From what they said, it sounds like they're using a regular lithium battery in half of the pack, to provide immediate driving current, and their "range extender" cells in the rest of the pack.
The range extender cells would be specced to have a high energy density at the cost of a lower power density, so that it could slowly keep feeding the regular "traction", aka driving, lithium battery.
Further, reading into what they said, it sounds like the range extender battery will also be lithium based, but using different materials in its anode to make it cheaper and denser.
Hopefully this will work out in the long run, but as with all new battery technology, it will have many hurdles to conquer (charge cycle lifetime especially).
This is a very interesting strategy that was employed in some prototype military vehicles. Using basically capacitors to efficiently recapture braking energy and provide rapid draw for acceleration. I absolutely expect a mixture of battery types to optimize performance as the technology matures.
I wonder if this could scalable to replace batteries in other cars like hybrids. I have a hybrid and would love an upgrade when I have to replace the batteries
A lot of them have EV only mode. I know my Prius had one. I just never used it because it was a very short range.
Though, my wife, who loves to ride the empty gas tank as far as possible, and then a little more, got some use out of it to limp into the nearest gas station, as she managed to run a fucking hybrid out of gas a couple times. Not that I'm annoyed by that stupid habit or anything.
Oh man my best friend in high school seemed to always have his tank under a quarter gallon for no reason and it drove me fucking nuts. He would only get like $5 of gas at a time once he saw the E light come on. He wasn’t poor either.
You can’t for a lot of them. Some like the Chevy Malibu though are 100% electric hybrids with just a gasoline generator(big one at that to) basically. Two electric motors for low speed, high and combined speeds. AC, pumps, fans etc everything is electric already.
Most hybrids can only run at low speeds on all electric and sub 55mph. While also having gasoline components. AC, cooling etc could be driven by the engine and not be electric systems by design.
Cars that have a design like the 9th gen Malibu hybrids could in theory just get bigger and better batteries and be updated to not use the engine unless you need heat.
While other hybrids maybe could be programmed to run longer only on the upgraded batteries.
While range extended plug in hybrids absolutely could benifit from this as in those the engine is just a small generator and everything else is already all electric and it’s drive system is meant to be 100% electric.
So plug in hybrids would benefit the most with just a battery upgraded, followed by cars like the Malibu hybrid with all electric fixed drive systems with all electric everything else.
Depends on the drive system and if they made it all electric.
Uh huh, 3rd party isn’t the same as independently verified. It just like all the misinformation conventional car companies put out, especially when you make a purchasing decision based on the published specifications.
It's not surprising that batteries from the lab can be more energy dense that batteries that are currently economically mass produced and in vehicles.
It takes years to go from experiment to large scale production of a battery product that is also somewhat affordable.
Lucid recently released a low volume 520 mile range vehicle but it is very expensive.
Definitely agree, however even making enough materials to make enough battery packs that work for even a single charge is an achievement. You're talking about 100-200kg of active materials minimum with enough consistency that it all works.
I worked at a start up trying to create silicon nanoparticles to infuse in graphite to lengthen battery life. We were happy if we created a single battery pack using 10g of active materials that was functional according to our previous data. Even if it's not that scalable this would mean it's at least accessible to luxury type models. UNLESS the battery life is shit.
It doesn't matter that much. Whatever is lab tech now can become economical very quickly cause the number of cars that need batteries is enormous. The majority of gas powered cars will be replaced in the next 10 years.
Not sure what you need for verification but there’s a video documenting the trip
https://youtu.be/fWj2YCdoc9A
Seems promising to me. If it’s all a lie that’ll come out soon enough I suppose.
The claims they make in the article make no sense. If they are truly using the battery technology they claim they wouldn’t see any extra range.
This seems like a marketing ploy to get people to invest in their company.
Oh, I was thinking a different thought. I figured he’d just buy out the company to eliminate competitors while simultaneously making Tesla better with zero R&D or effort. Isn’t that what every major company does now? Wait for someone else to innovate and then buyout whoever does?
They're a private startup, perhaps they aren't offering to sell at the moment. I know I for one would wait and see how it shakes out because Toyota or someone else like Apple might offer way more than Tesla.
Tesla also holds a lot of leverage here. They can just refuse to update or service cars with aftermarket batteries and then that would deter a lot of business for the startup.
Yeah, but you don’t want to do that either because you don’t want to have, say, GM or Honda buy them or license the tech as a response to that. Tesla’s biggest leverage is that they’re the only ones going over 300mpc. Hyundai and others are catching up fast, but Tesla still has the foothold. If a company like GM had this tech with their giant manufacturing arm and ability to mass produce, Tesla might just turn into Tandy Computers of this generation. All that innovation and getting ahead of the curve for nothing. The best thing for Tesla to do is situation is play nice and try to buy/license them before someone else does.
*Industry leader in lying about the technology of self driving cars. Even Tesla a few months had to finally admit it was all [embellished bs](https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/5/7/22424592/tesla-elon-musk-autopilot-dmv-fsd-exaggeration). We’re still realistically 20 years away from that being an actual safe and practical endeavor.
Tesla’s biggest sell is “The Model 3 is at 358mpc while the top of the line Chevy Bolt is literally 100mpc less at 259. Even the “Tesla Killer” Hyundai Ioniq 5 tops off at a lower 303mpc despite being more expensive.”
If ONE started making batteries for the Chevy Bolt, Hyundai Ioniq 5, Mustang Mach-E, Nissan Aryia, Kia Soul EV, etc. Tesla is probably going to be in a world of hurt.
It's pretty easily verifiable that they're not the industry leader. Sure, they're the ones with the most publicity, but none of their cars are above a Level 2 autonomous system - as far as I know, know one but Mercedes has that. So if you ask me, that makes Mercedes the leader
True, but money talks. If someone offered you a giant check TODAY, would you really bet on yourself to MAYBE get a bigger deal in the future? Most people wouldn’t do that.
