The wildest tech rumor this week comes from little substance, but somehow manages to ignite the imagination: According to Business Insider, an unsolicited Apple employee emailed to say that a group at Apple is working on a project that would “give Tesla a run for its money.” For this to be true, it means that an Apple employee either broke Apple’s strict rules for secrecy in some obvious way that makes Business Insider believe the email actually came from an Apple employee, or that it was some sort of vague and intentional leak from Apple, sent straight to Business Insider.
Historically, few companies enter completely new and mostly unrelated markets and succeed. The leap from computers and phones to automobiles is huge despite the fact that today's vehicles are more digital than ever. But...if any company could pull it off it would probably be Apple...if only due to its fiercely loyal customer base.
That aside, Chris how much do you know about electric vehicles? Specifically, how much do you know about the massive pollution caused by the mining and refinement of rare earth elements (e.g. graphite) required for batteries?
Laptop and mobile phones batteries require about 100 and 15 grams of graphite respectively. By comparison the average electric car contains about 50 kilograms (110 pounds) of graphite and hybrid cars consumer about 10 kilograms. There is an estimated 10 to 30 times more graphite in a Lithium-ion battery than Lithium.
Electric cars, windmills, etc don't solve the energy and pollution problems we have today. They simply displace the issues to regions of the world that are out of sight and out of mind. Today's electric alternatives put a modern spin on NIMBY. Ask a Prius or Tesla owner here in the U.S. if they'd mind having a graphite processing plant in their neighborhood. A) they'd have no clue what that means, and B) once it's explained to them, they'd say no.
But wait, there's more....Tesla is looking to build the largest battery production plant in the world right here in the States....rumored to be looking at Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico or Texas where the governments are still desperate enough and ignorant enough to allow such a destructive plant in its citizens' back yards. The raw materials, another environmental nightmare would likely be sourced from mines in Canada, Minnesota and Idaho.
If we're going to seek alternatives to fossil-fueled products, let's solve the problem not simply displace it.
Lots of great points here, josephmartins -- I certainly agree that most people don't realize that batteries are environmentally intense products. (As for graphite, I'm clueless to the environmental impact of graphite specifically.)
I don't see the potential benefits of a better Apple car in a new world fleet of electric cars necessarily . . . but both vision and pressure in many other ways.
For instance, there are some pretty efficient diesel engines and cars that could be made and delivered to the U.S. . . . but aren't. Apple brings intense scrutiny to its decisions, which also opens up other approaches for competitors. I think that Apple, ironically, encourages more breaks from tradition in its competitors than it does itself sometimes.
Right now, there are cars that can easily shut themselves off at stoplights, which has been proven to save gas -- but few vehicles use this technology yet. Apple is the sort of company that would find a way to make this not only work more seamlessly . . . they would make customers comfortable with it, want it, and pay for it. The end result? Less fuel burned.
Overall, I think spreading the reliance of natural resources is a good thing -- might that reduce the high cost of war and manipulation around the world? Hard to say. There's more going on than money and oil that causes conflict and environmental travesty, that's for sure.
I totally agree with your point about the risk of "displacing" problems with new ones. I get the impression that Cook actually cares, and I hope that he uses his power and influence to do the right things. And that, along the way, our environmentalists look at the entire supply chain over a period of time to determine efficiency and manage to communicate the results.
Complicated stuff, though. If given the choice of driving 75 mlles per hour and burning more fuel instead of driving 55 or 60 . . . I'm inclined to drive faster and be less efficient. Anyway, lots of places for improvement -- and Apple is a company that can become a catalyst to help spur innovation all around it, which is why I'm keen on seeing an Apple car in the future.
Here's one of the many articles about the pollution and destruction caused by mining rare earth elements (at least China): http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html
China has begun shutting down rare earth mines due to the environmental impact opening the door to competition. "Innovators" such as Musk, left unchecked, will bring that impact stateside.
And I do agree with you and hope Apple will at least serve as a catalyst for new research because the current research is largely little more than problem displacement.
By the way, regarding the cars that shut themselves off at stoplights....wouldn't it be fantastic if the municipalities actually reprogrammed their lights to be more effective, efficient and responsive? Paired with intelligent ignition systems it's a winning combination.
