Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Musk talked about his rocket company on Joe Rogan a few years ago. He said NASA was full of middle to late aged arrogant engineers who it took years to try and implement something. Space X took much younger engineers who designed things 100 times faster and tried them out with them failing many times, but they ended up reaching their goal wayyyyyyy faster.
There's been a lot of trash talking by fans of the traditional automakers, but the reality is, it's pretty clear what they will be doing with their EV systems: following and copying Tesla. Tesla settled the chicken and egg questions of battery swapping versus charging network, and they actually built their own network that's both first and better than any other - traditional automakers are behind and struggling to do the same thing as well. Tesla designed the basic EV architecture with rectangular battery array set low and filling the space between the wheels, then an electric motor set low between the driven wheels at each driven axle - one for FWD/RWD and two for AWD. Traditional automakers follow suit, later. Tesla has the most advanced electric motors and batteries as far as we know, and have more advanced designs under development. Their first manufacturing plant had quality issues and poor throughput. But they've built and are building more new plants, each one better is better than the last. So who has the experience here? I'd argue that EVs are not the same, and it's Tesla who's gone through multiple cycles, not the traditional automakers. The traditional automakers are just beginning to get their first "Tesla-fighter" modern EVs out the door, and while they show some advantages, they also show significant deficits, and it looks like they will be slower to get their next generation vehicles out as well.
I don't think the competition is over, and still think there are possibilities for the traditional automakers - especially those who are creative and have the drive and guts to innovate and take chances. Their first products though, look to me, a little underwhelming. It's like okay, that was a good effort, for a traditional automaker, but where are their next generation products?
Nio is already in Europe now, but it's mostly launched larger and more expensive vehicles. This seems like a much better mass market fit and a solid good contender to the Model 3. No idea if Nio would make it to the states, but the Chinese and European markets are quite large, so they have quite a bit of time before they really need more expansion. Note though, this video is prior to Tesla's sizable price reductions in most markets.
Nio is already in Europe now, but it's mostly launched larger and more expensive vehicles. This seems like a much better mass market fit and a solid good contender to the Model 3. No idea if Nio would make it to the states, but the Chinese and European markets are quite large, so they have quite a bit of time before they really need more expansion. Note though, this video is prior to Tesla's sizable price reductions in most markets.
It does sound like a competitive offering - after seeing CHEAPEST in all caps though, I thought it'd be cheaper!
China left us in the dust in the solar panel industry and will again with the EV industry.
The Chinese government made the solar panel industry a national priority, and they've done that with EVs as well. Here in the US, there is ideological opposition to government investment in industries, which can bring some benefits, yes, but also brings some liabilities, especially in a world where other governments are willing to invest strategically in critical industries.
It does sound like a competitive offering - after seeing CHEAPEST in all caps though, I thought it'd be cheaper!
I looked at the Nio website for Germany and see the ET5 costs just under 50K Euro, about $52,500 USD which also includes the 19 percent sales tax in the price. But the price doesn't include the battery!!
Add 12K Euro for a 75 kwh battery (range 450 km) or 21K Euro for a 100 kwh battery (range 590 km). Or they have a battery subscription plan, also not "cheap" at 200 to 300 Euro monthly.
Nio opened a high end "destination shopping" store in Berlin on Kurfuerstendamm, equivalent to a Park Ave in NYC. They are clearly after upper income buyers - this is not an economy EV like Renault or Dacia sells for under 25K Euro.
China left us in the dust in the solar panel industry and will again with the EV industry.
China stole the technology to design and manufacture polysilicon photovoltaic cells.
The dirty secret of rooftop solar: Most of the world's polysilicon, the key component in photovoltaic cells, is produced with energy from the world's dirtiest, carbon-dioxide-belching, unregulated coal-burning plants in Xinjiang China & Chinese controlled Inner Mongolia. It takes A LOT of energy to manufacture these cells, and to make the electricity cheap, China builds those coal-burning plants without air pollution controls (which would drive up the price of electricity).
The largest manufacturer of polysilicon photovoltaic cells outside of China pays over 4 times as much for electricity. That is a big reason China's polysilicon cells are way cheaper than anyone else can produce them: cheap electricity from burning the dirtiest, cheapest coal available in electricity plants with zero emission controls.
Last edited by moguldreamer; 02-24-2023 at 11:59 AM..
The Chinese government made the solar panel industry a national priority, and they've done that with EVs as well. Here in the US, there is ideological opposition to government investment in industries...
For good reason.
It is not the job of the Federal Government to invest in private enterprise and to pick winners and losers. See the half-billion-dollar Solyndra fiasco.
Quote:
Since the failure of solar-panel company Solyndra, President Obama’s $80 billion clean-technology program has begun to look like a political liability.
Venture Capital is a difficult industry with the brightest business & technical minds on the planet scouring opportunities for investment - and even they only get it right about 20% of the time.
Government bureaucrats and politicians have none of the business acumen of VCs. They have none of the instincts of entrepreneurs. They have not earned a seat at the table. They should go back to doing what we pay them to do - provide fundamental governmental services, administer the laws of the land, and balance the budget. Hell, they can't do that very well, so what makes anyone think our federal government has the competence to fund technology?
Everyone agrees the biggest impediment to the US techology industry is harmful governmental regulations that inhibit business from investing. There is no shortage of investment risk capital, so the Federal Government adds no value by making money available.