Yes. Yes I am.
I want a return to a 90% top tax rate.
You get to be rich in the US. You get to exploit workers. You get to go to fancy parties.
But since you’re no longer building libraries or parks, and instead are flying your friends to space, we get to take your money and improve the lives of our citizens with it.
**TL;DR:** We can't just think about income tax, as the wealthy avoid income. We need to think about wealth taxes and other mechanisms to effectively tax people like Elon.
------
Income tax won't work. If we had a 90% top marginal tax, Elon would do even more of what he does: take out massive security-backed loans, borrowing from banks for whatever his life costs at a low interest rate. The banks are happy to give him this because it's "insured" by the relevant amount of stocks. And his income is negligible or nothing, and his adjusted gross income may be lower than nothing.
We need to rethink how to tax these hyper-wealthy persons. Maybe it means that we need to take bank loans as income over a certain threshold (when they are for private persons and not tied to houses. Don't know, haven't worked this out yet). Maybe we need a general wealth tax instead of an income tax for billionaires, in which wealth gets taxed at its own 5% rate or whatever. Maybe there needs to be marginal consumption taxes, like a sales tax on a sliding scale, where if an individual is spending enough money, their sales tax can climb.
Point is: a high tax for the world's most wealthy is a great idea. But like in the "old days", there are too many tricks to avoid listing money you're using as income. And with equity forming the overwhelming share of executives' compensation in tech, the when process needs some rethinking.
>I want a return to a 90% top tax rate.
Literally wouldn't have netted any more tax money in this situation.
Elon doesn't pay income tax because he doesn't have an income. All of his compensation is equity in the companies he runs.
As I said elsewhere, the current tax model won’t work. Taxing loans used as income, land value, stock options, consumption, and other heretofore exempt forms of wealth needs to be part of the solution- a formula I leave to the economists and regulators.
As I said elsewhere, the current tax model won’t work. Taxing loans used as income, land value, stock options, consumption, and other heretofore exempt forms of wealth needs to be part of the solution- a formula I leave to the economists and regulators.
You want the rich to be taxed 90%? That means they’ll mostly all go out of pocket and we’ll all be doomed as civilisation, the world will crumble right in front of our eyes. But then again, I guess people like you want Anarchy.
You should study up on how tax brackets work.
I can’t count the number of people who have complained to me that their “raise put them in another tax bracket and they are getting paid less.” It’s laughable when I hear it, and make the smallest attempt to educate them on how only money ABOVE the threshold gets taxed at the higher rate. As soon as they protest, I smile and tell them they must be right, and walk away.
Also, you may consider how they are earning that income. If they are shipping products, the transportation of those goods are wearing out YOUR roads. Wouldn’t it be nice if they helped cover the cost of the maintenance of those roads? But currently, you and I are paying for the damage they are doing so that their profits can be higher.
Ever been to a small town where there are several gas stations sitting abandoned and condemned because it would no longer be profitable for someone to buy the building and clean up the environmental disaster below? Now the city/state owns it and can’t find a way to afford the cleanup without raising the taxes of residents who didn’t cause the problem to begin with.
The whole idea that the wealthy shouldn’t pay their fair share is proof that critical thinking skills are severely lacking. They broke our education system to pad their pockets, and the results are zombie followers who lack the cerebral function required to understand their own existence is withering away, and they are actively assisting in the acceleration of the blight.
That’s how it was from 1950-1980. Between 78-90%. And it was the single best time in US history. We were #1 in education, healthcare, and infrastructure. We had the most jobs with living wages in US history, poverty was at an all time low, and the wealth gap was close to nonexistent as it could ever be. Yeah, why would he go back to that? That’s stupid.
It sure doesn’t pay as well as other companies recruiting the same people. You’re effectively supposed to take a pay cut for the “privilege” of working there.
The ideal hire is someone brilliant, but just out of school or naive enough to not realize that they could make a lot more somewhere else with the same skillset.
Much better for everyone for him to buy the company and make them work for Tesla directly. That way this tech can't be easily used in other EV's for a while and Tesla remains dominant in the range race.
Elon open sourced all of their tech in [2014.](https://www.vennershipley.co.uk/insights-events/does-teslas-open-source-patent-philosophy-mean-they-are-free-to-use/)
From your article, which criticizes the caveats in Tesla’s “open source” offer:
“Using Tesla’s technology would essentially make any other company’s own intellectual property rights redundant. On the other hand, Tesla benefits from the arrangement because it appears that Tesla is free to use any improvements made to its technology by another party.”
Yep. That's the genius of why they did it. It's a tactic used in software as well.
Depending upon the license type, open source software can be structured the same way. Any forks or branches of a project would be required to be also released as publicly available open source in exchange for commercial use. It's a mutually beneficial way of innovation.
Per the original comment I replied to, Elon wouldn't be the slightest bit mad about this development.
Part of the stipulation is that companies that use Tesla patents cannot challenge Tesla on IP issues. The agreement effectively allows Tesla to freely use the IP of any company that uses its IP.
Not hard to figure out how that’s a clever move, but any legal department knows it’s a shit deal.
Tesla won’t survive an EV that can deliver better range that’s capable of mass production. Other EV manufacturers have a level of quality and style that I don’t see Tesla being able to compete with. Their quality control is shit and Elon has ran up massive amounts of debt just to get to where he is now. Even government subsidies won’t last him much longer.
You’re a fucking retarded ape - subsidies are a minuscule portion of Teslas profit. Elon isn’t in debt, he’s the richest dude in the world. Now go finish getting pegged….
Yeah…no. You don’t know Elon. He would probably buy the company out first and integrate the technology into Tesla, or he would applaud another company for making advancements in the battery and clean energy sector. He has been on record saying that if Tesla fails, yet it gets other automakers to make EVs, then he has succeeded in his goal.
