Short term supply crunch drives investment in lithium production which increases supply and drives down the price. That's how the market works my friend.

Most people who actually own BEVs find them to be far and away MORE convenient than ICE cars since you don't have to continually run errands to fill them up.

How is this insightful? It's complete bunk. All studies that have looked at this have determined that there will be no problems upgrading the grid to handle a total switch over to electric cars. Put aside the fact that the grid needs continual upgrading anyway, and consider that unlike a gas car most car charging happens at home or at work and most often this happens over a regular old 120v outlet. This is the equivalent of plugging in a coffee maker or new TV with the added benefit that cars can be time-scheduled to take advantage of time of use pricing on modern grids. Even high voltage rapid chargers can have their draw on the grid moderated by battery backup.

Of course they are. It's funny, so many analysts used the 'competition is coming' narrative to cast doubt on the wave of startups Tesla but in reality the OEMs are in just as much, if not more danger from the new wave of competition now that it's aiming squarely at their last remaining profit center... the truck/SUV segment. Now that the wolves are coming for their core business, they either need to compete or fade into history.

I'm not sure they survive this. They failed to hold on when the Japanese came for their cars. Now that we've got a wave of startups and well funded Chinese automotive contenders pointing daggers directly at the heart of the domestic OEMs, they could be in trouble. If history is any guide, they'll fail this test again.

This is extremely dangerous for America, more-so than everyone else. America has the privileged position of being the de-facto currency of the world. As such many (most?) debts and whatnot are conducted in American currency. This gives the USA unprecedented control over policy. Other countries have a large part of the national debt in American dollars which causes problems if their currency weakens. America, by contrast can literally reduce their debt by chopping the value of their currency. If America loses this ability by the world switching to another currency or a neutral currency then it loses the ability to carry such a large debt.

Climate change denialism is all about delaying action to preserve the status quo on behalf of the interests who find it profitable. We have the technology to solve climate change, we just need the political motivation to do so, alternately, we can just start doing and let those who who would see us fail, be disrupted.

We know exactly what went wrong: The energy distribution infrastructure was not built to handle the cold weather that Texas is currently experiencing.

The real question is why wasn't it? We can discard right off the bat that one or another modes of power generation doesn't work in the cold. That's clearly a false narrative as evidenced by gas, nuclear, wind, solar etc functioning just fine in areas that regularly experience far worse weather than Texas is currently facing. We can also discard the narrative that nobody could have predicted this. There are at least 2 widely reported on reviews of the Texas grid system that go back at least 2 decades which strongly recommend that Texas prepare for an even such as this. We also have weather records that show that these types of temperatures may not be common in Texas but THEY DO HAPPEN and far more frequently than 100 years.

So now we have arrived at the conclusion that Texas was both warned to upgrade their infrastructure for an event similar to this and had ample time to do so. So why didn't it happen? We may never get the full answer but Occam's razor would suggest that government didn't want to force the issue and utilities didn't want to spend the money. Now it will be up to voters in Texas to decide if they're willing to tolerate this level of unpreparedness from their elected officials, or if they would prefer to continue running a system on the edge if it means not having to pay anything in order to bring up their infrastructure to modern standards.

And all it cost was an automated system of social ranking where if a computer sees you too close to someone they don't like you go on a list preventing you from having a job or buying a bus pass.

Intel slow walked innovation in order to milk each incremental improvement for maximum shareholder profit. Business 101, maximize value! Unfortunately, this short term profit taking left Intel blindsided as their competition was allowed to catch up and blow past them.

None of this sounds particularly revolutionary. It sounds suspiciously like they're going to use CATLs cell-to-pack technology. Wile LFP will give them a robust cell, they will only get adequate range, they won't be leaders. But I don't suppose that will matter. Apple has an army of fanboys to rival Tesla.

As BEV sales increase, the volume of ICE vehicles produced will drop and they will gradually lose economies of scale driving up their price. Additionally many BEVs are already cheaper to own than ICE vehicles when lined up against ICE models in the same class. As we speak the 'cheap' ICE cars are rapidly disappearing anyway with an increasing number OEMs simply discontinuing them (as they're almost loss-leaders to attract a new generation into the brand) and consumers turning their backs on the ones that remain in favour or more expensively appointed ones or SUVs. This means that parity may be coming sooner rather than later.

This assumes that you always have a conveniently located gas station which takes no additional travel time to get to. Where I live, I do have a corner gas station on my route, HOWEVER, the Costco (which offers a substantial savings on a tank of gas) is 10 minutes away. This means that I am often spending 20 minutes in travel time, plus another 5-10 minutes waiting for a pump (dependent on the line), before spending 2 minutes to fill the vehicle. Being a 2 vehicle household, it's not unusual that keeping the vehicles fueled for our daily commuting wastes a combined hour+ per week. The ability to plug in at home would be a dream! A 20+ minute rapid charging penalty on long road trips is virtually meaningless to me, since every time I stop for gas on road trips right now, just getting the kids out to stretch their legs or go to the bathroom is 15-30 minutes anyway.

The biggest things HFC have going for them is an unshakeable fan club who continue to insist that despite all evidence to the contrary that HFCV's are 'the future'.

Lets see:

-Hydrogen chain is terribly inefficient compared to just storing it in a battery. Makes your fuel expensive. That's physics. No getting around that.
-HFC vehicles have been in development for several decades and they're still not yet developed to the point where they can be manufactured at scale.
-The infrastructure needed to support everyone's hydrogen vehicles will cost trillions and take a long time to build out in permitting time alone.
-HFC vehicles don't bring anything to the table that would make the average person want to go out and buy one. BEV's at least offer an interesting tradeoff to prospective buyers: The day-to-day convenience of home charging as well as dramatically reduced cost of ownership and fuel balanced against the possibility of slightly longer pit stops on road trips longer than 3-4 hours. Though it's a trade off that increasingly being made moot through technological advancement.

We could go on but it doesn't get any better for hydrogen.

Hydrogen is so volatile that it can be ignited by the friction of it escaping through a crack. It also burns extremely hot with an invisible flame...