Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has decided that there's no reason whatsoever to investigate the complete immolation of a Tesla Model S after it hit some road debris   (money.cnn.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Model S, no reason, spray, flammable liquids, CEO Elon Musk, investigation  
•       •       •

5426 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Oct 2013 at 11:39 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-10-25 11:48:13 AM  
5 votes:
Yes. A gas-powered, internal combustion engine has never been know to explode.
2013-10-25 11:45:19 AM  
5 votes:
There should be an investigation, but to the Republicans it doesn't matter, even if the results came out positively for the Tesla company. If it isn't an oil distillate powered vehicle, than it doesn't belong on the road in their opinion, because that would hurt the profits of oil companies that they support over the attempts to investigate alternative, less damaging ways to generate energy.
2013-10-25 11:44:52 AM  
4 votes:
Road debris? The driver running over an I-Beam that shot through the floor at I hear over 10 tons of force isn't "Road Debris".
2013-10-25 11:43:46 AM  
4 votes:
something tells me if that same hunk of metal had gone into a traditional gas filled tank it would have been a lot worse than a battery fire that never threatened into the passenger compartment
2013-10-25 12:52:20 PM  
2 votes:
Is the Tesla really a target of Republican rage? I mean it's not surprising if it's coming from the extreme Right and yes the GOP has a serious issue with their more moderate members not saying anything about anything but I would think anyone with conservative free market values wouldn't have a problem with just letting products exist and survive on the market.  I do think that the value of innovation has been downplayed lately for some odd reason.  That's always been America's greatest strength.  American industry essentially invented and created the technology that seems so critical to all first world societies. I don't see the reasoning behind railing against any advancement in technology and I'm a Republican!
2013-10-25 12:19:46 PM  
2 votes:

steve42: I'm all in favor of the investigation of "alternative, less damaging ways to generate energy."  I simply believe that if there is to be a viable alternative to petroleum-based power of any sort, it will come from a free-market implementation of technology developed by privately funded research.  The government throwing money down the rat-hole of research into solar, wind, and other green power options is not going to do it.  If someone comes up with a viable and sustainable solution, there are entrepreneurs and investors who will beat their door down to get involved.

Mandating that the petroleum companies fund the research, that the automakers invest in it before the market is ready, and that taxpayers subsidize the efforts is counter-productive.  It sucks money out of the economy without any assurance of a return.


If all human progress were the result of privately funded research, we'd still be sitting in caves trying to decide if rocks are edible.
2013-10-25 12:07:18 PM  
2 votes:
Yes, a car filled with batteries can probably burn spectacularly.  A car filled with gasoline can also burn spectacularly.  Anything that's carrying around enough energy to propel itself for several hundred miles is also going to have enough energy to do other interesting (probably bad) things too.
2013-10-25 12:06:15 PM  
2 votes:

barc0001: libranoelrose: I'll never understand the hate, I guess

People fear change, even if it's a positive change.  At the end of the day, humans are still just dumb animals deep down inside.


Electricity flows from negative to positive.  Going from internal combustion (an oxidation reaction, thus creating a more "positive" output - remember, OIL RIG!) to electric (where output is an electron) means that, quite literally, electric cars are a negative change.

just saying.
2013-10-25 11:58:57 AM  
2 votes:
And if this was any other car it wouldn't even make it to the press.
2013-10-25 11:51:17 AM  
2 votes:
2013-10-25 11:48:01 AM  
2 votes:

libranoelrose: I'll never understand the hate, I guess


People fear change, even if it's a positive change.  At the end of the day, humans are still just dumb animals deep down inside.
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-10-25 11:39:20 AM  
2 votes:
I want everybody to buy a Tesla roadster so they all get incinerated and I have the road to my gas-guzzling self.
2013-10-25 11:22:49 AM  
2 votes:
If every Tesla Roadster that ever left the factory caught fire, I'd still want one.
2013-10-25 04:22:22 PM  
1 vote:

Corvus: Because gas cars NEVER catch on fire. ?

I always don't understand the hate for new technology. People just want to attack things because they are afraid of change.


While your statement makes it easy to argue Poe's Law I'll respond as if you're foolish rather than malicious.

While I'm a fan of the concept of electric cars, I do think current electric cars are stupid. I'd be surprised if any existing car's charge lasted as long as the 10.8G of gas in my tank, it takes somewhere around 36 times longer to "refuel", and current battery packs wear out rather quickly and are enormously expensive to replace. Even if I could reliably find a charging station when I needed one, the trip to visit my father would take either 64 (slow charge) or 29 (quick charge) hours in a BMW i3 vs 22 hours in a gasoline car. In reality, with one driver, you'd have to sleep sometime and it'd take a rough minimum of 30 hours with gasoline, 37 with quick-charge, or 88 hours with the currently more realistic regular-rate charge (and you could realistically remove 1.5 hours for the quick-charge time and 3 hours from the slow due to charging while you sleep). Electric cars are useful in the same way as small motorcycles - they're good for running around town and making the occasional trip to a neighboring area, but they aren't ever going to be a practical replacement for gasoline cars unless manufacturers can make them competitive and charging stations become common. With quick-charge the i3 is getting close to competitive in the theoretical world, but remember in the real world you still have to be able to recharge when you need to, which just isn't possible at the moment. Hybrids aren't even a discussion because they don't get appreciably better highway mileage than my antique sports car and the difference in purchase price will buy me a whole lot of fuel.

