surfingslovak wrote:What pushed the argument over the edge, in my opinion, was the "don't drive a BEV" statement. I don't even know what to respond to that.
Sorry. To clarify, it was directed specifically
at GRA who appears to be pouting that BEVs are no use because he
won't get the range the manufacturers claim at his
desired max-velocity burn down the highway. (And apologies to him if that is not the intent of his posts, but it certainly sounds like it.)
My comments here were not, at all, intended to be directed at those who, as you say, are already well aware of the issued - that is to say, folks who already use EVs. Apologies that this comment could be misread out of context with GRA's apparent position. I was merely repeating what is known, for GRA's benefit.
Since I've been posting here for quite a while most people already know my position, but to repeat it for _your_ benefit, BEVs will only reach _mass_ adoption when they have acceptable ranges the way the average motorist actually drives, i.e. without making all the compromises early adopters/extreme greens are willing to make. That means you don't have to drive slower than the flow of traffic, you don't have to put up with not using the HVAC, and you don't have to take side roads instead of using the freeway. No pouting involved, just an acknowledgement of the facts.
Most drivers aren't motivated by environmental ideology, they're motivated by their pocketbook and convenience. For mass adoption, the range of BEVs needs to increase to the point where the typical driver doesn't even have to think about the fact that they're driving a BEV instead of an ICE, except that they plug it in at night when they get home. And this has to be at an affordable price.
If you go over to the MyRAV4EV forum, you won't see complaints about the car's inadequate range in daily use, unlike the case here. Per Tony William's tests the RAV4EV will go 142 miles @ 65 mph in ideal conditions when new, which implies a real world range of about 100 miles when making reasonable allowances for reserve, HVAC use, winds etc. and some degradation. Even at 70% of original capacity, the car will still go 70 miles or so with a reasonable reserve, where the LEAF is down in the totally inadequate 30-40 mile range depending on the temperature. Thus, about 150 miles EPA when new seems to be the necessary range to handle 95% or more or commutes/errands, and that's what's needed for mass adoption in the U.S. But it can't be in a $50k car, $30k or less is what's needed.
So much for daily drivers. Trip cars need considerably more range, ultimately at least four hours plus a reserve at whatever the freeway speed limit is (at a minimum; given the way most people actually drive in large parts of the U.S., five or ten mph over the limit is more realistic), with allowances for HVAC use, degradation etc. Not even the Tesla S-85 comes close to that yet (although FCEVs do), but we'll see steady improvement in batteries that will eventually allow it, or else FCEVs will take over the road trips, or we´ll use HEVs/PHEVs/diesels for those. But the Tesla S _does_ have enough range for the majority of weekend trips now, especially given an SC or two en-route. Obviously, they're far too expensive to ever be mass market, but Gen III won't be if Tesla can hit their price point.