Sorry Sage I don't agree with your scams like everything named Tesla except Tesla EV's.
Brown's gas/HHo, Tesla turbines, zero energy point, Fish, other carbs, etc are all scams and don't pass basic physics or real life tests.
Vs eff things like EV drives that are naturally eff at 20-65% in cars vs 7% for ICE's. Thus EV's, unlike your scams, actually threaten big oil by allowing any energy that can be made into electricity run them and big auto where they lose their most profitable market, ICE/ICE system parts which have an average markup of 2,000%.
As an example I get 250 and 600mpg equivalent in my EV's using 40-100 yr old tech and can rebuild the motor if it ever needs it in 30 minutes for well under $100. That is a real threat to them and I'm laughing all the way to the bank.
If you think your scams are so good do them yourself and sell electricity from it and make a fortune. Nothing is stopping you other than they don't work well, eff.
It's great for Tesla Motors that they can have more models available. I think it is good that electrical propulsion is advanced.
But really I think that we will get rid of ICE when the power can be generated in car, not just stored there. I may sound like a fool to some, but I really think that the black horse of (automotive) power generation will be ECAT developed by Andrea Rossi. So take a car like Toyota Prius and replace the ICE in it with suitable sized ECAT. The battery will probably be needed to start the ECAT and to give assist at acceleration. The price of that ECAT energy will be so low that when this will be available, no-one will ever want to buy other fuel (than nickel powder) for their locomotive needs.
Dead on Jerry! Of course, now, on the news, is another Gas Price Hike! Seems to me the refiners havent learned last summer's lesson of higher prices = less economic growth and lower fuel sales.
On the subtect of scams the R&D people aren't as gullible as the public and have formed inventive ways to combat BIG OIL BUYOUT KILLS of imaginitive invention and brillant engineering. Distributed geographics of patents, fab facilities and joint ownership development, are but a few methods useful in this end. Security and timing is also very productive.
In TESLA MOTORS case I believe them to be dead on target and I am sure they understand how to win this game.
Charles. Have you forgoten the NiMH Chevron scam? Chevron/Texeco bought the patents to the NiNH battery that was giving 130 mile range at 100mpge in the RAV4 and EV-1 until Chevron forced them to stop using NiMH more than 10amphrs. Stopped EV's cold 15 yrs ago.
I've recieved about every PR release on batteries, EV's and you can see mde up groups by big auto, oil lying about EV's like saying their batteries would be deadly when there already was 500milliom large lead batteries already in service with little problem.
Check out the film, Who killed the Electric Car for many other instances. Like lying that the charge ports in the EV-1, E-!0 couldn't be cheaply fixed. Or refusing to sell the EV-1 and all it's liabilities for $25mm profit to the wealthy owners.
Only Toyota sold their RAV4EV and those are still going strong with many over 100k miles now and sale price is $75k vs the $45k they sold for so making a profit after 12 yrs of free driving using no gas and few repairs.
As it will be with the 'overpriced' EV's which bought now and sold in 5 yrs likely because gas prices so high sell for it's new price, costing little.
Certainly my EV experience using cost effective forklift EV tech and lead batteries shows EV's can run at 25% of the similar ICE does. Just because some want to make them in ways to make them look bad and expensive, doesn't mean they can't be cost effective.
BTW the Tesla S is a smart way to do EV;s, light and the chassis shown will also do a SUV, Van and other models from it inceasing the economies of scale. Notice they use the $250/kwhr retail priced lithium cells and are the most sucessful EV company.
I have to admit that I'm not a big oil conspiracy theorist. I'm sure that big oil would have no qualms about conspiring with the auto companies. But from what I've been able to tell over the last 24 years of writing about this subject, a conspiracy hasn't been needed. Batteries haven't come close to oil in terms of energy or cost. And none of the materials science professors I've ever talked to at more than a dozen universities are familiar with a battery, or any other kind of energy source, that could put oil out of business. I ask this question in all sincerity: What are these (conspiracy) batteries made from and where are they?
One thing about this car as opposed to most of the other way too expensive consumer EVs on the market... if a much better battery does come along during the next 10 or 20 years it could be worth the cost of refurbishing and upgrading the Tesla S.
It's a good looking car in a classic kind'a way, and it sounds as though it was designed to be fun to drive... with a touch of luxury included.
Although I am a skeptic about the probability of a sudden leap in battery energy density/drop in kwh costs... if that does come... this could be a great platform for a car enthusiast (or anyone for that matter) to restore as a daily driver... w/the newer 1,000 mile range/high speed rechargeable battery pack of course.
Tim, the TERM scientific ZERO / energy refers to but sometimes also refered to COLD or DARK energy as found in/at space temperature NOT the absence of energy. Refer to Tesla, Moray, Bostick, Bearden, Bush,R.T.,Cook,M.B., Davidson D.A., Dirac P.A., Farnsworth P.T. and many many more. This istuff that will get you killed if markerted. READ John Perkins "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" and you'll start to understand what this is all about.
PS Tom when you see the light please pass these words to others.
The Model S is a step in the right direction. The market for a pure electric vehicla is relatively small. The Tesla brand has offered previous models with the emphasis on pure performance, but these Teslas had limitations. The British car show "Top Gear" tested a coulple of Teslas and proved that if you drive these cars insanely (flat-out) the published range figure is a joke. I think Tesla should be congratulated on offering a car that the devout EV buyer/user could feel proud to own and drive, recognizing the compromises in range/battery cost/performance that were made. The feeling of driving a performance car with the pickup and handling of a Porsche 911 with absolutely no noise and truly linear acceleration is unbelievable! Depending on recharge time, I could own a $50K Tesla as a 2nd vehicle; the deal breaker would be re-sale value. Ultimately I'm looking for the fuel-cell vehicle. One H2 fuel cell that would provide power for my car and house interchangeably. Meanwhile manufacturers like Tesla can give us vehicles like the Model S to keep our interest up.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.