特斯拉的秘密宏伟计划(一)
汽车资讯
日期:2022-08-19 00:11

马斯克 

2006年8月2日

Background: My day job is running a space transportation company called SpaceX, but on the side I am the chairman of Tesla Motors and help formulate the business and product strategy with Martin and the rest of the team. I have also been Tesla Motor's primary funding source from when the company was just three people and a business plan.

背景:我的日常工作是运营一家名为SpaceX的太空运输公司,但同时我也是特斯拉汽车公司(Tesla Motors)的董事长,和马丁、团队其他成员一起,制定业务和产品战略。我也是特斯拉汽车公司的主要资金来源,当时公司只有3个人和一个商业计划。

As you know, the initial product of Tesla Motors is a high performance electric sports car called the Tesla Roadster. However, some readers may not be aware of the fact that our long term plan is to build a wide range of models, including affordably priced family cars. This is because the overarching purpose of Tesla Motors (and the reason I am funding the company) is to help expedite the move from a mine-and-burn hydrocarbon economy towards a solar electric economy, which I believe to be the primary, but not exclusive, sustainable solution.

如你所知,特斯拉汽车的最初产品是一款高性能电动跑车,叫做特斯拉Roadster。然而,一些读者可能没有意识到,我们的长期计划是制造各种各样的车型,包括价格合理的家用汽车。这是因为特斯拉汽车(Tesla Motors)的首要目标(也是我投资这家公司的原因)是帮助加速从“燃烧碳氢化合物的经济”转向“太阳能电力驱动的经济”,我认为后者是主要(但不是唯一)的可持续解决方案。

Critical to making that happen is an electric car without compromises, which is why the Tesla Roadster is designed to beat a gasoline sports car like a Porsche or Ferrari in a head to head showdown. Then, over and above that fact, it has twice the energy efficiency of a Prius. Even so, some may question whether this actually does any good for the world. Are we really in need of another high performance sports car? Will it actually make a difference to global carbon emissions?

实现这一目标的关键是一款豪不妥协的电动车,这就是为什么特斯拉跑车被设计成“能在一场正面对决中击败像保时捷或法拉利这样的汽油跑车”。除此之外,它的能源效率是普锐斯的两倍。即便如此,一些人可能会质疑,这是否真的对世界有任何好处。我们真的需要另一辆高性能跑车吗?它真的会对全球碳排放产生影响吗?

Well, the answers are no and not much. However, that misses the point, unless you understand the secret master plan alluded to above. Almost any new technology initially has high unit cost before it can be optimized and this is no less true for electric cars. The strategy of Tesla is to enter at the high end of the market, where customers are prepared to pay a premium, and then drive down market as fast as possible to higher unit volume and lower prices with each successive model.

答案是“no”和“not much”。然而,这没有抓住重点,除非您了解上面提到的秘密宏伟计划。几乎任何新技术在进行优化之前,最初的单位成本都很高,电动车也是如此。特斯拉的战略是进入高端市场(高端市场的客户准备好了支付溢价),然后以尽可能快的速度压低市场,让每一款车型的销量更高、价格更低。

Without giving away too much, I can say that the second model will be a sporty four door family car at roughly half the $89k price point of the Tesla Roadster and the third model will be even more affordable. In keeping with a fast growing technology company, all free cash flow is plowed back into R&D to drive down the costs and bring the follow on products to market as fast as possible. When someone buys the Tesla Roadster sports car, they are actually helping pay for development of the low cost family car.

不透露太多,但我可以说的是,第二款车型将是一款运动型四门家用车,价格大约是特斯拉跑车8.9万美元的一半,而第三款车型将更实惠。作为一家快速发展的科技公司,所有的自由现金流都被投入到研发中,以降低成本,并尽快将后续产品推向市场。当有人购买特斯拉跑车时,他们实际上是在帮助支付低成本家用汽车的开发。

Now I’d like to address two repeated arguments against electric vehicles — battery disposal and power plant emissions. The answer to the first is short and simple, the second requires a bit of math:

现在我想谈谈反对电动车的两个论点——电池处理和发电厂排放。第一个问题的答案简短而简单,第二个问题则需要一点数学知识:

Batteries that are not toxic to the environment! I wouldn’t recommend them as a dessert topping, but the Tesla Motors Lithium-Ion cells are not classified as hazardous and are landfill safe. However, dumping them in the trash would be throwing money away, since the battery pack can be sold to recycling companies (unsubsidized) at the end of its greater than 100,000-mile design life. Moreover, the battery isn’t dead at that point, it just has less range.

