God created Elon Musk to be a supervillain but forgot to flip the last switch.

sexmag

I would have said:

' Elon musk, the real tony stark of our generation"

But this fits better

Stick a 1GF ultracapacitor up his arse and he'll do wonders

sabat

The ultimate conman. Estimated date for Tesla going bust and the entire world saying "how the feck did we fall for that?" sometime around March 2019.

sabat

sabat wrote: »

The ultimate conman. Estimated date for Tesla going bust and the entire world saying "how the feck did we fall for that?" sometime around March 2019.

Unlike most conmen, he is actually producing results and vehicles.
His problem is that he is trying to do too much, but all the same he hasn't failed (yet), I just hope that he does not piss off Tesla owners too much.
Otherwise he'll soon be toast!

prinzeugen

DeLorean produced results and vehicles and he was still a conman.

I did read somewhere that Musk would need every gram of Lithium produced on the planet for 2 years just to get close to his targets. And that is not going to happen.

But they guy is still taking money off governments/companies/people with more money than sense.

global reserves of lithium are estimated at 39 million tons, that's a lot of 38 grams of material.

No reason to assume that future batteries will need lithium, we do not yet know what will be the optimum battery that will power BEV's in the near future.
It could simply use carbon.

And there's plenty of that around!

prinzeugen

Deleted User wrote: »

global reserves of lithium are estimated at 39 million tons, that's a lot of 38 grams of material.

No reason to assume that future batteries will need lithium, we do not yet know what will be the optimum battery that will power BEV's in the near future.
It could simply use carbon.

And there's plenty of that around!

http://fortune.com/2016/05/06/elon-musk-tesla-lithium/

Musk said earlier this week that for Tesla to meet its target of 500,000 cars a year, “we would basically need to absorb the entire world’s lithium-ion production.”

transylman

Would also be of the fraud view. He is constantly coming out with these half baked technologies, whoe main purpose seem to be to distract from the fact that Tesla is getting no closer to being profitable.

Hyperloop, an almost-vacuum tube for electric trains, goal for one between San Fran and LA. Based on the technological challenge of creating a vacuum tube alone, not going to happen.

Boring company. Create hundreds of underground tunnels for automated underground trams. Based on costs of digging, not going to happen.

Rocket passenger travel replacing planes. Based on costs and safety of rockets not going to happen.

Tesla semi. Battery technology is nowhere near the level of being able to provide the performance he has indicated.

And on and on and on, classic PT Barnum distraction. Dont get me wrong, i would like to see an electric car succeed and do believe in a few years electric will have replaced diesel/petrol, but Musk will not be the guy to make this happen.

Have any of us seen the 'Bored Elon Musk' Twitter or FB page?..funny ****..but, yeah, I'd agree he's a charlatan..was it the guardian had an article on him a couple of weeks ago?

And here we have one of the major differences between Irish/British and Americans. You guys think it's a negative mark on him that one of his companies is struggling.

As someone with a struggling business, the attitude pisses me off. Like what is it? Just shlt on people who try and don't succeed while working 9-5 for people who tried and succeeded?


What other billionaires are taking the PR risk of building escape capsules for trapped Thai kids? Oh yeah, he's only doing it for spin. What an asshole he is.

Jim Bob Scratcher

Deleted User wrote: »

Have any of us seen the 'Bored Elon Musk' Twitter or FB page?..funny ****..but, yeah, I'd agree he's a charlatan..was it the guardian had an article on him a couple of weeks ago?

A 20 billion charlatan :pac:

mvl

(hihi - this thread would be too good not to watch.)

So ... I would really want to read more about what Sophia thinks about Elon

cournioni

Electric vehicles are a con. Unless you’re in Norway or Sweden, you are essentially using harmful energy sources to power the car anyway. Along with using loads of batteries that aren’t exactly friendly to the environment either.

We’ll need a few more waste incinerators around to meet further demand for these hairdryers.

Bubbaclaus

People calling him a conman clearly haven't seen SpaceX.

They've over 50% of the rocket launch market with a technology no other company/country has been able to copy as of yet.

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

Electric vehicles are a con. Unless you’re in Norway or Sweden, you are essentially using harmful energy sources to power the car anyway. Along with using loads of batteries that aren’t exactly friendly to the environment either.

