View Full Version : Carbon Footprint of attending the Model S Factory tour
AndrewBissell
08-12-2011, 10:10 PM
Anyone see the Carbon Footprint Elephant-in-the-Room? All this flying to ride in an electric car? Hate to be a party pooper, and I really want to go, but if I do it could only be because I had to be in the close area anyway for some other essential reason.
The European alternative is to see it in March at Geneva, with either electric trains or our own electric rides to take us there.
Some of us use electricity from the oldest coal power plant in the US to charge our electric vehicles. Not helping CO2, but we still love our EVs, which do still help in other ways.
Every day we have to decide how we will spend our electric miles (a limited asset for non-Tesla EVs). The best CO2 answer is to just stay home, but life must go on, so decide what trips are important, or add value to our lives, and go.
Likewise, everyone has a limited time to live. We all have to decide how to spend this limited time. If an activity is important or enriches your life, do it.
Likewise, we all have a travel budget. We only have so much vacation time, or just time period. We also have a monetary budget, and must decide what is most important to us, then use our money, and our time, for that. Some are also consicous of our CO2 budget. It is not zero. We have to decide what is important in life and spent our CO2 on that.
If anyone thinks that flying to beautiful SanFrancisco, meeting fellow Tesla enthusiasts and employees, and riding in a the new BETA Model S is worth spending their time and money to greatly enrich their life, it is also worth spending their CO2 budget as well. The time, money, and CO2 would most likely be spent on a different leisure trip somewhere else if they did not come to to celebrate Tesla's new EV.
GSP
Nice, GSP.
As many have gleefully pointed out, Al Gore does not sit in a cave with candles and blankets.
PopSmith
08-13-2011, 06:19 PM
Likewise, we all have a travel budget. We only have so much vacation time, or just time period. We also have a monetary budget, and must decide what is most important to us, then use our money, and our time, for that. Some are also consicous of our CO2 budget. It is not zero. We have to decide what is important in life and spent our CO2 on that.
For the CO2 part, find a nearly-full flight and use it to go to California for the tour. The planes are going to fly whether or not a Beta "Test Ride" attendee is on board. :tongue:
I hope Tesla does a similar event for BlueStar and beyond when they are first introduced.
dpeilow
08-16-2011, 03:51 PM
Anyone see the Carbon Footprint Elephant-in-the-Room? All this flying to ride in an electric car? Hate to be a party pooper, and I really want to go, but if I do it could only be because I had to be in the close area anyway for some other essential reason.
The European alternative is to see it in March at Geneva, with either electric trains or our own electric rides to take us there.
Absolutely
Some are also consicous of our CO2 budget. It is not zero. We have to decide what is important in life and spent our CO2 on that.
What actually is the level this budget should be set at?
For the CO2 part, find a nearly-full flight and use it to go to California for the tour. The planes are going to fly whether or not a Beta "Test Ride" attendee is on board. :tongue:
The planes are flying there anyway argument is the one that keeps them flying. So your personal emissions for the flight must be 0 then...
To give an idea of what this involves, if one took a flight from London to SFO just to see the car, you would have to drive more than 33000 km in the Model S just to offset the emissions from that flight compared with getting a 3 litre Audi A6 TDi from the local dealer. (I've used UK grid emissions in that calculation but German and Dutch are very similar.) 'Fraid I'm with Andrew on this: If you have to go there anyway, fair enough, but if you're just going to see the car then it kinda wipes out the benefit of the car.
Kevin Sharpe
08-16-2011, 04:18 PM
If you have to go there anyway, fair enough, but if you're just going to see the car then it kinda wipes out the benefit of the car.this personal responsibility stuff sure is tough sometimes :wink:
AnOutsider
08-16-2011, 04:21 PM
Can we please not turn this thread into this? Not everyone is into EVs for the uber green credit. With me, discussions about my "Carbon Footprint" is nearly equivalent to PETA telling me I can't have a steak.
