WAY before the tesla roadster ... there was the bmw 1602

[TimeMachinE30]

His death ray was a joke, it never existed. He had some pretty cool inventions, but he was also definitely a nut case. Don't think I'm not a detractor though, I donated money (and got a t-shirt) to buy and renovate the Tesla Museum.

Coming to an airport near you?

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/death-ray-could-be-used-at-heathrow-to-shut-down-flying-drones-a3232581.html

Funny enough to destroy wirelessly controlled device, much like he ushered in (albeit a waterborne drone, a submarine).

Of course our military has been doing this for a while and only covered by media in recent years (LaWS - Laser Weapon System).

[TimeMachinE30]

He gave a copy of his "death ray" to the hotel he lived in in lieu of paying, for the final years of his life. He told them not to open it until after he died. When they opened it was just random crap and wires sitting in a box. He duped them.

It is new tech. If we had death rays, they would have been used in WW2. It's just now being used in anti missile defense. If we had it before, we would have never developed mingun based CIWS. "The shield" is an anti-missile missile shield. Lasers as an offensive or defensive measure are just now being fielded in tests.

In your estimation...

Short of Hillary's server, top -secret, classified type information is not front page news or found in the back of the Popular Science. Lack of knowledge of existence does not render something unbirthed.

[TimeMachinE30]

Yes, tin foil. You failed to address anything that I said, and just called me "ignorant" for not seeing it your way.

From a literal conspiracy to "stifle innovation" by the oil industry to super secret technology invented by a man 100 years ago which has been flawlessly kept secret since then. You're basically just speculating on hearsay and a narrative that you find personally appealing then tossing around insults, calling me ignorant for not believing it because someone else wrote it online.

Is battery technology usable for superior laptops and phones and other stuff scaleable to cars? Of course it is. Is demand there without electric cars? Of course. Do you think they're using some special type of battery not found in anything else in modern EVs? There has not been much pressure to find any alternative to internal combustion engines because they were simply the superior solution and honestly still are until battery tech advances further and the infrastructure can support the added demand. Why have previous EVs failed? Nobody wanted to buy them. Why? Nobody wanted a car that had extremely limited range and needed hours to charge up. EVs have been around for over 100 years, they got steamrolled by the internal combustion engine because electric motors were weak and inefficient, batteries had low capacity and didn't last, and they took forever to charge. When EVs and gasoline powered cars were competing the EVs died because... why lug around heavy batteries that have no capacity and take forever to recharge when you can pour gasoline for a minute or so and be on your way? Let's not forget about the maturation of solar cells and other technologies generation of electricity. Nuclear power, more efficient and cleaner use of coal and natural gas, these things were in immense demand irrespective of the existence of EVs and it still took all these years.

What needs addressed?

If anything, your making my point albeit not in an easy to read manner.

Yes, the infrastructure would not handle the increasing electricity demands well...even at all. It is well known our electrical grid is rather weak.. a soft target. The rolling blackouts, the blackouts in the NE years ago, the tampering with remote sites causing great interruptions in service in the SW... it is all well addressed in publications far and wide. Attacking the grid is a great military offensive ... one the US Forces have used with great reward. Got it. Grid sucks but could improve.. why has it not? EV aside, we are a sitting duck re: grid and its looming SHTF results.

While the battery technology as it stands does not suit everyone in an EV role, it doesn't need to. I'm impressed by the increase in market representation and of course consumer use of electrified products....lawnmowers, weed eaters, many home and garden tools. It represents quite well a collective desire to (sounds to politicky') "embrace" the tech. Serious names, too... DeWalt and Echo for instance. Items ruled by fossil fuel being abandoned for battery powered! Not everyone needs to haul 60,000 lbs nor commute hundreds of miles at a given time.. many households would be very satisfied with these "limited" ranges of 300 miles or so currently offered.. no new battery improvements necessary.. studies on potential markets is done.. the needs of the consumer are known ahead of time.. the businesses ain't in business because they make poor decisions.



Back on point, if the EV market was there, unhindered, development would come naturally. A current example and not to get off topic: Look at OPEC, the fuel sitting off-shore or even returning to port... a response to our fracking, efforts to do our own fuel?

If you don't think businesses play dirty to protect their own interests.. please disregard this post and rebury your head in the sand.

Not sure what else to say... let me know.

[TimeMachinE30]

For Kershaw, and the death ray joke....interesting find:

http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/the-us-military-used-lasers-to-shoot-down-a-drone-in-19-1713754569

1973 weaponized laser destroying airborne targets...