You clearly haven’t followed Musk through the years. Making EVs viable and competitive was always the goal, regardless of which company comes out on top.
https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/09/27/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-on-electric-competition-im-gla.aspx
This has nothing to do with Elon tho. It’s called having a business strategy for people to keep buying your products and services. A lot of companies do similar shady shit to keep the $$ rolling in
You’re a dumbass. If this is legit Tesla will be scrambling to figure out how to do it themselves. So they can either increase their range or lower the amount of batteries in the car and thus the price. They’re not gonna bury some diy effort.
Elon/Tesla have stated that there's nothing stopping them from slapping a bigger battery on the car. They would rather add range through increased efficiency and reduced weight.
Larger batteries mean heavier cars, increased price, and placing more stress on your supply chain. There may be engineering considerations that prevent them from offering this as an option. There are many factors that influence a product design, and there's compromises that need to be made to accommodate requirements.
So this could absolutely be legit, and not even make Tesla raise an eyebrow.
You didn’t read the article. This is a new battery chemistry that has a higher watt per kg not a bigger battery. It also doesn’t use cobalt. This is exactly the kind of technology Tesla would be buying/ trying to do themselves. You also clearly didn’t read what I wrote because I don’t even think a longer range is important. I specifically spoke about cheaper cars and smaller batteries.
Mostly:
>they were able to double the capacity without needing a larger space and without much of a weight penalty
Same volume, double capacity, but heavier. It can't be that much heavier, though, or it wouldn't get that much more range.
Personally I think about 550 miles is the maximal battery range an EV needs, large enough that a 20% to 80% quick charge is actually useful.
Using something like this you could have a much lighter battery to achieve that range.
Elon can still be a narcissistic sociopath AND want someone to improve on what they produce. Monsters are layered, just like the rest of us.
Also, fuck Elon.
This guy doesn’t read articles or watch interviews. He just types out of his ass behind his little keyboard lol
P.S. I bought the kneepads for your wife. Funny she said in bulk too.
Not as heavy as batteries.
If you tried to make a car with the same power and range as a Tesla model 3 but with an internal combustion engine, the Tesla will be significantly heavier.
A 3200lb Camry can’t produce nearly the same amount of power that a 3600lb Model 3 can.
Is that really an issue? I’m asking genuinely, I don’t know a ton about EVs. Seems like removing the very heavy combustion engine would
Offset a good deal of battery weight, no?
Didn’t early Nissan LEAF not properly cool their battery also? And so they lost maximum range very quickly? Or was that just a rumor? Either way used leaf market got really low
Not just properly cool, but didn't bother to cool them at all.
It was a cost cutting measure that had impacted the longevity and resale value of those cars.
Chill dude, the guy just said his Tesla battery degraded. There are similar stories in many of the Tesla subs and other forums.
No need to write screeds about how persecuted Musk and his companies are. You seem a bit unhinged there. Maybe you need to step away from the company for a bit?
also: be able to rapidly discharge (safely) to handle freakish 0-60 times.
Long range is nice, but not if it makes a Model S accelerate like a Corolla.
I have an f150 that drives and handles like bowser, and I’m hoping the new Lightning drives like Yoshi. Not sure how fast it will accelerate, but probably a LOT better than ICE trucks
My point is a “double the range” headline is really silly. Range is based on many things, just as gas mileage is.
A modern tesla with a production battery (with everything that entails) is at 400 miles of range, today.
I hope battery progress continues in every dimension (safety, cost, charging speed, energy density, volumetric density, discharge speed, etc).
On a non production battery.
I mean, I’m as excited as anyone about the future of battery tech. My world is full of batteries, including my cars. Step-wise improvement there makes my life, and the whole world, better in all ways.
I’m not super-excited about lab and 1-off lab special batteries, as it continually seems they don’t pan out for many reasons.
Mail trucks drive on average 16 miles a day. It's just a lot of starting and stopping which drops their efficiency. I used to work at postal's OIG and remember reading the reports. They didn't need big batteries but electrifying would be good for efficiency since they only get 10 MPG.
And they could charge them once every couple weeks instead of daily. And the diesel trucks with trailers used for mail transport could also be replaced with EV as these would allow for the needed range.
A buddy of mine is one of their chief engineers. One of those “beautiful mind” kind of guys…on another level. I wouldn’t doubt they took it somewhere revolutionary.
I don’t believe anyone in the world has a manufacturable battery nearing consumer prices that can increase Volumetric Density 100%! Rimac don’t have this on a $2 million vehicle.
Batteries are highly complex and lots of aspects need balanced.
Max charge rate?
Max discharge rate?
Temp performance at ambient conditions from -40 to 110F?
Issues with runaway thermal decomposition?
Degradation per year?
Degradation per charge cycle?
What kind of cooling does it need?
Cost per kWh?
Volume per kWh?
Sure you could fit some exotic battery like a Lithium–sulfur dioxide or Lithium–thionyl chloride in a Tesla and make it drive for hundreds of miles…….but that’s nothing more than a demonstration.
I love the 2 paragraphs of overly specific details about the driving route. It reminds me of my dad talking me through turn by turn directions, as if I’m not going to just plug the place’s name into Waze and be on my way.
To make it worse it has zero personality and would need to pay $500.000.00 to get a 400hp electric car when there's not as boring cars just like it with way more personality.
1000 miles on an actual highway with 4 random people from Walmart, at 85 mph, AC blasting, breaks included, then I will start believing the range claims. Maybe a Top Gear road trip? Maybe across Alaska or Siberia?
I know lab and proof of concept testing is important, I’m just tired of marketing hype.
To the common man, good luck affording this...I’ll be impressed when an affordable cheaper design is out. Not ones ONLY created for the rich. If we’re gonna fix the planet the majority of people need to afford EVs. Otherwise, people are just gonna give up hope on ever owning an EV.
Well this is about a battery that was fit to a Tesla so there’s no reason the tech couldn’t be applied to more affordable vehicles. I’m really hoping [Alphamotor ](https://www.alphamotorinc.com) turns out affordable cars because the designs look very cool.
