SUMMARY:The market value of Tesla, the high-end electric car manufacturer, has surpassed that of American automotive giants like Ford and General Motors, both of which sell millions more cars than Tesla does. James B. Stewart of The New York Times joins William Brangham to discuss Tesla's brand allure and the state of today's auto industry.
WILLIAM BRANGHAM (NewsHour): Here are some head-scratching numbers to consider.
Tesla's market value is $50 billion, yet Tesla may lose nearly a billion dollars this year, whereas, combined, Ford and GM are expected to earn more than $15 billion. Last year, Tesla sold just about 80,000 vehicles. Ford and GM? They sold nearly 17 million.
James Stewart is a business columnist for The New York Times and a staff writer for The New Yorker, and he's here to help us understand why Tesla's value is skyrocketing.
James Stewart, welcome to the NewsHour.
You know these numbers very, very well. What is going on here?
JAMES STEWART, The New York Times: Well, these numbers are pretty amazing. They make no rational sense, really.
But Tesla is what I call the sort of ultimate story stock, which means investors care about the story. They don't care about the numbers. They do not care that it's losing. They have lost over $500 million last year, may lose a billion this year. And they don't really care that GM and Ford are making billions of dollars in profit.
The story with Tesla is that they are going to dominate the auto market, that they are going to create the world's safest car, that they are going to take over the battery market, and that they are going to dominate and reinvent the electric grid.
I mean, these are all huge markets, and they think Tesla is going to dominate every one of them.
SUMMARY: Wind can be a bountiful resource in Tehachapi, California, but not necessarily at the right time. There turbines generate the most energy at night, when the wind blows hardest, and the demand is the lowest. Science correspondent Miles O’Brien reports on the wider push for electricity storage solutions that may enable renewables to have a greater impact on the grid.
MILES O’BRIEN (NewsHour): A hundred miles north of Los Angeles, in Tehachapi, California, the wind can be a bountiful resource, but, unfortunately, not at the right time. It blows hardest at night, spooling up these wind turbines to their peak output, when the demand for electricity is at it lowest.
DOUG KIM, Southern California Edison: So, matching the output of wind to when customers really need it, that’s certainly one of the things that we’re looking at with this system that you see here, because you can store energy.
MILES O’BRIEN: Doug Kim is the director of advanced technology for Southern California Edison. The utility built this eight megawatt lithium-ion battery facility, designed to store electricity generated by the turbines.
DOUG KIM: We can certainly use this for an example, when the wind blows during the nighttime, capture that energy during the nighttime and then use it during the daytime, when the demand is high.
MILES O’BRIEN: The batteries, stacked in racks here, are equivalent to about 2,000 electric cars. It is the start of Edison’s effort to meet a state-mandated requirement to add 580 megawatts of energy storage into the grid by 2020.
It’s part of a big push to invent ways to practically store huge amounts of electricity, so that renewables so can become a more than fringe players on the grid.
DONALD SADOWAY, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: If we don’t treat the intermittency of renewables, they’re — they’re not really a solution.
MILES O’BRIEN: Electrochemist Donald Sadoway is a professor at MIT. He says lithium-ion batteries are not the answer; they pose a serious fire risk, and, as any laptop and cell phone user knows, their performance degrades fast as a speeding Tesla. In short, they are way too expensive and impractical for widespread usage on the grid.
But what are the alternatives?
DONALD SADOWAY:The issue is that we don’t have a battery technology that can meet the rigorous performance requirements of the grid, namely, super low-cost and super long service lifetime.
I am Retired U.S. Navy (22yrs) and a Vietnam Veteran. After my Navy retirement I was in the computer related industry, now retired. In 2000 I was a registered Republican and voted for George W. Bush. Six months of having Bush in the Whitehouse forced me to re-evaluate my political stance. I had always thought of myself as a Moderate Republican, but was a Republican by "default" NOT because of close examination of the GOP. Due to what has happened in America since 2000, I now consider myself a progressive, and registered as a Non-Affiliated voter.
*Anti-First Amendment policies that attempt to turn America into a theocracy by enshrining ANY religious belief as law.
* Any attempt to suppress human or Constitutional rights.
* Any law or policy that supports discrimination based on religion, ethnicity, race/color, gender, sexual orientation, or any law that does NOT support Equal Treatment under the law.
*Any law or policy that attempts to suppress Freedom of the Press or Free Speech.
LINK DISCLAIMER:
There is no guarantee that any link provided in this blog will always work, especially for older links. The validity of any link is governed by the source-site policies. Some sites will archive articles and require subscription to access. Very small sites, such as a local town newspaper, may not archive at all.