Daimler, Tesla team up in new EV partnership

[Curran Giddens]

http://earth2tech.com/2009/05/19/tesla-daimler-team-up-for-smart-batteries-daimler-takes-10-percent-stake/

CNN (http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/19/news/companies/tesla_daimler_electric/index.htm?postversion=2009051907)

TESLA
http://www.teslamotors.com/learn_more/wallpaper_dl.php?f=wallpaper_4982_800x600

Announcement comes as the Obama administration today set new stricter fuel economy standards for 2012 - 2016.

39.5 mpg (cars)
30 mpg (light trucks)
30% cut in emissions

:auto:

[Tom Lowe]

This is great news. I have high hopes for Tesla.

But it's going to be tough to compete on the manufacturing side with the dozens of up-and-coming Chinese automakers. They can pay 8 dollars a day to workers for 14-hour days. Hopefully our ingenuity -- robotics, etc -- can help to make up some of the difference until Chinese wages catch up.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Tesla has the EV know how.

Daimler has the manufacturing prowess.

This probably though has more to do with Tesla's experiments in putting the Roadster's EV drivetrain into the mini. If Daimler is going to invest in someone else's IP they might as well reap the profits from their own investment.

It's like buying stock in your largest vendor.

[Curran Giddens]

I like the Tesla Roadster but not so sure about all those Li-ion batteries. They won't let you on a plane with more than 25g of lithium, but you can drive a car with 100 times that amount?

What about the GE's new high-energy density, sodium-metal chloride batteries? Does anyone know if these can accidentally blow up like lithium-metal?

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-10238485-54.html

[Stefan Christou]

Nice :thumbsup:

[Clint Johnson]

When they make an electric vehicle that can match my Commander give me a call.

It will need to travel more than 500 kilometres between refueling/charging and do that refueling/recharging in under five minutes. It will also need to be able to do that all day long while towing a 3000 kilogram trailer. It can't be effected by sitting for a week at -40 and that temperature can not adversely effect its operation.

Gasoline is a known quantity and safety concern due to its volatility- I don't want it made worse with a couple hundred kilograms of corrosive and explosive material sitting twenty centimetres from my butt.

Then, when this comes along and the majority of the population switches to electric cars, we'll have to build another 500 nuclear power plants, dam every large river that isn't already dammed and tile over Nevada and half of Arizona with solar panels... or demand for electricity will so outstrip capacity that we will be dreaming about $10 a litre gas.

Technological advancement by government decree? The result will be grossly compromised cars of marginal utility, worth and safety that cost more to manufacture than people are willing to pay for them. The vehicles that people actually need or want will have their price tags jacked up to subsidize these crippled vehicles.

Gasoline is a stunningly efficient medium for storing energy and it will take decades more for electricity to compete with it. Government mandates will increase the cost of the advances required but have a minimal impact on the timeline.

Plus, we need to keep in mind that the car companies have spent over a quarter century and tens of billions of dollars trying to get better fuel economy out of the internal combustion engine so we are looking at tweeking the margins for increased mileage. The demanded increase in fuel economy will be met through the sacrifice of capability, safety and/or cost.

You need a set amount of energy to complete a set task and state fiat (not the car but the decree:thumbsup:) will not change that. Electric cars are fine if you will never carry anything more than a few bags of groceries... or three passengers... or if you will never tow anything... or travel any distance... or live anywhere but a mild climate. Okay, so there are a few million people who fall into this category and there might be even a few tens of thousands amongst those who have zero passion for automobiles and so would choose a (still not fully electric) 2010 Volt over a 2010 Camaro.

You thought they had trouble selling the vehicles they made before? Get used to auto industry bailouts becoming a fixed part of the budget.

[Hrvoje Simic]

Hiring a new design team would be a smart choice for Tesla Motors.

[Clint Johnson]

This is blandly efficient like most Japanese sports cars, designed to offend no one rather than to incite passion. It's as if they took a Lotus Elise and removed the boy racer quirks that make it lovable.

http://www.lotuscars.com/Images/Downloads/WallPapers/type72d/type_72d_1024x768.jpg

[Rob van Gelder]

When they make an electric vehicle that can match my Commander give me a call.

It will need to travel more than 500 kilometres between refueling/charging and do that refueling/recharging in under five minutes. It will also need to be able to do that all day long while towing a 3000 kilogram trailer. It can't be effected by sitting for a week at -40 and that temperature can not adversely effect its operation.

Gasoline is a known quantity and safety concern due to its volatility- I don't want it made worse with a couple hundred kilograms of corrosive and explosive material sitting twenty centimetres from my butt.

