Oh, I see the problem. You are comparing apples not with oranges but with elephants, failing to read for comprehension and getting it all wrong as usual. Fighting a straw man.
Comparing a Tesla with a BMW with a diesel or petrol engine is not what we're discussing. If you compare the Tesla with a 1920s equivalent power car or the original steam engine locomotive, you'll find the Tesla is much much better. If you compare the Tesla with the weight of an equivalent number of horses, you'll find the horses are heavier and not as fast and also make a big mess. You would be correct but irrelevant.
What we're discussing is how big the battery needs to be in a Tiny Tata Town Tootler TTTT [tm] when using a 7SSSS [Seven Second Swap Stop Station] compared with a plug in or Halo recharge method.
<<It might be that lugging around a bigger more expensive battery is worthwhile. The capital cost is another $7000
but here's evidence that people would rather pay more for more range << A separate battery replacement guarantee takes effect after the eighth year at a cost ofUS$10,000 for the 60 kWh battery and US$12,000 for the 85 kWh battery. In 2013, Tesla canceled a 40 kWh version of the car due to lack of demand, stating that only 4% of pre-orders were for the 40 kWh battery option.>>
The extra energy used with a big battery would be significant too, carting a huge battery up hills and with constant rolling resistance. >>
It's not a good argument to say to somebody "Don't buy that TTTT SSSS version because a BMW 5 series with a diesel engine is much heavier and can't do regenerative braking. You should buy the heavy, expensive, inefficient, Tesla muscle car". They would think you were out of your mind.
Rich Yanks don't have to worry about the odd extra $8,000 and the cost of the energy and loss of power lugging a very large battery around, up hill and down dale, nor the time taken to recharge it. Regular humans do. Especially regular humans in India, China and everywhere else.
Maybe you are unaware of the effort that engineers have gone to in the diesel and petrol car industry over the last hundred years to shave minuscule amounts of weight, waste and inefficiency from their cars. If they could get an $8000 cut in capital costs and a 20% increase in efficiency, and a boost in performance, while cutting recharge time, that would be a very big deal.
Elon has started in the very high end market where money doesn't matter to the buyers. Image, fun, status, boasting are what's wanted. More expensive is better! "Oh, it was a snip at $200,000. I am so rich that I can afford it whereas you regular human plebs are scurrying in the stinky old internal combustion mode scavenging for a dollar. I am so clever, so environmental, so amazing and you are such losers."
To get regular humans to buy will mean efficiency and low cost are needed. If Elon doesn't do it, Toyota will.
The Prius can be given a bigger battery and smaller engine until they produce a model with no petrol engine. Heck, they might have already done that. Then they can introduce a battery module that can be swapped. Then make the whole battery swappable. And make smaller and bigger cars such as a TTTT [Tiny Toyota Town Tootler] to compete with the TTTT [Tiny Tata Town Tootler]. Or a dirty great SUV.
A TTTT SSSS with Halo would be a very big seller. Especially when it's an Uber Google car [auto-driving rental]. The cost of operation would be nearly nothing per kilometre. No traffic jams. Get on the Net when in the car. Tell the car the destination via the Uber Android app, and off you go.
Mqurice |
