uh-ooh looks like we have trouble. A right winger has caught us soaking up government subsidies.
Who cares what they, or for that matter ICE car manufactures and oil companies like or not like. They will just look like fools not to mention be losers when more and more people realized the virtue of EV and Tesla.
Ditto above. Not sure about the name calling either--Charles Lane was editor of The New Republic--not really a bastion of right wing thought.
I love it when people mock EVs and PV in the same breath while saying EVs are "dirty" because of coal... what? The US is adding PV generation 10x faster than we're adding EV consumption. What do these morons want us to do? Deploy more PV than we can use and then sell EVs?
It an opinion piece folks. What in the article is not true? He gives Tesla and Elon Musk credit for the good things done, but also points out where they've had a little gov't help along the way. I take exception to the Model S fossil fuel carbon footprint assertion, but that's someone else analysis, not Charles Lane. The Washington Post is not exactly a right wing rag and Charles Lane is not a conservative. Among other things, he is a FOX News contributor who provides the liberal counterpoint in their panel discussions. It's refreshing to see a liberal take an honest look at their ideology when it comes to things green.
Sorry guys but this guy is a right wing nut job. I wouldn't say it as much except he can't stop going off on the left wing nut jobs. If he just stated his not correct facts and didn't blame Tesla's success on the liberals I would agree he was just making a normal Tesla haters argument.
As we all know everyone across both spectrums likes the Model S for different reasons. This right wing nut job should have kept the politics out of it.
Which facts were those, precisely? The ones that aren't correct?
The article's an opinion piece (which is why it's in the "WP Opinions" section). But even as a Tesla owner, I'm sympathetic to some of his points...which, I suppose, makes me a "right-wing nut job" in the eyes of many on this forum.
It's entirely true that without the sale of zero-emission credits, Tesla wouldn't be making a profit.
It's also true that that while we may all be pioneers in a decades-long shift to electric mobility (and even as a car nut with several other smog-spewing high performance cars, I kinda think we are), the environmental impact from all electric cars, now and for the foreseeable future, is immeasurably small.
Lastly, it's also true that many on the political left are heavily invested in the idea of green energy and companies like Tesla, to the detriment of other ideas and technologies that can have a much larger and more immediate impact environmental. For example, the way fracking has enabled CO2 emissions from this country to drop to the lowest level in 20 years.
I'm conflicted about Tesla. For me, it's a gamble: I love the car and hope the company succeeds (and have bet on this outcome with more than $100K of my own money); I just also hope they'll wean themselves off the Federal teat.
Stop the name calling. It can go both ways with either left or right and is unnecessary.
I m conflicted too, but regarding fracking. It does pollute ground water, and may be the cost is too much to bear in return for reduced emissions. May be the technology can be improved so it does to pollute ground water so much.
I still feel Thorium chain nuclear energy is the long term best solution. Along with all the renewables. Those on the left are not solely invested in green tech. I am not 'left' per se, rather, I am interested in reall world practical solutions without too much environmental impact. Nothing is free, you know.
@stevenmaifert What are you talking about? Stating the facts? Just read the first two words of the title and you'll know who the target audience of the article is for. The same group of people who watch Faux News for "facts" other than this time they can read newspaper.
For people like Dramsey who still don't understand the environmental impact of EV they can just do a small experiment. Start your ICE car (or borrow one if you don't have any ICE cars) in a closed garage for a couple minutes and try to breath. You'll know why taking that car off street is good for everybody. BTW be sure to turn off the engine and open the garage door promptly after or it could be the last time you try this.
@carlk - The title is absolutely true. The gov't loan guarantee, the CARB ZEV credits, the $7500 Federal EV tax credit as a purchase incentive. I'm not knocking it, but a fair minded person would have to acknowledge that up to this point, the foregoing has been a significant part of Tesla's survival. I hope that sometime in the near future Tesla will flourish on the profit made on every sale and we can put this silly controversy to rest, but they're not there yet. Let's not forget liberals bailed out GM and Chrysler too, putting the financial interests of their UAW buddies ahead of the bond and preferred stock holders. It's just the way they roll.
@stevenmaifert Those are "liberal investments"? These financial steps were actually initiated by the last Republican administration, the only thing GWB did that was good for the country. And the performance of the stock market, real estate, job market and economy in general now is only to "help the UAW buddies"? People who think letting GM, Chrysler and all the major banks to go bankrupt and the economy will just heal by itself are brain dead. Even GWB knew the consequence of letting that to happen. You should start to think logically yourself instead of listen to the Faux talking points.
