That is a silly statement, as absurd as saying electricity itself is a dead end. The fact of the matter is EVs and electrified vehicles in general are the best answer we've got for the future of consumer mobility. Nothing else really competes long term.

"As we know them" vs "future"

You can both be right here.

There are many current challenges that prevent people from choosing an EV or against rapid majority adoption. We also have to consider that alternative methods of taxation (how to pay for roads) and the eventual reduction in tax incentives are problems that still need to be solved.

I'm also looking forward to the EVs that come out 1-2 decades from now with batteries that should have 4x+ density and/or half the cost. The biggest downer for me is all the damn tech that comes with them currently. If cost can come down, then I hope I can get one with less tech. Or that conversion kit will be common.

> We also have to consider that alternative methods of taxation (how to pay for roads) and the eventual reduction in tax incentives are problems that still need to be solved.

Are roads really payed from gas taxes? Everywhere? I perhaps naively assumed all the taxes go into a big bucket which is used to pay for all kinds of things, including roads.

Somehow even relatively poor countries manage to have good roads. We will save elsewhere. Most of the taxes go into the social bucket in most countries (retirement, social security, health, education) anyway.

"Are roads really payed from gas taxes? Everywhere?"

Fuel taxes are quite common. In some areas they do make up a large component of the road funding. Finding a replacement for them is a major issue.

"Somehow even relatively poor countries manage to have good roads. We will save elsewhere. Most of the taxes go into the social bucket in most countries (retirement, social security, health, education) anyway."

This doesn't make any sense and lacks factual support. How do the poor countries pay for the roads, and which counties are these? What are we saving and where? The majority of current taxes going to social programs has no relevance to this discussion. If we're eliminating a current tax and having the same service costs (or more due to increased weight), a new one will need to take it's place.

Well for me who hasn't owned a car for 25 years I'm going to be quite annoyed that I have to pay higher electricity prices because of EVs. It's bad enough that I have to breath in their exhaust etc.

I agree. BEVs are more expensive than ICE, does not have greater range than ICE, are charging much slowly than ICE, I don't need any dumb application to get fuel into an ICE and with surging electricity prices does not even make economical sense to own BEV.

BEVs are currently more expensive than ICE but BEVs will be less expensive in less than 10 years as the technology continue to improve. ICE technology doesn't have much room left to improve after 100 years so it's impressive that BEVs will surpass ICE so quickly.

BEV is limited by availability of raw materials. Copper, Lithium. It is actually predicted that there will be shortage of batteries for following decade, thanks to lack of available lithium and subsequent processing capacities and shortage of copper thanks to fact that we already maxed out output of current copper mines.

So there is no reason for BEV to be cheaper, more less it will keep being expensive or will get even more expensive than it is today.

If there is a shortage of raw materials, companies will work to get them to fulfill the demand.

There is literally not enough copper on Earth to get BEV going.

> EVs as we know them are a dead end. It’s one of those wonderful solutions that look really good until you take a deeper look.

Shouldn't you try to at least give a reason why you think so?

Why bother asking these types anymore? It's just going to the same debunked propaganda over and over.

Don't be daft. They certainly have their problems, but calling them a dead end is hyperbole.

Sure, there are grid issues. There are resource issues(Li, Ni, Co, Al, Cu, rare earths) with both temporary and long-term shortages combined with geopolitical issues. But overall EVs are more efficient and will win in the long run.

Should we be more focused on hybrids right now? Yes. But, in the long run, electric wins(along with mass transit, walking, biking, etc).

Hybrids don't really need anymore focus than they have had for multiple decades now. It's a fully mature technology that isn't going to advance much in performance, efficiency, or cost no mater how much attention it gets. If it fits your needs great, buy one, if not but whatever does.

Plug-in hybrids have a benefit over BEVs in that they require fewer batteries. You can build 10 PHEVs with the batteries in one BEV. If Lithium production doesn't ramp up quickly enough, PHEVs should get more focus.

Additionally, PHEVs have unlimited range like ICE while using less fuel so they are good for people who frequently need more range than a BEV can provide.

This. I opted not to continue my EV lease when it ran out. Planning on getting a PHEV in a few months after prices ease a bit more. Right now, PHEVs are more appropriate for many. Also, FWIW, my wife hated the EV charging situation and prefers the familiar concept of getting gas at a gas station vs hunting for an open charger and waiting around for a charge.

LFP batteries don't even need No or Co, just Li.

> Should we be more focused on hybrids right now?

I think most people overestimate the distance they really need. I have not charged at a public charger for months. Charging at home is so convenient, I never want to go back to the hassle with gas.

And for the occasional road trip, superchargers are fine.

Petroleum-fueled vehicles are the same, for the same reason.