Range anxiety is overrated

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Why is it so hard to get why some people don't want to add yet another vehicle and its associated fixed costs?

It isn't and I guess your situation mean you aren't apart of an ev demographic.
Aka you don't count and aren't an average American

95% of American families in rural and suburban situations have 2 or more cars.

Most families need more than one member working and usually in very different places .

In those cases one could drive a volt or any other ice car and the other could have an EV.

If you can't don't worry about it, ev ownership doesn't affect you.

[gone-ot]

Unfortunately, the ICE-driver cannot "preach" to the devout EV-choir. Conversely, the EV-driver should not "preach" to the reticent ICE shopper:

"...perceptions are REAL to those who hold them..."

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Unfortunately, the ICE-driver cannot "preach" to the devout EV-choir. Conversely, the EV-driver should not "preach" to the reticent ICE shopper:

"...perceptions are REAL to those who hold them..."

False beliefs can be deadly but yes as much fun as it is to preach the reality is few listen. Each person has a situation that works best for them and a situation they "feel" is best for them.

In my mind most people who need to drive should be driving gen i Honda insights and the reality is a car like the insight being adopted would do more than the current ev offerings could.

That is why I am patiently waiting for the mudder phev upgrade for my insight.

The reality though is that there is another demographic being ignored, my x gfriend will never own a car, she feels anything other than human power is too wasteful and expensive.
She lives in a rural area but has her apartment and work chosen such that she can bike or hike everywhere she needs and rent or cab in the seldom situations she has to go further.

I have to say her attitude towards energy use puts myself and everyone in this thread to shame.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Why is it so hard to get why some people don't want to add yet another vehicle and its associated fixed costs?

The majority of households have more than one car. How often to most families have two cars more than 200 miles from home at the same time? In the 20 years my wife and I have been married it has happened twice.

[NeilBlanchard]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

Assuming empty tank or discharged battery:

GAS/DIESEL ≈ 4 minute refuel.

EV > 5 hour (300 minutes) recharge.

When traveling cross country, hope you REALLY like those 5 hr Howard Johnson or McD "rest stops"!

No, quick charges take 30-60 minutes.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by rmay635703

In my mind most people who need to drive should be driving gen i Honda insights and the reality is a car like the insight being adopted would do more than the current ev offerings could.

Which is exactly what I do drive (mostly), and have done since IIRC 2003. While I haven't seen any detailed analysis, I'm fairly sure that most of the current crop of EVs actually use more energy to get from A to B than the Insight does. (And that's even ignoring the use of 'Ludicrous Mode'.)

The majority of households have more than one car. How often to most families have two cars more than 200 miles from home at the same time?

Sure, because you are talking about multiple people sharing cars/vehicles, which clouds the essentials of their use. In your married couple example, you'd need two EVs for daily commuting, plus one vehicle for longer trips, so there's 1/2 an additional vehicle & costs per person.

Take the case of a single person - me, for example :-) I have an Insight for most driving, and a pickup for hauling/rough roads/deep snow &c. Adding an EV with less than 150 mile range would mean a 3rd vehicle with all those additional costs.

No, quick charges take 30-60 minutes.

At what cost in wasted energy and degraded battery life? And that's still longer than I, and I think most people, would want to stand around an EV filling station.

[NeilBlanchard]

Quick charging is very efficient and it doesn't hurt the battery. You can eat a meal, or take a nap, so it is not a problem - it is just different.

Again - an EV is 2-3X more efficient than any ICE can possibly be. So, charging times on long trips is a small compromise - with a YUGE gain.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

Quick charging is very efficient and it doesn't hurt the battery.

Evidence for that?

You can eat a meal, or take a nap, so it is not a problem - it is just different.

Don't know about you, but on long trips I eat while driving. I think that's true of many people. And if you're one of those adults who can actually take naps, you're lucky.

Again - an EV is 2-3X more efficient than any ICE can possibly be.

Not true. As for instance the Tesla Model S is rated at 95 MPGe, which I don't think counts generation, transmission, and, charging losses. That's nowhere near 2-3X the 70 MPG I get from the Insight.

Now I'm not saying that you couldn't build EVs that do much better than the Model S, but AFAIK they're not here yet. Smaller EVs like the Leaf seem to have limited range. I'd guess that's going to be an engineering tradeoff for the foreseeable future, given the portion of vehicle mass devoted to structure vs battery.

[NeilBlanchard]

All the EV's with quick chargers are evidence that is not a problem.

You are comparing the LEAST efficient EV with the MOST efficient hybrid. Do the math with 7 people in the Tesla, and 2 people in the Insight.

The Leaf and the Prius are virtually the same size. The Leaf is rated at ~114MPGe, and the Prius is ~50MPG.

[oil pan 4]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

No, quick charges take 30-60 minutes.

There are some thing like 100,000 gas stations in the United States.
How many super charges are there now?