Your unpopular (non-political, non-offensive) opinions!

[Bombastinator]

6 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

iirc piston engines are about 30% efficient, an EV only having 50% efficiency doesn't seem that great considering how much electricity is needed to keep a vehicle charged, an F-150 Lighting EV truck can power an average household for up to a week.

As for the electrical grid in the US I don't see it improving unless states were forced to add a lot of solar farms or wind turbines, although mining enough lithium is also another issue if the govt wants everyone to replace their gas car with an EV.

50-30=20. When gas was $1.44/gal gas cars were getting close.  At $5+/gal not so much.  Who knows? Maybe someone will get one of those 2 pistons per cylinder engines working and suddenly gas engines are 60% efficient and electric cars just blow away.  Might happen.  Probably won’t but it might.

[Donut417]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

Oh no $10.  That’s not even 2 gallons of gas.   It will go up though.  Possibly a lot.  That infrastructure buildout has to get paid for somehow.  It would have to go mighty high to even equal that 20% though.

Id be more concerned with states asking to see your odometer and then asking for the "tax" for all the miles traveled. At least with paying tax on gas, its paid at time of purchase and not later. What are you going to do if the Utility decides that your car charger is on a separate meter which they can turn off at any time due to high loads on the grid and can charge you a much higher rate? Early adaptors always pay the early adaptor tax, and tax you they will. Maybe Ill look at an EV in 7 or 10 years from now when we have the infrastructure  setup. But I find it beyond stupid to push EV's before:

 

1.  We have charging stations setup in mass
2.  Charging stations are common on new home builds / people have upgraded to charging stations
3.  We have enough power generation to handle the load. Preferably from renewable or nuclear power
4.  We have enough distribution to get the power from the damn plant to where the power is being used
5. We figured out how to properly tax people for using electric. Such as having a separate power meter for the charger, etc. 
6. We have better battery technology. Because Im not sold on Lithium ION. 
7.  We have a plan to deal with depleted batteries in a real way and not throwing them in the dump
8. We have 1 charging standard and not like 4 competing standards. 

[Bombastinator]

6 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Id be more concerned with states asking to see your odometer and then asking for the "tax" for all the miles traveled. At least with paying tax on gas, its paid at time of purchase and not later. What are you going to do if the Utility decides that your car charger is on a separate meter which they can turn off at any time due to high loads on the grid and can charge you a much higher rate? Early adaptors always pay the early adaptor tax, and tax you they will. Maybe Ill look at an EV in 7 or 10 years from now when we have the infrastructure  setup. But I find it beyond stupid to push EV's before:

 

1.  We have charging stations setup in mass
2.  Charging stations are common on new home builds / people have upgraded to charging stations
3.  We have enough power generation to handle the load. Preferably from renewable or nuclear power
4.  We have enough distribution to get the power from the damn plant to where the power is being used
5. We figured out how to properly tax people for using electric. Such as having a separate power meter for the charger, etc. 
6. We have better battery technology. Because Im not sold on Lithium ION. 
7.  We have a plan to deal with depleted batteries in a real way and not throwing them in the dump
8. We have 1 charging standard and not like 4 competing standards. 

Re: the illegal search thing:

Lol.  Has that ever even happened?  None of those points even relate.  That’s as silly as replacement theory that nut job on Fox News keeps trying to push. 
 

re: the demands

which is to say “never” because the power utilities won’t spend the money to build out infrastructure they can’t recoup on. It’s pretty reasonable.  That’s how cash flow works.  The rolling blackout thing in California and the east coast, and Texas for that matter didn’t happen because of a general holistic demand increase. They happened because of failing inadequate infrastructure and ‘deferred maintainance’.  That’s a landlord term which is a backwards way of saying ‘let stuff fall to crap by not fixing it’. Where the power companies let their stuff rot rather than keep it up, and then people lied about what could happen they even did it while it was happening.

[Donut417]

16 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

because the power utilities won’t spend the money to build out infrastructure they can’t recoup on

Actually if you read the link I posted DTE is building a new Natural Gas plant, which means they are investing in their infrastructure. And unlike Texas who are a bunch of idiots most other states the power company is a LEGAL monopoly and as a result has to follow some direction from the government. DTE even has gotten a permit to build a new reactor at the Fermi Nuclear power plant, the only reason they haven't is due to public pressure. 

 

The fact is if you want your perfect world with your EV this is what has to happen. Because people are not going to want to invest in an EV if well its not as convenient as their gas powered car. The only way to make them convenient is to fix the infrastructure and insure the charging stations are available. What I do get is why they didn't push plug in hybrids. You then incentivize people to put charger in their homes and incentivize gas stations to start offering charging stations. You incentivize utilities to build out better infrastructure over time as usage goes up over time. Instead we put the cart before the horse and we are going to be hurting. What happens when your trying to charge your ride and the utility decides to cut power? You going to call in and tell your boss you cant make it in? 

 

21 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Lol.  Has that ever even happened?  None of those points even relate.  That’s as silly as replacement theory that nut job on Fox News keeps trying to push. 

Last time I bought a used car they did ask what the odometer read. I would imagine if they felt like you lying then they have this thing called PROBABLY CASUE, remember odometer fraud is a Federal Crime with a $10,000 fine and or 3 years in prison. Again they can put a special power meter on your charger, they already do this for central air units, where they can charge different rates based on time of day or shut the appliance off to prevent issues with the grid. The state can charge special taxes based on the power usage on that special meter. At the end of the day, EV owners are going to have to pony up for replacing the gas tax. 

 

 

[Bombastinator]

16 minutes ago, Donut417 said:

Actually if you read the link I posted DTE is building a new Natural Gas plant, which means they are investing in their infrastructure. And unlike Texas who are a bunch of idiots most other states the power company is a LEGAL monopoly and as a result has to follow some direction from the government. DTE even has gotten a permit to build a new reactor at the Fermi Nuclear power plant, the only reason they haven't is due to public pressure. 

 

The fact is if you want your perfect world with your EV this is what has to happen. Because people are not going to want to invest in an EV if well its not as convenient as their gas powered car. The only way to make them convenient is to fix the infrastructure and insure the charging stations are available. What I do get is why they didn't push plug in hybrids. You then incentivize people to put charger in their homes and incentivize gas stations to start offering charging stations. You incentivize utilities to build out better infrastructure over time as usage goes up over time. Instead we put the cart before the horse and we are going to be hurting. What happens when your trying to charge your ride and the utility decides to cut power? You going to call in and tell your boss you cant make it in? 

 

Last time I bought a used car they did ask what the odometer read. I would imagine if they felt like you lying then they have this thing called PROBABLY CASUE, remember odometer fraud is a Federal Crime with a $10,000 fine and or 3 years in prison. Again they can put a special power meter on your charger, they already do this for central air units, where they can charge different rates based on time of day or shut the appliance off to prevent issues with the grid. The state can charge special taxes based on the power usage on that special meter. At the end of the day, EV owners are going to have to pony up for replacing the gas tax. 

 

 

Trying to sell a car and a cop stopping random people on the street and reading their odometers is not the same thing.  Also multiple and random taxation costs have never been implementable.  It’s still silly.  Especially when it’s so much easier to just tax by the gallon or run a general annual tax.  Yes the prevalence of electric cars would throw a wrench into the current taxation system because it becomes harder to charge for fuel.  There are so very many easier ways to do it though.  Why choose the most invasive possible one?

[poochyena]

8 hours ago, Donut417 said:

I thought the point of EV's is to be more environmentally friendly? Burning Natural Gas to produce more power doesn't seem very environmentally friendly to me. 

BUT IT IS
IT LITERALLY IS
Literally where are people getting this idea that gasoline engines are somehow more efficient than coal or gas power plants?? Where? Who is spreading that lie?
An electric car powered by a coal or gas power plant produces less emissions than gasoline car does.

 

8 hours ago, Donut417 said:

our power grid cant handle people using air conditioning. 

