If Tesla-class ranges are accepted, I'd think further battery density advances would translate into fewer batteries/lower-weight, rather than maintaining weight

If Tesla-class ranges are accepted, I'd think further battery density advances would translate into fewer batteries/lower-weight, rather than maintaining weight and adding additional range. Particularly if charging speed is also advancing, there wouldn't seem to be any call to increase the range beyond what's acceptable. (And using fewer cells would further-advance the charging-time-per-unit-range numbers) Better to optimize the things people don't like (total charge time) or the things you don't like (high cost of batteries), than to further improve a thing people find acceptable (range). That said, I wouldn't want to build any business plan that assumes the existence of dedicated charging stations simply because I don't see how they survive long-term. Dedicated gas stations exist because fuel storage is a large-enough consideration and pumping a fast-enough endeavor that it just makes sense to make fuel pumps a destination in-and-of-themselves. But if charging stations are a bit of additional electrical work to wire up a handful of spots and charging is going to take a bit of time, why wouldn't every already-viable roadside diner, attraction or hotel just add a few spots (and then a few more, and then a few more...)? And if you're getting a bit of charge from every other stop you make on a road trip (for snacks, restrooms, meals, attractions, overnights, etc) who needs a 30 minute purgatory at a dedicated charging station? Even if you needed a charge, choosing a destination that happened to have a charger would seem a more optimal move than choosing a charging station and then hoping it has a destination attached.