You appear to know three-fifths of fuck-all about charging, poverty, who owns cars in the UK and much more besides.

1. So what that some households with no offstreet parking have two cars? They are relatively uncommon compared t those with one or none, and they don't appreciably worsen pressure. What matters is, always, mileage per car per day; range; and thus mean time between charges.

2. It's extremely obvious that households without off-street parking are more likely to have no car at all. Take London, for example. If you live in an inner borough, you are much less likely to have a car than in an outer borough, because (a) you've got better access to public transport so you have less need, and (b) you're much less likely to have off-street parking, and (c) there's a high percentage of people who cannot afford to buy a car in places like Tower Hamlets. That's why 66% of Tower Hamlets households don't have a car, while the fraction in Hillingdon is just 20%. https://centreforlondon.org/bl....
It's not a reach, it's completely obvious. This pattern, which we see across not just London but all the UK's major conurbations, is what drives the UK national stats. I don't know why you think your pictures of Norwich somehow disprove this point about which households across the UK as a whole are least likely to own cars. The Norwich point is just the same point about needing on-street charging, not off-street.

3. Area man thinks he's on to something really clever when he says that EV on-street charging infra will require a big build-out. No shit, Sherlock. But we're only going to add between 500k and 2m EVs per year to the UK fleet each year, and 80%+ will go to households with off-street parking for the next few years. We don't need to do the big build-out all in one go. And a dropped kerb or a pavement gully is not a huge built-out, nor is a lamp-post charger. It's not all flash chargers delivering 1.5MW, is it? And the infra today is not "non-existent". That's absurd. If it were non-existent, then utilisation ratios for the apparently oh-so-few public chargers that do exist would be very high, as people fought to charge. Instead, utilisation rates at the UK's 120,000 public chargers is 8%...about two hours a day. And there's not a single village in the whole of England more than 10 miles from a charger, and the vast majority are under 5 miles. There's well over a hundred chargers around Norwich, to hark back to your example.

4. This thing about solutions not yet being rolled out "at the scale required in order to achieve the switch" is just your assertion. Back it up with some facts. What scale of implementation is required? How have you calculated this? It's not that hard to do some basic modelling, thinking about how many vehicles reliant on the public charging network will be added to the UK fleet annually for the next several years up to a 100% transition, factoring in charging times, utilisation rates, changes to the cohort mix for both vehicles and chargers, mean time between charges, etc. I've done it before, and the answer is we are fine. But I'm not going to do the work again for you. You can fuck about on Zapmap learning the basics and have a discussion with ChatGPT on the modelling and find out for yourself. The question about funding and planning is really weird. There's central government funding in place, for example, pavement gullies are funded by them up to £1200 per gully, managed by the Energy Savings Trust. Local governments are doing tons of work planning for the installation of more chargers. You don't know what they're doing, because you've not learned about it, not because it's not happening.

5. It is absolutely idiotic to say that "most people don't have a parking space at work". This is like saying "most people don't drive a van, so vans are stupid and pointless". There are literally millions of people with access to workplace car parks: they're common in healthcare, in many education settings, at industrial sites, at logistics sites, in out-of-town offices, etc. And commercial car parks can and do routinely have chargers in place, too. I have no idea what point you think you're making, talking about people sitting in their cars for 8 hours, but it bears absolutely no resemblance to how people actually use workplace chargers and destination charging.

6. You absolutely do not need to have 50 charge points for 50 houses. That's absurd. Totally ridiculous. 50 houses are not going to be plugging their EVs in on one night, never mind every night. You're imagining bizarre fisticuffs at dawn as people fight over the 50th charger. Stupid. If you have 10 chargers and 50 households, each with an EV, that is a minimum of double the capacity that's actually going to be used. One car will be going 10 days or more between charges, meaning the other four cars in the ratio of 1:5 have nine days or more to split between them for their own overnight charge.

7. The fact that you're an anxious little thing and that causes you to theoretically plug in your theoretical car every night does not translate to a population as a whole. There is a well-known pattern of behaviour among new buyers of EVs in which they start by plugging in more frequently than they need to, and then they unpucker their arses and start plugging in as and when. I've been driving 10 years and in all that time, there's been exactly one occasion in which I didn't have the charge I needed for a last-minute journey. I drove a couple of miles to Brent Cross, plugged in to a fast charger for 15 minutes, and then I did. Once. In 10 years. And I'm not a good planner, either. Maybe ask your wife how often she's been on call and had to drive 300 miles somewhere. Unless she's a community public health doctor working in rural Oxfordshire, I doubt her journey is going to be longer than the max 30 or 40 miles from your home to the acute site she's working out of. Maybe she's super-senior and works across multiple sites in Essex or something. I don't know, it's really hard to conceive of the circumstances in which she'd be driving more than 100 miles for an on-call.

8. Your problem is not EVs. Your problem is not "the lack of infrastructure to support EVs". Your problem is that you don't understand the basics of how EV charging actually works, driver behaviour, national patterns of household car ownership, etc. You think we need millions of chargers urgently, and that's absolute horseshit. I implore you to challenge yourself, spend some time discussing this with ChatGPT who is a lot more patient than me, and test your assumptions and do some basic modelling, starting with actual numbers for the private and public charging network, EV takeup, etc.

