From my thermodynamics class in 1978 I knew from day one that electric cars could never be viable. You know all the reasons. We all knew all the reasons. The signal that they would fail is the huge government subsidies required to make people buy them. So, we had taxpayers who could not afford and did not want electric cars subsidizing those who could afford them to buy a product that was below the standards of ICE cars. Now had there been some financial advantage not provided by taxpayers then they’d have taken off. If the range had been superior, along with charging times equal to filling your tank with gas, they had a chance. Even then it would be a difficult sale because the great unwashed masses who ultimately define success or failure are concerned with the infrastructure. It’s fine to have something with limited range if you’re in a nine to five job and only commute thirty miles to a university where you can plug it in for free. But the rest of us may arrive at a work site and find the materials haven’t arrived and we’re sent to another site fifty miles away. Right from the beginning people with calculators were saying, hey, when everybody has them, how will we charge the batteries? That would require many times the power and infrastructure we have now.
I think some guy who ran Toyota figured that out and was criticized. They now say he was late to the EV parade but will have a superior product for part of their fleet.
What gets me in those in the UAW who cannot see their jobs are heading to China. There maybe some assembly work in the US left but not much else. But I guess there is a bright side. They can get into infrastructure repair to accommodate the damage by the weighty EVs!
Like most new inventions they take time to find their place in
the usage pattern of society/work needs. There will be some
need but not for all things people are involve with. jmo.
Right from the beginning people with calculators were saying, hey, when everybody has them, how will we charge the batteries?