• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Or, y’know, there’s a war on and you can’t stop to recharge, or you need to cross a desert, or you just want to do an express route with one vehicle…

    Combustion is just a superior vehicle technology vs. lead-acid electric, assuming you don’t worry about emissions, and that will show up in plenty of contexts. Eventually, lead-acid would go the way of the other workable-but-not-as-nice technologies like crystal radios or black-and-white film.

    • 🔰Hurling⚜️Durling🔱
      link
      2
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      So… there isnt a war in the US right now, and there probablywont be one.

      “Lead-acid electric…” when was the last time you looked at an electric car. Electric cars can now give you 400+ miles of range just like ICE vehicles, and I don’t have to scavenge fuel from who knows where, all I need is a few solar panels and I’m good… eventually.

      Also, IF this was a war zone, I’d rather be whisper quiet than to tell everyone around that I’m driving by with the sound of an engine. Oh and it’s easier to remain undetected by food than on a vehicle anyway.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        Yeah, I know, I’m not arguing against electric now, or even as a concept then. This was an alt-history exercise, remember?

        Batteries could have been standard for a bit longer, but it seems to me that eventually the need to go faster for longer would have forced combustion engines to be a thing. All they had were lead-acid batteries (or primary cells, but that would be dumb) and new more energy-dense chemistries didn’t show up for a long time after. Maybe they could have found one if they really needed, but it’s a tricky science even today, so I’m skeptical.

        It’s possible, I suppose, that infrastructure could have been rolled out for both en mass, but I don’t see an even mix lasting through the whole 20th century. Probably not even past WWII.