I think the issue is the Roadster is offically out of production and the Model S is not yet shipping and does not have an MPGe. In my mind the model S is really a 2013 model and I bet it will make the greenest list next year.
The whole coal argument is baseless. A Tesla's efficiency, plug to rubber, is so astoundingly much higher than an ICE that it will ALWAYS be greener than ANY gas car.
Looks like the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy has a set of ideas about what is "right." Most of us here would probably disagree about their priorities. The Council also seems to have a clear preference for ugly cars - it must be part of their selection criteria. No one here believes in ugly cars!
Last edited by MarkR; 05-07-2012 at 10:42 AM.
"If this is the future, I'm not that worried." Jay Leno (after driving a Tesla)
85kWh, Blue Metallic, Tan Leather, Obeche Matte, Pano Roof, Active Air, 19" Wheels -- delivered Dec 29!
So, we all understand the coal argument is pretty baseless. What is the answer to the "green-ness" of battery production methods, and then disposal at end of life? How do those factors affect a green rating?
Oil can be recycled, i.e. thoroughly cleaned and reused as motor oil. There's even a retail brand now that advertises that some fraction of the oil is recycled.
EV batteries can also be recycled and the component minerals reused. A better use for aged EV batteries, however, will be to combine and reuse them as grid-scale storage. While a 60% degraded battery won't generally be useful in an EV, it's more than ample when combined with 1,000 others for grid applications (e.g., providing real-time reserves, reactive power, voltage stabilization, and renewables integration).
Important take-away: you have to pay to get rid of old motor oil; you'll get paid to hand over your aging EV battery.
If the smartForTwo is the car I'm thinking of, it shouldn't be considered at all. 38 mpg. I could get 55 mpg (cross country driving) with my '95 Geo Metro with two adults at least one teenager, a dog and luggage. The only Smart I've ever seen didn't look like it had room for a bag of groceries, if a second person was in it. Correct me, if they're talking about a different car.
At the introduction in 1998, the Smart forTwo had disappointing mileage of 39-47mpg (US). The public expectation was something around 3L/100km (=78mpg) instead of 5.5 to 6.5 L/100km. The Smart ForTwo has a tiny trunk, though.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)