potential. Tesla has commented on this in past blogs and sees plug-ins as part of an interim step. To me it is not a digital question of all this or all that and large steps. I think plug-ins should be looked at as an anvenue of incremental improvements to get us from nearly all ICE to nearly all EV. Basically a serial plug-in is an EV. They can start at 5, 10, or whatever mile range is practical and improve from there. As range improves, battery only EV’s market appeal will widen. Once the plugs are on the road, the outlets will follow.

Anatoly, does design choice have to be made between tightly coupled and loosely coupled generator and driving power? Couldn’t software and power electronics/controls make it a user choice?

What is available today? 8-15KWh battery packs are certainly available today. The available technology obviously varies greatly in cost, life, and performance? What does an efficient 2-cylinder genset weigh and cost? Could a Volt-like car be made using todays technology for batteries and gensets? How about a crossover or small SUV? Absolutely, don’t you think. The question is at what price and what functionality? In GM’s case, why not start with a Cadillac or Buick, if that’s what the technology affords? Let’s say the technology only practically allows 20 miles of battery range (20,000 mile life), 180HP, and 500-600 miles of range with 50MPG at a premium of $6000 (I think this is on the pessimistic side). With assumptions of $2.50 average gas, 7K battery miles per year, 6k gas miles, and $0.10/kwh electricity the power costs would be $447/year ($147 electric, $300 gas). This is $853 less per year than a 25mpg ICE equivalent. So that’s $2500, plus maintenance cost differences to pay for a battery replacement every 3 years. Would any dispute that battery costs will come down and gas costs go up? It sure seems plausable that serial plug-ins are viable today for certain markets today and best of all they would hasten the viability of more Teslas.

Ronald Greene wrote: “Why should you wait all day and then come home at night and then have to do [charge] it? You see who wants this job to do after working all day?”

I come home many days and am pretty exhausted, but if I’m too tired to insert a plug into a wall receptacle, then I’ve got bigger problems to worry about!

#TEG wrote on January 19th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
#One of the things that keeps me thinking the Tesla PEM solution is less than ideal is very large number of small cells that have to be put #in there. Is there a robot device that can assemble the 6831 cells into the pack? I assume that cells have to be soldered or welded #together in bundles. Also it would seem to be weight inefficient to have to carry arround all that individual packaging on each cell, as well #as space inefficient due to cylindrical packaging.

TEG - Tesla is using multiple cells - with the encasements that come along with them - deliberately. They are doing so because it gives them a safer energy storage unit given the risks inherent in existing Li-Ion technology. By using multiple cells, if one cell goes bad it wont cause the whole car to go up in a ball of flames. Ditto for the need for the encasements around each cell. GM is avoiding this issue by using A123’s batteries which do not have the thermal run away issue.

Thanks Anatoly for your update on EEStor.

One important challenge for building electric cars is electricity storage in batteries or supercapacitors. But to save the climate we have to produce this electricity in a sustainable way. If this was just half as appealing as having a car…

What do you think about concentrated solar power (CSP) plants in deserts, such as the Mojave Desert in California, which have produced clean electricity for already two decades now? Sunlight is concentrated by parabolic trough reflectors to produce overheated steam that drives a conventional steam turbine. Maybe it doesn’t excite many people because it is “Low-Tech”, however, it is much cheaper than photovoltaic cells and has a shorter energy payback time. Less than 1 % of world’s deserts would suffice to cover our entire primary energy consumption:
www.ez2c.de/ml/solar_land_area/

The electricity can be transported by high voltage DC lines with acceptable losses over a distance of several thousand kilometers, much more efficient than with hydrogen as energy carrier.
The money wasted in wars for oil could make us independent of polluting fossil fuels forever, would it be invested into solar energy instead. It will require a huge effort to cover thousands of square kilometers with CSP plants, comparable to something like the Apollo program, but this is a question of survival for mankind. People of the planet have to come together to save life on earth instead of making war against each others and against nature!

Here are some links to CSP:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_Solar_Power
www.solarpaces.org/csp_docs.htm
www.trecers.net/index.html

To night after an absence of several months I read all the blogs on here. I am astounded by the high quality and technical substance of many of the blogs. Very informative and valuable stuff.

But at the risk of getting labeled a pain in the ass, I repeat my questions on the battery pack.

1). Has TM test driven “on-road” their 6,000 cell battery pack to 100,000 miles or to end-of-useful-life which ever came first. ?

2). What were the results?

3). Were these results published ? and Where ?

4). How many packs were tested ?.

5). Were the test packs a true representation of the manufacturer’s standard production practices and QA , QC etc. ?

6). Was the test done on City , Urban and Freeway driving . Any rough road (pot holes) driving done ?

7). Did driving conditions include:
Hot anbient temps Phoenix in summer?
Freezing ambient temps Chicago in winter ?

Answer NO to any of the above questions and WE HAVE A PROBLEM (a big problem).

Let us know
Galactic Cannibal

Well, what to say? You folks are the only company I really trust around and look forward for your future models (I am keeping money apart for your next sedan!). GM is keeping make fun of its own audience with big lies to lobbying oil based technology, so… we have only you guys!

My only critique: please, answer to our e-mail inquiries, I sent to you several e-mails asking where I can see your Roadster in southern California and I never had an answer…

Thank you!

Fabrizio Ferrari
Virtual Sheet Music, Inc.
www.virtualsheetmusic.com

—

Editor’s response: Thanks for your interest in the Tesla Roadster. The best way to find out about upcoming events is to visit our Events page. We don’t have any events planned for this month, but please check back soon.

I was discussing EVs with other locals on the message forum of my town’s local newspaper. One fellow asked about the logistics of recycling the batteries that might be used in EVs. I don’t recall that this aspect of an EV “revolution” has been covered in detail on this site, and I hope that it will be the subject of blog column or whitepaper someday soon. Suppose that Tesla is wildly successful, in being able to put tens of thousands of EVs on the road over the next several years. What happens when the ESSs need to be replaced/disposed/recycled? How much of the materials can be used again in new batteries, battery packs, or other products? How “green” is the disposal process for material that cannot be recycled?

If this topic has been covered in depth somewhere on this site, I missed it. In that case, I’d appreciate the URL… Thanks.

 —

Editor’s response: The short answer is we have a plan for recycling. You can find the information we currently have available to the public on our Recycling page.

OOPs I was wrong, ZENN agreement with EEStor is for vehicles up to 3080lbs, so if Tesla does want to buy these ultracapacitors it will be through ZENN

Here is the full text of Dick Weir’s e-mail to me when I raised Anatoly’s doubts about EEstor Co.: “It is obvious that Tesla Motors does not understand the technical direction that EEstor, Inc. is taking. Of course we can make that statement about everyone else on earth. Seeing is believing and the latest EEstor, Inc. press release is the beginning of the certification process and in 2007 our battery will be functioning in someone else’s electric vehicle. I wonder what Tesla Motors will say then. It will be interesting”. - Any comments, Anatoly/ Tesla mavens/ anyone else?

Here is an idea from Japan to combine at a nano level a lithium ion battery and ultracapacitor to maximize power and energy density:

Electrode Made from Mesoporous Nanocomposite Materials to Upgrade Power Density of Lithium Rechargeable Battery by Two Orders of Magnitude or More
-Lithium Rechargeable Battery with Super-Capacitor Feature Made Available -

www.aist.go.jp/aist_e/latest_research/2005/20050203/20050203.html

Editor, There use to be a page on the site that said what dates the Tesla service centers would be opening in the respective cities. I cannot find it now. Is it gone? If not, can you post it or give us those dates? Thank you.

—

Editor’s response: The location of our planned Tesla Customer Centers can be found on the FAQ page. See: Who will service my Telsa Motors car?

To David Kosowsky:

Engine optimization to be the most efficient generator implies deep changes of engine itself. For example you have to swithc to Atkinson cycle instead of Otto cycle. Also generator would have significantly smaller power like 40 - 60 kW instead of 100 - 150 kW in case of normal ICE. This means that it will not be enough [ower and ICE generator dynamic range of power to operate in tightly coupled mode. So answer to your question is negative - choice happens at power plant architecture level and is not easily reversible especially in mass production line.

To David:

You imply that driving could happen without using gas basically in totally electric mode. For the modest car price range surely below $30000 it have to be for a limited range like 40 miles or less. If this mode of operation have to be most important it still makes no escape from the fact that major fraction of total driving energy flux goes through the battery pack. So we come to mentioned by Martin Eberhard problem that battery depreciation cost is independent from battery size and upfront cost. Tesla Motors engineering choice was to absorb high battery pack cost by car price on a high end cars market. This is wise choice making them successfull as a business. But it has nothing to do with going out of oil dependence in mass transportation. For typicall mass market battery cost today is about 4 times too high so either somebody should deliver 4 - 6 times more recharge cycles per same energy and cost or market would be locked with Prius style parallel hybrids as most successful.

To Andreas Kay:

The system you have mentioned is probably most old thermal solar technology in mass scale use. It is under use for ~20 years already I believe. Unfortunately it did not come to cost parity with coal power plants. As such business is not encoaraged to invest - end of story. Biggest problem is that accumulating heat tubes have too big surface and are too lengthy. This causes service overhead problems not really reducible much. Another “stupid” problem is severe dust accumulation on reflecting surfaces in dessert environment requiring overhead on clean up ( water is expensive in such places by the way ).

In thermal solar I believe tower systems are better and might come to cost parity with coal generators but it will take time. These thermal solar systems I believe are potentially more cost efficient than solar panels but biggest issue is that high upfront investment required - nobody want to risk for new technology at this level of investment. Today big investors are extremely risk averse as you can see from big car companies not doing right things for dozens of years and countless other examples of big business not acting. That is why for example Stirling engine based solar thermal systems are popular regardless that they are cost inefficient - no big invetment is needed.

Solar panels are much smaller so they could much easier come into use and prove themselves in a bottom up way through “grass root” kind of movement of environmentally concerned middle class people. I believe this is probably the most important reason of their growing popularity.

Great blog! I agree mass production of batteries is needed. When the government gives A123 cash, does it go to build facilities in other countries?

One thing i’ve noticed is that Oshinksy’s process of rolling metal out on an assembley line and coating it with materials (nano-tech and standard) in a vacuum, then baking it on, is used in batteries, capacitors, and solar PV.

Maybe the government cash ought to go to develop production lines of this type that are adaptable to various devices? This production line equipment mass produced would encourage investment in the various devices. A production facility would not become obsolete with a particular device. For instance, NIMH is obsolete because of Li-ion, Li-ion might become obsolete because of ultra-capacitors; a production line that could be switched as advancements are made would preserve the investment.

