Tesla Motors wins Globe Sustainability Innovation Award in Sweden
Tesla Roadster - Click above for a high-res image gallery
At a ceremony in Stockholm, Sweden the other day, Michael van der Sande, the Marketing VP at Tesla Motors, accepted the Sustainability Innovation Award given out by the Globe Forum. Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden presented the award to van der Sande in the third annual ceremony. The Globe Forum jury noted the Model S is an example of Tesla's innovation. However, it particularly highlighted the company's business model of aiming for the top end of the market as a way to get its technology on the street.
It is leveraging wealthy early adopters to both fund the development of more mainstream future models but also to be evangelists for the brand. This strategy has been part of Tesla's plan from the early days of the company. However, when the global financial crisis hit just as production was ramping up and money was needed for growth, the company stumbled. Thanks to the recent investment by Daimler, it now appears that Tesla might be on a sound enough financial footing to survive and perhaps even thrive.
Gallery: Tesla Roadster
[Source: Newsdesk.se]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mark 3:55PM (6/04/2009)
Well done Tesla! I think it is a shame that companies like Ferrari or Bentley don't have the guts to expand out with cheaper models but then they are dinosaurs where Tesla are the future.
I think Fisker also have a very good model but I don't know which came first the Fisker or the Tesla?
Reply
boo 10:27PM (6/08/2009)
The Tesla came first, and even lost a few employees to Fisker who apparently shared design secrets. Hence that lawsuit a while ago.
Stephen Paley 4:53PM (6/04/2009)
I am a physicist and I strongly take issue with plug-in hybrids. For each unit of energy put into the batteries of a hybrid from a coal-fired electrical generating plant twelve units of energy must be produced by burning coal. (As is generally known coal produces more pollution and carbon dioxide per unit of energy generated than any other common fuel.)
Thus the electric hybrid would help the US achieve energy independence and energy security but at a terrrible price. When the current recession ends any oil not used by the US is likely to be used elsewhere. So the world is likely to end up using the same amount of oil and a significantly increased amount of coal -- a prescription for environmental disaster.
Stephen Paley, Ph.D.
Reply
guyledouche 5:21PM (6/04/2009)
Mr. physicist, PHD
It is a proven fact (By many different sources) that our current electrical grid has an abundance of electricity and is often running way over what our actual consumption is at any given time. Even with a large scale adoption of plug in battery electric vehicles, we would not strain our current system at all, and we would not need to add more plants to the network. Also keep in mind that most BEV's would be charging at night during off peak hours when there is even more of an abundance of power available.
I appreciate that you have spent more time with your nose buried in books than most other people, but that does not necessarily mean you are correct.
Please do some simple google searches before patting yourself on the back and proclaiming your amazing "wisdom" for all to read.
BEV's make sense. There are some extremely intelligent people on this board who have made some excellent points and discussions pertaining to the overwhelming reasons that BEV's are the next logical answer for personal transportation. Feel free to do some digging on this site while you are not solving the worlds problems if you wish to educate yourself a bit more on BEV's. As soon as their cost comes down a bit, they will be the accepted and desired means of personal transport by many.
Good day Doc.
Stephen Paley 8:12PM (6/04/2009)
You arrogant SOB, assuming a bunch of things about someone you know nothing about and being insulting in the process. (For your info most of my work has been at a highly practical level.)
It is not a matter of grid capacity. It is a matter, mostly, of a fundamental thermodynamic loss (I.e., a loss that cannot be made smaller because it is at the theoretical limit) when the energy of buring coal is turned into steam to run the turbine which generates electricity. This, as well as certain other smaller losses that cannot be avoided generate the 12 to 1 ratio and if you do the problem in terms of efficiencies its a problem that a high school student can do. And for your information the calculation is neither optimistic or pessimistic but realistic.
As far as your disrespect for knowledge is concerned better rethink it since its only thing that might save your sorry ass as peak oil and environmental tipping points approach.
guyledouche 8:40PM (6/04/2009)
^--- POT CALLING THE KETTLE BLACK
LOL. Thank you sir I needed that laugh!
