I wonder if the same debates were made when jet propulsion replaced propeller driven aircraft in the 50s. It was only 40 years prior that we proved humans could fly using wood constructed aircraft and then it took less than 2 decades after jets to make it to the moon. The point being, you can't make an argument against tomorrow by using technology from the past if we are constantly innovating. There is no more innovation to be done with the internal combustion engine. But battery technology is improving at rate never really seen before. EVs are expensive because of those batteries, but we can lower the cost of those batteries by adding new domestic mining and manufacturing and continuing innovation of the technology. Then by finding ways to repurpose the batteries for some other common good we create new markets and uses along with lowering the cost to consumers. If batteries become more efficient to make and you can repurpose them as a home backup, hospital emergency backup, nursing home energy power because range isn't an issue but capacity is enough to recycle for some other purpose then you create a secondary market for used EV batteries because they now have value and someone will try to profit. Then when used EV batteries can be safely added in buildings to store power we can find smarter ways to lessen the demand on the grid. How many gas powered generator systems could be replaced with new innovation? What can you do with a used internal combustion engine other than sell it for parts or drop it into another gas burning vehicle?
Some car manufacturers are gambling on solid state EV batteries which aren't susceptible to weather, last longer, weigh less, and charge much faster which also means you can increase capacity and range without any temperature penalties. There are no EVs running with those types of batteries today, but when the largest companies in the world are trying to solve this problem so that they can make a profit, I have to believe it's not that far into the future. We aren't there yet, but I say, let free market capitalism dictate what consumers want rather than listen to the talking heads influenced by oil execs that want us to keep paying at the pumps. I don't think states have to mandate EV vs ICE sales. I think if the product is good and the other interests are out of the way enough people will tell manufacturers what they want with their money. Kia is probably betting on the adoption of EVs being faster so they want to be there when it happens and leading the pack rather than late to the party.
Some car manufacturers are gambling on solid state EV batteries which aren't susceptible to weather, last longer, weigh less, and charge much faster which also means you can increase capacity and range without any temperature penalties. There are no EVs running with those types of batteries today, but when the largest companies in the world are trying to solve this problem so that they can make a profit, I have to believe it's not that far into the future. We aren't there yet, but I say, let free market capitalism dictate what consumers want rather than listen to the talking heads influenced by oil execs that want us to keep paying at the pumps. I don't think states have to mandate EV vs ICE sales. I think if the product is good and the other interests are out of the way enough people will tell manufacturers what they want with their money. Kia is probably betting on the adoption of EVs being faster so they want to be there when it happens and leading the pack rather than late to the party.
Last edited:
