WetEV said:
GRA said:
As I've repeatedly stated that your situation is very different than that of most Americans,
As is your situation very different from most people. BEVs would work for a lot of people before they will work for you.
I've never said otherwise, although as we re-urbanize and households continue to shrink (with the largest U.S. household size demographic, for the first time ever, being singles like me), more and more people are choosing/able to go car-less/car-lite. It's unlikely that most of the country will ever live like NYC residents, the majority of which don't own cars, but we are moving that way. And outside the U.S., especially in the countries that will see the most income/car growth over the next several decades, I'm considerably more typical.
WetEV said:
GRA said:
As for longer-ranged affordable BEVs, once they arrive they may certainly be usable as some people's sole car, although I expect they still won't have enough range to take more than 5-10% of that market, given current and (my guess) likely near/midterm conditions as well as consumer needs/desires/expectations. We'll see.
Change happens over time. Hybrid cars, for example. Larger up front cost, lower running expense. Break even point is around $1.50 gasoline or less.
If longer ranged affordable BEVs hit 5% market share by 2020 I'll be surprised. And pleased. Hybrids have not done so.
I'm not expecting it to happen by 2020 if things continue much as they are, more like the end of the Gen 2 model runs, say 2022-24. I expect PHEVs will remain the mainstream choice for now, as they can provide most of the benefit at a lower price, one which is approaching the point where the TCO difference is probably not significant for those who are willing to make a small financial sacrifice to get the other benefits, environmental or other. I think getting to a 20 mile AER PHEV for $25k MSRP is more important for now than a 200 mile AER BEV for $35k.
WetEV said:
GRA said:
And yet, the fraction of people who find BEVs compelling given their current capabilities, even when bribed with other people's money, is minimal. We know that there's some even more minimal fraction who will drive this or that type of AFV regardless of the cost, because they're enthusiasts or ideologues, but we can't count on them for significant change.
I don't see how we get significant change anytime soon. I have, and I will, work for change that can be achieved.
Right, which is why I stay away from the 'ideal' choice of enthusaists and opt for the one(s) I think mainstream consumers will be willing to adopt in large numbers. That means minimum change from what they're used to i.e. minimal learning needed, and no sacrifices.
WetEV said:
GRA said:
BTW, turning your statement around, I think you meant that only those people who don't have to use expensive public charging will find BEVs economic. Since that leaves out the majority of the world's urban population, I don't see that as acceptable.
Present day, sure. I have not a clue what the world is going to be like in 2050. If you think you do, you are probably wrong.
Yup. OTOH, I probably won't be around to care. That being said, any major energy change takes decades, so all I can do in the meantime is try to encourage people to consider stepping just a little bit out of their comfort zone, and not oversell new tech that will draw a backlash when it comes up short, and causes instant rejection out of hand despite later improvements that fix the problems. I've seen that happen in the past (and am worried that Tesla's Autopilot issues may have that effect, as it's clearly unable to achieve anything like the nine 9s reliability needed, at the moment. Using the public to beta test critical safety equipment is a big no-no).
