Switched-On Highways

You notice how he skipped over the Midwest question and referred to the dense populations of the East Coast and California. Living in the "flyover zone" we do not have overlapping large metro areas where people live and work with relatively short commuting distances. Somehow having to stop and recharge multiple times on a trip from one end of my state to the other or even on a commute to work lacks appeal. I'll happily stick with my hybrid Mariner.

The U.S. government and its people need to support the building of nuclear power plants, along with other clean alternatives. The technology exists to deal with the waste. The main problem is to overcome the "not in my backyard" mentality.

Enter Your Comment

I think I would rather own and recharge the battery myself.

It seems to me that some are not taking into account the fact that the power to drive these electric cars must first be generated at plants, which by a wide, wide majority are coal-fired. These generation plants contribute to CO2, and SO2, and other atmospheric pollutants. Not to mention heavy metals such as mercury.

The time to charge the battery comes into play with regard to the distance factor. Today's batteries will take you 150 miles (using the example in the article, and of course they'll just improve with time); that's stopping every 2 hours or so on the road. That's not so bad, except how long does it take to recharge?

For my daily commute to work, and for most Americans, electric cars would fit the bill. In fact, I might not need my gas-powered car at all. If I wanted to go on a long trip, I could rent a car. Having said that, I am disappointed that our leaders in the last 20+ years have not had the vision to expand the public transportation system. Eisenhower's interstate system was a huge step forward at it's time. Perhaps what high-speed rail could be for us now. When public transportation is really convenient, people use it.

Everyone forgets to ask where the electricity to charge the batteries comes from. Unless we as a country are willing to seriously invest in nuclear enery we are still burning fossil fuels to make the electricity to power our cars.

The biggest problem I see with this idea is that if the battery only works for 150 miles (without air conditioning), it means way too many stops on a long-distance trip. This might work well for commuting to work or for short trips though.

Electric cars are the future, it eliminates most carbon producing - ga s guzzling - middle east oil problems and presents future generations with clean air. Our government should have pushed this a long time ago, the industry will need their help in battery recycling and re-charging facilities if only current battery technology is used. I read of a couple companies who have made battery cars that go 250 miles on a charge and over 80MPH, all they need is lower cost batteries. I pray that the Obama administration is serious about a green nation for our children and develops a brain trust to effect this needed change instead of the current administration begging the Saudi's for more production.TLC.Day Oh

Although electric cars may not be a viable alternative for the rural Midwest (which is where I am from), even the densely populated centers in the Midwest like Kansas City and Salt Lake City can benefit from the efficiencies of electric power. I do not think that there is a single solution to solving our automobile energy problems. Electric cars are a viable part of the solution. I am for reducing the amount of fossil fuels used in the US to what we produce (or less). The demand for oil will be there for the forseeable future and it would be nice if we could export oil and charge the prices OPEC charges us for a barrel of oil.

Viability in the midwest will take longer. If you look at the history of Network technology (and building this infratstructure is basically a network issue) typically it takes longer to build out to the Rural market but you build the momentum in the urban centers. It was true for telephony and electricity in the early part of the 20th century and was true for the internet in the last half of the twentienth century. These guys are on to something. The only proviso is what additional strain will this put on the Electric grid. Now we will be burning oil or natural gas to create electricity which will be sent out over the grid to be loaded into cars. And he is right this won't happen without government help.

Interesting how the objections are mostly based on erroneous readings of the information. EG: the article didn't say you had to stop every 30 miles to change batteries; it said you could go 150 miles, but that battery stations would be AVAILABLE every 30. And the comment that the electric car may not yet be viable in the "American Midwest," doesn't obviate its viability in the American urban centers, where most of the population and most of the pollution are located. weekend

He didn't directly compare the price of electricity to gas on a per cent/mile, either. If he was really confident in his plans ability to compete directly with gas powered cars then he would compare on cents/mile basis for an all electric car against a gas car with similar size and weight and maximum fuel efficiency currently available. The second problem I have with this plan is when he mentioned having to put "switch" stations 30 miles apart. Americans are not going to significantly inconvenience themselves to switch to electric so, stopping every thirty miles to change batteries would never work. Until it is cheaper, and not any more trouble to drive electric, Americans will never buy this. Just a fact of life for now.