Tesla Trolling

[denverpilot]

Well not really. But the analysis is interesting.

What say the Tesla fan boys to the hard numbers of having $2.3B in short term debt coming due, only $2.7B in the company, and a burn rate of $700M per year, without a single product having yet been net profitable?

@flyingcheesehead ?

Maybe Ford got out of the car game and out of their EVs for the most part, to buy them? Hostile takeover? Makes their EPA numbers look great if they do... and they could re-tool the factories to build them. Hmmm?

 

[3393RP]

Their burn rate was $753 million last quarter. I could post a long list of reasons why the company is going to collapse, but the people that insist Elon Musk is a genius and without Original Sin will just dispute it.

 

[ktup-flyer]

Same concept he's used with Space X. He pitched the concept, proved the concept, and amassed a massive following and amount of investors along the way. Now Tesla is the 2nd most valuable car company in the US behind GM. Musk is looking at the long term and is building a global infrastructure based around his cars. He built the biggest factory in the world to reduce costs, a huge recharging network to make them realistic, and direct sales dealerships to cut out the middle man. Tons of people gambling on the demise of the internal combustion engine. I'm just a stupid millennial in college, but that is what I have gathered.

For now, I like my big rumbly catless Earth killing V8

 

[deonb]

Maybe Ford got out of the car game and out of their EVs for the most part, to buy them? Hostile takeover? Makes their EPA numbers look great if they do... and they could re-tool the factories to build them.

A smaller company (in market cap) can generally not do a hostile takeover of a larger one...

As far as the cash flow - Tesla can launch a secondary for $5b if they wanted tomorrow and their stock price would hardly take a hit. They say it’s not needed since they expect to be cash flow positive in 6 months, but they could if they really wanted. RunnIng out of cash is the least of their problems.

 

[Lachlan]

<snip>but the people that insist Elon Musk is a genius<clip>

He’s a genius, for sure. I can’t figure out how to get $50 from a stranger, and he gets billions.

 

[Anymouse]

Perhaps he should do what all owners of high end car manufacturing companies do when they're in financial trouble. Go time traveling and sell cocaine!!

 

[Bulldog573]

Perhaps he should do what all owners of high end car manufacturing companies do when they're in financial trouble. Go time traveling and sell cocaine!!

You have to build with stainless steel to make that business model work...

 

[Clip4]

Well not really. But the analysis is interesting.

What say the Tesla fan boys to the hard numbers of having $2.3B in short term debt coming due, only $2.7B in the company, and a burn rate of $700M per year, without a single product having yet been net profitable?

@flyingcheesehead ?

Maybe Ford got out of the car game and out of their EVs for the most part, to buy them? Hostile takeover? Makes their EPA numbers look great if they do... and they could re-tool the factories to build them. Hmmm?

People said the same thing about Amazon.

 

[SkyDog58]

A friend has a Tesla Model X. It's a pretty decent ride with some features most cars don't have. I like it. I wouldn't buy one though for two reasons. One, they cost too much. Two, charging stations are not ubiquitous enough to make it convenient.

 

[NoBShere]

He built the biggest factory in the world to reduce costs.

Didn't he move into old nummi plant? He does have battery factory but, what capacity is it operating at?

I like Tesla's cars, maybe not the X. The people I know that have or do work at Tesla haven't had the most positive things to say. A quick look on line, OSHA seems to be quite interested in them as well.

 

[Dav8or]

A friend has a Tesla Model X. It's a pretty decent ride with some features most cars don't have. I like it. I wouldn't buy one though for two reasons. One, they cost too much. Two, charging stations are not ubiquitous enough to make it convenient.

The charging station is your house. That's pretty convenient I suppose. I have been driving electric for over a year now and have only used a public station once and I didn't really have to. On the other point, I agree. They cost too much and I don't think I'd trust those Falcon Wing doors long term. Also I would prefer the X to be designed like a proper CUV, or SUV with a squared off back for better cargo hauling.

 

[injb]

I'm curious to know where people who predict Tesla's doom think the fundamental problems lies. There have always been claims that electric cars just don't make economic sense, that it's all a big scam etc. Maybe that's true, but I don't believe it. Lately the criticism seems to be around Tesla's books specifically, i.e. it's not that there's no market etc. but just that Tesla will run out of cash and no one will be willing to bank roll them any longer. Are they just incompetent?

