What exactly are you disagreeing with? I'm postulating essentially infinite time (no upper bound on either time or distance) and finite battery. Which is more real world compared to infinite battery and is why I said when distances get long enough. If you want to flip the criteria to make your disagreement, sure.. My point is that there is actually no upper bound to distance (which implies more time than normal), and at a certain threshold the e-bike is no longer what you want because the battery runs out. If you want to say there is a hard upper bound for either time or distance, sure - but there isn't such an upper bound.
In practice, those that would go more than 70 miles round trip on a bike is a very limited number of people to begin with. Even given infinite battery and/or infinite time, it's just not a lot of people. Hence why I think the 'more than battery distance' aspect is not well appreciated. A car centric culture would just not even consider such distances as an option at all. Hence the perspective IMHO that going for more than 90 minutes is just a non option for everyone, even though it is.
My experience riding with e-bikes is how and why I come to say this. They simply can't do a century plus ride. For extreme distance rides (inter-state) - even more so. At those points, non motor is better. I've met just one person doing a tour on an e-bike (that is way less than 1% observed). While that is anecdata, it greatly contrasts with the ballpark 40% to 80% cyclists I observe commuting via e-bike vs non assist pedal bike.
You are a fanatic. Nothing wrong with that but it isn't 'most people' are going to do something else at those distances.
time matters for most people. Thus what matters is how far they can get in about half an hour. It doesn't matter if we are talking about walking bikes, cars, helecopters: how ever far you get in half an hour matters.
Perhaps we agree? I pretty much entirely agree with you - just adding some extra color.
I am of course explicitly not talking about most people. Which is my point - at greater ranges fewer people would be willing to bike, but e-bikes enable larger ranges, but at a point it flips back to non-assist.
In practice, those that would go more than 70 miles round trip on a bike is a very limited number of people to begin with. Even given infinite battery and/or infinite time, it's just not a lot of people. Hence why I think the 'more than battery distance' aspect is not well appreciated. A car centric culture would just not even consider such distances as an option at all. Hence the perspective IMHO that going for more than 90 minutes is just a non option for everyone, even though it is.
My experience riding with e-bikes is how and why I come to say this. They simply can't do a century plus ride. For extreme distance rides (inter-state) - even more so. At those points, non motor is better. I've met just one person doing a tour on an e-bike (that is way less than 1% observed). While that is anecdata, it greatly contrasts with the ballpark 40% to 80% cyclists I observe commuting via e-bike vs non assist pedal bike.