You clearly have a huge ax to grind with electric vehicles, and let's not start tossing around personal insults. 130 miles return trip is again plenty for the average commuter, always assuming one can't arrange for charging at work. You're also hugely overstating charging times. Yes, if one would take no other steps but to plug the car into the mains at home, it would be 9 hours. Only a fool would not install more high capacity charging options if they buy an $80k car that needs it.
I'm not saying a Tesla style car is suitable as a delivery truck or anything where you have to drive for 12 hours a day, obviously, not until there is a battery switching infrastructure in place. I'm just talking about 98% of the population or so.
Also, that tired old "the USA is so big, everything has to suck and be expensive" cliche is simply not true, not for Internet access and not for this. Every larger area can be split into smaller regions. You already have 50 of those. The effort per region is the same as in any smaller nation. Yes, you need more people in total to do the job but it anything larger areas give economies of scale - you wouldn't need 50 times more people, since you could re-use those workers in multiple locations it would probably work out to fewer workers in total to cover the entire nation.
But you also get more money back from the investment because there are more users and thus greater aggregate gain.
For the record, there are thus far zero Supercharger stations in Finland, as far as I know. There are some in Europe.
The USA has 98 strategically placed ones now. In 2015, they will be many enough to be usable for 98% of the population.
http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger
In addition, all Tesla cars can have their batteries robotically switched. It's not being done but if the need were to really arise it could be done.
http://www.teslamotors.com/batteryswap - that's a 90 second refuel, faster than refueling your gas guzzler.
As for the steam engine thing - using electricity to heat it would be folly from an efficiency viewpoint, since you'd lose a lot of stored energy by converting the electricity to steam and the steam to motive force. That's the same reason, by the way, that hydrogen is a bad idea, it's an unnecessary intermediary step from taking the electricity and powering a car directly. All forms of transit use energy of some kind - steam cannot be created for free, there is always going to be an energy cost. Alcohol has a very low energy density compared to gasoline and kerosene, so you'd have to haul a lot of alcohol to get any kind of range out of a steam car.
The future is here, may as well get used to it.
