3 ms·

I agree with you and at the same time those inadequacies aren't highlighted constructively. The comments are typically vague dismissals of the technology outri

I agree with you and at the same time those inadequacies aren't highlighted constructively. The comments are typically vague dismissals of the technology outright with unhelpful remarks like "this doesn't work for me (and probably not you) because of xyz boundary condition." I would much rather these people not say anything but ideally I would like to hear the feedback be more positive or suggestive in nature like "I drive a 500mi route semi-regularly and I just can't do it in an EV, I'd love if xyz existed so I could go all in on EVs."

tomatocracy 8y ago
Where I think I disagree is that I don't see this as some corner case - to me it's one of the primary use cases for owning a car, and I'd wager the same is true for the population at large - perhaps even second most common after commuting. A huge number of people have relatives/family/friends a 3+ hour drive away. The most constructive answer, I think, is to prefer plug-in hybrids as a drive train option (perhaps the default option) on "normal" cars/SUVs which people actually want to own. This is what Volvo is doing for example. It has a weight (and therefore efficiency) cost but a plugin hybrid with a true 100+ mile range is still incredibly worthwhile. Don't let the best be the enemy of the good. There are still incentives to build out decent fast charging infrastructure in a plugin hybrid world - as stopping to charge instead of stopping for fuel has a cost advantage (though the time cost still needs solving - it's not just time to actually charge, it's also queueing time to be able to use a charger in many places).
- michaelt 8y ago
  The solution I prefer is EVs with enough range for 3-4 hours of highway driving, that can regain a decent fraction of that range in the duration of a 10-15 minute toilet break. Alas, we don't yet have battery tech that combines a 3-4 hour range with recharging at 16x the rate it discharged at, at a price people can afford :)

tomatocracy 8y ago

Where I think I disagree is that I don't see this as some corner case - to me it's one of the primary use cases for owning a car, and I'd wager the same is true for the population at large - perhaps even second most common after commuting. A huge number of people have relatives/family/friends a 3+ hour drive away. The most constructive answer, I think, is to prefer plug-in hybrids as a drive train option (perhaps the default option) on "normal" cars/SUVs which people actually want to own. This is what Volvo is doing for example. It has a weight (and therefore efficiency) cost but a plugin hybrid with a true 100+ mile range is still incredibly worthwhile. Don't let the best be the enemy of the good. There are still incentives to build out decent fast charging infrastructure in a plugin hybrid world - as stopping to charge instead of stopping for fuel has a cost advantage (though the time cost still needs solving - it's not just time to actually charge, it's also queueing time to be able to use a charger in many places).

michaelt 8y ago
The solution I prefer is EVs with enough range for 3-4 hours of highway driving, that can regain a decent fraction of that range in the duration of a 10-15 minute toilet break. Alas, we don't yet have battery tech that combines a 3-4 hour range with recharging at 16x the rate it discharged at, at a price people can afford :)