Absolutely true. It's just current EVs are not competitive. Pretty much all opposition to EVs is caused by the government giving people's taxes to EV manufacturers. If an EV manufacturer stands on his own and sells whatever, why would anyone care? There are many EV vehicles currently in use - such as indoor forklifts and golf carts. Nobody villifies them because they do their job and they are not consuming taxpayer's money.
The Tesla S model can travel at 55 mph for 300 miles, so those batteries do exist. However, the current energy density levels means you need a lot of them to go 300 miles.
Yes - and then you are facing a kind of a rocket equation. You need a 10,000 lb of batteries to move a 200 lb payload (the driver.) While mathematically possible, it's unreasonably expensive.
On most days, people would trickle charge overnight.
This is OK as long as the battery has enough charge to cover all the daily trips. This also presumes that the car returns to the home base every night. Trips anywhere else, with stays in random hotels, are not supported (the charging port may or may not be available.) Which again says that the EV, as it exists today and in the nearest future, is a car for local use during the day, under controlled conditions. If you live on a ranch and on a windy day a telephone pole falls and injures your spouse you can't just take an EV and drive her 100 miles to the hospital. You need to let the EV charge first. This is obviously not what people like to hear.
To say that a battery would have to cost the same as an empty gas tank to be competitive is absurd.
You need to give some incentive to the car buyer. If an EV has the same TCO as a gas car then there is no reason to buy an EV. An EV must be cheaper. In any case, today's batteries represent about 80% of the EV's cost, so there is a long way to go until we can debate this fine point.
And don’t forget, that these cars can be programmed to hear / cool the battery and passenger car, using the plugged in power source before the owner gets in the car, so that the car’s battery is not wasted for that purpose.
Yes, the car can be preheated or precooled, but that doesn't last more than 5 minutes. I know that very well, I lived in cold climate for decades. Thermal insulation of a car is poor due to many glass windows. I don't know how the measurements that you refer to were made; perhaps the driver was using fur clothes, gloves, and was breathing through a water vapor absorbent. In real life, though, defrosting requires a lot of energy - and the only source of that energy is the battery.
If you drive a Tesla S with a 300 mile range, you are probably not going to pull into your driveway with zero miles left in the battery. However, charging gives you a mile after every couple of minutes, so even if you pulled in on absolute zero and were on charge for 30 minutes, when your wife injured herself, you would probably have plenty of juice to make it the few miles that most people live from an ER.
EV’s don’t have to be cheaper, they just can’t be more expensive, but you can’t just consider the battery cost, you have to consider the per mile cost to operate the vehicle, including the greatly reduced maintenance cost of EV’s.
Initial defrosting would normally happen while the vehicle was still plugged in was my point. Yes, you would have to heat the car on long trips, but a 300 mile battery will still take you 250 miles even with the heat on.