> Impractical compared to what? The U.S. burns about 4 million barrels of gasoline and about the same amount of diesel per day, mostly just pushing ground vehic

> Impractical compared to what? The U.S. burns about 4 million barrels of gasoline and about the same amount of diesel per day, mostly just pushing ground vehicles around. That sort of works, but I wouldn't call it practical in the long run. Maybe you mean it isn't 'sustainable'? ICE vehicles are the epitome of practical, they are used in practice all around the world. > You'd probably need to do more than just the interstates, but then at the same time you don't need to electrify 100% of the length of those highways. Maybe just 10% or 20%, The people who developed that project estimated they'd need to implement it on 25% of all roads. Also the project is just in a technical demonstrator phase. It is literally just a tech demo, and there are still major concerns about adoption, implementation, and maintenance. > This is all kind of simplistic and hand-wavey, but it seems like it passes the threshold of "we should at least consider doing this." I agree it should be tested further, but there are likely significant barriers that will prevent it from being useful, particularly in less dense areas.