Your math is off...you forgot to include the $1000 (or so) that the older vehicle would cost to purchase.
A standard 4 door sedan only seats 5. 30 years ago it was 6 but we've moved to smaller cars. In order to get a 6 seater these days you have spend more money.
Not only that, many people only have room to park 2 vehicles (apartment and condo dwellers). Adding a 3rd vehicle isn't practical. Maybe you can buy an extra parking space for $1600 a year (correcting your math above). Maybe not.
And how many Texans regularly drive across the state compared to the number that never leave Dallas or Houston? This car is for commuters, not long-haul truckers.
There are more costs to go that route. You have to have a place to store the extra vehicle for one. Then there's registration fees and insurance. Don't forget about maintenance on an extra vehicle.
My wife and I have two vehicles. We use the most fuel-efficient one whenever we can. If we're going out with the kids, we have to take the larger vehicle. Same for hauling things; the small vehicle just won't cut it. Should we replace the larger vehicle with another efficient one and then rent when we need a truck (or buy a cheap truck)? No - that'll end up being more expensive than just owning two vehicles.
Simple solution: reimburse him by the mile rather than by the vehicle he drives. If he gets less money to cover gas, he'll use the more fuel-efficient vehicle.
I have a Jeep and a Suburban. I take the Jeep everywhere unless I need to use the larger vehicle. Sure, the Jeep may not be the most fuel-efficient vehicle out there, but it's better than the Suburban. Between needing 6+ seats and the towing capacity on occasion, it is worth it to keep the Suburban over renting a truck every few days.
Depends on the mountains. Ever been to Colorado?
In a gas vehicle, you use a combination of engine compression and braking to keep from going too fast downhill. In an EV, you could regenerate that energy back into the charging system to extend your range rather than losing it to heat on the break pads.
At 100 miles, this is more than double the range of the typical electric car that's been offered to commuters. Most of those I've read about before were only good for 40 miles. That's fine if you live close to work and don't have errands to run but isn't really practical as a replacement for a gas guzzler. Sure, even with this people will keep at least one gas vehicle for longer trips, but the majority of their day to day driving will be done gas-free.
My daily commute is about 26 miles each way. Unless I could recharge at work, a 40-mile range EV wouldn't work. This 100 mile range vehicle would be fine for commuting including running errands on the way home from work.
Now if they wouldn't make the thing so ugly...
Slashdot Mirror
Your math is off...you forgot to include the $1000 (or so) that the older vehicle would cost to purchase.
A standard 4 door sedan only seats 5. 30 years ago it was 6 but we've moved to smaller cars. In order to get a 6 seater these days you have spend more money.
Not only that, many people only have room to park 2 vehicles (apartment and condo dwellers). Adding a 3rd vehicle isn't practical. Maybe you can buy an extra parking space for $1600 a year (correcting your math above). Maybe not.
And how many Texans regularly drive across the state compared to the number that never leave Dallas or Houston? This car is for commuters, not long-haul truckers.
There are more costs to go that route. You have to have a place to store the extra vehicle for one. Then there's registration fees and insurance. Don't forget about maintenance on an extra vehicle. My wife and I have two vehicles. We use the most fuel-efficient one whenever we can. If we're going out with the kids, we have to take the larger vehicle. Same for hauling things; the small vehicle just won't cut it. Should we replace the larger vehicle with another efficient one and then rent when we need a truck (or buy a cheap truck)? No - that'll end up being more expensive than just owning two vehicles.
Simple solution: reimburse him by the mile rather than by the vehicle he drives. If he gets less money to cover gas, he'll use the more fuel-efficient vehicle. I have a Jeep and a Suburban. I take the Jeep everywhere unless I need to use the larger vehicle. Sure, the Jeep may not be the most fuel-efficient vehicle out there, but it's better than the Suburban. Between needing 6+ seats and the towing capacity on occasion, it is worth it to keep the Suburban over renting a truck every few days.
Depends on the mountains. Ever been to Colorado? In a gas vehicle, you use a combination of engine compression and braking to keep from going too fast downhill. In an EV, you could regenerate that energy back into the charging system to extend your range rather than losing it to heat on the break pads.
At 100 miles, this is more than double the range of the typical electric car that's been offered to commuters. Most of those I've read about before were only good for 40 miles. That's fine if you live close to work and don't have errands to run but isn't really practical as a replacement for a gas guzzler. Sure, even with this people will keep at least one gas vehicle for longer trips, but the majority of their day to day driving will be done gas-free. My daily commute is about 26 miles each way. Unless I could recharge at work, a 40-mile range EV wouldn't work. This 100 mile range vehicle would be fine for commuting including running errands on the way home from work. Now if they wouldn't make the thing so ugly...