Tesla Station

[MoSurveyor]

No, we should look at the $7500 and possibly more subsidized by taxpayers that you call a profit.

I'd say that $7500/vehicle isn't even close to leveling the playing field, yet.

The United States Deep Water Royalty Relief Act (DWRRA) implemented a royalty-relief program that relieves eligible leases from paying royalties on defined amounts of deep-water petroleum production over Federal Outer Continental Shelf lands. After its expiration in 2000, the DWRRA was redefined and extended to promote continued interest in deep water. The Minerals Management Service (MMS) defines a "deep-water" lease as having a minimum water depth of 200 meters (656 ft).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Water_Royalty_Relief_Act

The most common incentives for offshore oil and gas development include various forms of royalty relief. The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to grant royalty relief to promote increased oil and gas production (43 U.S.C. 1337). The Deep Water Royalty Relief Act of 1995 (DWRRA) expanded the Secretary’s royalty relief authority in the Gulf of Mexico outer continental shelf (OCS).

Controversy over royalty relief currently focuses on the lack of price thresholds in Minerals Management Service (MMS) OCS lease sales held in 1998 and 1999. Without the price thresholds, deepwater producers continued to benefit from royalty relief, even as oil prices hit record levels. In an unresolved issue over the Secretary of the Interior’s authority and discretion to impose price thresholds, the Department of the Interior asserts that the Secretary of the Interior is not required to impose price thresholds in each lease (but has the discretion to do so). All lease sales held since the enactment of DWRRA included price thresholds, except those held in 1998 and 1999. According to the MMS and the Government Accountability Office (GAO), omitting price thresholds for those two years could cost the federal government as much as $10 billion.

http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/110359.pdf

Whoops! We all remember the MMS, right? So apparently, in 1998-99, the folks at the MMS were too busy flirting with each other, or accepting private-jet rides to college football games, or whatever, to notice that the price of oil had gotten pretty high and they shouldn't be handing out free leases anymore. As a result, 24 companies got free leases they shouldn't have gotten. And ever since, they've been making extra money that they really ought to be returning in the form of leases on public property to the American taxpayer. As of 2008, the bill came to $1.3 billion; this year, the losses will be $1.5 billion. Over the decades-long lifetime of the wells it'll add up to a lot more. According to the Government Accountability Office it'll come to $53 billion over the next 25 years. Last week, representative Ed Markey and a few other Democrats on the House Natural Resources Committee offered an amendment to the Republican budget bill to make those oil producers pay the standard amount in the future on the royalty-free leases they mistakenly received due to bureaucratic error. The amendment was voted down, 251-174.

Oil royalties: Giving away government money accidentally on purpose | The Economist


Any more myopic, skewed, or otherwise biased/prejudiced opinions???

 

[JC Callender]

If they're getting subsidies, then that's wrong too.

I'd say that $7500/vehicle isn't even close to leveling the playing field, yet.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Water_Royalty_Relief_Act




http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/110359.pdf




Oil royalties: Giving away government money accidentally on purpose | The Economist

 

[MoSurveyor]

If they're getting subsidies, then that's wrong too.

Tell it to Exxon, there's no "if" about it.

Saying it's wrong doesn't mean you haven't benefited for over a decade at the pump.

 

[JC Callender]

Okay, next time I see them. In the meantime, please stop confusing government subsidies with profits.

Tell it to Exxon.

 

[MoSurveyor]

Okay, next time I see them. In the meantime, please stop confusing government subsidies with profits.

If the government is giving away leases for black gold that's a subsidy to the tune of several billion dollars if not tens of billions.

Or are you trying to say handing out free access to black gold isn't a subsidy but tax refunds for electric vehicles are??? What a twisted, skewed, and prejudiced opinion that is.

 

[Dickieboy]

Tell it to Exxon, there's no "if" about it.

Saying it's wrong doesn't mean you haven't benefited for over a decade at the pump.

What you say is true, JC, me, you and everyone else in the country who uses fuel including freight energy. Can the same be said for those of us who cannot (or will not) afford a Tesla? I mean how are we ALL benefiting from the subsidy similarly to savings 'at the pump'?

 

[MoSurveyor]

What you say is true, JC, me, you and everyone else in the country who uses fuel including freight energy. Can the same be said for those of us who cannot (or will not) afford a Tesla?

Can we say "near-sighted"? LOL!

I mean how are we ALL benefiting from the subsidy similarly to savings 'at the pump'?

Sorry, the minute they started exporting oil products all that stopped. All we're doing now is giving oil to companies so they can process it and ship it overseas for a profit. That's not just a subsidy, that's plain, old-fashioned corporate welfare.

 

[Dickieboy]

Sorry, the minute they started exporting oil products all that stopped. All we're doing now is giving oil to companies so they can process it and ship it overseas for a profit. That's not just a subsidy, that's plain, old-fashioned corporate welfare.

