yeah this is great in the auto industry if you can get away with it. this is how you build sky scrapers. sell people with some marketing material and take the funds to a bank to secure financing for the project

The whole thing is absurd on multiple levels. Musk's ridiculousness is increasing in a stepwise exponential. I think he even said they'd be solar powered, which is lmaowtffraudster.

Still crickets on Model 3 by the way.

Wal Mart pre ordered a bunch of TSLA trucks

The first link you supplied states that an electric car is pretty even with a toyota prius. Loses in states with very dirty electricity, wins in states with cleaner electricity. The prius is pretty much the most efficient gas powered car that exists. Which means an electric car crushes an average gas powered car. I am extrapolating to assume that an electric truck will crush an average diesel powered truck.

The second link you provide has this graphic as a summary of their findings



And the article states
"On average in the United States, electric urban delivery trucks use about 30 percent less total energy and emit about 40 percent less greenhouse gases than diesel trucks, for about the same total cost, taking into account both the purchase price and the operating costs," said Dong-Yeon Lee, a Ph.D. student in the Georgia Tech School of Civil and Environmental Engineering. "However, costs and emissions depend on how and where the truck will be used."

Seems to show the electric truck crushing the diesel truck in emissions! Thank you for providing strong evidence for my post.

What do you think the extra cost to buy represents? The efforts of CO2 neutral fairies? the reality is that base cost for something like batteries is a rough proxy for human labor required, which is a proxy for CO2.

This is without getting into the terrible pollution from heavy metals.

Electrics will be better for the environment at some point, but we're not there yet.

I'm no electrical engineer, but what if the semi has 4 x 125kwh batteries? And you charge each battery on a separate charger at the same time? There are currently charging stations where 20+ Model S, each with a 100kwh battery, can charge. And they don't seem to be browning out any power plants.

If you can charge 20 model S, it seems like you should be able to charge 5 trucks that have 4 batteries each?

Actually as I type this I realize there must be a fatal flaw in my logic, otherwise they would already do this with model S and make it charge twice as fast. Maybe someone else knows more about this and can help me out.

It doesn't matter how you whether you split the load across 4 batteries or 1 from a power standpoint. After all 1 Tesla battery is just a grouping of smaller packs which themselves are composed of 18650 batteries. (they might be moving to a proprietary format as opposed to 18650 but that is irrelevant to our discussion). The issue is the gross amount of power transferred in a given time frame.

The claim is 400 miles in 30 minutes. With a stated efficiency of around 2kwh/mile we know that 800kw of power will need to be transferred in less than 30 minutes. A throughput of 1.6MW/hour.

To put it in perspective: The 20 stall supercharger you speak of is really a 10 stall supercharger at name plate charging rates. Each stall shares a charger that has a max throughput of 120kw. So if all 20 stalls are charging concurrently it's impossible for everyone to acheive the nameplate charging rate at X miles in 20 minutes or whatever Tesla markets it as.

So your 20 stall station is around 1.2MW of power throughput....probably on around a 1.5MW service. Not even enough to charge a single semi. Additionally, places where you need large numbers of stalls are by definition located in dense urban areas. Areas where the grid is capable of delivering 1.5MW loads b/c again by definition there are lots of people and industry so the transmission capacity is already there somewhere.

Put the above in contrast with say 400 miles inland from a port; or 400 miles east of the Central California Valley (produce); or basically pick any random trucking corridor. Anywhere, USA can't just trivially support at extra 10MW load conveniently located right next to the interstate next to the only Waffle House for 100 miles. I mean it's not impossible but it's an entirely different proposition from piggybacking in place infrastructure.

The solar powered aspect is beyond laughable.

He's essentially proposing building mini solar power plants along trucking corridors. The battery capacity alone he would need to support night time charging at each one would be completely out of the question financially.

What's he going to do? Drop 100MW battery charging stations everywhere? The one in Australia being built right now is like 50 million dollars I think. It's a complete non starter.

The article is based on urban delivery vehicles and clearly states that as the use cases that benefit electric deteriorate they are less effective. (IE Suburan delivery where starting and stopping is greatly reduced.)

