Tesla reviewed in Autocar
Tesla reviewed in Autocar
Author
Discussion

kevin ritson

Original Poster:

3,423 posts

258 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
And gets a good review thumbup

It's not as urgent as an Elise (weight and power delivery) but how many IC cars came before the Elise?

Bloody good effort, I reckon clap

http://www.autocar.co.uk/CarReviews/FirstDrives/Te...

Edited by kevin ritson on Wednesday 27th February 12:23

LivinLaVidaLotus

1,626 posts

232 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
It's just a shame the rear 1/4 is so bland frown

subaqua

892 posts

243 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
"If the Roadster’s electrical systems prove reliable and durable, the world will probably beat a path to Tesla’s door. And why shouldn't they for the world's first genuine, carbon-neutral sports car?"

I'm keen where I can to support initiatives like this, because, whatever your view on global warming etc, the price of fossil fuels is opnly going to keep climbing, so the sooner electric/hydrogen powered cars become econimically viable, the better I say (all the more petrol for our toys).

But I think the "first genuine, carbon neutral sports car" is stretching the point a bit.... would it charge in 4 hours from one of those wind turbines you can get from B&Q.... I think not. So it'll be mainly gas/coal powered then... hmmmmm

No problem with the car... the journalist maybe has rose tinted specs on tho

Edited by subaqua on Wednesday 27th February 12:41

ludo

5,308 posts

235 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
Saw a Tesla (at least I think it was a Tesla) going round the track at Hethel last week, I quite like the less fussy styling compared to an S2 or the Europa.

subaqua said:
"If the Roadster’s electrical systems prove reliable and durable, the world will probably beat a path to Tesla’s door. And why shouldn't they for the world's first genuine, carbon-neutral sports car?"

I'm keen where I can to support initiatives like this, because, whatever your view on global warming etc, the price of fossil fuels is opnly going to keep climbing, so the sooner electric/hydrogen powered cars become econimically viable, the better I say (all the more petrol for our toys).

But I think the "first genuine, carbon neutral sports car" is stretching the point a bit.... would it charge in 4 hours from one of those wind turbines you can get from B&Q.... I think not. So it'll be mainly gas/coal powered then... hmmmmm
Probably less carbon neutral than the biofuel Exige they made (saw that as well, static at the time, but very nice)

ETA: I would have one if the support was there for it, but I would still want to keep the S1 for weekends

Edited by ludo on Wednesday 27th February 13:01

kevin ritson

Original Poster:

3,423 posts

258 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
But the emphasis moves firmly on the electricity suppliers to clean up their act. Personally, if it goes on sale in the UK, the price was dropped by £20K and there was an infrastructure in place for battery-swapping, I'd have one. Whilst you lose the noise, instant torque has to be fun.

Bravo to Tesla and Lotus - we won't need to drive a Prius in the future

subaqua

892 posts

243 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
Oh yes.... particularly as I suspect most of the membersd in here would walk before driving one of them wink

LivinLaVidaLotus

1,626 posts

232 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
I drive for the fun, I don't care if it comes from batteries or dead creatures decayed over millennia.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

305 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
no mention of the CO2 cost to make one though...

I bet it's more then the total CO2 'saving' in the cars life.

this is exactly the same problem with wind-power, great on paper till you add up the CO2 cost to make and install the things.

LivinLaVidaLotus

1,626 posts

232 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
Depends, when it comes to wind turbines, there's an awful lot of crap spouted about the CO2 impact, with lots of, "It takes over 20 years, more than the working life of the turbine" - which isn't true, it's 3-4 years for it to become neutral.

No idea how much of a CO2 impact manufacturing Li batteries has, I'm sure there will be a study somewhere, seen as they are the same as used in phones - just arranged/managed/cooled very cleverly.

NathanE

539 posts

233 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
995kg... that's pretty good. I was expecting it to be quite a bit more

andy_s

19,857 posts

290 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=23&t=502086 

Lotus would be making a good move by getting into this market, whatever the arguements for or against carbon-neutrality and how it's achieved if electricity prices remain stable-ish over the next 5-10 years and petrol / oil prices soar then this will be a market segment to be already in.

