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