So, as I understand it, there are a couple of things supposedly in the mix that we should be factoring in..
Fusion reaction as a form of energy, which at the moment can operate reliably for 20 seconds, and "solar flow batteries", which combine the disparate elements into a single "unit", and operate more efficiently than
most commercial PV array systems on the market, but are "years away from commercialisation" (paraphrasing one of the lead designers).
So, while I realise that we "petrolheads" have been somewhat remiss in not keeping up with current developments, I would add that:
1) I was more asking about how
existent and soon-to-be-available technologies might shape the move toward EV take up (and the above mooted technologies would not qualify on the "soon-to-be-available" score), and
2) If those who hold themselves out as the smartest people in the room wish to get stuck into the rest of us for "not keeping up", perhaps it might pay to take a more holistic "Enterprise Architecture" view of the problem, and lay out the entire transition "timeline", rather than providing links to as-yet unproven technologies that are literally years away from general availability in any realistic form (and likely years after EVs are "a thing").
How does the "whole picture" look? Grid, Transport, Tax revenue, Infrastructure, End-User cost comparisons (now to then) etc?
- Technology (including transition stages, costs (including shifts - tax revenue and others) etc. E.g. how does the transition between fossil fuel excise and RUCs look, for petrol vehicle "hold outs". In Victoria's latest budget, they've announced a small RUC for EV owners in the most recent budget...'cos they aren't getting fuel excise from them...and many of them, who've paid a high price for entry...aren't happy!
- Environmental footprint. E.g. Where - and how - would spent fuel rods be stored sustainably over the (very) long term, without negative environmental impacts on ground water/other environmental areas? (assuming nuclear energy becomes a bigger part of the mix). Which other "refined" materials are going to cause "end-of-life" problems in disposal/recycling etc? How does the through-life environmental cost of an EV compare to a petrol vehicle? You'd hope it would be better, but even now the benefits range from minimal to large, depending on who is conducting the study.
https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-how-electric-vehicles-help-to-tackle-clima...(Note, in glancing through that article, I don't note decommissioning and disposal comparisons noted).
- Existing technology decommissioning (timelines/costs). As an example, there are plenty of wind turbines spinning on farmland around Australia. Who pays the cost of decommissioning them when they are at end of life? (I understand that the towers are only "guaranteed" for a certain life-span, so generally an end-of-life turbine would be decommissioned and recycled...But what of the blades?
https://www.intelligentliving.co/what-happens-to-old-wind-turbines-the-answers-n...- Other environmental issues, surrounding through-life "costs" (decommissioning/recycling of spent <insert appropriate new tech here>)
- Sustainability. (Just how big are the world's reserves of Vanadium, as an example?)
- And so on.
Clearly it isn't as simple as "Let's stand up a couple of nuclear reactors, and that'll fix some of our energy problems into the future!" (Look at the sh*tfight that went on about where to store the spent 'rods (from Lucas Height???) as an example).
I'm all for the latest tech. (Although I'll miss the "relative" simplicity of my ICE vehicles).
But it has to be more sustainable "through-life" than what it replaces (else what's the point?) and
It has to be useable in a meaningful, practical way. Preferably sometime in my lifetime.
Apologies for the long-winded reply...
Forum
Pages: 
