Here's Everything We Know About The New Tesla Model X

FREMONT, Calif. -- Amid great fanfare and expectations, Tesla Motors unveiled the Model X, its all-electric SUV, at an event Tuesday night at its Bay Area factory. 

The Model X is the second car available for sale from the electric automaker, which introduced the Model S sedan three years ago. The high-speed Roadster, its first car, was discontinued in 2012.

The all-wheel-drive, seven-passenger X could help Tesla crack into the SUV market. The vehicles experienced a surge in sales over the past year and are popular with female drivers. 

Shoppers can put down $5,000 on Tesla's website to reserve an X when they start rolling out. The base price actually runs up to $132,000 for the Signature Series, which includes add-ons like an autopilot mode and heated steering wheel and seats. 

A less expensive version, the $35,000 Model 3 sedan, is expected to come out in 2017. 

The X boasts a lot of power. It goes from o to 60 mph in 3.2 seconds, and has a range of about 250 miles before the battery needs a recharge.  

Plus, it's stylish. A new feature, the "falcon wing doors," swoop out and up. (It's easy to picture "Silicon Valley" character Russ Hanneman approving of the design.) There are three rows of seats, but the second row holds just two passengers.

The X features a windshield that extends above the driver's head, offering panoramic views and the feel of a helicopter cockpit, Musk said.

Most importantly, though, Musk said that the Model X is safe.

"We've made the safest SUV ever," he said. Sensors can automatically apply the brakes or steer away from cars and dangerous objects, he said during the debut, which was webcast from Tesla's Fremont, California, factory. "There's really nothing that's more important" than safety.

Eyes might be fixed on those back seats, because CEO Elon Musk said in August that they had become a problem during production.  

Tesla experienced success in the luxury market with the Model S, which was the second-highest selling luxury model last year. With the Model X, Tesla is introducing an electric SUV at least a few years before competitors like Mercedes, Porsche and General Motors crack into the field. 

For now, Tesla is niche player. It is forecast to sell almost 29,000 cars this year, according to LMC Automotive. Ford, in contrast, is predicted to move almost 2.5 million vehicles. Analysts see the Model X as a step toward somewhat wider appeal. 

 

“Tesla wants to be a mainstream automaker,” said Doug Gilman, an industry analyst for Frost & Sullivan. “To be a competitive automaker you have to have a whole host of vehicles. You can’t just have one super.”

An SUVs safety and size might attract female drivers with families, analysts said. If the X outsells the S, experts will probably deem the new line a success. 

“The big potential for the Model X is that it’s going to open up a whole new market that they had to fight a little harder for with the Model S. That’s the female market,” said Karl Brauer, a senior director at Kelley Blue Book. “There’s a huge market out there.”

The Fremont factory looked more like a nightclub on Tuesday night as thousands of attendees who had paid at least $5,000 to reserve a Model X sipped wine while listening to remixed versions of hits from Dolly Parton and the Rolling Stones.

Though attendees had yet to see the Model X in person, some people said they had faith in Tesla based on the quality of the Model S.

"I love my Range Rover, but I can't stand going to the gas station," Dana Cappiello, 55, a realtor from San Francisco, told The Huffington Post."It was as simple as that." 

She was peeved by the late start. CEO Elon Musk took the stage in a dark jacket and jeans just before 9 p.m. PST, nearly an hour behind schedule.

The audience erupted with laughter as he touted the environmental benefits of his all-electric vehicles while alluding to Volkswagen's ongoing scandal over software that helped its cars outrageously cheat on diesel emissions tests. Volkswagen is the biggest automaker in the world by sales.

"We designed this car well before recent events," Musk said.

Long lines formed for test rides in the factory parking lot after the presentation ended. 

For the company to become profitable, Tesla needs to increase sales by hundreds of thousands of cars per year, according to John Humphrey, a senior vice president at J.D. Power and Associates. 

“These customers are evangelical about the brand,” Humphrey said. “Going downmarket and not losing the allure of the brand is the challenge. Each rung you go down, you lose a little shine on it.”

Tesla stock was up nearly 2 percent in pre-market trading on Wednesday morning. 

This story has been updated to include additional comments from analysts.

A previous version of this article stated that the Model X is Tesla's second car. It's actually the second model currently available, because the company had discontinued the Roadster in 2012.

10 States That Burn The Most Coal

President Barack Obama released in August the final version of his climate policy and energy use program, the Clean Power Plan. The plan, if it passes, will allow the EPA to set carbon emissions targets for every state in the country. States will be required to meet the targets by changing energy sources.

One of the industries that will likely be affected the most is coal production as well as the plants using coal as an energy source. Burning coal produces a variety of unhealthy particulates and roughly twice as much carbon dioxide as natural gas. Some states generate tremendous amounts of energy from coal and use coal as a main power source. In West Virginia, all but 4.5% of the state’s electricity comes from fuel. 24/7 Wall St. reviewed the 10 states burning the most coal in the country.

Click here to see the 10 states burning the most coal.

In a conversation with 24/7 Wall St., Christopher Namovicz , U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) alternative energy analyst, explained that with newly discovered reserves and the advent of hydrofracturing technology, there has been a significant increase in the country’s reliance on natural gas as an energy source. Last year, 27.4% of the nation’s electricity came from natural gas-burning power plants, compared to 17.1% in 2001. In addition, the steadily increased use of solar, wind, and other alternative energy sources, has meant a decline in coal usage. In 2004, the country generated nearly 2 million gigawatt-hours (GWh) from coal. Last year, the country generated 1.58 million GWh from the fossil fuel.

This shift is true of some of the largest coal-burning states as well. In Pennsylvania, for example, the share of electricity generation from coal out of total production fell by 20 percentage points from 2001 to 2014. Natural gas, meanwhile, jumped from just 1.5% of total production to 23.7% over the same period.

The presence of natural resources in a given area often dictates their use within a state. Most of the states that rely heavily on coal as a means of energy are also coal rich. West Virginia and Kentucky, the two most coal-reliant states in the country, are first and third, respectively, in coal mining.

This is not always the case, however. Some heavy coal-burning states such as Florida and Michigan mine no coal at all within the state but import it by rail, truck, and waterway from states such as West Virginia and Kentucky.

Not all of the states that burn the most coal are as reliant on it as others. Texas and Pennsylvania, for example, generate the first and sixth amounts of electricity from coal, but it amounts to just 36.1% of Pennsylvania’s total energy generation and to barely one-third of Texas’s. These states produce massive amounts of energy. Texas, for example, generates roughly one-fifth of all the electricity in the country each year, and coal is only a part of it.

In order to determine the states that burn the most coal each year, we consulted the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s state energy profiles, which include state electricity generation by source from 2001 through 2014 for state use. The EIA also included total energy production, which also measure energy that may not be used within a state but in other places. The EIA also included the proportion of energy-producing natural resources such as coal that are shipped to other states, as well as electricity consumption per capita. All values used are for the latest available year.

These are 10 states burning the most coal, according to 24/7 Wall St.

• 10. Florida > 2014 coal electricity generation:52,046 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:231,062 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 22.5%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 61.0%
  
  Florida — the third-largest consumer of energy in the country — generated more than 52 thousand GWh of coal energy in 2014, 10th most of any state. However, there are no coal mining operations in The Sunshine State. All the coal burned in the state is shipped by barge and rail from other major mining states, primarily Illinois, West Virginia, and Kentucky. Florida is one of the most populous states in the country. So while the state produced the 10th highest amount of energy from coal in the country, this energy accounted for just 22.5% of the state’s electricity generation– well below the share of coal-based electricity generation nationwide of 38.7%. Natural gas is of greater significance in Florida. More than 60% of the state’s energy came from natural gas, the fourth highest share in the country.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 9. Michigan > 2014 coal electricity generation:53,086 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:105,821 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 50.2%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 10.9%
  
  Roughly 50% of electricity in Michigan was generated by burning coal, a somewhat lower share from just a few years ago. In 2009, roughly two-thirds of electricity generated in the state was from coal. The major cause for this shift has been an increase in the state’s nuclear power output. State reactors generated more than 31 thousand GWh in 2014, or nearly 30% of the state’s electricity production, up from 21,000 GWh, or 21.6%, five years prior. While there was once a substantial coal mining operation in the state, there are no active mines currently. Michigan receives its coal by rail primarily from Kentucky and West Virginia.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 8. Missouri > 2014 coal electricity generation:72,746 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:88,074 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 82.6%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 4.5%
  
  Nearly 83% of Missouri’s electricity was generated by coal last year. Plants burned more than 43 million tons of coal to produce nearly 73,000 GWh. Though Missouri is itself a coal producing state, only 1% of the coal it consumes is also mined there. Most of the coal burned in Missouri is shipped by freight train from Wyoming. The next biggest contributor to the state’s energy mix was nuclear power, which generated slightly more than 10% of Missouri’s energy in 2014. While many states are shifting to an increased reliance on natural gas, Missouri is not. The 3,952 GWh generated from natural gas in the state last year was only slightly higher than the 3,874 GWh generated in 2001. Missouri’s lack of any significant natural gas reserves may partially explain its lopsided energy mix.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 7. West Virginia > 2014 coal electricity generation:77,510 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:81,162 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 95.5%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 0.8%
  
  Last year, West Virginia generated the 19th most energy out of all states, producing roughly 81 thousand GWh. The state, however, generated the seventh most energy from coal, or 77,510 GWh. This amounted to 95.5% of West Virginia’s electricity generation, making West Virginia the most coal-dependent state in the country. This may not be surprising given the scope of the state’s coal mining industry. The state’s Appalachian Plateau region contains rich natural gas and coal deposits, and no state east of the Mississippi yields more coal each year than West Virginia. Roughly a quarter of the state’s coal stays in West Virginia, and the rest is shipped elsewhere to be turned into electricity. Consequently, while the state has just 0.5% of the country’s population, its resources are used to generate about 5% of total U.S. energy production.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 6. Pennsylvania > 2014 coal electricity generation:80,067 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:221,709 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 36.1%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 23.7%
  
  Home to the coal-rich Appalachian Mountains, Pennsylvania is one of the largest coal-producing states in the country. Pennsylvania exported nearly $1.6 billion worth of coal in 2014 alone. The state is also one of the biggest consumers of coal in the country, and much of the coal mined in Pennsylvania stays there. The state generated 80,067 GWh from coal in 2014, the sixth highest amount of any state in the country. Despite its high coal consumption, Pennsylvania has a relatively diverse energy mix. Just over 36% of the Pennsylvania’s energy came from coal, while 35.5% came from nuclear power, and 23.7% came from natural gas. Between nuclear power, natural gas, and coal, Pennsylvania is the leading energy producer in the eastern U.S.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 5. Kentucky > 2014 coal electricity generation:83,497 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:90,737 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 92.0%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 2.7%
  
  With 92% of Kentucky’s electricity coming from coal, only West Virginia relies more heavily on coal to keep the lights on. The state is the third largest producer of coal behind West Virginia and Wyoming, and one out of every four coal mines in the country can be found within the state. Roughly two-thirds of all coal mined in the state is exported. Apart from a small amount of hydroelectric energy, the state has almost no renewable energy generation at all.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 4. Illinois > 2014 coal electricity generation:87,371 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:202,352 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 43.2%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 2.7%
  
  The fifth most populous state in the country, Illinois is a large consumer of energy. The state generated, 87.4 million MwH from 57.4 million tons of coal last year. Over the course of the last decade, nuclear power and coal have been alternating as the state’s the leading energy source. Last year, however, more than 48% of the Illinois’ electricity came from nuclear power, while 43.2% came from coal. No other state in the country derives more electricity from nuclear power, and only three other states derived more electricity from coal in 2014.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 3. Ohio > 2014 coal electricity generation:90,163 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:134,602 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 67.0%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 17.6%
  
  Ohio is one of the largest generators of coal-based electricity in the country, with more than 90,000 GWh produced in 2014, which accounted for approximately 6% of all the electricity generated by coal in the country. Still, like the country as a whole, Ohio began to shift its reliance on coal in favor of natural gas. In 2003, 91.9% of the state’s electricity came from coal, while just 1.2% was derived from natural gas. Last year, 67% of the state’s energy came from coal, while 17.6% of the state’s energy generation was generated by natural gas. While Ohio has substantial coal mines, representing approximately 2% of the country’s total proved coal reserves, it imports approximately half of all the coal it uses, primarily from West Virginia.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 2. Indiana > 2014 coal electricity generation:97,729 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:115,634 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 84.5%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 8.3%
  
  One of the nation’s top coal producers, about two-thirds of the coal mined in Indiana never leaves the state. Contributing to nearly 85% of the state’s total energy, coal is disproportionately represented in Indiana’s the energy mix. In 2014, the state consumed 48.9 million tons of coal, producing a total 97.7 million MwH. As in many other states, the consumption of natural gas is on the rise in Indiana. While natural gas produced only 1.9% of the state’s energy in 2004, a decade later, more than 8% of electricity in Indiana was generated by natural gas. Texas is the only state that consumes more coal than Indiana.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.
• 1. Texas > 2014 coal electricity generation:148,174 GWh
  > 2014 total electricity generation:437,236 GWh
  > Coal as pct. total electricity generation: 33.9%
  > Natural Gas as pct. electricity generation: 46.8%
  
  The second largest state in the country, both by population and land area, Texas leads the nation in both energy production and energy consumption. In 2014, Texas consumed 102.7 million tons of coal, producing a total of 148.2 million MwH. Even though Texas generates more electricity from coal than any other state, coal is not the largest contributor to the state’s energy production. Nearly 47% of energy in Texas was generated by natural gas. Coal accounted for about 34% of the state’s energy mix. In order to meet the high energy demand across the state, Texas is also at the forefront of one renewable energy source. Last year, the state generated 37,400 GWh from wind, more than any other state in the country.
  
  Read more at 24/7 Wall St.

Elon Musk Says Climate Change Refugees Will Dwarf Current Crisis

Elon Musk, co-founder of electric carmaker Tesla Motors, warned on Thursday that climate change will spark a refugee crisis of catastrophic proportions if no action is taken.

In a speech in Berlin, the Tesla chief executive said Europe's current wave of people seeking asylum, prompted mostly by political violence, will be dwarfed as fresh water becomes scarce, food supplies become insecure and weather changes in the coming decades. 

"Today's refugee problem is perhaps a small indication of what the future will be like if we do not take action with respect to climate change," Musk told an audience at Germany's Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy. "Today, the challenge is in terms of millions of people, but in the future, based on what the scientific consensus is, the problem will be in the hundreds of millions and much more severe."

Volkswagen's ongoing scandal over cheating on nitrogen oxide emissions tests on its diesel vehicles is a troubling, Musk said, but it's a small issue compared with the problem of overall carbon dioxide emissions.

The billionaire has devoted much of his career to reducing the use of fossil fuels. Besides running an electric car company, he serves as the chairman of SolarCity, a solar panel manufacturer. Earlier this year, both missions merged, when Tesla announced a battery pack that would allow buildings to store excess solar energy generated throughout the day for use at night.

"I think it's very important that we take action today to recognize that we are making a very significant change to the chemical constituency of the atmosphere and oceans," Musk said. "One that is almost impossible to reverse."

