Hacker News Reader

I'm not going to point out how Tesla car batteries have to follow the laws of physics. Other people did that already.

Tesla cars aren't mass market products (yet). They're for early adopters who can afford what is essentially a $100.000+ toy. If you then don't read the manual and leave the car on a parking lot for months, then yes, you can ruin the battery.

So let's compare it to other early adopter technology. It took decades before motherboards didn't occasionally die during a BIOS update. For decades stereo equipment (and other expensive electronics) had a little slider on the back of the power supply labeled "110v - 220v". It wasn't always in the right position when you bought the device. If you forgot to switch it to the correct setting the device breaks, simple as that. Expensive cameras that you couldn't clean on the inside -- take them to the beach once and they're ruined forever. Cars with breaks that would fade so quickly that driving down a mountain became tantamount to suicide. Or how about power tools? They don't come with any manual and if you use them in the wrong condition you risk severe injury. Forget to turn off the stove before you leave for holiday? Your house might burn down.

So let's not lose perspective here. If you forget to plug in your Roadster before you go on holiday, in the absolute worst case scenario you have to replace the battery. Not the end of the world. As with any other piece of equipment, you can break it if you're sufficiently careless.

>So let's not lose perspective here. If you forget to plug in your roadster before you go on holiday, in the absolute worst case scenario you have to replace the battery. No big deal.

Have you read the original blog post? (http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-te...) Battery replacement costs $40k in cash and all of Tesla's documentation only gently "suggests" that the car be plugged in when convenient.

That article includes an incident where someone parked their car at a garage and the battery died within less than 2 months.

I read the original post. $40.000 is roughly 1/3rd of the original cost of purchase. So it's completely reasonable. If you can't afford that you have no business buying a first-generation $100.000 toy.

As far as I know Tesla strongly recommends owners buy a charging station for their home and plug in their Roadsters every night.

Then you also know that the Model S that's being aimed at average consumers is rolling out soon with the same shortcoming, negating your expensive toy argument.

The Model S will be hitting the streets soon with the same fundamental physics limitations, but much better systems to mitigate that problem. (ie. lower idle discharge rate and more reserve capacity)

The article mentions that it would take 30 days of being at 0 charge before the battery break.

From the article: "Of course you can drive a Model S to 0 percent charge, but even in that circumstance, if you plug it in within 30 days, the battery will recover normally."

So just discharging the battery to 0% gives you a month to charge it back; if you're at ~50% and leave it in the airport, it will be fine for over a year. (12 months to discharge to 0% and more time after that while it's still recoverable.)

Did that article provide any proof or detail about these bricked vehicles? It's easy to make claims and scare people, much harder to do real reporting.

It sounds like Tesla has put multiple redundant systems in place to protect the owner from a bricked battery. Warning lights and sounds. An alert to Tesla that triggers them to respond. A sleep mode that preserves the life of the battery for up to a year.

Yes, the car requires a minimum level of effort. Barring that, it provides many chances for the owner to see the problem coming.

Forget to turn off the stove before you leave for holiday? Your house might burn down.

This is the best example I've read so far. If you own expensive stuff, you have to be careful. That's life. If you're not careful, don't buy a $100,000 electric car. Buy a $750 used pickup truck or something. That way, if you break it, you'll be able to afford the replacement.

No, if you pay good money for something, you expect the product has good feature to pamper its user. It is more true with a car where if you pay good money for a car, the car should take care of you more than the other way around. If not, it is not worth the money to buy in the first place.

Your way of reasoning is pretty much the same as when iPhone 4 first came out. You pay good money for something that shatters easily. At least, in iPhone case, Apple came out, admitted faults and tried to make its user happy.

This problem is due to the laws of physics rather than bad product design, however. There is no battery technology that would scale to a car and not self-discharge. Yes, the thing discharges to keep some systems online, but even if it didn't, the battery would still brick itself over time.

The iPhone is a mass market product with millions of users. Tesla's cars are experimental products for early adopters, with a few thousand users. Completely different situations.

As a few dozen people pointed out, these batteries can become bricked even with a physical disconnect. They're not bricking because of being drained, they're bricking because they're drained and then left for months. Do this to any other Li-Ion device and the same thing will happen.

More generally, you jumped to conclusions based on personal anecdotal evidence, ignored the entire preceding discussion, then pretended you were some kind of PR expert based on stuff you just made up.

