WetEV said:
GRA said:
Along with capability, convenience and (externalities ignored, which is what the general public does) price. And we differ on subsidizing BEVs. If you insist on subsidies, subsidize charging infrastructure instead, because that's the critical lack. No matter how good BEVs get in the near- and mid-term, if people don't have convenient charging they won't buy them.
BEVs win for convenience, which you
might learn if you owned one, at least for the "daily driver" use.
Oh, for heaven's sake, we've been over this before. It doesn't win for convenience if you don't have convenient L2 charging, and I and virtually all apartment dwellers don't. At best I have L1 via a long extension cord, and most apartment dwellers don't even have that option. And L1 is far too limiting if a BEV is your only vehicle, something which took me less than a week to 'learn' (a couple of days were enough) more than two decades back.
As it is, my daily driver is a bicycle, which is both more environmentally friendly and more convenient than a BEV would be for the trips I use it for.
WetEV said:
Long trips are different, and that's what you focus on, you just want to disparage BEVs.
I focus on them because that's all I need a car for, and because most car buyers are unwilling to accept a car that is limited to local use.
.
WetEV said:
Capability? Close to even. All of the places that most people want to go to, they can.
No, they are getting closer, but still far short of even, both because of the cars and the lack of infrastructure. Any ICE will take anyone anywhere they choose to go (on pavement) with free choice of route and stopping places in a minimal amount of time, with maximum flexibility and with essentially zero planning required. BEVs and their infrastructure are still far from achieving that. We went over this about a month ago using a trip to Glacier as an example. Have you forgotten?
WetEV said:
Quiet? Not mentioned, you just want to disparage BEVs
As I pointed out last month, BEVs aren't inherently queter than ICEs, as wind, tire and gear noise can all be significant, and engine noise may cover those up. AOTBE, BEVs should have a noise advantage, but things often aren't equal - while the Model S is quieter than just about all its competition, the Model 3 isn't: i
https://forums.tesla.com/discussion/171096/cabin-noise
I don't make personal comments about vehicle noise levels now because my hearing is entirely artificial and thus unrepresentative of what someone with natural hearing will hear. Besides, I can make virtually any car completely silent by turning off my hearing aids, so leave noise comments to others.
WetEV said:
Smooth, low vibration? Not mentioned, you just want to disparage BEVs.
Some are, some aren't. The Bolt I drove wasn't noticeably smoother or lower vibration than an ICE, although I might have noticed a difference if I'd been able to drive them back-to-back. Thanks to its firm suspension it had a noticeably worse ride off pavement than my Forester; it was so rough I wouldn't want to take any passenger with a weak stomach in it. No doubt there are BEVs with different characteristics, but that's just normal variation and also holds for ICEs.
WetEV said:
Driving response? Not mentioned, you just want to disparage BEVs.
I guess someone else must have posted this under my name:
A few final items re the Bolt. Coming back over Sonora Pass in daylight allowed me to push it more, and no mistake, this thing's a pocket rocket. I think the last time I had that much fun on a winding two-lane was when my friend let me drive his M3 convertible! Not only does it handle well, but passing's a cinch in the mountains. Nothing like having sea level power at any altitude.
https://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=18907&p=592144&hilit=Bolt+suspension#p592144
Yeah, not mentioned at all, and nothing but disparagement. Other BEVs were worse, none that I've driven yet were better, although I'd say the e-Golf felt more refined all-round, but I only got to try that on a dealer test drive. But don't let facts get in the way of your rant.
WetEV said:
Features like remote climate control? Not mentioned, you just want to disparage BEVs.
Nice to have but a minor convenience, albeit more necessary for a BEV given their more limited range in cold weather. Certainly doesn't outweigh current ICEs cold-weather range with heat advantages. Personally, I find heated seats adequate until the ICE warms up enough to put out heat, but I can see some people valuing cabin pre-heating or cooling more than I do.
WetEV said:
Not all of the general public ignores externalities, after all that's why Ronald Reagan created CARB. That is one reason why there are subsidies for BEVs. You ignore externalities, you want to disparage BEVs.
Why no, not all of them ignore externalities, but only a small %, currently no more than 2%, care enough to make them choose a ZEV over an ICE.
And no, I don't ignore externalities, they're a large part of the reason I do almost all of my local travel by foot, bike and/or electrified mass transit, and are entirely the reason why I haven't driven out of state or flown for over a decade. But don't let facts get in your way.
WetEV said:
Price is getting closer. Near future, BEVs are going to be cheaper than comparable ICEs. 2025? 2028?
I consider that mid-term rather than near future, which would be 2022-2023, but we agree on the likely timeframe. Or course, we still won't have the necessary charging infrastructure by then. Even if the Dems push their own infrastructure plan and ignore the Reps, 50k chargers is a drop in the bucket unless they're all QCs. Some years back I mentioned that the City of San Francisco alone had over 400k publicly-accessible parking spaces, so if they were all L2 Biden's plan would only take care of San Francisco, with a few tens of thousands left over for the rest of the country. Seeing as how there's currently somewhere over 270 million LDVs in the fleet, that's not going to be significant, even subtracting the % of households who could charge at home now, or at least have the option to install it.