Well, maybe I erred in attempting to coin a humorous title to this thread, and maybe some should take the time to read my comments more carefully.
The "Suggestion for Nissan" I have made, is that certain aspects of EV development may be over-subsidized by both Nissan and government programs, such as early vehicle sales and home L2 installations, and too little consideration and neccessary subsidies have been given to the development of the fast charge network.
Nissan will lose a lot of money on every LEAF sale in the US for the next few years, and the governmental subsidies each early buyer receives are very expensive to federal (and some State) taxpayers. I believe that, in order for EV's to be profitable for Nissan (and other manufactures), and beneficial to the Nation as a whole, they will need to conveniently and rapidly rechargeable. And the only major fault in The LEAF roll-out, IMO, is the lack of opportunities, both present and in the advanced planning stage, to use the L3 option.
Eventually, fast charging must be a profitable market. It will not be until a sufficient number of EV's are on the road, just as LEAF sales will not be profitable until sales number in the hundreds of thousands-at least. Nissan has made the strategic decision to absorb current vehicle production losses as it's long range profit strategy. Waiting for other entities to provide the missing piece of the LEAF, the L3 chargers, may prove to be a strategic blunder. If Nissan would only select a number of dealers in critical locations for L3 installations, for example, I think future LEAF sales prospects would be greatly improved.
Please understand that there's nothing wrong with what you're suggesting - and we'll certainly get there! But a "version 1.0" EV with a 100 mile range and concerns about battery degradation with regular L3 charging is not necessarily the best candidate for cross-country travel.
L3 IS ON THE WAY!
The I5 corridor is first in line for complete electrification and there are already L3 units on the ground and in operation.
Considering that until late last summer there was not an approved L3 charger device available to be installed in the US, and considering that this type of deployment requires plenty of government action, and considering that government bodies move at the speed...of government...and not the speed of 'sports car' ...we'll need to keep gently pushing to overcome inertia.
I don't agree that L3 is a strategic necessity at this point because the vast majority of owners will be staying in their local areas. From a business perspective, I think concentrating on L2 deployment is a much better use of the money because that's going to have the largest positive impact on the largest number of drivers.
Please take a quick look at the numbers on this map: http://electric.carstations.com/ Please note the big red "256" hanging over California. Now please note the "59" over Texas. San Antonio is the country's sixth largest city - and so far we have FIVE charge points on the ground - and two of those are Nissan dealers and one is a regular 120V outlet installed in a church parking lot. Wanna trade?
Personally, I'd love to be able to get in an EV and drive from San Antonio to LA, but I'm certainly not holding my breath for that, and didn't even order an L3 option on my Leaf.
As for the perception that EV tax credits are either harmful to government or over subsidized, I offer this...
edit...and considering it could be useful to finish a sentence...