To me it comes down to whether you believe in the economics of electric cars or not. If you do, why back another company who would have to catch up with Tesla? For that reason I think they'll always be able to raise the cash as long as people have faith in electric cars, and there's no sign of that running out just yet. As for being taken over, I think it's no more likely that Ford will acquire Tesla than the other way around.

 

[Dav8or]

A smaller company (in market cap) can generally not do a hostile takeover of a larger one...

True. Ford is probably the last I would expect to try to take over Tesla. They're having a tough enough time with their own business. No, if anybody takes over Tesla, it's going to be a Chinese company for sure. They would love to have the brand and electric cars are more important to them than they are here due to crazy pollution and government taxes and mandates.

 

[SkyDog58]

The charging station is your house. That's pretty convenient I suppose. I have been driving electric for over a year now and have only used a public station once and I didn't really have to. On the other point, I agree. They cost too much and I don't think I'd trust those Falcon Wing doors long term. Also I would prefer the X to be designed like a proper CUV, or SUV with a squared off back for better cargo hauling.

I suppose if all you do with your electric car is to commute back an forth to work and run local errands that your home charger is enough. However if you want to drive it on weekend trips or long family vacations then you will find the lack of charging stations to be an issue.

 

[deonb]

I suppose if all you do with your electric car is to commute back an forth to work and run local errands that your home charger is enough. However if you want to drive it on weekend trips or long family vacations then you will find the lack of charging stations to be an issue.

There’s nowhere I’ve ever driven that I can see that’s not covered by the SuperCharging network. And I’ve taken quite a few road trips that cover 20 or more states. Even the scenic secondary roads are now covered.

Do you have an example of where you’ve ever driven that shows otherwise?

Here is the current SuperCharger map:
https://supercharge.info/

 

[Anymouse]

I suppose if all you do with your electric car is to commute back an forth to work and run local errands that your home charger is enough. However if you want to drive it on weekend trips or long family vacations then you will find the lack of charging stations to be an issue.

When the el cheapo Tesla was announced a while back, I looked to see if long trips would be feasible. Much to my surprise, it appeared that there were more than enough charging stations along the routes that I would take to make it doable. Of course, if you're planning on going down country roads and staying off the interstates, you may have an issue.

 

[James331]

I'm curious to know where people who predict Tesla's doom think the fundamental problems lies. There have always been claims that electric cars just don't make economic sense, that it's all a big scam etc. Maybe that's true, but I don't believe it. Lately the criticism seems to be around Tesla's books specifically, i.e. it's not that there's no market etc. but just that Tesla will run out of cash and no one will be willing to bank roll them any longer. Are they just incompetent?

To me it comes down to whether you believe in the economics of electric cars or not. If you do, why back another company who would have to catch up with Tesla? For that reason I think they'll always be able to raise the cash as long as people have faith in electric cars, and there's no sign of that running out just yet. As for being taken over, I think it's no more likely that Ford will acquire Tesla than the other way around.

I'd say based on profit vs loss.

No matter how much you yell at a calculator the numbers come out the same.

 

[SkyDog58]

There’s nowhere I’ve ever driven that I can see that’s not covered by the SuperCharging network. And I’ve taken quite a few road trips that cover 20 or more states. Even the scenic secondary roads are now covered.

Do you have an example of where you’ve ever driven that shows otherwise?

Here is the current SuperCharger map:
https://supercharge.info/

I’m just going by what my friend told me. He says that they have to plan their routes and their stops based on where the chargers are. Seems inconvenient. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for electric cars and would probably even buy one if the chargers were more widely available.

 

[kyleb]

I'm curious to know where people who predict Tesla's doom think the fundamental problems lies. There have always been claims that electric cars just don't make economic sense, that it's all a big scam etc. Maybe that's true, but I don't believe it. Lately the criticism seems to be around Tesla's books specifically, i.e. it's not that there's no market etc. but just that Tesla will run out of cash and no one will be willing to bank roll them any longer. Are they just incompetent?

Technology isn't faith based. I neither believe or don't believe in it. I seek to understand it.

I've looked at the economics around electric lift trucks vs propane powered lift trucks. Presumably, the comparison is similar between electric and gasoline powered cars. With all of the generating efficiency losses, transmission losses, etc., the difference in energy consumption is minuscule. So, choose your poison. I'm still troubled by the claim that electric cars are cleaner. Again, I've done the work and determined that with electric vs internal combustion, you're just moving the source of pollution - not changing the amount. So, my conclusion is that from an environmental perspective, there's no reason to go electric. Beyond that, there's still the range issue with electric cars. With my IC vehicle, I can stop at any of tens of thousands of gas stations and refuel in 5 minutes, giving myself a 500 mile range. Not so much with electric.

