GSDs. And on the larger side of breed standard.

Buy a towable trailer.

That was a previous reason you used for an EV not being suitable. But now you are having an issue with car size which has precisely zero to do with EVs.

That's true for everyone, so let's just let the planet burn, eh?

No idea because it's not a vehicle I aspire to own. My car has ample space for my dogs.

You do realise you can get electric SUVs now?

Previously, your use case for going ~1000 miles without a stop was moving house. I have dogs. I have a car. It has plenty of space for them to lie down. It doesn't need to be ICEV.

We went through this before. Firstly, the costs weren't what you said it was and secondly, you don't move house weekly, surely?

Now we get to the nub of it. I got mine.

The counter to this is why buy one that pollutes more 99% of the time just so it can be used for that 1% when you can use alternative means (including not driving a dangerous amount of time non-stop which you kid yourself you are good at) or hire one. Sure, if you are hauling a boat every weekend and you can't find an EV that does it reliably, fine, but if it's having to move house across three states, then perhaps plan ahead a bit more.

Sorry, not MTBF for the second half, but rather lifetime.

You need to first understand the difference between a warranty and MTBF. Just because 8 years are up doesn't mean the battery immediately fails and needs to be replaced. Secondly, there is a secondary market now for used EV batteries, although it's at an early stage, so the value of an old battery isn't necessarily zero. Thirdly, manufactures have in the past and possibly still do offer schemes where for a per mile fee they agree to replace the battery. However, as batteries are holding their charge better and the MTBF of the battery is heading towards the MTBF of other components, that's not really something companies are offering as much now.

The trend is repeated in multiple nations with different tax or subsidy incentives or none.

EVs aren't designed to be able to do this as it reduces overall structure weight if they are somewhat integrated into it. To make them replaceable requires additional car structural elements plus trunions and the like. It also requires standardisation, warranties, etc. That just not in place. Plus there is the potential issue of damaging connectors and the like causing issues such as fires. With the rate of charging increasing so rapidly, it's not likely to happen because the demand for it will be too low.

Yeah, but you can't drive across the whole of Canada in mid-winter in one without stopping even to pee, so they are entirely useless!

People in Europe aren't restricted to stay in one country their whole lives. In fact it's not uncommon for them to drive from one country, right across another into a third. A friend of mine, who lives in France, relatively near the border, did his PhD in Italy. Plus, I think you've failed to understand how long Japan is and that driving from one end to the other would be difficult due to sea getting in the way. But Kagoshima to Aomori is about 1200 miles. I don't think you could safely drive that in a day as it's 24 hours of continuous driving according to Google Maps. I suppose you are technically correct - you could drive across those bits that are continuously connected by land and/or bridges in a day defined as 24 hours, but that would be pushing the definition as it would mean no breaks, not even to refuel your ICEV.

You are just very obtuse and frustrating and despite literally years of being given information on correct figures or how to find them, you refuse to do so. So I am just a bit frustrated.

Nope, still overlaps with fission.

You were grumbling about cost, and now it's land use? Solar can be placed on domestic roofs, SMRs not so much.