There are regulations nevertheless. The limit is 8 hrs of consecutive driving, after which a 30 min break is required, and 11 hrs of maximum driving after an 10 hrs break. It would make sense to split the 11 hrs into two 5-6 hrs periods with the 30 min rest in between. With 60 mph, this gives a driving range of 360 miles on a charge. A commercially available Mercedes eActros 600 with 600 kWh of charge would easily be sufficient, requiring a 30-80% charge within 30 mins. Or you go for the 14 hrs total, and split the 11 hrs of driving into them, giving you for instance a 3 hrs drive/1 hr rest rhythm, and requiring you to recharge for 180 miles during the stops, which means that you could drive that schedule by charging solely at 350 kW chargers.

You don't actually need an MW charger to recharge a semi. Any normal car charger will do. And while most of them max out somewhere around 400 kW, it's still plenty to go from 10-80% in about 40 mins. Just do the math: 400 kW for 40 mins is about 270 kWh, or about the amount you need to go from 10-80% on an 400 kWh battery. That would be sufficient for about 250 miles with a semi.

German YouTuber Elektrotrucker does international hauling throughout Europe for more than a year now, and he regularly recharges at a normal car charger.

How does a society treat its citizens, specifically parents and children?

Autism -- is human psychology being maladaptive because of this situation. Parents aren't there for their children to imprint-upon. The psychological distress is real. Depersonalization is a result.

This depersonalization happening during acute childhood development phases, exacerbates the problem of social disengagement.

People should be treated as people, not chattel.

You can put solar panels on roofs. I wonder if someone ever had thought about it.

The oil from the tar sands isn't really good for petrol that you put in a car, and we let our refining capacity wane over the years as it is.

Everything we're doing here in Canada (I'm also Canadian) is such a boondoggle. The pipeline that Trudeau bought will never be profitable, and any other pipeline we pay for will be a similar money-loser. (If pipelines were as good investments as Danielle Smith claimed, oil companies would pay for them.)

I'd be willing to see EV subsidies go away if the government would also get rid of oil and gas subsidies, AND get rid of the tariffs on Chinese solar panels. Like, everything the government does right now is a tilt towards some ultra-profitable oil and gas donor, and we could save a lot of tax dollars just doing a reset and not subsidizing anything. On that basis, EVs would almost certainly win on their merits.

(I bought a used EV. It was still the most expensive car I've ever bought, inflation adjusted. But it costs $2/100km to drive for the electricity. The only other thing I need to maintain are the tyres. The running costs are ridiculously low.)

Everyone has the right to be a political activist. That includes scientists. You want to cut the ability of scientists to speak their opinion. And that's a bad thing per se.

In jurisdiction, there is the principle: Ignorantia legis non excusat. We should apply the same principle to science. Ignorantia scientes non excusat. Being wrong about science is not an opinion. It's something you could rectify by educating yourself about science, in the same way you educate yourself about the legal situation before deciding something important. No judge will excuse you for having a "different legal opinion" about something that is clearly stated otherwise in the law. We should do the same for science. And if you don't like the way scientists are of a different opinion than you about the possible outcome of a political decision, it's not because they are activists, it's because they know something you want to ignore.

I think the global numbers are low, honestly, and that's mostly down to this misadventure in Iran. Countries that had to ration oil and gas are seeing people flee to solar panels and Chinese EVs.

I actually kinda think that's what's going on already, tbh. My Ioniq 6 gets 100% of the claimed range at 90% charge, as near as I can tell. They've definitely fudged it a little.

Used EVs are such a good buy. My Ioniq 6 came with 40k km on it, and that's basically brand new. Certainly the interior and exterior look pristine, and without many wearing parts, the thing rolled off the lot with 100% of the claimed range (actually, a bit more) and hasn't given me any trouble at all.

It costs me about $2/100km of driving. I've seen petrol and diesel up to $2/L here on bad days, and even in a very efficient car, you need 5L/100km.

(One hiccup: someone literally stole my charging cable while the car was charging in my driveway. My fault, though. I didn't see the setting to keep the cable locked to the car unless the doors are unlocked. They just disconnected the power and it unlocked itself. But L2 chargers are so cheap, I'm only paying a 30c premium over home charging.)

Actually, yeah. Their reputation is on the line, and they won't survive as a company if they're wrong. It's not anonymous, it's not a think-tank generating faux reports to bolster some politician's opinion. Their name is now attached to this information, and if they're lying, that's it for them. They're not big enough to eat that kind of bad press and come out okay on the other side.

Valid concern, though the reality is that'll just leave the door open for 3rd party battery swaps. I bought my EV used knowing that the battery would probably outlast the body of the car, but in the off-chance that it doesn't, I'm actually a bit hyped for the potential to put a better battery in, with either longer range or less weight (though I assume a lighter battery would mess with the driving dynamics the car was designed for).

There is no such thing as "plain Lithium-Ion". Lithium-Ion is a catch-all term for accumulator cells which use Lithium ions in anode, cathode and electrolyte. There are many versions of them. The oldest type is Lithium-Cobaltoxide (LiCoO2), which uses Cobalt(II)-oxide in the cathode. Then there is Lithium-Nickel-Maganese-Cobalt (LiNMC), which is often used in cars, because it allows for very dense accumulator cells. Lithium-Ironphosphate (LiFePO4), while having the same gravimetric density as LiNMC, takes up more space for the same capacity, it is a more fluffy material. We have Lithium-Nickel-Cobalt-Aluminium-Oxide (LiNCA), used in the cells Panasonic builds for Tesla. Many pedelec batteries, but also the Nissan Leaf use Lithium-Manganeseoxide (LiMO) cells.

It makes no sense to spend more to tiptoe through costly incremental steps of infrastructure buildout buying stuff you crave to be rid of when you can hop right to the conclusion. Fuel is bad. You use it and then you need more fuel. That's a vulnerability to the fuel supplier, the logistics, the free market for fuel, changing government meddling. Fix it right once without fuel and be done with it for 30 years. It's not like there won't be another problem to solve the next day.

>as they are not allowed to use oil or coal

Or natural gas. No carbon. Carbon fuels amplify the already obscene thermal output by at least 2.5.

Also, none of them is dumb enough to go fission. The time to power is an order of magnitude greater than their expiration date if they don't have it. And their server and power costs are bad enough. They don't need to compound those expenses with the costliest source of energy available.