Anyone who starts their sentence by proclaiming themselves a physicist is both extremely arrogant and probably fairly insecure to boot.
The only thing I have assumed (And rightfully so) is that you are utterly clueless and a typical PHD... self absorbed and poorly informed.
Google is an amazing tool, start using it before you open your trap mate.
Please do us a favor and do not respond. lets not clutter this post with a worthless quibble regarding the massive chip on your shoulder. simply put the old tail between your legs and walk away.
Lets get back to recognizing Teslas accomplishment!!!!
Chris M 8:54PM (6/04/2009)
Paley, you've been badly misinformed. That "12 to 1 ratio" you quote would mean an overall efficienty of about 8%, when a more realistic overall "well to wheel" efficiency, counting efficiency of fossil fueled power plant, distribution grid, and plug-ins, would be closer to 29%. I note that you didn't bother to mention the "well to wheel" efficiency of petroleum based transportation, that efficiency is quite a bit less.
Moreover, not all electricity is made from coal. In California, 20% comes from hydro, 20% from renewables (solar, wind, geothermal) and only 20.1% from coal. That ratio of coal use has been dropping for years as increasing amounts of renewables come online.
But an even more bizzare bit of pseudo-logic is your assumptions that the rest of the world would automatically increase their oil consumption to match our decrease. Nope, the rest of the world will only use what they need, and are not going to increase consumption simply because somebody else uses less. Besides, there are efforts all around the world to reduce fossil fuel usage, not just in the US.
So, what do you propose? Just keep on the present petroleum based course? Or are you one of those H2 promoters? Sorry, H2 is less efficient than BEvs (Look up Ulf Boessel, a real energy expert), and H2 will be made mostly from steam reformed fossil fuels, including coal (that's what the "clean coal" initiative was all about, providing cheap H2 fuel for the Hydrogen Hyway).
occ 9:02PM (6/04/2009)
OK Mr PhD,
Let's not offset oil at all and the world wont use anymore either, according to your flawed logic.
Offsetting transportation off oil with electricity in the US does NOT require burning your units of coal since only 50% US electricity is generated by coal. in ADDITION, each unit of electricity to run an electric car offsets at least 15 units of oil to run the same mile, so we have a net gain. If we cant reduce the amount of oil the world use regardless of whether we go EV or not, at least we're promoting energy (and oil) independent for the US, which is a worthwhile goal in any argument.
The arrogant SOB is the one throwing out self serving titles in an argument.
Mark 6:08PM (6/04/2009)
Where did you get your PHD, the Exxon school of science?
Reply
Nick P. 7:18PM (6/04/2009)
Please do not make fun of the Exxon School Of Science. This reputable institution has been turning up graduates by the thousands while holding back EVs for almost 100 years.
Their first year course "Global warming: a crock of S**t", lectured by Dr. Lutz, Ph.D, has been a great success for several decades now and has been instrumental in bringing down a whole industry.
If you're interested, you can now follow the following courses and get credits toward earning a MB (Master Of BullS**t) degree:
Course 666: "Batteries are for toys"
Course 999: "Hydrogen is the future"
Course 696: "Kiss my ass, E.V lovers"
Regards,
- Nick -
Reply
environano 8:48PM (6/04/2009)
I agree partially with all the comments posted here. Plug-in Hybrid electric vehicles is the way to go, if you have a clean source of energy. For the record, around 60% of the global energy comes out of polluting coal burning plants. It is about using all the energy available, just using less of it is the key.
I personally feel that Velozzi has it right with its new crossover coming out in early 2010. I am already in the waiting list for one of these ASPIRIN vehicles. That is right. Bayer, plus other major suppliers such as Visteon, PPG, Worwag, Nanoledge are supporting Velozzi to mass produce its plug-in hybrid electric cars.
Reply
mike 10:42PM (6/04/2009)
I can't believe i just wasted my time reading these comments .....
Reply