Teslas are cool and everything, but what good is a GT car that can't do a practical grand tour? I'll get excited when an electric car can do 400 real-world miles on a charge and takes 5 minutes to recharge. Hydrogen isn't a bad idea either and has fewer real-world problems to overcome so that's where I'd put my money.

/On the bright side, I saw a Merc SLR the other day.
2013-10-25 03:23:37 PM  
1 vote:
and on the day that one tesla went up in flames, how many "normal" cars had accidents that resulted in fires and fuel leaks on that same day

it like the Nuclear vs Coal argument, a Nuke plant has one minor leak over a 30 year time span and everyone flips there lid, but ignores that yearly a Coal Plant puts out more rads from there day-to-day operations then the nuke plant ever will from a coolant failure
2013-10-25 02:44:02 PM  
1 vote:

spmkk: jimpapa: "something tells me if that same hunk of metal had gone into a traditional gas filled tank it would have been a lot worse than a battery fire that never threatened into the passenger compartment"


Yeah -- that "something" is the Tesla PR team. Damn near  verbatim in the company's official blog post, you farking shill: "It is important to note that the fire in the battery was contained to a small section near the front by the internal firewalls built into the pack structure. At no point did fire enter the passenger compartment. Had a conventional gasoline car encountered the same object on the highway, the result could have been far worse."

For my part, if "something" is going to inform me about physical reality, I'd like that something to be facts -- i.e. data that are discovered through an investigation, not opinions and marketing messages that are sold as data when an investigation is suppressed.


FTFA: "After reviewing all available data, the NHTSA has not found evidence at this time that would indicate the recent battery fire involving a Tesla Model S was the result of a vehicle safety defect or noncompliance with federal safety standards," the agency said in a statement.

Oh, wait, you don't mean an "investigation," you mean a "witch hunt." Got it.
2013-10-25 02:02:31 PM  
1 vote:

barc0001: libranoelrose: I'll never understand the hate, I guess

People fear change, even if it's a positive change.  At the end of the day, humans are still just dumb animals deep down inside.


I can explain it in like one line:
Stopping the use of one fossil fuel to trade off for another isn't a positive change.

And don't give me this "but now with solar, and wind" shhh, you just sound really really stupid. They make up less than 5% of the electricity on the grid. Plus there is a lot of environmental damage by putting solar and wind farms up, as well as with the infrastructure that brings those forms of energy to your outlet. Also if you want to see people get up in arms, tell them you're putting a giant power line in their backyard to bring clean energy to the city (you'd fight it too). and guess what, those renewables don't work nearly as well wide stretches of the country. And if you live in a place like Southern California, adding more power draining devices to the grid sounds like the recipe for rolling blackouts.

The hate is more from the fact that people are claiming "we have this energy thing all worked out now because...electric cars, windmils, the future, and such" when it's not true.

/I'm still betting on hydrogen fuel cells.
2013-10-25 01:20:42 PM  
1 vote:

a particular individual: libranoelrose: I'll never understand the hate, I guess

It's mostly from conservatives who have been conditioned to hate anything that deprives Big Oil of record profits. Same for Big Coal. Hence, their irrational loathing of compact fluorescents and wind and solar energy.


I don't consider myself a conservative (voted for Obama), but I'm not a huge fan of compact fluorescents.  Their spectrum is a mess since it's not a blackbody.  Invariably colors look "off" -- not to mention the problems with dimming and cold weather performance (since mercury's vapor pressure is an exponential function of temperature).
2013-10-25 01:11:22 PM  
1 vote:

jshine: Corvus: I always don't understand the hate for new technology. People just want to attack things because they are afraid of change.

I don't know, but I think some people see the fawning, completely uncritical adoration for a company or technology (think Apple fanboys) and react with visceral disgust.  I can see some of both sides of that coin with regards to Tesla.

Personally, it seems like a neat idea, but I've got a few issues that would prevent me from buying one as-is:

1) they're very expensive
2) if you ran out of "fuel" in an awkward location (yes, yes, this should never happen, I know), there is no way to bring fuel to the car; you'd have to tow it to an outlet
3) I would want to see empirical reliability data on the batteries in extreme cold.  Living in Minnesota, gasoline cars often *barely* start when it's -20 F outside, and battery performance is strongly dependent on temperature.


My great-great-grandfather made almost the same arguments about switching from horse-powered vehicles to the newfangled horseless carriage.

