Is Elon Musk Nuts?

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Thursday, September 3, 2026 02:05
VIEWED: 37827
PAGE 2 of 58

6STRINGJOKER

Monday, April 24, 2017 4:26 AM

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
And speaking of computers and AI - while it might be a time and money saver to have computers reproduce what people already do - like calculations, traffic control, and the like (and assuming the whole hacking problem has been eliminated) - there's a reason to not expand AI into realms beyond human capability. And that's because we'll be incapable of comprehending what they'll be doing. Being unable to comprehend it means we are putting ourselves in the power of an alien system.

---

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

SIGNYM

Monday, May 1, 2017 10:43 PM

So, just to get back to the energetics of electric vehicles ...

I read an article that claims electric vehicles are only 5-10% efficient in terms of energy to motion. (well to wheel) that seemed really low to me, so I decided to backtrack the calculations ...

Power plants have different efficiencies (min-max)
COAL FIRED PLANT 32 42
GAS FIRED 32 38
HYDRO 85 90
WIND 35 45
(Latest gas-fired turbines have attained 60% efficiency, but those aren't installed yet, just experimental.)
http://www.brighthubengineering.com/power-plants/72369-compare-the-eff
iciency-of-different-power-plants/

Electric energy transmission efficiency varies from state to state (min-max)
87 98
http://insideenergy.org/2015/11/06/lost-in-transmission-how-much-elect
ricity-disappears-between-a-power-plant-and-your-plug/

The charger itself is only 90-94 efficient

Battery charging also wastes heat, the battery is about 68-90 efficient
http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2010/ph240/sun1/

And the car inverter (DC to AC) efficiency and motor efficiency aren't 100% either: 70 average

All together, when you multiply the efficiencies of power generation with the other efficiencies, you get a range .... from a high of 52% (assuming max hydro power and max xmission/ automobile efficiency) to a low of 12% (assuming lowest coal/gas -fired power generation efficiency and lowest xmission and auto efficiency.)

Not counting hydro, which only accounts for 6% electric generation in the USA and is kind of an outlier, electric vehicles range from 12-24% .


-----------

For automobiles, the efficiency of an internal combustion engine could be as high as 37%, but currently averages around 18-24%. About 10% is lost to idle (depending on traffic) and about 10% lost to the power train leading to an overall gasoline vehicle efficiency of 14-16%. Latest improvements in power trains (constant variable transmission which improves engine efficiency by maintaining a constant RPM) have improved gasoline engine efficiency but I don't have the latest figures. Diesel engines are significantly more efficient.

So overall, gasoline vehicles are about in the same realm of efficiency (14-16) as electric vehicles (12-24), diesel engines are even better than gasoline engines.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/atv.shtml

I assumed the well/ mine to tank efficiencies are about the same for gasoline cars as for power generation.

IF the power is generated with nat gas, less CO2 is emitted than by burning a more carbon-dense fuel like gasoline, but given the higher diesel engine efficiency diesel emissions (CO2 per mile) is actually lower than gasoline.

------

So overall it's a complex question whether electric vehicles are more energy-efficient or produce less CO2 per mile than gasoline or diesel because so much depends on the fuel used to generate electricity and relative vehicle efficiencies. In addition, electric vehicles require rare earth metals which are mined energy-intensively. (It's a little like solar cells ... they just recently broke the barrier where they generate more electricity than is required to make them.) The potential is there, but it's not a slam-dunk improvement in all cases.

The REAL improvements would occur if we managed to (1) reduce our population and (2) reduce other energy expenditures ... such as not making war in foreign lands which require a lot of non-productive fuel-burning and manufacturing and (3) improved our land-use planning so people wouldn't have to drive so much.

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

1KIKI

Tuesday, May 2, 2017 12:46 AM

The other drawbacks to electric vehicles are lack of infrastructure, and charging time.

My ideal vehicle is an ethanol-fueled Minnesota-reformer fuel-cell direct electric drive vehicle (where the motors are directly attached to the wheels - ie, no transmission or axles). Unfortunately, there aren't any stats for that.

For example, the stats I read for ethanol production from corn indicated a lot of inputs in terms of fuel for equipment, herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, fertilizers, and irrigation. But when I wrote to the researchers asking if those figures were derived from FOOD GRADE corn growing, I got no reply. Food grade corn has to be perfect and so requires all of those inputs. But fuel corn would probably not need so much input. Who cares if it's got a little weevil in it, or the ears are misshapen, or even if it's moldy?

And then there are even better fuel sources other than corn, such as switch-grass, which have an even greater energy supply and even lower inputs than (fuel-grade) corn.

The advantage to that fuel-sourced vehicle is that it adds no carbon to the atmosphere from fossil fuels underground.

And such a vehicle wouldn't need to be a private car. It could be used in trains, trucks, trolleys, buses etc.

Why such a vehicle hasn't been invented is beyond me. All the 'parts' are already there - the reformer, the fuel cell, the direct electric-drive motors.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

SIGNYM

Wednesday, July 5, 2017 8:45 PM

Musk spins out "ideas" that sometimes don't pencil out (like his tail-fin-landing rocket) and his "business model" requires indefinite infusions of government money.