It was a smarmy and slanted article full of half facts, innuendo, and incorrect conclusions.
I agree with Carlk. I call it the "Dinner Challenge". I'll go to my garage with my Tesla, and the other driver takes his ICE to his after lunch. We'll both turn our cars on, wait in the garage, and run them till dinnertime. Then we meet at the agreed restaurant. Show up on time, and I'll pay the bill.
Actually, I don't want anyone to try this. About a year and a half ago, my mom closed the garage door but forgot to turn the car off. it ran in the garage for hours, with carbon monoxide seeping into the house. My folks began getting dizzy and sleepy after a few hours. A friend came over and found the car running. Probably saved their lives.
Why do so many have to be on one side? I would like to think of myself as an independent. I lean to the left on social issues and lean to the right on fiscal responsibility. For some on this forum, to mock the author, only incites more negative banter.
If you have positive facts on your side, and a history of good performance, the masses will give you credibility.
I hope Tesla makes it on their own Merritt. When all govt subsidies are considered, Tesla clearly has an edge on many other manufacturers. At 17 Trillion of Debt, the real issue is how long can the government support this program? At some point, investors are going to have reservations about buying US debt. It's not a matter of if, but when.
To put this into perspective, the average American makes 45K per year. How do you think an average individual feels when he/she see's wealthy American's getting a tax break, equivalent of 17% of their annual earning, for buying a car that they cannot afford? Think about it. How would you feel if you were in their shoes?
I have made the decision to wait until Tesla is available with a good lease program. If that happens, I will not be taking the tax credit as I believe it is morally wrong.
@carlk - You are correct, but was the enabling legislation sponsored by conservatives or liberals? Check it out. GWB had the good sense to reach across the isle once and a while and compromise, which is more than can be said about the current administration.
ZEV credits are not subsidies for Tesla. They are EARNED. Any car company can earn these credits by making cars with no tailpipe emissions.
In the alternative, car makers can keep producing smog emitting vehicles and pay for credits on the OPEN MARKET.
"But even if widely adopted, Teslas would have little impact on climate change as long as drivers have to charge their vehicles from a coal- and natural gas-fired U.S. electric grid."
Wrong again. This has been refuted so many times. Anyone can create their own green energy. And the grid mix which used to be mostly coal is now is less than 40%. In many states like Washington, a majority of electricity is hydro.
Plus it's simply non sequitur. The grid has to get greener regardless of whether we drive EVs or not. And progressives are the only people that are actively fighting for coal to be shut down.
No Obama fan but his EPA just released rules that requires new coal plants to sequester carbon.
Tesla doesn't operate in a vacuum and can't solve all of the worlds problems. It doesn't control the EPA or the grid, but there's nothing stopping owners from installing photovoltaic and having zero net CO2 footprint for their driving.
And since when did JPMorgan Chase become the Union of Concerned Scientists?
UoCS calculated differently
Guess Charles Lane forgot about Elon's other business Solar City?
FUD from big oil and it's backers will only get stronger as TM becomes more real.
@carlk-- Your silly and insulting reductio ad absurdum suggestion is typical of the "arguments" posed by religion zealots. And God knows there are a lot of them on the forum.
Nobody ever suggested that ICE cars don't pollute, or that replacing them with electric vehicles would reduce air pollution. What was said was that it will be a long time-- decades, most likely-- before the number of electric vehicles on the road is enough to make a significant difference.
This isn't a right-wing talking point; it's cold, hard fact. There are a number of reasons for this, and I'm sure you know them as well as anyone else on the forum. But just in case: cost, range, battery supply....
If you're seriously interested in reducing your personal environmental footprint, buying a $100K electric car is rather far down on the list of things you should be doing, unless perhaps you have a multi-hundred mile commute every day.
@jvs11560 I agree the name calling on the forum is fairly uncivil.
If you are worried about the morality of the tax credit ("I will not be taking the tax credit as I believe it is morally wrong.") you should probably not buy gas either.
Between 2002-2008 the U.S. subsidies to fossil-fuel based sources amounted to approximately $72 billion vs. $29 billion for renewable sources.
And most of that $72 billion for fossil fuel went to mature companies who are hugely profitable...