Last edited by moguldreamer; 02-24-2023 at 12:00 PM..
It is not the job of the Federal Government to invest in private enterprise and to pick winners and losers. See the half-billion-dollar Solyndra fiasco.
Venture Capital is a difficult industry with the brightest business & technical minds on the planet scouring opportunities for investment - and even they only get it right about 20% of the time.
Government bureaucrats and politicians have none of the business acumen of VCs. They have none of the instincts of entrepreneurs. They have not earned a seat at the table. They should go back to doing what we pay them to do - provide fundamental governmental services, administer the laws of the land, and balance the budget. Hell, they can't do that very well, so what makes anyone think our federal government has the competence to fund technology?
Everyone agrees the biggest impediment to the US techology industry is harmful governmental regulations that inhibit business from investing. There is no shortage of investment risk capital, so the Federal Government adds no value by making money available.
I am aware that not every government investment in business has paid off - just one of the liabilities I mentioned myself. Believe me, nothing you said is a news flash.
And the counterpoint is, what do you think the domination of the solar panel industry has been worth to China? What do you think it will be worth if they continue to dominate in lithium batteries (as they already do)? What will it be worth if they leave us in the dust on EVs as well? I don't know precisely what the answer is, but I am sure it's at least a few orders of magnitude greater than a few hundred million dollars that you are wringing your hands over. Oh, and of course, Tesla itself, may well have failed were it not for a government loan while they were getting going. Where were all those best and brightest venture capitalists when they were needed?
I work in R&D in a tech firm that was founded by high-flying venture capitalists myself. But I am not relying on simple platitudes or ideology - they sound great, especially in internet argument, but they won't take you very far in real life.
Last edited by OutdoorLover; 02-24-2023 at 04:55 PM..
I am aware that not every government investment in business has paid off - just one of the liabilities I mentioned myself. Believe me, nothing you said is a news flash.
And the counterpoint is, what do you think the domination of the solar panel industry has been worth to China? What do you think it will be worth if they continue to dominate in lithium batteries (as they already do)? What will it be worth if they leave us in the dust on EVs as well? I don't know precisely what the answer is, but I am sure it's at least a few orders of magnitude greater than a few hundred million dollars that you are wringing your hands over. Oh, and of course, Tesla itself, may well have failed were it not for a government loan while they were getting going. Where were all those best and brightest venture capitalists when they were needed?
I work in R&D in a tech firm that was founded by high-flying venture capitalists myself. But I am not relying on simple platitudes or ideology - they sound great, especially in internet argument, but they won't take you very far in real life.
Since you're in R&D in a tech firm, I suspect you're familiar with the challenge of transitioning products from the lab to production. At least if your company manufactures (or has someone manufacture) physical products. It is less of an issue for tech firms that do not manufacture (e.g., pure software companies).
When it comes to production in the USA vs. China, there are two areas the Federal Government could help. I'm quite familiar with manufacturing plant site selection in the semiconductor manufacturing business, so that is my perspective.
The first difference between the USA and China (or other nations around the globe) is taxes.
In China and most other countries, they view the prospect of a major high tech manufacturing plant such as a chip plant as an economic catalyst - a seed crystal, so to speak. They correctly see that if they win the site selection contest, the new plant will be a catalyst for many new tech businesses, and the need for educated employees will be a catalyst for local universities (employees in a fab typically have PhDs in materials science, EE, ChemE, ME, Chemistry, Solid State Physics, etc etc). It will be a catalyst for economic development. It will drive GDP upward, making everyone better off. Therefore, those foreign governments, in order to win the business, will offer incentive packages including tax holidays, reduced utility costs for water & electricity, will build out new transportation infrastructure to get imports & exports to/from the facility on a timely basis, etc.
In contrast, in the USA, politicians see the prospect of a major high tech manufacturing such as semiconductor fab as a source of tax revenue and a burden on the local economy. Instead of offering a tax holiday to win the site selection process, they greedily forecast how much tax revenue they can extract from the company.
So, the Federal Government could help drive technical innovation by implementing a set of tax reforms - permanent tax reforms - so the USA can compete with China and other countries regarding taxation.
The second area the Federal Government could step in is in regulatory reform.
Around the world, when a nation wishes to compete in the site selection process, its national government gets all the ducks lined up. The government commits to do what it takes, and all stakeholders from the local to the national level support the effort. (I recall when the national government of Vietnam said they'd move a river to make space for the chip plant.
In contrast, in the USA, there are a thousand and one local entities that think they should get a vote. They do not line up behind the cause. They instead complain about school overcrowding (instead of committing to build new schools), congested highways (instead of committing to build the transportation infrastructure). They complain of utilities (instead of securing rights to water & electricity for the company). Rather than facilitate the process, they throw up roadblocks. Local housewives, who have read about the horrors of dihydrogen monoxide attend public meetings while engaging in all manner of hand-wringing and pearl-clutching because they've heard about the dangers of - gasp - chemicals. Tree-hugging EnviroNazis come out of the woodworks because of the horrors of development. Everyone throws up a roadblock.
So, the Federal Government could help by getting all the governmental entities in line. It could take the NGOs & their lawyers behind the woodshed. It could sweep away local harmful regulations that exist solely to make development difficult.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