Climate change remains a contentious issue in the United States as some lobby groups, often acting on behalf of companies that benefit from the carbon economy, sow doubt with the scientific consensus of humankind's role in warming the planet. But in Germany, a country Musk called "the best in the world when it comes to solar power," facts about the climate are much more widely accepted.

Still, Musk said even Germany has a long way to go. Despite the country's aggressive transition to renewable energy, a program called Energiewende, Germany remains dependent on vehicles fueled by gasoline and diesel. The scandal engulfing Volkswagen -- the world's largest automaker by sales and, until now, the pride of Germany manufacturing and exports -- only serves to highlight the problem. 

"If you go 20, 30, 50 years in the future, what do you say to your kids or your grandkids? It's almost, like, scientists have all said that these bad things are going to happen, it's, like 97 percent," Musk said. "So, to say to your kids or grandkids, like, 'Did nobody tell you?' No, everyone was telling us. 'So why didn't you do anything?' What's the answer? I think it's very important that we do something."

Watch the full speech below. Musk begins talking at 9:03:

Here's The Joke Of A Sustainability Report That VW Put Out Last Year

Now that we know Volkswagen purposefully rigged 11 million vehicles to circumvent environmental rules, releasing an enormous amount of pollutants into the atmosphere, the company’s Sustainability Report from 2014 comes off as a horrible joke.

"It's a jaw-dropper. So unbelievable," Linda Greer, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council told The Huffington Post.

In the report, which was reviewed by consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers, the automaker details its commitment to the customer, its employees and, of course, to the environment. “Environment” is mentioned 335 times over 156-pages -- an average of twice per page. 

“The Volkswagen Group has a long tradition of resolute commitment to environmental protection.” -- page 86.

“We intend to put our creative powers to good use for the benefit of people and the environment." -- page 14.

As we now know, Volkswagen put its creative powers to use in a far less noble way, devising software to purposefully cheat on emissions tests and secretly installing it its diesel vehicles. On Wednesday, chief executive Martin Winterkorn was forced to quit his job at the world’s largest automaker in the wake of the growing scandal and in anticipation of billions in fines, lawsuits and increasing customer rage. More firings are on deck.

VW’s report follows a long tradition of companies using self-reported data -- sometimes certified by well-paid consulting firms -- to make broad declarations of ethical commitment, used to reassure the public that companies aren't just profit-seeking monsters. These are called “corporate social responsibility” reports, "CSR" is the biz lingo. This is a huge movement; most corporations produce these things. Here’s Coca-Cola’s. And Ikea’s. And Exxon-Mobil’s.

And, of course, not all of these efforts are mere publicity ploys. Some companies take this stuff very seriously, even tying environmental goals to executive pay -- an extremely sigficant matter. But in the wake of the VW scandal, it’s going to be harder for anyone to believe a word in these reports.

“[Volkswagen] will probably severely tarnish this entire movement,” writes Greer in a blog post. She’s written before about the key danger of CSR programs: that they end up as merely shiny promotional efforts that allow businesses to sidestep true responsibility for their endeavors.

"There are some companies doing good things," Greer told HuffPost. "Oftentimes they're just doing it and not necessarily putting it in a report."

Yet many efforts are sideshows. Companies give money to philanthropies, for example, but fail to examine the core parts of their businesses that need attention.

Volkswagen will probably severely tarnish this entire movement. Linda Greer, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Greer is working with Target now on cleaning up environmental issues in the retailer's supply chain. She also commends Apple for dealing with pollution issues overseas. "They have a CSR report, but I think they are walking the walk more than just talking the talk," she said of Apple.

VW’s absurd document follows a long tradition. BP is also notorious for the false promise of its environmental slogans. The oil company won plaudits for acknowledging the reality of global warming and for the slogan “Beyond Petroleum” back in 2000. Then, in 2010, BP caused one of the worst oil spills in history. 