What will happen to A123 if practical electric car ultrcaps are developed? Bankruptcy. This is what is holding up investment in battery mass production, as well as big oil/auto company opposition at the capital allocation level. Who will be the MSFT of this energy re-evolution? Whomever can adapt and use the latest, greatest developments. The rest will go the way of the 99% of startups that are hardly remembered.

I agree that 500 million ought to go for mass production here in the US. Why give away yet another trillion dollar manufacturing market to asia?

Hey Galactic, Telsa’s blogs www.teslamotors.com/blog1/?p=42 and www.teslamotors.com/blog1/?p=43 give at lot of confidence (to me at least) they’re serious about durability/climate testing.

I think more people here need to actually use an electric vehicle to go to work. Recharging the batteries every night is a big deal because your vehicle is out of service for that period. A self-recharging electric will spare you of all that and will offer the same convinence as our
present ICE’s. Thus, the car can always be used because the battery is always fully charged. Suppose you just came home from work
the battery in your electric needs to be recharged but your kid is sick needs to see a doctor are you going to make him wait until your
battery is recharged 8 hours later. Thats not how Americans live. We want and need full time mobility? I do not think that large numbers
of people are going to trade their ICE’s in for part time mobility? But the thing is we can build self-charging electrics and it a much better
idea because there is no waiting to use you car. While I do not recommend fuel cells cars because of their poor performance why not use them instead as generators of electricity to recharge the batteries automatically which will give us the performance we want without the
hassle.

—

Editor’s comment: Take a look at our Charging and Batteries page.

Has anyone looked at the Advanced Propulsion Technologies two stroke diesel as the ideal engine for an onboard generater. This engine has been in production for four years. It’s compact, quiet, very low vibration and very fuel efficient. I feel this is the missing link for an indirct hybrid. Any input and comments would be appreciated. I feel this coupled with altair batteries would make the ideal car based on current technologies.
Arthur W. Hanson

When is $50K LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO $43K????

Answer: When life cycle costs and the time value of money are factored in to the $50K buying decision.

Take a $43K purchase price of a BMW 525i (MSRP is say $47K). You got a deal! Now, assume 12K miles per year @ $0.10 per mile ($2.50 /gallon gas @ 25 MPG). For gass, you are spending $1200/y for 9 years for 108K miles. Now, assume oil change every 3k miles at say $29/oil change. The present value of these cash flows (9 years) at at 8% interest is $51.2K. So, when you buy the BMW now you are really committing $51.2K today for the life of the car. (in this example) The total expenditure will be more than $51.2K. $51.2K is just the present value of the money that will be spent in the future.

Now, take $50K purchase of “White Star.” 12K miles per year @ $0.01 per mile = $120 per year. No oil changes. The present value of these cash flows (9 years) at 8% interest is $50.7K. With the White Star you are committing only $50.7K to current and future payments. (In this example)

$50.7K IS LESS THAN $51.2K - and the White Star buyer helps the environment and lessens our dependence on oil too.

I realize than many assumptions can be made about interest rates, gas prices, cost of oil changes, other costs of maintenance and insurance, length of time the car is owned, cash payment vs loan, etc. All of these and others will change the end results of the calculation and the present value based buying decision. The point is that BMW is currently selling their 525i at a price point that is very similar to the White Star target price when discounted cash flows are totaled in my example. The average Joe may not buy a BMW 525i but many people do. Same goes for a White Star. The average Joe may not buy the car, but many people will. If Tesla, can get the price point to $45K , they will be able to attack the under $40K gas powered market.

I’ve read rumors of a 3rd generation Tesla electric vehicle at the $30K price point. If this becomes a reality, a $30K electric vehicle will compete up the under $23K gas power car market. The average Joe will be able to afford the $30K 3rd generation Tesla electric vehicle. Martin, is 2011 too soon to hope for the third generation vehicle????

In the EEStor coverage, I read that the company was going to make 15kWh storage units available to Zenn, and that these units could recharge in a few minutes. For five-minute recharge, that would require around 52A at 3500V. It is interesting to me to see quick-charge being claimed as a “feature” of the device, or a benefit to the vehicles that will use it, without any mention whatsoever of the means by which quick-charging can occur. It’s not coming through the wall-socket, that’s for sure.

Note that 3 years ago GM and CSIRO here in Australia have built both a series hybrid demonstrator:
www.csiro.au/csiro/content/standard/ps1h4.html

… and a parallel hybrid demo :
www.csiro.au/csiro/content/standard/ps1l2.html

They both used ICE with ultracapacitors and lead acid batteries.

Greene wrote:
Suppose you just came home from work the battery in your electric needs to be recharged but your kid is sick needs to see a doctor are you going to make him wait until your battery is recharged 8 hours later.

How many ways is this ridiculous?
Take you other car.
What if you did not have enough gas in your gas powered car to get to the hospital?
What are the odds that you have driven you car to the very last 250 mile runout “drop” before you pull into your driveway? Even if you did, you only need to charge it the few minutes to get to the hospital -assuming it’s not 250 miles away!
Call and ambulance or a paramedic.
Ask your neighbor.
Don’t leave your kid home alone.
Stop wasting time with specific “what if?” scenarios

e

To TEG- I e-mailed Weir of EEstor back at the time & explained it wasn’t Tesla saying this-but Anatoly & some others. Also said that, as Tesla said in earlier blog post, “if a better battery comes along one day we would use it”. Told Weir he should check out the blog posts of Anatoly & Emosson lately. I was shocked Weir even e-mailed me back in the first place.If it’s hype you’d expect no response from the EEstor maven at all , right?-So what’s with that?!

