90% of the public only drive 40-50 miles a day a few 100 miles (161 Kw)in a day. 70% drive alone. So most of the public would be very happy with a vehicle that makes no carbon monoxide poison gas or other pollution, can drive off their solar or wind system and doesn't use 65% imported oil.

Just give people a choice and see how they will respond.
Posted by: jim stACk

Urban transport vehicles would also benefit from such a battery for the same reasons.
Posted by: N McCoy

Are you really so short-sighted as not to see the implications of lithium air batteries?!? The point is not that everyone will want or need high- range battery packs, but that if such enormous energy density gains can be realized, the benefits will be enormous in several areas. Most people will likely not want or need such an extreme range between charges, opting instead for a much smaller, lighter, less expensive battery pack, saving hundreds of pounds of weight; a dramatic reduction in battery weight can mean a smaller, lighter electric motor; the cargo capacity will increase dramatically due to more room and less weight; the less copper will be needed for the motor, less lithium and other materials will be needed for the battery.

Since the battery pack is the single greatest expense of an EV, the cost of buying an EV will be less than that of an ICE- powered car, so NO ONE but a noise and smoke junkie will want to drive a gas guzzler.

EVs are already extremely efficient and have a low cost-per-mile for electrical energy, but with such small, light battery packs, they will cost even less to operate.

With small, light drive systems, hub motors will be even more practical, freeing up even more interior space-- no central motors, transmissions, drive shafts, differentials, or axles, reducing rotational masses, giving us roomier interiors, flatter floors and greater flexibility in vehicle configuration.

The loss of all that extra mechanical weight will again contribute to lower overall operational expenses.

When an EV uses hub motors, the only moving parts are the wheels themselves, making the cars so simple that there is very little left to do maintenance on. It will be like driving a transistor radio.

With smaller drive systems, we conserve precious natural resources-- copper, lithium, etc. need to be conserved. With smaller battery packs, we will save significantly on energy generation-- whatever the source may be-- solar, wind, natural gar or other. We will have less need for dirty enery sources such as coal and nuclear. Smaller, lighter battery packs can make an ENORMOUS difference.
Posted by: Bill Dale

Hobbyists have been making electric vehicles by retrofiting heavy (compared to what it could be if designed from the ground up) ICE vehicles with lead acid batteries for decades. They get 40+ miles to a charge. I don't believe the auto industry could not do significantly better with volume purchasing and the ability to design the vehicle from the ground up. A mini-cooper type vehicle with 80 mile capacity at $18,000 should be no problem. And I am sure there would be millions of Americans willing to buy that type of vehicle just for commuting to and from work.

There are always those who make the simple complex, some just don't think it through, but others take advantage of geek speak, and statistics to make the simple sound very complex so as to profit by it.

Complexity makes it sound like we should pay more, that there was no way around it. It is just one of those things.

I am glad that things seem to be headed toward a more EV rich environment. But I dislike the manner in which we are getting there. Then again I usually dislike any action that is being driven by greed, even when it is an action I hoped would be taken.

Posted by: Garry Holmberg