By contrast, Exxon Mobil after the Exxon Valdez disaster became “religious about safety standards,” writes Chrystia Freeland for the Washington Post in 2010. Getting the oil out of the ground and moving it around the world without killing anyone or destroying the ocean is a core social responsibility.

So is adhering to environmental regulations, which VW brazenly decided to forgo.

Companies need to start with those simple goals before moving on to marketing materials.

Apple Might Release An Electric Car In 4 Years

ADVERTISEMENT

Apple seems pretty keen to unleash an electric car soon.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the company is aiming to roll out a vehicle by 2019. The 600-person team working on the project, which is code-named "Titan," is set to expand threefold.

The vehicle is unlikely to be completely autonomous, though one with self-driving capabilities may be unveiled eventually, according sources involved in the matter who spoke to the Journal. Some also expressed doubt that Apple would be able to meet its 2019 target.

There's been much speculation about Apple's plans to break into the automobile market. The company has made several high-level industry hires in the past year: Doug Betts, formerly of Toyota, Nissan and the Chrysler Group, joined in July; and Paul Furgale, a robotics specialist, left his former post at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology earlier this year.

Last month, The Guardian reported that Apple was looking into testing robotic cars at a former naval base with high-level security near San Francisco. 

Apple may be feeling increased pressure from Google, which recently named John Krafcik, a former CEO of Hyundai Motors America, as chief of its self-driving car project. Google has been testing self-driving cars for years, and it began driving trials on its new egg-shaped prototype in May.

Google's far from the only other company with autonomous vehicles on the road, however, and there's been at least one run-in (or near-run-in) with a Google car and another self-driving prototype.

A Lot Of Managers Want to Raise The Minimum Wage, Too

A 64 percent majority of hiring and human resource managers think the minimum wage should be raised in their states, according to a new online Harris Poll commissioned by CareerBuilder. That's a slight increase from the 62 percent who said the same thing last year.

In the poll, released Friday, just over a quarter of the managers said they worked at firms that had hired minimum-wage workers this year. Among that group, 69 percent said they wanted the wage increased.

“As big name brands take measures to increase pay for minimum wage workers and the market overall grows more competitive for skilled labor, employers are going to start feeling more wage pressure when trying to attract and retain employees at all levels within the organization," Rosemary Haefner, the chief human resources officer at CareerBuilder, said in a statement.

The vast majority of the representatives of the firms surveyed believe that $7.25, the current federal hourly minimum wage, isn't fair, with more than 60 percent saying it should be increased to $10 or more. Just a small fraction, however, supported the idea of a $15 minimum wage -- a proposal that has the backing of many labor groups, including the Service Employees International Union.

Other polls have found a similar divide in the nation as a whole. While a majority of the public backs a $10.10 minimum wage, according to a July YouGov poll, support for a $15 wage remains lower, with Republicans substantially more likely to oppose the greater amount.

The CareerBuilder poll also found that Americans in minimum wage jobs mostly find it difficult to make ends meet. Just 33 percent of those who work at the minimum wage now, or who have done so in the past, said that they were able to make ends meet financially. Nearly half said they needed to take more than one job to stay afloat.

The survey used an online panel to reach 2,321 hiring and human resource managers in the private sector ages 18 and over, and 3,039 full-time private-sector employees ages 18 and over, between May 14 and June 3.

 

Europe's Refugee Crisis Spawns A Billion-Dollar Industry

Europe's refugee crisis is not only an urgent humanitarian disaster, but has also spawned an incredibly lucrative industry. Refugees and migrants are spending immense sums of money in attempts to reach Europe, siphoning more than billion dollars a year into an underground economy of traffickers. Likewise, EU member states are increasing funds for border control programs and deportations to stop people from entering their nations.  

Between 2000 and June 2015, migrants and refugees have paid traffickers over 16 billion euros to reach Europe, according to The Migrants' Files, a data journalism organization that has analyzed thousands of payments to smugglers to estimate the size of the trafficking market.