Semis are used for long haul trucking and are not delivery vehicles in any universe. (They may not even be turned off once per 8hr shift.) Please try to keep up with what we're discussing instead of just being openly dishonest.

I work at a paper mill and we get 50 semi trucks in and out a day. 90% are coming from less than 250 miles away.

We are talking about whether an electric semi in 2019 or 2020 will have more carbon emissions and pollution than a diesel semi. Since the electric semi doesn't exist yet, we have to extrapolate from data about other vehicles.

Again from your source

"In every state in the U.S., electric trucks provided some reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, with urban routes providing the most advantage. In about half of the states, the electric trucks cut greenhouse gas emissions by a third or more compared to diesel vehicles."

They are not explicit, but that sounds to me like even in the longer routes the electric truck had an advantage, though it was smaller.

That study was from 2013. I think it is reasonable to think that electricity production will be noticeably cleaner in 2020. So I think it is reasonable to extrapolate that an electric semi will be cleaner than a diesel semi in 2020. I am fine if you want to disagree, but I am not sure why you are calling me a dishonest liar for thinking that

you can argue all day if the semi is cleaner or not.
Honestly it doesn't matter for the financials.
Companies and people care about monetary incentives. If the government is subsidizing them (not gonna happen under republicans) or they are a lot cheaper to use than other trucks, companies and people will buy them.
But no company is gonna pay up a lot just for that green image. Especially not in logistics. That's just not what will be discussed in the boardroom.

hahahahahaha, good joke

Lol at a bunch

15


And they likely didn't even have to make the deposit since tesla definitely would let them pre order for the logo only

Actually 75k for free "green" advertising makes sense too

I really hope they can get the Model 3 production numbers and quality up...and also that these announcements aren't just smoke and mirrors to get people to not pay attention to the Model 3 production issues.

Watching the video of Musk talk about the specs of the Tesla semi and then hearing people clap and cheer was just LOL. Reminded me of a cult. Since when did anyone care about trucks? And the new Roadster looked cool but at $250k will likely only sell a few thousand over its lifetime, much like the previous roadster. Just another toy for Musk and his rich buddies.

I know you are ESL and lack the competency I have with the language. Here are some pictures to help you understand how little you know:

https://www.google.ee/search?q=deliv...=1903&bih=1243

TS, can we get your thoughts on the musk tweet saying the roadster2 might have a package that enables it to fly?

Not much to say except post my favorite movie scene of all time:

Yup semis coming and going 24 hours a day at my company and most of them are transporting parts within a couple hundred miles of here. Some are just going across town for assembly

Why are you so obsessed with being both right and at the same time the only person who holds that view?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semi-trailer_truck

This is what I am talking about. You linked a delivery truck. I know the difference.

Founders series for the semi requiring 200k deposit

Lol

Musk confirmed idiot/incompetent:
Not that big a deal when you're selling $100K cars made in ultra low volume. A very big deal when you're making something at higher volume, much lower price and thinner margins like the Model 3. There were previously articles about how Musk has skipped beta testing; we're seeing the results of that now.

When are the bulls going to realize that Musk is an incompetent clown, good for cutting corners on safety on rockets in a non-competitive low volume pork barrel industry, but way out of his depth in the cutthroat, complex, highly talented global car manufacturing business?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-t...-idUSKBN1DT0N3

Is this going to be a fantastic go-to re-shorter if the market begins to wobble?...or are we better off choosing less-known tech stocks that don't have the news pump spike ability that Musk delivers?

That's always going to be the question when it comes to grossly overvalued companies, isn't it? How long will people keep believing in the promoter, or the new "revolutionary" technology, or whatever.

Say a company is valued at 10x its intrinsic value. Why couldn't it be valued 15x or 20x in the future, provided the hype gains even more momentum?

Musk has been able to convince a lot of people to commit a lot of money into whatever he's doing. He's obviously great at getting people hyped up about technology, to believe that he can do the impossible (which is great when you pretty much have to do just that).

It's impossible to predict when the train stops. And not only that, but the valuation could be twice as crazy a year from now. If you're being rational and looking at the numbers, it's easy to say "this has to come down soon." Well, the numbers have been bad for a while, but the stock has only gone up. So clearly it doesn't work like that.