We’ll need a few more waste incinerators around to meet further demand for these hairdryers.

Maybe, but petrol cars are NEVER going to get more environmentally friendly. If anything they're
going to get worse as oil becomes more scarce.

Electric cars get greener year on year with that growth of renewables and given rumours of carbon and other batteries, there's a huge chance the most polluting component of an ecar will be cheap and easy to make before long.

cournioni

cournioni wrote: »

Electric vehicles are a con. Unless you’re in Norway or Sweden, you are essentially using harmful energy sources to power the car anyway. Along with using loads of batteries that aren’t exactly friendly to the environment either.

We’ll need a few more waste incinerators around to meet further demand for these hairdryers.

Industrial electricity generation is less polluting and more efficient than powering a car using an engine. It also moves the pollution away from cities.

As renewables gain more and more of a foothold, your argument evaporates. Musk is a part of that movement.

cournioni

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Maybe, but petrol cars are NEVER going to get more environmentally friendly. If anything they're
going to get worse as oil becomes more scarce.

Electric cars get greener year on year with that growth of renewables and given rumours of carbon and other batteries, there's a huge chance the most polluting component of an ecar will be cheap and easy to make before long.

Hybrid Technology is the way forward, whether petrol or diesel. Electric vehicles are not a sustainable option, they are a fad.

Can you imagine if every vehicle in the World was an EV? Where would all of that power come from? If there is a growth in renewables, what are the environmental costs of having them to the scale of powering every EV, that is not even bringing the horrific eyesores that these power sources (wind turbines, hydro stations, solar panels etc) are into account.

super_furry

I still think he’s going to turn out to be Andrew Ryan in space rather than underwater.

cournioni

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Industrial electricity generation is less polluting and more efficient than powering a car using an engine. It also moves the pollution away from cities.

As renewables gain more and more of a foothold, your argument evaporates. Musk is a part of that movement.

NIMBYism is not an option here. You are just pushing problems elsewhere, and not sustainable either. Renewable energy has its costs as well.

sexmag

cournioni wrote: »

Renewable energy has its costs as well.

Yes but renewable has one thing over fossile fuels....It's renewable

cournioni

sexmag wrote: »

Yes but renewable has one thing over fossile fuels....It's renewable

... but is insufficient in most cases. You cannot have wind farms, hydro facilities or solar stations everywhere either. If you did it would be one true way to ruin the local environment, which will be around long after you or I.

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

Hybrid Technology is the way forward, whether petrol or diesel. Electric vehicles are not a sustainable option, they are a fad.

Can you imagine if every vehicle in the World was an EV? Where would all of that power come from? If there is a growth in renewables, what are the environmental costs of having them to the scale of powering every EV, that is not even bringing the horrific eyesores that these power sources (wind turbines, hydro stations, solar panels etc) are into account.

Nope. You're taking current technology at face value and not accounting for advances.
PV efficiency is constantly climbing. There's billions in renewables research and it's very likely we'll be fully renewable in the next 50 years.

Our current grid has plenty of capacity for 30 times the ecars we have right now. Sure the ESB would love if everyone was using electric and charging at night to balance the load.

Every question and concern you have has already been answered and the future is bright for EV.

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

... but is insufficient in most cases. You cannot have wind farms, hydro facilities or solar stations everywhere either. If you did it would be one true way to ruin the local environment, which will be around long after you or I.

Based on what? There's a few countries that are 100% renewable already.
You're happy to burn coal and gas so long as it doesn't spoil the view?

Shenshen

cournioni wrote: »

Hybrid Technology is the way forward, whether petrol or diesel. Electric vehicles are not a sustainable option, they are a fad.

Can you imagine if every vehicle in the World was an EV? Where would all of that power come from? If there is a growth in renewables, what are the environmental costs of having them to the scale of powering every EV, that is not even bringing the horrific eyesores that these power sources (wind turbines, hydro stations, solar panels etc) are into account.

We're currently using a lot of energy drilling for oil, transporting it to the refinery, refining the oil, and then transporting it to point of sale, in other words your local petrol station.

