daveo4porsche

Example: Road Trip to Vegas from San Jose - minimum 4 fast charging stops - EV is not the best way to do it - 9 hours in an ICE - 12-13 hours one way in an EV! A real slog, but doable, but an ICE is way better if time is of the essence. Road Trip from San Jose to Santa Barbra - one stop in San Luis Obispo - charge at hotel in SB, run around SB all day- charge at Hotel each night you're staying - one stop back in SLO on the way home - no problem - and really honestly total travel time isn't much longer if you make the SLO stop a meal break - for that type of EV road trip I don't consider it much of a hassle…

Bay Area to Vegas - only for the truly EV committed - but possible - gas car clearly wins on total time/hassle factor
Bay Area to Santa Barbra - no real big deal and not much of a hassle - nearly equal to an ICE car.
Bay Area to Tahoe - no big deal - one stop at any of the 4 (60 stalls total) Superchargers on 80-N - many chargers at hotels, and superchargers in both South and North Lake Tahoe - no big deal
Bay Area to Grand Cayon - big Hassle factor, but possible - I'd probably rent an ICE because of limited charging options in Grand Canyon proper
Bay Area to Yosemite - no issue, take the EV!

daveo4porsche

the left leaning eco-terrorism radical progressive news source known as Forbes has published the heart wrench account about how the poor poor oil industry is spreading FUD regarding EV's - they document how many of the oil industry arguments against EV's are in fact false, but still persist (many that I've heard on this very forum)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/enrique.../#fb5250e31e58

covered in the article are the top hits for FUD originated by the oil industry:

1. EV's actually pollute more because the grid is fossil fuel based - turns out to be fake - and even if true trend is towards less fossil fuel on the grid
2. Car's don't cause that much pollution, it's industry you have to tackle - again not true transportation is more than 30% and concentrates it where we all live - and love this argument personally in that it's only 30%, so we shouldn't reduce it at all - I'll take a 30% reduction any day any time any place...this is not an argument that we should do nothing - yeah it's only 30% - so lets get that win off the table, and then focus on where we can do better else where…
3. EV's have no range - again wrong there are now choices with more than sufficient range - and this is getting better not worse
4. Batteries use limited/scarce resources and can't be recycled, and they degrade - again fake/wrong/false - supplies will ramp, they can be recycled, and they degrade about 1% for each 30,000 miles kM driven - no worse than ICE cars
5. Oh no we don't make enough electricity to charge all these cars - again false - UK energy authorities have projected no shortage of production for electricity if they need to charge millions of EV's

it just cracks me up to see these arguments trotted out time and time again - when the truth is in fact really really different.

cometguy

Amen. But I'm not sure about the degrading by only 1% for each 30000 km driven (as stated in the article; you changed to 30000 miles).

https://cleantechnica.com/2016/05/31...atteries-last/

My sister's Prius had the battery pack go at 100k miles (150k km) and had to have it replaced then. By the reasoning in this article, she should still have had 95% of the battery capacity left.

daveo4porsche

apologies for the transcription error - I'll fix it in the post - having the battery replaced at 100k miles isn't that big of a deal - and isn't representative of the overall reliability - my wife's Boxster is on it's 3rd PDK tranmission in less than 5,000 miles - things break and need to be replace, but overall the trends are that these things last a long time.

a battery failure is not the same as batteries degrading 1% per 30,000 km driven - LiON batteries do not universally fail after 100,000 miles - that doesn't mean some won't, it just means it's not an inherent outcome - for all practical purposes the batteries outlast the useful life of the car - and once they do fail they can be recycled or repurposed - they are too valuable to end up in landfills.

cometguy

I absolutely agree with the Forbes article and would love to go all-electric now... It's just too early, and not practical enough yet.
But hopefully huge changes will come in the next decade. I would love to walk away from ICE cars forever. Don't need the noise, the exhaust pollution, the supporting of oil corporations, the going to gas stations, the huge maintainance of ICE cars... For now, I'm enjoying my Pan4 ST E-Hybrid, especially the electric part of it, and only going to a gas station once every 700-800 miles...