AD #2880 – Tesla Posts Another Profit; Charging Stations Could Earn Carbon Credits; Camcon Develops Cam-less Engine

July 23rd, 2020 at 11:44am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #2880 – Tesla Posts Another Profit; Charging Stations Could Earn Carbon Credits; Camcon Develops Cam-less Engine” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 9:45

0:07 Tesla Posts Another Profitable Quarter
1:03 Charging Stations Could Soon Earn Carbon Credits
1:45 Kia Shows Design Sketch of Production Sonet
2:43 Mitsubishi Updating North American Lineup
3:53 Camcon Develops Cam-less Engine
5:10 JLR Working On Contact-less Touchscreen
6:10 BMW Makes Plastic Rider to Test Racing Motorcycle
7:15 Subaru Facing Low Inventory

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone and Intrepid Control Systems.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

36 Comments to “AD #2880 – Tesla Posts Another Profit; Charging Stations Could Earn Carbon Credits; Camcon Develops Cam-less Engine”

  1. lambo2015 Says:

    Camcon has an interesting product. All this high tech makes some great improvements however it will also continue to make cars disposable. If that system only works for 10 or 12 years I would bet it will cost more to fix than the car is worth.

  2. Kit Gerhart Says:

    1. Formula 1 cars use pneumatically operated valves. That seems to be good for engines that run at 15,000 rpm, but only need to last about 4 hours.

  3. Buzzerd Says:

    I think you can some up the Mitsubishi line up with just saying ” they have upgraded all their models with blah and more blah.” I take it they are getting sold mostly because of cheap prices.

  4. Roger Says:

    In the first place Tesla, as a electric only vehicle company should never have been given EV Credits, let alone allowed to sell them. EV Credits should only be used by makers of internal gas engine vehicles as rewards for increasing the efficiency of the vehicle.

  5. Roger Says:

    You think that JLR predictive touch will be as good [not] and annoying as the auto spell correct on my cell phone?

  6. Kit Gerhart Says:

    5 Hopedully, it will be possible to turn off the predictive touch, like you can turn off the predictive spell on a phone.

  7. lambo2015 Says:

    4 On one hand I agree with you that a sole EV manufacturer shouldn’t be given carbon credits that were created really for the sole purpose of preventing some manufacturers from building crap no one would want. Like Ferrari that didnt really have anything fuel efficient would have had to build some econobox thing to offset their credits. Instead they buy them from makers like Tesla and then roll that cost into the gas guzzling cars they sell. So other manufacturers probably like Tesla getting them as it makes more credits available.
    So the other side of the argument is the carbon credits was to create an incentive to lower carbon emissions. Tesla does that and thus should benefit from achieving the goal. They don’t need the credits and rather than be subsidised by the government they cash in on selling those credits. The money comes from the market and not tax payers.

  8. Ziggy Says:

    Sean, what is the difference between the “rotary actuators” and a cam on a shaft, or camshaft? Your story stated “For decades automakers have dreamed of controlling engine valves electronically instead of using a camshaft”, I guess they will have to keep on dreaming, or am I missing something about your story?

  9. XA351GT Says:

    Roger @ #4 Brace yourself , you will soon feel the wrath of the mighty Tesla cheerleader for daring to say a bad word about the mighty T. I agree with you and said before it was not really helping the environment as much as a way to monetize nothing. Tesla and other EVs selling credits to companies that make higher polluting vehicles made no sense. It would be like taking money from your right pocket and putting it in the left. In the end all you did was move it around and not really change a thing.

  10. ChuckGrenci Says:

    8, Ziggy, I was thinking similarly but what I think what these rotary actuators offer is independent cams to each intake and exhaust valve so that they are more flexible than even the current variable cams that are used in some of today’s engines. But you’re right, what was presented still relied on a cam, increased complexity (maybe more than they are worth) and probably aren’t the answer to the question that was originally asked.

  11. ChuckGrenci Says:

    9, XA, thanks for your post. I was trying to reply and got writers block on how to express what you stated clearly. Buying credits takes money away from R&D for those same companies that could use it to make more efficient vehicles. I think that the sentiment is noble but the system flawed.


    7) Just pointing out that the money is still coming from the tax payers. The “market” that is paying for the credits is formed exclusively by tax payers. Calling a tax payer “the market” does not change the fact that they are still a tax payer.

  13. rick Says:

    is the camcon cam-less system ready for prime time? market ready available now?

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    12. With the credits, you pay more, or less for a vehicle, depending on what you buy. Since Tesla is selling the credits, their cars cost less than they would otherwise, or the company would be out of business. FCA products and some others cost more, because they are the ones buying the credits.

