RIP the internal combustion engine!

All things Rugby
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

Rinkals wrote:
DOB wrote:They've discontinued the domestic version. The commercial powerpacks are still going.

http://fortune.com/2015/06/26/winery-tesla-batteries/
I wouldn't expect FA to acknowledge any facts which don't confirm his own point of view.

Well he accurately "home" version was closing, the other ones make little financial sense and will be replaced with better tech.
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by The Man Without Fear »

Rinkals wrote:
DOB wrote:They've discontinued the domestic version. The commercial powerpacks are still going.

http://fortune.com/2015/06/26/winery-tesla-batteries/
I wouldn't expect FA to acknowledge any facts which don't confirm his own point of view.
What's even more amusing is that in his desperate flailing to discredit anything Tesla does, he's forgotten to properly cherry pick and has included details of other firms that appear to be doing it cheaper and on better terms.
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

The Man Without Fear wrote:
Rinkals wrote:
DOB wrote:They've discontinued the domestic version. The commercial powerpacks are still going.

http://fortune.com/2015/06/26/winery-tesla-batteries/
I wouldn't expect FA to acknowledge any facts which don't confirm his own point of view.
What's even more amusing is that in his desperate flailing to discredit anything Tesla does, he's forgotten to properly cherry pick and has included details of other firms that appear to be doing it cheaper and on better terms.

Which firms were they ?
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

TESLA's 7 kWh Powerwall battery is mainly for solar. It makes great economic sense & is being continued... :thumbup:
Only their 10 kWh 'backup' batteries have been discontinued.


The issue here is battery chemistry & cycles, and hence price per kWh delivered.

7 kWh costs $3000 & is good for 5000 cycles so cost per kWh delivered ~ $3000/(5000x7kWh) ~ 8.6c / kWh

That is spectacularly good for solar applications - probably a game-changer for off-grid applications... :thumbup: :thumbup:


The other battery was intended for a different use - power back-up

10 kWh used to cost $3500 & was only good for 500 cycles so cost per kWh delivered ~ $3500/(500x10kWh) ~ 70c / kWh

That's not so attractive against lead-acid storage & traditional back-up generators, so TESLA dropped it. No big deal. :yawn:


Tesla won’t be making 10kWh Powerwalls—it’s 7kWh batteries only, for now
Demand for 5,000-cycle batteries leads Tesla to tweak its business model.


by Megan Geuss - Mar 24, 2016 2:20am NZDT

Tesla has decided that it won’t be making the 10kWh stationary storage batteries it unveiled last April, instead focusing exclusively on the 7kWh version.

The 10kWh version of Tesla’s Powerwall was made to be used as backup storage only—its nickel-cobalt chemistry limited the user to cycling the battery 500 times, so daily use was out of the question. The 7kWh battery, on the other hand, is made to integrate with solar panels, and due to its nickel-manganese chemistry, Tesla said it could be cycled 5,000 times.

After Tesla quietly removed the option for a 10kWh battery on its website, the company confirmed in an e-mail to Greentech Media that the larger version had been discontinued. "The Daily Powerwall supports daily use applications like solar self-consumption plus backup power applications, and can offer backup simply by modifying the way it is installed in a home," the e-mail read. "Due to the interest, we have decided to focus entirely on building and deploying the 7kWh Daily Powerwall at this time."

The $3,500 10kWh Powerwall was the flagship consumer-focused product when Tesla unveiled its stationary storage plans last year. In fact, the company seemed to think the $3,000 7kWh battery wouldn’t sell very well in most states in the US, especially where solar panel owners can sell their energy back to utilities. In an earnings call last year, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said "the daily cycling one, it is true, in the US they are more expensive than being on the grid.”

“This doesn't mean that people won't buy it [in the US],” Musk added at the time. "Some people want to go off-grid on principle.”

Still, the company said expected to sell daily cycling units primarily to customers in Australia and Germany, where the economics work out a bit better for people with solar panels.