The future - she's a comin' round the mountain whether we like it or not.
2013-10-25 01:00:22 PM  
1 vote:
Gas cars burn up every single day in America, but by all means let's take a shiat-fit over ONE TESLA that caught fire.

/This message brought to you (repeatedly) by the U.S. petroleum industry
2013-10-25 12:48:38 PM  
1 vote:

Cletus C.: Ned Stark: Cletus C.: A car priced for the wealthy that promises a trickle down sometime in the future for the less-well-to-do. Yet it's green, so ....

Yes because a first generation tech product marketed to early adopters is entirely analogous to national tax and economic policy.

It's priced out of range of most Americans. That's OK in this scenario. Trust us, you'll get yours later, poors.


Yes, that's literally how it works. Production of early luxury models builds experience and knowledge so that more and more efficient(and therefore cheap) meathods can be found and sale of same at luxury prices finances future production. Then prices fall.

Its one of the few things capitalism is good at.
2013-10-25 12:42:30 PM  
1 vote:
In a 'regular' vehicle without the steel plate on the bottom the driver might have been missing a foot or had a steel beam up their butt.
2013-10-25 12:32:01 PM  
1 vote:

anfrind: If all human progress were the result of privately funded research, we'd still be sitting in caves trying to decide if rocks are edible.


I'm all for government funded research, but that is one of the dumbest things I've read all week.
2013-10-25 12:24:48 PM  
1 vote:

mikaloyd: How did Tesla become a Republican vs Democrat thing?


Actively avoiding anything that reduces dependence on fossil fuels is now officially part of the republican platform. They've also come out in favor of destroying the ocean as quickly as possible.
2013-10-25 12:24:46 PM  
1 vote:
Two anti-electric cars threads in a row? Did one of the admins scooters break down in Walmart or sumpin'?
goldenagestrengthclub.com
ZZZZZZZZZ
ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzz-z-z-z-z-

`DAMN YOU, THOMAS EDISON!!'
2013-10-25 12:19:28 PM  
1 vote:
How did Tesla become a Republican vs Democrat thing? Or is that the primary distinction you tards use to classify all things now?
2013-10-25 12:10:09 PM  
1 vote:
Because gas cars NEVER catch on fire. ?

I always don't understand the hate for new technology. People just want to attack things because they are afraid of change.
2013-10-25 12:08:26 PM  
1 vote:
I have had my Model S about ten months now.  Freaking amazing car.
Wish I had bought the stock ten months ago (at $40 or so).
If I hit "road debris" with enough force to puncture through quarter-inch armour plating steel, I would fully expect that to have a detrimental effect to any vehicle.
2013-10-25 11:56:23 AM  
1 vote:

DrZiffle: Yes. A gas-powered, internal combustion engine has never been know to explode.


No one has ever seen a fire result from an accident involving Real American petroleum cars.  Maybe if two libulardos hit each other and their on-board organic hemp composters ignited.  I'm kidding of course-- libulardos aren't Job Creators and can't afford cars.

jayhawk88: New things are scary.


That's part of it, but also read today's bike thread to see the other half of that.  Bicycles aren't new things, but talk about how you bike to work and the haters come out.

At least part of it is that if you do something unusual (buy an EV, bike everywhere) the first reaction from a thoughtful onlooker is "Oh.  Less air pollution.  Power made domestically.  You're making the country a better place.", but that means the second reaction from a nearby cretin will be "Look at that guy, eating crackers not burning gasoline like he owns the place."
2013-10-25 11:53:18 AM  
1 vote:
"Complete immolation," trollmitter? Uh, not so much. TFA said the fire was confined to the battery area and did not endanger the passenger compartment.

/time to buy tesla stocks
//this too shall pass
2013-10-25 11:51:55 AM  
1 vote:

DarkSoulNoHope: There should be an investigation, but to the Republicans it doesn't matter, even if the results came out positively for the Tesla company. If it isn't an oil distillate powered vehicle, than it doesn't belong on the road in their opinion, because that would hurt the profits of oil companies that they support over the attempts to investigate alternative, less damaging ways to generate energy.


Does the DNC pay you well? Or is it Soros?
2013-10-25 11:51:37 AM  
1 vote:
The "complete immolation" where the fire was contained in the front bulkhead and spared the complete passenger compartment because of the design of said car?

I think I'll order two.
2013-10-25 11:50:48 AM  
1 vote:

DrZiffle: Yes. A gas-powered, internal combustion engine has never been know to explode.


...You are referring to the fact that it's a series of controlled explosions, or that every now and then those controlled explosions get a bit out of control?
2013-10-25 11:48:06 AM  
1 vote:

libranoelrose: I'll never understand the hate, I guess


New things are scary.
2013-10-25 11:45:18 AM  
1 vote:
I'll never understand the hate, I guess
 
Displayed 35 of 35 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report