Featured Reasons behind the slowness of EVs adoption in US

too late. A good part of the VW intervention already happened. It took Tesla eating their lunch, & getting caught cheating and thus penalized being forced to atone for their wrongdoing.
.

 

john - I'm not sure what you mean by collateral damage, unless it's that the volt got canceled. That doesn't seem any different than the Prius V being canceled - seems both losses are a shame too many. I tried to follow your displeasure with the volt, but it seemed like the more i read - the only 'sin' that the resently canceled version had - was its high price. But then - articles about the volt's longevity appeared - exemplified by the one below;
https://www.google.com/amp/s/insideevs.com/chevy-volt-400000-miles-odometer-no-noticeable-battery-degradation/amp/#ampshare=https://insideevs.com/chevy-volt-400000-miles-odometer-no-noticeable-battery-degradation/
400K miles! The power of traction pack thermal management.
A car gets expensive when it has liquid cooling. There are already stories of capacity loss with the first generation plugin Prius. That's not to say it isn't a great car. But the old adage does come to mind, you get what you pay for. If you've only got a few bucks, you get something that won't last as long. You pay big dollars, and you get more.
Sure - you don't have as many wealthy buyers that can afford to get 'more', so yeah I get it - that prius is a better price point. Also - both the volt & the Prius in their 1st iterations were way less than their improved versions. That's the nature of autos evolving.
So - call me slow, what exactly is/was the propaganda?
As for the premise of the op, electrics are in fact not growing slowly, because they are growing faster than hybrids did. The Op's linked article is from a No Name outfit, not repeated by any credible source. Rather by groups that are shorting Tesla stock and the like. There's a bit of irony that we who strive to drive efficiently, manage to find an angle that enables fighting amongst ourselves. That's too bad.
.

 

and now being charged by the sec

 

more relevant - do you think - in light of the fact 100's of thousands of hand raisers got in a year long wait line, just to become deposit holders for an ev? .... numbers on par with sales of an extremely popular car like yearly Corolla sales? & ... not to be restating numerous posts & linked data - but also do you find any merit in the article as it claims plugin growth is tepid - while growing faster than standard hybrids? What say you - even as the data flys in the face of what that article claims.
.

 

That's Sparkie and it's up around 467,000 miles now.

 

I did my own analysis of the data.

The fact that you posted that link shows you don't understand the problem.

FACT: EVs are just fine for "average" drives. In fact, a 60 mile Leaf is just fine to cover "average" drives.

The problem is the tail of the distribution, not the mean. A car can't be designed to just cover the mean because that means it can't cover anything above the mean, which is something close to half the total miles. The real problem is the very tail of the distribution, and that tail includes drives that no BEV can make with current charging infrastructure and vehicle range. Some of those drives are life-threatening if you run out of energy.

It's like how airplanes have to work.

"§ 91.167 Fuel requirements for flight in IFR conditions.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft in IFR conditions unless it carries enough fuel (considering weather reports and forecasts and weather conditions) to -

(1) Complete the flight to the first airport of intended landing;

(2) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, fly from that airport to the alternate airport; and

(3) Fly after that for 45 minutes at normal cruising speed or, for helicopters, fly after that for 30 minutes at normal cruising speed."

The number of times an aircraft is going to use the alternate plus the 45 minutes of fuel is vanishingly small (less than 1 in 100 million flights), yet every single one is required to carry that fuel. Why do you suppose that is?

So, the design isn't for the average, or even for the average plus contingency, but for the average plus a contingency plus a pretty big margin.

If you turn the above numbers into car numbers, you get something like "you need enough range to get to your next fueling station, enough to drive from there to another fueling station if the first one is unavailable, plus about 60 miles more on top of that." Now apply that rule to your driving and see what your actual BEV range is.

The answer is, in-town, it's pretty far (on the order of 100 miles). Out-of-town, especially in rural areas, it's almost zero, if not less than zero.

And, yes, that's how I drive a car, and always have. I basically never let real-world range drop below 100 miles in perfect weather or less than 150 miles in bad weather. And you should too.

 

I've had no problem with the 72 mi EV range of our BMW i3-REx. The 25 mi EV, Prius Prime range has had an occasional problem like I did Tuesday morning when the ICE came on about 1/2 mi from home.

