On 19/04/2019 18:25, ARW wrote:
On 18/04/2019 13:44, dennis@home wrote:
On 18/04/2019 10:01, NY wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
Since electric motors should be much more efficient than internal
combustion engines the above figures are pessimistic but even if
the power requirement was only 30% of the above they'd still be
problematic.

If we can actually produce an acceptable battery car in due course
for more than intra urban short hops, then all the infrastructure is
buildable over the same sort of period that aÂ* petrol and diesel
based infrastructure was rolled out in the last century.

Yes. What worries me is that we may find that we have to alter our
habits, scheduling in longer breaks whenever the car is getting low
on power, whereas we are used to filling up in a few minutes whenever
we need to (without having to plan ahead).

It's fine for people who have a commute with recharging points at
both ends,

How many people drive 120 miles to work and 120 mile back every day?


I did 843 miles this week and it's a 4 day week.


But most people don't commute to sites hundreds of miles away.
So for them there wouldn't be any need to charge an electric car at
work, just at home.
It makes a big difference to how much infrastructure is needed when they
can recharge the 20 miles they have driven overnight rather than a full
charge both ends.

I would have an electric car if they weren't so expensive.
I rarely drive more than a hundred miles these days.
Too knackered from the chemo to do much more.