TSLA is toast? <--- epic selloff

[misterkel]

several modern countries are already almost entirely run on natural resource energies.

Iceland (geothermal), and??

 

[mac]

Because I agree global warming is a real problem. It is people's actions and the solutions I questioned. For those that are committed to save the world, they should demonstrate their resolves by reducing their energy consumption instead of buying Teslas. People buy Tesla or electric car to save money on gas, not to save energy consumption and it is advertised as such.

Anyway my apology to @KCalhoun for going off topic.

You can always use alternative energy source to charge your EV.

 

[KCalhoun]

Call me oldschool but I still like powerful normal gas engine cars. The roar, the energy. Evs seem hipster treehugger stuff.

Imagine Fast & Furious race movies with evs, lol. Woo an electric toy car #epicfail

 

[Overnight]

...

Imagine Fast & Furious race movies with evs, lol. Woo an electric toy car #epicfail

Have you watched any eF-1 races? It's just odd. Especially when they have to strategize those two "boost" chances they get for a temporary power increase. It's like watching a video game, heh.

 

[tradingbb888]

Everyone talking about EV.
TSLA is overvalued. But stocks like NIO is certainly an insane.

 

[VicBee]

Iceland (geothermal), and??

And look at previous posts on this thread

 

[ironchef]

You can always use alternative energy source to charge your EV.

Most of the time you trade one problem for another with their own environmental damages and challenges and a net gain in energy consumption overall.

I still remember my freshman physics: If you burn more energy, no matter the source you heat things up, and freshman thermodynamics: Every step in converting energy from one form to another you lose efficiency due to conversion. So, from crude to gasoline to ICE, 2 steps. From crude (hydro...) to oil to electricity, to charging the battery to running the electric motor, 3-4 steps.

Anyway, I didn't mean to argue or defend either sides. So, my last post here.

@KCalhoun I give you back your thread.

Regards,

 

[D&D Finance]

Tesla stock might reach $4000 this year already!

 

[Overnight]

...

I still remember my freshman physics: If you burn more energy, no matter the source you heat things up, and freshman thermodynamics: Every step in converting energy from one form to another you lose efficiency due to conversion. So, from crude to gasoline to ICE, 2 steps. From crude (hydro...) to oil to electricity, to charging the battery to running the electric motor, 3-4 steps...

OMG, someone finally gets it! ironchef, where have you been for the last 4 years on the forum as I am whining about EV? Frak!

 

[VicBee]

Most of the time you trade one problem for another with their own environmental damages and challenges and a net gain in energy consumption overall.

I still remember my freshman physics: If you burn more energy, no matter the source you heat things up, and freshman thermodynamics: Every step in converting energy from one form to another you lose efficiency due to conversion. So, from crude to gasoline to ICE, 2 steps. From crude (hydro...) to oil to electricity, to charging the battery to running the electric motor, 3-4 steps.

Anyway, I didn't mean to argue or defend either sides. So, my last post here.

@KCalhoun I give you back your thread.

Regards,

You're talking energy efficiency, but there is more to coal, oil and gas, starting with atmospheric pollution which you conveniently remove from your 2+2 equation.
Furthermore, crude to processing to gasoline to ICE to run an engine is multiple steps froth with health dangers along the way. Oil spills at oil extraction, spills at transportation, explosions at processing, fumes at filling ICE engine and smoke from inefficient burning.
Certainly, holding on to oil in order to create electricity is inefficient, but the goal is to remove oil and coal as soon as possible.