We tripled our energy consumption when air conditioning was introduced. If we could scale up electricity production 70 years ago, we can do it again. Its a political issue, not some fundamental power issue.

[Donut417]

5 hours ago, poochyena said:

We tripled our energy consumption when air conditioning was introduced. If we could scale up electricity production 70 years ago, we can do it again. Its a political issue, not some fundamental power issue.

I never said it wasn't possible but when the power company chooses rolling blackouts instead of increasing capacity or waits till the last possible moment to upgrade we have issues. Outside of Texas Power is heavily regulated by the government, so its about time the goverment lean on them hard. 

 

5 hours ago, poochyena said:

BUT IT IS
IT LITERALLY IS
Literally where are people getting this idea that gasoline engines are somehow more efficient than coal or gas power plants?? Where? Who is spreading that lie?
An electric car powered by a coal or gas power plant produces less emissions than gasoline car does.

The point of EV's is to fight climate change right? That means ending our use of Coal, Oil and Natural gas. Building new Natural Gas plants in this day and age is mentally retarded, especially when DTE has a permit to build a new reactor at an already existing Nuclear Power plant. All they need to do is grow some balls and tell the tin foil hat crowd to fuck off. 

 

The government is putting the cart before the horse. We dont have the infusuture setup to handle all of this. Not to mention many dont have the money needed to really utilize an electric car. Not everyone can afford one, or the charges an electrician is going to charge to put in a charger (charging on 110v isnt practical for many). Ive heard registration fees are higher on this as well, not everyone has a large sum just to drop down. I pay like $160 a year for my car, if its much more than that many will struggle. Also lets say DTE does a blackout and you were charging your car, you wake up the next day and do have enough charge to get to work. Do you call your boss and say I cant come in? That happens enough you will get fired. 

 

I stand by the list of demands I made earlier. Thats the only way electric is going to be accepted. I wont buy an electric car until most of that is implemented. 

[Quackers101]

6 hours ago, poochyena said:

BUT IT IS
IT LITERALLY IS

An electric car powered by a coal or gas power plant produces less emissions than gasoline car does.

yes and no, in being "more environmentally friendly" they fall short.

in performance, sure they will be better (unless they mess with this to sell more cars).

 

as they are not exactly more environmentally friendly, the waste of the many generations of EV's + their increase will impact a lot on the earth with toxic metals from being unable to recycle a vast amount of batteries and electronics. Some car manufacturers deal with this better, some have batteries that is a bit more recyclable or have the infrastructure to deal with some of it.

 

it can be fixed, but its going to take a good amount of time.

 

then there is having EV for cars being an option, when some dont have enough range either. and not every area being as advanced with having enough power or grid to support it.

Edited May 18, 2022 by Quackers101

[poochyena]

3 hours ago, Donut417 said:

The point of EV's is to fight climate change right? That means ending our use of Coal, Oil and Natural gas.

No. The goal is to reduce those. Its not a binary switch where it must be all or none. Suggesting that electric cars that get power from coal or gas power plants is no better than using gasoline cars is just wrong.

3 hours ago, Donut417 said:

The government is putting the cart before the horse. We dont have the infusuture setup to handle all of this.

again, thats political. We CAN have it, and its being built.

4 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Also lets say DTE does a blackout and you were charging your car, you wake up the next day and do have enough charge to get to work. Do you call your boss and say I cant come in? That happens enough you will get fired. 

The same thing that happens if there is a gas shortage? This is an completely made up fear. The odds of you being at near 0% charge when arriving home and the power being out for 8+ hours is almost non-existent outside of a major disaster. What is much much more likely if your your car to have 50%+ charge, and when the power goes out, you can use your car's battery to power your house.

3 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

their increase will impact a lot on the earth with toxic metals from being unable to recycle a vast amount of batteries and electronics. Some car manufacturers deal with this better, some have batteries that is a bit more recyclable or have the infrastructure to deal with some of it.

you presented both the problem and the solution within 2 sentences.

