This isnt the case. The average mileage of a car is 19 miles a day, so to say that most people do 50 is somewhat wide of the mark.
Fair point, no idea where I got 50 from!
But many are 300+, some over 400. It woudl be interestinng to know the average range of Evs being sold now, I reckon it will be closer to 300 than 200.
I suspect it will go down rather than up. I reckon we'll see more of the ~50kw highly efficient 200-250mi EV, the range is high enough for most people, a smaller battery is much lighter and cheaper, and it can charge fairly quickly even on a slow charger. Vauxhall had this with the Corsa and Astra Electric, though they have a weird pricing system with the list price being bad but the real-world dealer price being quite good. The Citreon e-C3 looks to be in this class but with good pricing.
300+, 400+mi EVs will continue but will be premium motorway cruisers rather than the everyday car IMO.
This assumes that everyone will only ever charge their cars at ‘home’, which is obviously not the case. Assuming an average range of 250 miles, average mileage (19 per day), and that 70% of charging is done at ‘home’ (complete guess, but seems reasonable), then the average car will need charging at home once every 18 days. On that basis, 1:10 seems more than adequate.
The problem with 1:10 is the risk that someone parks in the charging spot but isn't charging. We'll see government policy encourage more single-car households, which should improve off-street parking.
the range on them is abysmal
The range is adequate for most people.
and the lack of charging infrastructure (although it is getting better)
Public charging infrastructure is getting good now, though pricing needs work and local charging can really depend on your local authority.
EV charging infrastructure is much easier than hydrogen. As far as the installer is concerned lower powered units are a self-contained box that needs connecting to mains electricity. Civils and possibly a new grid connection are required but neither are new skills.
Hydrogen filling stations are much more involved. The ones for the Toyota Mirai use liquid hydrogen transported via lorries.
The better way forward is hydrogen power, as it just as clean as electricity (possibly cleaner, depending on the source),
Electrolysis is only 40% efficient, and its difficult to improve. From a kwh basis you will always pay at least 2.5x for hydrogen over electricity.
Wait until you hear about renewable electricity...
James May, while he was still part of Top Gear, travelled to California way back in 1999 (I think it was) to look at hydrogen powered cars, and the infrastructure required, and was very positive about the whole concept. At the time, running costs were about the same as conventional petrol powered vehicles, but this has possibly changed since.
And yet since 2010 electric vehicles have become more common place while for hydrogen there is a poorly selling Toyota and only 4 filling stations in the UK.
Hyrdogen is written about as if it is a fuel, not really accurate, you do not combust hydrogen, you create hydrogen eg by electrolysis of H2O using an energy source, then return the hydrogen to H2O after performing work making the vehicle move).
Hydrogen engines do combust it. Fuel cells recombine it with oxygen, as the molecules want to recombine you can capture energy from this.
I believe hydrogen is not simply a substitute for petrol, as "fill the tank and drive", a hydrogen-powered car has a traction battery , and the hydroegen fuel cell charges the traction battery.
Fuel cell vehicles have a small traction battery which is topped up by the fuel cell. Toyota has designed the Mirai to be fairly close to a normal car but with a different filling station.
Underneath fuel cell vehicles are essentially an EV with a fuel cell attached. They have most of the components of an EV only forgoing the larger battery and its associated cooling. As such they are much more complicated than an EV.
