At current gas price there are many places where EVs are already cheaper to operate.

It's unrealistic to switch everyone to EVs right now. But many two car households could reasonable have one EV and one ICE car. The Chevrolet Volt was pretty much perfect for the current situation: most commuting would happen on the battery but the extra long trips would switch over to gas.

I don't disagree with you, but I'm wondering about the 1%? For example I lived in Alaska for a few years. There are places up there when you have hundred of miles between stops, and if you run out of fuel the situation can be potentially deadly. Everyone carries extra fuel with them to protect against this situation.

What happens to those people when the cost of gas is sky high because economies of scale are completely gone and it's a niche product?

Obviously, Alaska will be outlawed as part of the bill that ends fossil fuel production and criminalizes the possession of ICE cars.

(Serious answer: gas will be subsidized, just like everything else up there.)

Two EVs is way easier to manage than an ICE car and an EV.

If you have no charging at home but a walkable charger nearby, with two EVs, you can drive the second one to your vehicle that is already at a charge station, and trade off, driving the first one home and leaving the second one to charge. Then trade off again later. With an ICE car as the second car, you would either do more walking (nothing wrong with that, sure, but it takes time) or you need a second driver.

You’re possibly falling into the trap of thinking EVs are hard to use for long distance road trips. Depends on which EV though. Not true for at least one brand.

If you don't have a second driver why do you have two cars in the first place?

That’s not what I meant.

I see a lot of ICE drivers giving an EV driver a ride to the charger. For example, husband wife couples.

If they had two EVs in their (multi person, ok?) household, then the ICE driving person would not have to spend their time being a chauffeur, because the EV driver could just drive the second EV to the charger and leave it there charging.

And then when the second EV is charged?

It feels like you have a half thought out point. Sure it can work, but I think anyone in that situation would discover it is really inconvenient in practice.

No it’s not only fully thought through, it’s a tried and tested lifehack that we did for a year or so, and we loved it.

It means if you have a 10 minute walk to the charger, you only have to do that walk once when you drop off for the first charge, and once when you pick up for the last charge. That can save a lot of time.

Who is talking about punishing hydrogen? And what about the fact that gas is currently massively subsidised, is removing subsidy a "punishment"? And what about the fact that we all need this air to breathe and we're all collectively subsidising this lifestyle with our health? Also note that trucks bringing goods into a city could still be subsidised separately from other things if we chose, and that bulk goods distribution have more options for on-premises fuel tanks than people's homes do, things don't have to be binary.

When you subsidize competitors to hydrogen (such as electricity), it punishes hydrogen. Toyota et al are asking to reduce these subsidies.

I don't know whether gas is subsidized or not, but if it is, I agree, remove the subsidy!

ha yes. Gas is wildly subsidized so consumers have cheap fuel prices to support the car based economy.

Same as corn, dairy, etc...

Ah yes, good point about corn. That's heavily subsidized and will only become more so since every politician wants to win Iowa early in the primary