Hacker News Reader

Comment by willmadden | Hacker News Reader

Hydrogen infrastructure is a nightmare and requires you to store massive amounts of explosive gas under pressure. The energy density per gallon/liter sucks compared to gasoline. It was a bad bet and will never see mass adoption.

Hybrids, however, do make sense right now. Lithium ion batteries don't have the range (especially under load) and don't recharge as fast as filling up a tank. If you use fast chargers, the battery life also diminishes, and the replacement costs are ridiculous. Those aren't features which allow for mainstream adoption. Too much consumer behavior change is required.

View on HN

I disagree with the notion that customer behavior change is required. This position sounds like unsubstantiated fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

For the vast majority of days, the car gets driven to work then returned home. As the driver leaves the car, they connect an electrical cable into the side of the car.

The biggest change here is the consumer no longer needs to make a stop out of their way to refuel their vehicle and will now have to take an extra 5 seconds to plug a car in.

On longer trips, there is a bit more change I’ll admit, but most EVs will tell you where your next stop is and let you see the nearby amenities. Need to stop sooner? Tap a closer charger and it’ll replan accordingly. This is a change from reading highway exit signs for gas stations but hardly an impediment. And some states are adding EV badges to the highway signs.

Lastly there’s the question of what to do with the vehicle while fast charging. Probably the biggest change that’ll only impact people 4-8 times a year, and that’s what to do while charging. It’s simple: plug in the car, then walk over to a nearby restaurant and grab breakfast/lunch.

This is certainly a deviation from powering through a 8 hour road-trip as fast as humanly possible, but driving without breaks is dangerous.

I would counter that it won’t see adoption in cars but will in heavy machinery. It’s a much better proposition for hauling huge loads than tonnes of batteries are (assuming you can’t use a train in the first place) or for things like large excavators. It also removes some of the need for regular filling stations along roads etc. if you can centre the infrastructure around where fleets are based and return to for more cargo.

I'm wondering if it would make sense for heavy trucks that don't have to travel far, like trucks used for shorter or medium-length trips to move cargo. Things like moving containers to/from shipping terminals and warehouses, or moving loads between cities/towns where cargo trains aren't economical.

This Canadian logging trucker has many excellent points. Apologies, it's TikTok.

https://www.tiktok.com/@freightfamous/video/7294648129654246...

I’d wager for 75% of vehicle owners the range and charge speed of the EVs on the market today meet their needs perfectly.

Remember, the average person in the US only drives 37 miles per day [1]

[1] https://www.kbb.com/car-advice/average-miles-driven-per-year...

I don't know the name for it, but I think there is a logic error in their math.

The average distance you do drive on days you drive, is what matters.

You could double it and double it again, and essentially all EVs for sale today still have minimum of double that range.

EV range is not a problem for the very vast majority of drivers, we just keep being told it is by the companies that are making a lot of money from the status quo and want it to continue

Maybe for day to day stuff. But sometimes, maybe even once per year, that one road trip where multiple charging stops at hokey non Tesla stations is enough to prevent a lot of people from jumping.

Lots of people want the possibility of doing XYZ with their car or truck, even if they only do it rarely or never.

Jim wants his truck to be able to tow a trailer, even if he only uses it for mulch. Maybe he buys an F150 instead of an old Ranger 4cyl.

Drive 2000 miles to FL just fine every year in my EV with my family of 5. Must be doing something wrong,

Really depends on where the car sells. In the EU, todays EVs probably have plenty of range. In the US, 300 miles is just not going to cut it for many people far too often.

Look at this comparison. And hour+ commutes are far from unheard of in the US. (Common within cities even due to traffic.)

http://www.comparea.org/USA48+EU

If you are driving over 300 miles a day and not a truck driver or traveling salesman, you need to full stop reevaluate your life. Life is too short to sit in a car. Average commute in my “flyover country” city is 10 minutes.

You are absolutely right. An hour+ commute, let’s call it 75 miles.

150 a day. Show me an EV for sale right now that can’t do that in a day and charge overnight at home or at the workplace.

EVs for sale today do this easily, even in the cold

Just to be clear, I agree with you. I just don't think you the value that matters is total / days is meaningful when you realise how the number is generated. What matters is the average length driven, when driven.

It's not the average distance you drive, it's the maximum distance you drive. Most people are not going to select an EV as their primary vehicle until they can make that infrequent but important road trip without charge anxiety.

I'm willing to bet most people drive on most days.

WFH and everyone in NYC disagree.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com