It's all hypocritical anyway unless you're living like the Amish folk around here, but if that's what you're about: great. Just don't preach to me.
dpeilow
08-16-2011, 04:25 PM
http://freedemreps.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/HypocrisyOffset.jpg
Kevin Sharpe
08-16-2011, 04:26 PM
CIt's all hypocritical anyway unless you're living like the Amish folk around here, but if that's what you're about: great. Just don't preach to me.nobody is preaching to you... just asking a grown up question about the choices that we make...
Carbon Footprint Calculator
(http://calculator.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx?tab=3)
Total Flights Footprint = 1.53 metric tons of CO2
1.53 metric tons:
Economy class direct return flight from LHR to SFO
Where is that 'electric jet' we keep hearing about?
I try to avoid flying as much as possible these days, but it sure does feel constraining.
Kevin Harney
08-17-2011, 05:19 AM
Well you do have to divide that 1.53 metric tons by the 200 or so passengers and crew right ?!?!?! LOL :)
Lloyd
08-17-2011, 06:08 AM
Well you do have to divide that 1.53 metric tons by the 200 or so passengers and crew right ?!?!?! LOL :)
No this figure would be correct for each passenger. Typical flight 200 seats will burn about 15,000 gallons San Francisco to London. Weight of Fuel ~90,000 lbs. C02 produced is about 600,000 lbs divided by 200 passengers is 3,000 lbs per passenger each way.
dpeilow
08-17-2011, 08:26 AM
Yep. The calculator I used (http://www.carbonneutralcalculator.com/flightcalculator.aspx) says 1.86 tonnes for economy, 5.3 for business class and over 7.4 for first.
I used 1.86 in the calculation.
NigelM
08-17-2011, 10:29 AM
Anyone want to buy some carbon offset credits from my solar system? :biggrin:
2371
Buy carbon credits from Florida Nig?
That one acre kinda looked like swampland to me...:biggrin::wink:
NigelM
08-18-2011, 02:31 PM
That one acre kinds looked like swampland to me...:biggrin::wink:
Everglades! :tongue:
Not sure how much one less ticket sold will reduce the amount of kerosene burned on any given flight, but it sure would be nice if jets burned hydrogen in the future and it was derived from alternative, non-carbon renewable energy. We're not going to change everything at once, but our electric cars make a significant impact in many ways. One thing to keep in mind, even if we can't reduce our carbon footprints as fast as we'd like, is that we've never had to fight a war over electricity. Coal, uranium, hydro, natural gas, solar, wind, geothermal... it's all right here in North America and requires no guns, tanks, rockets, drones, or fallen soldiers. To me it's more about moving the focus of our precious financial resources away from killing and toward developing a sustainable course. It's not so much about the momentary guilt of buying an airplane ticket... it's about the overall direction we're headed. It's impossible to live in the modern world at the moment without having significant carbon footprints, but I'd like to believe that the directions my footprints are headed are beginning to aim away from fossil fuels. Oil is a great resource, and the oil left in the ground needs to stay there for use in making plastics and other materials we need in the future. Even natural gas is used to make plastics.
DisneylandIsHome
08-22-2011, 03:30 PM
Everyone stay home and give us more time with the Model S. We're charging our Roadster using our solar panels and driving the 37 miles round trip no matter what anyone says! 8-)
dpeilow
08-23-2011, 02:08 PM
Not sure how much one less ticket sold will reduce the amount of kerosene burned on any given flight
It's more about reducing demand so that maybe 9 instead of 10 flights operate a route on a given day
but it sure would be nice if jets burned hydrogen in the future and it was derived from alternative, non-carbon renewable energy.
Or they could be switched to run on methanol pretty much tomorrow. Hydrogen for planes en masse is as much of an unobtainable dream as for road cars.
