German Public Television Report: “Electric Cars A Swindle” …”Rolling Climate-Killers”

Germany is a country that madly rushed in all earnest into green energies without any planning and thought some 10 years ago. Electric cars of course were envisioned as being a key part of the green energy transition, dubbed the Energiewende.

Fortunately, since then, some are beginning to wake up to the harsh reality of “green” energy.

10 years later, despite the now 56 gigawatts of installed wind capacity and 40 gigawatts of installed solar capacity, the country still relies on fossil fuels for more than half of its energy supply. That fact and all the batteries needed make e-cars a fake green dream.

“Eco-Swindle E-Auto”

This all means that over the long term electric cars in Germany are still more CO2 intensive than regular gasoline powered cars, according to a recent report titled “Eco-Swindle E-Auto” on DW German public television:

Ja so wird der Konsument für blöd verkauft.

Gepostet von Robert Scherleitner am Dienstag, 10. Oktober 2017

According to moderator Thomas Spahn, e-cars in Germany are not living up at all to the promises of being environmentally friendly. Quite to the contrary. “It’s a pity that this climate friendly vision still fails the test of reality,” he says.

Worse than diesel automobiles

According to Spahn of DW, the Stockholm Environmental Research Institute (IVL) calculated that just the production of the batteries for a Tesla S car spews some 17 tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere and that this is just as bad for the environment as a diesel or gasoline engine after being on the road 200,000 kilometers!

What’s worse, according to Spahn, is that in Germany the CO2 performance of e-cars is even worse because more than half the power that is needed to charge the e-vehicles is generated from coal or gas fuel, and thus he calls e-cars “rolling climate killers”.

“Illusion” and “self-delusion”

According to Spahn, e-cars won’t be clean until all electric power in Germany gets produced exclusively by green energies.

But that will take decades. Until then, climate-friendly e-cars unfortunately will remain an illusion. But let’s be honest, self-delusion is indeed the nicest when you can share it with many others.”

German online daily SHZ here wrote:

Raw material processing and the production of batteries in plants account for about 80% of the total environmental burden.”

68 responses to “German Public Television Report: “Electric Cars A Swindle” …”Rolling Climate-Killers””

  1. SebastianH

    This all means that over the long term electric cars in Germany are still more CO2 intensive than regular gasoline powered cars, according to a recent report titled “Eco-Swindle E-Auto” on DW German public television:

    *sigh* … this moderator is a bit late to the repeating swedish studies wrong party. He says producing the battery of a Telsa model S emits 17000 kg of CO2 which would be the same as a modern gasoline car emits in 200000 km. That’s 85 g of CO2 per km … I challenge you to find a modern gasoline car that does that 😉

    Not a single car listed on spritmonitor.de comes close to 85 g per km: https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/evaluation/co2_efficient_cars.html

    The standard VW Passat consumes 8,94 l/100 km which equals 208 g CO2 per km.

    So apparently this guy did not verify what they repeated from elsewhere.

    You can calculate yourself how much CO2 an electric vehicle emits when powered from the German grid with “more than half” of the power sources being fossil fuel power plants. Hint: it is much much less than any gasoline car emits.

    How do you feel when you help to spread “fake news”?

    1. J Martin

      My Skoda Octavia Greenline III has a co2 figure of 90g/km. Admittedly it doesn’t have the acceleration of a Tesla, but then if the Tesla driver used that power he would have to recharge more often, which is mostly from fossil fuels.

      Those who think that 30% of Germany’s electricity is provided by renewables should think again. Those renewables require fossil fuel backup, so much so, that Germany’s co2 emissions have not fallen. And so in reality the Tesla is recharging from a near 100% fossil fuel supply.

      1. SebastianH

        https://www.spritmonitor.de/en/overview/45-Skoda/399-Octavia.html?exactmodel=greenline&powerunit=2

        4.98 l (Diesel) per 100 km, equals 131 g CO2 / km …

        Those who think that 30% of Germany’s electricity is provided by renewables should think again. Those renewables require fossil fuel backup, so much so, that Germany’s co2 emissions have not fallen. And so in reality the Tesla is recharging from a near 100% fossil fuel supply.

