Chris;113915 wroteFamilyman is right in the sense that governments are thinking about models that get people away from ownership, especially in cities, but it is tied to automated vehicles not electric vehicles. There is an urgent need to reduce congestion in large cities, and AVs will increase congestion if privately owned.
Think about it - you won't care about congestion because the car is driving while you sleep/eat/drink/post to Oz Volvo etc so there's little incentive not to 'drive'. On top of that, with the cost of city parking and competition for spaces, you'll send your car home for the day. Bingo, instant doubling of trips.
Then the car will take each child to school, take your partner to work, take the dog to the vet, God knows what else. There is massive potential for increased travel that we just can't afford.
So, there is a need to make road travel way more efficient, and the best model is for individuals not to own but to purchase the access they need, just like a phone plan at the moment. You would be able to tailor the type of vehicle you use, when and how it is used. For example, your package might include a cheap multi seat shuttle to drop you (and your neighbours) at the rail station and pick you up. Then you might have a multi seat van that does your family trips at the weekend, a single seat that takes you to the gym, and so on. By buying access, these vehicles can be used to maximum efficiency because when you aren't using them someone else is or else they are parked in holding lots charging and ready for the next trip. This can actually reduce congestion, along with cooperative ITS that sees vehicles and infrastructure communicating and smoothing flows. Modelling has already been done to substantiate this.
The major car companies are already getting into bed with ride sharing companies, up to the point of even buying them (think GM and Lyft, or even the Volvo AV trial with Uber in the US) so something like I described is how they are currently thinking - transport as a service.
The model is likely to appeal to younger generations in particular who are used to purchasing like this through growing up with phones, and who are delaying getting a licence because it is less of a priority for them than it has been for previous generations.
OTOH if you live outside the big cities this model may get there one day but will be much slower to do so.
Probably the most coherent thing I've ever read on the topic.
I have read a lot of utter dribble on this topic, including/usually from so-called forward thinkers.
This idea of autonomous vehicle sharing misses a LOT of reality, and seems to be heavily focused on a highly optimistic version of a heavily urbanised scenario where demand is pretty much homogeneous.
We 'all' own cars for a bunch of reasons, but the main one is that modern society demands it.
The fantasy falls apart when you consider holidays, visiting family interstate, school pick ups, leaving the footy, taking the boat out, etc.
The far more realistic answer is to expect that most people will continue to own cars, but that we have a far better, cheaper mass transit system and can keep most of those cars off the road in normal usage.
I live in a town of nearly 6,000 people. Apart from school buses, there is no mass transit within the town. The train station is several kilometres out of town.
The inter-town bus service that could replace my 55km (each way) commute costs about triple my fuel costs, takes literally three times as long and doesn't run at a vaguely suitable time.
Etc. Collectively, we need to be MUCH more realistic about what we expect/need from the future of transport.
(This rant is much more about autonomous vehicles than manually operated electric ones).