That's actually a pretty pathetic argument. Do you know what it's going to take to convert all vechices to electic? Not only does the grid currrently not support EVs, but let's not for the fact that these vehicles weigh considerably more. Roads, bridges, parking garages, etc. will all need to be torn down and redesigned to safely support the heavier vehicles.
Another prisoner of the moment.
It can't happen by 2035 either, so your attempt at sarcasm is lost in that fact.
You really think that in over a decade from now we wont be able to figure out EVs? We are already buying about a million of them per year in the US right now and it's not causing mass issues. I agree we can't flip the switch overnight and expect 100,000,000 EVs on the road without problem, however it seems silly to think that battery technology wont get better to reduce the weight of these cars. And just to compare a Tesla Model 3 is among the most popular EV right now and weights roughly 3500lbs. A honda Civic weighs in the neighborhood of 3000lbs. The real issue with EV weight seems to be the SUVs and trucks who need the massive batteries for towing. It also seems crazy to think that we can't improve the electrical grid over the next decade to supplement the demand, especially as we increase our usage of solar energy. Electrical companies are set up to make a F ton of money from this transition, they'll figure out a way to do it, plus state/federal governments have motives to help fund these efforts.
EVs are also not the only option. There's hydrogen-powered vehicles, which do better with heavier loads. We might end up with most people driving EV cars, but with the semis on the road being hydrogen powered.
That's a very good point. We think of this strictly in terms of Gas vs EV, but there are other options too. Hydrogen could absolutely have a niche in the market. Hybrids may stick around for a bit too if EVs can't perform better in larger SUVs and work trucks. Cars are the piece that I just can't see people not wanting an EV in the next 10 years and probably a lot sooner.
Why the need to be insulting?
Consider the source.
We don't have the infrastructure to support this nonsense and won't by 2035 either. They was what I was saying.
You really think anything I said was a direct insult? Please point it out.
Your attempt to provide an informed response is undermined by reality.
Loool, I get it. You see things in black and white; off or on.
“That's actually a pretty pathetic argument.”
So the facts are not correct because you don't like Fox News? Got it
You don’t believe those #’s Or you are attempting to be humorous?
I understand what you're saying, I just don't get the logic behind it. The US government just put $150 Million towards building the EV infrastructure last month and are set to throw billions at the issue. Not to mention private companies like Tesla that are fighting to be the top dog once the EV takeover happens and are throwing silly money at this having close to 20,000 superchargers in the US already by themselves. If there is a legitimate reason why you think the infrastructure may not be ready 11 years from now I'm all ears, I just don't see any real evidence that the government or car industry is not committed to making this happen.
Compared to what I've read on this forum, that isn't insulting.
Money is a big problem. It won't be billions, it'll be trillions. It took 19 years to complete both world trade centers. That's just 2 buildings.