        You should really consider to re-assess your beliefs about renewables and CO2 emissions. Reading claims like that really hurts. Either you’ve read it somewhere and just repeat it or you really thought about it and came to this conclusion. Both possibilities are equaly weird …

        1. Steve

          Right back at you … picking and choosing facts ! That Institute even if out by 20% ..STILL puts a big question mark over electric , before you talk about its other detriments such as safety from incineration , EMF ( radiation ) emitted, disposing of the batteries as their life is not that great! We have petrol / diesel cars still going strong in regular use after 20 – 30 years … … the older they get the less the impact! At the end of the day any gains made by the massive cost of moving to electric will be wiped out by the very effect of the change! Lets talk about battery disposal?

          1. SebastianH

            20%? A comparable car to a Model S with the 17000 tonnes of CO2 battery pack would be a Mercedes E Class. You can lookup yourself how much CO2 those cars emit per km. There are more economic cars available with smaller battery packs and less “mileage”. Compare those to a 5 liter / 100 km Diesel car and you’ll see that they are worlds apart regarding the CO2 emitted, including battery pack manufacturing and electricity from “dirty” power grids like the one in Germany (489 g CO / kWh at 135 Wh per km equals 66 g CO per km)

            safety from incineration

            So far electric vehicles don’t burn as often as gasoline cars.

            EMF ( radiation ) emitted

            You are sitting in a metal cage.
            https://www.saferemr.com/2014/07/shouldnt-hybrid-and-electric-cars-be-re.html

            disposing of the batteries as their life is not that great

            Says who? Companies exist which can and do recycle them.

            We have petrol / diesel cars still going strong in regular use after 20 – 30 years

            Great, annecdotal evidence. The average car is gone after 15 years of service in industrialized nations. And hey, there is this Tesla S with 400000 km on its battery and it is still at 93% capacity: https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-s-400k-km-250k-mi-7-percent-battery-degradation/

            The shift towards electric vehicles will at the end reduce primary power consumption (of vehicles) to a third of what it is now. We will not have all the car exhaust in cities. Even countries with a fossil fuel powered grid will have this advantage as it is far easier to filter exhaust in central locations instead of in every vehicle. Everyone will be smiling while driving … seriously, go to your local dealer and test drive an EV. There no better experience for innercity driving right now. Long distance without to many charging stops with affordable cars will be solved pretty soon too.

            May I ask why you seem to hate the idea of a transition towards EVs?

          2. spike55

            “May I ask why you seem to hate the idea of a transition towards EVs”

            He’s certainly not the only one. lol

            US car sales

            https://s19.postimg.cc/jzs5i04gz/US_sales_EVs.png

            A “toy”. A niche market feel-good non-transport.

            People are buying something useful, like an SUV 🙂

            Me, I’ll stick with my V8 Holden, thanks.

            With two of us we can drive all day, fill-up with petrol and coffee in 10 minutes, even in the smallest towns.
            Not “trapped” to going where someone has subsidised a fast-charge power-point (often powered by a diesel generator)

        2. spike55

          “You should really consider to re-assess your beliefs about renewables and CO2 emissions.”

          Yes you should seb

          You KNOW that there is ZERO EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE supporting CO2 warming

          You KNOW you are totally unable to provide one tiny bit of real evidence that enhanced atmospheric CO2 does anything except enhance plant growth

          But your deep sludge-like brain-hosing, and your baseless arrogance, will never allow you to even consider that its all just a mindless irrational cult belief.

          1. SebastianH

            Didn’t you see what I replied to with that sentence? J Martin is under the impression that renewables don’t save CO2 emissions, because of fossil fuel backups. That claim isn’t new here in the comments and it also did not magically become the truth by repeating it.

          2. spike55

            “that renewables don’t save CO2 emissions, because of fossil fuel backups.”

            So he is correct.

            You have a point to make??

            Perhaps you have some empirical proof that enhanced atmospheric CO2 does anything other than enhance plant growth

            Something other than your headless chicken routines.

          3. SebastianH

            “that renewables don’t save CO2 emissions, because of fossil fuel backups.”

            So he is correct.

            You have a point to make??

            You are both incorrect. Reality doesn’t match this claim and I don’t know why your keep repeating it and how you can convince yourself that it might be true.

            And you know what? Even if everything else you are saying as a skeptic would make sense on some level, claims like these just make you a clown and invalidate all your possible other points.

          4. spike55

            Poor evidence-free seb,

            Always wrong

            The CO2 produced, the real pollution and environmental harm done during the use and manufacture of wind turbines FAR OUTWEIGHS the use of coal and gas.

            You STILL don’t have the common sense or understanding to realise that needing 100% back-up from fossil fuels causing them to have to be operated inefficiently, means that for the electricity they supply they have basically zero effect on reducing CO2 emissions, just transferring those emissions to somewhere else.

