Does this car have any competition at all?

When people say they want to roll coal, it's better to let someone else do it. The Tesla is like having a butler.

>400,000 preorders for a car that hasn't been revealed in production form
>niche

Sure, it's not the Model S, but there is a clear market for luxury electric cars.

shrinkthatfootprint.com/electric-cars-green

If anything, it's polluting more and polluting worse than a small motor with so many filters jammed down the exhaust pipe that it only exhales carbon dioxide and nitrogen

Try reading the article you post I did. Copied from said article:

Using coal powered electricity electric cars do nothing to cut emissions, using natural gas electricity they’re like a top hybrid and using low carbon power they result in less than half the total emissions of the best combustion vehicle, manufacturing included.

Just like I said IF COAL IS USED THEY POLLUTE LIKE A GAS POWERED CAR. If you can post on Veeky Forums I know you can read.

Realistically speaking it's still better in terms of emissions than a conventional car for a couple of reasons.

Coal plants are more efficient than your engine, but inefficiencies crop up from transportation and a bunch of other problems. Up for debate whether this outweighs the environmental costs of manufacturing. Depends on which plants, and which processes you use, so I can't find any real good analysis one way or another, and believe me, I've looked.

The big thing though is how it moves that out of the cities. Smog in big cities, particularly LA, is a problem. Nobody gives a fuck if you have a coal plant in the middle of Nevada. There's nothing out there but rocks, coyotes, abandoned uranium mines, and naturally occurring asbestos. This has some really bizarre far reaching effects. If the city is cleaner, you can actually increase population density, and that increases efficiency in other areas. That's not even getting into the obvious benefits of generally healthier living conditions.

So at worst they're equal, and at best they're far cleaner?

Why do we even care when diesel powered ships are spewing out shitloads of smog that we can't do anything about, unless you count "waiting for it to settle" a solution

Why

>answer: the environment was never the real problem, people just don't like to pay a shitload for gas and can actually generate enough of their own electricity to pay for the "green" generator several times over

Sigh. It is dependent on where your power grid is powered just read the damn article. Natural gas, wind, nuclear, and water are typically cleaner, coal is dirtier.

>natural gas comes from petrol drilling/mining
>dead burds
>nuclear waste
>disrupted ecosystems

no such thing as an environmentally friendly lunch unless you shrink the human population siginificantly and cut everyone's intelligence in half

>although some forms of environmental disruption do not necessarily hurt human prosperity in the slightest

That is the first I have ever heard that. All I hear when EVs are discussed is diminishing resources, less dependence on foreign oil, environmental pollution, and climate change. The only one I buy is less dependence on foreign oil, which is only partially true.

Because people pushing laws have no fucking clue what they are doing and just want to feel good. That's why 90% of stupid shit gets passed.

I live in a wet area, and have my own well. It costs me about a quarter to pump 2000 gallons of water. I can literally pump 20 gallons a minute continuously forever. The water table is staggeringly vast here. Renovated my house, and got a new low flow toilet, because hur dur they are required now. Shit clogged all the time, so I just put in the old one once I got it past inspections. Fuck that noise.

You live in cali or some shit? Yeah, toilet restrictions make sense. I live in a part of the country where I can go outside and dig a 1 foot hole, and come back to several inches of standing water within an hour. There's zero practical reason for that restriction where I am when I have well water. With city water you could at least pretend that they'd have to invest more in infrastructure, but well water? Nope.

>Diminishing resources

In more lifetimes than we will run out of rare earth metals to make our iPads, but before it runs out, as in way before, it will get much more expensive because production will slow but demand will only increase

It's all "gas is fucking expensive"

natural gas burns cleaner than coal. Wind turbines are being developed to lessen the effect of birds and bats, but the severity of their deaths is up to agreement. The nuclear threat is overblown, we aren't dealing with Chernobyl here any more. And disrupted ecosystems happen anyway you cook it.

Ok I misunderstood what you were trying to say.

>clean burning and oil sands
or
>dirty burning and cavernous mine

>we aren't dealing with Chernobyl here any more.
Chernobyl was human error anyway

the gas prices are ran more by cartels in the middle east, south America, and Europe (Russia). Between them and simple supply/ demand that effects the price of fuel than using electricity. So putting pressure on these cartels or pushing them out would be the way effect gas prices more. We agree then?

Also please don't forget about mining when flipping out about car emissions

Heating those ores releases some serious shit that does far worse than slowly kill off a bunch of fish we don't even eat and make weather a little less survivable for those who inhabit less than stellar works of architecture, like literally poison everything that breathes the cadmium/lead/mercury compound gases

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car?

If GM wanted to build competition for the Tesla they would have no problem doing so.

I'm waiting.