If anyone is interested in reading more on this issue, have a look at the link below (I'm guessing some of you might have already seen it). It's only one person's opinion, but it's backed up with facts and is easy to read.
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_111205/article.html
I'm skeptical of the 45 minute charge time too, but if anyone has the technology and expertise to back that claim up it's Tesla. Their whole business relies on these claims being accurate and while it may not be possible now, with the way battery technology is progressing it seems quite likely that it will be possible in 3 or 4 years when this car is released. I can't really comment on the materials used in batteries, but I can't see it being a whole lot worse than oil/petroleum production. The materials used in these things are quite expensive so I assume manufacturers will be looking at recycling old batteries to offset costs - they certainly won't be "disposable".
As for charging - I read an article somewhere recently about Adelaide introducing a "smart" type of controller into peoples homes that would turn off/on certain appliances during times of high power demand to help prevent total blackouts (ie, it would shut off the A/C but leave fans on etc). This technology could easily be adapted to charging an electric car as described in the article above.
If Telsa's claimed range of 300 miles is correct, that's more than enough range for me between charges. I can count on one hand the number of times I have driven more than 300 miles without at least a 45 minute stop - and I've driven all the way around North America!
Hydrogen is promising, but needs a massive amount of work and $$ to get the infrastructure in place. If these electric cars can be charged using existing power infrastructure it seems like a much more logical approach IMO. Hydrogen production is quite power-hungry, but as with electric cars at least it serves to localise the emissions.