Mr. B

iTrader: (1)

13,000 RPM, 256 MPG!

http://www.teslamotors.com/

You can even race this at E-Town with no noise!

For the same price as that Vette or Mercedes..

Cool28

iTrader: (2)

I would buy it. Thing looks cool and gets up and goes to^^

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

I've always liked that Tesla, not ready to give up my internal combustion/pistons just yet but in time something like that might have to be considered.

JS

iTrader: (4)

Green house junk

Zero4488

iTrader: (10)

Wow...I can see that having "electrical" problems.....

Mr. B

iTrader: (1)

I like it.

I'm sick of forking over my gas money to fund people that despise us, and would love to see us dead.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

I hear that.

iamsickofitall

iTrader: (18)

too bad it will only go 220 miles per charge...sure isn't very worthy of taking down the shore. then you have to find an outlet somewhere that you can run an extension cord to just so you can steal someone's electricity to charge your car back up for the next 3.5 hours...still the technology has come a long way and the vehicles are getting sexier

WS6TransAm01

iTrader: (13)

Its nice to see a worth while, good looking electric car.

But what makes me wonder is what is the Carbon Footprint of generating the electricity needed for that car to go 220Miles?

I could not quickly find the numbers for the United States, but In Germany a country that has a higher percentage of its electrical energy generated from non fossil Fuel sources then the US the figure is 596 Grams of CO2 per 1kW of electricity.

Lets do the math:

200kW is based on a guess trying to find how much energy the battery need to fully charge.
596g/kW (co2) x 200kw = 119,200g for 220miles

Note:1g (gasoline) = 3.1g (CO2)

1gal x 3.78541Gal/Ltr x 1000MLtr/Ltr x .7025g/MLtr = 2659.25g/Gal (C02)

Lets say your car gets 20MPH

At 220miles that is 11 Gal

11Gal x 2,659.25g/Gal = 29,251.8g of CO2

SO In our gas powered cars, we will produce 29,251.8 Grams of Carbon Dioxide,
While the Tesla will need en electric power station to produce 119,200g of Carbon Dioxide.

Not very green hu?

I like the idea that the Tesla presents. But until we find a better way of making electricity electric cars are no more green then our gasoline powered cars.

Just my $0.02

jimmy169

I've been hearing a lot about wind turbine's and solar power.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

A Tesla Roadster with a big sail and solar panels on it?

WS6TransAm01

iTrader: (13)

as you can see those sources make up a small part of the total electricity produced in the US. Plus, they are still incredibly inefficient.

Don't get me wrong, as an Architect I try to design as green of a building as possible, but a lot of times we the public get to easily BS'ed into thinking that electric cars are the ****.

I'm sorry to get political but the reasons are strictly so. Democrats want to us all to drive electric cars and figure out ways to make electricity from nothing. But we would have to cover the entire area of the US in solar panels to be able to produce enough electricity to run. Ted Kennedy was one of the largest proponents of wind energy in Congress but when a wind turbine farm was proposed off the shore of his summer home he shut it down faster then he can drown a mistress in a car. Democrats want clean energy, but they say no to the only clean energy source we have RIGHT NOW. Nuclear. In Europe they have about 20% more electricity from Nuclear plants then we do. But every time the NRC tries to open regulations to build more reactors the Left in the government creams NO.

If we were to cut out that HUGE chunk of electricity from coal, and produce it with Nuclear power, then the Tesla would be a worth wile car to get. In the mean time it looks to me at least that the Tesla is worse for the environment than a 1970's Diesel.

Mike 00'SS

iTrader: (9)

Yes but what is the carbon foot print left from refining the gasoline for our gas powered cars ????

ttranssam

iTrader: (10)

correct me if im wrong but if your going to shell out 100k for a pos that dont go vroom vroom would you evin give a **** about gas???

jimmy169

That's today, but I was listening to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. yesterday on Larry King Live, here is the transcript of some of what he said:

http://rfkin2008.wordpress.com/2008/...rry-king-live/

We have — the Midwest this is the Saudi Arabia of wind. We have enough harnessable wind energy in North Dakota, Kansas and Texas combined to supply all the electrical needs of our country, even if every American were driving an electric car.

We have the “Scientific American” just published a report that shows in 19 percent of the most barren desert lands in the desert southwest, we have enough solar energy to provide all the electrical needs of our country.

I know you're probably thinking I'm a crazy liberal, but I'm just open to idea's because right now these gas price's and giving billions to some of our greatest enemies is really pissing me off, but I am looking forward to your rebuttle to his statements because this sorta discussion really interests me.

Right before he said what he said about wind and solar energy he wrote:

First of all, even if we drilled every bit of oil on all of our public lands in Alaska, it’s less than 3 percent of proven global reserves. We’re using less than 25 percent of proven oil reserves in our country in our oil. So we can’t drill our way out of the problem.

The issue is a demand issue. We need to change demand and we do that by changing to other sources of to wind, to solar, to geothermal, to tidal and conservation.

The fastest way for us to solve our energy problems in this country is immediate conservation. If we improve fuel economy standards in our automobiles by one mile per gallon, we generate twice the oil that’s in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. If we raise fuel economy standards by 7.6 miles per gallon, we can yield more oil than we are currently importing from the Persian Gulf. We are borrowing.

To me it seems like oil company's have us by the *****, and I figure if we give em more land to drill, they'll just be able to squeeze us harder by the ***** a little later down the line, our whole economy seems to be controlled by the oil company's right now.

jimmy169

Heh, they mentioned that last night, and he replied:

STOSSEL: Yes. It’s wrong that there are all these subsidies. We should have a free market. But even without the subsidies, these alternatives are just not going to make much of a dent for a long time. They just are much too expensive. It’s interesting that Mr. Kennedy says he wants wind power, but he objects to a wind farm off his family’s compound on Cape Cod.
KING: Robert, can you quickly answer that? I got to talk to the head of AAA.

KENNEDY: On that issue, on Cape Wind, I have no objection to Cape Wind. I support that wind farm. I just think they should move it away from the fishing grounds, because it’s going to put out of business every fishermen on the Cape.

On the answer that wind and solar and the renewables can’t compete, that’s completely wrong. Look at the nations that have de- carbonized their economy. In 1970, Iceland was the poorest country in Europe. It was 100 percent dependent on imported coal and oil. They said, we’re not going to do this anymore. It switched. Today, it’s the fourth richest country in the world.

WS6TransAm01

iTrader: (13)

Jimmy I agree with you on most points except 1.

Where you say we give a lot of money to our enemies, yes we do get oil from Iraq and Saudi Arabia, but most of out oil comes from Canada, Nigeria, Venezuela and Russia. We get more oil from Canada then from the middle east. I don't see Canadians subside bombing us...

I don't think you are a "crazy liberal" at all. They are never as lucid as you seem to be. I agree we need to lessen our demand for oil, but right now we use mostly coal to make electricity and that is mined in the US, not imported. The biggest rising demand for oil is in China and India, so we and out SUV's are not to blame. Personally I think wind and solar are great ideas, but until these technologies come into the main stream, I think we need more Nuclear energy. Either way, we burn less fossil fuels.

CamaroRacing12

iTrader: (5)

looks like that lil lotus thats out, cool idea but i bet not many will buy it

jimmy169

Cool, thanks for the info! I see where you're coming from.

Kenny H

Hey Guys,

A bit off topic but I had Taco Bell for lunch today and just took a huge dump.