As far as Tesla's financials, building cars is hugely expensive. Until you get your production rates and costs in-line so each unit is cashflow positive, you're gonna bleed cash. Once you run out of cash (and nobody will loan you more), you're done. The question is whether Tesla can create positive cashflows before it goes broke.

 

[denverpilot]

Technology isn't faith based. I neither believe or don't believe in it. I seek to understand it.

You may have hit on something here. That’s not how the masses view tech anymore. They “believe” tech companies are great or not, more than they know anything about tech.

Which probably leads to @deonb ‘s point. They’ll throw money at his company for that belief.

(How many Apple fans realize the user interface on iOS on iPhone X is just Palm’s WebOS all over again with better marketing?)

As far as “understanding” EV tech goes, it’s pretty simple. It just moves the tailpipe from the car to a coal or nuke plant for base load.

 

[James331]

I’m just going by what my friend told me. He says that they have to plan their routes and their stops based on where the chargers are. Seems inconvenient. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for electric cars and would probably even buy one if the chargers were more widely available.

At a job I had a while back we had a customer come in with his tesla, asked where a charging station was, the girls at the front desk looked it up, turned out there was a station that would charge his car by the buss parking storage area, dude had to leave his 100k+ car in the sketchiest area of town for quite some time, yeah forget that noise, and that was for only a couple hundred mile drive.

Electric and hydrogen and all that nonsense, we already have a way to do this, diesel and aerodynamics and good transmissions.

Check this thing out, 200MPH at 57MPH, range of 2000mi, takes like 4min to refuel at any place that sells diesel or if you want to be green, anywhere that you can get bio diesel, now make to be super elite go make some bio diesel in your shed that will work in it, bada Bing.

Imagine what you could do price and economy wise in just a 4 door normal car that only needed to max out at like 120mph.


I'd get one of these bad boys way before a tesla for the same money.

https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1078688_trident-iceni-the-200-mph-57-mpg-diesel-supercar

The reason the rich boutique folks are getting teslas is because the Prius has been out long enough that the "help" can now afford one, and they can't be having their maids driving the same cars they do, despite them crying about helping, and forcing us to be over taxed to failingly help the [fill in the blank cause of the month].

...As far as “understanding” EV tech goes, it’s pretty simple. It just moves the tailpipe from the car to a coal or nuke plant for base load.

And since their million+ dollar homes are no where near those "fly over" places they don't care, same with getting kids from the ghetto into different districts, as long as it's not their district it's all very noble in their eyes.

 

[Salty]

What most people that post on internet forums set up for expensive hobbies, and think that electric cars are practical don't understand is that they are on the top of the economic ladder. The common man can't blow money on a car that costs more and has less capability than the cheaper one.

If you think electric charging stations are even remotely close to the convenience of a gas vehicle, then you are simply ignoring reality. Can you make a long trip in an electric car? Sure. But it WILL take longer, and be less convenient.

 

[X3 Skier]

Musk is great inventor, promoter and builder of limited volume successful gizmos. What he knows about mass production and delivering same on time on budget with the promised performance is essentially zero (and he probably doesn’t care since his internal financial chicanery will keep him rich forever).

Cheers

 

[cowman]

I think electric cars are still full of promise and that Tesla really built his car company on that promise. They're still hoping that they can learn enough by selling cars to the wealthy and enthusiast communities now that when someone eventually invents a better battery that solves the problems of pollution, charge time, etc they'll be able to build an amazing product.

I'm still really impressed with what they've been able to pull off given the limitations of current battery technology. Not amazed enough to buy one- they cost too much and don't work well enough yet but I see that changing one day. If not under the Tesla badge then some other.

 

[Salty]

I think electric cars are still full of promise and that Tesla really built his car company on that promise. They're still hoping that they can learn enough by selling cars to the wealthy and enthusiast communities now that when someone eventually invents a better battery that solves the problems of pollution, charge time, etc they'll be able to build an amazing product.

I'm still really impressed with what they've been able to pull off given the limitations of current battery technology. Not amazed enough to buy one- they cost too much and don't work well enough yet but I see that changing one day. If not under the Tesla badge then some other.

Tesla never built a car company.

