Tag Archives: Reno Gazette-Journal

Telsa Powerwall Has Product-Killing Questions Unanswered

04 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by in About Reno, Branding, Business, Communication, Customer Relations, Customer Service, Ethics, Green, Honor, Management Practices, Print Media, Public Image, Public Relations, Respect, Science, solar, Technology, Traditional Media

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What is Tesla trying to hide about its Powerwall?

I have great respect for a person who pushes boundaries and engages in future-vision projects. We currently lack the great visionaries of the past who established our nations great growth in technology and commerce.

That said, I have no respect or love for someone who toys with great ideas in order to build up consumer and investor hopes for personal profit while remaining silent on the issues that may eventually kill the great idea.

Enter Elon Musk.

I have expressed my reservations about his idea to build a space program to go to Mars, and I have additional reservations about his Falcon Heavy booster that is scheduled to launch sometime later this month.

But it is Tesla’s ‘Powerwall‘ product that has gaping issues that seem to be ignored in all the hype and mystic of Elon Musk. Two issues have to do with lithium-type batteries and their limitations and dangers.

Fantasy Cycles?
Tesla has a ten-year warranty on their Powerwall system. That sounds great, but it is the same as saying if you leave raw fish on the counter at room temperature it will be safe to eat in a year.

There are rules in chemistry. Batteries are defined by these rules. Every battery has a limited lifespan even if it is not used. Batteries also have a limit to the number of discharge/charge cycles it can undergo before they are no longer effective in holding a charge.

Lithium-ion batteries are superior to other types of batteries because they hold more charge per kilogram and they can be recharged. This makes them a good choice for a home power application.

However, lithium-ion batteries begin to deteriorate the moment they have been built. They lose about 5% of their charge capacity per month, and even if they are never used the lifespan of a typical lithium-ion battery is two years.

According to one source, lithium-ion batteries in the Powerwall are limited to between 800 to 1000 discharge/charge cycles. Assuming the Powerwall undergoes only one cycle per day, its useful lifespan is less than three years. Considering that with both normal use, and the natural deterioration of the batteries in the Powerwall, it will fail in less than two years.

But they’re under warranty for ten years, so who cares?

The chemical limitations of the lithium-ion battery are a fact. If Tesla strategy is to deal with massive warranty claims, then both investors and customers should be made aware. If Tesla has come up with some miracle technology they need to explain how they have overcome the chemical limitations.

The danger is that Tesla is aware of the limitations and is preparing for an alternative strategy such as bankruptcy in three or four years after they have squeezed the profits out of the company. Without further explanation, an alternate business strategy is the most likely scenario.

Burn Baby Burn
There is a reason that the FAA required a ban on the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 tablets on commercial flights. Bad lithium-ion batteries.

Lithium-ion batteries can overheat and burn or explode under certain conditions. If punctured they can burst into a fire that cannot be stopped by normal fire suppression tactics. The only way to prevent a lithium-ion fire from doing severe damage to the materials around it is to have a non-burnable barrier that can withstand the heat of a lithium fire.

The Powerwall encased in a metal, temperature-regulated, weather-proof housing. To my knowledge, there have been two tests performed on the Powerwall and its casing. Both tests were performed by a trade organization known as the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA.) The NFPA is not a government, nor regulatory agency, and no information was found as regarding Tesla’s involvement in the design or limitations of the test.

One test performed a test of overheating one cell group to the point of failure. The fire did not spread to the other cells. The second test applied a steady flame to the exterior of the Powerwall. In that test, all cells overheated and failed, but the Powerwall did not explode, nor did the internal lithium fire breach the casing; however, the Powerwall was not mounted on, nor near any combustible material.

The Powerwall does include a system of heating and cooling to keep the batteries within the range required to prevent failure leading to a fire; however, I cannot find any test of a complete cooling system failure in a hot environment, other than the controlled test done by Tesla and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA.)

I cannot find any testing as to the result of a puncture to the Powerwall. YouTube offers many videos on what happens when a lithium-ion battery is punctured. A puncture test of the Powerwall has not been released to the public, to my knowledge. 

If the Powerwall does not have extensive testing in various environmental situations then it may be impossible to know how dangerous the Powerwall is to mount on or near a wall that is combustible.

