[fso301]

Let’s know something... The EV pushers obviously think their tech is superior to EVERY OTHER ALTERNATIVE to require 75 percent market saturation in 30 years, right?

The only weakness of an electric motor versus internal combustion is the power source. Assuming lightweight, fast charging, longlife, high capacity storage technology is available, I'm not sure I know of a light duty vehicle usage scenario where an internal combustion engine is superior to an electric motor.

[lmr]

I'm not sure I know of a light duty vehicle usage scenario where an internal combustion engine is superior to an electric motor.

YOU COMPLETELY MISSED THE POINT.

This isn't about which technology you or I think is superior, more economical or whatever... This is about what should happen in our free-market system.

fso301, look at post #3. This is what ultimately matters. No real conservative has anything against technology, we just want it to compete on a level playing field without government intervention.

As another poster suggested, they would need 75% nuclear power to achieve this ridiculous goal.

My argument wasn't from the perspective of a proponent of a specific technology. My argument was as a proponent of the free market.

fso301, you need to understand base Freeper instincts before you comment.

[Lucius Cornelius Sulla]

Assuming lightweight, fast charging, longlife, high capacity storage technology is available

Assuming that Star Trek type teleportation technology is available we could all live wherever we wanted and travel wherever we wanted instantaneously.