3 hours ago, Quackers101 said:

dont have enough range

How much is "enough"

[Quackers101]

56 minutes ago, poochyena said:

How much is "enough"

depends on the car and the person and cost. at least price gets a bit lower and with more range, but some with added technology problems (tech in most cars not just EV) and battery? still some issues with both types of cars, and it can be nice to move over to EV. as most that has experienced troubles with EV, its not a great experience and little one can do. While other cars have their own troubles, not as locked down and can still move unlike EV's depending on the issue.

[poochyena]

15 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

depends on the car and the person and cost. at least price gets a bit lower and with more range, but some with added technology problems (tech in most cars not just EV) and battery? still some issues with both types of cars, and it can be nice to move over to EV. as most that has experienced troubles with EV, its not a great experience and little one can do. While other cars have their own troubles, not as locked down and can still move unlike EV's depending on the issue.

Ok, lets try this again. Try actually answering the question this time.
You said "some dont have enough range", and I want you to tell me, how much is "enough" range? I would like a single number response in either miles or km.

[Quackers101]

13 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Ok, lets try this again. Try actually answering the question this time.
You said "some dont have enough range", and I want you to tell me, how much is "enough" range? I would like a single number response in either miles or km.

its still unknown and depend on the area and usage. (also most rely on home and at work charging)

but if like what was said in this video, if EV's can average around 500km or while currently it might be around 313 km? some would be fine with 200-300.

but places without good grid and electricity is nothing like storing fuel in liquid form (currently).

Edited May 18, 2022 by Quackers101

[poochyena]

9 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

if EV's can average around 500km

The new F-150 Lightning and ioniq 5 both have ~500km range versions.

 

11 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

some would be fine with 200-300

200 - 300 range is the standard for most new EVs.

 

12 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

but places without good grid and electricity is nothing like storing fuel in liquid form (currently).

Anywhere without "good grid and electricity" isn't going to have good access to gasoline either. Unless you plan to take a road trip through completely barren areas devoid of any human life for hundreds of km, then there is no issue in driving an electric car. ~300k is many hours of driving. Unless you are a delivery driver, the odds of you needing to drive for multiple hours non-stop is almost 0.

 

[pythonmegapixel]

If mass adoption of EVs forces people on long journeys to take a break every few hours, more frequently in poor weather conditions (as they should be doing anyway to avoid getting tired enough to lose concentration), that is a good thing for road safety.

 

Similarly if it encourages people to maximise their car's efficiency, that is also a good thing.

[Avocado Diaboli]

As someone who frequently goes on day long tours with my motorcycle, I find a lot of concerns surrounding EV range a bit weird. Do you have to plan out your route and stops with an electric car? Yes. But my motorcycle with its piddly 12.5 l gas tank has a range of around 150 km, give or take, since I mostly ride around the mountains. So I also drive through a lot of sparsely populated areas and have to think ahead where I'll find a gas station, since there aren't a ton of alpine passes with gas stations all the way up. And you know what you could put up there? A bunch of solar and wind generators. Most bikers already stop at each of the summits so they can grab a coffee and charge their bikes up there.

 

And realistically, if you drive with a car that has a 500 km range and you drive at the regular highway speed limit of 120 km/h, you're looking at four hours continuous driving before you have to charge. So you can start off in the morning, grab a coffee after 2 hours while you top up. Around lunch time your battery will be empty, so grab a meal while the car charges back up and you're good to go to repeat the same pattern in the afternoon. I don't really see it as that big of a problem for longer journeys.

 

The only reasons why I'm currently not owning an electric car is because 1) I'm not wealthy enough to buy a new car outright and I'm still hesitant about the used market with regards to the longevity of the batteries and how expensive an eventual replacement would be, 2) I have no infrastructure to charge a car at home since I park my car in the shared parking garage of my apartment complex, which isn't wired up for this sort of thing yet. Neither of those reasons have anything to do with range, which would realistically only ever come into play a handful of times per year anyway, which isn't a good reason to not buy an electric car anyway. Because by that logic, everybody should be sporting a Mercedes Sprinter or something similar for those handful of cases per year where it comes in handy to have a car with that much cargo space. But you don't do that, because you don't specifically buy a vehicle for use cases that rarely if ever come up.

