> But as it turns out, it's not even necessarily replacing conventional fuel cars. More than 50% of the trade-ins for the Model 3 are sub-$35K vehicles (new pr

> But as it turns out, it's not even necessarily replacing conventional fuel cars. More than 50% of the trade-ins for the Model 3 are sub-$35K vehicles (new price). >Wealthy buyers are getting them as third cars! Source? >How is the assertion that a $15k gas car that can go 400 miles followed by a 5 minute 100% full up is superior to a $35+ electric car that might make it 300 and then be need a 30+ charge incorrect? Who said that? Are you rhetorical? You don't seem to be familiar with EV ownership if you think that's how people decide to switch. They are a multitude of benefits in EV that makes it okay to spend some 20 minute charging the car after 3h of driving (like having a fully charged battery every morning for peanuts, or not having to spend much on maintenance, or not worrying much about car depreciation, etc). >the article's main point about chargers covering the planet That won't be a problem. Gas stations are already becoming unprofitable so we don't have much of a choice and capital isn't actually lacking (banks are just waiting for the right time to invest). More importantly, all the $$ that are spent on the oil infrastructure will gradually become available for the EV infrastructure (a great upgrade to the grid that will make the switch to renewables even more economical thanks to economy of scale). One has to wonder why the journalist didn't even try to estimate the cost of the oil/ICE infrastructure (capex & opex). Here's one figure: the oil & gaz industry spends ~715 billion USD every year just to maintain the supply! The $6T isn't that big when you factory in everything and when you understand that this will be a multi-decade transition.