... Except you can't patent something that's already out in the wild. It would be a mess if you could retroactively be granted patents for things that are already being sold.
Tesla owner refuses to pay over $21,000 for a new battery, gets locked out of his car
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
- Status
... Except you can't patent something that's already out in the wild. It would be a mess if you could retroactively be granted patents for things that are already being sold.
WhiteLeaff
Posts: 474 +857
I agree, pollution is a big problem.
However, you will not improve the health of the planet at all with current EVs. They are expensive, inefficient and cannot replace the world's fleet of conventional vehicles. Not to mention that lithium and other rare materials in batteries are limited and cause equally high levels of pollution during extraction.
So the point is, yes you have a problem which is pollution, which you don't have a viable solution for right now. Today, we have only Tesla profiting with bigger margins than any manufacturer of combustion cars, worst of all, they have nothing special or revolutionary to justify all the flow of money concentrated in the company.
Most cars after 5 years or 150-200.000 km present some kind of expensive repair. Early 00s cars from my family cars (Rover, Honda, Peugeot, Renault, Fiat, VW) had engine issues (injectors, head gasket, electric, turbo, ...) with expensive repairs. My Rover had 3 head gasket repairs (over 2500€ repairs and at the end theengine died at 160.000 km). A Skoda of mine (Tdi, 105 cv 1.9) broke the engine completely at 150.000 km with all maintenance done correctly. My current high end Tdi had adblue pump issues with 50.000 km, but under warranty was repaired (I pay a plus so that everything is covered...). On my family 00s Fiat and Alfa Romeo had engine failure and electric fire respectively. My father's Peugeot has ATM already had the 5th injector's replacement, failing one every year. The brand says it is my father's fault (the maintenance is done on the brand since always but when the injector fails, they say he drives too slowly even if I drive the car on the highway... then they cover the replacement, my father has to pay the part (700€ each).
I think the problem is that on most countries the client is always unprotected from the government and always pays...
Yes, because your visor failing is definitely a good comparison to being locked out of your no-longer-functioning car.
As for the rest, you are correct, it was his own dumb fault for buying a Tesla. I mean, who on Earth would be dumb enough to spend $50,000 (or more) on a vehicle that you're going to have to spend another $20,000 every 5 years (oh I'm sorry, 8 years now) just to keep its most basic function (driving) running.
No thank you. Even with my gas-guzzling, living-with-California-gas-prices, 20 year old V8 Grand Cherokee with all of its repairs and maintenance and a 90-mile up hill daily commute, I still pay less money than you *****s pay every month for a Tesla. Even when gas was $6/gallon and I was paying $200/week in gas, that was still better than a Tesla with 0% interest on a 5 year loan (>$830/month), not to mention the full coverage insurance, the cost of electricity, and needing a new battery back every 5 or 6 years.
Yeah, when my ICE died, I wasn't locked out of my car, I was not forced to by new papers proving it was mine, and if I didn't live in imperialist California, I could have done whatever I wanted with it. Diesel engine? Sure. Vegetable oil engine? Yeah. Put in an identical, but less miles engine? Definitely. In the end, after the car ran for 15 years and 270,000, it cost me less than $1,800 to put in a replacement engine.
Oh and for all the environmental junkies out there, there are now studies that show the carbon footprint of an electric vehicle is just as bad, if not worse, then the carbon footprint of a gas vehicle.
Endymio
Posts: 2,676 +2,706
Which part of "Tesla didn't lock him out of his vehicle" did you fail to understand? When your battery dies, the electric locks don't function. It's not rocket science. Plug a 12V charger into the bumper socket, and the car unlocks. Simple.
Darth Shiv
Posts: 2,371 +886
The key for me is the leak. A fluid leaking corrosive material onto batteries - let's be honest - is a manufacturing flaw or defect. How can it not be? If there was car fluids leaking onto the battery, that's a problem. That's THE problem.
I have NO issue with expected wear and tear but this is not it.
If the owner can show this leak occurred within warranty period, that's done and dusted. The car had a defect that is NOT reasonable.
It'd be nice if the US government could repo the tax credits Tesla received. Unfortunately we are apparently going to need laws limiting the markup on battery replacement and requiring support for replacing them. It should not cost 22k to replace a battery unless there is also structural damage? Tesla likes to brag about their battery costs ....they claim to be near $100 / kWh. A 60 kWh battery should cost about $7000 (some markup) + going rate for 2 to 4 hours of a mechanics labor. Same for all other damn EV. Fear/cost of battery replacement is one of the major, valid, objections people have to switching to EVs.
This is only correct in certain circumstances, but it is a partially correct statement.
1) A large part of the carbon footprint if any car is initial manufacturing. It isn't really environmentally friendly to replace a vehicle that works fine with an EV unless it gets horei gas mileage and that gas mileage is unjustified (I.e. EVs still have limited towing capacity, if you need to routinely tow multi ton loads, you'll need to stick with diesel)
2) In areas with truly dirty grids (coal or gasoline powered), the break even points for EVs is close to 4 or 5 years....so still a little questionable (not so if you have adequate solar charging available). Most grids are in the 3 to 4 year range. California has a lot of renewable or carbon free (geothermal, hydro, solar, wind, nuclear), so it is more like 1 to 3 years of break even in California.
Better battery life (and cheaper replacement cost), cleaner battery manufacturing, less dependence on lithium/cobalt, will go a LONG way towards removing "carbon footprint" objections to EVs.
lithium iron phosphate already don't use Cobalt. There are other technologies close to market that don't need lithium. Making the batteries in the United States would also drastically reduce the carbon footprint (no shipping materials and finished batteries back and forth to China)
Lmao and? According to California it'll soon be ILLEGAL to buy a new gas powered vehicle so eventually you'll have NO CHOICE but to buy an electric car. And Tesla is probably the best unless I'm mistaken and which case I REALLY hope I am.
I'm sorry 9 years later your $130k car needed a new set of batteries. I've heard sometimes they explode so I'm glad since you couldn't afford new batteries you were able to find a buyer who could.
Get your eyes checked.
The batteries in these cars are designed to run for 300,000 to 500,000 miles or about 21 to 25 years before they have to be replaced.
Theinsanegamer
Posts: 5,454 +10,239
Oh hey look, that thing that us crazy conspiracy theorists said was going to happen happened! Turns out EVs are REALLY expensive to maintain and their batteries SUCK ARSE. So replace it in 8 years. SO GREEN.
Get used to leasing EVs or buying new constantly, its FOR THE ENVIROMENT GUYZ
Get used to leasing EVs or buying new constantly, its FOR THE ENVIROMENT GUYZ
LOL that's pie in the sky thinking. Batteries in EVs rarely make it to 100k miles before needing replacement.
m3tavision
Posts: 1,439 +1,223
I understand that... and it can be engineered to have a small rectifier to deliver power to doors and trunk.
ZedRM
Posts: 1,804 +1,207
That is debatable. EV car makers are not publicly sharing their usage data. We have no way of knowing.
And we have no reason to assume that the numbers will be better or worse than modern ICE vehicles.
A computer didn't lock him out. He knew the battery had an issue and still ran it completely dead. He can manually open the car but he'd rather get the publicity of claiming he is locked out.
There are plenty of things that can be argued about Tesla's and electric cars but this story is just stupid.
ZedRM
Posts: 1,804 +1,207
Oh yes we do. Lithium based batteries are inherently unstable and degrade quickly if sneezed on the wrong way. They are not just a less than ideal solution for EV's but they are in fact a pi$$ poor solution. Makers only use them because they are the easiest and cheapest to make.
What data can you show that indicates modern EVs are less reliable than modern ICE vehicles... apart from your conjecture?
RebelFlag
Posts: 179 +119
Even if he didn't see the adds on TV, you can't tell me he didn't get at least 500 spam auto warranty calls on his cell phone! LOL
ZedRM
Posts: 1,804 +1,207
The same level of evidence that you can provide that they are, EXCEPT that I don't need to provide any evidence about lithium chemistries for batteries, it is common knowledge, so there's that. Any other seemingly clever comments?
ZedRM
Posts: 1,804 +1,207
Not true. It happens frequently. Products get released with a "Patent Pending" statement. This happens because the patent office frequently take more time checking and approving patents than it does for the product manufacturing cycle takes.
Endymio
Posts: 2,676 +2,706
For an EV, there is no practical alternative to lithium batteries at present, regardless of cost. No other technology provides the same energy density and rechargeability characteristics, at a reasonably low weight.
You're confused over the meaning of this. Innovations already in use are considered "prior art", and are ineligible to be patented. If you doubt this, the controlling legality is 35 USC 102, which spells out the conditions for patentability in detail:
35 U.S. Code § 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
ZedRM
Posts: 1,804 +1,207
You are incorrect. Try looking up Sulfur battery chemistries. There is already one EV using them. They are more durable, provide better energy densities, are MUCH more safe and cost of materials is the same or less than current lithium chemistries. The downside is that making them is complicated, thus adding an expense to the manufacturing process. However those problems are being worked out.
I'm getting not getting into this argument. Legal code is very complicated and is NOT as cut and dried as you make it out to be. You are partly correct, but you are also partly incorrect. I'll leave it at that.You're confused over the meaning of this. Innovations already in use are considered "prior art", and are ineligible to be patented. If you doubt this, the controlling legality is 35 USC 102, which spells out the conditions for patentability in detail:
35 U.S. Code § 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
www.law.cornell.edu
- Status
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
DARPA unleashes 20-foot autonomous robo-tank with glowing green eyes- MasterAce replied
-
Generative AI could soon decimate the call center industry, says CEO- wiyosaya replied