[Bombastinator]

8 hours ago, Donut417 said:

I never said it wasn't possible but when the power company chooses rolling blackouts instead of increasing capacity or waits till the last possible moment to upgrade we have issues. Outside of Texas Power is heavily regulated by the government, so its about time the goverment lean on them hard. 

 

The point of EV's is to fight climate change right? That means ending our use of Coal, Oil and Natural gas. Building new Natural Gas plants in this day and age is mentally retarded, especially when DTE has a permit to build a new reactor at an already existing Nuclear Power plant. All they need to do is grow some balls and tell the tin foil hat crowd to fuck off. 

 

The government is putting the cart before the horse. We dont have the infusuture setup to handle all of this. Not to mention many dont have the money needed to really utilize an electric car. Not everyone can afford one, or the charges an electrician is going to charge to put in a charger (charging on 110v isnt practical for many). Ive heard registration fees are higher on this as well, not everyone has a large sum just to drop down. I pay like $160 a year for my car, if its much more than that many will struggle. Also lets say DTE does a blackout and you were charging your car, you wake up the next day and do have enough charge to get to work. Do you call your boss and say I cant come in? That happens enough you will get fired. 

 

I stand by the list of demands I made earlier. Thats the only way electric is going to be accepted. I wont buy an electric car until most of that is implemented. 

In place?  No, of course not.  We’re going to have to build some.   Dems have been trying to for 30 years but it keeps on being blocked and filibustered and stuff.

 

One of the points is to do that.  It doesn’t seem to be the currently driving one though in a lot of cases.  The fact that their amortized cost is also lower is a big one atm.  If you ignore the battery. Electric cars are a ton cheaper than gas cars.  There’s just a lot less to em.  So an electric car with a cheap battery will own all over a gas car price wise.  It turns out you don’t even need a 100mi range for the vast majority of people which means less joules which means cheaper battery pack which means cheaper car. 

[Quackers101]

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

So I also drive through a lot of sparsely populated areas and have to think ahead where I'll find a gas station, since there aren't a ton of alpine passes with gas stations all the way up. And you know what you could put up there? A bunch of solar and wind generators. Most bikers already stop at each of the summits so they can grab a coffee and charge their bikes up there.

which like you say is a nice thing about it, while the liquid fuel can be easier to fuel up etc, but not something you can "find" on its own. That you can get electricity from a lot of areas and tools to generate such power. If EV allowed it, that an emergency/remote charging station can be deployed and connected to the car. like wind masts and solar systems to be deployed or built in. if one are able to charge with them at all or being used. if solar built in, what level of maintenance needs to be done for it to work when needed. As all these factors can also lay down more uncertainty. of course so could it with liquid fuel and stations too.

 

not saying one shouldn't get an EV, just that it's not as great currently or as green as some say it is.

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

And realistically, if you drive with a car that has a 500 km range and you drive at the regular highway speed limit of 120 km/h, you're looking at four hours continuous driving before you have to charge. So you can start off in the morning, grab a coffee after 2 hours while you top up. Around lunch time your battery will be empty, so grab a meal while the car charges back up and you're good to go to repeat the same pattern in the afternoon. I don't really see it as that big of a problem for longer journeys.

As many has experienced with EV's is the breakdown of chargers, could be malware, damage, software bugs, broken cable etc. (some less likely than others).

Then you also need power grid supporting it, little to no queue, some charge slower than others, enough chargers, a network for it, not messing with different types of chargers (when tesla wanted to take over with custom connectors) and if its AC or DC. So even if one planned correctly, the chargers could be broken when you get there, getting stuck with no good option to get going.

1 hour ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

The only reasons why I'm currently not owning an electric car is because 1) I'm not wealthy enough to buy a new car outright and I'm still hesitant about the used market with regards to the longevity of the batteries and how expensive an eventual replacement would be,

 

But you don't do that, because you don't specifically buy a vehicle for use cases that rarely if ever come up.

yes which is hard to say what is the real need for it, longer range is always great (if not it totally destroys battery lifetime).

Also that batteries degrade and will lose charge, where smaller EV's that has around 50-180km will become less over time, some by 5% to much higher charge lost. Also charge lost due to weather or climate.

2 hours ago, poochyena said:

The new F-150 Lightning and ioniq 5 both have ~500km range versions.

 

200 - 300 range is the standard for most new EVs.

it's becoming a standard yes, and its great to see new EV's with around 500km range. Just means more options and longer driving.

Hopefully not some bad battery tech, that will reduce it's lifespan or is only to get that range.

Edited May 18, 2022 by Quackers101

[Bombastinator]

3 minutes ago, Quackers101 said:

which like you say is a nice thing about it, while the liquid fuel can be easier to fuel up etc, but not something you can "find" on its own. That you can get electricity from a lot of areas and tools to generate such power. If EV allowed it, that an emergency/remote charging station can be deployed and connected to the car. like wind masts and solar systems to be deployed or built in. if one are able to charge with them at all or being used. if solar built in, what level of maintenance needs to be done for it to work when needed. As all these factors can also lay down more uncertainty. of course so could it with liquid fuel and stations too.

 

not saying one shouldn't get an EV, just that it's not as great currently or as green as some say it is.

As many has experienced with EV's is the breakdown of chargers, could be malware, damage, software bugs, broken cable etc. (some less likely than others).

Then you also need power grid supporting it, little to no queue, some charge slower than others, enough chargers, a network for it, not messing with different types of chargers (when tesla wanted to take over with custom connectors) and if its AC or DC. So even if one planned correctly, the chargers could be broken when you get there, getting stuck with no good option to get going.

yes which is hard to say what is the real need for it, longer range is always great (if not it totally destroys battery lifetime).

Also that batteries degrade and will lose charge, where smaller EV's that has around 50-180km will become less over time, some by 5% to much higher charge lost.

Also charge lost due to weather or climate.

All of the negatives seem to apply equally to has cars though.  Standardization has been halting, but it is moving.  That had to be done with gas cars too, it was just so long ago as to be outside anyone’s living memory.  One method I understand was to run a car on little bottles of cleaning fluid.  Those cars only wanted that cleaning fluid.  Very different stuff from modern day gasoline, which is standardized.  The whole leaded gas thing happened because some dude did a bunch of research.  Then more research was done some time later and there was unleaded gas.  These days some cars are “flex fuel” and will run on gasohol where many other cars won’t.  Get an old car designed for leaded gas and you have to put in an additive along with the gas to make it work right. 

[IPD]

22 hours ago, Donut417 said:

 

 Also motorcycles are only good when the weather is good. In the winter you will be forced to put it up for the season. 

You don't really know any hardcore bikers do you?  I've known a few people who would only NOT ride their motorcycle to work--if the snowplows hadn't yet made it through.

[Bombastinator]

20 minutes ago, IPD said:

You don't really know any hardcore bikers do you?  I've known a few people who would only NOT ride their motorcycle to work--if the snowplows hadn't yet made it through.

There are bikes made for snow.  There’s a Russian multi wheel drive one with a non removable sidecar.  Supposed to be absurdly rugged.  Has a cult following.

[Donut417]

32 minutes ago, IPD said:

You don't really know any hardcore bikers do you?  I've known a few people who would only NOT ride their motorcycle to work--if the snowplows hadn't yet made it through.

Well around here when the snow plows run thru they generally take large chunks out of the road. Hit one of those pot holes going fast enough and your dead. When Michiganders say we have the shitiest roads in the country, we are not joking. This last winter was not kind to many roads, it got so bad on one of the local roads they had to close it temporary to fix it. 

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Well around here when the snow plows run thru they generally take large chunks out of the road. Hit one of those pot holes going fast enough and your dead. When Michiganders say we have the shitiest roads in the country, we are not joking. This last winter was not kind to many roads, it got so bad on one of the local roads they had to close it temporary to fix it. 