I am very much against government subsidies, they are a manipulation of the market. But those who want to blame Tesla, or us buyers, are looking at the wrong people to blame. I give no fault to those who take advantage of subsidies. I blame the Government for manipulating the market with subsidies. However when depending on subsidies then you become a slave to the Government. So I do have a problem with people or entities that complain when their dependence is cut off. It is the consequence of dependence and it is this reality that sparks the ire of people who complain about Tesla's subsidies.
Furthermore, fossil fuels such as oil, gas, and coal are subsidized over $500 Billion annually by the Government. So level the playing field and get rid of those subsidies too before criticizing EV buyers and companies. Then let the actual best technology win out without Government interference.
And one final thought. To say Tesla is not profitable because they are reporting losses may not really be looking at the big picture. Sure Tesla is selling credits to make that profit, however their capital expenditures have to be steep considering they are building a national infrastructure, expanding capacity, working on two new vehicle designs, and now are confronted with a battery supply issue where they are considering building a Plant. They may be using the Government subsidies, but all that means is they have more capital to invest in these. Without the subsidies then their plans either slow down, they incur more debt, or generate capital with bonds or stock.
The complainers are the same, people with Medicare, Social Security, and complaining about progress. Tea Party
"I hope Tesla makes it on their own Merritt" Actually, they are pretty good on the parkway (sorry, couldn't resist).
But, do we actually think Tesla can't sell without tax credits? Do people who go for a $100,000 car really run away if it is $107,500? Doubtful.
BMW 7-Series, $120k. MB S-class, $150k. Ferrarri, starts at $175k. Aston Martin, Audi A8, Porsche .......
BTW, the groundwater-fracking-pollution comment is nonsense. Groundwater is usually far, far above the frack level, and is under impermeable rock. Necessarily -- it's what keeps the gas there!
"Gasland"-type scams come from sites that have always had near-surface methane seeps, and in the iconic shot a NG feed line was hooked up to the tap to guarantee a good shot. Staged, IOW.
Even the final EPA reviews confirm all the above.
typo: is under over impermeable rock.
There is only one reason Tesla got to where it is today. Smart and hard working people (I've heard many stories how hard they work) led by Elon who is also willing to take the formidable challenge and risk all his money to invest in the company that no one believed was viable. The tax credit goes to you the buyer not to Tesla. You are welcomed to return the money if you don't like government subsides or don't believe you have done your part to help improve the environment and the air we all breath.
Instead of returning the 7500 or not taking the tax break at all take it and do something useful with the money. It's a certainty you could do more good with it than the government will.
Put me in the "please, less name-calling" camp.
Charles Lane's pedigree is hardly from the right, and tagging him with such a label doesn't make it so. In fact using such labels (along with the clever Faux News construction) is really only clever to people who are thoroughly on your side. Anyone else is likely to back slowly away from the crowd of Tesla-philes, looking for the nearest door.
Please: convince, don't attack.
@twestberg He started name calling with the first word in the article title. No?
Whenever I read a comment that contains things like "libtard", "democrat", some variation of "rethuglican", "Faux News", etc, I immediately stop reading. It does nothing but demonstrate the writer is biased one way or another and not open to opposing views.
typo, I meant to say "demonrat", or other lame play on "Democrat". Stupid autocorrect.
To any conservative or libertarians out there, I recommend disengagement on this forum topic. You cannot "win" any arguments here. I originally thought this forum was about cars but the more I read, the more I see the intolerance of some of the folks here. Intolerance and downright hostility, which, sad to say, is not a surprise to me after studying philosophy and politics for a few decades. The scathing assaults on any independent or non-green thought, coupled with _any_ criticism of the car itself is enough to make one very frustrated indeed. These are internet "tough guys" hiding behind their keyboards, demanding that you drink their cool-aide and worship as an acolyte at the Temple of Musk...or go home.
Well, I have never voted, I consider myself a libertarian, I own guns, I respect Mr. Musk, and I just ordered my Model S.
Put that in your pipes and smoke it.
Can we please get back to talking about cars instead of acting like a bunch of bikers arguing over Harley versus Japanese and other silly nonsense?
Of course, I guess the OP has the right to make this particular thread political since he started it. Therefore, I guess it is I who must move on to other, *constructive* threads. So be it.
X Deutschland Site Besuchen