What's Still Killing the Electric Car?

[GSP]

Lack of standardized plugs and payment methods are headwind for EVs. The J1772 interface assures companies like Walgreens and Simon Property Group, and employers everywhere, that if they put up a charging station all EVs can use it. It also assures would-be EV customers that they can plug in at any charging station. This is a very good thing, and much better than the Avcon vs. paddle, vs. small paddle charging situation back at the turn of the millennium.

Now, we need the same standardization for DC fast charging.

GSP

P.S. I am glad that Tesla does support J1772 with adapters for its cars. I wish they would support it directly, without adapters as well. Perhaps a Model S option to have SuperCharger connector on one side, and J1772 on the other.

[dsm363]

If the Model S adapter really is a cheap, $50 or so adapter then I don't think people will mind. The Model S has sufficient range that most people will be charging at home. If the adapter is cheap, it also won't be as big a loss if it's stolen somehow or left behind. Probably cheaper than adding a second plug to the car. If Tesla finds sales are lacing because people won't buy a car without direct J1772 support, then it would be worth it to Telsa.

[jerry33]

At this point almost everyone who purchases a Tesla is technically apt enough to understand that standards are wonderful because there are so many of them from which to choose. With a bit of luck, but the time Bluestar hits, most of the standards issues will have been resolved--even if they aren't resolved in the best way.

[vfx]

At this point almost everyone who purchases a Tesla is technically apt enough to understand that standards are wonderful because there are so many of them from which to choose....

NOt at all. I have met many people who tell me they have a down payment on a Model S. Few of them are technical. EVeryone here is, but the S is already making inroads into the mass market territory.

[jerry33]

NOt at all. I have met many people who tell me they have a down payment on a Model S. Few of them are technical. EVeryone here is, but the S is already making inroads into the mass market territory.

Really. I would have thought that other than some celebrities, politicians, etc., a large percentage of the first 20,000 would be the kind of people who do a lot of research before they buy. Well, you've met them and I haven't so I say that you're correct but it's still surprising.

[vfx]

Really. I would have thought that other than some celebrities, politicians, etc., a large percentage of the first 20,000 would be the kind of people who do a lot of research before they buy. Well, you've met them and I haven't so I say that you're correct but it's still surprising.

I'd say they're just riding the wave...

[Norbert]

I'd say they're just riding the wave...

Once the Model S is out, we might learn a lot about wave dynamics...

[dpeilow]

There are quite a few Roadster owners who are non-technical, yet alone Model S reservees. None of your good selves of course, but they are out there.

[mgemmell]

I don't see a response from Eberhard here. Did you post in the correct thread?

Been away for a little while... sorry.

Eberhard responded to the article on that same 20min.ch website.

[Mookuh]

I've stumbled upon a bit of an oxymoron here:

As mentioned earlier, folks from EMPA calculated that the electric car needs to be fueled from the "right sources" in order to make it cleaner than a gasoline car.
However, now I found a document by the same institution that constitutes electric cars to be "as environmentally friendly as a gas burning car that needs 3-4 l/100km if fueled by the current european energy mix" (That translates into 78-58 MPG). (Link, again in German. Apologies for that.)

What's mostly odd here is that the document stating the latter is dated of August 2010, while the study saying the former was published in October 2010 (signed for end of September, actually), so very close after each other.
My current guess is that the study took longer to conduct, and the document I linked in this post states that "a chemically more advanced (read: more environmentally friendly) version of the battery type currently in use in most of these vehicles", so it using newer figures. But this is, as stated, a guess.

The document also states that around 15% of the total environmental pollution comes from the battery, half of that is extracting and producing Aluminium and Copper, only 2.3% of that is Lithium.
So the answer to the earlier question "What rare metals are used for the battery?" is most likely Aluminium and Copper. Not exactly what I understand as "rare", but on the other hand ICE cars don't need them as much as electrics. Also, they're able to be recycled (but that still takes energy which needs to be figured in).

Long story short: EVs are more environmentally friendly than ICE cars.