I understand rain is more painful than snow if not more dangerous.  I’ve heard of people wearing wetsuits to ride in the rain because the foam rubber absorbs the blows from the raindrops and it’s not nearly as painful.  Not doing so is apparently like someone shooting needles at you.  The big danger with snowy roads is trying to turn and hitting a patch of ice.  Dead straight is more or less safe, but attempt to turn on it and bad things happen.  I think this is the idea behind the non removable side car.  3 wheels. 

[IPD]

11 hours ago, Donut417 said:

Well around here when the snow plows run thru they generally take large chunks out of the road. Hit one of those pot holes going fast enough and your dead. When Michiganders say we have the shitiest roads in the country, we are not joking. This last winter was not kind to many roads, it got so bad on one of the local roads they had to close it temporary to fix it. 

Again, that's a governance problem, not an inherent limitation of driving surface.  Michigan's problems, imho, are largely self-inflicted.  Just like California's.

[IPD]

I think the reason EV is having teething problems is because you are asking people to approach it from the wrong end of the spectrum.  Replacing the existing transportation grid is not going to happen.  The most you can hope for is replacing vehicles on the roads--air traffic will likely be permanently tethered to liquid fuels--even if renewable and bio based.

 

First target should be power equipment.  Indoor and outdoor.  Indoor tools are largely this way already, and nearly every contractor you see will be using battery powered tools.  Sure, originally these were still electric and corded.  But the battery tech going mainstream really pushed NiCad out of the forefront, which really helped advance technology.  The next logical step was outdoor power equipment.  If you can utilize the same battery tech (or even the same batteries--ala Ryobi), you can eliminate the old 1980's standard of having 3+ gas cans in every garage, each with a different mixture of fuel:oil for 2-stroke engines.  From there, it scales up bigger and bigger.  Walk behind lawn mowers.  Riding lawn mowers.  Etc.

 

Starting from the small end allows for technology to mature, adoption to broaden, and infrastructure to grow.  Right now, pushing for cars and trucks to be viable as cross-country options isn't really rational--given that the range required to make them viable means they will be priced outside the realm of most consumers.  The F150 Lightning looks great on paper, but to get that 300 mile upgraded battery, you'd have to plunk down $65,000+.  So not only are you fighting in infrastructure of sporadic fueling stations (which is much, much worse than in a conventional gas/diesel vehicle)--you are fighting the fact that the cost has priced most consumers out of the market.  And running out of charge is a much more complex problem than simply having a spare gas can in your trunk and hitching a ride to the nearest station to grab some spare fuel.  And don't get me started on towing with your EV and how few charging stations are designed to accommodate vehicles with a trailer attached.

 

Where the USA has gone full retard on EV's is where we are now.  Instead of pushing full-size EV's that cost more than some people will ever spend on any vehicle (and a used-market value that is abysmal at best) we should be pushing for EV's that were never designed for interstate traffic.  Electric motorcycles.  You want to reduce pollution in urban areas, traffic congestion, and allow for more people to adopt technology by having a lower entry barrier of cost?  Make electric motorcycles.  Not those $20-30 grand glorified shitbikes that everyone thinks consumers want (news flash: they don't).  Consumers want a $10,000-or-less electric motorcycle that can do commuter-range and "highway speeds if necessary".  You know, the same segment where entry-level motorcycles are already slotted.

 

Much easier to convince people to try out an EV if they know that they'll be within range of their own home on a daily basis--and they don't need another mortgage to afford it.

[Donut417]

55 minutes ago, IPD said:

Again, that's a governance problem, not an inherent limitation of driving surface.  Michigan's problems, imho, are largely self-inflicted.  Just like California's.

Doesnt matter who's problem it is. Because the problem exist there are solutions that wont work. We cant make the government do the right thing. Because electing the other guy leads to the same bull shit. The really fucked up part of it, the road Im referring to is an entrance/exit to Detroit Metro Airport. So literally people coming to visit, are having negative impressions of Michigan. I mean negative impressions already exist due to Detroit, but the crap roads make it worse.