Then, when this comes along and the majority of the population switches to electric cars, we'll have to build another 500 nuclear power plants, dam every large river that isn't already dammed and tile over Nevada and half of Arizona with solar panels... or demand for electricity will so outstrip capacity that we will be dreaming about $10 a litre gas.

Technological advancement by government decree? The result will be grossly compromised cars of marginal utility, worth and safety that cost more to manufacture than people are willing to pay for them. The vehicles that people actually need or want will have their price tags jacked up to subsidize these crippled vehicles.

Gasoline is a stunningly efficient medium for storing energy and it will take decades more for electricity to compete with it. Government mandates will increase the cost of the advances required but have a minimal impact on the timeline.

Plus, we need to keep in mind that the car companies have spent over a quarter century and tens of billions of dollars trying to get better fuel economy out of the internal combustion engine so we are looking at tweeking the margins for increased mileage. The demanded increase in fuel economy will be met through the sacrifice of capability, safety and/or cost.

You need a set amount of energy to complete a set task and state fiat (not the car but the decree:thumbsup:) will not change that. Electric cars are fine if you will never carry anything more than a few bags of groceries... or three passengers... or if you will never tow anything... or travel any distance... or live anywhere but a mild climate. Okay, so there are a few million people who fall into this category and there might be even a few tens of thousands amongst those who have zero passion for automobiles and so would choose a (still not fully electric) 2010 Volt over a 2010 Camaro.

You thought they had trouble selling the vehicles they made before? Get used to auto industry bailouts becoming a fixed part of the budget.

Typical reaction from an north-American Driver, used to ride and think big!

If there is one thing that the major car companies in the USA have - deliberately - avoided is investing billions in the right technology.
The standards that have to be met in 3 years are already surpassed by other - not American - companies.
There are many millions of car owners who do not live in extreme conditions, so the technical issues can be taken care of.
Many car owners do not want (to pay) or are able to have (parking) or do not use a car for everything possible.
Making choices....... something the American people should do more often. You cannot have everything in one, unless you want to burn a lot of cash and materials

The amount of small form factor cars in the world is incredible, the amount of oversized, 4 to 6 wheeler Pickup trucks that I saw on my last trip to LA, one year ago, all completely empty and used in day to day commuting is also incredible. In no other country I have seen this.
In the country where I live now, Thailand , the Pickup truck is very popular too and used extensively, for transport of passengers, live stock, vegetables, ice, etc.
But they are all Japanese, fully loaded (overloaded) and still reach a fuel efficiency that the American brands can only dream of.

Your Commander can do everything, but you will encounter the moment that you are not so sure if that is the best way to transport and travel.

[willg]

... I think Clint's main concern is government "control". Have you paid
much attention to the US Digital TV Transition? Expect more of the
same when it comes to motor vehicle emissions, healthcare, etc.

It's not about what is good for the environment or good for the voters,
it's about giving federal funding to GE and other large corporations whilst
keeping the masses just happy enough not to revolt.

These large companies will reap the benefits of "favored" and "green"
ecological status while others will be heavily taxed and eventually forced
out of business... or just forced to a country like Thailand with less
ecological "laws".

We've got a lot of folks who drive big empty Fords, but most of them
don't get up every morning thinking of ways to force their opinions and
twisted, self serving beliefs on others like some of our politicians do.
The fact is that if a friend of yours in Thailand was offered a Escalade
I doubt he/she would turn it down. It's human nature to want it, especially
if it has spinners!:cool:

[Rob van Gelder]

Sure, if it is offered for free....
And even then I think many will go for a Toyota Vigo or an Isuzu, as these cars have proven themselves and can be repaired on any street corner,

My point is that there will be a time that people have to choose between Want and Need.
And then the small form factor will be more economic and also easier to move by other means than combustion engines.

Last year I was invited by a colleague with a Hummer H1 to go out into the hills behind LA.
While I absolutely loved the experience, it also convinced me that this is excessive, in every way.

But it was good fun!
:)

[Clint Johnson]

First, North America is not the same market as Europe or Asia. The population density and infrastructure are completely different and the requirements on vehicles here is different from those elsewhere. On top of that, the market has had more sway here so consumer choice has had more sway than rules and regulations. It hasn't excluded foreign automakers but they have had to adapt models specific to the region as well as bring in models designed for more constricted environments.

Just as a side note, My Commander is rated at 14 mpg city and 20 mpg highway; the Nissan Armada is rated at 9/13 and the Toyota Land Cruiser is rated at 13/18. As for quality of the North American truck, despite Chrysler's troubles, Nissan is still trying to set up a deal where they can re-badge the Dodge Ram as the Nissan Titan.

Horses and courses.

To the heart of the matter. Unlike so many in the world, I don't want the state to mandate everyone be crushed down to where we are no longer allowed look beyond mere need.