We could run quite a vast number of additional EVs just on saving that energy alone.

cournioni

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Based on what? There's a few countries that are 100% renewable already.
You're happy to burn coal and gas so long as it doesn't spoil the view?

Norway and Sweden. Why? Because they have a natural environment that supports hydro energy, not everywhere does.

I’m happy without demand for EV’s ruining our natural landscape. Hybrids won’t do that.

Shenshen

cournioni wrote: »

Norway and Sweden. Why? Because they have a natural environment that supports hydro energy, not everywhere does.

I’m happy without demand for EV’s ruining our natural landscape. Hybrids won’t do that.

And Ireland has the natural environment to support tidal electricity generation, as well as wind generation.
There isn't a place on earth where the geology or climate would mean we couldn't generate renewable energies to cover demand.

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

Norway and Sweden. Why? Because they have a natural environment that supports hydro energy, not everywhere does.

I’m happy without demand for EV’s ruining our natural landscape. Hybrids won’t do that.

Well fortunately we have a government who proactively ignores people like you.

Onward to the renewable and EV revolution!

cournioni

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Nope. You're taking current technology at face value and not accounting for advances.
PV efficiency is constantly climbing. There's billions in renewables research and it's very likely we'll be fully renewable in the next 50 years.

Our current grid has plenty of capacity for 30 times the ecars we have right now. Sure the ESB would love if everyone was using electric and charging at night to balance the load.

Every question and concern you have has already been answered and the future is bright for EV.

Fully renewable at what cost? Ruining our landscape with more wind farms? No thanks. If everyone was using EV’s we would undoubtedly need more energy to power it ruining our landscape. We already have a growing population which will increase energy consumption further, we don’t need another thing to add to it.

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

Fully renewable at what cost? Ruining our landscape with more wind farms? No thanks. If everyone was using EV’s we would undoubtedly need more energy to power it ruining our landscape. We already have a growing population which will increase energy consumption further, we don’t need another thing to add to it.

First off, What's the alternative?

Secondly, I don't believe the landscape will be ruined. There's a hundred policies the govt could bring in to increase microgeneration and take a huge strain off large scale facilities.
Thirdly, there's plenty of wave and tidal generation that you'd never see and plenty of remove areas on the west and northwest which are perfect for hydro.

cournioni

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Well fortunately we have a government who proactively ignores people like you.

Onward to the renewable and EV revolution!

A government looking for any excuse to increase taxes? Well I never... :rolleyes:

The high horse brigade

cournioni wrote: »

A government looking for any excuse to increase taxes? Well I never... :rolleyes:

That makes no sense

Shenshen

cournioni wrote: »

NIMBYism is not an option here. You are just pushing problems elsewhere, and not sustainable either. Renewable energy has its costs as well.

It's quite ironic that you should accuse another poster of NIMBYism, after claiming that your own main objection to renewables is that you don't want to look at the infrastructure creating it...

Shenshen

cournioni wrote: »

A government looking for any excuse to increase taxes? Well I never... :rolleyes:

You are aware that you pay far LESS tax on an EV compared to an ICE, do you?

cournioni

Twenty Grand wrote: »

First off, What's the alternative?

Secondly, I don't believe the landscape will be ruined. There's a hundred policies the govt could bring in to increase microgeneration and take a huge strain off large scale facilities.
Thirdly, there's plenty of wave and tidal generation that you'd never see and plenty of remove areas on the west and northwest which are perfect for hydro.

Hybrid vehicles.

I do believe it will ruin the landscape. It has already done so in numerous locations throughout Ireland.

Tidal energy also has its costs to sea wildlife... but that’s okay once you can’t see it.

Wibbs

I like Musk I have to say. I admire his energy and his audacity, to the degree of how does have that level of brass neck going on.

I'd agree with others when they say his businesses are a bit of a joke. And one mostly on the American taxpayer and investors. I have a lot of time for Space-X as it is working as promised most of the time and in an area that's bloody hard to get to work at all. Spaceflight isn't for the weak.

