Tesla Model 3 | Tesla seeks $1.5 billion junk bonds issue to fund Model 3 production

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
Oh, have you ever heard of analysis paralysis ..which is what you are supporting, IMO.:eek:

No what I’m advocating is proper planning to achieve desired results unlike you who seems to be advocating to act on knee jerk and analyze the impact later no matter how irresponsible.

In the beginning, which is where we are I would rather go after the low hanging fruit. As technology improves and costs decrease the implementation that you want NOW regardless of environmental and human impact can be implemented.

But why act on facts when we can **** away trillions for little or no benefit. Be my guest to spend as much as you want personally chasing your dream but when it comes time to population benefits I prefer appropriate and legitimate expenditures since my taxes are paying for it.
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
China's economy is expected to overtake the economy of the US in the next 2 years. The government is promoting all kinds of hi-tech development there so they can be self-sufficient. I think you have been asleep at the wheel.

Steve N.

Good luck with that. Maybe I have been asleep at the wheel but it seems you not only fell asleep at the wheel but crashed into the wall of Chinese propaganda.
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
No what I’m advocating is proper planning to achieve desired results unlike you who seems to be advocating to act on knee jerk and analyze the impact later no matter how irresponsible.

In the beginning, which is where we are I would rather go after the low hanging fruit. As technology improves and costs decrease the implementation that you want NOW regardless of environmental and human impact can be implemented.

But why act on facts when we can **** away trillions for little or no benefit. Be my guest to spend as much as you want personally chasing your dream but when it comes time to population benefits I prefer appropriate and legitimate expenditures since my taxes are paying for it.

I believe the reality will come with government subsidies for these American car companies. Are there subsidies given any more to ICE car builders?
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
Dave

I know you get worked up by this topic and I understand where you are coming from. Your premise about the price of homes and the cost of solar is pertinent BUT in a positive way not the way you paint it as wealthy people are the adopters. The reality is that smaller houses have lower monthly electric bills and a system can be designed for a fraction of mine that takes them off the grid as well.

This is not something for the wealthy or well healed as you suggest but rather for everyone. What you fail to see is that if your energy bill is smaller then the cost of your solar grid is much lower. I have a good friend in our community who lives in a smaller house with his wife and his energy bill averages $250 per month. His July bill was over $800. He too is installing a Sun Power grid at a fraction of the cost of mine and he too will be off the SDGE grid.

So let's compare apples to apples Dave as I know how this topic gets you worked up

BTW I don't own an electric car but like you I believe it is the future and the technology is in its infancy. No arguments there. I do admit that I am eyeing the Taycan but so far I have nothing planned

Actually I think he makes lots of great points. It is a reality that the adoption of EV and solar is proportional to income/net worth. At least that is the reality today. No big deal it’s reality.

An interesting observation is that it seems that the more the California grid converts to renewable the higher the cost to the consumer.

FWIW, CA is I believe is the state most dependent on hydroelectric which hardly has a small environmental footprint but is “cheap”.

The best way to bring renewables to the end user is for the source, namely the grid, to change as we are seeing. Here in FL our price for electric has stayed relatively stable despite FPL moving more and more to renewable energy.
 

Empirical Audio

Industry Expert
Oct 12, 2017
1,169
207
150
Great Pacific Northwest
www.empiricalaudio.com
We as a society love to look at CO2 as an indicator of Global Warming/Climate change, whereas there are many other variables. Methane, in the first 2 decades of it's release has 84-86x more global warming effect than CO2 but the way we measure normalized for CO2 which lasts for centuries, thereby skewing the reality of methane.

True, however the climatologists and environmentalists are keenly aware of this, as was Obama. Obama administration directed orders to reduce Methane from oil development and Trump admin reversed that. The average citizen is not aware of the methane problem and it not responsible for it. It's big industry that is responsible, but thawing permafrost and other natural sources are on the rise due to the warming we are already experiencing.

It is so easy to bury our heads in the sand, ignore the statistics and just buy into all the propaganda. Right now, the USA, accounts for 15% of all CO2 emissions worldwide. China 30% and the EU 9%. China and the USA have similarly disparate geographical footprints yet China has a fraction of the automobiles the USA has. Currently, 28% of CO2 emissions in the USA comes from "transportation" of which 60% occurs from small vehicles, namely cars etc that S. Nugent is so concerned about.

