Originally posted by humy
sure, the lower energy density would mean they will take up more space and the stations would generally need more of them, but couldn't possible be a "great fire risk" if they are not lithium batteries but rather the fire-safe aluminum batteries and i don't see why the stations needing more of them would be an insolvable problem; just put the stations where there is plenty of room to put them somewhere such as in a big warehouse.
It's expensive.. Storage space costs money... lots of spare batteries costs money...
That's why it's a problem.
It's not a question of whether it's possible to do.
It's a question of whether it's more economically viable and/or practicable than in-situ
charging.
And having to have large numbers of BIG batteries that are HEAVY that require being
moved around by people or robots along with the tech/staff to rapidly swap the batteries...
It costs money, it takes up space, it requires the cooperation of many different competing
car manufacturers... It's not necessarily the case that setting up all the above is practically
easier and/or cheaper than charging them in-situ.
You keep thinking that things that are possible are thus practical and/or economic.
Also that things that are experimental are automatically going to turn out to be practical
and or economic and will live up to their promise... When almost everything experimental
lands up not turning out to be practical or economic... most stuff fails.