Tim Levin reports on an InsideEVs interview with Lucid CEO Peter Rawlinson:

… the California-based EV startup’s CEO and CTO, thinks the future of transportation hinges on EVs with less range—way less, in fact.

I definitely didn’t expect that from the CEO of the electric vehicle company selling the only car to over 500 miles on a full charge.

Rawlinson’s argument is very forward-looking. Convincing more people to buy 180-mile EVs anticipates significant improvements to the charging infrastructure—basically, chargers everywhere you park, especially the slower, less expensive “Level 2 chargers”—which can in turn shift consumer thinking about how much range they need. If drivers can find charging stations as easily as they do gas stations (or parking meters), they may be more accepting of lower range cars, which would mean smaller batteries, which in turn would lead to cheaper electric vehicles. Of course, that puts the industry in a chicken-and-egg conundrum: Getting more 180-mile EVs works only if Level 2 chargers are ubiquitous, which no one wants to build out without enough EVs to use them, and around we go.

I’m excited for a-charger-on-every-block future, and for most of my daily driving, a reduced-range EV would be fine (as it could be for many urban dwellers)—I’ve investigated several lower-range EVs myself— but I remain skeptical about its broader appeal and practicality. In 2010 I wrote (on my now-defunct personal blog) that there was one reason I thought pure electric cars weren’t ready for the real world:

Road trips.

Call me when I can drive to Disneyland from San Francisco with nothing more than 10 minutes to top off.

We’re almost there, 15 years on—assuming the right car and the right chargers—but most EVs still require both a longer charge time and a longer route to find a charger. That 6.5-hour drive to Disneyland could take eight hours or more in a 180-mile electric car—that’s hardly progress.

Admittedly, most people might make a trip of such distance only once or twice a year, and could rent a more capable car instead, but I doubt many people would bother. Who wants the hassle and the additional expense?

We absolutely need massive improvements to our vehicle charging infrastructure, but I don’t believe the answer is a reduced range car that needs to be constantly charged, anymore than it makes sense to buy a low-MPG car that demands weekly or more top-ups at a gas station.

Less expensive EVs are an important step toward the mass marketization of electric vehicles, and 180-mile variants could be a necessary component of that evolution, but I don’t expect such vehicles represent their final form.

(Via mmalc.)