I can see electric planes disrupting the general aviation industry. However, we are not anywhere near close of achieving the performance of jet engine aircraft

I can see electric planes disrupting the general aviation industry. However, we are not anywhere near close of achieving the performance of jet engine aircraft, be it speed or range. Passengers are not going to want to fly much slower than they are now. > Most flights are much shorter than that meaning a lot of their weight and range is redundant This is wrong. Most of the weight is fuel, which you can reduce by not topping off the tanks. In fact, airliners will do these calculations multiple times a day for every aircraft. On the other hand, you can not make a battery go lighter by charging it less. > electrical planes don't need to get up that high and can cruise efficiently at both low and high altitudes This is wrong. While they don't have to fiddle with the fuel mixture, they are still subject to air resistance. Unless you are flying slow, but then take out the Airbus from the discussion. And you can still fly slow at high altitudes with larger wings. > So you pay a huge price for getting all that weight up on every take off. That you do. But the weight actually * decreases * over time. Not so with a battery. > nce cruising, operating them as a glider is actually feasible as well because you can safely turn the engines off and on again Noone is going to book a flight on a glider to go anywhere except for leisure. As a part-time glider, you still want as much altitude as you can get (energy, in other words). Even for GA it's a stretch. Many pilots (and the AOPA) recommend landing when you have less than one hour of fuel left. One hour is more than the entire range of most electrical aircraft in development. I can see hybrid GA aircraft getting used (to save on maintenance), and maybe even electric trainers. I am all for electric engines, but the challenges are not just "a few".