# What if an Electric Car could go 500 miles and charge in one hour?



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

What about a smart phone with a week's worth of battery power and a charging time of about 15 minutes?  

Would you like it then?  http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2011/11/batteries-energy-kung.html

These squints are working on an electrode that would allow Li-Ion batteries to store up to 10 times more energy and charge up to 10 times faster.  Pretty interesting stuff.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> What about a smart phone with a week's worth of battery power and a charging time of about 15 minutes?
> 
> Would you like it then?  http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2011/11/batteries-energy-kung.html
> 
> These squints are working on an electrode that would allow Li-Ion batteries to store up to 10 times more energy and charge up to 10 times faster.  Pretty interesting stuff.



I don't care how far it goes or how quickly it charges up.  I care how much it costs per mile to operate.  That is all.  If it costs less than driving my $500 eBay special then yay.  If not, then boo.  Everything I decide is based off that.  I don't give two rips about anything except how much it costs me per mile to operate and the upfront expense.


----------



## elder999 (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> What about a smart phone with a week's worth of battery power and a charging time of about 15 minutes?
> 
> Would you like it then? http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2011/11/batteries-energy-kung.html
> 
> These* squints *are working on an electrode that would allow Li-Ion batteries to store up to 10 times more energy and charge up to 10 times faster. Pretty interesting stuff.



"_Squint???_"


----------



## granfire (Nov 21, 2011)

elder999 said:


> "_Squint???_"



people who have ruined their eyes by staring a computers all day long....


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I don't care how far it goes or how quickly it charges up.  I care how much it costs per mile to operate.  That is all.  If it costs less than driving my $500 eBay special then yay.  If not, then boo.  Everything I decide is based off that.  I don't give two rips about anything except how much it costs me per mile to operate and the upfront expense.


Well, shoot.  I can tell you I paid 2.7 cents per mile on average during the Summer.  Now that the weather has dropped, I'm averaging $ .4 /mile.  I paid an average of $ .16 / mile in my Mazda 5.

Cost per mile isn't even close.  There is no question that EV is significantly cheaper.  And in a few years, they'll start showing up in the used market, too.  

But damn...  500 miles on a charge with a 1 hour charging time.  That's pretty significant, in my opinion.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

elder999 said:


> "_Squint???_"


It's from the TV show Bones.  Squints are what he calls the scientists.   As Granfire said, it's because they stare at small things all day long with furrowed brows.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> Well, shoot.  I can tell you I paid 2.7 cents per mile on average during the Summer.  Now that the weather has dropped, I'm averaging $ .4 /mile.  I paid an average of $ .16 / mile in my Mazda 5.
> 
> Cost per mile isn't even close.  There is no question that EV is significantly cheaper.  And in a few years, they'll start showing up in the used market, too.
> 
> But damn...  500 miles on a charge with a 1 hour charging time.  That's pretty significant, in my opinion.



Nope, that's not cost per mile.  Factor in the cost of the vehicle, taxes, insurance, maintenance, and anything else that I have to pay and divide that by the miles per year driven.  Then I do the same to mine.  That's cost per mile.  The price of electricity doesn't impact it that greatly when my vehicle is already amortized.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Nope, that's not cost per mile.  Factor in the cost of the vehicle, taxes, insurance, maintenance, and anything else that I have to pay and divide that by the miles per year driven.  Then I do the same to mine.  That's cost per mile.  The price of electricity doesn't impact it that greatly when my vehicle is already amortized.


Yes, Bill. It is.  We've been through this before.  

If a car is produced that goes 500 miles on a charge and charges in one hour, it will become a used car over time.  

So, true apples to apples would be MSRP *new*, plus maintenance (or actual or projected) costs, plus fuel costs over the lifetime of the vehicle, adjusted to today's dollars (for comparison purposes).  What was the cost per mile over the life of your car, including the new purchase price, adjusted for inflation?  If you want apples to apples, THAT'S how to do it.  While I understand that your personal budget works a little differently, frankly, it's irrelevant to this discussion because we don't all live with you.  It can be presumed that some of these cars will be sold as used cars over time.  EVERY new car becomes a used car.  And they depreciate in value.  That's not unique to any car.

In other words, factor in the cost of the vehicle brand new, taxes, and maintenance over the lifetime of your car, and do the same for mine.  

Or as a convenient shorthand, you can compare a car to similiarly priced cars within the same general category of vehicle, ie, SUV, mid sized sedan, minivan, etc.  In this case, compared to Civics, Focuses, Mazda 3's wagons, and Golfs, among others, the price per mile is easily calculated based on mileage and the prevalent fuel prices.  Regardless of what you paid for it, if your car gets 25 miles per gallon, you're paying about $ .16 /mile.  And at $.11/kwh, I pay about 4 cents per mile.  

Make sense?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> Yes, Bill. It is.  We've been through this before.







> If a car is produced that goes 500 miles on a charge and charges in one hour, it will become a used car over time.



Yes.  It remains to be seen if the batteries will need to be replaced by the time the car is used.  I rather suspect that as cars shift to electric models, used cars will become essentially non-existent; they'll be intended to be disposable, since a good portion of the cost of the car is tied up in the batteries.  It's like used laptops; the problem is not that they are slow, the problem is their batteries will no longer hold a charge, and replacements cost so much, there's no point in buying them.



> Make sense?



Sure.  Except that I won't be buying any new cars.  The electrics will have to get down to $500 total cost before I could or would buy one, and I'm not then going to go out and spend $20K on a new battery pack for them.  Hopefully, internal combustion will be around until I'm not driving anymore.  Nothing against electric; just don't' think it will ever be cost-effective for me.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 21, 2011)

I think it would be cool and at some point in the not so far and distant future all cars will be this way.  BUT until I no longer have the choice there is nothing better then a well tuned Carb on top of a big old V8.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Yes.  It remains to be seen if the batteries will need to be replaced by the time the car is used.  I rather suspect that as cars shift to electric models, used cars will become essentially non-existent; they'll be intended to be disposable, since a good portion of the cost of the car is tied up in the batteries.  It's like used laptops; the problem is not that they are slow, the problem is their batteries will no longer hold a charge, and replacements cost so much, there's no point in buying them.


could be and something worth considering.  But even now, early in the development, the batteries are being constructed in such a way that they can be replaced easily and as discrete modules.  In other words, it's not one big, giant battery that powers the EV. Rather, it's thousands of individual battery packs, designed to be replaced singly if it fails.  Also, don't forget that the entire point of this thread is that there is significant research being done in battery technology.  There is every reason to believe that significant improvements in batteries will be made over the next few years should demand warrant.





> Sure.  Except that I won't be buying any new cars.


That's my point.  Your budget will not change, and certainly that's relevant to you and your wife.  But it's irrelevant to the larger discussion at hand.  We can't draw any useful conclusions based on your specific, household spending habits. 


> The electrics will have to get down to $500 total cost before I could or would buy one, and I'm not then going to go out and spend $20K on a new battery pack for them.  Hopefully, internal combustion will be around until I'm not driving anymore.  Nothing against electric; just don't' think it will ever be cost-effective for me.


And that is precisely the point of this thread.  If the cost of ownership for an EV is 1/4th that of a comparable ICE, particularly if the range issues are adequately addressed, even you might be won over.    

Once again, I'm not saying that this is smart or wise for you now.  Clearly, it's not.  I'm thinking 10 or 15 years down the road.

Ballen, that's a personal aesthetic, but I'll tell you that the instant torque and smooth acceleration of an EV is addictive.  And I even like the winding up of the electric motor.


----------



## Carol (Nov 21, 2011)

Overall cost is still a factor (I can't drive something I can't afford), but I am psyched to see work going in to expanding the range.  That would certainly take away a big barrier for me personally.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> ...particularly if the range issues are adequately addressed, even you might be won over.



Just want to make it clear, I have no personal interest in what powers my automobile, gasoline or electricity.  I'm agnostic.  I only care about final dollar cost per mile and my budget.  Nothing else matters to me.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Just want to make it clear, I have no personal interest in what powers my automobile, gasoline or electricity.  I'm agnostic.  I only care about final dollar cost per mile and my budget.  Nothing else matters to me.


I hope it's clear that I get that and completely understand.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

Carol said:


> Overall cost is still a factor (I can't drive something I can't afford), but I am psyched to see work going in to expanding the range.  That would certainly take away a big barrier for me personally.


No doubt, Carol.  Mitsubishi has a car in the $20k range, but the only way the cost of the vehicles goes down is either through expansion of market share or showing up in the used car lots. 

I'd really like to see extended range, myself.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> Ballen, that's a personal aesthetic, but I'll tell you that the instant torque and smooth acceleration of an EV is addictive.  And I even like the winding up of the electric motor.


My Fav hobby is rock crawling and 4x4 offroading.  I wonder how well the batteries would hold up to that


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 21, 2011)

Orange jeep is not mine just first rock crawing pic I saw


----------



## frank raud (Nov 21, 2011)

Any thoughts on how to generate all the additional electricity to charge these batteries powered cars as they become more common?


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

frank raud said:


> Any thoughts on how to generate all the additional electricity to charge these batteries powered cars as they become more common?


That is an excellent question and there are a couple of different answers.  The first answer is that we already do.  One possible solution is in storage.  Enough electricity is generated throughout the country every night and discarded during off peak times to completely address this issue.  Most EVs are charged at night, when electricity is actually being generated in excess of what we can store.  In other words, it's electricity that would be thrown away, anyway.  

With smart grids, the potential is to kill two birds with one stone.  One of the most interesting proposals I've seen is to set the EVs up so that they can discharge back to the grid.  In other words, I could purchase the electricity at night, when it's very cheap (say about $ .4 per kwh).  And then, if I'm hibernating at home during the day, I could actually choose to discharge that electricity back to the grid at a higher, price during peak usage, when the grid needs it.  The tech is already here to do this.  Right now, it's just about upgrading electrical infrastructure.  This is particularly true as you get further West.  

Here in Washington, much of our electricity is from Hydro, and the water runs no matter what.  Wind and solar are others where we are feast or famine subject and can get much more out of them if we can improve storage.  With EVs on the road, they can serve as mobile, community owned storage devices, expanding the capacity to store wasted energy at night while at the same time contributing energy to the grid during the day while at peak usage. 

Making the cars more efficient, and also accounting for the reduction in electricity consumed in the process of refining oil basically eliminates any concerns regarding capacity.  

I want to qualify the statements above, I'm not an expert, but I've been reading up on this stuff.  From everything I've read, there is plenty of electricity available.

Edit:  Just did a quick google and this article puts the wasted potential from Wind at 25 tWh.  http://cleantechnica.com/2011/03/27/25-twh-of-wind-power-idled-in-2010-in-us-grid-storage-needed/

That's a crapload.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

Ballen, I don't know jack about rock crawling.  Looks like fun, though.   Again, the torque is there. I don't know if water would be an issue.  I'm pretty sure nothing electric exists right now that can do that.  Closest thing I can think of is the Toyota Rav 4 EV that's coming out.  They released a Rav4 EV back in 2002, many which are still on the road.  But I don't think those are built like the Jeeps in your pictures.


----------



## Carol (Nov 21, 2011)

Steve said:


> No doubt, Carol.  Mitsubishi has a car in the $20k range, but the only way the cost of the vehicles goes down is either through expansion of market share or showing up in the used car lots.
> 
> I'd really like to see extended range, myself.



I didn't realize they had become that affordable, that is good news.   Lower price expands the market, extended range would also expand the market.   

I'll admit that I'm not a particularly good candidate for an EV, even though they fascinate me.  My driving habits are a bit outside the lines


----------



## MaxiMe (Nov 21, 2011)

Let me know when they have an 8' bed that never has to be made and can pull a trailer loaded with 3000 lbs of stuff. Then I'll think about it.


----------



## billc (Nov 21, 2011)

If you can get that car down under 20k, and it performs equal to or better than my camry then I'll buy it.  My problem with electric cars is that people tell me that sure, this car costs more and is less efficient than what you drive now, but to make it worth it, were going to subsidize it and do what we can to make gas so expensive you have no choice.  That is my problem with the electric car.  Otherwise, I could not care less, I'm not a car person.  I just need the thing to move me places.


----------



## Steve (Nov 21, 2011)

billcihak said:


> If you can get that car down under 20k, and it performs equal to or better than my camry then I'll buy it.  My problem with electric cars is that people tell me that sure, this car costs more and is less efficient than what you drive now, but to make it worth it, were going to subsidize it and do what we can to make gas so expensive you have no choice.  That is my problem with the electric car.  Otherwise, I could not care less, I'm not a car person.  I just need the thing to move me places.


 
Base model Camry is over $21k.  Oil is heavily subsidized in America.  And you're going to have to define "efficient" because clearly it means something specific to you that doesn't include common usage.

Can you be a little more specific?  I'm afraid I don't understand your implications.  


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Rich Parsons (Nov 22, 2011)

Steve said:


> What about a smart phone with a week's worth of battery power and a charging time of about 15 minutes?
> 
> Would you like it then?  http://www.northwestern.edu/newscenter/stories/2011/11/batteries-energy-kung.html
> 
> These squints are working on an electrode that would allow Li-Ion batteries to store up to 10 times more energy and charge up to 10 times faster.  Pretty interesting stuff.



I treat this article like I do with the ones around anti-matter and the Hadron Collider. It is good to do research. It is not going into production tomorrow. 

We can charge faster today but the heat goes into the battery pack and this is not as efficent but it is quicker. Also takes away from the "life" of the battery. 
As to the use of Silicon versus Carbon this is a good insight and research. What concerns me is the loss or destruction of the Silicon. The article states it is not lost, but where does it go and how does it react. Anyone who remembers the pellet catalytic converters because the designers all thought the pellets would roll around and never sit still to oxidize in place. So if the silicon goes in the wrong place what happens. What happens in accidents. For phones this is more likely which is good to have a market to immprove the tech before it goes into a vehicle which has safety critical components. 

I am not discouraging the research, just stating it is research, and I will wait and see. It could be out soon (* a few years *) or sometime in the future 5 to 10 years. But it is research in the right direction.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 22, 2011)

billcihak said:


> If you can get that car down under 20k, and it performs equal to or better than my camry then I'll buy it.  My problem with electric cars is that people tell me that sure, this car costs more and is less efficient than what you drive now, but to make it worth it, were going to subsidize it and do what we can to make gas so expensive you have no choice.  That is my problem with the electric car.  Otherwise, I could not care less, I'm not a car person.  I just need the thing to move me places.


Food for thought: http://www.weatherimagery.com/blog/electric-vs-gasoline-vehicle/


----------



## Steve (Nov 22, 2011)

Rich Parsons said:


> I treat this article like I do with the ones around anti-matter and the Hadron Collider. It is good to do research. It is not going into production tomorrow.
> 
> We can charge faster today but the heat goes into the battery pack and this is not as efficent but it is quicker. Also takes away from the "life" of the battery.
> As to the use of Silicon versus Carbon this is a good insight and research. What concerns me is the loss or destruction of the Silicon. The article states it is not lost, but where does it go and how does it react. Anyone who remembers the pellet catalytic converters because the designers all thought the pellets would roll around and never sit still to oxidize in place. So if the silicon goes in the wrong place what happens. What happens in accidents. For phones this is more likely which is good to have a market to immprove the tech before it goes into a vehicle which has safety critical components.
> ...


Rich, I agree completely.  I'm sharing interesting articles.  I think that the demand for batteries is pushing research into that direction and I'm excited to see what comes out.  

My concern, however, is that it will become a money issue with the auto industry.  We have many well documented examples of viable tech being suppressed by the auto industry for control and money.


----------



## Steve (Nov 22, 2011)

Josh Oakley said:


> Food for thought: http://www.weatherimagery.com/blog/electric-vs-gasoline-vehicle/


Interesting blog post.  Some of it has actually come to pass.  Others haven't, but overall, the points are legit.


----------



## ballen0351 (Nov 22, 2011)

Buy Electric cars or else she will come for you


----------



## Josh Oakley (Nov 22, 2011)

I may have been tempted to pull right up next to her. And blast Rage Against The Machine while I was at it. (Cwutididthur?)


----------



## Steve (Nov 22, 2011)

Lame.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## billc (Nov 22, 2011)

She is exactly what I am talking about.  Buy a prius if you want, but don't bug people who don't want to make the same choice.  You are not morally superior because you drive a hybrid and this guy drives a big car.


----------



## Steve (Nov 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> She is exactly what I am talking about.  Buy a prius if you want, but don't bug people who don't want to make the same choice.  You are not morally superior because you drive a hybrid and this guy drives a big car.


Guys.  I can tell you from personal experience that holier than thou, morally superior a-holes are not held in monopoly by any one group of people.  I routinely get flipped off, tail gated and crowded by insecure douchebags driving lifted pickup trucks and large SUVs.  It goes both ways.  Actually, it's even more pervasive than this.  Douchebaggery is universal.  

The lesson I take away isn't that I should dislike people who drive lifted pickups and SUVs.  It's that it is stupid to make sweeping generalizations about a large group based on a relatively small number of unflattering snapshots that support my predetermined position.

If you don't want to buy a prius, by all means, make your own choices.  But you're not morally superior, either.  This video is lame on a lot of levels.  The crazy lady in the video went off because she was making exactly the same mistake you just made in your post.


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 23, 2011)

:hmm: So would they buy an Electric Car if it could go 500 miles an hour on a charge 


And inconsiderate idiot knows no race, religion nor does it have a specific political or environmental affiliation. They are of every race, religion and political/environmental affiliation. Also.....I will let you in on a secret..... they do not have any specic style or type of vehicle either...they...are... everywhere :uhohh:


----------



## shihansmurf (Nov 23, 2011)

I don't know a great deal about the electrics so please bear with me on this.

How fast are they? How quickly do they do the 1/4 mile? 0-60?

I know it mey be sophomoric but I love the way my mustang performs. If they can produce an electric the performs as well or better than I would be all over it.

Mark


----------



## Rich Parsons (Nov 23, 2011)

Steve said:


> Rich, I agree completely. I'm sharing interesting articles. I think that the demand for batteries is pushing research into that direction and I'm excited to see what comes out.
> 
> My concern, however, is that it will become a money issue with the auto industry. We have many well documented examples of viable tech being suppressed by the auto industry for control and money.



Steve, can you give me examples. 

SIDI Spark ignition Direct Injection and CIDI Compression Ignition Direct Inject is often listed by people, and we have it today, but it was cost of implementing and development and research. It is easy to make any one car work in a lab or in one environment. It is difficult to validate against all altitudes and weather conditions. Not an excuse just stating some information. 

So what is being suppressed? 

Hybrids are not selling period. Toyota Hybrids are not selling. Only the Prius has numbers above 10k +/-. Which is why Toyota came out with four versions of the Prius to see if they can cash in on the name. 

If it is the cost fo $4,000 to $8,000 for a battery because of precious metals in them for a vehicle then I see you point of it not being readily available but not that it is suppressed. The general population just will not buy it. 

In 1972 GM produced 1000 Impalas with driver side airbags. The base Impala cost $1000. The one with the air bag cost $3000. No one bought one. GM Built them to show the feds that people were not ready to pay for that technology. So then Congress passed laws for Seat belts instead. GM had to sell the ones with the air bags at the same price as the others at the end of the model year to move them. How is this suppression? 

Just because you can build it does not mean you can build it safely or cost effectively. 
Just because you do build it does not mean people will buy it.


----------



## Steve (Nov 23, 2011)

shihansmurf said:


> I don't know a great deal about the electrics so please bear with me on this.
> 
> How fast are they? How quickly do they do the 1/4 mile? 0-60?
> 
> ...


No problem. As with any car, they will vary.  

The LEAF, which is the commuter level car I have, will go 0 to 60 in about 7 seconds.  It's said to top out over 90 mph.  I run about 70 mph without a problem on the freeway.  It's comparable to a Civic, Camry or something like that.  

The Tesla Roadster, an all electric sports car, will go 0 to 60 in under 4 seconds.  






As with most things, it depends upon what you're willing to spend and what you really want.  Tesla is marketing their Model S, which is a luxury sedan that will go 0 to 60 in about 4 seconds, and 300 miles on a charge.  I haven't seen one in real life, but they look pretty nice.  

When you get into performance, though, you're talking about intangibles, as well.  What I mean is, driving an EV is not exactly the same as driving a gas car.  The acceleration is smooth.  No gears to shift.  There's also no power band in an EV.  The torque is consistent throughout the RPM range, so that acceleration off the line is considerable, and continues all the way through.  It's also very quiet.

Now... you might not like either of those things.  Driving a Tesla Roadster wouldn't be anything like driving a Mustang.  In the same vein, driving a BMW M3 is nothing like driving a a Mustang, either.


----------



## CanuckMA (Nov 23, 2011)

And the quiet hum of an electric engine simply can't compare to 4 barrels openinig to dump fuel in a big block V8. :ultracool


----------



## Xue Sheng (Nov 23, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> And the quiet hum of an electric engine simply can't compare to 4 barrels openinig to dump fuel in a big block V8. :ultracool



ahh but I call electric cars Ninja cars...because they can sneak up on you


----------



## shihansmurf (Nov 23, 2011)

Steve said:


> No problem. As with any car, they will vary.
> 
> The LEAF, which is the commuter level car I have, will go 0 to 60 in about 7 seconds. It's said to top out over 90 mph. I run about 70 mph without a problem on the freeway. It's comparable to a Civic, Camry or something like that.
> 
> ...



That is pretty cool. I may have to look into this whole electric car idea.

Thank for the info.

Mark


----------



## billc (Nov 23, 2011)

Wait, ask how much the Tesla roadster costs.


----------



## Steve (Nov 23, 2011)

for a car thats comparable in speed, handling and style to a lotus, porsche or ferrari... It's right in the ballpark.Bill, whats the real problem?


----------



## Sukerkin (Nov 23, 2011)

shihansmurf said:


> I don't know a great deal about the electrics so please bear with me on this.
> 
> How fast are they? How quickly do they do the 1/4 mile? 0-60?
> 
> ...



:grins:  It's not hard to outperform a Mustang, Mark ... or indeed almost any American car .

There's the GT40 ... oops, mostly designed in Britain and Italy ... or the Mosler ... I watched TVR's eating this for breakfast at Donnington ... or ... what?  There's some uber-l33t 'super-car' that held the speed record for about a minute but I'd have to use the Net to recall what it was.

EDIT:  Here is one of my favourite clips about performance cars:

[yt]XGATSb54YEQ[/yt]


----------



## billc (Nov 23, 2011)

Well, left leaning, main stream media outlet, ABC news did a report on both Fisker and Tesla, this is what they mentioned about Tesla...

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/car-company-us-loan-builds-cars-finland/story?id=14770875#.Ts3TE2BO9FA



> Tesla's SEC filings reveal the start-up has lost money every quarter. And while its federal funding is intended to help it mass produce a new $57,400 Model S sedan, the company has no experience in a project so vast.



And there is this little bit of info. on Tesla...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2793811/posts


> The most troubling transaction: a $465 million loan to California&#8217;s Tesla Motors. Tesla received a loan rate of 1.6% from DOE to manufacture an all-electric car that will sell for nearly $50,000. It will not exactly be the people&#8217;s car. Tesla also builds luxury sports cars that retail for $103,000 to $128,000.
> Tesla also is no simple new age car company. It is owned and financed by big donors to the Democratic Party and to Barack Obama&#8217;s 2008 presidential campaign. Tesla&#8217;s principal owner is Elon Musk, the founder of PayPal. He has an estimated personal wealth of $672 million. His firm received venture capital from the The Westly Group, Daimler Chrysler, and from Abu Dhabi investors. The firm has partnerships with luxury sports car manufacturer Lotus and with Mercedes-Benz.
> The secret to access to the DOE money is The Westly Group, run by California Democratic Party stalwart and big Obama campaign bundler Steve Westly. The former eBay executive wasn&#8217;t merely a prodigious fundraiser for Obama, raising $500,000 for his presidential campaign. He also served as the president&#8217;s California campaign co-chairman. Another Obama $500,000 bundler was Solyndra investor George Kaiser and his foundation.
> Westly got statewide attention in 2006 when he spent $35 million of his own money to run an ugly and largely negative race against California state Treasurer Phil Angelides for governor.
> Westly is a personal friend of President Obama, and since the election has visited the White House for meetings and social parties. He privately dined with the president in February with a small group of Silicon Valley billionaires. It was called the &#8220;trillion-dollar dinner.&#8221;





> Westly&#8217;s Washington political connections to the White House have made him a &#8220;pied piper&#8221; of DOE money for start-ups. DOE records show that Westly&#8217;s venture capital firm has reaped at least $500 million in DOE loans for his companies, wowing Silicon Valley&#8217;s VC community.
> Westly also sat on Tesla&#8217;s board of directors early in the car company&#8217;s life.
> Tesla&#8217;s CEO Elon Musk also has been a generous donor to the Democratic National Committee, contributing more than $120,000 over three different election cycles and $292,250 to political campaigns, overwhelmingly to Democrats.
> Financial analyst Brian Krasting has called the DOE loan program &#8220;free money&#8221; for all electric car manufacturers at taxpayer expense. Others have called the Tesla deal a form of &#8220;corporate welfare&#8221; for the president&#8217;s friends. There have been complaints from alternative energy companies that the ATVM loans were awarded because of political connections.
> DOE defends the Tesla loan, telling PJMedia it was sound and neutrally approved by its financial analysts. However, the DOE spokesman also acknowledged not knowing of the company&#8217;s plan for a $200 million NASDAQ IPO when it awarded the firm the loan. Nor did the spokesman say DOE knew Toyota was to become its partner in the plant when DOE issued the loan.


----------