To my knowledge, Tesla is silent on this issue. On their website, I can find no information as to these issues about lithium-ion batteries or the safety testing done on the Powerwall casing.

In fact, Telsa is extraordinary reactive to journalists and media. In 2015, Tesla security guards used their ATV to reportedly ram a vehicle with journalists from the Reno Gazette-Journal, smashed their vehicle window, and cut their seatbelt to remove them, throwing them to the ground.

The journalists were taking pictures of the Tesla Powerwall plant under construction in Nevada. According to the newspaper’s attorney, Tesla security guards demanded the camera equipment and held the journalists against their will, created an alternate story that the journalist attacked them, and held them until the sheriff’s department arrived.

Image of inside of Reno Gazette-Journal’s vehicle after encounter with Tesla security guard

The incident suggests that Tesla is extremely sensitive to any unmonitored, unbiased release of information about its Powerwall product. The question remains: Why?  

Nevada Newspaper Goes Behind the Wall…to Die

11 Friday May 2012

Posted by in About Reno, Business, Communication, Customer Service, Employee Retention, Ethics, Generational, History, Human Resources, Information Technology, Internet, Print Media, Public Relations, Social Media Relations, Technology, Traditional Media, US History

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

RGJ’s main bunker…entrance in Reno

The Reno Gazette-Journal (RGJ) recently decided to lock themselves behind a wall and it will cost you at least $12/month to see what they have hidden. Does anyone else see the problem with this business model?

Allow me to reconstruct the history of news media in America to understand why this is a death sentence to the RGJ.

In the 1800’s newspapers owned the information world

1700-1900
In the 1700’s, newspapers became the source of community news. These newspapers often portrayed a political view, but were THE source of information in a society where travel was limited and information scarce. Writers and editors often became key figures in the social and political structure as the gatekeepers of what would be printed.

Radio was faster, but newspapers were corporeal

1900’s
The invention of radio and television gave new options to the public on how they accessed news. The radio offered broadcast news that reached more people faster; however, newspapers remained the source of news because it existed in corporeal form. News transmitted on radio waves disappeared if a person wasn’t in front of the radio during the broadcast. Newspapers; however, almost always gave more a more in-depth account of the events.

Television came shortly after radio and added the exciting features of seeing the reporter and moving images of events; however, newspapers continued to be the best source of significant events.

CNN was to newspapers what Wal-Mart was to Mom & Pop stores

1980
CNN was the first real threat to newspapers. It offered news 24/7/365 and it often relayed events in progress. People no longer had to wait for a newspaper’s version that would come the next day. The newspaper still had the corporeal advantage because CNN would eventually move on to the other news while newspapers could be read anytime. Newspapers also still gave more in-depth reporting on local news issues.

1995
It wasn’t until the creation of the Internet that newspapers faced a challenge that would threaten their existence. The public use of the Internet stripped newspapers of almost every advantage they held. News was not only reported, it was discussed and people reacted in real-time. With the development of the Google search engine topics could be accessed and researched at any time anywhere there was Internet access. The news was no longer filtered and limited to what an editor thought people should know, but rather raw information reached individuals who made their own decisions on what was significant to them.

Reporters who spent years in college and thousands of dollars in tuition and books now found themselves competing against bloggers who had no editors to please. Reporters might get the story and accurately report it to their community but in a real-time world their information was just following up to what people already knew. Newspapers have adapted by presenting an online version of the information that will be in the next day’s paper and that has helped writers compete and be read; however, investors want profit and that is the heart of the dilemma.

The Reno Gazette-Journal has decided that they will create demand and increase revenue by limiting access. That is a rational position to take if you have a product that has significant value and demand, but newspapers and their value appeals to a diminishing demographic. Older white males are dying off at an incredibly rapid pace and newspapers have little demand or value to younger, non-white, non-male demographics. How does RGJ expect to gain new readers by charging for access who have free access to local online news through three Reno television news station’s webpages?

