Tesla's are chalk full of the automated crap and can even sort of drive themselves most of the time and yet they have the worst accident rates of any model vehicle on the road.

Modern cars are heavier than previous models which means more kinetic energy/danger during a crash.

There are more possible means to avoid an accident than simply braking. When you take one of those actions while the computer decides to do something else the result is lost traction and you may end up losing control of the vehicle or causing an accident as a result.

ABS prevents skids in exchange for provably INCREASING stopping distance vs an experienced driver. ABS does not work independently on each wheel so you are necessarily exchanging traction for anti-skid.

My point is that it is not a news story, it's an opinion piece. News stories generally inform the reader of the news in as neutral and balanced way as possible. This was a badly written opinion piece. Going to the sources is the job of the journalist. The fact that even you are suggesting that this is needed means that clearly the so-called journalist did not do their job.

You said "EVs". Now you've shifted that to "mass production vehicles road legal".

You just shifted the goal posts. Golf carts are EVs.

Didn't seem to be a problem in1969. Maybe the engineers are too distracted by tiktok.

Historically, I don't think assassination has ever led to an improvement in government.

In general, I think it leads to a new leader who's just as bad, but more paranoid.

There was a period in the Roman empire when emperors lasted about eighteen months or so before being assassinated. There was a story that one prominent Roman had his name suggested as a good choice for emperor, and his response was "I'm not yet so tired of living."

No.

The Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars program") didn't actually deploy anything during the Reagan years, but it was very much non-nuclear.

Basically, tests during the '60s showed that nuclear explosions in space would be very damaging to pretty much everything in orbit, and the purpose of SDI was to knock out incoming warheads, not destroy everything in space.

I am in favor of an agreement not to put nuclear weapons in space, but I think that if the US had a way to "put world pressure" on Russia, we have already used it.

The Outer Space Treaty already forbids countries from deploying nuclear weapons space, of course.

Excellent point.

Also, making an aluminum/air battery is nearly the holy-grail of high specific energy battery tech.

You see them all the time. We call them "golf carts".

Every time I remember opening a ton of different tabs I would inevitably run clear out of GDI objects and the UI would start going bonkers. That was years ago with far less than 100 tabs.

No it doesn't; less. Check your data. 416 kJ/mol for burning sodium, compared to 596 kJ/mol for lithium.

If it did have more energy, of course, it would be vastly better than lithium on a battery energy per unit weight basis. Unfortunately, it's not.

Sodium does ignite more easily, but that's cancelled out by the fact that really it's the electrolyte that's burning, and the electrolytes used for sodium batteries are harder to ignite.

Accurate. Chile is number two.

However, China is number one in refining lithium from ore (or salt) into usable lithium or lithium carbonate.

Sodium is most easily sourced from salt, so there's no hard rock mining. In any case, salt production is already an order of magnitude higher than lithium production, so diverting a few percent to batteries isn't going to require more mining,

The original link worked for me, but some alternate sources may be of interest:
  https://cen.acs.org/business/s...
  https://www.businesswire.com/n....
  https://www.energy-storage.new...
  https://www.environmentenergyl...