I think it looks fab, nicely smoothed out although they obviously lacked inspiration for the rear top.

What with bio-fueled Exiges, underwater, supercharged and electric Elises god only knows what's next.

Scuffers

20,887 posts

305 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
LivinLaVidaLotus said:
Depends, when it comes to wind turbines, there's an awful lot of crap spouted about the CO2 impact, with lots of, "It takes over 20 years, more than the working life of the turbine" - which isn't true, it's 3-4 years for it to become neutral.
fancy backing that up with some real numbers?

just for starters, work out the CO2 cost for the concrete under one turbine - I think you might be in for a supprise!

Gooby

9,269 posts

265 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
I would drive one. Looks great and with a little "tweaking" it could be a handler too. More fun than a milf float and with the price of petrol going skyrocket, it seems a good proposition.

A silent electric car would be good for sneaking into the garage after a late night hoon and keeping under Mrs Gooby's radar.

kambites

71,659 posts

252 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
LivinLaVidaLotus said:
Depends, when it comes to wind turbines, there's an awful lot of crap spouted about the CO2 impact, with lots of, "It takes over 20 years, more than the working life of the turbine" - which isn't true, it's 3-4 years for it to become neutral.
fancy backing that up with some real numbers?

just for starters, work out the CO2 cost for the concrete under one turbine - I think you might be in for a supprise!
I read a pretty detailed study into turbines (by a university, funded by one of the major electricity companies, so no obvious bias) which came to that kind of figure. I think it was about 4 years for a single turbine installation down to about 3 years for a major wind farm using current technology as of a few years ago. They pay for themselves economically in about the same time (far faster than any other form of power generation) too. The only real issue with wind farms, is where to put the damned things.

LivinLaVidaLotus

1,626 posts

232 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
Turbine takes about 500-1000 tons of concrete & aggregate on land for the foundation pad.

1 ton of concrete produced is roughly 150kg of CO2.

1000 * 150 = 150,000KG CO2

24.1% is the average loading of an on-shore wind turbine (DTI figures 2004).

If it's a 2.5MW turbine, then it's producing:

0.241 * 2.5MW = 602.5KW

1kw of electricity in the UK is roughly 0.527KG of CO2

So, an hours turbine spinning at 24.1% efficiency gives us 602.5kWh of electricity, which if produced by "normal" means would be:

602.5 * 0.527 = 317.52KG of CO2

So lets work it out for our concrete:

150,000 / 317.52 = 472.41 hours

= 19.68 days, operating at 24.1% efficiency

Of course that doesn't take in to account the cost of fabricating the turbine, or the transport etc. and transmission losses - but we are certainly not talking about it never covering it's CO2 emissions from construction within it's own lifetime. Also as concrete ages, it re-calcifies, absorbing some of the CO2 back in, that was emitted during the calcification process of the cement production.

Edited by LivinLaVidaLotus on Wednesday 27th February 15:19

bencollins

3,574 posts

236 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
re wind turbines the foundation plot can be used for yonks.
interesting sums though cheers.

tesla looks great.

thetrash

1,860 posts

237 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
They were testing a tesler berfore xmas were I was working, looked good but they are so going to get a few lawsuits when one hits a pedestrian.

Tuna

19,930 posts

315 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
Scuffers said:
LivinLaVidaLotus said:
Depends, when it comes to wind turbines, there's an awful lot of crap spouted about the CO2 impact, with lots of, "It takes over 20 years, more than the working life of the turbine" - which isn't true, it's 3-4 years for it to become neutral.
fancy backing that up with some real numbers?

just for starters, work out the CO2 cost for the concrete under one turbine - I think you might be in for a supprise!
There are some wildly anti-wind posters on Pistonheads, and they keep repeating some ridiculous figures that simply aren't true. I'm glad that a couple of other posters have already pointed out that you are basically wrong.

There are other reasons to be anti-wind turbine, but payback really isn't one of them.

LivinLaVidaLotus

1,626 posts

232 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
I'm not pro or anti, I just can't stand utter bks, lol.

Tuna

19,930 posts

315 months

Wednesday 27th February 2008
quotequote all
LivinLaVidaLotus said:
I'm not pro or anti, I just can't stand utter bks, lol.
Same here