Forums

Pricing on Model X?

Pricing on Model X?

For the Model S, those that have a reservation prior to year-end will not be subject to the price increase that takes effect on Jan 1. Is there any similar advantage to making a Model X reservation before year-end? Or is the only advantage, at this point, that you get a spot earlier in line?

Solarwind | 13. März 2013

@ SamFisher
I think Elon and Tesla are doing what has to be in order to make a viable company. You remember the cellphone evolution, remember Apple computer . In order for new innovation companies to make it and build the necessary infrastructure they have to depend on vain, early adopters to help pay the cost. The people that buy Viper's and boats, and will pay for quality and innovation.

Regarding your volcano statement and global warm, you swallowed the hook, line and sinker. (sorry couldn't resist) Way to much Fox New. You do not need to be a scientist or genius to figure that one out, just common sense. Volcanos were here before man and the world was in balance. If it took one Billion years to store carbon that got put back in the atmosphere in 100 years, that can't be good. If the population of earth was in balance at one Billion then 16 Billion due to the exploitation of oil is probably not a plus. If one pint of oil burned in your garage will kill you then 85 million barrels a day in the atmospher can't be good. If the ice is melting then the earth is warming. If oil is nonrenewable then drilling more, more expensive holes will not reduce the price. If you have foreign bank accounts, it is not to create jobs, it is to dodge taxes.

Brian H | 13. März 2013

Solarwind;
The CO2 (not "carbon", dum-dum) was up over 7000 ppm as a result of volcanoes at one point. The plants and phytoplankton had a long piggy field day, and gradually converted it into chalk, limestone, and oil, leaving barely enough to live on. We have barely begun to restore a bit of what they need and love. They're egging us on, eagerly hoping to get some back into circulation.

Solarwind | 14. März 2013

Brian, Brian, Brian, CO2 is a byproduct of burning carbon, (fossil fuel) CO2 is only part of the problem with burning fossil fuel. The naysayers don't mention the earth's oxygen level has dropped .2% in the last 20 years, doesn't sound like much but when it gets into the 19's everybody will be packing oxygen. You say the plants need CO2 that is true but the CO2 is not readily available to the plants and we are applying more and more fertilizer (oil product) to keep our yields up. (I'm a retired farmer) In our area we are loosing thousands of acres of forest to pine beetle, never there before. You cannot depend on Faux News or adds on the internet. You must look around see what is happening and THINK FOR YOUR SELF!!
It is said on this forum that there is 3000 years of oil in the middle east. Come On, the only way that is possible is if we stopped using oil tomorrow and that's not going to happen.
Oil has made it possible for people to have a high standard of living. The higher the standard of living the more those people are willing to lie and spend money to keep it that way. Fossil fuel has been borrowing from the environment sense it was put to use. If we stopped using oil tomorrow it would be 25 years (estimate) before we saw a deacceleration in the climate change. Payment on this debt is coming due and the National debt won't even be a pimple on you butt compared to this one. The high rollers and naysayers are willing to let the great grand kids pick up the tab, so they can keep rolling in the $$$$$. If the environment debt was being serviced the oil companies would be the poorest in the world not the richest.
Elon is my hero! He is a very smart man trying to do something positive for posterity and the world. He even inspired the car I now drive the Chevy Volt. Bob Lutz of GM looked at what Elon was doing and said we can't let a little startup Co. like that get ahead of us. I will be supporting Tesla any way I can including buying when I can.
As far as the name calling; Whatever turns your screw!

ian t.wa.us | 14. März 2013

Solarwind, You're picking the wrong person to argue with on human caused (CO2) global warming. You have been warned. ;-)

Brian H | 14. März 2013

Groan. There is only about 4% of 1% of the atmosphere which is CO2. About 20% is oxygen. You could re-double the CO2 level about 6X and that would drop the oxygen level by 2% (assuming you mean 2% of the total atmosphere, and not 2% of 20%).

Your misunderstandings and lack of numeracy skills are so deep it is pointless to discuss the issue. End.

LeonardD | 14. März 2013

I thought I would be reading about pricing... But this is great, because, now that's what I call entertainment!

Solarwind | 15. März 2013

@ gonesklian

Thanks for the warning, I have learned common sense is not common. I'm out :-)

mthomtech | 15. März 2013

This thread is very interesting ... and as most have pointed out, fairly absurd.