Yet curiously there have been airliners and small planes that went BINGO fuel:

• Air Canada Flight 143 was a Canadian scheduled domestic passenger flight between Montreal and Edmonton that ran out of fuel on July 23, 1983, at an altitude of 41,000 feet (12,000 m), midway through the flight.
  
• List of airline flights that required gliding - Wikipedia

That is one reason why the BMW i3-REx has been a useful training tool. I've done two one-way, EV trips to Nashville, ~120 mi, and two EV round trips. It also includes three half-way EV tests to an Electrify America (VW) fast charger. So I've found:

• Unusable fast EV charger - the early (current?) Electrify America station in Manchester TN
• Broken L2 charger - at Shelbyville TN, diverted to dealer charger near airport
• Under powered charger(s) - the BMW i3-REx can only take 6.6 to 7.2 kW, ~31A, but I've found L2 chargers at 16-24A.
• Undocumented NEMA 14-50 network - the ShorePower.com network, 30 A.

Well I am the guy who has done over 40, run the tank dry, Prius tests in Gen-1, Gen-3, and Gen-4 (Prius Prime) with a 1 gal spare can of gas. I've also done a 700 mi BMW i3-REx trip that included finding at 2 AM an unexpected, shutdown, truck stop in Western Arkansas. In an abundance of caution (and testing,) I added 1 gallon to continue the trip. Notice the keyword, "test".

Over the past two years, I've used the 72 mi EV range of the BMW i3-REx to test the EV charging infrastructure including the PlugShare.com map. The lessons learned have given me confidence to replace our 25 mi EV range Prius Prime with a 220 mi EV range, Standard Range Model 3. I've also planned my testing:

1. My "mph vs Range" chart - similar to my earlier "mph vs MPG" charts.
2. 250 mi trip to Tunica and return - this will include a maximum range, SuperCharger leg; camping at an RV park with wife and dogs, and; return using a midway SuperCharger, the expected leg.

I'm not the ordinary 'wabbit' but have an abundance of curiosity. I like to share my 'lessons learned' and try to make unique contributions and have no illusions that others can safely follow my path. But one trend is the further West I go, the charging network becomes sparse with more risk.

Bob Wilson

 

The penalty for an airplane running out of fuel is far greater than if a car (EV or ICE) runs out of fuel.
Sure, in cold weather and/or when traveling far off the Interstate one has to be more conservative.
But many cars are not used to travel far from home and/or the Interstate.
You are free to own and drive however you want, as are others

Mike

 

As I said, less than 1 in 100 million flights. Not zero. If we didn't have the reserve, the probability would be far higher.

Intentional tests are not the same as unexpected failures.

 

Not really. Actually, I'd rather run out of fuel in a plane at altitude than be stuck on the side of the road. The side of a highway is a life-threatening location and I personally know two people who have died there.

 

Wow, now you are really stretching it. DO YOU really rather be on a plane without fuel??? I for one, will not get on the plane even with full of fuel. LOL

 

Well, yes, I'm planning a glider ride, but a GA or commercial powered plane is very likely to make a survivable landing if the only thing that goes wrong is running out of fuel.

Why?

 

Short answer is because I hate flying period. BUT, mostly because I have no need for transporting myself that far that quickly by using enormous amount of CO2 emitting fuel. Flying is the last resort option only for my absolutely necessary traveling when there is no other means.

 

Yeah, okay, flying is a major hassle and a high-CO2 activity, but it's also the only practical way to get some places in any reasonable period of time, and it's much much safer than driving.

 

Flying is faster and safer, I agree. I even admit, in most cases for a long distance trip, it is cheaper than any other options. But it is NOT pleasant. Maybe use to be, but not any more. In most part I don't live with schedule filled calendar, taking a few hours or even a few days longer for a trip is just fine for me.

 

I'm afraid we won't be able to get rid of it soon...

 

I'm planning a trip to Hawaii. The alternative to flying is a 2 day drive followed by a 5 day ship ride, then the vacation, then another 5 day ship ride and another 2 day drive. That's two extra weeks in transit and thousands of extra dollars.

 

Or you can just skip the Hawaii vacation part and do staycation at home instead. You will save thousands $ and no CO2 emission. lol