It seems from Tesla’s statement that the company isn't giving up on storage-only customers; it’s just producing one type of battery instead of two and will modify the smaller battery for storage use-cases.

Tesla has already started shipping Powerwall units to pilot customers and early adopters in Australia. Musk has said that Tesla will announce a second version of the Powerwall sometime later this year. The UK's first Powerwall unit was installed in Wales last month.
http://arstechnica.com/business/2016/03 ... y-for-now/



Personal view is TESLA will be using almost all its batteries for its cars - as many as it can make - but these storage batteries are a compelling insurance policy if that turned out not to be the case.
User avatar
RWC2015
Posts: 4458
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:19 pm

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by RWC2015 »

slow wing wrote:Just a week and a half to the TESLA Model 3 reveal on 31 March 2016- hugely exciting!! :thumbup: :thumbup:


Recent talk is the Model 3 is more of a ground-up first-principles design of the BEV than just a shrunken Model S... :o


I would love to see TESLA fix the front... :nod:
Q. Why do cars have a long bonnet :?:
A. to house a dinosaur-juice engine... :thumbdown:
The Tesla S and X just made it storage space - a front trunk or "frunk".
Admittedly it also doubles as a crumple zone for hard frontal collisions.
But I would like to see it disappear... :nod:

:arrow: The entire front can be a half-ellipsoid... :shock:

Take a sphere, sit on it to squash it, then slice it in half from top to bottom and one half is the front of the Tesla... :idea:
The top half of that will be safety glass for unprecedented driving visibility... :thumbup:
Then taper vertically going backwards from there like already exists in the Model S* :arrow: wonderful aerodynamics: world's best! :idea: :nod:
Could even have a tubular roll-cage to make it the world's safest production car... :idea:

That would be amaaaaaaaaaazzing!!!

C'MON ELON MUSK- YOU CAN DO IT!!!


:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:


*car design enthusiasts might recognise the design as foreshadowed by Buckminster Fuller's seminal Dymaxion:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dymaxion_car

Image
Image

:nod: :thumbup: :thumbup:
drivers wont be sitting in the front with the advent of driverless cars :thumbup:
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Woo hoo!! Tesla Model 3 is a STUNNER... :thumbup: :thumbup:

Image
http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/31/11335 ... s-preorder


115k pre-orders in past 24 hours!

35k base price
215 EPA miles base range
base model 0-60 mph in less than 6 seconds
seats 5 adults comfortably
fits a 7-foot surf board
auto-pilot sensor hardware standard
5 star safety rating in parts of test
slow wing wrote:...
I would love to see TESLA fix the front... :nod:
Q. Why do cars have a long bonnet :?:
A. to house a dinosaur-juice engine... :thumbdown:
Yep! Elon Musk says the extra room is largely because front seats are further forward than in other cars... :thumbup:
User avatar
booji boy
Posts: 9034
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:12 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by booji boy »

slow wing wrote:Woo hoo!! Tesla Model 3 is a STUNNER... :thumbup: :thumbup:

Image
http://www.theverge.com/2016/3/31/11335 ... s-preorder


115k pre-orders in past 24 hours!

35k base price
215 EPA miles base range
base model 0-60 mph in less than 6 seconds
seats 5 adults comfortably
fits a 7-foot surf board
auto-pilot sensor hardware standard
5 star safety rating in parts of test
slow wing wrote:...
I would love to see TESLA fix the front... :nod:
Q. Why do cars have a long bonnet :?:
A. to house a dinosaur-juice engine... :thumbdown:
Yep! Elon Musk says the extra room is largely because front seats are further forward than in other cars... :thumbup:
So have you placed your order Slowy?

