All this is fine, but any car must be affordable to retail employees who earn $10 to$12/hour and service sector workers who earn $25,000-$35,000/year, for school teachers who earn $45,000/year. The Tesla starts at, what, $100,000? The Fisker will cost $125,000, get a $75,000 federal subsidy, and still cost $50,000. The technology is cute and clever, but unaffordable to a couple hundred million Americans. So, it is worthless because of its impractibility.

>> Do you believe that electric cars will become the "green" cars of the future?

In theory, yes, but that depends on the method by which the electricity used to charge the battery was first created. At present, 50% of US electricity generation still comes from coal, another 20% from natural gas - which is 70% fossil fuel. An exact calculation of the total CO2 produce per mile on this vehicle versus a traditional internal combustion engine vehicle will require figures on the efficiencies of power stations and vehicle engines. However, in the present electricity generation regime, it is very unlikely there is much difference. The goal, of course, is to have electricity generated from as close to 100% from renewables as possible. Only then will "green cars" actually become "green".

This is just propaganda.

The article neglects to mention that the challenge was not completed in any form of real world driving.

There was no stop and go traffic to contend with and the vehicle was not travelling at any where approaching actual highway speeds

So basically it is pointless.

At a constant 32 MPH my Ford F-250 gets 37 MPG that gives me a theoretical 1200+ miles per tank in the same conditions these guys drove in.


Don't get me wrong, I am all for electric vehicles but they need to work on genuine practicality before making exagerated claims under near scientific conditions.

When there is an electric car that sells for under $15,000.00 gets 300 miles per charge HWY or City and has a battery that can either be charged in 5 minutes or swapped for a fully charged battery in 5 minutes at a "service station" then you will be on the mark.

Until then George Clooney and Ed Begley can only buy so many cars each.

John and TheDude are correct.

Personally; I would rather get an EV for alot less if it will simply get me to work and back in the same day with charge to spare for other short range tasks such as the store, or friends house.

At no time will I pay over 40K for one of these though. I mean Goss132 has theirs reportedly under 30K. That is worth it for me, and not a bad Coupe either.

The Tesla Model S (2011) is $50,000, but will cost about the same as a $30,000 gasser to own and operate. 5+2 passengers, serious cargo space.
The "long tailpipe" argument above is drivel, because the last step, the motor, is 95% efficient in the Tesla, and

It's already been said, but really, these results are based on "closed conditions" and not on real life. I can especially relate to the guy who said his F250 gets up to 37MPG under the most ideal circumstances. My BMW 7-series says pretty much the same when I am cruising at 30 mph down a long, unpopulated road. The efficiency approaches 40 mpg and my "range" jumps up to well over 600 miles. But those readings are all artificial since as soon as I resume normal driving it drops. The difference is I can just pull into a gas station when it is time vs. charging up somewhere for hours and hours.

The price sucks too. I mean you're paying over 100K for something that fits two people and a handbag. Not only that but when you want to get spirited and smoke a few other cars, you have to consider if you will have enough charge to get home.