Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When the world transitioned from horseback to gas-powered automobiles, there was very a clear, plain, and massive functionality increase. So much so that everyone instantly saw the future and we dedicated decades and billions of dollars to creating an infrastructure to support them. People flocked to the new technology and demanded automobiles on the free market in massive numbers. In the USA, this led to the most successful and meaningful century in world history.
Fast forward 100 or so years, and there was a supposed new revolution into the next generation of vehicles that we would migrate to: electrics. But after 20 years, we've seen almost zero growth in the segment and still more than 98% of vehicles on the road are gas-powered.
Here's the problem: Does anyone in the year 2022, 20 years into the "electric" generation, look at a Tesla or a Prius, then look at say a Corvette and an F150, and say "wow, there's a clear, massive functionality increase? I doubt it, in fact I'd bet most people would say it's a functionality decrease, and a hassle increase.
So this "new generation" is not fueled by functionality buy rather by philosophy. We are supposed to dedicate billions of dollars and probably decades again, to switch over to electrics not because they work better, but because we are going to stave off supposed environmental doom.
The problem is that millions upon millions of people in this country think this is BS. When you are basing your product on environmental dogma, rather than actual functionality, it's a clear and present loser (as we are seeing). People are certainly not seeing this clear future like they did during the horse to automobile transition.
Many proponents of EV's are calling for punitive taxes on the "old technology" (even though electricity has been harnessed by man way before the gas engine was invented) in order to get more traction, but if you have to punish your customer to buy it, isn't that a sign that your product is a dud?
We have hundreds of years worth of fossil fuels with witch to make gasoline. Electrics will always have the problem of batteries and re-charging. I think that the next iteration of vehicles will still be the same "instant" replenishment of power like gasoline, not some technology based on charging depleted cells, despite the massive media gas lighting and brain washing that so many have fallen for.
It will be the future if nothing else better takes over. Electric isnt a massive functionality increase. You dont need massive improvements for people to trade up to the better product. Electric represents an incremental improvement over gas engines and that is enough for people to buy one for their next car (electric isnt presently the right choice for many people).
People think they like electric not because of the fake clean aspect, rather because they accelerate quicker. They like the performance increase over their prior V8 SUV. GM invented the modern electric car, btw. GM and Hugh's aerospace division.
Because I can’t have a gas pump in my garage, yes I see electrics as a functionality increase. Especially with something like the F-150 Lightning which can act as battery backup power for your whole house. And yes, super car acceleration numbers for a fraction of the price.
Some people just think gas/oil is part of their political belief system and they are required to protect it for some reason. What do you care if people start buying electric cars? Supporting oil/gas isnt a conservative principle even though you may believe it is.
wind and batteries are yesterday’s technology. small core reactors are what will be a clean, safe, and efficient way to power everything. the technology just needs to be developed
It will be the future if nothing else better takes over. Electric isnt a massive functionality increase. You dont need massive improvements for people to trade up to the better product. Electric represents an incremental improvement over gas engines and that is enough for people to buy one for their next car (electric isnt presently the right choice for many people).
EV's are a giant leap when it comes to acceleration, efficiency, and reduction in pollution. The negatives are less density of the energy, heavy weight and longer duration of refueling. I would agree the net improvement is incremental and that will lead to its adoption unless a more desirable solution is found in the next 20 years.
Because I can’t have a gas pump in my garage, yes I see electrics as a functionality increase. Especially with something like the F-150 Lightning which can act as battery backup power for your whole house. And yes, super car acceleration numbers for a fraction of the price.
You can buy all the gas you want and store it at your house, independent of the status of the electric grid in your area.
Remember: gas powered generators BACK UP the electric grid today!
With natural gas electricity production so strong, it is actually significantly more efficient to have cars running directly off of natural gas, as opposed to electric cars running off of natural gas power plants.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