It's not that the idea of electric vehicles is fundamentally flawed, because in some cases it can improve our carbon footprint. But I was pointing out to some folks at work who ponied up $1000 for Tesla's not-even-fully-designed electric vehicle that making 500,000 vehicles requires setting up factories and supply-chains, none of which were remotely in place. Even his shareholders are rebelling.

Tesla Price Target Cut To $180 At Goldman; Warns Of "Demand Plateau" For Model S/X

More factory problems as Elon Musk's Tesla starts producing the Model 3
http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-tesla-model3-announceme
nt-20170703-story.html

Tesla’s Second-Quarter Sales Hit by Production Shortfall
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tesla-ceo-elon-musk-details-model-3-produ
ction-ramp-1499097398

Tesla delivered 47,000 vehicles so far this year, barely meeting its goal
https://www.recode.net/2017/7/3/15916730/tesla-delivery-goals-second-q
uarter-2017

-----------

"Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor"- William Blake
THUGR, JONESING FOR WWIII
All those guns 1kiki, are pointed towards your beloved Russia. All those cyber capabilities, pointed right at Russia. Thanks Putin, and get ready to duck.
I'll accept your apology any time, THUGR. But I know you're not man enough to give me one

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

6STRINGJOKER

Thursday, July 6, 2017 2:57 AM

The average human being expells 839.5 lbs of carbon dioxide per year. That's just breathing to live.

Everybody's largest addition to their carbon footprint, no matter their social or economic level is their children.

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

SIGNYM

Friday, July 21, 2017 7:38 AM

Quote:

---

Government "Flabbergasted" After Elon Musk's Most Bizarre Claim Yet

Elon Musk set the interwebs ablaze this morning when he tweeted out that he somehow got every major city on the eastern seaboard to "verbally approve" a "NY-Phil-Balt-DC Hyperloop" to be built by his Boring Company.

"Just received verbal govt approval for The Boring Company to build an underground NY-Phil-Balt-DC Hyperloop. NY-DC in 29 mins."

"City center to city center in each case, with up to a dozen or more entry/exit elevators in each city."

"Still a lot of work needed to receive formal approval, but am optimistic that will occur rapidly."

"If you want this to happen fast, please let your local & federal elected representatives know. Makes a big difference if they hear from you."

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 20, 2017

Of course, if you're like us, the first question that came to mind after reading those tweets is whether Musk is really just that naive, if he thinks we're all really just that dumb or if he's just gone completely batshit crazy...mix of all three?

Now, we don't have a Masters in Government from Harvard, but we're almost certain there is no such thing as a "verbal agreement" when it comes to massive public projects that span multiple states and cost billions, if not trillions, of taxpayer dollars. And while Musk may be permitted to unilaterally make decisions to burn through hundreds of millions of dollars worth of shareholder money at Tesla, municipalities are specifically designed to prevent granting such powers to individuals when it comes to blowing through taxpayer funds.

Not surprisingly, it didn't take long before various "government" officials took to twitter to point out that they hadn't the faintest clue what Musk was even talking about...

New York City's mayoral press secretary apparently wasn't in the loop...

This is news to City Hall. https://t.co/GmEm0b5C4i — Eric Phillips (@EricFPhillips) July 20, 2017

also, if you're stopping by City Hall, please bring a copy of the proposal. That would help. https://t.co/sk6iCM2ymI — Eric Phillips (@EricFPhillips) July 20, 2017

Meanwhile, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) in New York didn't even know who Elon Musk was...which is not a good sign for that "verbal agreement" getting converted to a 'contractual' agreement at any point in the near future.

I just talked to the New York MTA about this. Press aide is so flabbergasted that they're asking me to spell Elon Musk's name for them. https://t.co/mLWb4Abfb8 — Nathan Bomey (@NathanBomey) July 20, 2017

But, it wasn't just New York City that was flabbergasted by Musk's announcement as government officials from NYC to Washington D.C., and everywhere between, were forced to spend their entire day laughing off calls from anxious reporters about his imaginary project. Per The Guardian:

“Who gave him permission to do that?” asked a spokesman with the Maryland department of transportation.

“Elon Musk has had no contact with Philadelphia officials on this matter,” said Mike Dunn, the city spokesman. “We do not know what he means when he says he received ‘verbal government approval’. There are numerous hurdles for this unproven ‘hyperloop’ technology before it can become reality.”

A spokesperson for the state of Pennsylvania confirmed that neither the governor nor the state’s department of transportation had been contacted by Musk or his company.

Ben Sarle, a spokesman for the New York City mayor’s office, said in an email: “Nobody in City Hall, or any of our city agencies, has heard from Mr Musk or any representatives of his company.”

“The New York state department of transportation did not give verbal approval for a hyperloop,” said spokeswoman Jennifer Post.

Anthony McCarthy, the spokesman for the Baltimore mayor, Catherine Pugh, said: “Mr

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME