Electric Car News

PeoplesElbow

Well-Known Member
Not so fast there, chief. You have to read quite a ways down into the announcement to learn the uncomfortable truth about this purchase. The supposedly "all-electric" fire engine has a diesel engine in it. The pumps that actually deliver the water to put out fires run off of the diesel engine and the truck itself can run off of diesel when the battery inevitably runs out. So the entire description of "all-electric" is a farce. (MSN)



So why would these fire trucks still have diesel engines? They're supposed to be eliminating fossil fuels to save us all from climate change, aren't they? The answer should be fairly obvious. These are emergency response vehicles. If your neighbor's EV can't make it out of the driveway one morning because they couldn't find a charging station or there was a blackout, they might miss a day of work. If the fire truck can't do its job, buildings will burn down and people may die. It's simply not worth the risk.

The water pumps on the fire trucks are massive. They have to be to move that much water so quickly over a sustained period of time. Also, the engine that powers the vehicle is far larger than the ones in most consumer vehicles, on par with the ones in big rigs. If there is a significantly large fire taking place, the pumps may be running for hours on end. EV batteries simply are not up to the job. If a conventional fire truck begins running low on diesel, a refueling truck can be brought over to fill up the tank in a few minutes. You can't accelerate the battery recharging process.

Here is another fun fact about these trucks, as pointed out by Larry Behrens, Communications Director for Power The Future. Those "all-electric" fire trucks cost 40 to 50 percent more than conventional, diesel models. The one that Bernalillo County purchased cost $1.8 million. That's roughly $600,000 more than standard diesel truck costs and that bill was saddled on the taxpayers of the county as well as the entire state thanks to the Governor's "generous" grant. (It's funny how these politicians are always able to be so generous with your money, isn't it?)






So they are hybrids
 

Kyle

Beloved Misanthrope
PREMO Member
82BBD33C-6EA3-4422-9401-3DE5F6101997.jpeg
 

glhs837

Power with Control
He'll never sell out of Tesla. What he needs is a Gwynne Shotwell for Tesla, I think. And yep, I voted for that pay package before and I did again. At the time, most folks thought it was insane because no way could Tesla hit those targets. Yet they did. He earned it.
 

phreddyp

Well-Known Member
He'll never sell out of Tesla. What he needs is a Gwynne Shotwell for Tesla, I think. And yep, I voted for that pay package before and I did again. At the time, most folks thought it was insane because no way could Tesla hit those targets. Yet they did. He earned it.
What he needs is no competition, but THAT ship has sailed. Not to mention about 12,000,000 more morons to buy his products.
 

PeoplesElbow

Well-Known Member
This is a nice insight to why some people with Teslas use non Tesla chargers. Also shows that charging on the go may be a bit cheaper than gassing up, not by a lot, especially if this is the bargain that the author makes it sound.

 

Sneakers

Just sneakin' around....
This doesn't exactly sound legal.

Not sure how. Even tho they are separate and distinct entities, they are all owned by the same owner, he's just re-directing resources. But it does give some minor insight to what he's thinking, that the car is becoming less important than AI integration. And since there seems to be a glut in EV availability and a decline in sales, it would seem to be a prudent choice.

On the downside, having that much power over so many companies to be able to do that, and no mention of any company board concurrence, is a bit scary.
 

phreddyp

Well-Known Member
This doesn't exactly sound legal.

Why not? Tesla's sales are off most likely they don't need the number of chips they ordered right now. As long as he is accepting the chips that were ordered instead of canceling them, he will stay in the manufacture's good graces. Sound like a good plan to me.
 

glhs837

Power with Control
Why not? Tesla's sales are off most likely they don't need the number of chips they ordered right now. As long as he is accepting the chips that were ordered instead of canceling them, he will stay in the manufacture's good graces. Sound like a good plan to me.

Agreed, and nothing happens in a vacuum.

 

glhs837

Power with Control
This doesn't exactly sound legal.



From a recent tweet, seems these chips were destined for a compute center being built in the new expansion of Giga Texas. Which expansion wont be done for a while so the chips would have sat.



For information about tis south extension, Joe T. who's made himself an interesting job just flying drones around that factory and delving into the development has videos on the regular. But for us, just pause the video at about 3:05 to grasp the scale of Gigga Austin, and again at about 3:47 for a pan around that end of the building.

Another interesting note is that the Boring company has already tunneled under that six lane highway while it was open.

 

PeoplesElbow

Well-Known Member
Not sure how. Even tho they are separate and distinct entities, they are all owned by the same owner, he's just re-directing resources. But it does give some minor insight to what he's thinking, that the car is becoming less important than AI integration. And since there seems to be a glut in EV availability and a decline in sales, it would seem to be a prudent choice.

On the downside, having that much power over so many companies to be able to do that, and no mention of any company board concurrence, is a bit scary.
Not necessarily criminal but civil, he may be CEO, but I don't think he has the sole authority to redirect Tesla resources to a different company that he happens to own without concurrence from others. What if he started doing that with funds?
 

glhs837

Power with Control
Not necessarily criminal but civil, he may be CEO, but I don't think he has the sole authority to redirect Tesla resources to a different company that he happens to own without concurrence from others. What if he started doing that with funds?

Like the cooperation between Tesla and SpaceX, I'm surer there are written agreements between them governing these sorts of things. One article I read mentioned specifically that X would be paying back these assets out of an already written purchase of their own.


“Elon prioritizing X H100 GPU cluster deployment at X versus Tesla by redirecting 12k of shipped H100 GPUs originally slated for Tesla to X instead,” an Nvidia memo from December said.

“In exchange, original X orders of 12k H100 slated for Jan and June to be redirected to Tesla.”


In DOD acquisition we do these sorts of things all the time.

I might have three test assets on order for delivery next month, but for some reason my range time got taken by a higher priority test so I might offer those up to another org testing the same thing. And they pay me back out of their order in return.
 

PeoplesElbow

Well-Known Member
Like the cooperation between Tesla and SpaceX, I'm surer there are written agreements between them governing these sorts of things. One article I read mentioned specifically that X would be paying back these assets out of an already written purchase of their own.





In DOD acquisition we do these sorts of things all the time.

I might have three test assets on order for delivery next month, but for some reason my range time got taken by a higher priority test so I might offer those up to another org testing the same thing. And they pay me back out of their order in return.
There are also rules for that sort of thing and some can't be broken, else the contract can be in jeopardy because a losing performer can contest the contract.
 
Top