There is another problem with RGJ’s decision that may impact the quality of writing. A writer for RGJ has to accept that their audience will be extremely limited. Blogs will exist for decades and are be searchable to anyone in the world. An RGJ reporters work is locked away behind a wall forever. Who wants to dedicate their life to writing and have it unread? Over time writers will have to decide how much damage RGJ is doing to their career by locking their work behind a pay wall. Once the good writers are gone, what value will the Reno Gazette-Journal have to anyone, paying or otherwise?

War Declared on Social Media: Desperate Acts of Traditional Media

02 Wednesday Jun 2010

Posted by in 2020 Enterprise Technologies, About Reno, Branding, Communication, Customer Service, Information Technology, Internet, Management Practices, Public Relations, SEO, Social Interactive Media (SIM), Social Media Relations, Website

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by Paul Kiser

Paul Kiser - CEO 2020 Enterprise Technologies

(NOTE USE AND REPRINT INFORMATION BELOW)

For the most part, the people in the traditional media (newspapers, magazines, TV, etc.)  have seen the tidal wave of Social Media coming for years. They have typically adopted an if-you-can’t-beat-them-join-them strategy. The editors of our local paper have pushed their reporters (from here forward I’ll refer to them as journalists) to use Twitter and to blog in order to keep pace with the millions of reporters online that inform the world of everything from the cute thing their toddler did this week to the world event that everyone will be talking about in tomorrow’s newspaper.

Social Media has given voice to everyone and now journalists are but one voice among many, which is a problem if your living comes from your ability to be paid to have people read your stuff. In the days before blogs and Twitter, publishers and editors had the ability to control who could be heard and who could be silenced, but Social Media took away all their power and at least one publisher is mad as hell and he’s not going to take it anymore. He has declared war! He is going to sue!

The rationale for the suit is legitimate. A certain publisher (let’s call him, Elmer) at a certain Nevada newspaper (let’s call it The Old Conservative Times) has called out the demons (let’s call them lawyers…on second thought, let’s stick with demons) and is going after any website that uses copyrighted material of the The Old Conservative Times. What’s more, Elmer wants everyone else in the traditional media to get on the bandwagon with him.

I agree that anyone who steals an article from another website without crediting or revealing their original source of information is wrong.  If possible, they should also link back to the original source. That’s the way Social Media works. We share information and let our friends, followers, readers know from where we got the information and, in turn, help publicize their work. Journalists, for the most part are professionals, and to steal their work and claim it as your own is unethical.

But that is not what this issue is really about for Elmer and the methods being used by The Old Conservative Times demonstrate that this is not an act of preserving the work of professional journalists. Elmer and his demons have decided to sue first and ask questions…never. Rather than contacting the offender and telling them to remove the copyrighted information, Elmer and his demons are going for the throat and filing suit with the intention of stealing the domain rights of the organization. That’s right, Elmer is using the nuclear option. No warning, just show up in court and turn over everything to Elmer. Freedom of Speech be damned, Elmer is here to tell us what we should think!

I should note that according to Elmer’s blogs he is a conservative. He hates President Barrack Obama and he takes any opportunity to spin a situation to cast a negative light on our President, or Democrats, or the elected government of the greatest nation in the history of the world. It seems about every third blog is pounding home the conservative dribble that proposes hate for our government, hate for our elected leaders, hate for the citizens of Mexico, ….you get the picture.

So Elmer is lashing out at Social Media, which is composed of people who want to be informed, but not by just those who hate, but those who can love, and everyone in between. Elmer wants traditional media to regain control of people’s hearts and minds and this Social Media thing is not acceptable! So Elmer and his demons are not seeking to correct the issue of copyright infringement, which could be done with a phone call or an email, they want to take away the voices of the Social Media, one domain at a time. Elmer also wants all his publishing friends to join him as he strikes a blow against freedom of speech for all and raises a flag on the land of the uninformed.

Hey Elmer, let me know how that works out for you…but don’t quote me, or I’ll sue you.

(Any use or reprint of part or all of this article is expressly ALLOWED for anyone,-except The Las Vegas Review-Journal, its staff, Stephens Media Group, or any affiliates, or any conservative-based organization that has made derogatory remarks about President Barack Obama, Senator Harry Reid, or Speaker Nancy Pelosi,-providing credit is given to Paul Kiser and, if possible, a link to this web address is included with the appearance.)

More blogs