GRA
Well-known member
WetEV said:
If I lived in Norway, a country ~10% smaller than California, had no need to travel outside it, and had the kind of bribes and infrastructure available to them that we don't have here, I'd have been one of the first 10% to get a BEV. As it is, I expect I'll be somewhere in the 50% range here. As to how long I have to wait, I've already been waiting more than a decade for a ZEV to become available that will allow me to resume taking out of state trips, and I'm damned tired of waiting.
I'm perfectly willing to put this particular round of the argument on hold, although we both know it will burble up again in a month or so. FCEV passenger cars will or won't become a viable consumer option depending on the speed and amount of improvement of BEVs and their infrastructure, vis a vis the rate of FCEVs likewise. FCEV or maybe even H2/ICE heavy transport, OTOH, is definitely going to be a major part of future ZEVs.
WetEV said:
Of course it got too easy, because the FC infrastructure got built, and except for Tesla all of it was built with government subsidies. Now, let's see you drive your e-Tron right now on I-80 between SLC and Cheyenne, or I-90 east of Missoula, or I-94 east of Billings, or I-25 north of . . .well, I could go on, but that poor horse is already dead. For that matter, let's remove all the DCFC stations that were built with government funds, or even just the EA ones (which is certainly government money), and see how well you can take a trip in your e-Tron. How does government-supplied infrastructure for BEVs somehow make it impossible to duplicate for FCEVs, when every government with a Hydrogen Strategy is subsidizing such infrastructure? From California's "2021 Annual Evaluation of Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle Deployment and Hydrogen Fuel Station Network Development", page 6:
OTOH, although we continue to subsidize them here in California (planning to build 200 H2 stations in state), surprisingly there are currently 23 stations either planned or in progress being built solely with private money (16 by First Element, and 7 by Iwatani). Please point to the number of DC FC stations in the U.S. that can say the same. As I previously mentioned, economies of scale have dropped the average grant per H2 station and per kg./day capacity considerably. Further from California's 2021 Annual report:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-09/2021_AB-8_FINAL.pdf Page 4.
Trips will remain easier in FCEVs (or ICEs) than BEVs given the same infrastructure because of their inherent capability, and will do so unless/until BEVs can achieve those same capabilities, or close enough that most people will accept the difference.
https://www.edmunds.com/toyota/mira...en-highway-vs-tesla-supercharger-network.html
I trust you remember which vehicle was faster on the return trip from SLT to Santa Monica, despite the much more limited infrastructure available to it that forced an initial detour 41 miles in the opposite direction then 100 miles on a heading about 70 degrees off the needed one, before finally heading towards the final destination? Just think what two (with a Mirai 2 or Nexo Blue, just 1) more H2 station(s) in the right place(s) would have achieved.
I've laid out what 'close enough' means for me and I suspect most potential BEV buyers, and we're still waiting to hear what you think it will take. I think the 500+ mile range Lucid Air (300 or so on trips when charging 20-80%, 300 miles in 20 min. charging) is pretty close, but until they can reduce the price by 75-80% (and offer a lot more types) it's not going to compete with ICEs, or FCEVs with appropriate infrastructure as above (still need 2/3rds price reduction to compare to a $50k Mirai 2) FTM. When they can combine the Lucid Air's range and charging speed (along with adequate longevity) with something like that below, that will probably do it:
https://www.autoblog.com/2021/10/06/gm-revenue-ev-sales-investor-event/
