Nick Carter stated:
> Our EV has adequate range for well over 90% of our needs > and judging by all the figures I've seen would meet the > needs of most commuters in the US. Very few american consumers purchase based upon need alone. If that were the case we'd all be living in 500 sq foot houses, riding bicycles and using 10 year old computers, since all of those meet the "need". Americans want as much extravagence as they can afford (or not), and industry is there to sell them whatever they can afford (or finance). > It costs $219/month. > That doesn't seem expensive. I don't think it's high maintenance. I would estimate the typical car payment these days is around $400-$600 a month. Maintenance is relative, most ICE cars go for many 10's of thousands of miles without any more than oil changes. EV's are still in their (advanced) technological infancy. Automakers want to build a car they don't see again until after the warranty is up. I'm sure they see a great warranty liability in EV's, and a perceived image risk. > Watering the batteries every 3,500 miles? Plugging in? As mentioned to Bob Rice, I doubt you'd ever see a liquid electrolyte battery in an OEM EV. It's the eventual pack replacement that negates any potential operating savings. > Hybrids pollute way more than EVs just look at the CARB figures. But they pollute way less than regular ICE's, are available today and satisfy the needs of the consumer, and with production quantities rising, costs may reach par with ICE's. Looks like a win-win. > EVs powered by solar do not produce emissions at the point of generation. How many are there, 10? Not statistically significant to count. Hydro would have a higher chance of supporting EV's, but hydro isn't everywhere. Coal and natural gas are what fuels most of our EV's. Should I bring up nukes? :-) > I don't want a hybrid because I don't want to use oil for transportation. > Oh yes and our car is a real car - it's a Ford Th!nk City. You are putting your money where your mouth is. Most consumers rarely have this notion, much less conviction. > It's not tiny, it's quite comfortable for two people. > you're obviously used to the oversized monstrosities that are widespread > on U.S. roads. But it's what you have to compete with on the roads. If *everyone* drove Think sized cars it wouldn't be as much of an issue. There are too many Joe Sixpacks out there blowing down the road in their excursions talking on the phone. I want steel around me. > Go to Europe - there are plenty of Th!nk-sized cars on the road. True, for a variety of reasons. The Think may have had a better chance in europe, though I don't know why they would fare better than other EV's that have been offered there. The issue though is why Ford dropped them for the U.S.. > As far as I can see there are no "technical or economic issues" > standing in the way. That's easy: Short range, as perceived by the public Expensive, fragile batteries, not suited for all climates No public charging infrastructure in place "Foolproof" charger and drive systems would be required, adding to expense Limited production quantities keep prices high Advanced battery technology still experimental and fraught with problems More expensive than ICE counterpart That's just what I could think up without pausing from typing, give me a few more minutes and I could probably double it. > Our car works *now* and would be economical > if produced on the scale of typical gas cars and *for sale*. But you miss my point, it's not a car *most* (american) people *want*. It *wont* reach a point of economic scale. There are only so many people that would buy a car like this, and it isn't enough to warrant OEM quantities. >The only thing that stands in the way of us driving this > car for the forseeable future is Ford. Not if you mean "you" personally, or "you" collectively. Certainly from a personal standpoint you may be on your own, if you're leasing you can just turn it in when the lease is up. If you own, well, you're "it" when something gives up. Companies drop support for products all the time, they are only doing what is in their best interest financially. They answer to stockholders before anyone else. The *only* reason we saw as much OEM EV activity as we have in the past few years was based solely on a California ZEV law. And, those vehicles were only there to assure continued sales of ICE vehicles, as dictated by the mandate. Thus, the activity was artificially induced. Ford bought that assurance by buying the Think company, now that they likely won't need it anymore, they dropped it. No suprises here. > I will be at the protest because I see at as a way to educate "the masses" > that people do want EVs, just as I gladly educate people one by one every day. > Otherwise Ford and GM will just sweep this issue under the carpet. A noble effort, but will be forgotten as soon as it's over. Harsh, but reality. > The science and engineering has been solved to the extent > that there are adequate solutions on the road, "the rest" > is the problem. We keep coming back to this. They are adequate only to those who don't mind a very expensive, quirky, 50 mile limit car. Keep in mind, I have an EV too, and have driven it almost daily since 1997. From a transporation standpoint, it's barely adequate. It gets me back and forth to work, and errands on the weekends. That covers 80% of my needs, the rest is satisfied by the "monstrosity" we own. I'm always concious and concerned about driving within the limits of the EV, and while I've automated most of the operational tasks, it's still a concious effort to keep and maintain an EV. Not so for conventional ICE's, the infrastructure is such that you can be completely mindless, put gas in it and when it breaks the dealer is there to rescue you. And they rarely break, especially under warranty. You can build an EV today that is nearly mindless to operate, but at what cost? The EV1, Honda EVPlus, Toyota RAV4 (real cars) were subsidized to what extent? I would seriously doubt an economic scale would ever be reached for these cars to be produced at a price on par with ICE counterparts. No one ever mentions either just what do you do with all the spent batteries out of these cars. Sure, you recycle them, but imagine the scale when there are a dozen or more per auto instead of just one SLI. Leaves a lot of opportunity for hazardous waste. We could beat this thing to death indefinitely, and I think I've used up enough bandwidth. My parting shot to this thread is come October 11, the Think will still be history, and Ford will continue to promote hybrids. It's nothing personal, it's all business. I'd put my backing towards Rick Woodbury's Tango, that might be your only chance for an OEM-quality EV in the future. Even Solectria is out of the game now. If EV's are so great, why is it so hard to get anyone to buy one? Mark Brueggemann Albuquerque, NM [EMAIL PROTECTED] S-10 EV
