BillyGee

Well-known member
First Name
Bill
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
390
Location
Northern California
Vehicles
F350, Yamaha Stryker
Occupation
Technician
Country flag
Nuclear power doesn't count any legal liability, cost overruns, waste disposal, and you can't carry it with you.

The comparison is with being able to carry the energy with you. Your own calculations shows that it pays off in five years, so why are you saying it doesn't?

Also, if they don't plan for this internal charge management, then you won't be able to have charging trailers without major alterations.

-Crissa
Nuclear is far and away the safest energy that we've ever created from start to finish and it also has the highest return for energy invested. everyone always recites the same three incidents, but when you compare the environmental damage of mismanagement of facilities to the everyday output of things like a cadmium mine or an oil refinery, nuclear is not only cleaner but cheaper in almost every capacity. I wish I could have a radioisotope generator built into my car, I would pay a lot for that because then I would never have to plug it in, but it probably wouldn't generate very much electricity overall.

My numbers for the return on investment are based off of the exorbitant crisis in California crossed with maximum power generation and retention, if you pay closer to the average of 13 cents per kilowatt hour that the rest of the nation does and generate even less per day, both of which will likely be the case, then the numbers really don't shake out. I was being generous with my estimate, if I were to be conservative it would be a no-brainer to avoid it.





Advertisement

 

BillyGee

Well-known member
First Name
Bill
Joined
Jan 22, 2020
Messages
257
Reaction score
390
Location
Northern California
Vehicles
F350, Yamaha Stryker
Occupation
Technician
Country flag
$0.02 = 2¢ ≠ 0.02¢

Did you mean 2 cents, or 2 hundreths of a cent?

Sorry, I have a bit of a pet peeve with units. Had quite a discussion at a Burger King a long time ago that was advertising 0.99¢ Whoppers.
Just a normal two cents, no fractional cents being traded here.
 

Luke42

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 10, 2020
Messages
505
Reaction score
864
Location
Illinois, USA
Vehicles
GMC Sierra Hybrid (2-Mode)
Country flag
Your shady situation aside, why would I take my house with me when the truck has more than enough charge to last the day?
If you're an RV full-timer, you take your house with you whenever you travel.

They're not super-common, but they are an interesting corner-case and they often need pickup trucks with large tow-ratings.

And, yes, I'm one of those annoying people who has actual answers to rhetorical questions. 🤦🏻‍♂️
 

Crissa

Well-known member
First Name
Crissa
Joined
Jul 8, 2020
Messages
3,667
Reaction score
3,991
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
2014 Zero S, 2013 Mazda 3
Country flag
Nuclear is far and away the safest energy that we've ever created from start to finish and...
...it still isn't as safe as solar. It just doesn't count the liability in the cost, since only governments hold it. There's no insurer with premium payments built in, like for other sources of energy.

Just like coal rarely has the local medical costs of its emissions counted into it's cost, true, but I didn't say externalities.

-Crissa
 

sdk

New member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Jun 1, 2020
Messages
3
Reaction score
2
Location
Jacksonville, Oregon
Vehicles
Cybertruck
Country flag
The tunnels will only support electric vehicles (with ICE you would have to deal with all the exhaust fumes). So he wouldn't want to exclude one of his own models since that is probably a significant percentage of potential users in the future. The size of the tunnels is pretty specific and has an impact on the speed with which they can be dug. I'm not surprised that he adjusted the truck to fit the tunnels rather than the tunnels for the truck -- particularly if it is only a modest change to the truck to make it work.
 

madquadbiker

Well-known member
First Name
Tony
Joined
May 23, 2020
Messages
132
Reaction score
123
Location
Weston Super Mare, UK
Vehicles
Nissan Navara NP300, Smart fortwo, Honda TRX700XX, Honda MSX125SF.
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
...it still isn't as safe as solar. It just doesn't count the liability in the cost, since only governments hold it. There's no insurer with premium payments built in, like for other sources of energy.

Just like coal rarely has the local medical costs of its emissions counted into it's cost, true, but I didn't say externalities.

-Crissa
Now having a pop up wind turbine on the roof of the CT, would that be classified as perpetual motion 😂
 

Dids

Well-known member
First Name
Les
Joined
Dec 21, 2019
Messages
1,008
Reaction score
1,835
Location
Massachusetts
Vehicles
04 Tacoma, 21 Cybertruck
Occupation
Self
Country flag
I'd argue that nuclear outstrips solar in terms of price, efficiency and return on investment. Solar is great, it's just an expensive front end energy cost for breaking even over the lifespan of most panels. Still preferable to gas by a long margin. However until people learn to love nuclear we probably won't ever get that 0.02¢ energy price in our lifetimes.

I don't know what the cover would cost, but Tesla charges over a grand for upgraded wheels instead of just charging the difference. I'd expect it to be a premium feature, so I think my guess of $3k or more is reasonable.

Solar also plays into one of Elon's favorite expressions, "economy of scale". A shared inverter across many panels will always reduce loss over a single inverter on a small array, so micro-arrays are useful for really small consumption accomodations, like gates and emergency phones, but on the CT will just be a passive drip charge at best.


Even extrapolation out to 12 years makes the system barely break even over my assumed cost.

I think I wasn't clear enough. I was saying that if your car is just parked in the driveway you can just plug it in on 110 and get better results for far cheaper than the solar tonneau. Even if you're in a remote location it's far cheaper to get a portable panel and if it in. Sure, it's not as convenient as it being built in, but it's probably about a 10th the price and there's plenty of youtube videos of people trickle charging a tesla with DIY panels.