If not why not?
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by The Man Without Fear »

Looks a bit lumpen on that angled view if you ask me. Is it a hatchback, because it looks like it should be given the side view.
User avatar
message #2527204
Posts: 13293
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Ultracrepidaria

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by message #2527204 »

The Man Without Fear wrote:Looks a bit lumpen on that angled view if you ask me. Is it a hatchback, because it looks like it should be given the side view.
Luggage space must be in the front unless you squeeze it in under the glass roofy thing.
User avatar
booji boy
Posts: 9034
Joined: Sun May 19, 2013 9:12 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by booji boy »

The Man Without Fear wrote:Looks a bit lumpen on that angled view if you ask me. Is it a hatchback, because it looks like it should be given the side view.
It was on the TV news tonight and it looked a lot better on TV than it does in that picture tbf.
User avatar
maverickmak
Posts: 5731
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2012 11:18 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by maverickmak »

Yeah, that's not the best angle. Looked quite nice on the beeb.
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

It will be fasinating to see how many of the 135,000 pre orders will convert to actual cars and when they'll be delivered. Only 1,000 usd deposit that is refundable.
User avatar
RWC2015
Posts: 4458
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2015 10:19 pm

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by RWC2015 »

They now have 200 million in the bank from deposits, 200,000 orders. Musk estimates that this equals 7.5 billion worth of orders in 24 hour. Not so shabby day's business.
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

RWC2015 wrote:They now have 200 million in the bank from deposits, 200,000 orders. Musk estimates that this equals 7.5 billion worth of orders in 24 hour. Not so shabby day's business.

As if said it will be interesting to see how,many stay ordered and how many get delivered in two years.
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13787
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by MungoMan »

slow wing wrote:TESLA's 7 kWh Powerwall battery is mainly for solar. It makes great economic sense & is being continued... :thumbup:
Only their 10 kWh 'backup' batteries have been discontinued.

The issue here is battery chemistry & cycles, and hence price per kWh delivered.

7 kWh costs $3000 & is good for 5000 cycles so cost per kWh delivered ~ $3000/(5000x7kWh) ~ 8.6c / kWh

That is spectacularly good for solar applications - probably a game-changer for off-grid applications... :thumbup: :thumbup:
That is also, albeit not spectacularly, incorrect.

Firstly, the nameplate capacity is now 6.4 kWh. See page 6, Powerwall Installation and User's Manual.

Secondly, Telsa does not warrant 5000 cycles @ 7 kWh or 6.4 kWh. What it warrants is this (see Powerwall Manufacturer's Warranty (UK):

CAPACITY RETENTION LEVELS
1. The Product shall maintain >85% of its initial rated capacity until the earliest to occur of:
(a) The lithium-ion battery cells in the Product have reached 4 MWh of aggregate discharge throughput
(at the battery DC output); or
(b) 2 years have expired from the Original Installation Date.
2. The Product shall maintain >72% of its initial rated capacity until the earliest to occur of:
(a) The lithium-ion battery cells in the Product have reached 9 MWh of aggregate discharge throughput
(at the battery DC output); or
(b) 5 years have expired from the Original Installation Date.
3. The Product shall maintain >60% of its initial rated capacity until the earliest to occur of:
(a) The lithium-ion battery cells in the Product have reached 18 MWh of aggregate discharge throughput
(at the battery DC output); or
(b) 10 years have expired from the Original Installation Date.
During measurement of the Product’s capacity, (i) the ambient temperature of the Product shall be 25°C ±2°C, (ii) the initial temperature of the battery pods shall be 25°C ±1°C and (iii) power shall be discharged by the Product at 2kW, as measured at the 400V DC link, from 100% state of energy.


Thirdly, there's the matter of local currency / USD exchange rates plus reseller / installer markup to consider as regards sticker price, and the cost of a suitable inverter and the installation itself. These costs combined will be non-trivial.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Hence the "~"s, Mungoman. Very approximately, they mean "very approximately".


An even bigger approximation than what you've mentioned is that the battery doesn't initially operate at exactly specified capacity for the specified 500 or 5000 cycles and then plunge immediately to zero capacity. Instead the capacity dies away gradually, with a decay constant related to the rated number of cycles.


My point stands that the configuration that TESLA dropped used a battery chemistry much less durable - by about an order of magnitude in cycles - than in the configuration they are still selling, so the cost per kWh supplied was much higher over the useful lifetime of the system.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3h3 hours ago
Now 232k orders
An order with a cash deposit counts as a sale, right? :P

Asking because Model 3 orders over the past 1+ day are probably similar to the TOTAL world-wide combined order rate* for ICE cars... ;)

So maybe I was spot on** with one of my predictions from 9 years and 4 months ago, repeated in the opening post... :P
slow wing wrote:My predictions from December 2006...
Within a decade from now, sales of fully electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles will have surpassed those of petrol and diesel driven vehicles. New car owners will be driving more kilometres on mains electricity than on petrol or diesel, and cities and towns will be passing regulations to prohibit or restrict the use of internal combustion engines within their boundaries. The noisy, dirty, polluting, complicated, high-maintenance internal combustion engine will be well on its way to the scrap-heap of history.

So will people continue to marvel and drool at the throaty roar of a powerful internal combustion engine at full throttle? No! Our grandchildren will shake their heads in wonder that we were stupid enough to put these monstrosities into our cars, to ship oil around the world to feed their insatiable thirst, and to wage war if those supply lines were threatened; not to mention killing hundreds of thousands with their localised pollution and messing up the entire planet with the greenhouse gases they emit.[/b]

So how's it looking? :D

Image
Image


*world-wide car sales ~73 million/year / 365 days/year ~ 200,000 sales/day
** momentarily


Fat Albert should be along shortly to congratulate TESLA and me... :nod: :thumbup:
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

Not if said deposit is fully redundable. .....
User avatar
MungoMan
Posts: 13787
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Coalfalls

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by MungoMan »

slow wing wrote:Hence the "~"s, Mungoman. Very approximately, they mean "very approximately".
Yes. I know what the tilde character means in this context. And 'very approximately' does not equal 'very different indeed'.
slow wing wrote:An even bigger approximation than what you've mentioned is that the battery doesn't initially operate at exactly specified capacity for the specified 500 or 5000 cycles and then plunge immediately to zero capacity. Instead the capacity dies away gradually, with a decay constant related to the rated number of cycles.
Than what I've mentioned? I cut'n'pasted the battery performance that Tesla actually warrants, which clearly identifies degradation of the reliable ability to send out power over time / number of cycles
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Fair enough & thanks for the information.

My rough figure assumes 35 MWh over the lifetime (& you have a smaller quibble on price).

I accept your point that 35 MWh is about double the warranty (18 MWh). But the warranty will be for
considerably less than the expected performance (otherwise they would have to replace most systems)
so I'm still comfortable with my back-of-the-envelope calculation for the purpose intended.


This is a side-topic for this thread and in a watershed moment for the BEV revolution... :)
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3 hours ago
253k as of 7am this morning
2,205 retweets 5,060 likes
Reply Retweet 2.2K
Liked 5.1K
:thumbup: :thumbup:


That's half a year's planned production of 500,000 TESLA vehicles in 2020.


Design the world's best car for the price & the analysts can't understand why it sells so well... :thumbup:

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3 hours ago
Will give an update tonight for the 3 day total, then last one on Wed for the full week. All efforts focused on accelerating the ramp.
471 retweets 2,266 likes
Reply Retweet 471
Liked 2.3K

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk Apr 2
Definitely going to need to rethink production planning...
3,469 retweets 9,245 likes
Reply Retweeted 3.5K
Liked 9.2K

Q. who will want to buy a new mid-range ICE car by 2020?
A. almost nobody :yawn:
User avatar
Enzedder
Posts: 20328
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: End of the road, turn right and first house on the left

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Enzedder »

So how's it looking?
Not very flash - have they reached even 5%, let alone 50%?
User avatar
Bloutoria
Posts: 838
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Pretoria

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Bloutoria »

So will it be like a cellphone? After 2 years you barely get it out of the garage on a full charge?
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

slow wing wrote:
Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3 hours ago
253k as of 7am this morning
2,205 retweets 5,060 likes
Reply Retweet 2.2K
Liked 5.1K
:thumbup: :thumbup:


That's half a year's planned production of 500,000 TESLA vehicles in 2020.