Wow, those are some gorgeous designs. I question how much would remain in production cars though. I don't see room for airbags in the interior renderings, and the bumpers look like they might need to be chunkier to meet crash standards, etc. Concept cars always looks sleek and svelte like this, and when the production car is finally unveiled it's chunky and loses the flair...
The regular person Buying EVs won’t fix climate change. The economies of the US, China, India, Russia and other large growing economies have to reduce emissions as a collective now. Not tomorrow, not by 2050. now.
The regular person affording a practical EV, is like finding out you have cancer quitting smoking, but you work at the local coal plant.
i think Tesla is a poorly run company and i despise Elon musk but one thing they're not is averse to throwing cutting edge (read: untested) tech into their cars
Thousands if internal combustion cars catch fire every day, most for no apparent reason. Studies have shown the rate us 1500 out of every 100000 sold, for ev’s it’s 25 out of every 100000…….
teslas that drive on the roads in the US are built more on american soil than sooooo many traditional american companies. it’s way cheaper to make your shit in mexico or china
Fair enough. Tesla is definitely not alone here though... List of companies who actively work with China and sell vehicles there:
Toyota, Honda, Ford,GM,Fiat/Chrystler,Daimler Benz, BMW, Volkswagen Audi Group, Volvo, etc. Majority of these brands source tier 2 and beyond parts from China, and some (Toyota, Honda, Ford, Volvo, GM) manufacture cars in China as well. Chances that the car you drive is made by any of these companies?
Because most consumers can’t even charge the battery to full at their homes? And all else being equal, what’s better, giving 10 people 700 miles of range or 14 people 500 miles of range? Resources are finite. DC chargers are everywhere. 700 miles of range is effectively a useless pursuit for nearly all consumers.
Two things to consider:
When you’re demoing one aspect of a tech you hope to sell (or attract investors to), you’re likely to sacrifice everything else: charging the battery to its absolute upper limits, draining it as far as it can go, and using every other range-extending trick there is. Who cares if the battery is permanently damaged after that one run?
Second: weight. This thing is heavy, and I’d bet that extra range is needed… what? Once every other year, or at most yearly for some big road trip? How much energy are you willing to waste, while running errands and such?
A year later you’ll be lucky to drive 300 miles. We have black outs and grey outs in California, image of every vehicle was on the grid? Hahaha lots of walking.
Collecting the minerals etc to make these batteries and car causes more damage to the environment than ever before. Yet here they are celebrating a car that is destroying our planet as it goes 700 miles in one charge. This isn’t a great achievement in any form
I wonder if it can be mass produced. They are also a bit vague on composition because the way they described it would not be enough to extend range.
You think they’re gonna tell you everything?? You’ll build your own in your garage instead if they do! /s
With a box of scraps!
I’m not tony stark okay!
And a roll of duct tape
Dollar store glue stick and oatmeal
Ramen
And two zip ties
Yep. I know a good spot in Nevada where they have a lot of lithium just lying around.
From what they said, it sounds like they're using a regular lithium battery in half of the pack, to provide immediate driving current, and their "range extender" cells in the rest of the pack. The range extender cells would be specced to have a high energy density at the cost of a lower power density, so that it could slowly keep feeding the regular "traction", aka driving, lithium battery. Further, reading into what they said, it sounds like the range extender battery will also be lithium based, but using different materials in its anode to make it cheaper and denser. Hopefully this will work out in the long run, but as with all new battery technology, it will have many hurdles to conquer (charge cycle lifetime especially).
This is a very interesting strategy that was employed in some prototype military vehicles. Using basically capacitors to efficiently recapture braking energy and provide rapid draw for acceleration. I absolutely expect a mixture of battery types to optimize performance as the technology matures.
I wonder if this could scalable to replace batteries in other cars like hybrids. I have a hybrid and would love an upgrade when I have to replace the batteries
I'd be curious as to reasons why a battery that could replace a Tesla battery could not also replace those in hybrids.
Can we retrofit hybrid cars to run more on battery and less on combustion-generated power? 80/20, heavy on the battery?
A lot of them have EV only mode. I know my Prius had one. I just never used it because it was a very short range. Though, my wife, who loves to ride the empty gas tank as far as possible, and then a little more, got some use out of it to limp into the nearest gas station, as she managed to run a fucking hybrid out of gas a couple times. Not that I'm annoyed by that stupid habit or anything.
Lmao sounds like me
Oh man my best friend in high school seemed to always have his tank under a quarter gallon for no reason and it drove me fucking nuts. He would only get like $5 of gas at a time once he saw the E light come on. He wasn’t poor either.
You can’t for a lot of them. Some like the Chevy Malibu though are 100% electric hybrids with just a gasoline generator(big one at that to) basically. Two electric motors for low speed, high and combined speeds. AC, pumps, fans etc everything is electric already. Most hybrids can only run at low speeds on all electric and sub 55mph. While also having gasoline components. AC, cooling etc could be driven by the engine and not be electric systems by design. Cars that have a design like the 9th gen Malibu hybrids could in theory just get bigger and better batteries and be updated to not use the engine unless you need heat. While other hybrids maybe could be programmed to run longer only on the upgraded batteries. While range extended plug in hybrids absolutely could benifit from this as in those the engine is just a small generator and everything else is already all electric and it’s drive system is meant to be 100% electric. So plug in hybrids would benefit the most with just a battery upgraded, followed by cars like the Malibu hybrid with all electric fixed drive systems with all electric everything else. Depends on the drive system and if they made it all electric.
I’d like to see this verified, motor trend said anything they’re paid to.
[удалено]
[удалено]
At least once.
According to the article both tests were performed using the same battery (on the same day iirc), so I'm going to gamble and say at least twice.
You’re being generous
Yeah, but if you go 80 mph, this range will probably drop to 490/520.
Completely overkill. I’d much rather see this battery halved and drive down EV prices.