It's true that US CO2 emissions are 15% of worldwide emissions. China is 30% of the pie but they are taking some serious steps. They have the majority of the EVs in the world. Much of their transportation system is electric. They have more solar electric on rooftops than any other country. When they convert mostly to renewables, they can take advantage of this. We are doing very little. In fact, Trump Admin EPA just relaxed coal emissions and opened up new lands for coal mining. Trump backed-out of the tough emissions standards set forth by Obama. Car manufacturers are pushing large trucks and SUV's with poor mileage. Just the opposite of what we should be doing. Just because we are not a big piece of the pie, we are still the country that other countries look to for global actions. If we back-off, everyone backs off and then we are screwed.

It's like saying: everyone throws trash out the window on the highway and we pay for people to pick it up, so it's okay for me to do it too. It's not okay.

Steve N.
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
I believe the reality will come with government subsidies for these American car companies. Are there subsidies given any more to ICE car builders?

Steve we have a fundamental disagreement with government subsidies. Nothing in history is more of a guarantee to screw up quality, availability and price efficiency than “Governemt subsidies”.

Free markets and innovation will lead to products that will create consumer demand and ultimately bring prices down. Government subsidies will ensure the opposite
 

Empirical Audio

Industry Expert
Oct 12, 2017
1,169
207
150
Great Pacific Northwest
www.empiricalaudio.com
So as Mike has pointed out, yeah, those who may see 1/4 of all vehicles being electric can feel "good" but as he pointed out, it makes up a tiny % and as I point out, the real difference is miniscule.

It's more than "feel good" for me. My local grid is 97% renewable, so the effect of EVs here is significant for both the local atmosphere and GW.

Steve N.
 

Empirical Audio

Industry Expert
Oct 12, 2017
1,169
207
150
Great Pacific Northwest
www.empiricalaudio.com
the problem with pure EV's is battery life, not the motors.

it costs more to replace the battery than the EV is worth when it starts to fail. so the EV is useless. and disposal is a problem. this is also the case for Hybrids, but it happens later in the life cycle.

OTOH internal combustion engines (from the right manufacturer) last as long as the rest of the car (15-20+ years) and can be repaired.

i'm not saying that EV's or Hydrogen/Fuel Cell will not become more prevalent, only that there are plenty of longevity issues yet to be resolved with those technologies.

I've had a laptop for 15 years and the LI battery finally crapped-out. How many people keep a car 15 years? I typically keep them 20.

Steve N.
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Steve we have a fundamental disagreement with government subsidies. Nothing in history is more of a guarantee to screw up quality, availability and price efficiency than “Governemt subsidies”.

Free markets and innovation will lead to products that will create consumer demand and ultimately bring prices down. Government subsidies will ensure the opposite

I don't agree with government subsidies as well. My point is that the government seems hell bent on promoting solar
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
An interesting observation is that it seems that the more the California grid converts to renewable the higher the cost to the consumer.

Totally agree Howie but at some point one has to think of his own reasons for becoming an adopter. The reality where we are is that electricity rise by 4-6 cents every year. SDGE has a 3 tier system. If you are unfortunate enough to make it to tier 3 the cost per kWh is 45 cents. Thats what I object to
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
It's more than "feel good" for me. My local grid is 97% renewable, so the effect of EVs here is significant for both the local atmosphere and GW.

Steve N.

Steve you live in the pacific NW? If so a huge % of your “renewables” are coming from hydroelectric, no?

Man has to do what we have to do but dams and hydroelectric has a huge environmental footprint including a major source of methane production as well as a direct destructive footprint on the environment the dams destroy.

However I agree the best way to bring reduce C02 emissions from America’s cars is to improve the grids. If all of America’s grids were 100% renewable driven and 100% of all vehicles in the USA were EV we could reduce the worlds total CO2 emissions by 2.5% per year. Of course that ignores the environmental footprint of renewables which does exist.
 

Empirical Audio

Industry Expert
Oct 12, 2017
1,169
207
150
Great Pacific Northwest
www.empiricalaudio.com
Steve you live in the pacific NW? If so a huge % of your “renewables” are coming from hydroelectric, no?

Man has to do what we have to do but dams and hydroelectric has a huge environmental footprint including a major source of methane production as well as a direct destructive footprint on the environment the dams destroy.

However I agree the best way to bring reduce C02 emissions from America’s cars is to improve the grids. If all of America’s grids were 100% renewable driven and 100% of all vehicles in the USA were EV we could reduce the worlds total CO2 emissions by 2.5% per year. Of course that ignores the environmental footprint of renewables which does exist.

Yes, the Pac. NW. How does hydroelectric produce methane?

Steve N.
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
I don't agree with government subsidies as well. My point is that the government seems hell bent on promoting solar

Steve I think it’s happening. There is this belief that for political reasons people won’t adopt renewables. The more innovative, the cooler the products the bigger the demand and as supply increases to meet the demand it becomes a very viable product. We are seeing it happen. It may not be happening fast enough for some but it’s happening pretty quick.

My concern is the fastest way to dismantle what is occurring is to get the Governemt involved.
 

Mike Lavigne

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 25, 2010
12,471
11,368
4,410
I believe the reality will come with government subsidies for these American car companies. Are there subsidies given any more to ICE car builders?

unless you are a domestic car manufacturer and you went bankrupt (and those companies did pay that back).

then there was that 'one-time' 'Cash for Clunkers' back in 2009, which was a crazy wacko idea by Congress to throw Detroit a bone. that was government at it's worst.

there are certain types of research that get grants here and there, but it's rare. mostly fees and taxes on ICE car builders pay for the regulatory agencies that oversee them. the automobile business is 20% of our economy in the USA.......including fuel. if we add roads it's 33%.

not trivial.

now if you are a farmer, or 'green' industry person, or medical research person......subsidies and grants are your lifeblood. and I don't have a problem with that really. I'd rather my tax dollars go to those places than big government. that's what I hate. I will stop there as I don't want to polarize this with political comment.
 

Empirical Audio

Industry Expert
Oct 12, 2017
1,169
207
150
Great Pacific Northwest
www.empiricalaudio.com
unless you are a domestic car manufacturer and you went bankrupt (and those companies did pay that back).

there are certain types of research that get grants here and there, but it's rare. mostly fees and taxes on ICE car builders pay for the regulatory agencies that oversee them. the automobile business is 20% of our economy in the USA.......including fuel. if we add roads it's 33%.

not trivial.

now if you are a farmer, or 'green' industry person, or medical research person......subsidies and grants are your lifeblood. and I don't have a problem with that really. I'd rather my tax dollars go to those places than big government. that's what I hate. I will stop there as I don't want to polarize this with political comment.

Explain what you mean by "big government".

Steve N.
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL
Yes, the Pac. NW. How does hydroelectric produce methane?

Steve N.

First what is the goal of reducing CO2 emissions? To prevent “global warming” or more appropriately to improve our environment which is what rising C02 theoretically interferes with, no? The direct and devastating effects on local ecosystems as a result of dams and their effects is overwhelming. Again it’s a compromise that we have to be willing to live with but make no mistake dams upset the fragile balance of local ecosystems as well as river deltas.

As to your question it’s a two fold effect. The more stagnant the water the higher the build up of bacteria with significant increase in methane production. Same in the river deltas.

No better example of this than along the CO river with their “man made lakes” and silt etc as well as the devastation of the CO river delta. The Columbia River likewise has similar (and different) issues but production of methane from your hydroelectric sources normalized for gallons/minute is not as severe but still high.

The point is that everything is a compromise and nothing is perfect and I just can’t stand dams but understand their need.
 

Priaptor

Member Sponsor
Jan 28, 2012
929
19
0
FL

DaveC

Industry Expert
Nov 16, 2014
3,899
2,141
495
Dave

I know you get worked up by this topic and I understand where you are coming from. Your premise about the price of homes and the cost of solar is pertinent BUT in a positive way not the way you paint it as wealthy people are the adopters. The reality is that smaller houses have lower monthly electric bills and a system can be designed for a fraction of mine that takes them off the grid as well.

This is not something for the wealthy or well healed as you suggest but rather for everyone. What you fail to see is that if your energy bill is smaller then the cost of your solar grid is much lower. I have a good friend in our community who lives in a smaller house with his wife and his energy bill averages $250 per month. His July bill was over $800. He too is installing a Sun Power grid at a fraction of the cost of mine and he too will be off the SDGE grid.

So let's compare apples to apples Dave as I know how this topic gets you worked up

BTW I don't own an electric car but like you I believe it is the future and the technology is in its infancy. No arguments there. I do admit that I am eyeing the Taycan but so far I have nothing planned

Thanks for understanding.

I have looked into solar and will be taking the plunge sooner rather than later, it's a good idea... but manufacturing solar cells isn't necessarily environmentally friendly, just like lithium batteries. It's not free energy, you get a defined return on investment over the life of the solar cell that may not be quite as favorable as one might assume, and this doesn't take into account pollution, which is a major issue as well. There is no free lunch.

I also agree with not taking the plunge on an EV right this second... it's questionable if it's really doing any good.

However, what would do a great amount of good would be to figure out how to use less energy around the home and office. Especially larger homes where all the space isn't used all the time, yet it's heated and cooled anyways. This would make a much larger difference vs what kind of car you drive imo.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing