Re: Carbon neutral
FUD much?
"Too expensive, limited battery life, difficult repairs, meddling manufacturers."
Too expensive - only way I could afford a new car was because it was an EV, not dino juice powered. Teslas are fairly expensive, but that's like saying that ICE cars are too expensive because I can't afford a Jaguar... (Car being on a motability lease means that operational cost savings are very significant in terms of how much you can spend on the car itself, never bought a new car before).
Limited battery life - How much battery life do you need on a regular basis?
Relatively few people need seriously long range, my current vehicle has a WLTP of 160, realistically that's 140. I only charge once a week normally, and it makes our semi regular "long" journey a whopping 40 minutes longer over a six hour journey. It's rather nice having a break and stretching one's legs after a couple of hours of driving. But even my longest, completely insane, commute would have been covered - and it would have taken all of 10 extra seconds a day (to plug in as I got home, unplug as I left for work).
Difficult repairs - Less so than an ICE vehicle. Let's face it both are basically computers on wheels nowadays, and the EV does have a significant advantage, a much lower part count.
Meddling manufacturers - Manufacturer of my vehicle hasn't touched it since I took delivery. And I'll probably ask for the latest update when it goes in for a service. Tesla have over the air updates, which are generally well received because they are improvements to the vehicle systems.
In this case it seems a safety update has lowered the performance of the battery system, which is really not good - but that's as much a failure of communication as anything else.
As for carbon neutral - I'm nowhere near. I'm closer than I was with an ICE car, but unlike Norway our grid is not 96% hydro powered (which is pretty darned close to carbon neutral).
Biting the hand that feeds IT
