|
|
February 29, 2012 · By Robert Romano · 0 Comments
Tesla Model S electric car (Photo credit: Mark Warren)
The bad news just keeps coming for the Obama Administration’s push to force electric vehicles on the public with the revelation that the much loved Tesla line up of vehicles have a singular problem — they become bricks if the battery runs out.
That’s right, the $100,000+ Tesla vehicle reportedly has at least five instances out of the mere 2,200 in production where the vehicle ceased to function when the battery ran down to a zero charge. The Tesla didn’t just need a recharge like a cell phone, no, the $32,000 battery needs to be replaced entirely when it runs out – at the owners expense.
Of course the $32,000 replacement charge does not include transporting the now inert “vehicle” whose wheels no longer move, or the labor to replace the battery. The total estimated cost to the Tesla customer is $40,000, because in spite of the bumper to bumper warranty, the battery running out of juice is considered the customers fault.
Ordinarily, a car built for the eclectic wealthy class would not matter, but the Tesla is different.
The Tesla Corporation was singled out by Obama’s Department of Transportation and Environmental Protection Agency as a company of the future, during a regulatory “study” conducted to determine the volume of vehicles manufacturers would produce in 2025.
The study was part of the EPA and Transportation’s dramatic change to the nation’s Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard (CAFÉ) which dictate the average fleet gas mileage requirements that each automobile manufacturing company must meet.
The new standards are set to rise to 54.5 miles per gallon in the next thirteen years and the Tesla was at least a part of the Obama social engineers plan to force industry to conform to the new law.
Tesla is important because in many respects, it just might be the last solely electric car company standing with the announcement that the much hoped for Fisker Automotive has run into severe financial problems with layoffs announced at two of their facilities. This, in spite of already receiving $193 million of taxpayer funded loan out of a promised $529 million.
Fisker, which is developing another $100,000 car for the masses using taxpayer dollars, is under Department of Energy scrutiny because they have missed development and sales milestones. Ironically, the Fisker vehicle is called the Karma.
The fallout of the pending Fisker failure is that taxpayer dollar funded electric fuel cell developer A123 is now also in danger of failing due to its reliance on their Fisker contract. For those without enough taxpayer heartburn, A123 has received a cool $249 million from the Obama Administration’s crack Energy Department venture socialism division.
But back to the brickworks at Tesla Corporation, the recipient of $465 million in taxpayer dollars from the Obama Administration, is attempting to change the game by introducing a new vehicle model which can be purchased for under $65,000.
Of course, the car still costs $40,000 to repair if you let the charge run down, so buyer beware.
By the way, how many Tesla’s did the Obama Administration guess would be produced and purchased by the ever environmentally concerned American public in 2025?
31,974. That is a lot of very expensive bricks.
Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.
History repeats itself
This mailer went out yesterday regarding the Rapid City mayoral race. We have an establishment "Gov. Daugaard is our supreme being" RINO Mark Kirkeby running against incumbent Mayor Sam Kooiker. Rapid City voters know what they're getting with Kooiker, since he has served them for years on the city council and now for one term as mayor. The voters also deserve to know what they would be getting with Mark Kirkeby.
This video of Glenn Beck does some jumping around, but there is one overriding theme: the hijacking of the national conversation by the morally bankrupt Left. Please take the time to watch this, and then ask yourself some tough questions, including: "Have I been taken in by any of this? Have I let them silence me? Have I let them intimidate me from standing up for what is right?" If you don't like the answers you come up with, what are you going to do about it?
According to pro-abortion reasoning, poor women -- desperate because of an unwanted pregnancy, pressed because regulations and costs make abortion difficult to get -- turn to sleazebag doctors who will do it cheaply, with no regard for the woman, the law or safety. But it is ironic that those who call themselves "pro-choice" argue that the only alternatives facing low-income women are unsafe abortions done by sleazebags or government-subsidized abortions. There is another choice, but those who call themselves don't want women, particularly poor women, to consider it. This option is called birth.
This is a very interesting and telling interview from Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA) of IRS Commissioner Steven Miller over the Obama Administration scandal involving IRS harassment of Tea Party and other conservative groups. I don't know why Kelly isn't trying to extend an olive branch. Why isn't he trying to find common ground? Why isn't he trying to persuade this guy to see things his way? Why is he being so mean?
The front: homosexual marriage. The end: schoolchildren. This week, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton (labeled one of America’s worst senators by TIME) signed homosexual marriage legislation into un-law after the un-lawful House and Senate approved it. In concert these branches of the Minnesota government have proven themselves to be in defiance against the laws of Nature and Nature’s God, as found in the Declaration of Independence.
|
"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the party over to the so-called moderates wouldn't make any sense at all." - Ronald Reagan, Nov. 10, 1964 |
Sorry, comments are closed on this post.