This focus on austerity and restrictions is an ugly one but I don't think that the majority of those trying to force these ideologically based draconian rules and regulations on others are doing it from a malicious place. They want to save the world and the only way to do that is to insist that it needs saving. Whether it actually needs saving isn't relevant as long as they can indignantly shout down any dissent.

I feel that a life crushed down to merely food and shelter until the day we die is a sad way to live a life and I want the developing world to have a chance at more than that... and I don't want the developed world dragged down to that.

When we are forced to forgo want for need we have failed.

[Mark B.]

When we are forced to forgo want for need we have failed.

When mankind dies from its own pollution, we have failed.

[Nuno Ribeiro]

electric cars can be charged over night in most cases,as well as extra batteries. no new power plants. new habits.

[Joseph Ward]

The "Holy Grail" for vehicles are Plugin Hybrids. Once that takes off everyone will get used to EVs.

[Clint Johnson]

When mankind dies from its own pollution, we have failed.

{sarcasm on}Yes, because the most heavily polluted places on earth have such a low population density. There are only 3 million people in Linfen City, 2.6 million in Sukinda and Mexico City is a veritable ghost town with only 20 million people.{sarcasm off}

Sure these places are dirty and unhealthy and the pollution is statistically implicated as a primary cause in thousands of deaths... and yet the population in each of these cities is growing. Pollution won't kill us all but if we are pushed down to a needs only society then it will become worse and make our lives miserable.

Capitalism lifts peoples standard of living and as their standard of living grows they can afford to spend time and money on making their environment more pleasant and healthier. The closer we get to the subsistence existence that seems to be advocated by the most vocal environmentalists the worse things will get for the environment. If you are worried about starving to death you will not worry about how much pesticides they are using on the crops or how much pollution is coming out of the factory you work at. Prosperity gives us the luxury of worrying about the environment.

Rationally, we want to get the developing world through the dirty part of the industrial revolution and into the relatively clean and healthy environment of the developed world. We can't move quick enough to get the rural Chinese and Indian population driving their SUV to Walmart with a stop over at Starbucks.

Cheap energy is the only thing that can get us there and clean is a secondary consideration. I would vote for nuclear power plants and in situ building of space based solar power but China and India will probably want to go through their nasty dirty old coal first if they want to get through this heavy polluting phase quickly. They should also want to get out of the way of the free market as much as they can too... but I won't hold my breath for that.

Legislating them to a life stuck in poverty while trying to drive the developed world back to that same level would make for an uglier, darker and dirtier age.

[Chris Parker]

jim. just build the damn RED-mobile already. something revolutionary that no one else has quite thought of yet. priced WAY lower than any comparable competitor. change the world man.....again.

[sander kamp]

Rationally, we want to get the developing world through the dirty part of the industrial revolution and into the relatively clean and healthy environment of the developed world. We can't move quick enough to get the rural Chinese and Indian population driving their SUV to Walmart with a stop over at Starbucks.

The western countries have become cleaner because they have outsourced the dirty work to countries like China and India. And while the US public debt has been steadily growing the Chinese have been saving their money and lending it to the US. Time will tell who is the smarter of the two.

This whole idea that if everybody starts living like the Americans do all will be good is just... oh, never mind.

[Petr Dvorak]

... It's as if they took a Lotus Elise and removed the boy racer quirks that make it lovable.



But Tesla is built on Lotus body. :wink:

[Petr Dvorak]

I think there is also serious problem if we have enough of Cadmium, Lithium and other elements on our planet in case it ends like global technology. Also it can seriously devastate living enviroment of few countries where it is mined.

[Clint Johnson]

The western countries have become cleaner because they have outsourced the dirty work to countries like China and India. And while the US public debt has been steadily growing the Chinese have been saving their money and lending it to the US. Time will tell who is the smarter of the two.

This whole idea that if everybody starts living like the Americans do all will be good is just... oh, never mind.

There are examples in the US and Canada of every single one of those dirty industries. It is partisan rhetorical argument alone that pretends that these industries are gone rather than smaller and cleaner. We still have plenty of metal mines, steel mills, pulp mills and construction sites. Gold mines in particular lag behind the others and they could use some watchdogging but all told these industries are considerably cleaner than they were fifty years ago.

The infrastructure and machinery operating cost difference between the developing world and the developed world is negligible- a Terex TXC300LC-2 cost pretty much the same in Guangdong as it does in British Columbia. By far the largest difference is the cost of labour. It wasn't environmental regulation that drove industry overseas, it was unions. Unions driving up the cost of labour here and in Europe has been the biggest job creation program for the developing world that I can imagine. Seriously, I can't imagine a more efficient way to move jobs to China and India.