            Germany and the EU is a classic example, as is South Australia.

        3. J Martin

          You picked the older mark II version, I drive the mark III version and I pay tax based on its co2 output, 85 On my tax form the co2 is stated as 90 which I believe is for the estate version, so the taxman is overcharging me.

          https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/skoda/octavia/first-drives/skoda-octavia-greenline-iii-16-tdi-first-drive-review

          Skoda’s UK website also gives up to date co2 figures.

        4. J Martin

          The fact remains that those countries that have significant wind and solar have not reduced their co2 output. Certainly in northern Europe wind and solar are a waste of money, nuclear, preferably 4th generation, is the way to go.

          In the UK, to replace current fossil fuel generation would require half the country to be covered in wind and solar. But it would need more than that along with storage that hasn’t yet been invented to fully provide. Since the UK imports nearly half its food, should we import nearly 100% of our food, and that, at a time when green loonies are calling for an end to shipping.

        5. J Martin

          @ Sebastian.

          In the UK wind does not save any co2 whatsoever.

          https://www.thegwpf.org/images/stories/gwpf-reports/hughes-windpower.pdf

  2. John F. Hultquist

    The assumption still seems to be that CO2 is a climate killer and that if EVs could be powered by Hamster/Gerbil exercise wheels Climate Armageddon (aka catastrophic anthropogenic global warming) would be avoided.

    So this seems a minor recognition that current actions are not enough to save Earth and more radical efforts to remove carbon fuels will be needed.

  3. Yonason

    Hi Piere. The following needs to be fixed.

    “That fact and the all batteries needed make e-cars a fake green dream.”

    Is this what you meant?

    “That fact, and all the batteries needed, make e-cars a fake green dream.”

  4. Bitter&twisted

    “sigh”
    DNFTT
    Interesting report in today’s “Sunday Times” in which states “Musk- A deceiver or deluded”.
    My view is that “Enron” Musk is a deceiver and greens, deluded.

    Musk’s view is that there is one born every minute.

    1. SebastianH

      Do you think it is trolling when someone points out that the math is off? Or do you just think it is trolling when it hurts your view of the world?

      1. spike55

        “Or do you just think it is trolling when it hurts your view of the world?”

        Again seb sees his real self.

        Trolling for attention because he doesn’t like someone able to think for themselves.

        Poor sad lonely seb.

  5. MrZ

    Average driving distance per year in Sweden is 15000 km.
    So over 10 years we get 17000/150000 = 113g/km. (truer than 85 for a Golf size diesel)

    How long does a Tesla battery last again?

    1. SebastianH

      How long does a Tesla battery last again?

      Decades? Tesla seems to think its batteries will outlast the car itself on average. Exception might be when Teslas are used in taxi services with hundred thousand+ km per year.

      1. Hivemind

        Teslas use Lithium-Ion battery technology, just like is used in laptops. They don’t last 10 years. More like 5. That mid-life battery change is going to be a killer.

        1. spike55

          Big question is if they will even be making Tesla batteries in 5-10 years time.

          May not be just a financial nightmare…

          … it may just be impossible !

        2. SebastianH

          Teslas use Lithium-Ion battery technology, just like is used in laptops. They don’t last 10 years. More like 5. That mid-life battery change is going to be a killer.

          You do know that electric vehicles exist for more than 5 years now. There are no reports of widespread failing of batteries.

          While the cells have the same format as in (older or cheap) laptops, they aren’t the same cells nor are they used in the same way. Thousands of cycles are easily possible at hundreds of km per cycle that can easily approach a million km from one battery until it “fails”. And even at that state it is still usuable for things like home storage, etc …

          You won’t have “mid-life battery changes” in electric vehicles unless you are driving very very long distances.

          1. spike55

            “unless you are driving very very long distances”

            Yep, golf carts and local delivery vans should last for ages. !

          2. MrZ

            Excellent!
            The Tesla is then CO2 neutral after only 15 or so years From then on you save CO2 provided the grid is carbon free then. Sounds like a really good deal for all of us.

          3. SebastianH

            MrZ …

            Assuming you are driving your car for 15 years with 15000 km per year on average, the Tesla S would consume around 46417 kWh of electricity. At 489 gCO2/kWh (power grid in Germany) that equals 22698 kg of CO2. A comparable Mercedes E-Class consumes 8.32 liters of Diesel or 11.52 liters of gasoline per 100 km. That equals 49420 kg of CO2 for Diesel or 60393 kg of CO2 for gasoline.