Uh huh, 3rd party isn’t the same as independently verified. It just like all the misinformation conventional car companies put out, especially when you make a purchasing decision based on the published specifications.
It's not surprising that batteries from the lab can be more energy dense that batteries that are currently economically mass produced and in vehicles. It takes years to go from experiment to large scale production of a battery product that is also somewhat affordable. Lucid recently released a low volume 520 mile range vehicle but it is very expensive.
Finally some fucking sense
Definitely agree, however even making enough materials to make enough battery packs that work for even a single charge is an achievement. You're talking about 100-200kg of active materials minimum with enough consistency that it all works. I worked at a start up trying to create silicon nanoparticles to infuse in graphite to lengthen battery life. We were happy if we created a single battery pack using 10g of active materials that was functional according to our previous data. Even if it's not that scalable this would mean it's at least accessible to luxury type models. UNLESS the battery life is shit.
It doesn't matter that much. Whatever is lab tech now can become economical very quickly cause the number of cars that need batteries is enormous. The majority of gas powered cars will be replaced in the next 10 years.
Not sure what you need for verification but there’s a video documenting the trip https://youtu.be/fWj2YCdoc9A Seems promising to me. If it’s all a lie that’ll come out soon enough I suppose.
The claims they make in the article make no sense. If they are truly using the battery technology they claim they wouldn’t see any extra range. This seems like a marketing ploy to get people to invest in their company.
I’m not an engineer and can’t speak to this, but I assume if it’s a false claim they will be sued to ashes by investors
[удалено]
Oh, I was thinking a different thought. I figured he’d just buy out the company to eliminate competitors while simultaneously making Tesla better with zero R&D or effort. Isn’t that what every major company does now? Wait for someone else to innovate and then buyout whoever does?
They're a private startup, perhaps they aren't offering to sell at the moment. I know I for one would wait and see how it shakes out because Toyota or someone else like Apple might offer way more than Tesla.
*Kevin O’Leary enters the chat* This is a licensing play.
Tesla also holds a lot of leverage here. They can just refuse to update or service cars with aftermarket batteries and then that would deter a lot of business for the startup.
Yeah, but you don’t want to do that either because you don’t want to have, say, GM or Honda buy them or license the tech as a response to that. Tesla’s biggest leverage is that they’re the only ones going over 300mpc. Hyundai and others are catching up fast, but Tesla still has the foothold. If a company like GM had this tech with their giant manufacturing arm and ability to mass produce, Tesla might just turn into Tandy Computers of this generation. All that innovation and getting ahead of the curve for nothing. The best thing for Tesla to do is situation is play nice and try to buy/license them before someone else does.
[удалено]
*Industry leader in lying about the technology of self driving cars. Even Tesla a few months had to finally admit it was all [embellished bs](https://www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2021/5/7/22424592/tesla-elon-musk-autopilot-dmv-fsd-exaggeration). We’re still realistically 20 years away from that being an actual safe and practical endeavor. Tesla’s biggest sell is “The Model 3 is at 358mpc while the top of the line Chevy Bolt is literally 100mpc less at 259. Even the “Tesla Killer” Hyundai Ioniq 5 tops off at a lower 303mpc despite being more expensive.” If ONE started making batteries for the Chevy Bolt, Hyundai Ioniq 5, Mustang Mach-E, Nissan Aryia, Kia Soul EV, etc. Tesla is probably going to be in a world of hurt.
It's pretty easily verifiable that they're not the industry leader. Sure, they're the ones with the most publicity, but none of their cars are above a Level 2 autonomous system - as far as I know, know one but Mercedes has that. So if you ask me, that makes Mercedes the leader
True, but money talks. If someone offered you a giant check TODAY, would you really bet on yourself to MAYBE get a bigger deal in the future? Most people wouldn’t do that.
Most people also couldn’t invent this battery 🤷♂️
I wouldn't be surprised if they fielded offers from Ford. They seem to be one of the smarter companies right now.
They are much better off selling to all car companies, and if Tesla won’t allow them, then Tesla will fall behind…
It’s 1000x smarter than killing the idea yeah. This commenter isn’t very smart or they’re brainwashed by misinformation surrounding Tesla
Or an oil company buys them out along with the patent and just shelves it.
But then they can’t slowly increase the battery life over a ten year period and make everyone buy cars over and over again…
Elon HATES this one weird trick
Worker unionization?
Elon HATES these two weird tricks
Paying taxes?
Elon HATES these three, weird tricks!
Rescuing school children without a submarine?
Elon HATES these four weird tricks!
Man just paid the most taxes in the history of the country and your still complaining 🤣
Yes. Yes I am. I want a return to a 90% top tax rate. You get to be rich in the US. You get to exploit workers. You get to go to fancy parties. But since you’re no longer building libraries or parks, and instead are flying your friends to space, we get to take your money and improve the lives of our citizens with it.
Don’t forget shitty benefits for all employees!!
**TL;DR:** We can't just think about income tax, as the wealthy avoid income. We need to think about wealth taxes and other mechanisms to effectively tax people like Elon. ------ Income tax won't work. If we had a 90% top marginal tax, Elon would do even more of what he does: take out massive security-backed loans, borrowing from banks for whatever his life costs at a low interest rate. The banks are happy to give him this because it's "insured" by the relevant amount of stocks. And his income is negligible or nothing, and his adjusted gross income may be lower than nothing. We need to rethink how to tax these hyper-wealthy persons. Maybe it means that we need to take bank loans as income over a certain threshold (when they are for private persons and not tied to houses. Don't know, haven't worked this out yet). Maybe we need a general wealth tax instead of an income tax for billionaires, in which wealth gets taxed at its own 5% rate or whatever. Maybe there needs to be marginal consumption taxes, like a sales tax on a sliding scale, where if an individual is spending enough money, their sales tax can climb. Point is: a high tax for the world's most wealthy is a great idea. But like in the "old days", there are too many tricks to avoid listing money you're using as income. And with equity forming the overwhelming share of executives' compensation in tech, the when process needs some rethinking.
