Update on lenta.ru 30 minutes ago:
http://lenta.ru/news/2013/02/15/muchmore/

According to RIA novosti news agency:
950 people wounded to some degree. Of these:
524 needed medical assistance
34 adults and 12 children hospitalized
2 people had to be put in intensive care

Most damage apparently came from shards of shattered glass wounding people.

Other set of figures is from federal government and that one specifies:
571 wounded to some degree
758 asked for medical assistance

It's also stated that they already found remains of one of the pieces in a local lake where meteorite punched through the ice and left shards on the site.

Actually dashcams are a requirement of insurance companies to insure a car.

Capacity stays the same. Capability of discharging this capacity however decreases.

You just quoted a lie there. Logs clearly show that he never drove that slowly.

This car appears to have "reserve power" in the same way that cars have a "reserve tank". I.e. even after your fuel meter shows you're completely dry, your car should still be good for 50-70km at optimal fuel consumption speed on the highway (at least every car I've driven so far was).

Most people forget that "gas alleys" were staple of early ICE automobile age. You can still see their remains in big cities.

Law is not the issue though. Issue is him claiming to have to slow down to conserve battery. Essentially lying. Speed is in direct relation to range here.

Calling you ignorant. Most modern cars have traction control that will not let you spin your tyres at 80mph without traction.

Not only that, he actually claimed in the story that "he was freezing in his winter jacket" to juice his story up.

Do it on your own gasoline car. Follow this principle:

1. Clutch to the floor, gear in first.
2. Clutch up, accelerator pedal into the floor until you hit yellow line on tahometer
3. Hard brake, clutch to the floor.

Come back and tell us how you burned tens of kilometers worth of fuel in that one kilometer of testing.

As noted by many, those words raised a LOT of red flags. Basic lessons in physics would suggest to anyone that perpetual motion does not exist. That means slowing down and speeding up isn't going to magically charge the battery. So either reporter is lying or exceptionally stupid.

Considering that he reports on cars and has done so for a while, one would assume that he is familiar enough with physics not to be exceptionally stupid.

The idea is on a shaky ground. It's basically a corporate pharma interest (huge lobby) vs public interest.

Corporate pharma argues that to discover the exact gene, they need significant research, just like with medicine. This is true, though research requires much less then new medicine producing research. They also argue that it's an invention rather then discovery for the same reason why discovering certain molecules leads to new medicines. Molecules that existed in nature for ages, that can be transformed into some form of treatment therefore is patentable.

The obvious counter arguments are plentiful, but they lack the powerful lobby behind them, and current trend is "weak government representing people, strong corporate lobby representing potential profits". Results can be seen in the ruling on top of the page.

If you're talking about BBC's Top Gear, then question is "what is this review you're talking about?"

You would be surprised at how much easier it is to fool someone who is fairly disconnected from troubles of real life due to personal wealth.

Are you one of the people who thinks that US Chamber of Commerce is a government organisation because of the way its named?

It's actually a massive central lobbying arm for corporate interests.