Did you sucker a bunch of investors into paying for it?I have a Bonanza because it is cooler than driving, or even flying a Cessna.
Did you sucker a bunch of investors into paying for it?I have a Bonanza because it is cooler than driving, or even flying a Cessna.
Swapping a pack out today is a major PITA. But I remember when swapping a disk drive was a major PITA too, until they made hot-swappable disks. There is no reason engineers can't develop an easily replaceable battery pack, even if it does take a tow motor to lift it in and out.
Now scale that up to 250,000,000 personal vehicles that need to "refuel".
What kind of electrical generation/distribution infrastructure needs to be in place to support that? The current grid? I don't think so...
Who paid for the infrastructure, and how many years did it take to get to the present state?I wonder if folks had a similar conversation about gas stations on internet forums at the beginning of the 20th century when most folks thought a horse was much more convenient and useful than some new fangled motor car.
Who paid for the infrastructure, and how many years did it take to get to the present state?
Ok. But you're using circular logic. You're right, because you know you're right. Yeah, that proves you're right.
They make up 80% or more of the market, but they are niche users. lol Right.All the people arguing here against the practicality of electric vehicles are niche users.
People have been saying this since before Tesla existed. In fact, Tesla's free chargers were going to solve the problem that what you described wasn't happening yet.Gotta admit, Ford, the Model T and his assembly line was a black swan event that changed transportation world wide.
Now, just talking here, but let's say there was a black swan event that changed how cars are powered. Suppose some big gas station company like Shell, Amoco, Casey's, etc. decided it was time to catch that E-Car market. Let's face it, most of their business comes from folks stopping to fuel up, right? So, what if they decided to start putting chargers at their stations. I bet folks would tend to migrate into the stores. Maybe sit down for a bite to eat.
I could even see them setting things up at places of business so workers can get charged up while on the job.
Really, about the only thing preventing this from happening right now is the fact that Tesla has been providing free charges for their more expensive cars, but I understand that's changing.
Keep searching, you'll find the problem for this solution.
They make up 80% or more of the market, but they are niche users. lol Right.
If you think that, you're sadly deluded. Ever visited a city, or another country? From the way you
think, I'm guessing not.
Check your reading comprehension. I said that people whose typical travel wasn't possible with an electric vehicle were a niche market. You don't help your argument by pretending others said things that they didn't.
Here's a graph showing average journey length for trips taken by US drivers in 2009. I feel pretty safe in saying that a 200 mile range electric vehicle is going to work just fine for the vast, vast majority of the population.
Yes, I am deliberately not accepting your unsubstantiated premise that electric cars are the only solution for the future.You seem to be stuck in the past. The rest of us here are talking about how things will change going forwards. Don't you understand that or are you being deliberately obtuse?
Any idiot can see it's not going to change instantly but the tech is at the point where it's starting to swing that way fast.
Sounds like you're back tracking. Wise move.Care to quote where I said that?
We'll come back to this thread in 5 years and see how things have changed.
Yes, I am deliberately not accepting your unsubstantiated premise that electric cars are the only solution for the future.
Swapping a pack out today is a major PITA. But I remember when swapping a disk drive was a major PITA too, until they made hot-swappable disks. There is no reason engineers can't develop an easily replaceable battery pack, even if it does take a tow motor to lift it in and out.
From where are you pulling these "stats"?All the people arguing here against the practicality of electric vehicles are niche users. The people who have a need to do long road trips in tight timescales, regularly enough that renting a car doesn't make sense, are a very small proportion of the American population. They are significantly over-represented on this forum because pilots tend to be the kind of personality who'd also be into setting off independently on that kind of trip.
I'd guess that existing electric vehicles probably meet the needs of 95% of the population, >99% of the time. In Europe, the percentage is probably even higher.
From where are you pulling these "stats"?
I'd be chasing wild geese too, if I were on your side of this discussion.Mmm, I didn't think you could quote anything to support it. Come on, show us all where I said that electric cars are the only option for the future.
Here, I'll post it again before you edit it out:
Right. You reversed your position, but I'm the one that lost. Keep telling yourself that.Thanks for playing anyway, Salty. Next time you engage in a battle of wits, try not to come unarmed
Great, that'll encourage others to jump into the market.Tesla actually has a bunch patents related to this.
Tim
In summary:
@Salty stated that 80% of the population would not buy a EV because it cannot do the mission.
@Katamarino stated that current EV tech can perform for 90+% of the current driving public.
Did I miss something? Or is this a case of miscommunication?
Tim
You got some USDOT, AAA, etc. data? The one you posted made by a Dutch guy. Europe is a hugely different travel environment. Anyone can make a graph "proving" their point.Check your reading comprehension. I said that people whose typical travel wasn't possible with an electric vehicle were a niche market. You don't help your argument by pretending others said things that they didn't.
Here's a graph showing average journey length for trips taken by US drivers in 2009. I feel pretty safe in saying that a 200 mile range electric vehicle is going to work just fine for the vast, vast majority of the population.
Feel free to show me some data that says 80% of the population are making regular, epic cross country drives though.
You got some USDOT, AAA, etc. data? The one you posted made by a Dutch guy. Europe is a hugely different travel environment. Anyone can make a graph "proving" their point.
You got some USDOT, AAA, etc. data? The one you posted made by a Dutch guy. Europe is a hugely different travel environment. Anyone can make a graph "proving" their point.
isn't the sample size noted as 749K?Sure; the guy is Dutch, but working at Columbia University in the US, and the data is from a survey of 150k+ households across the USA.
the difference in our arguments is that mine is based on fact that people aren’t buying ev, and his is 100% his opinion that they should.In summary:
@Salty stated that 80% of the population would not buy a EV because it cannot do the mission.
@Katamarino stated that current EV tech can perform for 90+% of the current driving public.
Did I miss something? Or is this a case of miscommunication?
Tim
the difference in our arguments is that mine is based on fact that people aren’t buying ev, and his is 100% his opinion that they should.
isn't the sample size noted as 749K?
the difference in our arguments is that mine is based on fact that people aren’t buying ev, and his is 100% his opinion that they should.
No. You misstated my position. My position is that if he were right, people would be buying the cars. They aren’t because they know better than him what makes sense for them.Actually no. His position is that current tech meets the mission for most. And eventually due to tech, it will take over the market.
Your argument is because people do not buy it, it there for cannot meet the mission. There is not definitive provable correlation between capability and sales.
Tim