Aren't a lot of countries basically forcing companies to do this early before the support infrastructure is in place?
I'm still curious how people living in the mountain of condo buildings in most major cities are going to charge their consumer cars, without having to line up for hours at gas-station style charging stations, considering most condo parking garages I've seen only have 3-4 charging spots.
Solving it for trucks delivering to various locations across non-urban areas seems a bit easier, given it's less of a real estate problem, but still a huge investment.
I'm guessing loading docks at warehouses will need to set up individual plugs while it loads/unloads and pre-planned trucks stops all along the highways? Any time they eat/rest will be designed around charging.
Easy: condos will place more chargers.
Currently the paradigm is to place a few high-power chargers and have people occupy the charger as little as possible. Once electric cars hit a certain threshold everyone will want a charger, so it'll become more viable to just equip every single parking space with a low-power charger, and have everyone slow charge overnight.
All of them?
I guess there will be either be rapid improvements to charging time where the real estate burden for charging won’t be too bad or the private landlords will have to pay for it (or get subsidized to). There’s a ton of buildings in each city which aren’t exactly in a rush to do investments in old properties.
Maybe it's different where you live, but Superchargers are all over here. Most of the grocery stores around me have them, and they have lots of spots available even at peak hours (some have EA and Superchargers next to each other). Chargefinder.com shows tons of public charging options around.
Even the lowest range Model 3 has more "range" than my petrol car, and I still only fill up at the grocery store gas station most weeks.
The infrastructure is already there and it's growing quickly. But unless you have an EV, you probably don't even notice it's happening.
Or maybe their plans is to get the first mover advantage and see what pans out ? Or get the whole market à la Uber by spending a lot of VC money and then figure out how to recoup ? See farming tech.
Uber makes a gross profit of over $12 billion on a revenue of nearly $32 billion. They lose money on paper because they keep reinvesting profits and further investments back into the business. They've almost doubled revenue YoY.
So even the most ludicrous SV startup you can think of pulled this off.
I am not following. I didn't mean to make fun of you, I honestly thanked you for correcting my warped vision of Uber's VC situation. Sorry if it sounded ironic or aggressive.
It's also not true to say that Uber's loss is due solely to R&D, since R&D only represents $1 billion in expenses, per Uber's 2022 annual report and their Q1 financials. Uber would still be unprofitable even if it did no R&D, since it has very large G&A, marketing costs, and CORS (cost of revenue).
Perhaps these limitations aren't as rigid as people swear they are, or maybe shipping modalities change in order to play to the strengths of EVs. For example, there's nothing stopping shipping from becoming a relay-based, rather than point-to-point. Or maybe it becomes financially feasible to have drivers swap trucks. Yeah, that kills the "owner operator" long-haul trucker, but that model is pretty untenable anyway.
Even industry experts can call an idea patently absurd, then have it become dominant over the next 20-30 years. Cable television is a good example of this, it's crazy to attach physical cables to every house in the USA in order to deliver TV, which can be sent over-the-air at a fraction of the cost. But we did just that. The benefits out-weighed the (tremendous) costs.