I’ve read that “Wait but Why” post before, the author has a clear agenda, and you should take it with a big grain of salt. In one of the notes, the author uncritically reproduces the spurious conspiracy theory put forward in Who Killed the Electric Car without acknowledging that the claims in it have been thoroughly rebuffed (and frankly were never sensible to begin with).
I think the worst part of that article, which should totally discredit him on the topic, is his belief that electric cars have always been a viable competitor to gas cars. Huge advances in computers, chemistry, aerodynamics, metallurgy, and materials science were needed to get us to where we are, with electric cars just now starting to become a viable alternative to ICE. He seriously makes the claim that it was just a coincidence; Henry Ford happened to like ICE, so all the other automakers in the world obeyed the will of Ford and stopped developing electric vehicles even though they were just as promising. The author shows no understanding of the underlying technology, so it isn’t surprising he made this mistake.
Not get a sense of purpose out of your career.
Not get a sense of purpose from solving extremely challenging science and engineering problems to produce the fuel that keeps civilization from collapsing?
He seriously makes the claim that it was just a coincidence; Henry Ford happened to like ICE, so all the other automakers in the world obeyed the will of Ford and stopped developing electric vehicles even though they were just as promising.
I’ve read that “Wait but Why” post before, the author has a clear agenda, and you should take it with a big grain of salt. In one of the notes, the author uncritically reproduces the spurious conspiracy theory put forward in Who Killed the Electric Car without acknowledging that the claims in it have been thoroughly rebuffed (and frankly were never sensible to begin with).
I think the worst part of that article, which should totally discredit him on the topic, is his belief that electric cars have always been a viable competitor to gas cars. Huge advances in computers, chemistry, aerodynamics, metallurgy, and materials science were needed to get us to where we are, with electric cars just now starting to become a viable alternative to ICE. He seriously makes the claim that it was just a coincidence; Henry Ford happened to like ICE, so all the other automakers in the world obeyed the will of Ford and stopped developing electric vehicles even though they were just as promising. The author shows no understanding of the underlying technology, so it isn’t surprising he made this mistake.
Not get a sense of purpose from solving extremely challenging science and engineering problems to produce the fuel that keeps civilization from collapsing?
You can tell can tell how effort has gone into EV research from patent filings, and its a lot. Countries with a manufacturing base but no oil reserves are particularly motivated.
However there are real problems getting the technology into a form that enthuses consumers