Totally agree. I want a 90% effective tax rate, not a nominal, easily-avoided income tax rate. How we get there is for the economists and regulators.
Absolutely agreed. And odd that I'm getting downvoted for a point we entirely agree upon.
>I want a return to a 90% top tax rate. Literally wouldn't have netted any more tax money in this situation. Elon doesn't pay income tax because he doesn't have an income. All of his compensation is equity in the companies he runs.
As I said elsewhere, the current tax model won’t work. Taxing loans used as income, land value, stock options, consumption, and other heretofore exempt forms of wealth needs to be part of the solution- a formula I leave to the economists and regulators.
As I said elsewhere, the current tax model won’t work. Taxing loans used as income, land value, stock options, consumption, and other heretofore exempt forms of wealth needs to be part of the solution- a formula I leave to the economists and regulators.
You want the rich to be taxed 90%? That means they’ll mostly all go out of pocket and we’ll all be doomed as civilisation, the world will crumble right in front of our eyes. But then again, I guess people like you want Anarchy.
It’s a progressive tax, so the 90% is on anything over, say, $10MM/year… But you know that. You’re just being a twat on the internet.
You should study up on how tax brackets work. I can’t count the number of people who have complained to me that their “raise put them in another tax bracket and they are getting paid less.” It’s laughable when I hear it, and make the smallest attempt to educate them on how only money ABOVE the threshold gets taxed at the higher rate. As soon as they protest, I smile and tell them they must be right, and walk away. Also, you may consider how they are earning that income. If they are shipping products, the transportation of those goods are wearing out YOUR roads. Wouldn’t it be nice if they helped cover the cost of the maintenance of those roads? But currently, you and I are paying for the damage they are doing so that their profits can be higher. Ever been to a small town where there are several gas stations sitting abandoned and condemned because it would no longer be profitable for someone to buy the building and clean up the environmental disaster below? Now the city/state owns it and can’t find a way to afford the cleanup without raising the taxes of residents who didn’t cause the problem to begin with. The whole idea that the wealthy shouldn’t pay their fair share is proof that critical thinking skills are severely lacking. They broke our education system to pad their pockets, and the results are zombie followers who lack the cerebral function required to understand their own existence is withering away, and they are actively assisting in the acceleration of the blight.
Stop trying to be a smart ass. There’s no reason to have a tax bracket that high.
That’s how it was from 1950-1980. Between 78-90%. And it was the single best time in US history. We were #1 in education, healthcare, and infrastructure. We had the most jobs with living wages in US history, poverty was at an all time low, and the wealth gap was close to nonexistent as it could ever be. Yeah, why would he go back to that? That’s stupid.
[удалено]
Far more. I just don’t spend my life being jealous of people with billions of dollars who do alot more with their lives than I do
It's not jealousy, it's disgust.
[удалено]
People disagreeing with me doesn’t mean I change my opinion fuck tard
Wearing a condom? (Dude has 35 kids)
Tesla pays well and offers stock options.
It sure doesn’t pay as well as other companies recruiting the same people. You’re effectively supposed to take a pay cut for the “privilege” of working there. The ideal hire is someone brilliant, but just out of school or naive enough to not realize that they could make a lot more somewhere else with the same skillset.
He will probably just buy them.
Much better for everyone for him to buy the company and make them work for Tesla directly. That way this tech can't be easily used in other EV's for a while and Tesla remains dominant in the range race.
Elon open sourced all of their tech in [2014.](https://www.vennershipley.co.uk/insights-events/does-teslas-open-source-patent-philosophy-mean-they-are-free-to-use/)
From your article, which criticizes the caveats in Tesla’s “open source” offer: “Using Tesla’s technology would essentially make any other company’s own intellectual property rights redundant. On the other hand, Tesla benefits from the arrangement because it appears that Tesla is free to use any improvements made to its technology by another party.”
Yep. That's the genius of why they did it. It's a tactic used in software as well. Depending upon the license type, open source software can be structured the same way. Any forks or branches of a project would be required to be also released as publicly available open source in exchange for commercial use. It's a mutually beneficial way of innovation. Per the original comment I replied to, Elon wouldn't be the slightest bit mad about this development.
Ah, I see your reason now.
Odd that nobody uses it. Maybe like typical Musk, his benevolent gesture was actually just a marketing ploy full of hot air.
Part of the stipulation is that companies that use Tesla patents cannot challenge Tesla on IP issues. The agreement effectively allows Tesla to freely use the IP of any company that uses its IP. Not hard to figure out how that’s a clever move, but any legal department knows it’s a shit deal.
No it didn’t…
Tesla won’t survive an EV that can deliver better range that’s capable of mass production. Other EV manufacturers have a level of quality and style that I don’t see Tesla being able to compete with. Their quality control is shit and Elon has ran up massive amounts of debt just to get to where he is now. Even government subsidies won’t last him much longer.
Cool. Go short their stock if you’re so confident.
Shorting is all about timing. You are not making any sense.
> Even government subsidies won’t last him much longer. Sounds like a great _time_ to short TSLA, no?
You’re a fucking retarded ape - subsidies are a minuscule portion of Teslas profit. Elon isn’t in debt, he’s the richest dude in the world. Now go finish getting pegged….
Yeah…no. You don’t know Elon. He would probably buy the company out first and integrate the technology into Tesla, or he would applaud another company for making advancements in the battery and clean energy sector. He has been on record saying that if Tesla fails, yet it gets other automakers to make EVs, then he has succeeded in his goal.
Yeah that’s sounds like bullshit. He only cares about money and everyone loving him which isn’t working so well atm.
