Batteries are the Achilles' heel of electric cars and always will be. It's a fact of chemistry and physics. However, I submit to you that electric cars really don't need stupid, unobtainable, heavy, expensive, low-power density batteries any more than they need to carry the road with them.
Modern, gas-burning cars need roads. Look out your window in any direction and you will see this reality. Cars that don't need roads are called four-wheelers or Off Road Vehicles (ORV). Now, I don't think that the greens are really suggesting that we develop electric ORVs, so we can conclude that electric cars are intended to be used on roads (infrastructure). Thus, if electric cars need roads to function, then they don't need batteries. Here's why - electric power can be added into the existing roads and the electric cars can pick-up the power they need from the road. Only a small battery would be required to take the car from the garage to the electrified road. The driver could even be billed monthly for the electricity used since the car could connect to the road grid with a unique IP-like address, similar to a cell phone or other wireless device and keep track of the kilowatt-hours used.
Of course, a nuclear power plant would have to be "connected" to the road, or what would be the point of burning coal instead of gasoline? This arrangement would also have the added benefit of supporting both gasoline powered cars and electric cars at the same time.
Note: Non-contact power transmission devices have been available for industrial uses for a few years. I believe that they could serve as a model for the type of electric car that I am talking about.