To Wolfgang:

You just did a dipole estimate not related to real material structure. I could say that there is no limit to the field strength estimated this way - the close to the electron you go the stronger field you could get. So you could claim arbitrarily strong fields and no limits. But this would be hardly realistic.

Good estimate of interatomic field strength could come from energy consideration. Chemical energy of molecular bonding by order of magnitude comes from electrostatic attraction of atoms in molecules. So field strength delivering this energy density of strongest chemical reaction would be a good estimate for interatomic fields in question. If you exceed this field strength molecular structure would be disrupted and material would be destroyed. It exist a formular for volumetric energy density of electric field in a vacuum as follows:

= Eps0 * E^2 / 2

Eps0 = 8.85 * 10^(-12) F / m - dielectric constant for a vacuum.

Most energetic chemical reactions like burning hydrogen in oxygen and similar give up ~14 MJ / kg of energy if you take into account mass of all reactive components. Hydrogen has ~120 MJ / kg but without weight of oxygen needed for burning included in estimate. Density of reaction products would be ~1000 kg / m^3. This is pretty characteristic reaction in terms of volumetric energy density. Other reactions could have bigger density but smaller energy production per unit of mass so more or less chemical energy comes to ~15 x 10 ^9 J / m^3. Using the formula above and assuming for convenience about 3.5 times higher energy density ( favorable for EEStore because of bigger interatomic field ) we end up with:

sqrt( 3.5 x 2 x 15 x 10 ^ 9 J / m^3 / ( 8.85 x 10 ^ (-12) F / m )) => 10 ^ 11 V / m => 10 ^ 9 V / sm interatomic field strength.

As you can see we come up with ~200 times less field strength estimate from energy considerations. Energy is fundamental value so I think this is more close to reality estimate than artificial dipole local field strength.

EEStore claim breakdown electric field strength threshold ~3 x 10 ^ 6 V / sm. This is about 1 / 300 of interatomic field strength. Dielectric constant characterizes the ratio of electric field made by charge in a vacuum by electric field for the same charge in a material (same geometry). The physical effect making field in the material to diminish like this is that electronic clouds for atoms shift to compensate the externally applied field in a capacitor because they experience the force from that field.
From this consideration is is hard to imagine that this compansating field could exceed interatomic field - it is not logically possible. So at claimed electric field threshold average dielectric constant Eps should be close to 300 instead of 18500. Dielectric constant of 18500 for low field strength means just that electronic clouds are basically soft and easily compensate external field almost perfectly. So for field strengths about 50 times smaller than threshold it is perfectly OK to have such a high Eps.

Now even this “low” field strength corresponds to 60000 V / sm. For measument equipment this is insanely high - like high voltage power line. It exist no standard equipment to measure dielectric constant at fields above that “low” limit - you have to build your own special devices from scratch.

But you would not see any reduction of dielectric constant lower than this fields. So it is likely to suppose that measurements were in fact made below this threshold unless EXPLICITLY explained upfornt by EEStore that they did care about this. It is not obvious.

I do not see such precautions from EEStore explaining what they with the powder. So it is very likely that they do not understand this issue. But your highest energy comes at upper threshold of electric field and it is proportional to actual average value of dielectric constant at top voltage.

EEStore unique achievement is that they pushed high the upper threshold electric field strength by more than 10 times. So before them nobody except physicists of the past even comes to the field strength region in question. So previous industrial experience to use the powder material is not valid.

Now what we have:

1. If you use Eps = 300 instead of Eps = 18500 you get ~50 times less energy per unit of volume.

2. There is no previous experience of use the dielectric material in question for implied field strengths

3. There is not a word about the effect I described from EEStore. And this effect does not make any trade secret - no reason to hide it. Actually would they comment the effect upfront themselves they would get better credibility.

Under this conditions I would think that at least some proof is needed that effect I estimated and explaned in such details is irrelevant.

OK I am nobody and piece of trash and EEStore people are great Gods. So whatever they just say with no proof is surely gospel truth and who am I to question Their Majesty. Want to have faith without proof in this technology - just do it - no issue with me.

Re. Patrishkoff post, Guess Detroit is at a low ebb due to 3 things: it is run by people who are not engineers (or designers, at least), but bean counters (in practice if not reality), they also didn’t care about design in the 70’s,’80’s -or quality either (as in ” no pride in their product”). Of course in the ’90’s they started to change, but it’s still going on. Then there’s the health care & other “union cost baggage money drain issues”. A fourth problem is, being bean counters, they aren’t inclined to do the right things (like hybrids) until absolutely backed into a corner. Another annoying thing is that, like so many other American CEO’s they pay themselves a pile of undeserved money. Entire boards of directors in this country should be tarred & feathered and run out of (the company) town. Detroit needs to turn the engineers & designers loose across the board. Ford did this wiith the Mustang (at least in design) and they got the best one since ‘67 (took them that long to get with it again). Maybe Tesla will do the Whitestar plant in Michigan. If not, maybe one day there’ll be more than one plant-with one in Michigan. That will be nice.Then they can help clean up inner city Detroit while they’re at it-I hear it needs rehab. That would be a fun job-really-turn it all green, solar on every rooftop., tear some of it down for parks & rec. (with native landscaping).The big three ain’t going away, so Tesla should stake out the high ground (like BMW ,in principle-though I don’t really like all their designs). If Tesla stakes out their own “cachet” in terms of the technology/ design gestalt, they’re set, regardless of the big three or anyone else.

TEG - While normaly I would totaly agree with you in regard to the implausibility of a quick charge, in the case of EESTOR I would take pause. If EESTOR’s claims are correct (big if) than above and beyond all of the other wonderful properties of their energy storage unit, the cost of their ESUs would be around a fifth of a similar capacity battery. With that sort of price difference it could conceivably make sense to purchase 2 units - one for the car and one for the charger. The charge pack would then fill from a wall-socket at normal rate, and upon demand would be able to dump/quick charge the car’s unit in less than 5 minutes.

Congratulations on creating 50 new jobs and stimulating our economy!!! That is the real goal of any entrepreneur, I would argue enjoy the ride not the technology.

VOLT vs TESLA vs PRIUS:
Conventionals (15% efficiency) are yesterday, hybrids are today (37%), plug-ins tomorrow (50% est) and electrics are the future…

Is it a matter of battery technology or patent control?

If it’s tech, I say efficiency is king!!!!

If it’s patent control [the Prius racked up 650, the Ford Escape Hybrid 350, Tesla and Volt (?)], the deep pockets and heavy hitting legal teams will be kings…

I hope you hired some great patent engineers, CAD guys, paralegals and lawyers. I’d take an A legal team over any other function if I was going to try and swim with the elephants in the world’s largest business.

I wish those 50 new hires (patent lawyers included) all the things they need including health insurance, families and security!!!

The point about charge cycles for the battery pack is common to Parallel Hybrids like the Prius and Series Hybrids like the Volt. Actually the problem is more severe with the parallel hybrid, since it uses a much smaller battery pack and therefore must absorb a great deal more charge/discharge cycles than the series HEV. What they do in the Prius is simply use a 1.2 kwh NiMH battery pack that is only 25% utilized. And it is charged / discharged each time the vehicle does an accelerate / brake cycle.

Note the Edrive and Hymotion Li-Ion PHEV Conversion battery packs (similar size as the Volts) endure the same problem as the Volt, and are rated for 5-10 years, with a plugin range of 50 miles. And they manage that with a 75% utilization factor.

The NiMH batteries, long available, have excellent charge cycle capability, and are rated 4000 cycles at 70% utilization. The NiMH battery works just fine in PHEV’s, EV’s or Series Hybrid EV’s, and everything points to a production cost, in Volume, of $130 to $250 per kwh. That’s $1200 - $2500, and weigh 220 lbs, for the Volt type vehicle battery. My car starter battery weighs 65 lbs.

This quote is from GM-Ovonics in 1998:
“A more significant problem is the Power to Energy ratio of the small parallel HEV battery pack. For the larger Volt battery pack in Li-ion or NiMH this is not a problem, but for a vehicle like the Prius, it puts severe limits on how much braking or downhill energy the battery pack can absorb.
GM already developed a perfectly functioning Plugin Series Hybrid, based on the EV1, 10 years ago. Quote from 1998:
‘GM’s series hybrid (using an electric motor to drive the front wheels) uses a compact micro gas turbine generator system to charge the GM Ovonic NiMH HEV battery pack while driving, which provides an effective fuel economy of nearly 100 miles per gallon (MPG) of reformulated gasoline! This is based on GM’s anticipation that the series hybrid owner will plug the vehicle in overnight while parked in the garage (grid charging), leaving in the morning with the HEV batteries fully charged. Operating as an HEV only (no grid charging), the hybrid obtains 60 MPG highway and provides a 350 mile driving range. When the generator is running, tailpipe emissions are one half of California’s stringent ultra low emission levels (ULEV). The very high power to energy ratio GM Ovonic NiMH battery provides ample power for acceleration (zero to 60 MPH in nine seconds) and offers a zero emission, EV only, driving range of 40 miles, significantly more than other HEV battery types can provide.”

## W. Heath wrote on January 23rd, 2007 at 7:59 am
## This quote is from GM-Ovonics in 1998:
## “A more significant problem is the Power to Energy ratio of the small parallel HEV battery pack.
## For the larger Volt battery pack in Li-ion or NiMH this is not a problem, but for a vehicle like the Prius,
## it puts severe limits on how much braking or downhill energy the battery pack can absorb.

Keep in mind that Ovonics/Cobasys eventually started preventing others (like Panasonic/Toyota) from selling large format, large capacity NiMH packs for vehicle use. Toyota couldn’t continue to make and sell a pure EV (like the Rav4-EV) in the USA anymore using NiMH batteries. They were basically backed into a corner and their only option was hybrid using a small NiMH pack.

Now Li-Ion is set to upstage NiMH, and so (as far as I know) the manufacturers are free to use larger packs, or even full EVs without restriction from those Cobasys patents. I suspect that Toyota will soon switch to Li-Ion for their hybrids, and the pack sizes could be much larger.

www.electrifyingtimes.com/goodtoyota-badtoyota.html
www.evworld.com/blogs/index.cfm?page=blogentry&authorid=12&blogid=83&archive=1

Hopefully, Cobasys doesn’t take over the best Li-Ion tech and prevent it from being used in EVs…

www.greencarcongress.com/2007/01/cobasys_and_a12.html

## David wrote on January 23rd, 2007 at 12:39 am
## TEG - While normaly I would totaly agree with you in regard to the implausibility of a quick charge,
## in the case of EESTOR I would take pause.

