Whether the new HummerEV will be designed to be able to withstand the stresses it encounters as owners use it, remains to be seen. I happen to think there is a good chance it will work just fine. Your comments about EV's loss of battery capacity seem exaggerated.
It depends on the climate and usage. Hot climates like AZ wear the batteries out faster. Deeper discharging before recharging wears the batteries out faster. Higher charge levels wear the batteries out faster. Use of the Supercharger wears the batteries out much, MUCH faster!
I say this based on the statistics I have seen regarding Teslas. Do they lose battery capacity over time? Yes. If memory serves me correctly, about 5% in the first 3 years, then less in the years following.
Again, that depends on many factors. That figure would be the most optimistic scenario.
Tesla has a pretty substantial warranty on their battery packs: 8 years or 120000 miles with retention of 70% or better battery capacity remaining. Which gas / Diesel engine manufacturers offer that kind of warranty?
They don't have to. Fuel tanks don't shrink in size as they age. The fuel tank in my Blazer holds the same 31 gallons of fuel as it did when it rolled off the assembly line in 1991. How many EV's will still be on the road in 29 years?
BTW: I *do* lease my Tesla. Not because I'm particularly concerned about loss of battery capacity, but because the EV market looks like it will be VERY different in 3 years. I believe there will be many many more EV's on the market by that time, so I am protecting myself from any crazy losses of value by leasing.
You make one of my points about EVs. Because their "fuel tank" shrinks with age and use, they will depreciate much more rapidly. When the battery reaches less than 50%, and definitely by the 30% mark, the vehicle will be scrap because the batteries are far too expensive to replace compared to the vehicle's residual value.
That brings me to another problem; recycleability. The batteries are only partially recycleable. The motors are probably nearly 100% recycleable (not sure about the permanent magnets). So is the copper or aluminum wiring. However, the electronics are not only not recycleable, but they are persistent toxic waste. One of the most polluted, toxic cities in China is the one where much of the world's dead electronics go to be "recycled". They extract the meager (but profitable) precious metals and junk the rest. Because EV's are impacted by weight more than vehicles powered by ICE's, more lightweight composites and filled plastics are used, both of which are virtually non-recycleable, don't have much use as ground filler material, don't biodegrade, and can only be incinerated in incinerators with expensive filtration to remove the toxic compounds generated. There are also a lot of non-filled plastics used that are also not either economically or practically/usefully recycleable. Basically, they are bulk waste with varying levels of toxicity, just like the scrap electronics.
By contrast, steel and aluminum are EXTREMELY recycleable. Modern cars all use lots of non-recycleable composites and plastics, but those powered by ICE's use less than their electric counterparts, on average. Composite and plastic body panels might be good for dent resistance, but aluminum is just as light and can be recycled over and over. I will avoid my tirade on the trend/fad of equipping cars with more and more electronic infotainment junk that becomes more persistent solid waste when the disposable car they are used in is scrapped at the end of it's life. Also, ironically, despite the toxicity of lead, the lead-acid batteries commonly used for SLI (starting, lighting, ignition) are recycled with virtually no loss. They are the most completely recycled item in common use. Not just the lead plates and conductors, but the polyethylene case and separators are also highly recycleable.
When discussing EV's, you have to consider so much more than "how many miles of gasoline equivalent does it get" and whether or not it emits CO2 from a tailpipe. They are far from being more environmentally and economically benign vs their ICE counterpart. And again, if the ICE vehicle is powered by renewable biofuels and manufactured with more recycleable materials, and considering ICE vehicles require very little in the way of rare expensive elements for their manufacture, then the environmental and economic aspects of EV's gets even worse.
Finally, despite appearances, I am not "anti-EV" per se. I AM anti-EV using the current technology. I see it as hopelessly wasteful, and being touted as "environmentally friendly", "sustainable", and "emitting no evil global-warming-causing greenhouse gases" when in reality they are actually doing more environmental harm than ICE powered vehicles. They are an anti-solution to a non-existent problem. If you like your EV, like the performance, quietness, or whatever other perceived positive attribute, that is great, and that is the free market at work. They're being made, and if you like one and can afford it you can, and should, be allowed to own one. But when people start touting their "environmentally friendly" EVs and saying we need to eliminate ICE vehicles and replace them with current EV technology, that is where I have a big problem. I know nobody in this thread has proposed such a thing, but a LOT of global-warming evangelists do, and so do some EV manufacturers who spend millions lobbying in Washington for more laws and rules favorable to EVs. Even if EV's were truly superior to ICEV's environmentally I would be against it, but when it's based on lies solely to boost the profitability of the EV market then that makes it criminal.