With Germany’s EV Landscape Thawing, Tesla Starts Hiring


Five years ago, Germany was heralded as one of the inaugural hot spots for electric vehicle adoption.  The thinking was that a well-heeled, accommodating population and a willing government would see the country take the electrification lead in Europe.

Well, as it turns out, not so much.

Just 1,144 plug-in vehicles were sold in Germany in November.  A result that was further split up between 25 different models, a number that was also within 100 units of being the 2nd best result to date.

Historical Plug-In Sales In Germany, Broken Down By BEV and PHEVs

Historical Plug-In Sales In Germany, Broken Down By BEV and PHEVs

However, things are changing in Germany.  The year-over-year numbers, while still low overall, are now showing a consistent market improvement over the flat wasteland of 2013, and the German government has recently come around to the fact they will need to assist the market if they hope to achieve their “at least one million electric vehicles on German roads by 2020” mantra.

New corporate write-offs for up to 90% of the cost of EVs used in fleets (of which relates to more then 1 of every 2 new cars sold in Germany), tax incentives for individuals, and increased infrastructure funding are now all suddenly on the table and being rushed into reality.

Tesla Plans To Have Almost 50 Superchargers In Germany By The End Of 2015, Covering 100% Of The Population

Tesla Plans To Have Almost 50 Superchargers In Germany By The End Of 2015, Covering 100% Of The Population

It appears Tesla is well aware of the changing tide, as the company’s Supercharging network has been expanding at an incredible rate over the past few months, and the company has just added an exhaustive “Job Opportunity” tab on their German mainpage.

Click the link and you will find nearly 70 new jobs posted as available at the company.  (A listing of all the jobs can also be found below)

To date, Tesla has sold just 650 copies of the Model S in Germany this year (good for 7th), so clearly the company is looking for a vast improvement in these numbers going forward, otherwise the hirings make little sense.

Editor’s Note:  Who leads Germany in plug-in sales? The BMW i3 with 2,130, followed by the Smart ED at 1,419.

Tesla Germany's Latest "Want Ad"

Tesla Germany’s Latest “Want Ad” (click to enlarge)

Hat tip to Carston!

Category: Tesla

Tags: ,

37 responses to "With Germany’s EV Landscape Thawing, Tesla Starts Hiring"
  1. It is amazing that for such an advanced country with such high aspirations in technology (particularly cars) that they are married to diesel and shun electric.

    1. Carsten says:

      There are no EV-subsidies for individuals in Germany and electricity is at .28EURO/kWh. People drive less and public transport is much, much better than in the US. I drive electric in the US but would currently not consider it back in Germany. I have hardly ever had a 2nd car in Europe, which is what my MiEV is here in the US. I pay .08USD/kWh here and can charge on 110V at work. My round trip is 70mi/day. I have close to 20.000mi in 17months on it. Love it and worth doing here.

      1. Whatever says:

        Yep, that’s what you get when you have an irrational fear of nuclear power.

        1. ffbj says:

          I would not call such fears irrational. What is irrational is to think that we can continue to destroy this planet on which we live, and not suffer greatly, or cause future generations to suffer due to our stupidity.
          Would it have been irrational to consider what happened to Fukushima a possible outcome?
          Yes, nuclear can be safe it’s just that a single nuclear accident can have negative consequences that last for hundreds even thousands of years.

          1. Whatever says:

            Yes, lets check out the Fukushima disaster.

            How many died because of radiation exposure from the Fukushima nuclear accident? It turns out, only one person died from what could possibly have been because of radiation exposure but the jury’s still out on that one. There are no confirmed radiation deaths from Fukushima.

            The World Health Organization has calculated that the increased risk of cancer even among the most sensitive group (infants) is a barely noticeable 1% tops and that is with the linear no threshold model which we know over-estimates the risks.

            So what we have is that even in the worst possible accidents the health risks are negligible. This goes for Chernobyl too, by the way. Not quite what Greenpeace wants you to know but it’s the truth.

            1. jessy says:


            2. Bill Howland says:

              Nope, there never will be ANY deaths officially listed due to Radiation Poisoning.

              The Abe government has made it illegal for Doctors to tell their patients they have radiation poisoning, threatening removal of hospital priveledges and practice.

              The few courageous hospitals who attempt to print mortality figures pre and post 2011 have to their figures ‘reviewed’ by the U.N.’s IAEA, the second chapter of their Charter being “Promotion of Nuclear Power”.,

              Its not so different here in the States. The Massive Pacific Ocean die-off’s “Something Strange is happening in the Pacific!” is blamed on

              “Some Strange Virus”

              which of course no one ever identifies.

        2. Bill Howland says:

          I have a ‘Rational’ Fear of Nuclear Power:

          Just consider the years 1979, 1986, and 2011.

          Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, respectively.

          TMI had a partial core-meltdown, although plenty of Radioactive Gasses were released.

          Chernobyl had a complete meltdown and explosion, with no groundwater contamination.

          Fukushima had 3 core meltdowns, and units 1,2 and 3 are so radioactive not even a robot can go in to see where the Cores happen to currently be. Unlike the Robot picture of the ‘elephant foot’ at Chernobyl, no Robot has survived an attempt to search for any of the 3 ‘missing’ Fukushima Cores.

          I’m not going to get into death estimates here, but suffice it to say for this paragraph’s purpose that it is on an increasing trajectory.

          Since 1979, counting only MAJOR INCIDENTS, there have been FIVE “Once in a million year” events. I know once in a million because the Nuclear Industry has drummed it into me that is how unlikely a ‘bad day’ at a Nuclear plant is.

          There are around 400 working reactors, so that would mean an ‘event’ every 2,500 years.

          Instead, we’ve had 5 ‘events’ in the past 35 years, or once every seven years, not every 2,500 years as the Nuclear Industry would have us believe. I’m of course disregarding “Routine Releases”, which Nuclear pundits would rather avoid discussing.

          Rational Conclusions:

          1). Nuclear accidents happen roughly once per decade, not every other millenium.

          2). Nuclear accidents are getting worse, and affecting more people (TMI affected mostly Pennsylvania, Chernobyl contaminated Europe, and Fukushima is poisoning the entire Northern Pacific Ocean).

          1. Big Solar says:

            + 1,000,000

          2. Chris O says:

            Clever not to go into the death toll. The direct death toll of TMI and Fukushima was zero and for TMI it has proven hard to establish a significant connection with cancer rates in and around the area since the accident.

            Too bad you left these facts out of your “rational” analysis.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Just as when I speak about Electrical topics I don’t constantly repeat Ohm’s law, or Maxwell’s equations, with every post.

              Any interest in what I say can be requested as an elaboration.

              To satisfy you, I’ve made an “Amplification” a few posts down. If you disagree, argue with THEM, because they have all the little letters after their names.

              As for me, and many other rational persons, their arguments and facts are sufficient.

              The views of reasonable people can differ, that is why some people who agree with me here will not agree with me on other subjects. But that is all fine.

              The way one learns about a situation where all the facts are not at once obvious, is to discuss it and see what added information may be obtained or applied.

          3. Whatever says:

            “I’m not going to get into death estimates here, but suffice it to say for this paragraph’s purpose that it is on an increasing trajectory.”

            Actually, it’s not. TMI didn’t cause any fatalities, Chernobyl has caused about 50 and most of these are people who worked on cleaning up after the disaster and Fukushima has to date have had 0 confirmed radiation deaths.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Several sailors who were aboard U.S. Navy’s “Ronald Reagan” have died, many more are incontinent, and are having diseases and pains more in line with 80-90 year olds instead of previously in-shape, athletic guys in their 20’s. They just happened to be near the plume that drifted by when Daichi #3 suffered a ‘Detonation’ (i.e. faster than the speed of sound, therefore, not a Hydrogen Explosion which would be a ‘Deflagration’, but what is called a “Prompt Criticality”.

              And, By the Way, I was told that was impossible to happen too, prior to 3/11/11. But Belarus Physicists admitted it also happened at Chernobyl, with the second explosion just after the Steam Explosion.

              No less than the New York Academy of Sciences had the papers of Belarus Doctors and Physicits translated into english, and published 985,000 dead directly due to the Chernobyl #4 ‘event’.

              (It was there I learned about the Prompt Criticality secondary Detonation, similar to the Unit#3 Daichi Detonation).

              Read this link, all you big Nuclear Experts. and if you disgree, write letters to THEM. It was plenty to RATIONALLY convince ME.


              1. Whatever says:

                If you need to use conspiracy theories to make your world view come together, maybe there’s something wrong with your world view?

                The USS Reagan lawsuit is a frivolous lawsuit, an attempt to cash in on this disaster. You know these people are working on a NUCLEAR powered ship, don’t you? They have all the equipment they need to detect radiation and all reports say that the radiation levels were well within acceptable numbers. Their own propulsion system exposed them to way more radiation than the Fukushima disaster did and it’s still within safe levels. It’s a scam lawsuit.

                The “985000 dead” claim comes from a book by a Russian Greenpeace activist, “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment”. The New York Academy of Sciences did not peer review the book so they have not endorsed it or validated it’s claims.

                The 985000 number comes from the flawed assumption that ANY change in death rates since 1986 was because of Chernobyl, even for diseases that have nothing to do with radiation. It’s completely unscientific and bogus. It’s a propaganda piece, not science.

                You conspiracy nut job link means nothing. It’s not a matter what one person with letters after their name thinks, it’s the science that matters. The person interviewed was involved in the Chernobyl book so her bias is quite obvious.

                If you are getting your information from conspiracy theories, you are not rational. Sorry.

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  Hey I make very small statements but I stand behind them…

                  There have been all kinds of documentaries on PBS showing ‘slice of life’ people in the Ukraine and Belarus with all kinds of health problems, something the vast majority of teenagers don’t experience.

                  Since I’m here using my real name, and putting my reputation for truthfulness at stake with every post I make, why are you hiding behind ‘whatever’?

          4. Bonaire says:

            Nuclear is a necessary evil. And a darn good base-load plant. Renewables cannot replace nuclear unless we get every person on the planet to use 1/2 of their current electricity demand per day. Making that happen probably can only come through adoption of widespread universal power conservation. And just who is going to do that? It is currently a world of ever-growing convenience demand. For example – do we cut down on power usage after the sun goes down so that solar primarily powers us during the day and we go into a sort of powered-down night-time energy usage pattern? Cook during the day only? and so on…

            Somehow, we wanted to see 7 billion on the planet. Somehow we will see 9 billion on the planet soon. So, nuclear is required for this level of humanity. And perhaps coal will be too. While we burn up those resources, we can educate all of the world population on the limited lifespan of natural resources, including uranium. And we can start some forms of spent-fuel-rod recycling for new nuclear generators which are not as dangerous as light-water reactors.

          5. Whatever says:

            Speaking of radiation, Veritasium just uploaded a video yesterday comparing radiation doses in different places.

            They visited both Chernobyl and Fukushima but they are not the worst, something else is far worse…

            “The Most Radioactive Places on Earth”

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Sorry to spoil his party.. Yes, he confuses ‘whole body radiation’ with hot particle ingestion, and the fact that small amounts of Radioactive Potassium from bannanas are regulated by the body (the more radioactive bannanas you eat, the more radioactive potassium you excrete, which, unfortunately does not apply to ‘unnatural sources’.

              I’m in agreement with only 2 points. CT scans are dangerous, as is cigarette smoking in general. Everything else is a gross simplification.

              I like sitting in front of a nice warm Coal Fire with orange hot coals. I feel nice and warm, with not too much danger to my health.

              It would be different if I picked up one of the orange hot coals and swallowed it. Besides the pain, I would probably die within hours.

              Its the same mistake made by pronuclear groups regarding the deliberate confusion between external and internal exposures. No detailed explanations are ever given.

              1. Whatever says:

                It’s kind of ironic that you enjoy coal fires since coal power causes FAR MORE deaths per year than any other form of power generation.

                By the way, guess which power generation method has caused the least amount of deaths in relation to the energy produced, severe disasters included. No, it’s not solar, nor is it wind power…

                1. Bill Howland says:

                  You should have been around in the early 19th century defending bloodletting.

                  The arguments must have been pretty convincing, it convinced George Washington (not exactly a dummy if one reads his writings) to have a procedure which ultimately killed him when all the procedure was to do was to cure his common cold.

                  Yeah, I’m one of the very few here who has no problem with “Carbon Footprints”.

                  But I’m in good company.. Saint Thomas Aquinas and Chaucer didn’t have a problem with Global Warming either.

        3. Priusmaniac says:

          There has been an actual authentic sabotage in a Belgian nuclear plant and they still don’t know who did it. In the same time some people, that turned jihadist, have been working in the plant. So today, the fear is more of the clear and present danger of terrorism on a nuclear plant than the inherent danger of the nuclear plant itself. But since security is obviously not able to protect against intrusions and sabotage, it becomes safer not to operate nuclear plants and it is therefore better to turn to other energy sources. Either non fission nuclear like fusion or renewable like wind, sun, deep geothermal, or for winter time biomass thermal plants.

      2. But the greens always claim their solar is super cheap and you can charge your car for free…but then they still refuse to buy a electric car….

    2. David Stone says:

      Part of it is the loyalty to national car makers which also happen to have very good global reputations.

      Part could also have to do with supercharger locations.
      Two of the richest cities, Frankfurt and Munich, have NO superchargers between them, unless you count the one north of Würzburg, which is a roundtrip detour of 40 km.

      Between these two cities is a distance of 400 km and another big city, Nürnberg.

      Also, many rich people travel between Munich and the noble border town of Partenkirchen.
      There is no supercharger along this route either.

      1. jamminrio says:

        I think your first part is right with loyalty to the German brand, but not because of Super Chargers. Partenkirchen is very close to Munich. As for Frankfurt, it has many SC on different routes. Schweitenkirchen, Germany is now under construction adding more onto Frankfurt. Having one in the city of Munich probably doesn’t make sense right now because of the congestion and besides in should be where you need it most traveling from one city to the next. There will be more added I am sure closer to Nuremberg.

        1. David Stone says:

          I never said there should be one in a city and the many superchargers on routes to Frankfurt does not help anyone traveling between there and Munich.

          And Patenkirchen is close to Munich, but a supercharger would be an incentive and advertising to the rich, especially those who lose range fast due to high energy use at high speeds, and those who use the town as a waypoint to Austria.

      2. Bonaire says:

        German population is very loyal to local car makers. I am surprised that their corporate EV fleet writedowns do not require German-made vehicles.

        Why hire all these people? Isn’t the goal to have the internet be the place to write up orders and take simple delivery from a local good-looking 20-something “delivery specialist”?

        We see some Tesla sales offices loading up on loaner cars as inventory sales units. They will need to do that in the UK and Germany also to allow for inventory purchases off the sales floor and lot to grow sales there. Pre-building versions and placing them in Tilburg may work for quicker delivery. My close-by Tesla sales office has 8 inventory cars right now. They have been showing a good number of them ever since early October and they do turn them over and replace with more 60 and 85 models sold at discount.

    3. jessy says:

      “such an advanced country” i am sorry i dont like people who overrate continually germany, the such thing germans can do is build cars and nothing more.germans can’t build planes rockets and war jets

  2. Get Real says:

    German society is actually very conservative and very German centric when it comes to autos.

    1. ffbj says:

      True, and they make damn fine cars. Various factors will limit the velocity of the uptake of Tesla’s in Germany, though eventually I think the German peoples own understanding and appreciation of fine automobiles will prevail.
      After all this is not your typical American import. It’s more like a German car than an American car.

    2. Priusmaniac says:

      They should also avoid adds that looks more like they belong to United Colors of Benetton then Tesla. Germany is German and force feeding US melting pot stereotypes on them is not helping especially with the big monday Pegida rallies going on. People are open but they don’t like to feel pushed in a corner.

  3. JR says:

    Electric cars require fast charge infrastrukture Tesla has really expanded in Germany and shown the way, now is the time to hire people and build a sales and service structure up and sell some cars.
    The big breakthrough comes first when the German government provides some tax rebates on electric cars, and they do so only when the big German car companies all have an Electric car ready, when we get there Tesla is ready with a well proven product

  4. jessy says:

    what’s the problem with nuclear power ? 80% of electricity in france is nuclear power and the french don’t have problems with them.he has also the cheapest domestic power in europe thank you nuclear power.

  5. jessy says:

    the electricity in germany is the most expensive in europe, THATS the reason why germans dont buy GREEN VEHICLES

  6. Bill Howland says:

    France’s biggest electric problem, is the over utilization of electric heat.

    (Back when electricity was cheap in the 1960’s in the US, utilities were constantly advertising “ELECTRIC HEATS BEST!”, but then reality setlled in when ‘early adopters’ realized it was just too expensive to be ‘all electric’ and the likelihood was it was going to be worse in the future. Which was exactly accurate… Many formerly ‘all electric’ buildings in the northern states hastily converted to other heat forms just to financially survive).

    I’m told that many poorer neighborhoods around Paris, during the depths of winter, go to bed cold, since, although 13 cents (US) per kilowatt-hour is indeed “THe Cheapest in Europe”, it is too expensive for Dear incomes in a poorly insulated, drafty home.

    The ‘advantage’ EV’s have in the states is turned on its head during cold months in France. The loadings are TRIPLE during the wintertime compared to summer, and a mere 1 degree Centigrade drop in temperature results in an add 2,600 megawatts (E.G. 2 huge Nuclear power station’s worth) increase in demand to satisfy all the electric heaters.

    1. jessy says:

      “I’m told that many poorer neighborhoods around Paris”……i am sorry but paris is not Detroit or NYC or Berlin.and there’s no people in france who dies from cold winter.if i had the choice better be poor in france than in The States.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        I said some (meaning mostly immigrants) go to bed cold. I didn’t say they died.

        On that point of twisting things I’ve said, I recall a documentary when school children in France were told that American Kids can’t count past 10 and don’t know the letters of the alphabet.

        Maybe that is the trajectory, but I don’t think as a rule, the American school system is quite that bad yet.