Before you think that I'm bashing unions, I actually believe that this exodus of labour has been a truly great contribution to the overall well being of humanity. I am a human first and a Canadian second; I believe that the average family in the province of Guangdong could use economic uplifting more than the average family in the province of British Columbia. I do not resent the jobs that have moved overseas even if it costs me my job. I do resent the coercive methodology of many "progressive" organizations and politicians.

As China and India become more prosperous, their costs of labour will approach parity with us and industries and factories will once again become more localized as shipping costs become a larger percentage of the finished goods costs. The hundred mile diet ideology would actually become more rational and extend to other industries.

I don't know if it is intentional or not but the socio-economic policy that the Obama administration is following will lead to several years (maybe a decade or more) of double digit inflation. This will devalue the American dollar at the same time as the Chinese Yuan should be holding value or getting stronger- the point of parity will accelerate toward us as our businesses use the economic hardship as a valid reason for not raising wages at the same rate as inflation- leading to lower real wages for us as China and India slowly gain in real wages. The politicians seem to be trying to bring this parity about far quicker than the market would naturally take- at the expense of the average American's standard of living.

Sure it won't be smooth sailing for China and India but they are heading in the right direction while we rush madly through recession toward depression. Their wages will fall for the next few quarters - but I'm guessing that they will not drop bellow where they were five years ago. They should pull out of their recession faster than the US pulls out of their depression.

Who would think that the leaders of Russia, India and China would have a better grasp of economics than those running the show in the US, Canada and the EU? Maybe it is that they've already gone through their phase of pretending that wishful thinking and magical realism make for sound economic policy?

[Clint Johnson]

But Tesla is built on Lotus body. :wink:

Yes, and they ended up using less than 10% of the Lotus parts... the bland and generic parts.

[Joe G.]

"I would vote for nuclear power plants..."

The most dangerous, most polluted waste on the planet. You ready to babysit the waste for the next few million years? What about those generations? They get no say in the matter.

Not only don't they have a realistic plan for storing the radioactive waste, they would need to transport it all over the place, with potential for leaking radiation along the routes.

The nuclear industry is the worst kind of state-mandated risk. Everyone who owns property near a plant is put at risk, and the industry (the Homer Simpsons of the world) have no liability if they destroy BILLIONS in property and lay waste to large swaths of America.

Since you're so intent on jacking threads into political discussions, Clint, you should try writing something substantial for my blog...

[John Hunt]

Cheap energy is the only thing that can get us there and clean is a secondary consideration. I would vote for nuclear power plants and in situ building of space based solar power but China and India will probably want to go through their nasty dirty old coal first.

You can vote all you like, but the reality is that 49% of U.S. electric power plants are coal-fired. By 2030, new coal plant construction underway will increase that number to 54%. Solar, wind, and all the other preferable green options account for a single digit percentage of total energy production. That could change in some decades ahead, but in the meantime, I'd like to see alternative ways to charge the upcoming EV's rather than pretending that plugging in at home is a green thing to do.

[Michael Schrengohst]

"...keeping the masses just happy enough not to revolt."

Who said we were happy?

[Curran Giddens]

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/06/23/going-electric-nissan-exxon-the-feds-and-tesla-enjoy-a-big-day-for-electric-cars/

Looks like Exxon is in the game by sponsoring a new EV called Maya-300. Plugs into 110-volt outlet and has a 120-mile range. Price: $35k.

[Emery Wells]

I prefer the design of their new sedan

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/tesla-model-s-1/1455163/

[Petr Dvorak]

What catched my attention is German Loremo concept of ultralight car.
Looks kinda like UL Porche with thin tires :smile:
No side doors so frame is light and very rigid. You just get inside from front or back,
back seats looking backward, most people dislike sitting this way but result is only 600Kg 4 seat car and small, aerodynamic shape = very efficient and it meets all safety needs, execpt when you roll over and land on roof you probably hardly get out

http://evolution.loremo.com/
http://www.instylecars.com/loremo/loremo-electric-car-will-take-its-road-trip-in-2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loremo
http://news.cnet.com/i/ne/p/2008/326loremo500x750.jpg
probably only for thin people :001_huh:

... and plan of creating net-sharing fuelcell powerplant from all parked cars plugged to electric sockets at parking lots so they can cover at least 1/3 of US energy or so.

Also zero pollution car iAir running on compressed air is interesting. Yet ugly but promising.
http://www.mdi.lu/english/

[Hrvoje Simic]

I prefer the design of their new sedan

http://www.autobloggreen.com/photos/tesla-model-s-1/1455163/

Absolutely.

Back side slightly resembles Jaguar XF, but love the design anyway. Much more innovative and creative.
Could be even more "ahead of time" as Tesla was, but very nice still.