Jony Ive's friend Marc Newson joined Apple recently, right? He has experience in designing transport products: http://www.marc-newson.com/ProjectImages.aspx?GroupSelected=0&ProjectName=Ford+021C+Concept+Car%0d%0a1999+-+Ford+Motor+Company&Category=Transport
Loading ...
Why Tim Cook Would Build an Apple Car
Posted by: Chris Maxcer February 13, 2015 11:43 AMThe wildest tech rumor this week comes from little substance, but somehow manages to ignite the imagination: According to Business Insider, an unsolicited Apple employee emailed to say that a group at Apple is working on a project that would “give Tesla a run for its money.” For this to be true, it means that an Apple employee either broke Apple’s strict rules for secrecy in some obvious way that makes Business Insider believe the email actually came from an Apple employee, or that it was some sort of vague and intentional leak from Apple, sent straight to Business Insider.
That aside, Chris how much do you know about electric vehicles? Specifically, how much do you know about the massive pollution caused by the mining and refinement of rare earth elements (e.g. graphite) required for batteries?
Laptop and mobile phones batteries require about 100 and 15 grams of graphite respectively. By comparison the average electric car contains about 50 kilograms (110 pounds) of graphite and hybrid cars consumer about 10 kilograms. There is an estimated 10 to 30 times more graphite in a Lithium-ion battery than Lithium.
Electric cars, windmills, etc don't solve the energy and pollution problems we have today. They simply displace the issues to regions of the world that are out of sight and out of mind. Today's electric alternatives put a modern spin on NIMBY. Ask a Prius or Tesla owner here in the U.S. if they'd mind having a graphite processing plant in their neighborhood. A) they'd have no clue what that means, and B) once it's explained to them, they'd say no.
But wait, there's more....Tesla is looking to build the largest battery production plant in the world right here in the States....rumored to be looking at Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico or Texas where the governments are still desperate enough and ignorant enough to allow such a destructive plant in its citizens' back yards. The raw materials, another environmental nightmare would likely be sourced from mines in Canada, Minnesota and Idaho.
If we're going to seek alternatives to fossil-fueled products, let's solve the problem not simply displace it.
I don't see the potential benefits of a better Apple car in a new world fleet of electric cars necessarily . . . but both vision and pressure in many other ways.
For instance, there are some pretty efficient diesel engines and cars that could be made and delivered to the U.S. . . . but aren't. Apple brings intense scrutiny to its decisions, which also opens up other approaches for competitors. I think that Apple, ironically, encourages more breaks from tradition in its competitors than it does itself sometimes.
Right now, there are cars that can easily shut themselves off at stoplights, which has been proven to save gas -- but few vehicles use this technology yet. Apple is the sort of company that would find a way to make this not only work more seamlessly . . . they would make customers comfortable with it, want it, and pay for it. The end result? Less fuel burned.
Overall, I think spreading the reliance of natural resources is a good thing -- might that reduce the high cost of war and manipulation around the world? Hard to say. There's more going on than money and oil that causes conflict and environmental travesty, that's for sure.
I totally agree with your point about the risk of "displacing" problems with new ones. I get the impression that Cook actually cares, and I hope that he uses his power and influence to do the right things. And that, along the way, our environmentalists look at the entire supply chain over a period of time to determine efficiency and manage to communicate the results.
Complicated stuff, though. If given the choice of driving 75 mlles per hour and burning more fuel instead of driving 55 or 60 . . . I'm inclined to drive faster and be less efficient. Anyway, lots of places for improvement -- and Apple is a company that can become a catalyst to help spur innovation all around it, which is why I'm keen on seeing an Apple car in the future.
China has begun shutting down rare earth mines due to the environmental impact opening the door to competition. "Innovators" such as Musk, left unchecked, will bring that impact stateside.
And I do agree with you and hope Apple will at least serve as a catalyst for new research because the current research is largely little more than problem displacement.
By the way, regarding the cars that shut themselves off at stoplights....wouldn't it be fantastic if the municipalities actually reprogrammed their lights to be more effective, efficient and responsive? Paired with intelligent ignition systems it's a winning combination.