evnow said:
GRA said:
+1. Like many here, I'm more willing than most to alter my lifestyle to be greener.
I don't think you are willing to make any changes at all.
Yeah, you're right. Oh, except for deciding almost 15 years ago to move to a small, downtown studio apartment (actually a mother-in-law unit, which I think was formerly a carriage house) so that I could walk for all my errands, bike to work, and use a combination of public transit/walking/biking for the majority of my regional transit needs - the car is used only for inter-regional trips. My housing costs and transportation time went up, my transportation costs, living space, energy use and GHG production went down. I'm healthier so medical costs are probably down, and I'm definitely less stressed.
Oh, and then there's the use of passive solar heating and movable insulation instead of using the furnace for much of my heating; takes more time and awareness, and doesn't save me a dime as my utilities are included. Oh, and then I've been peeing in a jar for the past five months to save water, taking navy showers etc., even though, again, I don't (directly) pay for that.
Oh, except that I've altered my diet; I'm no vegetarian, but I now eat less beef than pork, less pork than poultry, more fruits, nuts and veggies, most of those bought at the farmer's market held every weekend 7 minutes walk from my place - although, considering that I live within 100 miles of the Central, Salinas and Napa valleys, whether there's actually any energy/GHG savings by buying from the farmers hauling their produce in smaller trucks, instead of from the supermarket in the next block (which hauls their produce in semis from the same places) strikes me as questionable. Oh, and then there's choosing foods with less packaging. Oh, and of course, we've had curbside recycling for a decade or two, and I'm religious about that.
But other than those, yeah, I'm unwilling to make any changes at all. Besides, what have the Romans ever done for us?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9foi342LXQE" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
evnow said:
But for a road trip, if the car can't go at least 4 hours plus a reserve at freeway flow of traffic speeds in a wide range of temperatures, it will be extra hassle. In some cases it's hassle I'm willing to accept, but it all depends on the frequency with which I have to put up with it. And I don't confuse my willingness to structure my stops around the needs of the car rather than my own needs, with the mainstream's willingness to do so.
Just go to Costco gas station and see how much time people are willing to wait for to get the gas 10 cents cheaper.
Sure. Now look at all the other gas stations that are still in business despite charging prices far higher than Costco, because they're more conveniently located and/or have shorter waits. In my city, today's regular prices range from $3.73 (Costco and one Valero) to $4.26/gallon (a Chevron), per Gasbuddy. My corner Valero is $4.00/gallon. I'm a cheapskate; I won't buy gas there and can't even imagine paying Chevron's prices, but instead wait until I have to take a trip past one of the lower cost stations on my way out of or into town. But I won't wait in Costco-size lines, either, so I generally pay more than the lowest price per gallon so I can drive right up to the pump. Of course, if I don't have to go by one of those other stations, there's a problem. Although the corner station is more expensive per gallon, by the time I make a special trip to one of those other stations, I'll have burned more money in gas than I will have saved at the lower price. Given my driving habits that hasn't been a problem, yet.
evnow said:
Anyway - the point is - this is a sliding scale, there will be more and more people willing to switch as the range & infrastructure improve. People who anyway take longer breaks will be willing to switch sooner than those who don't. We used to drive non-stop from St Louis to Chicago - 300 miles & 4 to 5 hours - that won't be possible now with 2 small kids.
Absolutely. At the moment, the only long range BEV owners have Teslas, and they're far less price sensitive than most (reflected in the survey results that showed Tesla Model S owners rated government incentives lower among factors that made buying a PEV possible). As the price of long range BEVs come down to a more price-sensitive crowd, the number of people willing to trade time off against money will increase, simply because their time is worth less than people with higher incomes. But unless the price/time trade-off is compelling, they won't bother.