From http://www.efcf.com/reports/E21.pdf
The full dimensions of the challenge become apparent when these numbers are translated to a specific case. The following case study may serve to illustrate the point. About 50 jumbo jets leave Frankfurt Airport every day, each loaded with 130 tons of kerosene. If replaced on a 1 : 1 energy base by 50 tons of liquid hydrogen, the daily needs would be 2500 tons or 36 000 m3
of the cryogenic liquid, enough to fill 18 Olympic-size swimming pools. Every day 22 500 tons of water would have to be electrolyzed. The continuous output of eight 1-GW powerplants would be required for electrolysis, liquefaction, and transport of hydrogen. If all 550 planes leaving the airport were converted to hydrogen, the entire water consumption of Frankfurt (650 000 inhabitants) and the output of 25 full-size power plants would be needed to meet the hydrogen demand of air planes leaving just one airport in Germany.
For hydrogen derived from fossil hydrocarbons, the availability of water and the safe sequestration of CO2 may pose serious problems, not because of inadequate technology, but with respect to logistics, infrastructure, costs, safety, and energy consumption. To fuel the 50 jumbo jets with hydrogen, about 7500 tons of coal and 11 250 tons of water are needed daily and 27 500 tons of carbon dioxide must be liquefied for transport, shipped to a suitable disposal site (perhaps in the deep waters of the mid-Atlantic) and safely deposited. The significant energy needs for hydrogen liquefaction and transport are the same for any source of hydrogen. Fueling the 50 jumbo jets at Frankfurt airport is only an insignificant part of a hydrogen economy. Has the magnitude of the task been recognized?
It's not so much about the momentary guilt of buying an airplane ticket... it's about the overall direction we're headed. It's impossible to live in the modern world at the moment without having significant carbon footprints, but I'd like to believe that the directions my footprints are headed are beginning to aim away from fossil fuels.
But is that going to really be affected by your seeing the car a few months before it's in the local store?
I wonder how much CO2 is produced to fly a corporate jet between LA and SF twice a week all year long...
dpeilow
08-23-2011, 02:36 PM
I wonder how much CO2 is produced to fly a corporate jet between LA and SF twice a week all year long...
Absolutely. A carbon audit would make interesting reading.
Lloyd
08-23-2011, 04:22 PM
I wonder how much CO2 is produced to fly a corporate jet between LA and SF twice a week all year long...
I can answer that. 500 gal per round trip approximately depending on the type of plane. X2 =1000 gal. Wt of Fuel is 6,600 lbs, and CO2 produces is approximately 45,000 lbs per week. It enables him to run two companies, and is a business necessity. I don't fault him for taking advantage of this type of travel.
S-2000 Roadster
08-28-2011, 03:38 AM
Yep. The calculator I used (http://www.carbonneutralcalculator.com/flightcalculator.aspx) says 1.86 tonnes for economy, 5.3 for business class and over 7.4 for first.
I used 1.86 in the calculation.
Why is it that economy, business class, and first class take a different amount?
Is the calculation dividing by cubic feet of cabin space? square feet of floor space? feet of row space?
Wouldn't the share be equal for each person? What about accounting for weight of the person and their luggage instead of the price of their seat and service? Are the drinks and meals that you get in first class really creating almost four times as many emissions? I find that hard to believe...
Kevin Sharpe
08-28-2011, 04:14 AM
It enables him to run two companies, and is a business necessity.I own two global companies and we use technology to replace long distance travel most of the time... in the 21st Century I do not believe that it's a "business necessity" for anyone to fly on a regular basis.
Norbert
08-28-2011, 04:25 AM
I own two global companies and we use technology to replace long distance travel most of the time... in the 21st Century I do not believe that it's a "business necessity" for anyone to fly on a regular basis.
In this case I'm sure it is. Although the high speed rail connection might change that, but that's a few years down the road.
dpeilow
08-28-2011, 04:37 AM
Why is it that economy, business class, and first class take a different amount?
Is the calculation dividing by cubic feet of cabin space? square feet of floor space? feet of row space?
Wouldn't the share be equal for each person?
By some combination of all those factors, they've decided one could fit four economy class passengers in the volume or mass taken by one first class passenger. Be it reclining beds, extra storage space for meals or whatever. This may help (http://www.eci.ox.ac.uk/research/energy/downloads/jardine09-carboninflights.pdf).