Hey! I never said it was implausible. I was just pointing out that it looked like someone told EEstor that Tesla doubted them which may not be true.

## Kcops wrote on January 22nd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
## To TEG- I e-mailed Weir of EEstor back at the time & explained it wasn’t Tesla saying this-but Anatoly & some others.

Great, thanks.

By the way, I personally have no idea if what EEstor (or others) are suggesting will be real or not. I sure hope it turns out to be true because we definately could use better electricity storage technology!

Anatoly is right that the industry is littered with false hopes that failed to live up to expectations and hype.
On the other hand, history is filled with doubters that were proved wrong by great inventions.

Future electric vehicles will all use electric generators inplace of large heavy battery packs. Why store electricity in large heavy battery
packs when it can be generated on the spot saving 900lbs of dead weight. For those who do not think
that this can be done I would suggest you check the “Arotech Company Electric Fuel website”. They run everything from Cars to
buses on electric generators and do not use batteries at all.

—

Editor’s comment: You might be interested in Martin’s blog, Hybrids, Plug-in or Otherwise.

“David Kosowsky wrote on January 17th, 2007 at 9:37 pm

Let’s see” $500M… hmmm… should we give it away in the hopes that the handful of recipients will develop a product for a market that barely exists or do we incentivize that market to grow. That could be a $5,000 tax rebate for 100,000 vehicles. Additionally, redirect $500M from hydrogen development and setup realistic electricity storage device development contests.”

… or you could give away 5,000 $100,000 Tesla Roadsters for that… or subsidize $50,000 off the cost of existing technology for 10,000 cars.

and what happened to the 80MPG car that Al Gore promised us in 1992? wasn’t that $500,000,000 given to GM/Ford/Chrysler at the time? I don’t see any 80MPG cars on the road… they must not have been produced…

Brian Hague

Mitsubishi Li-Ion plans:
www.greencarcongress.com/2007/01/report_mitsubis.html
“…Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd. (MHI) plans to produce lithium-ion batteries for electric and hybrid cars and market them to automakers worldwide by 2010…
…The prismatic cells for the stationary application use lithium manganese oxide, and are 270 Wh-class, with energy density of 160 Wh/kg and an expected cycle life of 3,500….”

Freddy wrote “..Of course, if you know anything about caps you know that the discharge curve is a decreasing exponential. Once the voltage falls to 1/2 the max voltage, you only have 25% of capacity left. To use this residual 25% energy, the current would increase to unacceptable high levels so for practical purposes, the usable capacity is 112 KW*hr.”

The first statement is true see graph at www.plasticlabels.ca/index_files/compareEVbatteries.htm but the second statement is not because the voltage is still higher than required by the motor. Almost all of the power would be available. One half of 3500 volts is 1750, the Tesla motor requires only 377. EEStor’s capacitor would deliver full power to the motor until it drops below 377 volts at the same current as used by the battery system in place now.

EVstudy, an excellent presentation, but an additional consideration is the marginal or incremental cost of supplying power to EV’s vs an equivalent ICE vehicle. My calculations are that an efficient EV, like the Tesla, would be cheaper to operate than a comparable ICE vehicle, even with a power rate of 60 cents per kwh, with Gas @ $3.00 a gallon. Even the most expensive Green Energy Solar Power runs 12-50 cents per kwh, depending on location. Therefore the incremental cost of adding 100% Green Energy to the Grid is still much cheaper to the consumer than running on gasoline. And USA gasoline prices are much lower than most places in the world, and that price is almost certain to rise sharply, while the price for Green Energy is steadily falling. Another consideration, is the inherent efficiency and economic advantage to power producers of running their plants and the utility company’s grids at a higher (and more efficient) level at night, when most EV’s will be charged, and other consumption is low. It is an economic fact that to maximize return on investment a plant or infrastructure must be run at 100% of capacity 7 days of the week / 24 hrs per day. Reduced costs imply more investment available for green energy production.producers of running their plants and the utility companies grids at a higher (and more efficient) level at night, when most EV’s will be charged, and other consumption is low. It is an economic fact that to maximize return on investment a plant or infrastructure must be run at 100% of capacity 7 days of the week / 24 hrs per day. Reduced costs imply more investment available for green energy production.

Sorry about my screwup on the last post, the last part should have read:
A more significant problem is the Power to Energy ratio of the small parallel HEV battery pack. For the larger Volt battery pack in Li-ion or NiMH this is not a problem, but for a vehicle like the Prius, it puts severe limits on how much braking or downhill energy the battery pack can absorb.

GM already developed a perfectly functioning Plugin Series Hybrid, based on the EV1, 10 years ago. This quote is from GM-Ovonics in 1998:

“GM’s series hybrid (using an electric motor to drive the front wheels) uses a compact micro gas turbine generator system to charge the GM Ovonic NiMH HEV battery pack while driving, which provides an effective fuel economy of nearly 100 miles per gallon (MPG) of reformulated gasoline! This is based on GM’s anticipation that the series hybrid owner will plug the vehicle in overnight while parked in the garage (grid charging), leaving in the morning with the HEV batteries fully charged. Operating as an HEV only (no grid charging), the hybrid obtains 60 MPG highway and provides a 350 mile driving range. When the generator is running, tailpipe emissions are one half of California’s stringent ultra low emission levels (ULEV). The very high power to energy ratio GM Ovonic NiMH battery provides ample power for acceleration (zero to 60 MPH in nine seconds) and offers a zero emission, EV only, driving range of 40 miles, significantly more than other HEV battery types can provide.”