In my opinion, Tesla is the first company with the RIGHT business models on EV's, which seems to be evidenced by their success so far.

The Model S or X are not the Leaf, Prius or Volt, and it's crazy to compare them to standard counterparts. The technology is superior, the overall features are superior ... it really is a better car. And that's the whole model ... build a care nice enough to command a higher price, so that the economics work for Tesla, and allow for future production at lower price points for average consumers.

That said, the economics are not bad, and for what you get, I think priced competitively.

For me ... I wasn't following EV's at all (my wife does have a hybrid), but I was always more on the SamFisher side of things ... economics didn't make sense to me. Funny, but the NYTimes article originally is how I started looking more at Tesla ...

So the CO2 emissions, the global warming stuff ... none of that matters that much to me (mostly because I believe man has a much smaller impact than we think we do ... we always have a big ego thinking that we cause so much). But ... I'm definitely a techie ... and I love the technology of EV's, fuel cells, and other no/low pollution options. And politically, I'd love to reduce our dependence on oil.

What I love about Tesla, is it is really leading edge ... it's found the right place in the market, and it really is driving change. And the cars are so freaking awesome! I can't wait to own a Model X! I commend Tesla on breaking through the barriers that it seems every other EV manufacturer has gotten caught up in (trying to satisfy the SamFisher customer first) and failing miserably. Tesla is the first real evidence in my mind, that EV will make it and now is the time.

ian t.wa.us | 15. März 2013

+1 mthomtech

I hadn't paid much attention to Tesla until the Motortrend COTY award. At least the S anyway.

Sure I'd heard of the Roadster and thought "Wow! That's cool!" But it was out of my price range at the time and still is out of my functionality range (i.e. not enough space to haul all the other toys I like to use like bikes and skis and whatnot). I am a bit of a car guy though so I always notice them (when not mistaken for a Lotus or vis versa) ;-).

With the COTY award though I really took notice and with the X, and then the Superchargers. That's when I realized "Hey this EV thing could really work for me!"

Now I'm really excited to get one. My wife is going to take some more convincing though. She's much more frugal and an S or X would be a bit more than double what we've previously spent on a car (I'd want it loaded of course! ;-)). She does want our next vehicle to be something larger, though, I'm not totally sure why as we don't have children. The S would be more than large enough in my opinion. Although the all wheel drive, while not necessary, would be nice to have the couple times a year it snows here in Seattle or we travel to the snow.

Anyway, I agree that Tesla's pricing strategy is a great way for them to get the EV off the ground. I'm hoping they make it work long enough for us to get one!

Cheers!

Brian H | 15. März 2013

gone skiin';
Interesting, you're the first I've heard explicitly say the MT COTY award piqued their interest enough to investigate. Anyone else?

CleOlivia | 16. März 2013

I agree with both sides, because though Tesla X pricing doesn't make economic sense, it's only because petroleum gas is greatly under-priced.

goneskiian
I know that global impact of CO2 emissions is negligible on geologic scale, however when we look to all known planets, suitable atmospheres for supporting our life forms are extremely rare. Earth itself has supported human life for a relatively short time.

Climactic scientific research has developed only several human generations.

Let's say we make a fabulous flea market find; buying a a personally useful and highly attractive yet bargain priced antique. It may be a worthless knockoff, or worth a fortune, but wouldn't you treat it with care, even before having it appraised?

Common and economic sense says don't spew poison into your breathing supply. Without studying the process by which CO2 dissipates, interacts, and is consumed, I think it unwise to assume it costs what it takes to pump petroleum out of the ground and then distribute it.

For me, it's as simple as the horrific odor of exhaust. The cost of disgust, shame and guilt at spewing that nastiness while traveling long distances with my large family, may be eliminated by driving the only vehicle that can do so emission-free. Tesla X!

Brian H | 16. März 2013

Cle;
your thinking isn't bad, but will improve when you distinguish "poison" from CO2. Did you know...in higher CO2 concentrations, plants' leaves need fewer stomata to take in all they need? This then means they lose and take in less water -- so not only do they become more productive (grow bigger and faster), their water use is far more efficient, and they become drought-tolerant.

Ultimately, everything you eat was built up out of CO2 and water. It's good stuff. Far, far from being a poison.

alcassfast | 16. März 2013

@Sam F.
No oil/filter changes, no transmission flushes, no tune-ups, no exhaust system maintenance, no radiator flushes, no gasoline.