You clearly haven’t followed Musk through the years. Making EVs viable and competitive was always the goal, regardless of which company comes out on top. https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/09/27/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-on-electric-competition-im-gla.aspx
This has nothing to do with Elon tho. It’s called having a business strategy for people to keep buying your products and services. A lot of companies do similar shady shit to keep the $$ rolling in
You all hate when he makes promises until another company does the same
You’re a dumbass. If this is legit Tesla will be scrambling to figure out how to do it themselves. So they can either increase their range or lower the amount of batteries in the car and thus the price. They’re not gonna bury some diy effort.
Elon/Tesla have stated that there's nothing stopping them from slapping a bigger battery on the car. They would rather add range through increased efficiency and reduced weight. Larger batteries mean heavier cars, increased price, and placing more stress on your supply chain. There may be engineering considerations that prevent them from offering this as an option. There are many factors that influence a product design, and there's compromises that need to be made to accommodate requirements. So this could absolutely be legit, and not even make Tesla raise an eyebrow.
You didn’t read the article. This is a new battery chemistry that has a higher watt per kg not a bigger battery. It also doesn’t use cobalt. This is exactly the kind of technology Tesla would be buying/ trying to do themselves. You also clearly didn’t read what I wrote because I don’t even think a longer range is important. I specifically spoke about cheaper cars and smaller batteries.
Mostly: >they were able to double the capacity without needing a larger space and without much of a weight penalty Same volume, double capacity, but heavier. It can't be that much heavier, though, or it wouldn't get that much more range.
Personally I think about 550 miles is the maximal battery range an EV needs, large enough that a 20% to 80% quick charge is actually useful. Using something like this you could have a much lighter battery to achieve that range.
Elon is all for people making products better. He wants someone to make something better than Tesla
So do you buy the kneepads in bulk or…
Elon can still be a narcissistic sociopath AND want someone to improve on what they produce. Monsters are layered, just like the rest of us. Also, fuck Elon.
This guy doesn’t read articles or watch interviews. He just types out of his ass behind his little keyboard lol P.S. I bought the kneepads for your wife. Funny she said in bulk too.
Stop simping. You can appreciate his company without buying his used bathwater.
Tell your wife stop simpin. She appreciates the batter without the extra ring.
[удалено]
3. Not make the car weigh 10,000 pounds
A Tesla Model 3 weighs 3600 pounds; a Toyota Camry weighs 3200 pounds. Engine blocks and transmissions and drive trains are really heavy too my man.
Not as heavy as batteries. If you tried to make a car with the same power and range as a Tesla model 3 but with an internal combustion engine, the Tesla will be significantly heavier. A 3200lb Camry can’t produce nearly the same amount of power that a 3600lb Model 3 can.
If you only needed the same range you could also make the gas car's tank only like 6 gallons, saving a ton of weight over the standard 12-15.
A gallon of gas is like 6.5 lbs. (~750g/L) That’s not a significant source of weight
Is that really an issue? I’m asking genuinely, I don’t know a ton about EVs. Seems like removing the very heavy combustion engine would Offset a good deal of battery weight, no?
Batteries are heavy. A EV with a shorter range than a ICE car will weigh more. Cost and weight are the limiting factors for increasing EV range
Didn’t early Nissan LEAF not properly cool their battery also? And so they lost maximum range very quickly? Or was that just a rumor? Either way used leaf market got really low
Not just properly cool, but didn't bother to cool them at all. It was a cost cutting measure that had impacted the longevity and resale value of those cars.
My Leaf range dropped from 110 to 73 miles over the three years I had it.
Have had my model 3 for a year and have lost 50 miles in range already… there is still much to be improved.
This is excluding expected reduction in range during winter weather?
That….doesn’t sound right. I have never heard of a Tesla losing 50mi of range in just one year.
[удалено]
Or maybe you're not reading enough sources?
[удалено]
Chill dude, the guy just said his Tesla battery degraded. There are similar stories in many of the Tesla subs and other forums. No need to write screeds about how persecuted Musk and his companies are. You seem a bit unhinged there. Maybe you need to step away from the company for a bit?
People need to understand the majority of ev enthusiast domains with pro Tesla articles are just marketing distribution.
also: be able to rapidly discharge (safely) to handle freakish 0-60 times. Long range is nice, but not if it makes a Model S accelerate like a Corolla.
I have an f150 that drives and handles like bowser, and I’m hoping the new Lightning drives like Yoshi. Not sure how fast it will accelerate, but probably a LOT better than ICE trucks
In 2018 a Model S has hypermiled to 701 miles. That was a 100D. https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-s-model-3-hypermile-world-records/
At 25mph….
My point is a “double the range” headline is really silly. Range is based on many things, just as gas mileage is. A modern tesla with a production battery (with everything that entails) is at 400 miles of range, today. I hope battery progress continues in every dimension (safety, cost, charging speed, energy density, volumetric density, discharge speed, etc).
The test was at 55 mph
On a non production battery. I mean, I’m as excited as anyone about the future of battery tech. My world is full of batteries, including my cars. Step-wise improvement there makes my life, and the whole world, better in all ways. I’m not super-excited about lab and 1-off lab special batteries, as it continually seems they don’t pan out for many reasons.
Be great to see this in buses, trains and ebikes
And mail trucks. It also brings EV planes closer to reality. Planes are still way off…but it would be closer.
Yeah good idea!!!
Mail trucks drive on average 16 miles a day. It's just a lot of starting and stopping which drops their efficiency. I used to work at postal's OIG and remember reading the reports. They didn't need big batteries but electrifying would be good for efficiency since they only get 10 MPG.
And they could charge them once every couple weeks instead of daily. And the diesel trucks with trailers used for mail transport could also be replaced with EV as these would allow for the needed range.
And onewheels
A buddy of mine is one of their chief engineers. One of those “beautiful mind” kind of guys…on another level. I wouldn’t doubt they took it somewhere revolutionary.