Re. Daryl comment- yeah, two problems are stockholders & boards of directors/ceo’s paying themselves absurd amounts-like the guy who ran Home Depot until recently (that got me shopping exclusively at Lowe’s). In the end, if all else fails, they bail out with their golden parachutes. This is basically a white-collar criminal system if you ask me. But then again, when two guys sell “You Tube” to Google,after about 18 months, for billions that’s nuts as well. However one good thing is that when some of these dot.com/tech. millionaires make cash they tend to use some of it well-like the Tesla founders, Paul Allen, Gates, etc. Enough of these guys doing the right things with their money could change the country (”no stockholders/ good old boards” req’d” but ” batteries included”, in some cases). If a lot of these current/future guys would follow the credo of the Google guys (Do no evil, and beyond that do good) then we’re talkin’.

Milesautomotive updated their web site, now they have different photos of the XM200 and XS500 (Sports sedans) coming from the Javlon division:

www.milesautomotive.com/showroom_xs200.php
www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=119247

Regarding EV quick recharging, I was thinking, what if every home had a Plugin Hybrid sized battery or ultra-capacitor bank of about 10 kwh, and an Online Inverter of 25 to 50 kw (about 10% to 50% of the EV or HEV’s Inverter). This battery bank would then provide a quick recharge for PHEV’s and about a quick 25% (50 mile) recharge of EV’s. Now the typical household average grid energy requirement is 1-2 kw, that is 4 to 9 amps @ 240 vac. As such each home would only need a feeble #16 cable to tap into the utility, instead of a heavy 2/0 cable and a large transformer tied to a 4,160 volt to 13.8 kv utility distribution feed. This would create a revolutionary change in the way we use, distribute and produce energy. Gone would be the days of major power blackouts, brownouts and fears of terrorist or environmental disaster caused power failures. This distributed energy system of course would inevitably lead to distributed energy production, in particular CHP (Combined Heat & Power). Home solar stations of modest size, or home or neighborhood windmills, and home natural gas fed microCHP furnace/hot water/power generators, which could be small 1.5 kw natural gas fed fuel cells (not like your 15-50 kw automotive hydrogen fed fuel cell) or stirling engines or even small diesel engines with heat exchangers.

Regarding public EV charging stations. They could be like the home ones mentioned above or they could be just 15a/120vac or 30a/240vac plugin chargers, which would be typically a 9 or a 36 miles per hour of charge, station. Not suitable for a filling station type charging station. They would be very simple units though and could be made to look like parking meters, and could easily be installed anywhere, like on street parking spaces, restaurants, shopping plazas and motels. Actually some northern countries have parking meter like plugins for vehicles in the winter for the electric engine block heaters. These might be more an emergency recharge to get you home if you miscalculated your energy requirements for the day – stop at a restaurant, have a meal while your vehicle recharges. Or for long trips the motel type overnight recharge station would be most suitable.

To Anatoliy Moskalev:

Anatoly, have you ever tried to estimate APCT items feasibilty for EV and HEV? It is in Google Tech Talks
November 13, 2006. Details can be found ecologyenergy.blogspot.com/2007/01/energy-crisis-management-new-technology.html

I am going to save my money in order to buy the 3rd model to be offered by
Tesla Motors, along with the Solar Power-Charge System to install on my
rooftop. You guys are going to absolutely change the face of everyday
transportation the world over! The fact that your products will substantially
reduce dependence on imported oil the world over, will lessen the threat
of war, as well as hasten the day when terrorists will not be financed by
certain oil producing nations anymore!
I salute your forward-thinking philosophy, and wish your company the
very best!

Also, I can picture a day when your systems will be employed for water
transportation systems which are recharged each day with solar energy.

I see energy-storage on a worldwide scale at formally inaccessible sights
which can provide the life-blood of small villages by providing power to
pump clean potable water,light shelters,etc.

Your advanced technology,together with the solar re-charging system
will make such a tremendous difference in so many places the world over!

I wish you God speed!

I love your company, the vision, the product, etc… etc… I drive a BMW 5 series that I CANNOT WAIT to trade in for a White Star. I do enjoy the maintenance philosphy of BMW, though, very curious how that will pan out with Tesla.

I work in artist management, pretty closely with a lot of celbrities. If you need any Hollywood-types (musicians/actors/directors?) to help with your product in any way, please look me up. I’d love to help get the word out. I know a lot of them are already on board — I can’t tell you how many meetings are sidetracked by the big Tesla conversation!

Please give us just a little bit more info on the White Star…

Electric or Fuel Cell is the way to go for cars of the now and future. But with the existing problems in Fuel Cells Electric is definitley to way for the cars of the current generation.

I only hope TESLA motors, can/will have the corporate integrity to stay away from the payroll of the big corporations.

Keep it up TESLA!!!

—

Editor’s comment: You might be interested in our whitepaper, The 21st Century Car. 

I’ve been watching your progress for over a year now, and I can’t being to explain how exciting it is to think that despite big oil and Detroit, this company has it right with regard to using electricity rather than just another consumable commodity. I don’t think you realize how popular White Star is going to be, even in areas where you don’t have a physical presence. I live in the Dallas-Fort Worth area, and am hoping that by 2009 you’ll have a service center either here, or Houston, or Austin. I thiink you’d find Austin to be the most hospitable as far as incentives go. I know you guys are busy and bubbling with passion, but keep us posted on your continued successes!!