His car company? Total white elephant in my humble. He most certainly has raised the profile of leccy cars and that will be his rightful legacy, but I would question the intelligence of anyone investing in his car company. His truck is a complete nonstarter and simply can't work. His cars are good, if expensive but he hasn't a snowball's hope in hell of meeting production figures he needs to meet. TBH I'm surprised he hasn't sold out or gone into partnership with one of the existing car companies, whose production capacities make his look like a bloke assembling a kit car in his garage. Ford produce more cars in a single month than Tesla has, ever.

Of his other ideas. None of them are his. The idea of the "hyper loop" was around in the 19th century. Most of his other schemes are just as nebulous. His battery production plant is where he seems to be putting his future in. Figuring that making the cars is one thing, but making the fuel is the more sustainable and profitable way to go.

His fans can be batshit crazy though. Slightly criticise him on say youtube and they will show up in swarms like quasi-religious nutters who just have to believe.

As for leccy cars? They have a lot of potential but in only one area. Their "fuel" has the potential to be fully "green". Their production environmental hit is higher than fossil fuelled cars. Well they have another potential major advantage; the electric motor that propels them can potentially last for many decades(though this is offset by the fact their batteries won't). And we're back to the elephant in the room, the consumer production cycle. If that remains at the average five years per car model and scrapped at ten, then one of the biggest impacts on the environment, building the cars in the first place, won't change. If anything it could get worse.

Wibbs

cournioni wrote: »

Hybrid vehicles.

I do believe it will ruin the landscape. It has already done so in numerous locations throughout Ireland.

Tidal energy also has its costs to sea wildlife... but that’s okay once you can’t see it.

Well there is nuclear, but that's a major no no for most policy makers and "green" types. If we ever truly crack fusion then these problems go away and wind farms will go the way of windmills from the past.

cournioni

Shenshen wrote: »

You are aware that you pay far LESS tax on an EV compared to an ICE, do you?

No kidding, that’s what happened when they tried to phase out petrol for diesel, then diesel for hybrid now EV... Nice little incremental increases each time. EV, once the norm would see similar taxes once they realize the environmental impact that they have (batteries, energy consumption etc.).

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

Hybrid vehicles.

I do believe it will ruin the landscape. It has already done so in numerous locations throughout Ireland.

Tidal energy also has its costs to sea wildlife... but that’s okay once you can’t see it.

And petrol and Diesel are fine as the devastating environmental impact happens in other countries? And we have climate change. And we have local pollution. And we have insane fuel taxes.
And what happened when petrol prices go up?
Hybrids aresnt terribly more efficient than petrol cars in fairness.

To be fair, you or I don't have a choice on what cars we'll buy. Most countries are banning new petrol and Diesel. That leaves hybrid and EV. Hybrids IMO are the worst of both worlds. All the problems of an ICE, all the problems of an EV.

Near all manufacturers are looking at EV. Hybrids are only a stopgap measure.

Wibbs

Shenshen wrote: »

You are aware that you pay far LESS tax on an EV compared to an ICE, do you?

You are aware that's currently and for obvious reasons; as a carrot to get more on the road for "green" purposes. If you think governments will keep that in play and lose billions worldwide in fuel and motor taxes, or that electricity prices to charge them will stay low, that's pretty naive.

Lone Stone

give it a listen it's interesting

cournioni

Twenty Grand wrote: »

And petrol and Diesel are fine as the devastating environmental impact happens in other countries? And we have climate change. And we have local pollution. And we have insane fuel taxes.
And what happened when petrol prices go up?
Hybrids aresnt terribly more efficient than petrol cars in fairness.

To be fair, you or I don't have a choice on what cars we'll buy. Most countries are banning new petrol and Diesel. That leaves hybrid and EV. Hybrids IMO are the worst of both worlds. All the problems of an ICE, all the problems of an EV.

Near all manufacturers are looking at EV. Hybrids are only a stopgap measure.

They’re not ideal, but my point is neither are EV’s. They are a fad. People are being sold the idea that EVs are green by the likes of Musk. It’s good marketing and all of the green painted sheep will follow. I’m just making the point that Hybrid is the best we can hope for with out doing further damage to our landscape.

Shenshen

cournioni wrote: »

No kidding, that’s what happened when they tried to phase out petrol for diesel, then diesel for hybrid now EV... Nice little incremental increases each time. EV, once the norm would see similar taxes once they realize the environmental impact that they have (batteries, energy consumption etc.).

