I just watched the movie "Who killed the electric car?".
This movie draws debates just like any Michael Moore movie. It shows how simple, useful, desirable the first electric cars were. Without, personally, choosing sides, it talked about the GM ALL electric car called EV1, made in the early '90s. GM didn't sell the cars - only leased them. And, because of that they still retained ownership of the vehicles.
Something changed in the US political winds and all of a sudden, GM was demanding the cars back, and off they went to the crushers and shredders - never to be seen again.
In it's place came SUVs, trucks, and minivans.
Some issues in debate was that the cars only got about 160 miles to the "fill-up". Another issue was hydrogen was better.
Now, my question is: how desirable is a 2 door car that is totally electric (no gas at all) with simple plug-in at (or anywhere, for that matter), that charges in 1 hour, go 80 mph, has 160 mile range, and drives like any other kinda of car?
The biggest debate I see it is that "this" car was driving around in the 1990 - it is now almost 20 years later. I could only imagine what we could be driving NOW with 20 years of research and development under our belts.
Hybrids are nice - just add gas when out of electricity. BUT, hybrid only use electric in slow, stop and go situations - NOT on the highway. On the highway, it acts like any other slow, low horsepower car.
=======
My answer to my own question: I could use one of these DEFINITELY as a second car (or FIRST?). I would still need a gas-powered car for LONG trips and hauling stuff. It would definitely be safer than riding a motorcycle.
(notice how I say "safER" - not saying the motorcycle are inherently dangerous - I ride).