(Edit: I guess the accusations are that some earlier battery models discharge in a week or a few, not months. I'm told the charge management circuitry of the 6000+ cell battery is extremely complicated, so improvement over time is to be expected. Nevertheless it's not a case of "duh just disconnect the battery"--these things self-discharge and also discharge very slowly over the disconnection circuitry!)

Except that for the Tesla it's days after reaching zero charge, not months.

From the manual "Important! Caution: If the battery’s charge level falls to 0%, it must be plugged in immediately. Failure to do so can permanently damage the battery and this damage is not covered by the New Vehicle Limited Warranty."

Of course the manual is going to say that. If the manual said it took weeks or months for the battery to discharge then people would dilly dally and forget and suddenly there would be a lot more bricked batteries out there.

If you tell people to plug their cars in IMMEDIATELY then maybe they won't let it sit around for more than a week or two.

It looks like one of the specific cases on this, Max Drucker's Tesla, was it bricked two months after bringing it to 25% displayed charge level. So the car wasn't even run all the way down. Presumably the time to failure is much shorter if you bring it to the 0% displayed charge level at which point it shuts down. Your guess of days is probably correct.

In the first link here you can even see the emails between Tesla representatives and Drucker, so Tesla is 100% aware that this car was bricked and the cost to fix it was over $40,000, which was the "friends and family" price for "loyal supporters", not the standard repair rate, which is presumed to be much higher.

Because they have emails on the subject, which note that even Musk is aware of the situation, their PR efforts to suggest the cars can't be bricked and the allegations in their statement are not only false, but are intentional lies and misrepresentations by Tesla, showing bad faith. It is absolutely a cover up, coupled with the start of a media smear campaign that we see getting in gear in the technical press.

http://jalopnik.com/5887499/who-is-trying-to-smear-the-tesla...

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/02/the-tesla-roadster-...

edit: I see that people are so threatened by reality they are paralyzed into downvoting because they have no coherent response and so censorship is the only action that makes sense to their tiny reptilian brains. Above are actual emails between Tesla and an owner that prove Tesla is aware of the problem, bricking is possible, the repairs are a minimum of $40,000, the blogger is telling the truth, and Tesla is blatantly lying and misrepresenting the situation in their response. Downvote all you want, it only shows what a failure you are and won't change reality.

>More generally, you jumped to conclusions based on personal anecdotal evidence, ignored the entire preceding discussion

I didn't ignore anything, nor did I "jump" to any conclusions. The preceding discussions have been talking about the vehicle doing things like "phoning home" and issuing audible warnings.

This stuff doesn't come for free. You need the battery to power this.

You know those things take virtually no power, right? These are 50KwH+ batteries and you're worried about I don't know how many fractions of a millijoule.

Do you have any hard data on this, or are you just "jumping to conclusions"?

I'd love to see a comparison on how long the battery can sit if it is physically disconnected from anything drawing current, and how long it can last when plugged into Tesla's phone home system.

I mentioned this yesterday [1], but I am repeating it here, because I believe that it is a critical piece of the conversation.

The consequences of failing to maintain the battery are clearly stated by Tesla Motors in the owner's manual.

Is it the fault of Tesla Motors that an owner did not read, understand and follow the maintenance procedures outlined in the owner's manual? Is it not the buyer's responsibility to perform due-diligence in this regard?

From the Roadster 2/Roadster Sport owner's manual (italic emphasis is mine):

"Important! Caution: If the battery’s charge level falls to 0%, it must be plugged in immediately. Failure to do so can permanently damage the battery and this damage is not covered by the New Vehicle Limited Warranty. Also, if you allow the battery to fall to a critically low level it may not be possible to charge the vehicle. If you are unable to charge the vehicle, contact Tesla Motors."

[...]

"However, situations may arise in which you must leave the vehicle unplugged for an extended time (for example, at an airport when traveling for a couple of weeks). If this is the case, it is your responsibility to ensure that the battery does not become fully depleted."

[...]

"If for some reason, you are unable to keep the vehicle plugged in when it is not being used, it is up to you to preserve battery life by paying attention to the charge level and the temperature [...]"

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3625527

You can put whatever you'd like into the warning. The fact of the matter is that this is a car. When a car runs out of gas, it's not forever bricked. People will, due to a hundred years of experience, expect the same from a new car that has a different power source.

They can fix this. They have the technology.

