Continuing problems with Tesla 3: Musk doesn’t understand manufacturing

It has always been clear that Musk does not understand high-volume manufacturing. Building rockets is very hard, but building 100,000 cars is very hard for a different reason! His predicted ramp rate was absurd. In the last 6 months, I think he has started to realize this.

Tesla has little chance of hitting its 5,000 weekly output during the fourth quarter. The chief reason: Its current production line can’t build vehicles at that rate unless it runs two 10-hour shifts seven days a week, which is unlikely. impossible.

Source: Tesla | Hiccups Threaten to Slow Model 3 Launch | Industry content from WardsAuto

According to the article, Tesla has also deliberately ignored much of the accumulated wisdom about how to ramp in auto production. That might be OK for his second high-volume vehicle.

More details on Tesla’s ramp plans:

Manufacturing expert says Tesla Model 3 plan to skip beta testing is risky

Tesla now has 2 choices, both bad:

  1. Go ahead and start building and shipping as fast as possible. The result will be multiple problems that require expensive hardware recalls.
  2. Add another 6? months to the schedule to run the as a pilot line for learning, rather than for volume. Expect zero salable output during that period. (As one of the comments said, they can give/sell those cars to employees.)

Reality versus belief, and the American right

Warning: this post is entirely opinion about American politics.

Bret Stephens had an interesting op-ed in the NY Times recently. On first reading, it was great. Then I went through the comments, and realized it was quite one-sided. (He is a conservative, over from the WS Journal.) So I wrote the following letter to the editor.

In his column of Sept. 24 Mr Stephens sharp eye noticed, and sharp tongue castigated, only the left’s fundamental error in today’s discussions: judging arguments based on the speaker’s identity. But even more destructive is the fundamental error found primarily on the right: judging arguments based on the desire to believe them. That Congressman R believes something, no matter how strongly, does not make it true, nor a valid basis for setting policy.

I  am at a university that emphasizes science and engineering, and teaches little about Mr. Stephens’ Great Books. But we  teach our students that objective reality exists, and that it matters.  We base our arguments on empirical evidence. And if evidence is insufficient, we look for more.

Here are a few examples of facts that are somehow viewed as controversial: making contraception and information more available to teenagers reduces unwanted pregnancies, and abortions. (See Colorado for a large-scale proof.) Vaccinations reduce disease. Cutting income taxes of the rich will do little to stimulate the economy when the economy is near full employment. Pumping gases into the atmosphere creates a “greenhouse effect.” There is room to disagree about what actions to take as a result of these facts, but not about the facts themselves.

I have elsewhere argued that America (and other parts of the world) are retreating from Reason back to Faith, reversing the Enlightenment of the 1600s. If this continues, the consequences for our country will be dire. But that is a longer discussion.

Play sound on multiple devices from your Mac

Mac OS simple sound mixer

Ever wanted to play sound through multiple audio devices on your Mac OS X system? It cannot be done with the normal Mac controls, but to my surprise there is a decent sound mixer built into the base Mac OS.

Step by step instructions: Play sound on multiple devices, including Internal Speakers, on OS X | Best Mac Tips

I have this setup for my 90 year old mother, so we can all watch TV at once:

  • HDMI from Mac to our Panasonic TV
  • Headphones plugged into the earphone jack on the Mac
  • Closed captions turned on for TV

The result is that we can turn her volume way up, while we listen over the TV’s internal speakers. The headphones, even at maximum volume, may not be quite loud enough for her. In that case, I will add a $25 earphone amplifier into the system.

Still missing: I cannot find Bluetooth headphones that are loud enough for her.

Second, I don’t know of anything similar for her phone.

Explaining  Negative Electricity Prices 

When my colleagues and I developed the theory of real time electricity prices back in the dark ages (1982), we were amused to see that our equations allowed for the optimal price to be negative. Power companies would pay consumers to use more electricity! At the time, we thought it was a paradoxical case that was unlikely in practice, except possibly in the middle of the night in systems with lots of nuclear units.

Fast forward 30 years, and negative prices are a regular occurrence in real systems, including in Texas and California. And now they are even happing in the middle of the day. But there is still a puzzle: why don’t generators stop generating the moment the price goes negative?

Several blog posts from Berkeley’s great Energy Institute, and my response to one of them, show that real power systems can have a lot of unanticipated phenomena. Take together, these probably explain these apparently strange behaviors.

Source: Is Solar Really the Reason for Negative Electricity Prices? – Energy Institute Blog.   and from Catherine Wolfram, Is the Duck Sinking?
Continue reading

Photovoltaics in Mission Bay neighborhood = 30% wasted

TL;DR In Southern California should put PV on houses and buildings that are far from the coast, because coastal areas are cloudy much of the summer. But the actual pattern is the opposite. I estimate a 30% magnitude of loss. Even my employer, UCSD, has engaged in this foolishness in order to appear trendy.

The bumpiness of this graph shows the effects of coastal weather in August.

Continue reading

Science policy fellowships @ UCSD

For STEM doctoral students at UCSD who have policy interests but are not in social science fields. I have advised several students in this program, and it has been useful for all of them.

Drawing applicants from UC San Diego’s STEM related programs, each year the School of Global Policy and Strategy (GPS) selects three doctoral students from across campus and pairs them with a GPS faculty advisor to explore the policy implications of their dissertation research.

Continue reading