Design the world's best car for the price & the analysts can't understand why it sells so well... :thumbup:

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3 hours ago
Will give an update tonight for the 3 day total, then last one on Wed for the full week. All efforts focused on accelerating the ramp.
471 retweets 2,266 likes
Reply Retweet 471
Liked 2.3K

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk Apr 2
Definitely going to need to rethink production planning...
3,469 retweets 9,245 likes
Reply Retweeted 3.5K
Liked 9.2K

Q. who will want to buy a new mid-range ICE car by 2020?
A. almost nobody :yawn:

Hardly anyone will have one the orders made let a,one buy new ones.
User avatar
blueandwhite
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:19 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by blueandwhite »

Got to hand it to you slow wing. You did see this long before the rest of us and even though it's going to take another 5-10 years longer than you anticipated its certainly going to happen.

I'm a huge fan of Elon Musk, the guys a fucken champ.
User avatar
blueandwhite
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2012 9:19 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by blueandwhite »

bimboman wrote:
slow wing wrote:
Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3 hours ago
253k as of 7am this morning
2,205 retweets 5,060 likes
Reply Retweet 2.2K
Liked 5.1K
:thumbup: :thumbup:


That's half a year's planned production of 500,000 TESLA vehicles in 2020.


Design the world's best car for the price & the analysts can't understand why it sells so well... :thumbup:

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 3 hours ago
Will give an update tonight for the 3 day total, then last one on Wed for the full week. All efforts focused on accelerating the ramp.
471 retweets 2,266 likes
Reply Retweet 471
Liked 2.3K

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk Apr 2
Definitely going to need to rethink production planning...
3,469 retweets 9,245 likes
Reply Retweeted 3.5K
Liked 9.2K

Q. who will want to buy a new mid-range ICE car by 2020?
A. almost nobody :yawn:

Hardly anyone will have one the orders made let a,one buy new ones.
Irrelevant. Electronic cars are the iPhone and internal combustion cars are a Nokia 3310.
User avatar
Sandstorm
Posts: 28667
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Chickenrunning...

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Sandstorm »

Be interesting to see where all the power needed to charge up these cars with electricity is going to come from by 2020.
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

Sandstorm wrote:Be interesting to see where all the power needed to charge up these cars with electricity is going to come from by 2020.

As luck will have it we have until 2050 before its needed.
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

Irrelevant. Electronic cars are the iPhone and internal combustion cars are a Nokia 3310.
Maybe, I predict tesla are more Nokia than apple for sure.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

bimboman wrote:Well if you think there 100 bucks a share in it slowly why are you not buying.? Do you really think they go up 100 bucks in 2 months ? Maybe we should wait until they've actually delivered a model 3 before we break out the tissues.
So there it is...
After Hours
$257.45
Today's close
$ 255.47
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/st ... tory_quote


As I predicted 7 weeks ago, with the Model 3 unveil TESLA has closed more than $100 higher (69% higher) than their then share value of $151.


Imo they are still way undervalued. Whether the market's appreciation continues to grow in the short & medium term is up to them. But certainly for the longer term at least...

BUY. BUY. BUY.
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

Elon Musk ‏@elonmusk 7 hours ago
Over 325k cars or ~$14B in preorders in first week. Only 5% ordered max of two, suggesting low levels of speculation
Tesla: "the biggest one-week launch of any product ever.”


:thumbup: :thumbup:
User avatar
The Man Without Fear
Posts: 11126
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: The centre of The Horrendous Space Kablooie!

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by The Man Without Fear »

bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

slow wing wrote:
bimboman wrote:Well if you think there 100 bucks a share in it slowly why are you not buying.? Do you really think they go up 100 bucks in 2 months ? Maybe we should wait until they've actually delivered a model 3 before we break out the tissues.
So there it is...
After Hours
$257.45
Today's close
$ 255.47
http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/st ... tory_quote


As I predicted 7 weeks ago, with the Model 3 unveil TESLA has closed more than $100 higher (69% higher) than their then share value of $151.