 

[James331]

Musk is great inventor, promoter and builder of limited volume successful gizmos. What he knows about mass production and delivering same on time on budget with the promised performance is essentially zero (and he probably doesn’t care since his internal financial chicanery will keep him rich forever).

Cheers

Musk is the flavorflave of that world, he's a hype man, he markets to the right people and gets the CA and NY debutants to "make it rain" As for his cars, well they just arnt that great on paper

It's like designer clothes, you normally can get better performing clothing for less, but everyone wants what the kool kids have.

 

[cowman]

Tesla never built a car company.

I did that on purpose to see if you were paying attention

 

[deonb]

You may have hit on something here. That’s not how the masses view tech anymore. They “believe” tech companies are great or not, more than they know anything about tech.

Which probably leads to @deonb ‘s point. They’ll throw money at his company for that belief.

I'm long TSLA stock, and I own both a Model S and a Model 3, but I agree, some people have bizarrely outsized expectations of the company.

There are a group of people out there that honestly think TSLA shares can grow another 30 fold in the next 10 years, because "Tesla is also a solar company, not just vehicle". And they invest accordingly...

To put that into perspective, absent an insane bubble, to justify a $1.5 trillion valuation in the auto & energy section it would mean you need about $4.5 trillion in revenue per year. Or put another pay - more revenue than all of the vehicle companies in the world put together today PLUS solar installations that are equivalent to 125% of all current power production in the world from all sources, put together. And all of this is going to happen in 10 years...

You're burnt in effigy if you point out the flaw in that logic.

 

[Palmpilot]

There’s nowhere I’ve ever driven that I can see that’s not covered by the SuperCharging network. And I’ve taken quite a few road trips that cover 20 or more states. Even the scenic secondary roads are now covered.

Do you have an example of where you’ve ever driven that shows otherwise?

Here is the current SuperCharger map:
https://supercharge.info/

I see some pretty big gaps on that map.

 

[Palmpilot]

Technology isn't faith based. I neither believe or don't believe in it. I seek to understand it.

I've looked at the economics around electric lift trucks vs propane powered lift trucks. Presumably, the comparison is similar between electric and gasoline powered cars. With all of the generating efficiency losses, transmission losses, etc., the difference in energy consumption is minuscule. So, choose your poison. I'm still troubled by the claim that electric cars are cleaner. Again, I've done the work and determined that with electric vs internal combustion, you're just moving the source of pollution - not changing the amount. So, my conclusion is that from an environmental perspective, there's no reason to go electric. Beyond that, there's still the range issue with electric cars. With my IC vehicle, I can stop at any of tens of thousands of gas stations and refuel in 5 minutes, giving myself a 500 mile range. Not so much with electric.

As far as Tesla's financials, building cars is hugely expensive. Until you get your production rates and costs in-line so each unit is cashflow positive, you're gonna bleed cash. Once you run out of cash (and nobody will loan you more), you're done. The question is whether Tesla can create positive cashflows before it goes broke.

Does anyone have the actual numbers for end-to-end cost and pollution from electric vs gasoline-powered cars?

 

[DaleB]

Does anyone have the actual numbers for end-to-end cost and pollution from electric vs gasoline-powered cars?

All kinds of people will happily give you numbers, but whose are you going to believe? A lot of the claims on both sides seem to be "faith based".

 

[denverpilot]

I'm long TSLA stock, and I own both a Model S and a Model 3, but I agree, some people have bizarrely outsized expectations of the company.

There are a group of people out there that honestly think TSLA shares can grow another 30 fold in the next 10 years, because "Tesla is also a solar company, not just vehicle". And they invest accordingly...

To put that into perspective, absent an insane bubble, to justify a $1.5 trillion valuation in the auto & energy section it would mean you need about $4.5 trillion in revenue per year. Or put another pay - more revenue than all of the vehicle companies in the world put together today PLUS solar installations that are equivalent to 125% of all current power production in the world from all sources, put together. And all of this is going to happen in 10 years...

You're burnt in effigy if you point out the flaw in that logic.

Yeah it’s a strange form of irrationality. I liked the video pointing out that it takes the best automakers in the world about three years to build a plant, but all these promised new models from Tesla are magically going to spring forth from the ether without having built a plant for them yet. LOL.

 

[injb]

Technology isn't faith based. I neither believe or don't believe in it. I seek to understand it.

