I suspect the reason that Ford are electrifying current models is because of two reasons, a) inventors dilemma and the sales teams / channels that don't want to undercut their current stock of models, and b) for an organisation as large as Ford the change will take years to plan. I'd look for ground up EVs from Ford after two more year model cycles (i.e. about 6 years time); even if they wanted to move quicker I suspect that organisationally they'd struggle.
Toyota are still wedded to the hybrid models of cars, they are the world leaders there, by volume heads and shoulders the first, by technology first or very nearly so.
the technology is far from mature and world wide it would be even a bigger leap to electrify cars where grids are not reliable nor roads.
when the sales are such a paltry number of total automobile sales its kind of hard to be behind. batteries and charging systems have a long way to go hence betting on hybrids combined with ev tech is the best bet short term. plus much work is being done in range extended EVs with the REX still up in the air. hauling a thousand pounds of batteries for the short ranges we see now is not a good solution
I really hope this pans out for them. Their stock has been flat for a while now, but they’ve also claimed they were heavily investing in electric vehicles for some time as well.
It’ll be interesting to see who will take the lead in the next 5 years- startup automakers like Tesla or these larger auto titans who in theory should have been first to the game.
I'll wait till I hear they have a model actually moving to production.
The big oems across the board have been great at convincing people they are looking toward future tech while only releasing new combustion pickup truck and SUV models. They want the excitement for the investors and public that electrification brings but they also want to sell super simple 50 year old V8 motors in body-on-frame trucks, something has to give.
The 2018 auto show is a great example, the big three refreshed all of their pickup models without any news on production or prototype ev's. The "investments" dont mean much if they are minuscule compared to combustion development.
Granted its what people are buying right now but they are not really putting any compelling alternatives out in the market.
I wouldn't got that far on the truck front, in fact Ford just announced a V6 Turbo Diesel half-ton that should get 30MPG(the Dodge equivalent EcoDiesel already sees 28-30mpg in real-world scenarios). You're not going to see a truck that will fill that role as pure EV for a long while(and I say that as a Model S owner).
Agreed on the announce-but-not-build front. VW did the same but seems like GM is the only one following through.
Oh yeah, totally. The EcoDeisel is the same case(Fiat engine from Europe).
I'm just happy to see more efficient engines making it into the US. The fact that you can have a vehicle that will tow 8k GW but get 30mpg unloaded is fantastic.
The X can tow 6k GW but range really tanks so it's okay for short hops but usually when you're towing you're going to be driving > 200mi.
About 15-20 years ago, pickups were the go-to vehicle for DIY electric conversions (particularly the Chevy S-10). You could put the heavy lead-acid batteries under the bed and therefore lose no space.
There's no fundamental reason why trucks are less likely to electrify than other vehicles. In fact, the greater fuel savings makes it seem even more likely.
The only thing standing in the way is that some people who buy pickups are part of the idiotic anti-environment movement that likes to "roll coal" (i.e. modify their trucks to spew black smoke). But not everyone who buys pickups is like this, which is why fuel-efficient pickups are a thing.
The torque and power of the electric drivetrain make it possible to make an insanely good truck. It'll happen sooner than you think, certainly before 2022.
So if I buy a new all electric ute (that's what we call them in Australia: a utility vehicle or 'ute' for short), put a 1000kg load in it the back, then attached my 1500kg tool trailer, and drive up and down the hilly Tasmanian terrain...
How much range am I going to get?
That's the one factor that will keep the turbo diesel engine in utility and commercial vehicles for longer.
> ... up and down the hilly Tasmanian terrain...
> How much range am I going to get?
For the same energy-cost, you'll get a LOT more range out of the electric ute. Electric trucks make MORE sense in hilly regions due to regen braking making a much bigger difference than flat regions and due to the lack of brake wear.
>There's no fundamental reason why trucks are less likely to electrify than other vehicles. In fact, the greater fuel savings makes it seem even more likely.
Energy requirements between commuter and heavy-duty commercial vehicles differ substantially, and batteries are of course the biggest hurdle against full electrification.
Light trucks could probably mirror SUV development, at least for part of the market. If they won't, it's probably due to demand side of the equation.
That's backwards. The large energy requirements are exactly why trucks will electrify earlier: as far as useful energy goes, electricity is usually MUCH cheaper than diesel. The more energy that is used, the greater the benefit of electrification.
The power usage are wildly different. Your standard full-ton pickup gets about 10-12 MPG towing a reasonably sized trailer.
GGE for #2 diesel is 37.5kWh @ 50% efficient(which is better than gas) gets you 1.875kW per mile or 562kWh battery pack if you want 300 mile range before charging.
Current Model S packs are 1,300lb per 100kW so you'd be adding over 7,000 lbs just for a battery pack of that size.
For short-haul commercial stuff that's something you can plan for but I don't see a consumer who infrequently tows to variable locations making that work.
For reference your average 30MPG commuter needs only 0.33kWh per mile(and is almost exactly what our Model S does).
The weight still has to go somewhere but this makes me wonder if trailers could have battery packs too, maybe even drive wheels? With electric power trains we could rethink the whole arrangement.
Does it? 7k is close to the max towing capacity of most half-ton pickups so you'd basically be towing a trailer to match the capacity of an empty truck.
I mean add battery capacity to the trailer which extends your range when you need it. Whatever capacity you carry on the trailer would be that much less on the vehicle. 7k is the total battery size to be equivalent to a modern gas tank, the majority of the battery would remain on the truck but the trailer could be used to carry extra in a way that petroleum fuels don't really offer.
Just as an aside: the (optimistic) 50% efficiency figure is lhv, which doesn't take into account all the chemical energy available. 46% if you use HHV.
There's a couple things that make trucks a hard nut to crack(again I say this as a Model S + diesel truck owner).
1. There's a 6k GVWR weight limit for a lot of local streets. Most half-ton trucks are in the 5200k range so adding 2k of batteries easily puts you over this.
2. Trucks are rated for total tow capacity, adding 2k of batteries means you cut towing capacity by 2k or upgrade the brakes/drivetrain which adds more weight.
3. Trucks aren't that aerodynamic, trailers even less so. That means per-kW you're going to get a lot less range than something that has a good Cd.
4. Charging stations just aren't setup for trailers at all. You'd have to find a place to unhitch, charge and rehitch which adds even more travel time.
For commercial trucking routes you can probably go electric sooner since they are regular routes but for consumer trucks I don't see it happening soon.
Recently we had to drive 400mi roundtrip towing a 5k lb trailer @ 18 MPG. Going from a GGE of 37kw/gal * 0.5 thermal we would have needed a 412kWh battery pack to make that trip with 0% range left.
1-2: How much does a diesel fuel tank + transmission + engine weigh? Would it really require adding 2,000lb of batteries to the truck or can something serviceable be built with a similar overall weight?
3: Why does an electric truck have to look like a gasoline truck? can it be repackaged to be more aerodynamic?
4: This is trivially easy to solve.
How many times did you stop for fuel on your trip? How long were you at your destination 200 miles away?
Doubt it considering all BEVs are heavier. Our Model S weights nearly the same as our half-ton and that's without the frame-reinforcement needing to tow.
> 3
If you want standard truck clearance and bed sizes you're not going to do this without making trucks a lot longer. For reference our Model S and short-bed quad cab are already close in length.
> 4
Easy in theory but massive infrastructure investment. Also if you've ever towed a trailer then you'd know there's some sidestreets where superchargers are where you physically cannot turn around a trailer.
For reference we did the trip in 4 hours, no stopping since the truck has a 26gal tank. I'm as big of a proponent of EVs as you'll find but you also can't just blindly assert that EVs will work everywhere if you want to convince people that you aren't crazy. There are realistic limits and I think applying the technology where it makes sense is the fastest way to drive adoption.
Towing capacity is more than just the powertrain. The frame, suspension and brakes make a huge difference. 1500->2500 has a huge GVWR jump but only a small engine size increase. The extra weight from a batter pack is also going to eat into your tow capacity.
You also can't rely on engine braking in cold-soaked weather or at full charge so you're still don't get to omit those things.
You most certainly can rely on engine braking in those conditions. In operation, the battery quickly warms up and can easily be set to warm before the car is started. It's also common to not fully charge a large-battery EV unless you need to. It helps battery life if you only charge to ~90% anyway (no one drives around with a fully-fueled conventional vehicle at all times).
I've owned a Model S for 2 years and 65k miles, I'm really familiar with regenerative braking. Let's say your charging for a long trip to 100% and live at to top of a large grade.
In that case you will have to rely on your brakes 100%. I know this because I make a 300mi roundtrip that exactly matches that profile nearly every week and for the first 5 miles I have no regenerative braking.
From a safety standard you have to match the braking system of an equally equiped ICE.
If you live on the top of a tall hill, there's no reason to charge to 100% no matter how long your trip will be as you'll charge up to 100% on the way down.
All you have to do from a safety perspective is ensure there's charge overhead. I own a Volt and there's a "mountain mode" setting for just this purpose, plus in the Volt there's always some headroom in the battery that is held in reserve by the system.
I suspect the bulk of the 40 will be hybrids, not prius type hybrids, but 918/P1/LaFerrari/i8 type hybrids. They are more fun to drive than 100% gas cars, and are more green than traditional hybrid vehicles.
Here's what I'd like to see. Either a plugin hybrid version of the Ford Fusion that gets at least 50 - 100 miles in EV mode (instead of 21), or something like a Tesla with a smaller (50 - 75 mile) battery powering the front wheels, with a 50-HP ICE powering the rear wheels. Something like this could still give you more than 95% EV-only, yet can still be your main car as you have the ICE as a range extender. And by trading battery for the gas engine, you end up with about the same weight/cost as a 350-mile range EV only car, but never have range anxiety.
That is one of the cars that fits my criteria, along with one of the models that BMW has out (i3, is it?). The problem I have is the styling, they are styled to look different than a regular sedan (also I didn't really care for the ride, the Volt felt like driving a lower end model). The thing I like about the Fusion is that it is a regular car model, that has hybrid and plugin as options (kind of like picking different sized ICE engines). The thing that I really like about the Fusion Hybrid is that it really feels nice to drive -- smooth, kind of like a magic carpet (I'd imagine that a Tesla feels similar).
Ideally, I'd like to see this for nearly all manufacture models -- electrification added to existing lines, instead of whole new designs.
The conspiracy-minded part of me thinks the GM/BMW electric cars are styled so differently to make them unappealing to “normal” (non-early adopters) to either deliberately sabotage the project or at least to avoid making the cars too popular. They really seem bent on squeezing the most from their century-old investment in ICE.
Honda Accord Hybrids are pretty close to this. The wheels are primarily motivated by an electric motor. Much of the time the ICE is simply a generator that turns on to charge the battery. When the battery is exhausted or the car needs more power, a clutch plate closes between the ICE and the motor. There's no transmission in the car otherwise (they advertise as e-CVT, but there's no actual physical CVT, software controls the balance between the ICE and the motor to simulate infinite gearing). [1][2]
At low speeds you're basically driving an electric car that stores the electricity as gasoline instead of in batteries. They get all the electric motor torque and such that you'd expect. Range is between 550-750 miles [3] on a tank of regular 87 unleaded and costs under $30k.
If the ratio of gas tank to batteries were reversed we'd claim it was an electric car with a range extending ICE.
This type of products is always higher cost, higher maintenance (two different powertrains), and generally the worst of both worlds (small battery and weak ICE).
The future is fully powered EVs. If buses and semis can be that, then certainly passenger vehicles can, too.
I agree with you that full EVs are ultimately the future, but the Chevy Volt is a fantastic interim step. It's not higher maintenance than a regular ICE vehicle because the engine is rarely used.
The battery is also big enough that you can drive it pure electric for the vast majority of trips, at full highway speeds. Most other plug-in hybrids can't do that, and I agree they suck.
(The Volt's battery is also carefully used only in the middle ~65%, i.e. not charged all the way and not fully discharged. That extends the battery life dramatically. It can get away with that because the battery is much larger than most other plug-in hybrids.)
One thing I really like about Ford and Toyota hybrids, is the transmission is actually simpler than a pure ICE vehicle. I haven't found that many good write ups online, there is one fairly good youtube video (it covers the Toyota implementation, but Ford's is similar).
The transmission consists of one planetary gearset, and two combination motor-generators. The engine is hooked to the planet carrier, the wheels and a larger motor/generator is hooked to the sun gear, and a second motor/generator hooked to the ring gear. When running on the ICE motor, the smaller electric motor acts as a generator. By varying the amount of current going to the larger motor (and/or battery), it effectively changes the gear ratio. When running on battery, the larger motor is used for motion, and is also used for regenerative braking. The smaller motor is then kicked in at a different speed, to start the ICE engine when needed. Of course, the complexity is all in math that drives the software, but there is much less mechanical complexity in that transmission (compared to an automatic, and even to manuals). But the end result is a very smooth acceleration that seamlessly moves between electric and gas as needed (the feeling is pretty close to what you would get if it was all electric).
To make electric cars really mainstream, I think it would help to make some standard, easily removable battery modules that different manufacturers use. Then they sell the electyric car without battery and you lease the battery from providers something like a gas stations.
It's not a new idea. I think it is just a matter of waiting for the market to be ready. But its kind of a chicken and egg problem.
I don't think introducing another recurring payment is the best thing for society. The market will be ready for battery leases when the average person can't afford their own battery outright.
Jsut to be clear, the idea was that you would go to the gas station and trade in an empty battery for a full one. In this case it is better for the people to not own the battery since they will be getting different ones all the time.
Of course it would also make sense to allow people to keep the battery and recharge it themselves, in which case they would be paying for holding the battery.
I wholeheartedly agree, and believe that this model is the only way to make electric vehicles mainstream.
Battery performance/range can only be improved so much with the current technology (and future battery tech. is still a looong ways off), and not everyone is willing to wait tens of minutes to charge their vehicles (e.g. when on long-distance trips.)
"In order to overcome the limited operating range of electric vehicles, and the lack of recharging infrastructure, an exchangeable battery service was first proposed as early as 1896. The concept was first put into practice by Hartford Electric Light Company through the GeVeCo battery service and initially available for electric trucks. The vehicle owner purchased the vehicle from General Vehicle Company (GVC, a subsidiary of the General Electric Company) without a battery and the electricity was purchased from Hartford Electric through an exchangeable battery. The owner paid a variable per-mile charge and a monthly service fee to cover maintenance and storage of the truck. Both vehicles and batteries were modified to facilitate a fast battery exchange. The service was provided between 1910 and 1924 and during that period covered more than 6 million miles. Beginning in 1917 a similar successful service was operated in Chicago for owners of Milburn Wagon Company cars who also could buy the vehicle without the batteries."
In Taiwan scooters are very common and their two stroke engines are noisy and dirty. The obvious solution is electric scooters. A company called Gogoro [1] makes electric scooters with removable battery packs about the size of a US gallon milk container. They are exchanged in charging racks that look a lot like a propane tank exchange location.
I think this model could easily take off in the states, gas stations could be given incentives (tax breaks) for providing a battery exchange point. This could jump start the infrastructure investment and get us closer to a point where car batteries can be exchanged too.
I'm looking forward to an hybrid F-150. It would be nice to have the batteries under the bed so I don't have to buy the sand in the winter. Since the F-150 family is still the best selling vehicle in the US, its going to be very interesting when they make the move. A full electric is really going to have to some decent range when towing or have a quick charge time to be accepted.
Given the effort and marketing Ford is putting into the diesel F-150 with the better towing capacity, I'm a bit skeptical. Plus, the recreational uses for normal folks requires towing to parks.
57 comments
[ 3.7 ms ] story [ 140 ms ] threadI’m surprised Toyota is so far behind.
Toyota are still wedded to the hybrid models of cars, they are the world leaders there, by volume heads and shoulders the first, by technology first or very nearly so.
when the sales are such a paltry number of total automobile sales its kind of hard to be behind. batteries and charging systems have a long way to go hence betting on hybrids combined with ev tech is the best bet short term. plus much work is being done in range extended EVs with the REX still up in the air. hauling a thousand pounds of batteries for the short ranges we see now is not a good solution
It’ll be interesting to see who will take the lead in the next 5 years- startup automakers like Tesla or these larger auto titans who in theory should have been first to the game.
The big oems across the board have been great at convincing people they are looking toward future tech while only releasing new combustion pickup truck and SUV models. They want the excitement for the investors and public that electrification brings but they also want to sell super simple 50 year old V8 motors in body-on-frame trucks, something has to give.
The 2018 auto show is a great example, the big three refreshed all of their pickup models without any news on production or prototype ev's. The "investments" dont mean much if they are minuscule compared to combustion development.
Granted its what people are buying right now but they are not really putting any compelling alternatives out in the market.
Agreed on the announce-but-not-build front. VW did the same but seems like GM is the only one following through.
Also I would point out that 3.0 ford engine you are referring to has been around since 2009 as the lion engine in various international markets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_AJD-V6/PSA_DT17
It probably has a different calibration for the US market to meet stricter emissions but that's about it.
I'm just happy to see more efficient engines making it into the US. The fact that you can have a vehicle that will tow 8k GW but get 30mpg unloaded is fantastic.
The X can tow 6k GW but range really tanks so it's okay for short hops but usually when you're towing you're going to be driving > 200mi.
About 15-20 years ago, pickups were the go-to vehicle for DIY electric conversions (particularly the Chevy S-10). You could put the heavy lead-acid batteries under the bed and therefore lose no space.
There's no fundamental reason why trucks are less likely to electrify than other vehicles. In fact, the greater fuel savings makes it seem even more likely.
The only thing standing in the way is that some people who buy pickups are part of the idiotic anti-environment movement that likes to "roll coal" (i.e. modify their trucks to spew black smoke). But not everyone who buys pickups is like this, which is why fuel-efficient pickups are a thing.
The torque and power of the electric drivetrain make it possible to make an insanely good truck. It'll happen sooner than you think, certainly before 2022.
How much range am I going to get?
That's the one factor that will keep the turbo diesel engine in utility and commercial vehicles for longer.
For the same energy-cost, you'll get a LOT more range out of the electric ute. Electric trucks make MORE sense in hilly regions due to regen braking making a much bigger difference than flat regions and due to the lack of brake wear.
Energy requirements between commuter and heavy-duty commercial vehicles differ substantially, and batteries are of course the biggest hurdle against full electrification.
Light trucks could probably mirror SUV development, at least for part of the market. If they won't, it's probably due to demand side of the equation.
GGE for #2 diesel is 37.5kWh @ 50% efficient(which is better than gas) gets you 1.875kW per mile or 562kWh battery pack if you want 300 mile range before charging.
Current Model S packs are 1,300lb per 100kW so you'd be adding over 7,000 lbs just for a battery pack of that size.
For short-haul commercial stuff that's something you can plan for but I don't see a consumer who infrequently tows to variable locations making that work.
For reference your average 30MPG commuter needs only 0.33kWh per mile(and is almost exactly what our Model S does).
1. There's a 6k GVWR weight limit for a lot of local streets. Most half-ton trucks are in the 5200k range so adding 2k of batteries easily puts you over this.
2. Trucks are rated for total tow capacity, adding 2k of batteries means you cut towing capacity by 2k or upgrade the brakes/drivetrain which adds more weight.
3. Trucks aren't that aerodynamic, trailers even less so. That means per-kW you're going to get a lot less range than something that has a good Cd.
4. Charging stations just aren't setup for trailers at all. You'd have to find a place to unhitch, charge and rehitch which adds even more travel time.
For commercial trucking routes you can probably go electric sooner since they are regular routes but for consumer trucks I don't see it happening soon.
Recently we had to drive 400mi roundtrip towing a 5k lb trailer @ 18 MPG. Going from a GGE of 37kw/gal * 0.5 thermal we would have needed a 412kWh battery pack to make that trip with 0% range left.
3: Why does an electric truck have to look like a gasoline truck? can it be repackaged to be more aerodynamic?
4: This is trivially easy to solve.
How many times did you stop for fuel on your trip? How long were you at your destination 200 miles away?
Doubt it considering all BEVs are heavier. Our Model S weights nearly the same as our half-ton and that's without the frame-reinforcement needing to tow.
> 3
If you want standard truck clearance and bed sizes you're not going to do this without making trucks a lot longer. For reference our Model S and short-bed quad cab are already close in length.
> 4
Easy in theory but massive infrastructure investment. Also if you've ever towed a trailer then you'd know there's some sidestreets where superchargers are where you physically cannot turn around a trailer.
For reference we did the trip in 4 hours, no stopping since the truck has a 26gal tank. I'm as big of a proponent of EVs as you'll find but you also can't just blindly assert that EVs will work everywhere if you want to convince people that you aren't crazy. There are realistic limits and I think applying the technology where it makes sense is the fastest way to drive adoption.
You also can't rely on engine braking in cold-soaked weather or at full charge so you're still don't get to omit those things.
In that case you will have to rely on your brakes 100%. I know this because I make a 300mi roundtrip that exactly matches that profile nearly every week and for the first 5 miles I have no regenerative braking.
From a safety standard you have to match the braking system of an equally equiped ICE.
All you have to do from a safety perspective is ensure there's charge overhead. I own a Volt and there's a "mountain mode" setting for just this purpose, plus in the Volt there's always some headroom in the battery that is held in reserve by the system.
Cool, your volt can fallback on its ICE and always leave a reserve a Tesla/Leaf/Bolt just isn't the same.
You're saying I need to plan my charge down to the watt? What happens when I hit 100% with a mile of hill left to go?
I suspect the bulk of the 40 will be hybrids, not prius type hybrids, but 918/P1/LaFerrari/i8 type hybrids. They are more fun to drive than 100% gas cars, and are more green than traditional hybrid vehicles.
[1] https://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/prius
[2] https://www.caranddriver.com/features/the-2015-porsche-918-s...
Ideally, I'd like to see this for nearly all manufacture models -- electrification added to existing lines, instead of whole new designs.
At low speeds you're basically driving an electric car that stores the electricity as gasoline instead of in batteries. They get all the electric motor torque and such that you'd expect. Range is between 550-750 miles [3] on a tank of regular 87 unleaded and costs under $30k.
If the ratio of gas tank to batteries were reversed we'd claim it was an electric car with a range extending ICE.
1 - http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/02/review-2014-honda-a...
2 - https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2018-honda-accord-hybri...
3 - https://www.boston.com/cars/cars/2017/04/05/2017-honda-accor...
https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2403481,00.asp
This type of products is always higher cost, higher maintenance (two different powertrains), and generally the worst of both worlds (small battery and weak ICE).
The future is fully powered EVs. If buses and semis can be that, then certainly passenger vehicles can, too.
The battery is also big enough that you can drive it pure electric for the vast majority of trips, at full highway speeds. Most other plug-in hybrids can't do that, and I agree they suck.
(The Volt's battery is also carefully used only in the middle ~65%, i.e. not charged all the way and not fully discharged. That extends the battery life dramatically. It can get away with that because the battery is much larger than most other plug-in hybrids.)
The transmission consists of one planetary gearset, and two combination motor-generators. The engine is hooked to the planet carrier, the wheels and a larger motor/generator is hooked to the sun gear, and a second motor/generator hooked to the ring gear. When running on the ICE motor, the smaller electric motor acts as a generator. By varying the amount of current going to the larger motor (and/or battery), it effectively changes the gear ratio. When running on battery, the larger motor is used for motion, and is also used for regenerative braking. The smaller motor is then kicked in at a different speed, to start the ICE engine when needed. Of course, the complexity is all in math that drives the software, but there is much less mechanical complexity in that transmission (compared to an automatic, and even to manuals). But the end result is a very smooth acceleration that seamlessly moves between electric and gas as needed (the feeling is pretty close to what you would get if it was all electric).
It's not a new idea. I think it is just a matter of waiting for the market to be ready. But its kind of a chicken and egg problem.
Of course it would also make sense to allow people to keep the battery and recharge it themselves, in which case they would be paying for holding the battery.
Battery performance/range can only be improved so much with the current technology (and future battery tech. is still a looong ways off), and not everyone is willing to wait tens of minutes to charge their vehicles (e.g. when on long-distance trips.)
Indeed...
"In order to overcome the limited operating range of electric vehicles, and the lack of recharging infrastructure, an exchangeable battery service was first proposed as early as 1896. The concept was first put into practice by Hartford Electric Light Company through the GeVeCo battery service and initially available for electric trucks. The vehicle owner purchased the vehicle from General Vehicle Company (GVC, a subsidiary of the General Electric Company) without a battery and the electricity was purchased from Hartford Electric through an exchangeable battery. The owner paid a variable per-mile charge and a monthly service fee to cover maintenance and storage of the truck. Both vehicles and batteries were modified to facilitate a fast battery exchange. The service was provided between 1910 and 1924 and during that period covered more than 6 million miles. Beginning in 1917 a similar successful service was operated in Chicago for owners of Milburn Wagon Company cars who also could buy the vehicle without the batteries."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_electric_vehi...
I think this model could easily take off in the states, gas stations could be given incentives (tax breaks) for providing a battery exchange point. This could jump start the infrastructure investment and get us closer to a point where car batteries can be exchanged too.
[1]: https://www.gogoro.com/