the electric car was invented before the internal combustion engine driven car. The electric one lost due to real physical disadvantages and economic realities that persist to the present day. So your assumptions are demonstratablely wrong. We also know how to build thorium reactors, we just don't.
The SUV has a valid use case. It's not significantly different than a minivan, nor are they less efficient; and they can be used as a small truck as well.
We can't. The best we can do is to present a level playing field and hope that the law of averages will permit these talented types to rise to their potential.
What economic realities are you talking about? The fact that you don't have to pay for your pollution? And physical disadvantages?
Batteries are heavy, and include a huge 'sunk' energy cost in their production. They also don't last very long relative to the steel block combustion engine. They contain huge amounts of poisons that would contanimate any area that a major accident occurred. They are relatively slow, and have very limited ranges and long 'refueling' times. Even many 'green' leaning inventors have acknowleged the problems with electric transport, which is why the Revopower Wheel was invented. Pity it never made it to mass production, I would have bought one straight away. There is no substitute for the energy density of petrol.
Like in real physical hurdles that can't be overcome? Or problems to be solved?
Mostly matters of physics and economics, not matters of technology. Electric vehicles will become commonplace as soon as the economics of peak oil force the issue, and then people get accustomed to the particular inconviences that electric transport presents.
Yes, and why do we use uranium instead? To produce weapons. Sad but true. Thorium waste can't be refined to nuclear bombs so that line of research was killed. Depressing isn't it?
That is an accurate assessment.
Is that really the end of the line in nuclear research? Don't you think we could have gotten a bit further if we didn't focus most of our energy on burning oil?
Perhaps we could have, but again, there isn't a lot of further research to be done. Again, we know how to build thorium cycle reactors, and we did it fourty years ago, but we just don't. The infrastructure, as you noted, exists for the refinement and production of uranium fuel rods, because of the military's desire for plutonium. We no longer need any more of that, and really need a lot less than we have, but the infrastructure exists. So uranium fuel cycle reactors not only have a precedent, they have an economicly mature nationwide/worldwide supply chain. An equivilent supply chain for thorium reactors would have to be built up from scratch, which can be done if we had the political will, but it seems that no one but India has any such will.
Sure the SUV have valid uses. Is that how most of them are used? The idea of using 3 tonnes of steel to transport 70 kg of flesh is bloody stupid.
No contest there, but it's not really your's to decide.
How do you present a level playing field? Education for everyone? Nutrition to help them develop their physical and mental strength? Who will pay for this?
True equal rights under the "law" (common law or natural law, like how the term was intended when the framers spoke the term.) No special rights for historicly oppressed groups, no identity politics. As a parent, I am responsible for the quality of their education and their health care, and no one else gets to intervene in my decisions. (excepting, perhaps, the child)