I've looked at the economics around electric lift trucks vs propane powered lift trucks. Presumably, the comparison is similar between electric and gasoline powered cars. With all of the generating efficiency losses, transmission losses, etc., the difference in energy consumption is minuscule. So, choose your poison. I'm still troubled by the claim that electric cars are cleaner. Again, I've done the work and determined that with electric vs internal combustion, you're just moving the source of pollution - not changing the amount. So, my conclusion is that from an environmental perspective, there's no reason to go electric. Beyond that, there's still the range issue with electric cars. With my IC vehicle, I can stop at any of tens of thousands of gas stations and refuel in 5 minutes, giving myself a 500 mile range. Not so much with electric.

As far as Tesla's financials, building cars is hugely expensive. Until you get your production rates and costs in-line so each unit is cashflow positive, you're gonna bleed cash. Once you run out of cash (and nobody will loan you more), you're done. The question is whether Tesla can create positive cashflows before it goes broke.

Technology may not be faith based, but economics certainly is, especially with things like this. Just look at Tesla's capitalization and share prices vs their record of profilts if you don't believe me! There's a reason why they call it the dismal science.

Regarding the technology, a lot of people have said that it's just moving the source of pollution, but that's not really the whole story. Firstly, the only way we will ever have to get kinetic energy from fossil fuels is by burning them. But burning fossil fuels isn't by any means the only way to get electricity. It's just the main way that we've always done it, because it's always been cheap (unlike solar panels) and free from political difficulties (unlike nuclear power). But the fact is that we have far more options when it comes to electricity. In fact, any source of sustainable energy you look at is going to end up being consumed as electricity, whether it's wind, solar, geothermal etc. So the simple reality is that in the future we'll be driving electric cars or we won't be driving at all.

But secondly, no one actually knows the full story about the thermal efficiency of IC engines, if you take it from start to finish. We do know that it costs up to 7kwhr of electricity to get one gallon of fuel to the pumps, and also that electrical power plants burn fossil fuels more efficiently than the small engines found in cars. So even as things stand now, electric cars are more efficient.

 

[Salty]

I'm considering an electric car for my next purchase. I have a 60 mile commute every day (round trip), so a good electric would be perfect for me. But I won't pay $100k or even $40k for one. I'll buy a cheaper one or a used one.

But I'm looking at the possibility of a work from home job, and it's really the only reason I would buy one, so it's a risk for me.

The only reason I want one is I really despise stopping for gas once a week, like I do now. In this small use case, it's actually a convenience. But if I get a different job, it will convert back to an inconvenience.

 

[Salty]

Technology may not be faith based, but economics certainly is, especially with things like this. Just look at Tesla's capitalization and share prices vs their record of profilts if you don't believe me! There's a reason why they call it the dismal science.

Regarding the technology, a lot of people have said that it's just moving the source of pollution, but that's not really the whole story. Firstly, the only way we will ever have to get kinetic energy from fossil fuels is by burning them. But burning fossil fuels isn't by any means the only way to get electricity. It's just the main way that we've always done it, because it's always been cheap (unlike solar panels) and free from political difficulties (unlike nuclear power). But the fact is that we have far more options when it comes to electricity. In fact, any source of sustainable energy you look at is going to end up being consumed as electricity, whether it's wind, solar, geothermal etc. So the simple reality is that in the future we'll be driving electric cars or we won't be driving at all.

But secondly, no one actually knows the full story about the thermal efficiency of IC engines, if you take it from start to finish. We do know that it costs up to 7kwhr of electricity to get one gallon of fuel to the pumps, and also that electrical power plants burn fossil fuels more efficiently than the small engines found in cars. So even as things stand now, electric cars are more efficient.

Walking is even more efficient. The efficiency has to be important enough to overcome the inconvenience. Which, for most, it is not; if there is any actual efficiency in the first place.

 

[deonb]

I see some pretty big gaps on that map.

Click "Map Options" (top left), "All Range Circles On".

The western gaps look big mostly because the east coast is covered so densely.

Most of the U.S. with exception of a small section in Northern Montana is in range of the even the older cars. If you change the range to "240 miles" at the top of the map (all of the currently produced batteries have 240+ miles), there is nowhere in lower 48 that's not covered. On the east coast, some sections are covered 20 times over.

Also keep in mind this is SuperChargers stops only. In addition to those, Tesla has another 5000 chargers in hotels, that they plan to expand to 15000 by the end of this year. Tesla gives chargers away for free to any hotel that wants them. It's obviously more convenient to just get to a hotel and give your key to the valet to charge it, than stopping at a SuperCharger (or even compared to going to a gas station for that matter).