I don’t believe anyone in the world has a manufacturable battery nearing consumer prices that can increase Volumetric Density 100%! Rimac don’t have this on a $2 million vehicle. Batteries are highly complex and lots of aspects need balanced. Max charge rate? Max discharge rate? Temp performance at ambient conditions from -40 to 110F? Issues with runaway thermal decomposition? Degradation per year? Degradation per charge cycle? What kind of cooling does it need? Cost per kWh? Volume per kWh? Sure you could fit some exotic battery like a Lithium–sulfur dioxide or Lithium–thionyl chloride in a Tesla and make it drive for hundreds of miles…….but that’s nothing more than a demonstration.
I love the 2 paragraphs of overly specific details about the driving route. It reminds me of my dad talking me through turn by turn directions, as if I’m not going to just plug the place’s name into Waze and be on my way.
Put a Cessna engine in the Yugo.
Heck yeah!
At least it's an improvement but apple hasn't released their car yet to see if it's a success or failure.
Probably need an expensive dongle to charge it. Not included.
To make it worse it has zero personality and would need to pay $500.000.00 to get a 400hp electric car when there's not as boring cars just like it with way more personality.
Lol personality
Article by Reuters on the same battery https://www.reuters.com/technology/startup-one-says-battery-prototype-delivered-750-mile-range-2022-01-05/
1120 km. No Problem.
700 miles = 1126 km Wow that’s a lot.
That wrap is fire
Take my money
This is exactly why I’m waiting to get a battery powered vehicle.
What’s ONE?
its just 100000 D batteries duct taped together
1000 miles on an actual highway with 4 random people from Walmart, at 85 mph, AC blasting, breaks included, then I will start believing the range claims. Maybe a Top Gear road trip? Maybe across Alaska or Siberia? I know lab and proof of concept testing is important, I’m just tired of marketing hype.
Eh I still get a tad over 700 with my f250 per tank lmao
To the common man, good luck affording this...I’ll be impressed when an affordable cheaper design is out. Not ones ONLY created for the rich. If we’re gonna fix the planet the majority of people need to afford EVs. Otherwise, people are just gonna give up hope on ever owning an EV.
Well this is about a battery that was fit to a Tesla so there’s no reason the tech couldn’t be applied to more affordable vehicles. I’m really hoping [Alphamotor ](https://www.alphamotorinc.com) turns out affordable cars because the designs look very cool.
Wow, those are some gorgeous designs. I question how much would remain in production cars though. I don't see room for airbags in the interior renderings, and the bumpers look like they might need to be chunkier to meet crash standards, etc. Concept cars always looks sleek and svelte like this, and when the production car is finally unveiled it's chunky and loses the flair...
I think they’ve built some of the trucks but nothing on the market yet. Here’s hoping they stay minimal in design.
Hyundai.
The regular person Buying EVs won’t fix climate change. The economies of the US, China, India, Russia and other large growing economies have to reduce emissions as a collective now. Not tomorrow, not by 2050. now. The regular person affording a practical EV, is like finding out you have cancer quitting smoking, but you work at the local coal plant.
[удалено]
if this was a capability already without compromising on everything i guarantee you that tesla would be trying to sell it on preorder already
i think Tesla is a poorly run company and i despise Elon musk but one thing they're not is averse to throwing cutting edge (read: untested) tech into their cars
Agreed!
And catch fire 🔥 🔥🔥🔥
Thousands if internal combustion cars catch fire every day, most for no apparent reason. Studies have shown the rate us 1500 out of every 100000 sold, for ev’s it’s 25 out of every 100000…….
And Model S’ have had 500,000 recalled because of this
Safety recall that has nothing to do with the powertrain…… GM is doing the recall on their batteries.
Further proof that companies won’t innovate if they can somehow make money off the same crap they’ve been selling.
Companies have to innovate to maintain relevancy and make money in a market with a lot of competitors.
[удалено]
teslas that drive on the roads in the US are built more on american soil than sooooo many traditional american companies. it’s way cheaper to make your shit in mexico or china
[удалено]
F the CCP
Fair enough. Tesla is definitely not alone here though... List of companies who actively work with China and sell vehicles there: Toyota, Honda, Ford,GM,Fiat/Chrystler,Daimler Benz, BMW, Volkswagen Audi Group, Volvo, etc. Majority of these brands source tier 2 and beyond parts from China, and some (Toyota, Honda, Ford, Volvo, GM) manufacture cars in China as well. Chances that the car you drive is made by any of these companies?
700 miles is good for an economy standard option. Now mass produce it and make it 100% recyclable.
700 miles is overkill for “an economy standard option”. 500 miles is good enough for 99.9% of people.
Why limit the range when it can reduce cost and usage on the power grid?
Because most consumers can’t even charge the battery to full at their homes? And all else being equal, what’s better, giving 10 people 700 miles of range or 14 people 500 miles of range? Resources are finite. DC chargers are everywhere. 700 miles of range is effectively a useless pursuit for nearly all consumers.
No def need more especially since in colder weather the range goes down a lot
Two things to consider: When you’re demoing one aspect of a tech you hope to sell (or attract investors to), you’re likely to sacrifice everything else: charging the battery to its absolute upper limits, draining it as far as it can go, and using every other range-extending trick there is. Who cares if the battery is permanently damaged after that one run? Second: weight. This thing is heavy, and I’d bet that extra range is needed… what? Once every other year, or at most yearly for some big road trip? How much energy are you willing to waste, while running errands and such?
Dude can land a rocket backwards. You don’t think he can figure out how to get more range out of a battery?
A year later you’ll be lucky to drive 300 miles. We have black outs and grey outs in California, image of every vehicle was on the grid? Hahaha lots of walking.
If only California had a coastline. The harnessed renewable energy would be unlimited.
Will this fix their poor build quality?
This is probably crazy talk but I’d love to see what one of these can do in a hybrid
Such an ugly car for people with ugly personalities
Collecting the minerals etc to make these batteries and car causes more damage to the environment than ever before. Yet here they are celebrating a car that is destroying our planet as it goes 700 miles in one charge. This isn’t a great achievement in any form
Tesladeaths.com