Oh, forgive me. I thought is was YOUR argument that we benefited at the pump but the above seems to counter that...I'll leave now and let you debate yourself...carry on.

 

[MoSurveyor]

Oh, forgive me. I thought is was YOUR argument that we benefited at the pump but the above seems to counter that...I'll leave now and let you debate yourself...carry on.

I said "for over a decade". If you had read the cites you would know this started back in 1995. They didn't start exporting until 2010, IIRC, which would be 15 years, more than a decade. :roll:


But, hey, if you think it's such a great benefit we should just make it all free so we can burn up as much oil as possible without consequence!!!!

 

[specklebang]

They sure picked some losers. No doubt a few political rewards helped select some of them. Others were run by smooth talkers who didn't have such a great plan. The (seemingly) good news is that one of them seems to be making it. If Tesla succeeds - and that's not a sure thing yet - then other car companies will get into this with better efforts than they have so far. Eventually, cars will run by electricity and gasolin engines will be like steam engines. A thing of the past.

This is a process. But imagine a place without carbon monoxide fumes in the air. Imagine real energy independence. Some things are very long term thinking.

NASA is a good example. Why do we need to visit the moon or send rovers to Mars? Because someday the human race will have overwhelmed this planet. We will in fact be headed for the stars in order to survive. Everything starts somewhere, some things on a scale that incorporates government. While it hardly applies to most things, some times it does.


Just a humble opinion of course. Am I wrong?

Oh, so they are getting huge subsidies. Okay.

Our government has wasted massive amounts of taxpayer money on trying to get these green companies going with p-poor results.

 

[Dittohead not!]

Can we say "near-sighted"? LOL!

Sorry, the minute they started exporting oil products all that stopped. All we're doing now is giving oil to companies so they can process it and ship it overseas for a profit. That's not just a subsidy, that's plain, old-fashioned corporate welfare.

Oh, c'mon, aren't those corporations entitled to a return on investment when they purchase their very own congressmen?

 

[MoSurveyor]

Oh, c'mon, aren't those corporations entitled to a return on investment when they purchase their very own congressmen?

That's the second great joke I've heard today! :lamo

 

[poweRob]

I'll bet that half ton battery on the bottom of the vehicle gives it a nice, low center of gravity.

It does. watch some videos of people driving the model s. they comment on its low center of gravity.

car and driver review...

 

[poweRob]

The battery swap concept will not work because the batteries have a limited lifespan. Would you allow the battery in your car to be regularly swapped out with someone else's unknown condition and age battery?

if I had a problem with a battery after a battery swap is simply swap it out againand tell the station manager that there is something wrong with the old battery. so that isn't a problem at all.

 

[the_recruit]

Yes. Just put serial numbers on the batteries. Add a tick mark to a spreadsheet everytime that battery gets swapped out (and recharged). Once it starts to near the end of its lifecycle, the recharging station pulls it out of circulation. Or better yet, the recharging station puts old batteries in the "bargain bin" where you can swap your battery out at a lower cost but increased risk of it going kaput before your next swap out.

It's a non-issue.

 

[poweRob]

Yes. Just put serial numbers on the batteries. Add a tick mark to a spreadsheet everytime that battery gets swapped out (and recharged). Once it starts to near the end of its lifecycle, the recharging station pulls it out of circulation. Or better yet, the recharging station puts old batteries in the "bargain bin" where you can swap your battery out at a lower cost but increased risk of it going kaput before your next swap out.

It's a non-issue.

or the old motor gets stripped of it's precious metals to build a new battery.

 

[poweRob]

or the old motor gets stripped of it's precious metals to build a new battery.

my bad. I meant old battery. not old motor.

 

[MoSurveyor]

or the old battery gets stripped of it's precious metals to build a new battery.

The "battery" is made up of hundreds of common cells (similar to laptop cells). If a battery goes bad I'd think they'd open it up and replace the bad cells, which could be done on site. Those bad cells could certainly be recycled or whatever but I don't see them swapping out the whole frame structure of the main battery because a few cells have gone bad.

Every so often (every 200k miles, maybe?) they'd have to refurbish - like clean the contacts, check the wires and connections, check for any corrosion, etc. That probably wouldn't be done on-site but sent to a facility designed for that purpose. The thing is, if a lot of cars start using the same system it could become rather routine and cheap to do all this. Refurbished batteries could even be sent back to the manufacturers for installation in new cars. If battery technology improves, all they need do is make the improved cells the same size as the old ones and start swapping when needed.

 

[Ontologuy]

The Tesla sedan and roadster are my favorite cars.

And, considering battery technology continues to shrink in size, it has to be the future.

In addition, Tesla makes solar charging units, where you drive your car under the solar panels, plug in the hose, and the sun charges the battery pack to full-strength. You can get a solar charging unit installed in your driveway.

Absolutely clean perpetual motion.

