But the post you were responding to was describing a Sunday, and you expressed disbelief at what was being described. What your experience Sunday morning has to do with Nava’s account of being in the Pyrenees is eluding me.
And currently in areas subject to wildfires in California there are deliberate power outages that limit home charging and en-route charging. Best to have an ICE vehicle where you can keep a couple of gas cans onhand for both generator/sprinkler system and extending bug-out range.
Many households have two cars so it’s entirely possible to own both an EV and an ICE vehicle.
I’m sure there’s some picturesque communities in the Pyrenees that roll up the side walks on Sunday but that isn’t the norm in the US. Not only that but the people who live in out of the way places are generally smart enough to fuel their vehicle accordingly. The advantage of an ice car is that you can easily extend the range with a can of gas in the trunk.
that’s a good idea in fire zones. You can put a trailer hitch on the ICE car and tow the EV to safety.
None of which excuses you from essentially suggesting that Nava was mistaken about her surroundings, or that her case of running out of fuel was not actually due to a relatively fragile local gasoline distribution network, on Sundays at least.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting that at the moment gasoline distribution infrastructure isn’t more widespread than the fast charger network (though electrical distribution generally most certainly is). All people are saying is that gas stations aren’t literally everywhere, and they don’t spring up magically when needed. Sometimes one actually has to make plans based on gas availability, and this necessity isn’t solely the domain of EVs.
EV cynics on the convenience of charging at home: “Your personal experience isn’t universal!”
EV cynics on availability of gas stations: “My personal experience is universal!”
You can pull up a map of superchargers in Italy if you want to argue the point. At the end of the day range is still driven by ICE infrastructure regardless of the day of the week.
the word you’re looking for is EV realist because EV cars are still a niche market due to battery charge rate and charging infrastructure.
Your coherence levels aren’t improving. What the supercharger network in Italy has to do with gasoline distribution in northern Spain is beyond me.
Also, you’re not actually addressing the point, which is merely that having to plan around fuel availability isn’t the sole province of EVs.
Do you need to drive more than 200 miles per day? Yes -> don’t get an EV.
No ->
Is home charging impossible for you? Yes -> don’t get an EV.
No ->
Do you need to tow a trailer or haul lots of stuff? Yes -> don’t get an EV.
No ->
You should look into getting an EV
55% of Americans live in suburbs, and 64% of Americans own their own home.
I’m convinced that most of the EV detractors here just love going to gas stations. You know, you can still buy lottery tickets and Slim Jims, even if you don’t need gas?
Convinced are you? That’s rather insulting.
And that’s what people that need an ICE hears from pro EV people. Hey, I’m all for EV’s. Just won’t work for me. It will someday I have no doubt.
You may be able to make a better argument if you laid off the insults.
Indeed. Someday autonomous EVs will be mandatory in developed states - and the infrastructure will be “good enough”. That’s already the case in many (sub)urban hot zones. We schmucks elsewhere will just have to wait. Where’s my atomic helicopter?
(dupe, sorry)
Heck, I rent (condo) and it’d work for me; landlord is a-ok with me having a 240VAC circuit run to the garage.
EVs have been part of the market for 10 years and make up less than 3% of vehicles. ICEs have been the car market for 110 years, and represent the remaining share of vehicles.
The infrastructure for ICEs has been developed over that 110 year period. 10 years post ICE introduction, I guarantee that “planning around fuel availability” was a thing, and was likely a thing far longer than that, particularly if you were traveling cross country.
The fact that it isn’t a thing now is not due to the inherent superiority of ICE, it’s due to the relative maturity of the technology. Suggesting that this new technology is inferior because it doesn’t have the vast infrastructure of the technology we’ve been using for the last 110 years is just silliness.
What you’re witnessing is HOW big new technologies like EVs get adopted. It starts with those willing to spend more and be inconvenienced more to have the newest toy. Then moves to more typical people who happen to have a use case ideal for the new tech. Then moves to the average Joe when it shows distinct benefits for the average user. All the while, the infrastructure grows to absorb the new volumes.
not to mention this silly idea that every car company making EVs needs their own charging network. I don’t think I saw them owning their own chains of gas stations.
Spreading misinformation is not realism.
This 100%. One of the cases my co-workers made is that government rebates should be going to building the infrastructure, not buying the vehicles. He made the point that early adopters are more likely to be able to afford the newest and brightest and that the money saved is really not super relevant. If you can pay $110k for a Model X, you can pay $117500 without stretching the bank.
All that subsidy money could be used to put toward more charging stations and re-enforcing the grid to the benefit of all users rather than a few bucks in the individuals pocket; and if you still want to incentivize, offer free charging for a set period or something like that.
Thank you. This is my OP in a nutshell.