XPost: rec.arts.sf.written, rec.arts.sf.science
From: robban@clubtelco.com
On 15/01/2014 11:35 am, J. Clarke wrote:
> In article , robban@clubtelco.com
> says...
>>
>> On 14/01/2014 10:57 pm, J. Clarke wrote:
>>> In article , leszek.karlik@gmail.com
>>> says...
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 13:20:24 +0100, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>> However, that would not save you much if anything because you'd still
>>>>> have to maintain all those vehicles.
>>>>
>>>> Luckily, electric vehicles are significantly less maintenance-intensive
>>>> than
>>>> internal combustion vehicles.
>>>
>>> But now you have the issue of the electric vehicles not having any range
>>> and being slow to recharge, so the strategy of sending them hither and
>>> beyond picking up and dropping passengers fails.
>>
>> As far as I know, all current electric cars will do about 100km before
>> they need to be recharged. Not many people commute that far by car every
>> day.
>
> We are not talking about one person having a car that he uses to commute
> to work and back. We are talking about him having a self-driving car
> that drives him to work, drive itself back home, takes his wife shopping
> and to the beauty parlor, takes her home, drives back to his office to
> pick him up and take him home after work, and somewhere along the way
> takes the kids to soccer. It's doing a lot of driving around that the
> single-user commuter car isn't. And when you expect it to also make you
> money by carrying passengers for hire . . .
Yes. All those journeys with an empty vehicle makes the whole concept
uneconomic.
--
Robert Bannister - 1940-71 SE England
1972-now W Australia
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