            Now lets assume a Tesla S’s production only adds 17000 kg of CO2 to the production emissions and doesn’t save anything by not needing lots of parts that ICE cars usually have. Is 17000 + 22698 equal to 49420? Certainly not …

            So what are you talking about?

          4. MrZ

            Why do you change car?
            I had 113g/km in my Golf example
            113 x 15000km x 15years = 25 425 kg. Agree 15 years was a bit too optimistic for the Tesla. Was that your point?

  6. Yonason

    OK, now I’ve read the rest of it, and see that Spahn is himself delusional, as is the rest of Germany if they share his belief that CO2 is a pollutant and a “climate killer.” Neither are true.

    Not a pollutant.
    http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx?menuitemid=370

    No effect on climate.
    https://objectivistindividualist.blogspot.com/2018/06/using-heat-transport-powers-of-nasa.html?m=1

    Here’s the English language DW article, btw.
    https://m.dw.com/en/how-eco-friendly-are-electric-cars/a-19441437

    And if batteries won’t deliver reliably for a dwelling, why would anyone be interested in relying upon them for transportation?
    http://euanmearns.com/will-solar-panels-and-tesla-powerwalls-meet-your-homes-energy-needs/

    What on earth is wrong with these people?!

    1. SebastianH

      What is wrong with you? When you perceive everyone around you are being “wrong”, have you considered that you could be the one who is wrong? Or does the delusion you suffer from prevent something like that to happen?

      1. Don from Oz

        Seb Have you asked and considered the very same questions you ask here of yourself?
        You should look at the fundamentals of whether CO2 is a causation of temperature rise.
        Start with ‘The Climategate Emails’by John Costella.’
        On page 23 he quotes Tom Crowley , Dept of Oceanography, Texas A&M University in email 0969618170 dated Sept 22 2000 Questioning ‘So, are you sure that some carbon dioxide effect is responsible for this? May we not actually be seeing a warming?
        To which Malcolm Hughes responds ‘… Although a direct carbon dioxide effect is still the best candidate to explain this effect, IT IS FAR FROM PROVEN ..’ (my emphasis in capitals)
        Show us the proof please?

        1. SebastianH

          Seb Have you asked and considered the very same questions you ask here of yourself?

          Do I have to? My math is sound and agrees with what nearly everyone is saying. Then there is this small group of pseudoskeptics who think everything we know is fake and that we are being lied to (conspiracy). It’s not like I consider everyone around me to be wrong, you know … that’s what you guys do 😉

          Show us the proof please?

          Show us proof that it is whatever pseudoskeptics say it is. I mean, look at this article here … they repeat what they like to be true without questioning the validity of the claims. And you expect others to honor this group with actually trying to explain it to them? Take them by the hand and lead them to the sources? Sorry, you just need to read more and don’t listen to your “false prophets” that talk of conspiracy anymore. You’ll quikly realize what’s happening …

          1. spike55

            “My math is sound ”

            NO it is not. It is juvenile and trite, based on anti-science assumption

            You are totally incapable of presenting any proof for even the most simple argument of the AGW meme

            You arrogance and baseless ego will NEVER allow you to admit that you are inept, and have nothing of any scientific worth to back up the AGW mantra.

            You need to stop reading DISHONEST site like SkS, and go back and complete your junior high education, then see if you have the capacity to progress passed there.

      2. John

        Hey Seb:
        “What is wrong with you? When you perceive everyone around you are being “wrong”, have you considered that you could be the one who is wrong? Or does the delusion you suffer from prevent something like that to happen?”

        Someone once said that the earth was not flat..whilst others, the lot of them, insisted it was.

        Science is about keeping an open mind on other views. Green scientists keep on saying that it is settled.
        That’s not science, that is the mark of a hoax.

        1. SebastianH

          Hey John,

          just having a different view doesn’t make it automatically correct or necessary for others to have an open mind about it. Flat earthers and anti-vaxxers still exist, do you want to keep and open mind about their views too?

          Someone once said that the earth was not flat..whilst others, the lot of them, insisted it was.

          Someone once said that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and is changing our climate … whilst others insisted that it wasn’t.

          The mark of a hoax is when it sounds like everyone in on it are ultimately claiming that they are the victim of a big conspiracy (faked climate data, etc) and being lied to by the “establishment”.

          1. spike55

            “Someone once said that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and is changing our climate “

            They call them FAIRY-TALES, seb

            You know there is absolutely zero-evidence that enhanced atmospheric CO2 has ANY effect on the climate… anywhere, anytime, anyhow.

            If you think it is anything more than a Fantasy,

            If you think you have real scientific evidence.

            Then WHY NOT PRESENT THAT EVIDENCE, seb

            Or just keep running away.. EMPTY

  7. Steve

    Are these people actually from planet Earth, because it seems to me that they likely came from cloud cuckoo land?

    1. Yonason

      We give evidence from reputable sources and interpret it critically. They give us fantasy and histrionics from con artists. So yeah, Steve, “cloud cuckoo land” is as good a guess as any where they’re from.

  8. Penelope

    Be careful what you wish for. The impeachment of green energy will be used as proof it cannot “save” us– that there is no escape from transformation of society, ala Agenda 21.

    You and I can stay up here in the scientific high ground, but just now from the windows of our tower I saw the oligarchic huns setting fire to the ground floor.

  9. Don from Oz

    Seb Have you asked and considered the very same questions you ask here of yourself?
    You should look at the fundamentals of whether CO2 is a causation of temperature rise.
    Start with ‘The Climategate Emails’by John Costella.’
    On page 23 he quotes Tom Crowley , Dept of Oceanography, Texas A&M University in email 0969618170 dated Sept 22 2000 Questioning ‘So, are you sure that some carbon dioxide effect is responsible for this? May we not actually be seeing a warming?
    To which Malcolm Hughes responds ‘… Although a direct carbon dioxide effect is still the best candidate to explain this effect, IT IS FAR FROM PROVEN ..’ (my emphasis in capitals)
    Show us the proof please?

    1. Yonason

      Don from Oz

      SebH is an activist. They don’t deal in facts or think objectively. Their currency is false assertions repeated ad nauseam. They are as impervious to reason as are religious fanatics.

      Nice argument, though. Not something any REASONABLE person would dismiss.

      1. SebastianH

        Yonason, you are so deep into this conspiracy theme and your weird version of reality … there is no amount of reasoning that can get through to you. But nice try at projecting this to others whom you disagree with 😉

        1. spike55

          The ONLY person mentioning “conspiracy” is YOU, seb

          You has ZERO sense of reality.

          Stop projecting your inner panic onto everyone else.

          Its pathetically boring.

          1. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

            Right, Spike.

            Also, it has occurred to me based on an invalid criticism or two by a troll whose arguments consist of nothing but, that I should clarify my position. I am not saying the TV show is anything but an attempt at an honest evaluation of ecars.

            The vast majority of these people believe that climate is in danger because of human caused emissions of CO2. And, if they were correct, Spahn would be 100% correct in his analysis and concerns. Only in blaming C02 is he wrong, and it’s not his fault.

            Such a mess the red/greens have made of everything, isn’t it.

          2. SebastianH

            Yonason, the whole point was that Spahn is 100% incorrect. The numbers don’t match up, yet they chose to repeat them unquestioned on television. It is not an attempt at an honest evaluation it is an attempt to spread further FUD for whatever reason. And you guys are now complicit, yet feel like criticism would be invalid …

            This imperviousness to criticism is what is super aggravating and the reason nobody can take you guys seriously even if you had actually a single valid point why it’s not AGW that we are observing.

            Such a mess the red/greens have made of everything, isn’t it.

            So it is political for you. You perceive this to be left-leaning topic and because you seem to be right-leaning you must automatically be against everything. I understand now.

  10. spike55
  11. Steve

    I have noticed that Sheep H, aka Sebastian H, is the only commentator on NTZ who still clings to the notion that CO2 causes AGW.

    1. SebastianH

      Steve, the very nature of this blog and its commenter crowd is that you believe there is no AGW. This is a big [snip — vulgarities are unwelcome here]. Somewhere in your life you took the wrong turn and now you are convinced that everyone is lying to you except those that say everyone is lying to you. It’s a very weird state of mind … one that you need to get out of, everyone of you.

      1. Steve

        Wow SebH where is that coming from?
        I’ve never thought that people were lying to me.
        I just think there is enough evidence to show that AGW is false science.

        I also think that in reality you are one of those ” the end is nigh types”

        1. spike55

          “the end is nigh types””

          Those guys are usually just RAVING, RANTING NUTTERS..

          .. with nothing worthwhile in their pathetic lives. !!