 

[denverpilot]

Walking is even more efficient. The efficiency has to be important enough to overcome the inconvenience. Which, for most, it is not; if there is any actual efficiency in the first place.

Walking is horribly inefficient. Feeding and housing a human on a cross country walk consumes a lot of resources.

 

[colojo]

I split my time between Denver and Marin County, CA. In Marin, Teslas are ubiquitous, both S's and X's. Seems like every third or fourth car is a Tesla. I attribute it to three factors: 1) Demographics - lots of wealthy people; 2) The liberal and "green" Bay Area mindset; and 3) The high price of gasoline (over $4 a gallon). CA had other incentives in place to buy electric cars and hybrids, but I think they might have been phased out.

You see Teslas in Denver, but not nearly as many. I think most people in this neck of the woods think they're too expensive, and they prefer to have an SUV to drive in the snow.

I think the S is a fine looking car with a lot of innovative features, but it's pretty damn expensive.

 

[kyleb]

Technology may not be faith based, but economics certainly is, especially with things like this. Just look at Tesla's capitalization and share prices vs their record of profilts if you don't believe me! There's a reason why they call it the dismal science.

Regarding the technology, a lot of people have said that it's just moving the source of pollution, but that's not really the whole story. Firstly, the only way we will ever have to get kinetic energy from fossil fuels is by burning them. But burning fossil fuels isn't by any means the only way to get electricity. It's just the main way that we've always done it, because it's always been cheap (unlike solar panels) and free from political difficulties (unlike nuclear power). But the fact is that we have far more options when it comes to electricity. In fact, any source of sustainable energy you look at is going to end up being consumed as electricity, whether it's wind, solar, geothermal etc. So the simple reality is that in the future we'll be driving electric cars or we won't be driving at all.

But secondly, no one actually knows the full story about the thermal efficiency of IC engines, if you take it from start to finish. We do know that it costs up to 7kwhr of electricity to get one gallon of fuel to the pumps, and also that electrical power plants burn fossil fuels more efficiently than the small engines found in cars. So even as things stand now, electric cars are more efficient.

Neither solar or wind are economically competitive with coal unless the deck is stacked with phony things like green credits. I did the analysis on a very large solar grid my employer installed. If you looked at the investment compared to pulling power off of the grid, there was no way the project was viable. We did it for the green story which is a selling point to the the designers and other non-math people who are the specifiers of our products.

I'm very familiar with the full story of the efficiency of IC engines and delivery costs of petroleum products. Also, I'm familiar with the efficiency and investment required for solar cells, wind power, etc. from all aspects - manufacturing (you do realize batteries and battery manufacturing are nasty?), transportation to the site, and then installation and maintenance costs for a distributed system. All-in, those technologies are not competitive from a cost standpoint unless someone puts his/her thumb on the economic scales or unless you're so far off-grid that hooking to the grid would be prohibitive.

On the relative efficiencies of burning coal in a big plant versus running your car on petroleum. The power plant is more efficient than the typical IC engine. But the advantage is nullified by transmission losses and other systemic losses between the power plant and the drive wheels on your electric car.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Technology may not be faith based, but economics certainly is, especially with things like this. Just look at Tesla's capitalization and share prices vs their record of profilts if you don't believe me! There's a reason why they call it the dismal science.

Regarding the technology, a lot of people have said that it's just moving the source of pollution, but that's not really the whole story. Firstly, the only way we will ever have to get kinetic energy from fossil fuels is by burning them. But burning fossil fuels isn't by any means the only way to get electricity. It's just the main way that we've always done it, because it's always been cheap (unlike solar panels) and free from political difficulties (unlike nuclear power). But the fact is that we have far more options when it comes to electricity. In fact, any source of sustainable energy you look at is going to end up being consumed as electricity, whether it's wind, solar, geothermal etc. So the simple reality is that in the future we'll be driving electric cars or we won't be driving at all.

But secondly, no one actually knows the full story about the thermal efficiency of IC engines, if you take it from start to finish. We do know that it costs up to 7kwhr of electricity to get one gallon of fuel to the pumps, and also that electrical power plants burn fossil fuels more efficiently than the small engines found in cars. So even as things stand now, electric cars are more efficient.

Lithium mining is some kind of nasty. Totally non sustainable too. The energy storage answer has to be better than lithium ion for me to buy in.