Range has been solved for normal people for years now. Charging infrastructure... less so but getting good in some countries.

As for airplanes we need a different chemistry and there isn't a huge amount of work going in that direction right now, most money is currently focused on EV or stationary storage. Both of which can afford to trade off battery density (both weight and volume) for better longevity and price/kWh. LFP in particular is poorly suited for aircraft.

The chemistry that is probably best for aircraft right now is NMC but even then there are a lot of challenges around weight related to thermal runaway protection and general thermal management of the battery.

So for now electric planes are limited to trainer aircraft which are good for ~20-30mins on a single charge. Enough for a beginner pilot and CFA to go up and do some pattern work and practice some touch and go.

Unfortunately I think we need a 'big battery breakthough' or atleast more money being directed towards solving the problem before electric aircraft are much of at thing, even for experimental class.

Even before energy density passes jet-a electric aviation will start dominating and completely changing aviation. I suspect at the rate things are going that is just a few years away. One of the massive hurdles holding back innovation in aviation is certifying new engines. Electric motors are so simple that it will be much easier to certify them. Electric will also open up brand new aircraft designs since electric propulsion can go in places an incredibly hot jet engine can't. There are so many advantages that I can't wait for the next few years.

With probably 30-40% better density you could start realistically replacing trainer planes for flight schools for a portion of the fleet. The Pipistrel Velis Electro is going for this market now, but its 50 min range (including 30 min reserve) probably isn't quite enough. Under an hour is still pretty rough, but at say 80 minutes this would cover a good portion of initial lessons. And cost savings would be huge I'd think.

Somewhere between this and the energy density of jet fuel. These are 0.2 kWh/kg, jet fuel is 12 kWh/kg. There are some really lightweight 1-2 place airplanes that have very short range and are battery powered. There's a pretty big chasm between where we are now and replacing 737s.

Pretty cool but can the charging infrastructure keep up!? That's a lot of power per charger.

400 kW chargers are being deployed now. Europe's charger infrastructure plan wants 400 kW chargers available on TEN-T (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-European_Transport_Netwo...) as a baseline by 2026, 600 kW by 2028:

https://www.fleeteurope.com/en/new-energies/europe/article/f...

Alpitronic and Kempower make the best chargers.

Alpitronic's 400 kW chargers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4ZWN_-a2j4

Alpitronic HYC400s are getting to North America: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KW3C5yYSENw

Kempower's 400 kW chargers: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR2M5W6saAk

Gravity is deploying 500 kW chargers: https://insideevs.com/news/715496/gravity-charging-highest-p...

A key figure for gauging transition would be the hourly | daily kW equivilent of petrol|gasoline|fossil fuel consumption for a 'medium' city of (say) 1 million population.

How much additional electricity generation is required to replace petrol consumption (asuming electric cars, etc).

Related figures are what tonnages of "final" LFP batteries does that imply, and what tonnages of raw material mined, concentrated, and processed does that imply.

That kind of ballpark gives a feel for scaling out to larger country wide populations (along with variation on personal transport usage by city|country).

They have it at 2022. And we dont really see so many EVs at 600KM mark. If they have it in 2024 with 1000KM, it would have been prevalent in China already. This kind of bold claim, plenty. I wait and see the actual implementation on the road.