I don't think a jerry can is an analogous comparison. I don't know of any jerry can that refills itself, and even if it did I'm not sure if trust putting whatever is in there into a fuel tank, haha. It'll be great in a pinch or for camping because so long as you have sun you can limp a few more miles out or have climate control to survive the night. Again though, a field solar kit under the back seat will get you more miles for less money. I may just do that for my emergency kit in the CT.

All I was trying to illustrate in my post was that economically it is a bit of a stretch for a solar tonneau to wash out. If you an to drive your CT for 30 years (like I do), then it's worth it even up to exorbitant costs. If money is no object and you can put the environment first, awesome. If you just want it because it's cool, I agree and I also want it.

The business man in me doesn't see the long term benefit for a fleet though, which is what I think ol Musky was saying in his remarks.
You can argue but you would be arguing with Dept of Energy who says that solar costs $35 -44 per Gwh. Nuke costs 112 -189. I don't know if that price includes storage for the solar.
 

TheLastStarfighter

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2020
Messages
292
Reaction score
672
Location
Canada
Vehicles
Dodge Challenger
Occupation
Engineer
Country flag
...And charging on the road is not the same as having power off it. I have affixed solar for my trips for the last fifteen years.

-Crissa
Well that's a bit different. I think there's little debate that built-in solar could be useful for a small segment of the population. What Elon says is it doesn't make economic sense to integrate it in a vehicle like the Cybertruck. To do so would add cost, complexity and possibly sacrifice: the panels can be on the hood, roof or vault, but the present material on each was chosen for a valuable reason. For me and likely 95% of CT buyers, they would never have reason to need built in solar, and the cost and other sacrifices would likely deter them. For the remaining niche group, they could continue to use the system they already have to go to Burning Man and probably still be better off than the additional cost Tesla would have to charge to add a fairly complicated but rarely needed option.
 

Jhodgesatmb

Well-known member
First Name
Jack
Joined
Dec 1, 2019
Messages
998
Reaction score
1,064
Location
San Francisco Bay area
Vehicles
Lexus Rx450H Tesla Model 3
Occupation
Researcher
Country flag
Nuclear power doesn't count any legal liability, cost overruns, waste disposal, and you can't carry it with you.

The comparison is with being able to carry the energy with you. Your own calculations shows that it pays off in five years, so why are you saying it doesn't?

Also, if they don't plan for this internal charge management, then you won't be able to have charging trailers without major alterations.

-Crissa
Agreed. Nuclear would have never existed without the government (us) paying for it, and without the government (us) guaranteeing that there would never be liability suits or the utility having to deal with spent core rods, contaminated land, etc. If factored in the cost of nuclear would be astronomical. I have friends that have spent their entire careers doing risk analysis for the nuclear industry.
 

happy intruder

Well-known member
First Name
O. K.
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
137
Reaction score
98
Location
Irvine
Vehicles
Model 3 Jun 2019..... Model S Jan 2020
Occupation
Retired
Country flag
300 is the range of the Dual Motor. That explains why he'd mention it.

-Crissa
yes, ~300.......but doesn't that really mean around 275 or so?......my 2020 Model S is touted for 402......but I have never seen over 390 and my calculations are showing battery capacity is 92.1......my wife's 2019 Model 3 is at 289 capacity now (11k)....she has never seen the 324 much less anything in the 300's.....very conservative driver.....when checking TeslaFi, she is always around 99% efficient.....so I have no idea what the dual motor or tri-motor CyberTrcuk will have as range....I guess it is a waiting game right now
 

rr6013

Well-known member
First Name
Rex
Joined
Apr 22, 2020
Messages
320
Reaction score
259
Location
San Carlos Panama
Website
shorttakes.substack.com
Vehicles
1997 Tahoe 2 door 4x4
Occupation
Retired software developer and heavy commercial design builder
Country flag
Well that's a bit different. I think there's little debate that built-in solar could be useful for a small segment of the population. What Elon says is it doesn't make economic sense to integrate it in a vehicle like the Cybertruck. To do so would add cost, complexity and possibly sacrifice: the panels can be on the hood, roof or vault, but the present material on each was chosen for a valuable reason. For me and likely 95% of CT buyers, they would never have reason to need built in solar, and the cost and other sacrifices would likely deter them. For the remaining niche group, they could continue to use the system they already have to go to Burning Man and probably still be better off than the additional cost Tesla would have to charge to add a fairly complicated but rarely needed option.
This power requirement/range friction point inherent in BEV is unfortunately persistent. After 2040 the rub will stick if technology doesn’t overcome it. That’s become my take on BEV.

Hardcore wirednuts, aka gearheads of old, will gen offgrid and solar-up they’re rigs. There’s no ski lifts in the backcountry either but three pinner’s get it done. No limits!

BEV are corridor bound transportation. ICE will easily fill them shoes outside corridors BEV dare tread. MFGR’s will elect to leave off-grid to third party aftermarketers.
 

ÆCIII

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2020
Messages
24
Reaction score
29
Location
Virginia
Vehicles
Model 3
Country flag
Not sure if it's been mentioned already (this topic has a lot of posts), but in my opinion even a 3% scale reduction needs to eventually have another Reveal Event for us to see it and also an update to the Cybertruck content on the Tesla website. Because who knows if it's exactly 3% proportionally all directions inside and out. Likely there are going to be some areas that lose more space than others to optimize the design, so we will want to see the actual new prototype - just my thoughts anyway. Any rumors on when an updated Reveal might be expected?
 
Last edited:

Advertisement





 


Advertisement
Top