3 ms·

> ‘charging ABSOLUTELY needs to get to a point where it's on-par with "splash and dash" in the petrol world’ People will accept some increase in inconvenience

by pavlov 3y ago

> ‘charging ABSOLUTELY needs to get to a point where it's on-par with "splash and dash" in the petrol world’ People will accept some increase in inconvenience on a particular metric if the product is a lot better on other metrics. Look at mobile phones. Before the iPhone, all of them had a detachable battery. When Apple came out with a device with a glued-in battery, a lot of people were saying they would never ever buy a phone whose battery can’t be swapped out for a fresh spare. The argument was same as yours: “I can’t possibly wait ten minutes to charge if the phone dies!” Presumably 99.9% of those people now carry a smartphone with a fixed battery.

traceroute66 3y ago
> Presumably 99.9% of those people now carry a smartphone with a fixed battery. Your argument happily co-incides with the point I was making. Smartphones have matured and are now at the point where you easily get a whole day's battery life, maybe a day and a half if you don't use it much. So who cares if the battery is glued in. (And as an aside, phones also charge a lot faster than they used to). EV needs to go through the same maturity process.
- pavlov 3y ago
  But today's smartphones are still nowhere near the convenience of a 2005 Nokia phone which could go several days on one charge, and you could also swap out the battery for a spare. Phones used to do so much less, and the software was optimized to conserve energy on those limited use cases. Similarly EVs don't need to exactly reach the convenience of refueling, it just needs to be good enough in balance.
  - jmaker 3y ago
    How does that analogy apply if you’re trying to justify that one should simply give up that “convenience,” which has just been a basic notion of car driving? In my view it’s rather an inconvenience. I’d rather not have to manage that concern at all. Instead, you suggest to accept an even worse alternative? Smartphones are capable of more, not less. EVs aren’t capable of more than an ICEV, which doesn’t hold up to an analogy.

by pavlov 3y ago

traceroute66 3y ago

> Presumably 99.9% of those people now carry a smartphone with a fixed battery. Your argument happily co-incides with the point I was making. Smartphones have matured and are now at the point where you easily get a whole day's battery life, maybe a day and a half if you don't use it much. So who cares if the battery is glued in. (And as an aside, phones also charge a lot faster than they used to). EV needs to go through the same maturity process.

pavlov 3y ago
But today's smartphones are still nowhere near the convenience of a 2005 Nokia phone which could go several days on one charge, and you could also swap out the battery for a spare. Phones used to do so much less, and the software was optimized to conserve energy on those limited use cases. Similarly EVs don't need to exactly reach the convenience of refueling, it just needs to be good enough in balance.
- jmaker 3y ago
  How does that analogy apply if you’re trying to justify that one should simply give up that “convenience,” which has just been a basic notion of car driving? In my view it’s rather an inconvenience. I’d rather not have to manage that concern at all. Instead, you suggest to accept an even worse alternative? Smartphones are capable of more, not less. EVs aren’t capable of more than an ICEV, which doesn’t hold up to an analogy.