the lithium batteries do. they tend to burst into flame when exposed to water.

Perhaps you are thinking of Lithium Polymer and Not Lithium Iron Phosphate which most Evs use - and are safe.

I'll believe that when I see it.

You'll believe that they don't burst into flames when you see that they don't burst into flames. Good to see that the scientific method isn't lost. Do some research - please.

They may be more stable/incombustible due to short circuits and bad charging parameters, but I have not seen where they are incombustible when the cathodes are exposed to water. THAT is what I stated in my original response. In a crash those batteries may possibly be busted open. When the fire department arrives and starts hosing things down, there is a risk of a lithium/water fire. If you can point to data on water exposure to the cathodes not resulting in a conflagration, I'm all ears. You also lose about 14% of energy density and a lower charge/discharge rate which makes them only marginally better than NiMH technologies by my way of thinking.

OK you win. We better stick to Petrol, LPG and Diesel - just to stay safe.

Works for me. I'm in the oil and gas biz.

I drive less than once a month, but usually well over 100 miles when I do go to a city. The Leaf may appear to recover range in stop and go traffic, but it can only do that by regenerative braking if the traffic is trending strongly downhill. Maybe the battery is just regaining voltage by resting.

I have always maintained that the definitive success of the EV will come with a battery whose energy producing parts will be liquids.

The driver will take a twin hose-nozzle and will replenish the battery by injecting fresh liquid through one hose and removing the depleted liquid through the other.

The spent liquid will be recharged at a Factory.

THESE BATTERIES ARE THEORETICALLY POSSIBLE.

Recharging will take the SAME time that now is used for a gasoline refueling.

So practically ALL the problems with the EV will be solved.

Cannot you get the same mileage per tank than a gasoline car?.

Simply install more Electric Refueling Stations.

The only nuissance would be the increased number of visits to the "Gas Stations".

I do not consider this to be a psychological problem, because you are sure that you always have a Refueling Station WITHIN RANGE. No anxiety.

The actual "Range anxiety" is really bad.

Chorete

Why aren't we anxious about petrol/gas? Because there are petrol pumps/gas stations all over the place. So, all we need is electric charging stations as ubiquitous as petrol/gas stations (and as fast in charging). If the Witricity corp catches on, the wireless charging will be a great benefit.

i believe vested interests are keeping EVs and other alternate fuels at bay.

nope, the market simply does not want them. The Chevy Volt has sold so few that the only real customer is the government which is buying them to save face for pushing them so hard. In California, the state offered to pay companies to install charging stations in their parking lots. One of the largest retailers Costco has made the decision to remove them citing lack of use.

It is funny to see how people gives answers without having fully read the question.

WE ARE assuming that the batteries could be charged in THE SAME it akes to fill up a gasoline tank.

Of Course that NOBODY would like to wait hours in a rechargin station.

This is really the core of the rejection of the EV.

chorete