Tesla in Alaska

Tesla in Alaska

It is my intention to purchase a Tesla S model for driving from Wasilla, Alaska to Anchorage. Yes, I do have concerns over the extreme weather condition here in Alaska and how the vehicle will perform. I honestly believe it will surpass my expectations. At the present time, we have no Sales or service facilities available for Alaska. I still plan to purchase one.

Jamon | 26. August 2013

You go, Don Jacobs!
I'm excited to hear about it :)

Don Jacobs | 26. August 2013

I drive 110 miles round trip from Wasilla, AK to Anchorage, AK and back home 5 days a week. My fuel costs are to the extreme. We pay in excess of $4.29 a gallon for regular gas and it will go higher. Thanks, Obama! I have read many comments on the Tesla S model and I am confident that it will exceed my expectations. Yes, it may be risky but what isn't! I'm very anxious to get started, even if I have to go to Seattle to purchase the S Model.

jq5073 | 26. August 2013

I read somewhere that Obama gets $1.30 from every gallon of gas sold. I'm pretty sure that's right because I can't think of any other reason for gas prices to be high right now.

negarholger | 26. August 2013

Don - you should have peak into the Norway threads. Tesla sells a lot MS in Norway. Alaska and Norway have similar conditions.

negarholger | 26. August 2013

Don - $4.29 for a gallon is cheap, I used to pay close to $5 in CA, but I lost track lately. 110 miles RT should be not a problem even in the cold, rain and bad winds. I you can afford get the 85 kWh battery for additional range down the road ( batteries degrade over time and worst case expect after 8 years to have 70% left that means a 85 kWh will be a 60 kWh ). You are driving about 30k miles a year... depending on your electricity cost that could save you a lot.

Don Jacobs | 26. August 2013

Thanks for the Information. I would not spend the money on Tesla, if I had any concerns about the quality and the performance on the Model S. Granted, it may cost a little more then many other cars but the savings on fuel is unprecedented! As I had stated earlier, driving 110 miles back and forth to work in some serious weather conditions is a concern. I just saw a Video from Tesla where all of my concerns were satisfied as to the handling of the vehicle on Snow and Ice, it would be driving the car from Seattle to I was very satisfied. If I have any other concern's, it will be keeping it Charged coming up the ALCAN Hwy. I'll discuss that later. I do have an answer for keeping it charged and will post that one later.

Don Jacobs | 26. August 2013

Driving the car from Seattle to Wasilla, Alaska and keeping it charged. I do have the solution.

negarholger | 26. August 2013

Seattle to Wasilla - 2300 miles on your first trip... you are brave. Why not have Tesla deliver it to your house? Asking could not hurt. Definetly get the ranger sevice plan - you are the reason why I paid for the ranger service plan myself ( I have 2 service centers within 30 miles with more to come )

Don Jacobs | 27. August 2013

That sounds like a plan. If they will deliver it then it could save us both some possible imbarrasment.
I will take your advice and ask. Never know until you ask. Thanks

ddruz | 27. August 2013

There are already a number of Tesla owners in AK. Search the TMC threads for pictures and reports. Tesla delivers to AK.

Don Jacobs | 27. August 2013

It's not a Chevy Volt!

JAFIC | 27. August 2013

You might want to get winter tyres from the start. I hear the normal tyres are not that good over there

Don Jacobs | 27. August 2013

I have used Standard tires on all of my vehicles and have no problems. Alaska does take great care of its highways and is always prepared for the worst. Having said that, I did get the Paint protection package. Sand and gravel have a tendency to break most all windshields here in Alaska. Its hard to avoid. There are packages available for $400.00 that will cover the replacement of a windshield for the life of the car. (Original owner)

NYC Realtor | 27. August 2013

This is what you need to check out. Lead footed long distance winter driving!

AmpedRealtor | 27. August 2013


Don Jacobs | 27. August 2013

I will check the sites out. Thanks

jweinstein | 03. September 2013

I had my Model S delivered on April 1 in Anchorage. There was snow on the ground, and the car handled wonderfully. No issues with range anxiety or service. I have driven to Seward and back without the need for a charge, although I did plug-in at an RV park because I took a break. I'd be happy to meet up with you sometime, if you'd like to check the vehicle out.

mario.kadastik | 03. September 2013

I always find it hilarious how you Americans haggle over gas prices and administration. You're driving almost for free considering we've got it at $7.5 / gallon here in EU or even higher ;)

mario.kadastik | 08. September 2013

Well the price of electricity isn't that bad. it's arond 4c / kWh for electricity and about the same added for transmission maintenance etc coming roughly to 9c/kWh with all the extra fees etc (i.e. renewable energy fee etc). Then there's amperage fee that is fixed per month and therefore adds a varying amount depending on total amount of kWh spent (the more you use the cheaper the kWh). Right now I have it at ca 12c/kWh average. If I were to charge my MS I'd add about 240kWh to the night time costing me ~20 eur / month. Right now my Evo X monthly fuel usage is ~180-220 eur / month so it's a factor of 10 reduction :)

anna Muhovich | 16. Mai 2014

I have posted this question several times and my posts seem to disappear. I can find a location,even a map on this website for a planned service station in Anchorage but I can't find any timeline for completion or even if it will have a super charging station attached. I want to purchase a Model S but I am very concerned about the lack of service providers in Alaska and having a super charging station here would also help sway me towards a purchase of a Model S. Does ANYONE know if there is a estimated completion date on the service center in Anchorage, Alaska? Does ANYONE know if there will be a charging station built in Alaska?
Thank you,
Anna Muhovich

DaphneGreen | 16. Mai 2014

Most states tax gasoline as a why of getting money to build and repair roads. The tax is different in every state. Obama has nothing to do with it.

Obama's certainly not perfect, but not everything is his fault. In fact, you should thank Obama for lending Tesla a half a billion dollars to save the company.

Brian H | 17. Mai 2014

The loan did not save the company. Elon has said it helped speed up some R&D, but the firm was just fine without it.

DaphneGreen | 17. Mai 2014

Okay, helped when Elon was finding it difficult to get fresh money. I certainly wouldn't want take anything away from Elon. Anyway, it was a good thing.

dmerki | 17. Mai 2014

Actually it was GWB that started the program that initiated the DOE to loan for the new technologies in 2007. It did not get funded until 2010. Not tooting a horn or bashing.

DaphneGreen | 17. Mai 2014

Americans use to believe scientists and support new technology. Something's gone awry.

Plugged In | 17. Mai 2014

Those who claim President Obama makes $1.30 / gallon or discuss the 2012 election... do the rest of us a favor and go back to watching Fox News and other assorted propaganda. If you own or plan to own a Tesla then you made a good choice. But you clearly missed the boat on political issues... sail it elsewhere please.

bigd | 17. Mai 2014

@andrew.berman "Those who claim President Obama makes $1.30." I would guess that was sarcasm. However, you need to go back to that joke MSNBC and get all your propaganda (if it is still on with there poor ratings LOL). As Daphny said "--- you should thank Obama for lending Tesla a half a billion dollars to save the company. Then we see that it was actually GWB policies that we should thank. But she does not mention we should thank Obama for losing the American tax payers half a billion $$$ when his administration re-wrote the solyndra deal.

Plugged In | 18. Mai 2014

#bigd - some serious word salad there. I do thank Mr. Obama for lending Tesla, GM and Chrysler the money that they needed, for it was money well spent. Solyndra didn't work out: Turd happens. GWB was a moron of the highest order who put the economy into the ground, wasted untold billions on an unnecessary war after he said "Mission Accomplished", and I could keep going if so choose. Seriously folks - don't argue politics on here. If you bought a Tesla then congratulations on your choice. But if you choose to live in the bubble of reality that Fox News created for you, that is your problem -- not mine.

bigd | 18. Mai 2014

".GWB was a moron of the highest order who put the economy into the ground,". Just a little history lesson, the financial "crises" came about due to the lending policies from Clinton administration. You know, everyone deserve a home loan, even if they cant afford it. I don't think that the present (lack) of leadership is good but I am not going to call a president a moron. However, ones who spout off about them and don't even know their policies and those of others may need look in the mirror before calling names:-)

Plugged In | 18. Mai 2014

Cough cough cough....

Actually, those policies came about during George W. Bush's administration too. After all, who wanted government oversight over things like how the financial institutions handle money?

Glass Steagall was effectively undone during the Clinton administration, so I will hand you that cookie. Beyond that, I concede nothing: Clinton gave us a budgetary surplus. GWB unwound it. Tea Party discovers deficit is a problem. Who created it the problem? President Obama inherited it, but it seems the issue became serious on 01/20/2009, if you ask the "right" people.

I could keep going but it just isn't worth the trouble.

Red Sage ca us | 18. Mai 2014

Hmmm... So, I guess this means that Bjørn Nyland hasn't moved to Alaska, eh?


bigd | 18. Mai 2014

@andrew.berman. "After all, who wanted government oversight over things like how the financial institutions handle money? "--"2005 Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA), for example, described them as "not facing any kind of financial crisis."Labaton, Stephen (2008-07-27). "New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae". New York Times. Retrieved 2008-09-27. " I concede nothing: Clinton gave us a budgetary surplus. GWB unwound it."Just go read this and it will help you to understand what was wrong. @Red Sage That was pretty funny LOL. Has all the snow melted in Alaska? --- I made it relevant Sage :-)

Plugged In | 18. Mai 2014

Seriously, is that what you use to make your argument? Did Rush Limbaugh or the boys from Fox come up with that?

If you wish, you would find that that argument has been refuted. No sir, the private sector was not forced to live beyond its means by Clinton's tax increases. What happened -- per Forbes, who is definitely more conservative about this than I -- was that the budget surplus turned to deficit and it was then that both the public and private sectors lived beyond their means. At the same time, the average home prices began to skyrocket. Yet, paradoxically, that was when the conservative attitude was prevalent that there was too much government interference in business. As housing prices escalated, therefore, regulations designed to protect potential homeowners from over-borrowing became increasingly lax: People who should never have been given mortgages were approved with remarkable ease.

All of this, and plenty more, happened during the previous administration. If someone wants to pretend that the economy tanked in 2008 because of Clinton, please do try harder. The facts are what they are, feel free to spin them any way you want to.

Roamer@AZ USA | 18. Mai 2014

Funny thing is we never learn. The Fed juiced the housing market and created a bubble. Right now we are seeing exactly the same thing only it's student loans. Pushing student loans has inflated college tuition and has built a huge liability that will explode just like housing did. Lots of students getting $200,000 student loans for a, "do you want fries with that" degree. The government is creating another bubble.

I have to laugh when people forget about the community reinvestment act that started the path to failure. I lived it. Banks were under presure from the Fed during the Clinton years to loan more money into economically depressed areas. If you were around then you would recall all the presure over "redlining" where banks were accused of not lending in certain zip codes. This was considered a bad thing and banks were under great presure from regulators to increase lending in economically depressed zip codes. Socially that sounds great but from a financial standpoint the government was scoring how much they were lending into markets that were much higher default risk. Basically the government said we want you to make bad loans.

During this time I had a bank provide me a map and say we will loan on your real estate deals but to get the loan you also have to buy something in one of these zip codes so we can get the regulators off our back. So we bought a crap low income housing deal in a crap area. If you want social justice it is a great idea. Only problem is loaning to bad locations is a good way to someday lose lots of money.

The federal government over a 20 year period 100% created the housing bubble and crash.

Red Sage ca us | 19. Mai 2014

I seem to remember the old man's explanation was something along the lines of, "I was surprised. I didn't expect the banks to be so irresponsible. I thought they knew better, and could be trusted to make the right decisions."

lolachampcar | 19. Mai 2014

Come on guys and gals.... Give it a rest.

Both sides are broken and we are all stupid for going along with the Ford/Chevy party labels and picking sides. Money has broken both sides with the corruption in plain site.

We should all either stiffen our backs and go fix it or shut up and realize our government is an accurate reflection of ourselves.

I know my buds from AK understand this......

bigd | 19. Mai 2014

"Seriously, is that what you use to make your argument?" Sorry I was just trying to make it short and sweet hoping you would understand. I think that Roamer has said it best. But I can go on and on if you like. "People who should never have been given mortgages were approved with remarkable ease." You are correct here, But alas, why did this happen. Because the govt guaranteed the loans and Banks were under pressure to do the loans. If the govt did not back the loans, banks would be more frugal in the loan process without govt intervention. I put this as simple as I can in hopes that you can understand it and see how it goes back to the reinvestment act. However, Sage get back on topic LOL.

Roamer@AZ USA | 19. Mai 2014

And so we start down the path again.

The economy as been in neutral for 6 years so let's crank it up by making it easier to get mortgages. Government just can't help themselves.

Roamer@AZ USA | 19. Mai 2014

Lola, I agree. The real solution is to quit running to mommy government everytime you get a boo boo.

Now with Net neutrality mommy government is going to screw up the internet. The Federal busy bodies just can't resist inserting them selves and screwing things up......pun intended. The solution is to toughen up and do everything possible to reduce the power of government to mess things up. Free people making free decisions will ultimately produce much better results than a bunch of DC narcissists spending someone else's money.

DaphneGreen | 19. Mai 2014

I'm not so sure the banks were pressured by congress to make bad loans. I have a feeling the banks were looking for more ways to make more money and they were the one's pressuring congress. The banks and the government work hand-in-hand. Made the realty companies lots of money, too.

Lots of poor people and middle class people lost their homes and savings, the debt was sold of to investors and the banks got bailed out. The CEO's got bonuses.

bigd | 19. Mai 2014

@Daphne "I'm not so sure the banks were pressured by congress to make bad loans." Not sure if you was around in those days but yes they were and it was pretty open. "I have a feeling the banks were looking for more ways to make more money (probably, as that is what banks do) and they were the one's pressuring congress." Not hardly, they were not in favor of the re-investment act until govt guaranteed loans. However, after govt got involved it was a gold mine for them. "banks got bailed out". Im not a proponent of to big to fail. Again govt intervention is the problem. "Lots of poor people and middle class people lost their homes and savings," tell me why they lost the homes etc..

DaphneGreen | 19. Mai 2014

Yeah, that got the guarantee and went to town. People lost their homes because they took out loans they couldn't pay for. Of course, the mortgage company and banks assured them that they could and if they couldn't they could always sell it at a higher price then they bought it for. They were easy targets.

Imagine trusting your bank, mortgage company, and broker. Poor dumb people. And then all the finance guy that ran retirement funds bought the garbage loans. Poor dumb people.

The banks have been milking us for decades with or without the blessings of congress. Just easier when congress goes along.

bigd | 19. Mai 2014

@Daphne "People lost their homes because they took out loans they couldn't pay for." So that is the banks fault? "Of course, the mortgage company and banks assured them that they could and if they couldn't they could always sell it at a higher price then they bought it for" LOL And we believe everything we hear? However, I went back and looked at my home loan and nowhere does it say that. "Poor dumb people" Daphne, you should be ashamed calling those people that. But basically, you are saying that people have no personal responsibility for their actions? My Bank does not "milk me". If I am not satisfied with the rate of loan, length, etc.. I would go to another place.

Red Sage ca us | 19. Mai 2014

"However, Sage get back on topic LOL."

Why ever would I want to do that? ;-)


Of course, another way to look at it is this... Sears, JCPenney, KMart, and Target were doing just fine. They were profitable, well established companies, with solid revenues. Then Wal*Mart showed up, seemingly out of nowhere, began having massive profits up the wazoo, glorifying everyone who had bought stock on Wall Street. Investors started to ask why the older, bigger companies weren't making such big returns on the dollar.

So Sears, JCPenney, KMart, and Target all tried to match Wal*Mart, dollar-for-dollar at retail, to steal their business, and failed miserably. They alienated their existing clientele. They [PEEVED] off their existing suppliers. They lost market share hand over fist. They couldn't properly supply their locations. And a couple of them nearly went out of business. All because they abandoned what they already knew how to do, in favor of chasing someone else's profits, and didn't realize those profits came from a carefully planned and executed distribution system that none of them were prepared to match.


Once upon a time, a teensy tiny, eensy weensy little upstart called Coldwell Banker was lending to anyone and everyone under the sun like nobody's business. Basically if you had a pulse and a pay stub, you could buy a house. They didn't care if they would have qualified with anyone else. All they cared was whether they could find a sucker willing to get into tremendous debt at any cost. Then after they had a binding loan in place, everything went through escrow, and the checks all cleared, they immediately sold that debt to someone else. Thereby they showed nigh instantaneous profitability on the books every quarter.

Well, larger, more established lending institutions all over the realm suddenly noticed that and wondered why they couldn't make money like that too... They begged the Clinton Administration to loosen restrictive regulations on lending and promised to 'do the right thing'. And so everyone was happy. People were getting loans. Banks were getting money. Real Estate prices were going higher. Interest rates were dropping. Money was cheaper to borrow than anyone could have possibly hoped for... right up to the point it wasn't anymore. Because someone forgot to read the fine print that said interest rates were only 'fixed' for a limited time and after that they would JUMP by a huge amount plus the Prime Rate. Oops.


Everybody and their Grandmother's Sister Sarah in the Detroit Big Three said it was impossible to make a decent electric car. They said it was a waste of time and money. They complained that government regulations were too harsh and should be done away with. They lobbied to have those regulations stripped to the bone. And they immediately abandoned all their efforts at electrifying cars.

Then Tesla Motors came along.

DaphneGreen | 19. Mai 2014


It IS the bank-financial institutions fault. They took advantage of unsophisticated borrowers, who were being assured by people SO much smarter than they were that not to worry.

Like you synopsis, Sage. Of course, homeowners were assured that they could either sell at a higher price or refinance.

Roamer@AZ USA | 19. Mai 2014

DaphneGreen, Everybody thought they would win the lottery by buying real estate. Never saw a bank hold anyone at gun point when they signed their liar loans where the buyers misstated their income and ability to pay.

The banks are evil if they won't loan to unsophisticated low income buyers, so they lower the standards, create a gold rush mentality, and loan to anybody with a pulse so now they are evil because they didn't stop customers from doing something stupid.

I think there is plenty of blame to go around. In the end the government beat the banks to make the loans. Then the government created a market to combine and buy the bad loans in bulk. The banks just said OK I will,figure out how to make money under these rules. Then they started buying their own crap loan pools. They should have just let Fannie and Freddy own all the crap.

The irony is that this week the government announced plans to juice the economy by encouraging banks to loosen lending standards. Here we go again. We never learn.

pabeader | 19. Mai 2014

So, should the guy get his Model S for use in Alaska?

Roamer@AZ USA | 19. Mai 2014

Pabeader, if it was me I would go for it. But it may be a long trip for service.

DaphneGreen | 19. Mai 2014

Goldman Sachs sold bad mortgages to the clients and played the short side through AIG. Ended up making money of course. If AIG was taken in, how in heavens to you think the unsophisticated average Joe would get it. Mortgage companies preyed on the poor communities. Fannie and Freddie weren't the only ones.

And yes, college loans are next.

Red Sage ca us | 19. Mai 2014

pabeader remained on topic with, "So, should the guy get his Model S for use in Alaska?"

Good question. Currently the description of the 'Subzero Weather Package' for the Tesla Model S seems rather sparse...
3 Zone Rear Seat Heaters
Wiper Blade Defrosters
Washer Nozzle Heaters
I had thought there was supposed to be some additional protections as well. Maybe something along the lines of:
Heavy Duty Battery Pack Insulation
Sealed Wheelwells
Heated Mirrors
Heated Front Windshield
Headlight Washers
But maybe those were just a wishlist of items cold weather patrons have requested as additional options. I don't know really. I haven't seen an actual snowstorm in two decades, at least.