While that figure may seem astronomical, The Migrants' Files says it's a conservative number that doesn't include recent months of record migration.

More than 381,000 people have attempted to enter Europe by sea so far in 2015, dwarfing the number of journeys made in previous years. There were nearly 130,000 sea arrivals in the Mediterranean this August alone, up from around 33,000 arrivals during the same month in 2014. Given the exponential increase, the money traffickers receive likely far exceeds The Migrants' Files' estimate. 

Syrians make up the largest group of migrants and refugees -- accounting for just over half of the people making the trip -- while Afghans and Eritreans are the next most-represented nationalities.  

Traffickers have charged many people thousands of euros for the trip to Europe. Smuggling routes vary depending on the region, and can consist of thousands of miles of travel to get to the Mediterranean. African migrants and refugees often pass through trafficking hubs in cities like Agadez in Niger or Sabha in Libya. Once they arrive, smugglers take them in truck convoys to the Libyan coast.

One of the more popular routes this year runs through the Balkans. Many people travel from Turkey toward Greece and beyond, passing through Hungary to more hospitable countries like Germany and Austria. 

It can cost around 2,500 euros per person to travel from Syria to Germany, according to Der Spiegel, but prices vary according to a person's country of origin. A Libyan smuggler told the Guardian in April that people from sub-Saharan African usually paid less than 1,000 euros, while Moroccans paid no more than 1,500 euros.  

Smugglers often operate within a network, rather than as lone actors. Trafficking organizations have hierarchies for everyone from recruiters and drivers to financiers and organizers, who all carry out specific functions within the group. They're paid through an informal money exchange system that uses banking offices and ticketed receipts, according to Der Spiegel.

Meanwhile, migrants' experiences on their journeys to Europe can be vastly different from what traffickers have promised them. Traffickers often replace proper transport with overloaded, rickety boats that frequently capsize or leave people stranded, or with cramped trucks in which they can suffocate to death. Some travelers face violent armed robberies while at sea.

While there is still no comprehensive policy for addressing smuggling networks and the refugee crisis, European leaders have noticed the growing human trafficking industry.

This year, the EU has ramped up anti-trafficking measures, which included launching a new naval operation this summer in the Mediterranean. But while the deepening crisis has highlighted the importance of Europe's response to smuggling, European nations have already spent billions over the past decade and a half to secure their borders in a policy informally known as "fortress Europe."

The Migrants' Files report finds that the EU and European states allocated more than a billion euros for walls, guard equipment and coordinated border security efforts between 2000 and 2014. This doesn't include more recent projects, like Hungary's 109-mile border fence.

During this period, the EU also publicly funded 39 research and development projects to enhance border security, at a cost of 230 million euros. 

Finmeccanica, a company that handled 16 of these projects, came under fire in 2012 for delivering a shipment of radio equipment to the Bashar Assad government in Syria while the country's revolution was underway.

European countries spent an additional 11.3 billion since 2000 on deportations alone, although The Migrants' Files notes that this is an estimate, because only Belgium keeps a full record of its spending on deportations.

Europe is spending money to combat a trafficking industry it actually helped create, rights groups and migration experts say. They argue that European countries' restrictive border policies have forced refugees and migrants to turn to dangerous trafficking routes.

"Such policies only serve to open a new and lucrative market for smuggling rings, a market which could not exist without this prohibition,” François Crépeau,a U.N. expert on migration, stated in June.

While countries such as Germany and Austria expect to take in hundreds of thousands of refugees this year, other countries and EU officials have balked at the suggestion that they have a humanitarian responsibility to accept asylum claims.

EU ministers are set to meet on Sept. 14 to discuss how to address the crisis, with nations calling for a unified asylum policy.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, called on Wednesday for sweeping reforms that could open up legal channels for migration and overhaul border control policy.

Also on HuffPost: