EV mass adoption requires power plants, improved infrastructure, and new battery technology.
Nuclear power has long been a bogeyman, but it's time to seriously consider it again. Plants can be built safer, and we have decades of design improvements compared to Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, and Fukushima. Waste concerns are overblown, and I suspect "spent" rods can be re-enriched or repurposed instead of just buried, to say nothing of the potential in switching from uranium to thorium. Caveat: I am not an expert in any of this, just a casual amateur researcher.
The local electric cooperative and a neighboring utility company have been upgrading their transmission lines locally. I'm not a fan of megacorporations, but at least they aren't government.
As for batteries, there are numerous possible future tech developments, but LiFePo is here now. It's not as energy dense, so more battery volume is required, but it requires less scarce materials.
But above all, the fact that subsidies and mandates are the driving forces (no pun intended) behind current EV adoption is proof the market cannot sustain it.
I agree with your entire post, and I like that formulation. Nickel metal hydride is another formulation that is less power dense with easier to find components. It doesn't burn like LiIon either. I also like the Edison battery, with all its faults!
But I still like the vanadium reflow battery best, especially if I can make my redesign of the electrode bodies work as I hope!
The reactors are truly a good solution, and can be used in slack load times, to make the hydrogen discussed in the main post. If the hydrogen is liquid, and pumped around a superconductor core, power can be disbursed with no appreciable losses! Them the hydrogen can be used to power small local power plants containing fuel cells.
The waste problem can be solved in two ways. First refine the spent fuel rods to recover the unused fuel, to reuse. Then you can grind it up and mix it in sand to be fired into glass...the perfect container! Then it can be buried safely, as it can't ever leach out! The second method starts the same, but the waste is cast into a large block. That block is lifted, on disposable rockets like the Germans make; and sent into the sun. We simply add a tiny amount of nuclear fuel to a huge nuclear reactor....
The regulation problem is the greatest threat to EVs! The politicians, in total ignorance of the real World; are doing untold damage to EVs!!!! This must be a scientific and engineering problem, because that is the only way to solve the issues!
These idiots once tried to change π, to 3 for state use; because 3.1415927 was too hard to remember.... Some of the dumbest people on Earth!
👍💙🐾🐶🐾💗🤠🤔
Sending objects out of the solar system is actually more energy-efficient than sending them into the sun. Less delta V. But launching it is very energy intensive in the first place. Why bother?
I have always liked the glass option. I have several calibration sources for my Geiger counter. They are glass, and size determines the strength of the calibration source.
I was shooting for the sun, so someone else wouldn't have to deal with our trash later!
👍💙🙏📖🙏💗🤠😁