I just came across this via the BBC UK website.

As an observer I have to state that it seems extremely apparant that this is one big hoax that has sucked in few untruistic yet naive investors.

They have worked on this since about 2000, go into production this year yet have no working prototypes.

You have to admire them though for just putting enough information out to keep people believing. I am sure it might happen some time in the next 50 years but not from these people.
If it was true they would now have billion dollar backing and prototypes woulld have been out in 2002!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

—

Editor’s surprise: Are you referring to the Tesla Roadster? We have many working prototypes. Check out our latest video of recent safety tests and some of the “first looks” from major media outlets on our Media page.

September 10, 2007
More than a tip

My Texas family is handling Toyota today with its gas & electric stuffs. I told the Mrs. I’m getting into real estate -but my 1942 Chrysler New Yorker (that is off the books if you believe in DMV) is how I plan to sell here in Vallejo (considered its own country by koo-koos). I got family with PG&E and all things point to me not to trust anyone. What I would like is a bolt on “motor” for this heavy “car”. I haven’t weighed it -I don’t have a “scale” and can’t credit an original scale manufacture (now) here in OUR (now) network. Anyways, Pep boys, Auto zone sell motors for automobiles but what I would like is an ALL electric self recharging DRIVING MACHINE motor.

O.k.
TJ Remlinger

enjoy your enlightening feedback letters on auto technology and where you are taking tesla motors. (tesla what a great name)wish your car could attend all auto shows , even if it were just a hologram. hoping our country will get off the oil addiction someday. when is your song coming out for name recognition. go tesla go tesla go

Mr. Anatoly Moskalev,

In your critique of EESTOR’s technology above, you stated that EESTOR has failed to address the problem of “dialectric saturation”.

Just this week a new EESTOR Patent application came to light. The Patent is for the entire EESTOR prcoess of silk screen printing the capacitors which EESTOR are claiming to be “game changing”. I have quoted the following from the Patent application. The most important part is at the end:
————————————————

“The following data indicates the relativity permittivity of ten single-coated composition-modified barium titanate powder batches. Batches Relativity Permittivity @ 85° C 1. 19,901 2. 19,889 3. 19,878 4. 19,867 5. 19,834 6. 19,855 7. 19,873 8. 19,856 9. 19,845 10. 19,809

Average relativity permittivity = 19,861

The following data indicates the relativity permittivity of ten components measured at 85° C, then 85° C and 3500 V, and the last test 85° C and 5000 V. Components 850 C 85° C - 3500 V 85° C - 5000 V 1. 19,871 19,841 19,820 2. 19,895 19,866 19,848 3. 19,868 19,835 19,815 4. 19,845 19,818 19,801 5. 19,881 19,849 19,827 6. 19,856 19,828 19,806 7. 19,874 19,832 19,821 8. 19,869 19,836 19,824 9. 19,854 19,824 19,808 10. 19,877 19,841 19,814 Average K 19,869 19,837 19,818 Results indicates that the composition-modified barium titanate powder that has been coated with 100 A Of AUO3, immersed into a matrix of PET plastic, and has been polarized provides a dielectric saturation that is above the 5000 V limit and the relative permittivity is highly insensitive to both voltage and temperature.

Leakage current of ten EESUs that contain 31,351 components each and having the capability of storing 52.22 kW»h of electrical energy measured at 85° C and 3500 V. EESU Leakage Current - μA 1. 4.22 2. 4.13 3. 4.34 4. 4.46 5. 4.18 6. 4.25 7. 4.31 8. 4.48 9. 4.22 10. 4.35

Average leakage current 4.28

Voltage breakdown of ten components with and average dielectric thickness of 9.81 μm measured at a temperature of 85° C. Component Voltage Breakdown — 106 V/cm 1. 5.48 2. 5.75 3. 5.39 4. 5.44 5. 5.36 6. 5.63 7. 5.77 8. 5.37 9. 5.64 10. 5.88

Average voltage breakdown 5.57

Full charge/discharge cycles of a component from 3500 V to 0 V at 85° C. After each 100,000 cycles the leakage current was recorded. The leakage current was multiplied by 31 ,351 to reflect the full EESU value. The rise time on the charging voltage was 0.5 seconds and the discharge time was 1.0 seconds. The RC time constant was 0.11 seconds for both the charging and the discharging times. The voltage breakdown was tested at the end of 106 cycles and was measured at 85° C with the results being 5.82 x 106 V/cm and the total capacitance was measured at 30.85 F. The final test data indicates that the full cycle testing did not degrade the total capacitance, leakage, or voltage breakdown capabilities of the component.”

——————————-

Any comments would be appreciated. There’s alot more in the Patent Application. You may view it in its entirey here:

www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/fetch.jsp?SEARCH_IA=US2005028970&DBSELECT=PCT&ABIMAGE=09032006%2FUS2005028970_09032006_gz_en.x4&C=10&TOTAL=18&IDB=0&TYPE_FIELD=256&SERVER_TYPE=19-10&ELEMENT_SET=B&START=1&SORT=41231903-KEY&QUERY=%28IN%2Fweir+AND+IN%2Frichard%29+&RESULT=5&DISP=25&FORM=SEP-0%2FHITNUM%2CB-ENG%2CDP%2CMC%2CAN%2CPA%2CABSUM-ENG&IDOC=1324301&IA=US2005028970&LANG=ENG&DISPLAY=DESC

Is there more to this blog or What Happened?