I do not believe that it's a "business necessity" for anyone to fly on a regular basis.
All depends on the business. A travel author for example. How about pilots?
Kevin Sharpe
08-31-2011, 12:44 AM
All depends on the business. A travel author for example. How about pilots?sure... isn't the bigger point though that we have to find a way of equating our decisions with their impact?
All depends on the business. A travel author for example.
http://www.michaeltennesen.com/articles/audubon_carbon_neutral.htm
sure... isn't the bigger point though that we have to find a way of equating our decisions with their impact?
Yes i agree. I just think your previous statement was a sweeping generalization that did not include millions of others that have no choice but to travel on a regular basis to earn a living in their field.
To me, the most important thing about my Tesla is the impact it is making on the future of automobiles. It's a breakthrough that heralds a new future. We're not there yet, and we will continue to generate a lot of carbon dioxide, but honestly, the things we're discovering about climate change are changing so rapidly that, imho, our carbon dioxide impact in the near future isn't going to change much. With the tundra thawing there's so much methane headed into the atmosphere that we will most likely need a technological solution to the problem, like whiting out the sky with particles to reflect back heat. We can't really foresee all of the changes we'll experience. Imho, we've crossed the tipping point already and what's left is a race for technological advances that let us save as much petroleum and natural gas as we can for future plastic and other material production. We used up half of it in 100 years and we're using more than ever right now. Yep, we probably wrecked the planet's weather, but maybe we can fix that somehow.
S-2000 Roadster
09-01-2011, 07:58 PM
With the tundra thawing there's so much methane headed into the atmosphere that we will most likely need a technological solution to the problem, like whiting out the sky with particles to reflect back heat.
What would you call such a solution, Skynet?
Norbert
09-02-2011, 12:39 AM
Yep, we probably wrecked the planet's weather, but maybe we can fix that somehow.
At the same time as climate scientist are being accused of not knowing what they talk about? ;)
What would you call such a solution, Skynet?
Just 'the Shield', surely. [Link (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102034/)]
US answer to global warming: smoke and giant space mirrors | Environment | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/jan/27/usnews.frontpagenews)
bonnie1194
09-02-2011, 09:03 AM
I miss World Weekly News (http://www.google.com/search?q=weekly+world+news&hl=en&prmd=ivnsb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=VP5gTt2ZBY3UiAK--K2XDg&ved=0CF4QsAQ&biw=1440&bih=799). Surely they would have had a creative solution to this. After all, they brought us the stellar headlines such as 'Computer Talks to the Dead', 'Human Head Kept Alive for 7 Days', and 'Angry Bull Downs Helicopter'.
dpeilow
09-03-2011, 03:05 AM
So the 'promise' of future sci-fi solutions means we can just party like it's 1999?
bonnie1194
09-03-2011, 10:58 PM
So the 'promise' of future sci-fi solutions means we can just party like it's 1999?
I don't believe anyone was suggesting that.
So the 'promise' of future sci-fi solutions means we can just party like it's 1999?
Sci-fi? Do you doubt that people will just keep burning fossil fuels at an ever-increasing rate? No matter how hard we advocate for change, the rest of the world is going to continue increasing their use until they can't buy fossil fuels anymore, and then they'll use biofuels and keep poisoning the atmosphere that way. There's only one way to change things, as far as I can see. Introduce and expand the use of electricity and batteries for everything, then increase the production of solar cells and wind and every other clean energy source to the point where using them is the only realistic choice, financially. We've had thousands of brilliant scientists and politicians and pundits advocating for change for years now, and the world does not listen. Use the methods that have always worked in the past! The wallet is the only place they notice. Look at Sarah Palin, preaching AGAINST solar power and mass transit THIS WEEK. Sarah Palin criticises Obama and Republican rivals | World news | The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/04/sarah-palin-obama-republican-rivals) If this is what we're up against, I don't think the carbon dioxide represented by an airline ticket should be a deterrent to supporting and celebrating the arrival of the best electric cars on the planet.
dpeilow
09-04-2011, 02:38 PM
Whiting out the sky with particles and "fixing the weather" sounds pretty sci-fi.
My sense is that when we try to "fix nature" on a grand scale we tend to make things worse.
Generally I think it is better to "stop doing bad stuff" and let it "heal itself" than try to intervene further.
Even if we fixed one problem we might introduce others.
http://www.actgeo.com/files/3812/8561/5404/Better-world.png (http://www.actgeo.com/about/abouttheceo/)
Norbert
09-04-2011, 10:19 PM
http://www.actgeo.com/files/3812/8561/5404/Better-world.png (http://www.actgeo.com/about/abouttheceo/)
Always loved this one!
I'm all for doing the right thing. I'm a realist, however, and I don't see the whole world taking the situation seriously enough to really slow down oil consumption (as fuel) until something catastrophic happens, say, every week. China's out of control with CO2 and will probably get much more out of control before anything gets better. Continued technological innovation and generating more excitement and acceptance of electric vehicles are some of the most important things we can do right now.
Norbert
09-05-2011, 01:12 AM
I'm all for doing the right thing. I'm a realist, however, and I don't see the whole world taking the situation seriously enough to really slow down oil consumption (as fuel) until something catastrophic happens, say, every week. China's out of control with CO2 and will probably get much more out of control before anything gets better. Continued technological innovation and generating more excitement and acceptance of electric vehicles are some of the most important things we can do right now.
In the next few years, several clean/efficient technologies technologies will become viable technologies. In our minds they already are, but by usual standards, for example solar will become cost competitive only soon. EVs have not yet proven their mainstream appeal. In our minds, they are already solutions, but they aren't yet by usual standards.
However, once they are "solutions" in a more conventional sense, vague environmental problems will be re-categorized as solvable problems, as problems for which there is practical action that can solve them or at least begin to solve them in the sense of making a valid difference.
This means that environmental thinking will change from being perceived as "utopian", to being understood as "real". Which in turn will allow the problem recognized by environmental thinking to be taken seriously, as a "real" problem. At that point, I think, a lot can change.
Seriously? So I'm only expected to write about things I can drive to in my Nissan Leaf?
What about just Europe? Do all reporters have to be global, filling up flights to far off destinations?
No offense to you, but it is part of the system that continues to consume up the oil.
gg_got_a_tesla
09-25-2011, 04:54 AM
What about just Europe? Do all reporters have to be global, filling up flights to far off destinations?
No offense to you, but it is part of the system that continues to consume up the oil.
I disagree. *aminorjourney* is very welcome! Tesla and the rest of us EV advocates can do with all the favorable press that we can get. If anything, the press on this side of the Atlantic is much more myopic, prejudiced and stuck in the past on average. Flying far and often is what it is - I'm 'guilty' of that too; as someone said on the other thread about the event, Al Gore does not live in a cave burning just candles :)
mcornwell
09-25-2011, 05:45 PM
More jet fuel burned. Don't they have someone more local to cover it?
You should probably delete your account here at teslamotorsclub.com, as the servers that host the forum do not run themselves, they rely on massive power and cooling in a data center...
bonnie1194
09-25-2011, 05:48 PM
You should probably delete your account here at teslamotorsclub.com, as the servers that host the forum do not run themselves, they rely on massive power and cooling in a data center...
snarky.
At least the servers ~could~ be running on solar, wind or hydro... Unlike a jet.
Speaking of which, Elon keeps talking about making an 'electric jet' someday.
SByer
09-25-2011, 08:16 PM
Cloud computing is, in general, much more efficient than using local computing resources.
http://googlegreenblog.blogspot.com/2011/09/how-our-cloud-does-more-with-less.html
And, like EVs, cloud computing gets more green as we green the grid (so does local computing, but like ICE vs. EV, might as well be efficient, too).
Look, we're at the tip of an iceberg here. If travelling to the event gets you more excited by the Model S, and you sell more to the unbelieving heathens(*), then the CO2 spent is well worth it. It's still very, very hard to live a zero-damage life - I doubt you actually can (I suspect you can come close on CO2, but there are so many measures...). It's like building renewable power - it still costs a lot of fossil fuel / CO2 to build renewable power sources, but for each one we do, it's far, far better leverage of the non-renewable resources than just puttering about in a inefficient pollution-spewing banger.
(*)I originally thought I needed some sort of explanation for this, but really, do I?
A thought that keeps popping into my head is "where does the buck stop?"
In other words, the early adopters can say "we are just early adopters still using the old fuel but we start to set an example for the next generation to take over." Or do we decide that the time has come to fully embrace the EV and start to make huge sacrifices on anything else that burns fuel?
I have seriously mixed feelings when the ones creating or hyping the product aren't doing everything possible to set the full example. Well, Tesla themselves seem to have "ratcheted way back" from the "sales by guilt" angle... I guess it is probably true that sales volumes could be bigger if they sell purely based on attractive metrics such as costs per mile for energy, and reduced maintenance without resorting to the "you must buy this to be good" angle that would turn many away.
One great thing about the Internet is that it can replace much air travel for many. Particularly for things like new product information announcements. For instance, say hypothetically, I wanted to go to the Frankfurt auto show and see what is there. Well these days I can look on the Internet and see photos and videos of everything going on there, and don't feel like I missed out by not going there in person.
If a UK based reporter flys to the USA to cover a USA product unveiling and that keeps multiple other Europeans from "bothering" to make the trip themselves, then great... Pollution reduction. But if EV products are attracting so much mainstream press that every publication wants to get on board, and there are huge amounts of reporters flying in, maybe not so good. Maybe Nikki can let us know how many international reporters ended up flying out to see it? Also, will that result in many unique stories, or a bunch of redundant repeats of the same info?
Doug_G
09-25-2011, 09:19 PM
This probably should be moved to another thread, namely Carbon Footprint of attending the Model S Factory tour (http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/6134-Carbon-Footprint-of-attending-the-Model-S-Factory-tour?highlight=carbon+footprint)
But I'm going to comment on this thread anyway.
IMHO your comment was inappropriate. Nikki's job is to report on green technologies. She can't do that by reading a few random third-hand internet postings. It's not just reasonable for her to attend the event and report on it; it's necessary.
You're going to have a footprint on the environment if you're living in this world. At this point in time some things can be done with a lower environmental footprint, and other things cannot. You can't stop your life because of that; you just have to do what you can. I'm not going to stop traveling by air when I need/want to, but I do less of it than I used to. Hopefully over time low-carbon or recycled-carbon fuels will be developed for air travel.
In the meantime, I'm driving an EV, which is more than 99% of the population is doing, but I don't feel a need to get on a high horse about it. I'm not trying to shame my neighbours about what car they are driving.
AnOutsider
09-25-2011, 09:20 PM
Barring some huge eye-opening event that outright requires it, the world isn't going to change this way... People aren't going to all of a sudden start thinking "hmmm, should I really take this trip? How can I take a vacation and have the lowest carbon footprint possible?". Myself included.
I think the trick, if there is one, would be to make it easy to do the right thing. Make it no compromise. Work to make jets cleaner, not reduce travel. Work to make the energy you burn in the house cleaner, not enter full blackout mode in your house after 9pm. Work to offer a great vehicle that saves you money while also burning clean!
Timothy
09-25-2011, 09:33 PM
If you REALLY want to be green, forget about all this electric car stuff. There are just too !@#$%^& people on this planet. So the real answer is not 'buy Tesla' but 'buy condoms!'
Doug_G
09-25-2011, 09:34 PM
If you REALLY want to be green, forget about all this electric car stuff. There are just too !@#$%^& people on this planet. So the real answer is not 'buy Tesla' but 'buy condoms!'
'Tis true... if there were fewer of us, we could do pretty much anything and it wouldn't matter.
Did everyone notice the 'birth' over the past 5 years or so of the 'Staycation' concept?
Staycation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staycation)
I still think a mantra of reduced long distance travel is a good idea, even if everyone has reasons to think all of it is justifiable.
Sorry to be a 'Debbie Downer' (as Doug might say), but I do feel rather strongly that long haul air travel is something we (as a populace) should take more seriously. Think about this:
An average driver goes perhaps 10K miles per year in their car. One air trip from San Francisco to London and back basically duplicates that mileage. The aircraft has no catalytic converter. It goes at a fast speed which causes a lot of wind resistance. Sure you have a lot of people in the one vehicle, but it still uses a tremendous amount of fuel per person. Just taking one of those trips negates a good chunk of the environmental relief one might have had from driving an EV instead of an ICE all year.
And yes, I hope we get some new technology someday soon so that air travel can get off of petroleum burning just like Tesla is doing for cars.
Cobos
09-25-2011, 10:30 PM
Just to chime in with support for TEG. I do believe it is appropriate to ask if a reporter really needs to come over from the UK. I'm not saying it's never justified but one should really ask that question. I also believe reducing long-range travel has merit, though I've done almost a yearly US vacation the last years so what a strive to do and what I actually do isn't the same. That doesn't mean the goal is wrong just that I'm working towards it.
Cobos
Thanks Cobos. I am done 'spouting off', and will return to the 'regularly scheduled program' now.
VolkerP
09-26-2011, 12:40 AM
In the meantime, I'm driving an EV, which is more than 99% of the population is doing, but I don't feel a need to get on a high horse about it. I'm not trying to shame my neighbours about what car they are driving.
+1 for that. I myself must try very hard to keep my emotions to my own, or I will not convince anybody outside the EV supporters group.
drbradfo
09-26-2011, 02:08 PM
if you are worried about carbon footprint of air travel, check out TerraPass | Fight global warming, reduce your carbon footprint (http://www.terrapass.com). If I was traveling solo from Portland to San Jose, it would be lower CO2 to fly then drive my Prius, but since my wife is coming along, carpooling in the Prius wins (and it wins on price too).
You should probably delete your account here at teslamotorsclub.com, as the servers that host the forum do not run themselves, they rely on massive power and cooling in a data center...
Didn't someone else already calculate the cumulative electricity TEG is "wasting" on our computers with his spinning fan avatar? :rolleyes:
More jet fuel burned. Don't they have someone mSore local to cover it?
Though I'm less absolutist than TEG, and as much as I like Nikki, this is a reasonable question. John Voelcker or someone else in the US wasn't available?
Doug_G
09-26-2011, 06:06 PM
I'm less absolutist than TEG, but this is a reasonable question. John Voelcker or someone else in the US wasn't available?
I dunno, I hate to second-guess people like that. Wouldn't it be better to say, "looking forward to meeting you, Nikki?" and be done with it?
bonnie1194
09-26-2011, 06:13 PM
It wasn't personal to Nikki (looking forward to meeting you, Nikki!).
It was a bigger question & good for him for saying 'hey! elephant in the room!'. We shouldn't be afraid of these discussions. Everyone had good points. It should be an ongoing dialogue.
Just my opinion.
I dunno, I hate to second-guess people like that. Wouldn't it be better to say, "looking forward to meeting you, Nikki?" and be done with it?
Sorry, I had revised my post while I guess you were composing yours. Yeah, I'm just curious and I think this is a useful discussion (as long as it's in the appropriate thread).
Well, I am glad to learn that Nikki has combined other activities with the same trip, so it is more productive than just a "come see the S beta" back and forth.
Hopefully other long distance / international travelers have multiple reasons to come out and enjoy the SF Bay Area right now.
Over the years, I can recall some people saying things like "Ugh, I have to take this stupid 2 day trip half way around the globe for a pointless meeting." When that happens I get rankled.
Doug_G
09-26-2011, 07:37 PM
Hopefully other long distance / international travelers have multiple reasons to come out and enjoy the SF Bay Area right now.
Yep. I'm coming from eastern Canada, but I'm also meeting with one of our largest customers. This has the added benefit of letting me write off the trip. :wink:
AnOutsider
09-26-2011, 07:57 PM
I'm coming. Sitting in my hotel room (probably room service). Renting a Hummer, driving to the event, driving back to the hotel, then flying back out on Sunday.
Don't hold me to this, but I might also crush a kitten while there.
Don't hold me to this, but I might also crush a kitten while there.
"Do not worry. He is biodegradable." - The Cyclists
dsm363
09-27-2011, 06:09 AM
http://www.michaeltennesen.com/articles/audubon_carbon_neutral.htm
From the article
"Despite its problems, travel can actually be a boon for conservation, adds Honey. "It's crucial to host communities and an important
economic activity in developing countries. Plus travel is a learning tool, as well. It gives the traveler an awareness of the world and
the environment, that you won't get from staying home watching television."
I agree. If traveling to see nature (seeing humpbacks breach for the first time) gets your interested in conservation or going to the Tesla event gets you inspired to talk your friends into getting an electric car then it's worth it. The carbon footprint argument of attending the event is a valid point to bring up but sometimes you just have to go to something to really enjoy it and everyone needs a little vacation now and then. Plus there is the pre-pre-party anyway so your trip will serve a dual purpose.
EVery one of us here is sowing seeds. If we have to use precious water to feed the planet then its a good use. Nikki serves up the most palatable offering to the most populous so she gets the biggest ration.
Or, f this did not work would you like my film popular culture "contagion" analogy better?
Renting a Hummer...I might also crush a kitten...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se0RafEh7SI
AnOutsider
09-27-2011, 09:46 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Se0RafEh7SI
haha, well spotted
gg_got_a_tesla
09-29-2011, 07:41 PM
Something I heard on NPR the other day: Air Force And Navy Turn To Biofuels : NPR (http://www.npr.org/2011/09/26/140702387/air-force-and-navy-turn-to-bio-fuels)
Someday, maybe, the cumulative carbon footprint of an event such as Tesla's may be far better if commercial airlines bite...
Looks like TheChargingPoint's Will Dron is coming over too...
Twitter (http://twitter.com/#!/charging_point/status/119755561158979584)
WD here. Aboard the flight to San Francisco, then on to Tesla in Fremont to ride in the Model S. Report and gallery next week.
I'm told there will be a thousand Tesla employees at the event this weekend.
Companies have annual meetings all the time. Sometimes several per year. Kudos to Tesla for combining a customer and corporate EVent meetup.
Didn't someone else already calculate the cumulative electricity TEG is "wasting" on our computers with his spinning fan avatar? :rolleyes:
Brilliant Doug! 5 star comment. On a 0-3 rating scale. :-)
I "calculate" 10^9 tons of CO2 per hour! ;-)
GSP
Didn't someone else already calculate the cumulative electricity TEG is "wasting" on our computers with his spinning fan avatar? :rolleyes:
I'm happy with the cooling breeze that wafts from my screen whenever TEG posts. :)
bonnie1194
10-01-2011, 07:29 AM
I'm happy with the cooling breeze that wafts from my screen whenever TEG posts. :)
Agreed. It cuts down on my cooling costs here.
Just to be clear, I was poking fun at the guy that mentioned first mentioned the fans, and not TEG.
Funny, mine just seems to be blowing a lot of hot air most of the time!
Did TEG's avatar just stop spinning for everyone else? Ok, on second check, it spins in Safari but not in Firefox. Time to reboot, I guess.
Ok, whew, I can breathe again.
dpeilow
10-08-2011, 12:29 PM
The flipside
Electric Mini: It takes a lot of coal to make gasoline (http://electricmini.blogspot.com/2011/10/it-takes-lot-of-coal-to-make-gasoline.html?showComment=1318100210590#c5990007129983322940)
I'm about five hours from flying to Munich. I'm scheduled to drive an ActiveE Monday afternoon at 3pm. So when you get up for work in Carlsbad at 7am, I'll be just about getting behind the wheel!