Imo they are still way undervalued. Whether the market's appreciation continues to grow in the short & medium term is up to them. But certainly for the longer term at least...

BUY. BUY. BUY.

How many shares did you buy ? What did you make ?
User avatar
Rinkals
Posts: 17659
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Rinkals »

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... an-motion/
The lower house of the Dutch parliament passed a motion recently that would ban the sales of non-electric cars in the country by 2025. The motion still needs to pass the Senate to become binding, but if it does, it would mean that the only non-electric cars allowed in the Netherlands would be those already on the road today: anyone in the country looking to buy a new car would have to buy electric.
User avatar
Sensible Stephen
Posts: 3074
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:45 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Sensible Stephen »

Rinkals wrote:http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... an-motion/
The lower house of the Dutch parliament passed a motion recently that would ban the sales of non-electric cars in the country by 2025. The motion still needs to pass the Senate to become binding, but if it does, it would mean that the only non-electric cars allowed in the Netherlands would be those already on the road today: anyone in the country looking to buy a new car would have to buy electric.
Interesting. Whats the environmental impact of all the batteries required? Better than oil I assume, but can't be squeaky clean can it?
User avatar
clydecloggie
Posts: 2141
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by clydecloggie »

Rinkals wrote:http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... an-motion/
The lower house of the Dutch parliament passed a motion recently that would ban the sales of non-electric cars in the country by 2025. The motion still needs to pass the Senate to become binding, but if it does, it would mean that the only non-electric cars allowed in the Netherlands would be those already on the road today: anyone in the country looking to buy a new car would have to buy electric.
Technically speaking, they would have to be non-fossil-fuel based, e.g. could be hydrogen or whatever else is viable by then.
bimboman
Posts: 68535
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by bimboman »

Sensible Stephen wrote:
Rinkals wrote:http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... an-motion/
The lower house of the Dutch parliament passed a motion recently that would ban the sales of non-electric cars in the country by 2025. The motion still needs to pass the Senate to become binding, but if it does, it would mean that the only non-electric cars allowed in the Netherlands would be those already on the road today: anyone in the country looking to buy a new car would have to buy electric.
Interesting. Whats the environmental impact of all the batteries required? Better than oil I assume, but can't be squeaky clean can it?

So motorists touring ?
User avatar
Rinkals
Posts: 17659
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by Rinkals »

bimboman wrote:
Sensible Stephen wrote:
Rinkals wrote:http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2016/0 ... an-motion/
The lower house of the Dutch parliament passed a motion recently that would ban the sales of non-electric cars in the country by 2025. The motion still needs to pass the Senate to become binding, but if it does, it would mean that the only non-electric cars allowed in the Netherlands would be those already on the road today: anyone in the country looking to buy a new car would have to buy electric.
Interesting. Whats the environmental impact of all the batteries required? Better than oil I assume, but can't be squeaky clean can it?

So motorists touring ?
User avatar
slow wing
Posts: 5124
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: NZ

Re: RIP the internal combustion engine!

Post by slow wing »

bimboman wrote:Take It from me, buy the lithium index as wel it's price will rocket in the next 10 years.
Companies scramble to secure lithium supplies as “white petroleum” prices soar
Posted April 25, 2016 by Charles Morris & filed under Newswire, The Tech.


Image
Lithium
The hottest commodity on the planet right now is not oil or coffee but lithium, according to a recent article on OilPrice.com. The ballooning battery market is expected to drive demand for the light white metal, and mining companies, battery producers and automakers are scrambling to secure supplies.

Goldman Sachs predicts that for every 1% rise in EV market share, lithium demand will rise by 70,000 tons per year. The company expects the lithium market to triple in size by 2025 if EV sales continue to grow.

According to The Economist, the price of lithium carbonate imported to China doubled in November and December of last year, reaching $13,000 per ton. ...
https://chargedevs.com/newswire/compani ... ices-soar/
Post Reply