 

[poweRob]

The "battery" is made up of hundreds of common cells (similar to laptop cells). If a battery goes bad I'd think they'd open it up and replace the bad cells, which could be done on site. Those bad cells could certainly be recycled or whatever but I don't see them swapping out the whole frame structure of the main battery because a few cells have gone bad.

Every so often (every 200k miles, maybe?) they'd have to refurbish - like clean the contacts, check the wires and connections, check for any corrosion, etc. That probably wouldn't be done on-site but sent to a facility designed for that purpose. The thing is, if a lot of cars start using the same system it could become rather routine and cheap to do all this. Refurbished batteries could even be sent back to the manufacturers for installation in new cars. If battery technology improves, all they need do is make the improved cells the same size as the old ones and start swapping when needed.

What I'm looking for is exactly that. Will the motion of Tesla becoming profitable in such short order and that their cars are leading sales of all electric cars out there... will that have them leading in developing and will they allow a standardization of batteries so that other manufacturers can use the same setup where the batteries are the same and can be mounted the same in their cars as well. Therefore be able to use their stations' battery swap and whatnot.

If Tesla does allow this, man the investment fortune to be made with them could be astronomical in that other car manufacturers would have to pay nonstop royalties to Tesla designs for using their standards.

 

[Fisher]

What I'm looking for is exactly that. Will the motion of Tesla becoming profitable in such short order and that their cars are leading sales of all electric cars out there... will that have them leading in developing and will they allow a standardization of batteries so that other manufacturers can use the same setup where the batteries are the same and can be mounted the same in their cars as well. Therefore be able to use their stations' battery swap and whatnot.

If Tesla does allow this, man the investment fortune to be made with them could be astronomical in that other car manufacturers would have to pay nonstop royalties to Tesla designs for using their standards.

I wouldn't hold my bated breath.

 

[poweRob]

I wouldn't hold my bated breath.

It's definitely too early to tell. But Tesla is leading in electric car sales. And they already have their charging/batter swap stations popping up. So if they can afford to expand their charging/batter swap stations to have the infrastructure in place... it could really be a heavy hand against competitors for them if they want to compete in sales of EV's.

Tesla charging stations:

Tesla Superchargers allow Model S owners to travel for free between cities along well-traveled highways in North America. Superchargers provide half a charge in about 20 minutes and are strategically placed to allow owners to drive from station to station with minimal stops.

Coverage
Today – 8 stations
Summer 2013 – 27 stations
Fall 2013 – Most metropolitan areas
Winter 2013 – Coast-to-coast travel
2014 – 80% of the US and Canada
2015 – 98% of the US and Canada​

Superchargers are located near amenities like roadside diners, cafes, and shopping centers. Road trippers can stop for a quick meal and have their Model S charged when they’re done.​

I think their goal is to have them at 150 mile intervals. And the 17 inch GPS navigation screen has them always located for you on your travels.

Combine all this with Elon Musk's promise that charging your Tesla at a Tesla station is and and always will be free... wow...

 

[poweRob]

dupe post

 

[Fisher]

It's definitely too early to tell. But Tesla is leading in electric car sales. And they already have their charging/batter swap stations popping up. So if they can afford to expand their charging/batter swap stations to have the infrastructure in place... it could really be a heavy hand against competitors for them if they want to compete in sales of EV's.

Tesla charging stations:

Tesla Superchargers allow Model S owners to travel for free between cities along well-traveled highways in North America. Superchargers provide half a charge in about 20 minutes and are strategically placed to allow owners to drive from station to station with minimal stops.

Coverage
Today – 8 stations
Summer 2013 – 27 stations
Fall 2013 – Most metropolitan areas
Winter 2013 – Coast-to-coast travel
2014 – 80% of the US and Canada
2015 – 98% of the US and Canada​

Superchargers are located near amenities like roadside diners, cafes, and shopping centers. Road trippers can stop for a quick meal and have their Model S charged when they’re done.​

I think their goal is to have them at 150 mile intervals. And the 17 inch GPS navigation screen has them always located for you on your travels.

Combine all this with Elon Musk's promise that charging your Tesla at a Tesla station is and and always will be free... wow...

The stations cost like $500K each; each station requires electrical grid upgrades where they are located, and the only way the company has made any profit is by selling their California Zero Emissions Credits. The scheme did not work for Renault, and I am skeptical Tesla will have coverage in 98% of the US. It further seems like despite Elon's supposed promise, they would need to charge for the refills.

 

[poweRob]

The stations cost like $500K each; each station requires electrical grid upgrades where they are located, and the only way the company has made any profit is by selling their California Zero Emissions Credits. The scheme did not work for Renault, and I am skeptical Tesla will have coverage in 98% of the US. It further seems like despite Elon's supposed promise, they would need to charge for the refills.

I was thinking that if he wanted free recharges that the stations would need some offset like cooperatives with starbucks or some chain restaurant which people would visit during the 20 to 30 minute charges. The energy consumption looks to be offset by the solar production at the stations.