Most of the populated parts of Norway are still subzero over Dec/Jan. And the eastern parts of Norway which have sizable populations are MUCH colder. It can be -15C sometimes. Sweden & Finland aren't aggressively pursuing EV adoption but they still have EV sales of 35%. Even Iceland has EV sales at 65%.

I think as we see sodium ion batteries become more prevalent that they'll become very popular in colder climates because of their better performance in lower temperatures. As you say, most cars need heat pumps to warm up the battery for charging otherwise.

Biggest impediment in America was the way consumers were used as pawns in a charging format war. The market was thrown into confusion by such stupidity when they could have just mandated a standard like Europe did.

Then you have the MAGA brain-damaged, conspiratorial, & protectionist view of the world that EVs are evil, China is evil, WEF 15 minute cities etc so therefore let's all buy 15mpg pickup trucks.

Norway demonstrates the benefit of joined up thinking. I think a lot of developed countries, the US being the worst, just let market forces fight it out with consumers being used as pawns. Others recognize ICE vehicles suck (air pollution, noise, health, global warming, fuel fluctuations) and since there is a viable alternative they work to shift consumers onto the alternative.

It reminds me of incandescent light bulbs a few decades ago. Idiots were screaming they'd never use CFL or LED bulbs and spouting a bunch of stupid arguments. But saner governments simply banned the sale of incandescents or incentivized the sale of alternatives and now they're basically history outside of some niches.

That's what Norway has done - imposed disincentives on owning an ICE vehicle (higher parking, tolls, ferry, purchase taxes) while simultaneously creating incentives for owning an EV (infrastructure grants, subsidized parking, tolls, grants). And lo and behold they achieved their aims of shifting from ICE to EV with some joined up thinking.

Of course this isn't the end of it because there are still plenty of petrol / diesel cars on the road, and large vehicles like trucks but attrition will mean in 10 years nearly all small passenger vehicles are going to be electric and infrastructure will have move to that future. And electric may be better than ICE but public transport / cycling & better infrastructural planning is better again so it's not the end by any means.

I guarantee the wear off your shoes (or bicycles) doesn't even remotely compare to the wear off vehicle tyres for obvious reasons. It's an absurd comparison.

This isn't the first time somebody has tried to make a not-android open source phone OS. Firefox OS for example got some initial traction and even sold in some markets. But it died on its ass because the reality is that phone buyers want a phone that runs apps and runs the apps they want - games, banking, streaming etc.

It doesn't matter if some other phone OS is built on open source principles or not, or even if it functionally usable in a limited way. If it doesn't have the apps it sucks.

Because FSF seems to have a knack for sucking all momentum out of projects and miring them in politics. No doubt the first release will be powered by Hurd and take 5 minutes to boot to a bash prompt.

Solid state batteries are still batteries. Charging infrastructure is the same. Cars are the same. Solid state means a more energy dense battery. It doesn't negate or cancel out the battery another EV has. There are already a variety of battery types coexisting right now with different properties. And even if solid state batteries manufacturing started tomorrow (they won't) it would be years before production capacity, yields and cost allows them to they show up in ordinary vehicles.

As for your Norway comment, ffs. Many Norwegian cities have average temperatures which are below freezing in winter let alone the country as a whole. You proclaimed EVs only work somewhere small and warm which Norway is not by any measure and this seems to a pattern in your argumentation - say something very silly about EVs which you clearly don't know much about and then double down.

The most promising concept was the Sono Sion which was going to be a no frills boxy car covered in panels. The panels might gain ~20 miles per day under good conditions but that's sufficient for many commutes, school runs and so on. Of course it could also be charged the normal way too. It nearly made it production but funding ran out. I've been to lots of places where there is so much strong sunlight that a car that charges while parked should be a no-brainer.

People are definitely buying EVs and even electric hyper cars. Electric performance cars are practically a no-brainer. I just wonder about the insecurity of both Ferrari and its customers that they feel the need to put in fake broom broom noises into a car that could wipe the floor with any ICE counterpart.

Solar benefits everyone. Lots of people drive their car from home to work, leave it parked outside all day and then drive home. They're not hooked up to a charger but the car would still be replenishing itself while it is parked. People in apartments could of course benefit from a vehicle that lasts a lot longer (potentially forever) between charges, but the benefits are still the same for everyone else.

I said nothing of the battery, I was talking of the solar panels. The average daily commute in Europe is 17 miles, in the US its 40 miles - kind of shameful for the US but anyway... If solar covers the commute then the car never needs charging ever. If it covers *most* of the commute it still slashes the time between charges. But if you want to talk battery, then the implication is less charges means the car could offer a variant with a smaller battery and therefore be cheaper. There was a car called the Sono Sion a few years back which followed that route but unfortunately couldn't secure funding to go into production.

Aptera's issues are uniquely their own but that is why in another comment I called them the Star Citizen of cars. I think solar is viable in EVs, but Aptera is so questionable as a company I wonder what is going on - constantly scrounging for money but conspicuously failing to deliver on their promises of making cars.

While I'm highly skeptical of Aptera, the concept of putting solar on EVs is still a missed opportunity. Even if a car *only* got 20 miles from solar a day that's still more than many people commute meaning they never have to charge. Or even if they drove 30 and recouped 20 miles it still triples the time between charges. There are plenty of places around the world where the concept could work fantastically well. Aptera's problems seem less to do with the concept and more to do with their fundamental inability to build a frigging car.

While I think the concept is amazing, what is not amazing is the way every time Aptera comes up in the media its usually because the begging bowl is out and not because they're actually in production. And it sounds like this public listing is an exit strategy for share holders to leave somebody else holding the bag.

Ah yes "small and warm" countries like Norway with new vehicle sales which are 98.3% BEV and half the remainder are PHEV. Norway is ahead of the rest of Europe but EV sales are growing everywhere in Europe and the infrastructure is too. And no it's not like Betamax, or 3D TVs and no the EV is not the "last resort". And I wonder what this "better technology" is you speak of.