So, add this to your mathematical calculations and factor in that we won't be killing as many people or animals to get oil and could me making the fresh air and water last a little longer.

And, you can park your Model S in your living room, just like Batman.

alcassfast | 16. März 2013

...could "be" making...

ian t.wa.us | 17. März 2013

CleOlivia and alcassfast - You both make great points. Thanks for contributing.

I wonder if SamFisher will return to enlighten us with his brilliant math skills and comprehensive understanding of Tesla's business plan some more. Probably too busy installing an 80 mile battery and electric motor in a Chevy S10.

Brian H - I'm sure there are others. Probably quite a few that are already (or soon to be) driving their S's!

Solarwind | 17. März 2013

@CleOlivia
You are correct, it is always better to keep what you know works then count on a pie in the sky. Common sense makes sense.

Just watched science channel show about dinosaurs. On there they showed a test done by the japan scientists on plants in our atmosphere and plants in higher CO2 atmosphere. The plants grew bigger but were all yellow and brown, had less then half the nutrition of the plants grown in our atmosphere, there was no mention of water intake reduction. CO2 is a big blanket and will suffocate our planet.

I hear things all the time like, "I don't think we (people) make as big of a impact on earth as we think we do." What does that mean? I can't think of one thing on earth we don't impact, most of it negative.
If doing the correct is obvious, why do the opposite? Money against your grand kids life.

A couple of old sayings come to mind. Garbage in garbage out. Figures don't lie but liars figure.

anton.arnesen | 18. März 2013

As a person that bikes forth and back to work every day, I look forward to a future where the ICE cars are replaced by hybrids and EV’s. The EV technology should in fact be so heavily subsidized in the years to come, that all of today’s obstacles with the technology is minimized (battery weight, charging etc.), so that the price of the car is on equal terms to an ICE car.

Unfortunately, there are only a few countries in the world where a heavy subsidy is possible (Norway, Denmark).

mthomtech | 22. März 2013

There's no doubt about it, the Model X is a very cool car and has something for all sides, whether you are really that concerned about the CO2 or not.

Cle - I agree with the general pollution control. I don't buy that we'll have as much impact on climate as many do ... you are right about just the general avoidance of all the other smog and pollution. Definitely a worthwhile pursuit.

Speaking of pollution - what about noise pollution! One of my favorite things about the hybrid is how quiet it is in EV mode.

goneskiian - it's going to take me awhile to convince the wife too ... no deposit for me yet ... but I'll keep trying :)

djb | 04. Mai 2013

I think a lot of people will buy the Tesla brand for the absolute cool factor. Have you seen the vehicle? It is awesome. The fact that it is all electric just makes it so much better.

hermannr | 13. Mai 2013

I have absolutely no concern about the Co2 levels in the atmosphere, the oceans will take care of that...climate change has been going on for as long as the earth has existed...IMHO: puny little humans cannot effect it in any appreciable degree...

But, that being said, I love the idea of an AWD vehicle that can go over 50 miles on a charge. Where I live I MUST have AWD minimum, true 4X4 would be better. Other wise I can go nowhere in the winter. I already have a Polaris EV, and love not having to worry about gas. Just plug it back in and it is ready to go next day.

I presently have an Audi A6 Quattro, and it appears that the Tesla X will be about that size. Perfect for me. We live 20 miles from a small town, and 40 miles from a place big enough that it has a Wal-Mart or Home Depot, so 100+ mile range is imperative. We live 250 miles from our children, so that is even better. The number of miles we drive is generally limited except our weekly trips to town, and occasional trips to visit the kids and to go to church with our old congregation where the kids still live.

So, how to justify the price? you do not look at the total cost of the vehicle minus the cost of operation. You look at the investment cost of ownership, plus depreciation, plus the battery cost (I plan on this being my last car purchase...I'm retired) less the cost of the savings in gas or Diesel. (if Audi would only bring the A8 over with the 4.3L diesel... oh my)

This is assuming the fit and finish will be in the same class as the Audi A8...

All purchases are made with funds that Could be earning; or through Debt, that has a direct cost. If your investments earn you 5% on average, your $80,000(est)investment will cost you $4000 a year in earnings not received, or in something else you can no longer use those funds for. If your investments earn 10%, then that opportunity cost would be $8,000 a year. If you have to borrow the funds, the cost of the debt is the opportunity cost of the funds used to pay that debt and interest.... all, plus depreciation.

The savings will be with the difference between the cost of the batteries verse the cost of the fuel that was not consumed. It would appear, if you are a high mileage driver your savings would be much better than if you are a low mileage driver like I am these days. Back when I was driving 50k miles a year or more, the Tesla would have made me money.

Compare those numbers to the same analysis of an acceptable alternative, then you will see what the cost of the Tesla will actually be.

zhengst0905 | 01. Juni 2013

It's just hard to estimate the value of living guilt-free. Driving EVs you no long feel guilty about getting poor kids from the Midwest killed while trying to kill the poor bastards in the Mideast; or feel guilty about feeding the corporation beasts who are corrupting the American politics and democracy; or feel guilty about contributing to warming up an already over-heated planet, which in turn has been driving countless species to extinction, has caused ever more catastrophic natural disasters, about to release huge amount of methane from sea bed and perma frostfrost, and will raise up sea level to wipe out island nations and coastal cities.

With the current EV adoption rate, these things can't be stopped. But at least we no longer contribute to the problems. Years later, when confronted by your grandchildren or ready for the Judgment Day, at least you can say I tried and did my part.

So give me your number. How much value that could count for?

Brian H | 01. Juni 2013

$0. They're all ideological delusions.

zhengst0905 | 02. Juni 2013

To Brian H:
Obviously you are one of those people who never went to school. If you ever did, you should know that when you have the word "all" in a statement, that statement is most probably wrong. This is one of the tricks to deal with multiple selection questions on tests.
I was amazed by your spelling though. Spelling check must be working well.

zhengst0905 | 02. Juni 2013

When you give out a short statement like that, it's lazy people's way of saying: "I don't agree with you. But I don't know why."

ian t.wa.us | 02. Juni 2013

Trust me. He does know why. Go read the "Man made. We're screwed thread" if you want to see a full explanation.

westmich | 08. Juni 2013

2 threads here make no sense at all--it is very simple to me:

a. Why would someone spend so much on a Tesla X when they could buy a Dodge Journey for so much less?

Well, why do people buy ANY vehicle for more than the Journey if it has comparable size, work caoability, etc.? Not everyone buys vehicles -or anything else for that matetr- for the same reasons as you do. Is it OK for someone to have other car-buying criteria than you? Why would someone buy a house overlooking the beach when it costs so much? Why would I buy fresh salmon when there is cheaper food with good nutritional value? If someone has 100k to spend on a car, they can choose between any number of vehicles and they may choose a Tesla. Good for them, they like it better. So what? If the Tesla is not yet for you based on how you choose your vehicles, buy something else. But it is a self-centered non-sequitor to impose your car-selection criteria onto everyone else.

b. Are gas engines more harmful than the Tesla? Well, you can do all the calculations you want to about car emissions and cow farts, but there is no way you will ever, ever take into account all elements at work in maintaining the Earth's ability to sustain life as it has for our known history. We know what we know and we don't know what we don't. Ice caps are melting, all heck has broken loose in other ways, and people will not all agree on the causes. You have your science and I have mine, and they become more like defending religions than honest dialog. I am pretty sure of this: have a picnick and fire up a Journey and a Tesla so the exhaust blows toward the gathering. Then give people there the option to have one car leave and one stay. Better yet, park the Tesla or the Journey in a garage, close all the doors, turn on the car and sit there for a few hours. Then the Tesla owners and the Journey owners can meet for a beer and discuss the experience.

ian t.wa.us | 08. Juni 2013

Well said westmich.

ppape | 11. Juni 2013

+1 Very well said Westmich!

Skotty | 11. Juni 2013

Re: "puny little humans cannot effect it in any appreciable degree..."

If you don't think humans can affect the environment in any appreciable way, try looking up information on the Aral Sea.

Re: "everything you eat was built up out of CO2 and water. It's good stuff. Far, far from being a poison."

As with most things, it's only okay in moderation. If you look up information on health concerns for CO2 gas concentrations, you will find that high levels of CO2 is hazardous for humans regardless of O2 levels. Negative side effects begin around 10K ppm with death possible around 100K ppm. Of course, global warming isn't about direct health affects, but overall environmental affects. At what point does excess CO2 become detrimental. Or perhaps more poignant, at what point does the effects of excess CO2 become more problematic than the challenges of trying to control it's levels? The point being, it's not an argument about whether or not too much CO2 is bad; it's an argument about how much is too much. While 400 ppm is a long ways from 100K ppm, clearly there is a tipping point somewhere, because at 100K ppm we would all go unconcious and die.

Re: "My WAG is that about 25-30% of those buying it never contemplated buying a car in this price range before, and about half of those are squeezing their budgets hard to handle it, in ways they would never dream of doing for ICE cars."

Back closer to on topic, I believe this little nugget from Brian H is right on the money. It describes my wife and I perfectly. We have never contemplated buying a car in this price range before (it's about 2x the cost of what we have ever considered before), but we are now, and we are squeezing our budget for it.

Brian H | 11. Juni 2013

Except the ice caps are not melting. Antarctica is icier than ever, and current northern sea ice is higher than the last 6 years. Meanwhile, spoiled brats everywhere are dissing the source of their own easy lifestyles.

XMikeX | 11. Juni 2013

Three things:

Somebody REALLY loves his Dodge Journey R/T. I wonder how that would change if the exhaust came out the center of his steering wheel.

My Model X will cost slightly more than all the cars I have ever owned COMBINED. Looking forward to it.

If gasoline was FREE, I would buy a Tesla.

quentinD31 | 12. Juni 2013

Okay, Antarctica is icier than ever, but its "expansion" is not proportional to the Arctic's decrease. The fact that the Arctic is losing its ice while Antarctica is gaining ice is due to the fact that an increase in temperatures affects the northern hemisphere much more than the same increase does to the southern hemisphere as high(er) temperatures are normal down there.

LeonardD | 13. Juni 2013

Quite a few people have asked how I could spend as much on a car as my Model X will likely cost. My reply is that if I combine the cost of my current vehicle plus gas, and repairs, the cost of the Model X is not much more (Than what I have spent on my F150 FX4) Maintenance is a little more, but the I currently spend about the same per month on fuel as I would be spending on annual service.

cloroxbb | 14. Juni 2013

@leonard

Are you saying you spend $600/month on fuel in the F150 or $50?

Brian H | 14. Juni 2013

Sea ice is floating, by definition, and has no effect on sea level.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/sea-ice-page/

quentinD31 | 14. Juni 2013

Who ever mentioned sea levels?

rrc | 18. Juni 2013

To SamFisher (March 10, 2013)...I'm trading in my Honda Fit for a Tesla Model S. By my calculations, with very conservative estimates, the total cost of ownership for my new Model S will be less than that of the alternative of continuing to make car payments on my 2010 Fit and exchanging it for another ICE car after the cost of repairs gets too high.

Any way I slice and dice the numbers (with the exception of assuming that electricity prices will increase while the cost of gasoline at the pump will decrease over time), my soon-to-be new Model S comes out ahead, financially speaking, compared to any other reasonable alternative (including keeping my little Honda Fit).

Brian H | 18. Juni 2013

remyco;
Sounds interesting. Have you looked at and commented at teslarumors.com/teslanomics? Similar conclusions. "Can you afford NOT to buy a Tesla?"

Siddhartha | 19. Juni 2013

Hey SamFisher,

Here are some thoughts. When figuring ROI on an electric vehicle it's all about the variables. The key one being how much do you drive a year. You used 12K. I personally drive 40K. Your equation doesn't work - mine does.

The days when the price of gas goes down substantially are over. Yes yes yes, new resources are being discovered but they are always more expensive to recover and with emerging countries like China, demand will outstrip any growth in supply.

I think the issue of battery replacement is silly. First of all, when you go to buy a Suburban nobody says "well ya know, in ten years you're gonna have at replace that transmission and its gonna cost ya 4-6 grand." Batteries will last that long and the only thing we know for sure is that they will cost far less to replace in ten years than they would today.

The primary keys to electric vehicles taking off are 1. Driving down the initial cost. 2. Having the refueling infrastructure in place. 3. Range 4. It needs to work in larger vehicles - SUV's.

Great strides are being made in all of these areas and big oil is and will continue to fight progress every step of the way.

BTW, it should be mentioned that Consumer Reports reviewed the S model and found it to be the best vehicle they've ever reviewed! EVER! In any category!!

ian t.wa.us | 19. Juni 2013

I love it that you are all still responding to Mr. SamFisher. Hopefully he's still lurking.

ian t.wa.us | 19. Juni 2013

Oh yeah, excellent points remyco and Siddhartha!

Cheers!

zhengst0905 | 19. Juni 2013

To: Brian H | June 11, 2013
Re: "Except the ice caps are not melting. Antarctica is icier than ever, and current northern sea ice is higher than the last 6 years."

Sorry, can't help it, but where did that claim come from? Did you watch the movie "Chasing Ice"? That should give you some other perspective. Also if the ice is not melting, why would people expect to revise the trading routes to go through the Arctic?

Here's just a source out of too many:
http://www.businessinsider.com/sea-ice-loss-shorter-arctic-trade-routes-...

Brian H | 20. Juni 2013

At the moment it's true. That movie is a laughable propaganda piece.

http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/observation_i...

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png

The trade route expectations might or might not come to pass. The North East Passage (near Russia) is the most likely, for a little while each summer.

In a way, the whole issue is bogus. Sea ice has no effect on sea level, and the Arctic has been clear several times in the last millennium or two. So what? An advantage, if anything.

zhengst0905 | 21. Juni 2013

Brian H:

Obviously you didn't see the movie.

The graph in your first link comes from data between 2007 and 2013. Ice does overall look expanded over those years. But if you check other charts in the same website with data between 1978 and 2013 (3.5 decades vs. 0.5 decade), the trend is clearly down, with an average shrinking rate of 4 to 5% per decade:

http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/total-icearea...

http://arctic-roos.org/observations/satellite-data/sea-ice/month08

The temporary upward trending between 2007 and 2013 coincides with the global recession during which time global fossil fuel consumption dipped for a while before coming back up.

This perfectly supports the correlation between fossil fuel consumption and ice shrinking. And cherry-picking data never really works.

zhengst0905 | 21. Juni 2013

Brian H:

You know what's really laughable? That you tried to use the DSIDC graph to prove your point that "Antarctica is icier than ever":

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/S_timeseries.png

Yes, the graph shows "Antarctic sea ice extent" increased in 2012 and 2013. But the sea ice extent is defined as "area of ocean with at least 15% sea ice" in the chart. So when you see more ice floating on the surface of the sea, it means only one thing, that those ices broke off from the Antarctic continent as a result of the increased temperature.

So Antarctica is far from icier. It's freaking breaking apart, for crying out loud.

Brian H | 22. Juni 2013

Yawn. Those are the standard stats and ways of assessing ice coverage. Total world sea ice is up by 135,000 sq km over baseline at the moment.

Antarctica is in the middle of its winter, and accumulating ice fast, as usual this season.

Just to give you a sense of scale, it would take about 3,000 years to melt the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets at about 8° higher. And world temps are on the way down, not up.

zhengst0905 | 22. Juni 2013

Don't know what your gibberish is about.

You can't even respond to my points. Just jamming the cyber space with non-relevant claims doesn't really prove your point, if there is any.

Do every one a favor, just tell us how much they pay you for spreading baseless lies on EV forums. $8 an hour? $0.01 a word?

Temperature on the way down, not up, my a$$! What planet are you on? What century are you in? And what species have you evolved from?

jk2014 | 22. Juni 2013

Will someone pro/con global warming tell what the the price of an awd Model x will be? I need to know soon so I can plan to drive through mud slides and over melting melting glaciers to get to Brian's house in burnaby to save him...

AlMc | 22. Juni 2013

So.....Bringing the discussion back to the OP's topic.....Does anyone have any idea about pricing on the Model X?

JimmyJ | 23. Juni 2013

Solarwind:

You said,

" If one pint of oil burned in your garage will kill you then 85 million barrels a day in the atmospher can't be good."

In what way?

Let's take an average, 20ft by 20ft garage, with a 10ft ceiling. That is 4000 cubic feet, or 113.25 cubic meters. If 1 pint oil burned per 113.25 cubic meters is the lethal dose, then how bad is 85,000,000 barrels in the atmosphere?

85,000,000 barrels is 28,560,000,000 pints. The effective atmosphere of the earth is 4,200,000,000 cubic kilometers. There are 1,000,000,000 cubic meters per cubic kilometer.
That means there are 147,058,823.5 cubic meters of atmosphere per pint of oil burned, or 1,298,532.6 times less than your lethal dose. In other words, we would have to burn almost 1.3 million times more oil daily to reach the concentration of one pint in a garage.

:)

Pages