对环境无害的电池! 我不会推荐它们作为甜点配料,但特斯拉的锂离子电池没有被列为危险产品,而是垃圾填埋安全的。然而,把它们扔进垃圾桶是在浪费钱,因为电池组在超过10万英里的设计寿命结束时才会被卖给回收公司(无补贴)。除此之外,电池还没有耗尽,只是续航里程更短了。

Power Plant Emissions aka “The Long Tailpipe”. A common rebuttal to electric vehicles as a solution to carbon emissions is that they simply transfer the CO2 emissions to the power plant. The obvious counter is that one can develop grid electric power from a variety of means, many of which, like hydro, wind, geothermal, nuclear, solar, etc. involve no CO2 emissions. However, let’s assume for the moment that the electricity is generated from a hydrocarbon source like natural gas, the most popular fuel for new US power plants in recent years.

发电厂排放  对于电动车作为碳排放解决方案的一个常见反驳是,它们只是将二氧化碳排放转移到发电厂。显而易见的反对意见是,人们可以通过多种方式开发电网电力,其中许多方式(如水力、风能、地热、核能、太阳能等)不排放二氧化碳。然而,让我们暂时假设电力是由碳氢化合物产生的,比如天然气(这是近年来美国新发电厂最受欢迎的燃料)。

The H-System Combined Cycle Generator from General Electric is 60% efficient in turning natural gas into electricity. "Combined Cycle" is where the natural gas is burned to generate electricity and then the waste heat is used to create steam that powers a second generator. Natural gas recovery is 97.5% efficient, processing is also 97.5% efficient and then transmission efficiency over the electric grid is 92% on average. This gives us a well-to-electric-outlet efficiency of 97.5% x 97.5% x 60% x 92% = 52.5%.

通用电气的H-系统联合循环发电机将天然气转化为电能的效率为60%。“联合循环”是指燃烧天然气发电,然后利用余热产生蒸汽,为第二个发电机提供动力。天然气回收效率为97.5%,处理效率为97.5%,然后通过电网传输效率平均为92%。这使我们的井到电源插座效率为97.5% x 97.5% x 60% x 92% = 52.5%。

Despite a body shape, tires and gearing aimed at high performance rather than peak efficiency, the Tesla Roadster requires 0.4 MJ per kilometer or, stated another way, will travel 2.53 km per mega-joule of electricity. The full cycle charge and discharge efficiency of the Tesla Roadster is 86%, which means that for every 100 MJ of electricity used to charge the battery, about 86 MJ reaches the motor.

尽管车身形状、轮胎和传动装置的目标是高性能而不是高效率,特斯拉跑车每公里需要0.4兆焦,换句话说,每兆焦的电力将行驶2.53公里。特斯拉跑车的全循环充放电效率为86%,这意味着每100兆焦的电力用于给电池充电,大约86兆焦到达电机。

Bringing the math together, we get the final figure of merit of 2.53 km/MJ x 86% x 52.5% = 1.14 km/MJ. Let’s compare that to the Prius and a few other options normally considered energy efficient.

把数学放在一起,我们得到的最终数值是2.53km/MJ × 86% × 52.5% = 1.14km/MJ。让我们将它与普锐斯(以及其他一些通常被认为是节能的汽车)进行比较。

The fully considered well-to-wheel efficiency of a gasoline powered car is equal to the energy content of gasoline (34.3 MJ/liter) minus the refinement & transportation losses (18.3%), multiplied by the miles per gallon or km per liter. The Prius at an EPA rated 55 mpg therefore has an energy efficiency of 0.56 km/MJ. This is actually an excellent number compared with a “normal” car like the Toyota Camry at 0.28 km/MJ.