  12. Don from Oz

    I know what has already happened SEB.
    Crowley was not convinced that CO2 was the demon.
    Hughes acknowledged that it wasn’t proven.
    Since that time lab experiments on pure CO2 have shown it to have little effect as a GHG. As a trace gas it’s effect is so minimal as to be called negligible yet the conspirators continue to delude themselves and mislead the gullible who can’t reason and think for themselves.
    I only asked for proof to elicit a response as I know it is as mentioned in the previous paragraph but didn’t expect such an obtuse reply.Something which is a trade mark of AGWers.

    1. spike55

      Seb will do EVERYTHING little twist and turn and slither and slime he can imagine to manically AVOID posting any proof of CO2 warming. (his fevered imagination is really all he has)

      His methods of evasion are totally hilarious at times, often leading to great value slap-stick comedy as he runs around like a headless chook, regularly faceplanting, while still managing to yap mindless AGW mantra regurgitations.

      Bizarre behaviour to say the least 🙂

      If he actually had any of this “evidence” he yaps about, surly he would present it!

      Seems he just LUVS the attention he gets, its his ONLY reason for being here.

  13. spike55

    OT

    July 1st

    DMI ice volume is now above +1sd in the whole of the DMI ice volume record since 2003.

    1. Yonason

      Very hot here in Indiana right now, but ifJoe Bastardi is correct, that’s about to change. Bracing for the cold.
      https://www.weatherbell.com/video/the-daily-update-440?full

      Oh, and note how he puts the lie to the warmest June disinformation.

      Many thanks to whoever it was (sorry I don’t remember) who suggested listening to his updates!

  14. spike55

    Oh dear.. what a pity
    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2018/06/30/electric-car-buyers-claim-they-were-misled-by-nissan/

    “They say charging the Leaf can take three times longer than claimed on Nissan’s website.”

    “But drivers attempting longer journeys in the Leaf have found themselves spending up to two and a half hours at motorway service stations to recharge.”

    “It is only when drivers come to charge for the third time – or the second rapid charge – that some have said they face long waits.”

    “When journalists from What Car? tested the new Leaf, they found a “real world” range of just 108 miles.

    Oh dearie me. !!!

  15. Bill589

    Why are people still worried about CO2?

    1. spike55

      “Why are people still worried about CO2?”

      Severe brain-washing, and a total lack of any understanding of reality or of physics, biology or science.

      Behind his manic high-pressure brain-hosing, seb KNOWS there is not really a problem.

      Its all just a play-act to him.

      Trolling here is what he chooses to do with his pitiful, lonely life.

      It is just a perverted form of attention-seeking.

  16. No, Mr President, cold weather in the USA does not challenge GLOBAL warming ..... - Page 106

    […] German Public Television Report: “Electric Cars A Swindle” Sign in or Register Now to reply […]

  17. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

    Oh, isn’t THIS special (My bolding and caps)…
    http://www.newscats.org/?p=15476

    “If you live in Norway and your Tesla is involved in an accident, it doesn’t necessarily get repaired, instead they will be collected in specialized “Tesla-graveyards” where the workers need special education and safety precautions to process the “green”, feel-good, political correct crap …”
    . . . .
    “According to the article, Tesla wrecks (average 2 years old) has become a million (NOK) business for a local company, Grønvolds Bildemontering, where they are taking apart damaged Teslas then exporting parts to other European countries because IT’S TOO EXPENSIVE TO REPAIR.“.

    I tried to check it, but the link they give requires registration to access the article.

    HOWEVER…

    Here are a couple of supporting articles.

    https://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/05/model-s-owner-owing-tesla-awesome-get-accident/

    https://cleantechnica.com/2015/01/05/model-s-owner-owing-tesla-awesome-get-accident/

    Yeah, I’m sure they’ll fix those problems in a hurry. …or not.

  18. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

    Oops, here’s the other link that was supposed to be in my last post on the joy of owning electric cars when they need repair…
    https://cleantechnica.com/2018/06/04/electric-car-insurance-woes-evs-have-more-accidents-tesla-model-s-most-expensive-to-insure/

  19. Yonason (from a friend's comp)

    PICK A WAY TO DIE

    And our contestant has selected…

    Death By Self-Driving Tesla.
    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/apr/03/the-customer-is-always-wrong-tesla-lets-out-self-driving-car-data-when-it-suits

    Or, borrowing and adapting a line from Woody Allen’s “Tiger Lily,” “hijack us and kill us, please. And step on it.” (sorry, couldn’t find a clip for that)

    Why isn’t Elon Musk in jail?

Leave a Reply

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this. More information at our Data Privacy Policy

Close