"I've been a driver long enough to be able to judge how much I can stretch things based on the current road conditions I am on. Now, if I'm on the open highway and there aren't many people around, I'll open it up and let it fly....or even in town, on roads no one else is on around me, etc, I have routes I know that have some sharp turns, etc, that I do have fun accelerating around faster than usual."

In short, you're assuming that just because YOU don't happen to see anyone around that there's no one around. You're assuming that just past those "known" turns there hasn't been an accident or breakdown or an oil spill or that a bike or pedestrian doesn't happen to be in the way.

Nope. Doesn't matter. You think it's okay to put everyone else's life in danger just because you like to go vroom-vroom.

You might think I don't understand your need to be a special little snowflake to whom the law doesn't apply and you're right. I don't. But that's partly because I had a 17 YRO cousin who died when an equally special snowflake came speeding around a turn, drifted just a bit too far across the line... and hit him head on. Killed him, ruined the other kids life as well.

Had an aunt who spent six-months in a hospital with a crushed femur and a complex spiral fracture of of both the tibia and tibia... again because some idiot was "flying" down the road and couldn't stop when he crested the hill and t-boned her car pulling out of her driveway. Still can't walk without a cane.

Look. I don't particularly care if you smash into a guardrail at a 100 MPH and turn yourself into tomato sauce. But I do tend to mind when you and your ilk kill and maim my family just for a little ego-boo.

But I get it. Those accidents only happen to OTHER people. About 40,000 per year, to be exact.

You're special.

He elaborated...

"I've been a driver long enough to be able to judge how much I can stretch things [!] based on the current road conditions I am on.

Now, if I'm on the open highway and there aren't many people around [!], I'll open it up and let it fly [!] ....or even in town [!], on roads no one else is on around me, etc, I have routes I know that have some sharp turns, etc, that I do have fun accelerating around faster than usual."

In short, he assumes that it's completely fine for him to "let fly" whenever he thinks he can get away with it.

Another thing that's clear to see is that in the UK you typically don't drive oversized tanks down the road at high speeds. A significant cause of the increase in auto and pedestrian deaths in the US has been the incessant trend towards buying and driving oversized SUVs and "light" trucks with high hoods that are more likely to kill and maim.

Of course, the US also has a lot more stroads...

Was about to say just this. Too many idiots out there who confuse their daily commute with a Fast and Furious audition.

"As written, this implies that all humans are dangerous. And yet millions of road trips are taken daily with no one dying or being injured. The vast, vast majority of drivers will drive their entire lives and never get injured or injure someone in an accident. And it's been this way for decades."

BS. Here in the US alone we have 5.5 million auto accidents each and every year. Which in turn injured 2.5 million people and killed 40,000 others.

And if you don't care about the lives and misery, those accidents caused over $300 billion in damages.

Those are NOT inconsequential numbers.

Ektachrome was blue. Fujichrome punched blues and greens. Provia balanced (most) skin tones.

Kodachrome was just contrasty.

In regard to your comment that nobody is buying sedans any more... it's true. To an extent.

But that's largely because American automakers STOPPED MAKING THEM. And it wasn't do to lack of demand, but because American automakers continued to push buyers towards ever larger SUVs and trucks.... on which they make a lot more money.

Why sell someone a passenger car for $30,000 when you can convince the same person that they "need" a $100,000 truck?

On which they make $30,000 in PROFIT.

Not so simple as China's "push" to EVs. Auto sales (especially luxury sales) in China were dominated by foreign brands with highly sophisticated ICEs. The advent of the EV gave Chinese companies a way to leapfrog their competition, plus there's now a lot of preference in China for Chinese brands. Add it all up and foreign auto sales are plummeting.

The only way out is for many companies like Volvo and VM to partner and build in China. Much like how Honda and Toyota have plants in the US and as such they can advertise American-made (or at least assembled) cars.

I suspect that in the US the playbook will be for many dealerships to ignore EVs for as long as they can.

But once they're no longer able to do so, they're going to hit up the automaker for the money needed to convert. And the automaker won't really have a choice in the matter if they want to stay in business.

That said, Ford and GM both have over $100B in debt and their sales numbers are dwindling overseas, which means that they're either going to declare bankruptcy or run to the government for another handout.

They were subsidized in part by sales in China, but the Chinese market is turning away from them too.

The brand is effectively dead.

If you watch the video, it appears that a lot of the EV "repair" problems come down to Tesla and Rivian's fit and and finish issue. Misaligned panels, rattles, and so on. Tesla's drivetrain tech is pretty good, but after 10 years they're still learning how to build cars.

Wonder if someone has done a debt analysis on the amount of CO2 created building a nuclear power plant. All of that steel and concrete doesn't just drop out of the sky, not to mention running a construction site and equipment for a decade or more.

Then there's uranium mining, enrichment, storage, reprocessing...

There are quite a few studies that show EVs as better for the environment. We may not have nailed down every factor, but the flip side is that almost any other external factor you might want to add to the equation is probably offset by the same factor applied to building and continually fueling ICE vehicles. All of the exploration, drilling, mining, pumping, shipping, refining and distribution of oil and gasoline has massive externalities involved. Who produced the steel for the rigs and pipes? Who produced the drilling equipment and what was their footprint? Who built the oil tankers?

Only problem with ICEs is that you need to do all of the above, daily, year in and year out for the lifetime of the vehicle.

Moving on, I agree wholeheartedly that we should do everything possible to prioritize mass transit, walkability, and biking, and minimize car use.

But.

In the US we've spend the last century designing our cites around urban sprawl. Like it or not, that's where many of our homes are and where people live.

You're simply NOT going to solve existing urban sprawl, especially in western cities, with mass transit.

As such, some form of personal transportation must exist. And if so, then it benefits everyone to make it as efficient, and as clean, as possible.

Tesla's success, the general success in the EU, and the overwhelmingly abysmal sales of traditional ICE vehicles in China.

Many are waking up to the unpleasant realization that they're going to have to learn how to build the silly things, or be forced out of the market.

Pretty much the entire used car market is underwater at the moment, but we do need some reliable metrics for determining battery health and state of wear. Simple odometer milage will no longer cut it.