There's one major point this misses: when it's this cold, you're leaving the engine on in your ICE vehicle for heat, and an idling engine will drain a full gas tank much faster than an EV's heater will drain a full battery. See also https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/comments/rw7reo/people_...
> All else being equal, though, cars and trucks with internal combustion engines (ICE) would have the advantage in coping with a sudden challenge such as the I-95 fiasco. It is much easier to rehabilitate a disabled ICE vehicle. Rescuers can deliver gallons of gas in convenient jugs; gas stations are still far more numerous than EV charging stations; and ICE car batteries can be jump-started in minutes.
Despite the article's claim that "Absent some breakthrough in mobile charging technology, out-of-juice EVs in out-of-the-way places will need a tow", EV charging trucks already exist and have for over 10 years: https://electrek.co/2016/09/06/aaa-ev-emergency-charging-tru...
This is bog standard clean tech skepticism warmed up and ladled over a recent event for a newshook. And solar power doesn’t work when the suns not shining. Ok.
I don't see many facts shared in this article. An anecdote about a Tesla driver lacking a blanket. I don't understand what that's got to do with the car's energy source? And the point that gasoline can be delivered to a stranded motorist more easily than extra electric charge. I mean, when every car is electric, then hopefully there will be a way to transfer charge from one to another, like my phone can charge my friend's.
7 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 26.5 ms ] threadThis part concerns me.