  15. cwolf Says:

    I don’t understand why Tesla gets carbon credits in the first place. From what I have read, the gov’t set a $/ton of greenhouse gas emissions. Companies lower what is owed by reducing their emissions either by switching fuels or by adopting new technologies. But, since Tesla inherently has low emissions and any reductions are small creates the question;” why do they qualify!”
    I also read some believe Tesla has a business problem. As they report to have sold $15M in credit sales in its 10-Q filing with the SEC, they did not report the $200M in non- emissions credits. At the time, doing so cut their losses by that amount or more. And as such has an effect on stock prices as well.
    I know so little about how this works, but I not sure if Tesla isn’t bending the rules to use them to their advantage… perhaps deceitfully so.

  16. lambo2015 Says:

    14 If our government was serious about Carbon emissions they would just get rid of the credits all together and just throw a tax on the vehicles that do not meet the set standard. Just like the already gas guzzler tax.

    Yep the price of the trucks and SUVs would go up and suddenly the fuel efficient cars would be cheap. But you wouldn’t have this buying of credits and the market would dictate what people want. Automakers would no longer be building crap that they cant sell to suffice some carbon credit scheme.

  17. RS Says:

    Explaining the technology as “electromagnetic rotary actuators” is probably a buzzword. I bet this is a sort of “drive by wire” in which each valve is driven by an electronic pulse that would control timing and lift. Anything mechanical would not really be an improvement on the trusty old camshaft.

  18. Kit Gerhart Says:

    17 Does anyone here have an idea how much power it takes to turn a camshaft? Unless there is a lot of friction, I’d think you’d get back a lot of the energy used to open a valve, when the spring pushes the back side of a cam lobe.

  19. Larry D. Says:

    Filled the tank again, Diesel prices varied widely between stations, the speedway was 2.159, as was the KRoger I tanked, but Mobil a block away was 2.59 or even 2.69. Obviously some stations have to much diesel in their tanks and others too little. AND with my $0.40 plus 2% discount, I paid the lowest diesel price in 4 years, $1.742 a gallon.

    More importantly, after July 4 and Bastille Day July 14, today was the biggest holiday of them all. Instead of letting you all go home early, I will allow you to do so tomorrow, so you can have a longer weekend, and ponder all of Tesla’s Triumphs.

    Happy Birthday to me! (also from over 20 friends so far)

  20. Larry D. Says:

    4 UTTER NONSENSE, Hope you never become a JUDGE of anything What utter garbage!!!!!!

  21. Larry D. Says:

    7 Do not encourage the clueless fool!!!!

    If you take a dump in frongt of the Supreme Court, you pay a FINE. SIMILARLY if you pollute with your car.

    The problem is ONLY cars pay the price, in the form of carbon credit purchases, and NOT furnaces, and especially LAWN MOWERS and other VERY polluting widely used appliances or whatevers.

  22. Larry D. Says:

    16 No, if they were serious and FAIR about emissions, they would punish ALL emitters, like the god-awful 100 million LAWN MOWERS and not saddle the whole burden on SOME polluters. BUT do not expect intelligence in the CORRUPT Congress.

  23. Larry D. Says:

    15 bEcause they build CLEAN car, and DIRTY makers like FORD who prefer to POLLUTE and SHORTEN YOUR LIFE, (if you had an ounce of brains u would know) should PAY for their pollution.

    PAY AS YOU GO, USER FEE, it;s all the same idea.

    100% proper to have carbon credits AND punish the dirty makers. NOT a handout! NOT a tax. A FAIR system, BUT should ALSO apply to OTHER polluters (lawnmowers etc)

  24. Kit Gerhart Says:

    22 et. al. Are you suggesting that everyone keep a goat or two to keep the grass down, rather than using mowers? More seriously, yeah, lawn mowers are have high HC and probably other emissions, for their size, but they are much better than they once were. I remember mowing the lawn as a kid with a two stroke Lawn Boy that used 16/1 gas/oil mix, and on calm, summer evenings, a ~12 acre field next to the house would sometimes be completely covered with a blue cloud, from that one little engine. Not only are the two stroke mowers gone, but also, the other mowers are much cleaner. They still don’t have catalytic converters, though, even the riders with 20 hp engines, and they still have carburetors. The new riders are much cleaner, though, than my 43 year old one. Probably the dirtiest new machines, as far as producing bad emissions to breath, and maybe smog causing emissions, are string trimmers, edgers, etc., some of which still use two stroke engines.

  25. Kit Gerhart Says:

    As far as CO2 emissions, lawn mowers are trivial contributors compared to road vehicles and airplanes, but they could be much more efficient. They use 20 hp engines for mowers that only need 10 hp, and they’d use less gas with a smaller engine. I guess there is a horsepower race in lawn mowers.

  26. Larry D. Says:

    Hey John and Sean

    Since many here seem to have no clue as to what exactly carbon credits are and why they are 100% fair and appropriate to be given to ANY Company which produces green vehicles, maybe you can get some decent economist (maybe one your friends at CAR) that knows about them, to give a dumbed-down presentation preferably on this show some time soon.

    Enjoy the rest of your 23rd of Larry Weekend!

  27. lambo2015 Says:

    24 The newer EV mowers are pretty good. My brother has a 48V push mower for his suburban home and can mow the whole yard with a single charge which is good cause he doesn’t have a second battery. He does have a pretty good sized yard too for a subdivision.
    I fully expect my next push mower to be electric. I already ditched the gas weed-wacker for a cordless electric and it works great. Much quieter too.

  28. Kit Gerhart Says:

    27. I have an acre lawn where I spend summers in Indiana, and have the 1977 John Deere I’ve mentioned. I use a ~10 year old push mower for trimming. An electric push mower would be great for that, and wouldn’t be temperamental about starting like the gas one if it’s sat a few weeks. I don’t have a week whacker; I do that kind of trimming with old fashioned manual shears. If I ever get a new rider, I’ll look into electric. They probably now exist, that would easily do my one acre on a charge.

    My condo in Florida is mowed using a big, really noisy ZTR, with gas weed whackers and walk behind mowers also used.

  29. ChuckGrenci Says:

    Quite a few of the new lawn mowers have changed over to overhead valve engines (as opposed to flathead). With increase in power per displacement, economy as well as reduced pollution has resulted. I have also switched some of my yard equipment to battery electric but this is mostly because of gasoline issues rotting out the innards of the small engine carburetors and fuel feed lines (even using Stabil, etc. for help with the ethanol in gasoline). I have an electric weed eater and blower that perform fairly well; quiet and powerful enough, though probably for professional all day/heavy duty users they may not make the grade. I will though stick to my gasoline push mower for my needs.

  30. Kit Gerhart Says:

    29. The newer lawn tractors are also going to two cylinder engines. I don’t know if that is for “bragging rights,” or because they might be smoother, though there is little vibration from the flat head, single cylinder Kohler engine in my antique. For efficiency, a single cylinder would be better for mower engines typically ~600 cc. More cylinders are better for high rpm, like with “sporty” motorcycles, but mower engines typically run 3500-4000 rpm. My single cylinder KLR650 motorcycle has a power peak at 7000 rpm, and red line of 7500.


    I like my electric yard tools including my 56V self propelled mower. The mower is particularly good because the extra torque from the electric helps with tall and/or wet grass. I have had my electric tools for 4 years now and have never worried about any type of maintenance. There are electric riding mowers out there but I don’t know how long the charge lasts. My yard isn’t really big enough to warrant a rider.

    I can see why commercial companies would not go electric given that they are using the tools for 8-12 hours per day and no ability to recharge in remote locations. Also likely no room to store all the spare batteries needed in their trailers given all the equipment that they haul around.

  32. Ukendoit Says:

    I had an electric mower for a small yard in the city in the 90s. It did fairly well, acceptable for a small yard, but the battery only lasted one season. I have more recently replaced all my other yard tools (string & hedge trimmers, blower) with electric but still use an OHV riding mower occasionally supplemented by my hand/reel mower. As good as battery tech is getting, I could see getting an electric mower again for the next mower.

  33. lambo2015 Says:

    Kind of surprised Tesla hasn’t tapped into that market. Seems they could do well selling EV mowers. I mean if people will pay $4k for a small John Deere, They would probably pay more for a Tesla EV mover.
    With as many people that have carb issues in the north from their gas equipment sitting all winter I bet people would love not messing with gas anymore. Plus an EV mower makes much more sense. Something you use once a week and can trickle charge for days before you need it again.

  34. Kit Gerhart Says:

    It seems that the small, diaphragm carburetors on weed eaters, etc., are a constant hassle, but the float carburetor on my 43 year old John Deere has never been worked on.

    32. Was the battery in the ’90s lead-acid, or maybe NiMH? If lead-acid, the deep discharges wouldn’t have been good for it. If NiMH, if it had ever been completely discharged, reverse charging a cell or two, it would have been damaged. The service life of lithium batteries in current lawn equipment will be determined by the same things that determine life of batteries in electric cars, laptops, and phones. The batteries will last a lot longer if only the “middle” ~80% of the charge-discharge cycle is used.

  35. Ukendoit Says:

    Kit, I think it was a NiMH, but I don’t remember the specifics of it, like the make or voltage. Some of the new mowers have 40v-80v batteries, so they should be even more powerful, last longer per charge, and have a longer life.

  36. Bob Wilson Says:

    I used to wonder about Tesla staff turnover. But Rivian has revealed there are active recruiting programs to peal away Tesla employees.

    In the 1970s and 80s, I remember the ‘head hunter’ calls.