汽油车的井到轮效率等于汽油的能量含量(34.3 MJ/升)减去提炼和运输损失(18.3%),乘以每加仑行驶的英里数或每升行驶的公里数。普锐斯的EPA评级为55英里/加仑,因此其能源效率为0.56公里/兆焦。与丰田凯美瑞这样的“普通”汽车(0.28 km/MJ)相比,这实际上是一个优秀的数字。

Note the term hybrid as applied to cars currently on the road is a misnomer. They are really just gasoline powered cars with a little battery assistance and, unless you are one of the handful who have an aftermarket hack, the little battery has to be charged from the gasoline engine. Therefore, they can be considered simply as slightly more efficient gasoline powered cars. If the EPA certified mileage is 55 mpg, then it is indistinguishable from a non-hybrid that achieves 55 mpg. As a friend of mine says, a world 100% full of Prius drivers is still 100% addicted to oil.

请注意,“混合动力”一词用于目前在路上行驶的汽车是用词不当。它们实际上还是汽油驱动的汽车,加上一点电池辅助,除非你是少数几个有售后服务的黑客,否则这些小电池必须从汽油引擎充电。因此,它们可以被简单地认为是更高效的汽油动力汽车。如果EPA认证的里程是55英里/加仑,那么它与达到55英里/加仑的非混合动力汽车是没有区别的。就像我的一个朋友说的那样,一个100%都是普锐斯司机的世界,仍然100%沉迷于石油。

The CO2 content of any given source fuel is well understood. Natural gas is 14.4 grams of carbon per mega-joule and oil is 19.9 grams of carbon per mega-joule. Applying those carbon content levels to the vehicle efficiencies, including as a reference the Honda combusted natural gas and Honda fuel cell natural gas vehicles, the hands down winner is pure electric:

任何一种燃料的二氧化碳含量都是很容易理解的。天然气是每兆焦14.4克碳,石油是每兆焦19.9克碳。将这些碳含量水平与汽车效率进行比较,包括以本田燃烧天然气汽车和本田燃料电池天然气汽车为参考,纯电动车无疑是赢家:

The Tesla Roadster still wins by a hefty margin if you assume the average CO2 per joule of US power production. The higher CO2 content of coal compared to natural gas is offset by the negligible CO2 content of hydro, nuclear, geothermal, wind, solar, etc. The exact power production mixture varies from one part of the country to another and is changing over time, so natural gas is used here as a fixed yardstick.

如果你假设每焦耳的美国电力产生的平均二氧化碳排放量,特斯拉Roadster仍然以巨大的优势胜出。与天然气相比,煤炭的二氧化碳含量较高,但水力、核能、地热、风能、太阳能等的二氧化碳含量可以忽略不计。全国各地的电力生产比例各不相同,而且会随着时间的推移而变化,因此这里使用天然气作为固定的衡量标准。

Becoming Energy Positive. I should mention that Tesla Motors will be co-marketing sustainable energy products from other companies along with the car. For example, among other choices, we will be offering a modestly sized and priced solar panel from SolarCity, a photovoltaics company (where I am also the principal financier). This system can be installed on your roof in an out of the way location, because of its small size, or set up as a carport and will generate about 50 miles per day of electricity.

保持正能量  我应该提到的是,特斯拉汽车将与其他公司合作营销可持续能源产品。例如,在其他选择中,我们将提供大小适中、价格适中的太阳能电池板,这些太阳能电池板来自SolarCity(我也是该公司的主要融资人)。这个系统可以安装在你的屋顶上一个偏僻的位置,因为它的体积小,或装配为一个车库,每天将产生约50英里的电力。

If you travel less than 350 miles per week, you will therefore be “energy positive” with respect to your personal transportation. This is a step beyond conserving or even nullifying your use of energy for transport – you will actually be putting more energy back into the system than you consume in transportation! So, in short, the master plan is:

· Build sports car

· Use that money to build an affordable car

· Use that money to build an even more affordable car

· While doing above, also provide zero emission electric power generation options

如果你每周出行少于350英里,你将因此在私人交通工具上处于“正能量”状态。这是一个“超越节约”、甚至“抵消你在交通中使用的能量”的步骤——你实际上将更多的能量投入到系统中,超过你在交通中消耗的能量!所以,简而言之,宏伟规划是:

1. 造跑车

2. 然后用这些钱造一辆经济适用的车

3. 然后用这些钱造一辆更经济适用的车

4. 在做上述工作的同时,也可以“零排放发电”

Don't tell anyone.

不要告诉任何人。

本文转载自网络,版权归原作者所有,如侵犯您的权益请联系wyl860211@qq.com,我们将第一时间删除。