9. You can absolutely drive from one end of the country to the other in an EV at the drop of a hat. What are you talking about? Why wouldn't you be able to? The only difference is the timings of breaks. I drive quite often from London to Durham. There's chargers at every single service station on the way. I just stop when I'm hungry, plug the car in, go and eat, unplug and get going. It's trivial, convenient, straightforward, a complete non-issue. And I largely plug in out of habit, not because I actually need to. My car can take me the 260 miles to Durham on a single charge easily. That's 5.5 hours of driving. This is the reality of what a long UK journey looks like. It's relatively rare, people stop at some point for coffee and the loo and some food, and that's when they'll charge. Only a few idiots drive 5 hours with a five minute fuel break as their sole stop, because it's dangerous.

10. No, the government hasn't said you can't buy ICE vehicles after 2030. They've said you can't buy *new* *non-hybrids* after 2030. You're being ridiculous. You'll be able to buy a new PHEV in 2030, which you can then drive for the next 10 or 15 years before you even have to *think* about dealing with EV charging.

Go and learn something about a topic before you spout off.

Yes, but 6.9m of those 27.6m don't have a car in the first place, and pretty obviously, those are more likely to be the households without the ability to park a car off-street. It's always going to be that much more convenient for people who can park off-street to charge at home compared to those who can't.

But:
- that still leaves at least 70% of cars / households able to charge at home offstreet compared to 0% able to refuel at home offstreet, which is a massive win for tens of millions of people, and obviously reduces pressure on the public charging network
- tons of solutions for on-street charging are rolling out, from lamp-post to bollards to gullies
- there's tons of other places to charge, including workplace charging
- cars only need to be charged once every 10 to 14 days in the UK, given how much the average car is driven per day

I don't know where you got the notion that EV tech is better suited to small cars than large cars from, but it's really not the case. EV tech works fine in every size of car, from a Citroen Ami up to a Rolls Royce Spectre or that stupid Hummer EV thing and beyond up to buses and semis. There are shitty implementations at every level, but the tech can scale up and down perfectly well.

My own experience has been that I can use AI to develop materially better outputs than I could otherwise make without spending a lot longer on each task. And sometimes just materially better full stop, by treating AI as a thought partner. It's not perfect, but it can be pretty damn good.

About 4% of China’s 2025 oil came from Venezuela. Trump has cut off much more US access to oil with his Iran action than that.

As I said, he’s an idiot.

You’ve got yourself confused. Camshafts are made in the US, yes, but by global suppliers like MAHLE and LInamar. They amortise tooling, designs, and process engineering across all their global production. They are able to purchase supplies at costs held down by their global scale. They stay in the market at all because the volumes of sales globally justify it, and having multiple camshaft suppliers keeps costs down by increasing competition.

I think the gap between Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Stellantis, GM and Ford in relation to EVs is a distinction without a difference. They are all in deeper trouble than they know what to do with. The US auto market is doomed to ever-higher prices and ever-worse tech than the rest of the world, because it will miss out on the global economies of scale that have been essential to the last 50 years of automotive manufacturing and which will be just as important, if not more so, in the next 50. Camshafts made for a market with a population of 330m are going to be a shit ton more expensive than those made for a market with a population of 8bn.

I'm absolutely with you. Honda is strategically fucked, as are the US OEMs over the longer term. BMW and Renault may get through this, along with Hyundai and Kia, but many ICE OEMs are in their death throes, whether they know it or not.

You can't rely on fucking anecdotes for this kind of thing. You need some actual data. All the data points in the opposite direction, and in line with what one would expect: low cost Chinese EVs use LFP batteries because those are cheap, and LFP batteries do not have any thermal runaway issues.

Once again, Trump is an idiot. The literal only reason that Venezuela is said to have the largest oil reserves in the world is because their government said so in various official reports. There is no actual proof that it does have oil reserves of the size it's claimed.

It's truly astonishing that people write that kind of stuff without the slightest hint of irony, isn't it? After Trump has used military force against two oil producing countries in less than six months, and announced he's just going to take Venezuelan oil without compensation (although being an idiot, he's neglected to get the oil majors on board)

Obviously we all depend on oil. But given the challenges associated with it, from the costs of extraction to wars to climate change, it makes sense to use as little as possible, and certainly not for activity which is better done with alternatives. EVs are an excellent example. Heat pumps are another.

Ember wrote an excellent recent report on a related topic:
https://ember-energy.org/lates...

While you could be right, I reckon Apple has done the work to find out what the segment really values and has got this right

The chip is more than capable of powering that screen. It’s already used to power a screen that has slightly more pixels on the iPhone 16 Pro Max.

As for build quality, it’s made out of aluminium rather than plastic, has the same keyboard as MacBook Pros, and every review has commented that the build quality is as good as other Macs. That alone puts it well ahead of the competition. I’m sure many people don’t care about build quality, but many more absolutely do, because it means it feels nice in the hand and is less prone to physical damage.