1. The number of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) in the global transportation sector has not been increasing significantly in recent years.
2. The higher price of AFVs compared to gasoline and diesel vehicles is one of the main barriers for their wider adoption.
3. People's knowledge and encouragement on AFVs are important for wider AFVs adoption, as well as technical recommendations for increase in AFVs adoption rate.
The article “Why is the world not yet ready to use alternative fuel vehicles?” provides an overview of the current state of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) and why they have not been adopted more widely. The article presents a comprehensive review of the advantages and disadvantages of different types of AFVs, including flexible-fuel, gas, electric, hybrid electric, and fuel cell electric vehicles. It also discusses the potential barriers to wider adoption such as higher prices compared to gasoline and diesel vehicles, lack of infrastructure availability, and lack of knowledge about current AFV models among consumers.
The article is generally reliable in its presentation of facts and data related to AFV technology and its potential benefits or drawbacks. However, it does not provide any evidence or sources for some claims made throughout the article such as “people mostly do not select AFVs due to their higher price” or “many people around the world have no/less/old/wrong knowledge about the current AFVs” which could be seen as unsupported claims that should be backed up with evidence from research studies or surveys. Additionally, there is a lack of discussion regarding possible risks associated with using alternative fuels such as safety concerns or environmental impacts that could arise from their production or use. Furthermore, while the article does present some technical recommendations for increasing AFV adoption rates, it does not explore any counterarguments that may exist against these recommendations which could lead to a more balanced discussion on this topic.
In conclusion, while this article provides a comprehensive overview on why alternative fuel vehicles have not been adopted more widely yet, it lacks evidence for some claims made throughout the text and fails to explore counterarguments against certain recommendations presented at the end which could lead to a more balanced discussion on this topic.