The batteries can, once they're no longer capable of a full charge to propel a car, be used to store energy from solar-voltaic panels for households.
We'll be getting a package like this installed soon.

Shenshen

Wibbs wrote: »

You are aware that's currently and for obvious reasons; as a carrot to get more on the road for "green" purposes. If you think governments will keep that in play and lose billions worldwide in fuel and motor taxes, or that electricity prices to charge them will stay low, that's pretty naive.

I am well aware of that.
I was replying to a poster who claimed the government was happy to charge higher taxes on EV right now, which simply isn't the case.

Franz Von Peppercorn

cournioni wrote: »

Fully renewable at what cost? Ruining our landscape with more wind farms? No thanks. If everyone was using EV’s we would undoubtedly need more energy to power it ruining our landscape. We already have a growing population which will increase energy consumption further, we don’t need another thing to add to it.

Wind farms can be offshore.

Also our natural landscape, including the burren, is mostly man made. Highlands aside and there are huge electricity generators, pylons and wires dotting it.

Wind farms are far prettier.

Twenty Grand

cournioni wrote: »

They’re not ideal, but my point is neither are EV’s. They are a fad. People are being sold the idea that EVs are green by the likes of Musk. It’s good marketing and all of the green painted sheep will follow. I’m just making the point that Hybrid is the best we can hope for with out doing further damage to our landscape.

Best based on what?
You'll still pay extortionate amounts for fuel.
You'll still pay extortionate amounts for servicing and parts.
You have all the problems of an ICE and of an EV.
You still have all same "environmental" impacts.

Your only argument against EVs is the power generation infrastructure which, lets be honest isn't actually that much.
There's plenty of spare capacity at the moment to handle a huge uptake in EVs.
There's plenty of solutions for all the potential problems you've posed.
Hybrids are not and have never been a solution. Hybrids are only a stepping stone for ICE manufacturers to move to full EV production. All motoring trends are going to full EV, hell, even Rallycross is going full EV.

Signore Fancy Pants

This post has been deleted.

Wibbs

Twenty Grand wrote: »

You still have all same "environmental" impacts.

I'd say more. You have the extra environmental hits of pure battery cars with the hits of petrol cars on top. You're doubling up. If anything hybrids are more polluting than either.

sexmag

cournioni wrote: »

Hybrid vehicles.

I do believe it will ruin the landscape. It has already done so in numerous locations throughout Ireland.

Tidal energy also has its costs to sea wildlife... but that’s okay once you can’t see it.

Are you really arguing that we shouldn't use renewable energy because it might look unsightly for landscapes?

There will be no landscapes left if we don't

Peregrine

I'm indifferent about him to be honest. SpaceX has been a success and he deserves credit for that. I don't think Tesla will be successful even if EVs in general are but wouldn't mind being proven wrong about that.

His intransigence on the topic of Hyperloop is disappointing. Also very disrespectful and insulting to anyone who tries to suggest that his sci-fi vision is just that and ignores the realities of transit and geometry.

At least he's trying. He has succeeded in a lot of things but he holds some naive (probably cultural) visions. Also reminds me about people who go on about disruptive technologies. Hey, it's his money I suppose. What do I care?

Skylinehead

SpaceX is fantastic. Really shook up the space market, and showed just how expensive the likes of NASA are. Tesla, eh. I can't warm to the guy when he claims Tesla will show the likes of Toyota how to do lean manufacturing. Toyota, the pioneers of the concept. Toyota, who make 17 vehicles a minute. Sort out your own production and quality control problems before you go after the big boy Elon.

kenmc

Personally I'd rather see him set up an office here, than the vacuous farcebook, twitter etc. At least he's trying to do something positive for mankind, however seemingly impossible that is. Spacex has transformed the rocket market, with its reusable boosters. Sure, the first few landings didn't go as planned, but fail early and you'll learn fast. Tesla has focused the minds of the mainstream car makers, that if they don't start going electric, they're going to be irrelevant soon.


His biography is a very good read. Despite all the setbacks encountered, he refuses to concede defeat. Seems like a difficult person to work for, but so apparently was Jobs,Gates etc