What kind of technology is going to keep a battery magically charged if left alone? Self-discharge is a built-in phenomenon of these batteries. The fix they have is that the car can "phone home", and that's what Tesla and other car manufacturers are doing.

I know two people who have bricked their gas-powered cars by going too long between oil changes. This isn't a novel problem for complex machines. You need to maintain them if you'd like to continue using them.

No, but if it runs out of oil, and especially if you let it sit for a while, your engine can make a very good mimicry of a steel brick, and that's one of the more expensive pieces of your car to replace. Probably more than 4/10ths of the cost of the car, in many situations.

We haven't fixed this. Have we the technology?

Yes, it is Tesla's fault. Clearly. You shouldn't need to read a manual to drive a car. Tesla has to make sure things behave like people expect them to behave. That's how people are going to see it, anyway. Owning up to it would be a small price to pay for Tesla.

> You shouldn't need to read a manual to drive a car

I thought it would be clear enough that this is not "your average car".

Everyone buying electric car would automatically know the difference. If I would buy it, first thing I would ask myself is: OK this is $50,000 piece of machinery [a car] and there is new key element here: there is no gas injection, rather electronic plug. here come the question: "how do I maintenance the battery/vehicle not to fuck this up".

Simple.

How is neglect of the car owner (assuming the rumors of these owners cars "bricking") the car manufacturers fault? If I buy an electric car I expect to plug it in regularly.

I'll make an assumption here; most people expect to have to plug in an electric car on a regular basis. The expectation is to plug in the car regularly.

I don’t think you can allow yourself to think that way as a company. Fussy debates about whose fault it was – when your customers didn’t do anything outrageously unusual – lead nowhere, just to bad PR.

They did something outrageously stupid. No conventional car should be left sitting for months at a time without appropriate preparatory steps, and neither should an EV unless it's connected to power.

The EV actually has a distinct advantage here -- all you really have to do is plug in a power cord. A conventional car has several much more involved steps to be taken.

The only reason that we don't need to read a manual for normal cars is that we have grown up knowing that they need basic maintenance, and what that maintenance is.

Imagine the flip side, that electric cars were normal, and internal combustion engines were unusual. Then we could have stories about owners ruining their engines because they never changed their oil.

"Imagine the flip side, that electric cars were normal, and internal combustion engines were unusual. Then we could have stories about owners ruining their engines because they never changed their oil."

No you wouldn't because an oil change is part of the annual service for the car. Everyone knows that if you neglect to follow the manufacturer's maintenance schedule for a car you might get problems. On the other hand, many people see charging the car as analogous to filling up a tank with fuel - not as maintenance - that's why they are surprised that failing to do so for a few weeks could "brick" the car.

And plugging in the damned car is part of the daily routine of owning an EV. You're only making his point for him.

But it’s new and unusual. If there are really only these vague warnings in the manual (manuals tend to have all kinds of crazy warning that you usually don’t have to take all that seriously) then this is absolutely Tesla’s fault and they have to own up to it.

First of all, the warnings in the manual are anything but vague.

Second, again you're proving the point. If EVs were the norm and suddenly internal combustion engines burst onto the scene, people would be breaking those because they're not used to what you can or can't do.

Electric cars have an uphill battle in front of them. As a company you cannot have fussy debates about whose fault something was.

That may be true, but it's orthogonal to the point I was responding to, which was "You shouldn't need to read a manual to drive a car." The only reason that statement holds with gas-based cars is that the things one needs to do to take care of them is common knowledge. New technologies have new quirks, and those who adopt them will have to read the manual. Eventually, when the technology becomes common, how to take care of them will become common knowledge, and then no one will read the manuals.

You're making a point about what is best for Tesla from a marketing perspective.

Which is the only perspective that matters for the company.

Which is a fine position to have, but a non-sequitur in this discussion.

You are absolutely right, and Tesla has no liability for these batteries.

That does not change the fact that the thing -- and especially its' handling -- is an absolute PR disaster that WILL greatly (likely fatally) hurt any wider adoption. If Tesla thinks that saving 5x40 = 200k is worth it, they are free to do whatever they feel like.

"The consequences of failing to maintain the battery are clearly stated by Tesla Motors in the owner's manual."

For sure they are well documented in the owners manual.

However, the idea of getting a $40,000 repair bill for a car is going to turn many buyers off. Tesla should cover it for the sake of their business. If Tesla was paying for these repairs I guarantee you they'd figure out a way to prevent the failure.

Yes, if these kinds of failures are truly rare it won't cost Tesla much to cover them. Then they can reduce the loss rate further both by improving technology and emphasizing to their salespeople to ensure that the buyer knows to never let the battery discharge. The prospect of having their car out of commission for the replacement, and maybe a token service fee, should be enough disincentive to keep owners from being cavalier about charging.

At least with the 2008 manual I looked through, the warning (which doesn't seem to be as detailed as the more recent one) appears in section 5-2 of the manual. Well past all the dire warnings about using seat belts and how the car may contain chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer. I wouldn't conclude--based solely on this evidence--that everyone would be fully aware of the seriousness of letting the car discharge fully.

Of course, Tesla may emphasize the point in other ways.

That's the general problem with the omnipresent safety warnings you get with products. The important and possibly non-obvious get drowned out by the all the boilerplate silliness.

You really can't fault Tesla for putting the battery warnings after the legally required warnings. They most likely have no choice. Now, if the battery warnings aren't immediately after the legally mandated warnings, that is Tesla's fault, but you have to keep in mind that it is totally reasonable to expect a first-time EV owner to read the section on charging.

They're not: http://www.scribd.com/doc/24701291/Tesla-Owners-Manual

I don't really disagree with you though.

The hell? Batteries are not magic black boxes, that when disconnected, will be removed from this world only to be recovered at a pleasing time from a distant galaxy back to you. They will continue to discharge, even if you completely disconnect them. Which is a stupid thing to do, because then the microcontroller drawing <~500mA won't be able to warn you of the impeding battery death.

You can get a microcontroller to draw far less than 500mA. There are plenty of microcontrollers that can spend most of their time in a low power sleep mode where current draw is measured in microamps.

> NONE of these things have ever been completely incapacitated because of this. I've never had to replace my laptop because I let it go flat.

Maybe you're fortunate, but I've definitely had to replace laptop batteries because they got bricked. If you leave your battery discharged for a long enough time, you can never charge it again.

Now that you mention it, I've probably seen a couple of 'bricked' laptop batteries. At the time I didn't realize that was an issue inherent in the technology, but looking back that's probably what killed those batteries.

Well at least this whole saga has taught me more about Li-ION batteries. I feel like this information is something that should be more generally known amongst the population, not just for cars but for all the products we use with Li-ION.

Every rechargeable device I've ever owned has had various warnings in its documentation about battery care. If you've never read the manual, that is 100% your fault. No one can force you not to be stupid, it's up to you.

OK. I have to say I think you're acting bizarrely entitled. "Bizarrely" because you're acting like you're entitled to fictitious, impossible technology. Objects that exist within the physical world require maintenance to retain their use. Even with that maintenance, they will eventually degrade. Things fall apart. Tesla's maintenance requirements - "plug your car in once every twelve months" - are absurdly reasonable.

The conversation surrounding this issue reminds me of an adult explaining to a child why their goldfish died. If you don't feed the fish, the fish dies. If you don't take care of your toys, your toys break. In this world, entropy is the natural order of things. And there's no world but this world. So stop complaining and plug your car in.

The problem is, I think, that a battery will discharge even if it's physically disconnected.

I do wonder why the batteries become 'bricked', though. All I've heard so far is just that 'they do', not why.

"sounds" answered that previously http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3619112

He referenced http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithium-ion_battery#Electrochem...

"The overall reaction has its limits. Overdischarge supersaturates lithium cobalt oxide, leading to the production of lithium oxide, possibly by the following irreversible reaction:"

I believe all lithium-ion batteries have a low-voltage threshold that once crossed they can not be charged again. It's similar to a fuse - once tripped - there's no* getting around it. This protection is to guard against shorts in the internal circuitry. With the current technology there is no way around it.

* Edit. Missed the 'No'.

You have never had to replace batteries in those items because they are not completely dead when they will not turn on. They are designed to prevent users from killing the battery.

Of all your devices that have run out of charge, have you let them sit that way for months? If not, then you're making an invalid comparison.

You missed the part where they say that it's fine if you plug it in in less than 30 days.

I've had plenty of devices nearly bricked (only working with an external power source, battery lasts seconds/minutes) by leaving them unattended for months. My 1st gen iPod dies in less than an hour after being left at 0% charge for a few weeks.