License plate cameras will soon track phones, wearables, infotainment, and even your pets



Those license plate cameras hanging over highways and intersections are no longer just reading plates.

New technology now allows some of them to detect the electronic devices traveling with you: your phone, smartwatch, Bluetooth headphones, infotainment system, AirTags, and even some pet trackers.

Collect enough data points, and it becomes possible to identify where someone works, where they live, and who they regularly travel with.

In other words, the goal is no longer simply to identify your car. It's to identify you. And most drivers have no idea this capability already exists.

Easy reader

Most Americans are familiar with Automatic License Plate Readers. Police departments, toll authorities, and private companies have used them for years. They photograph license plates, log the time and location, and store that information in massive databases.

These systems were originally sold as tools to find stolen vehicles and assist in Amber Alerts. But the databases have grown enormously, storing billions of scans and increasingly being used for purposes far beyond their original mission. Civil liberties groups have been raising concerns about that expansion for years.

According to Flock Safety, one of the largest providers of these systems, its cameras capture multiple frames of video and use motion detection to identify vehicles. The company says it does not use facial recognition technology and that its cameras are not designed to identify individuals.

Yet that distinction is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain.

ALPR cameras use optical character recognition technology to convert license plate images into digital text and compare that information against databases of vehicles of interest. Increasingly, however, the cameras are doing much more than simply reading plates.

Electronic fingerprint

Now, here's where things get serious.

A defense contractor called Leonardo has been promoting a system called SignalTrace. It turns license plate cameras into advanced vehicle-tracking technology by combining plate information with signals transmitted by nearby electronic devices.

Even if you never gave permission for anyone to access your phone, smartwatch, Bluetooth devices, or your vehicle's Wi-Fi system.

SignalTrace is essentially an add-on sensor that can be attached to existing license plate cameras. Instead of simply reading a plate, it searches for wireless signals coming from nearby devices: Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, RFID, and other identifiers.

Drive past one of these systems and it may detect the electronic signatures coming from your phone, smartwatch, Bluetooth headphones, infotainment system, AirTags, tire-pressure sensors, or other connected devices.

The system then links those electronic identifiers to a license plate. Leonardo calls this your "electronic fingerprint."

In plain English, the goal is to connect vehicles with the electronic devices and people associated with them.

May the Fourth be with you

According to documentation referenced by multiple publications, SignalTrace isn't limited to roadside cameras. The technology can also be deployed in parking garages, transportation hubs, event venues, and other public locations where wireless devices are present.

That means these systems can continue gathering information even when a vehicle isn't the primary focus.

This raises two obvious questions.

First: Who controls the information about where you go and what devices you carry with you?

And second: How much of this surveillance is consistent with Americans' expectations of privacy?

Privacy advocates argue that technologies like this raise serious Fourth Amendment concerns because they allow governments to collect detailed information about people's movements and associations without individualized suspicion or a warrant.

Modern problems

That debate is only becoming more important as vehicles themselves become increasingly connected.

Modern cars already collect enormous amounts of information, including location data, driving behavior, route histories, voice commands, vehicle diagnostics, and in some cases information gathered through interior cameras and driver-monitoring systems.

Critics worry that systems like SignalTrace add yet another layer to an already expanding data ecosystem.

Most drivers don't realize that they don't fully control much of the information their vehicles generate. Manufacturers often determine who can access that data, whether it can be shared, and how long it is retained.

Now, layer SignalTrace on top of all that.

Not only can manufacturers collect information from connected vehicles, but external surveillance systems may now be able to detect the devices you bring into the car and tie those identifiers directly to your license plate.

Over time, that creates a remarkably detailed picture of your movements and routines.

RELATED: The latest 'solution' to reckless driving could limit freedom for all of us

United Archives/Getty Images

Pattern of life

Privacy experts often refer to this as "pattern of life" surveillance. Collect enough data points, and it becomes possible to identify where someone works, where they live, who they regularly travel with, and even sensitive locations they frequently visit.

Leonardo says the technology captures identifiers and frequencies, not the contents of calls or messages. That may be technically true. But once detailed information exists inside a database, history shows that its use often expands over time.

So what does this mean for ordinary drivers?

It means the privacy expectations many Americans still have on public roads may be changing quickly.

It means the data ecosystem surrounding your vehicle is becoming larger and more interconnected.

And it means lawmakers need to have serious conversations about who can collect this information, how long it can be stored, and what can be done with it.

I'm not saying every police department will abuse these capabilities tomorrow. But once the technology exists and the infrastructure is already in place, the temptation to use it more broadly becomes very real.

We've seen that happen with other surveillance tools.

Protect yourself

So what can you do right now?

  • First, familiarize yourself with your vehicle's privacy and data settings. Many cars allow you to disable certain forms of data sharing or location tracking.
  • Second, be mindful of Bluetooth and Wi-Fi. If you're not using them, consider turning them off. These are precisely the types of signals systems like SignalTrace are designed to detect.
  • Third, if you use AirTags, fitness trackers, or pet trackers, understand that those devices can also become part of your electronic footprint.
  • Fourth, when you sell or trade your vehicle, factory-reset the infotainment system and remove all paired devices. Many people leave enormous amounts of personal information behind without realizing it.
  • Finally, support serious data-privacy legislation and efforts to give consumers greater control over the information their vehicles generate.

Because technologies like this rarely arrive with a major announcement.

They appear quietly in police budgets, vendor contracts, and infrastructure projects.

And by the time most people notice, the system is already in place.

Bottom line: Your car is supposed to work for you, not the other way around. When surveillance systems start linking your license plate to the devices you carry every day, it's worth paying attention — and asking some hard questions before these technologies become the new normal.

I’ll keep watching this space and bringing you updates as more departments adopt or test these systems. And I’ll let you know about the wins too.

If you’re wondering, “Where are all these cameras?” you will be shocked. Check out websites like deflock.org, an open-source project mapping license plate readers. Or look on eyesonflock.com, an aggregating Flock Safety Transparency Portal data, and haveibeenflocked.com, where you can enter your plate number to find out more.

Why are automakers so afraid of you fixing your own car?



When President Trump emerged from a recent meeting with automotive executives and said he found it strange that some industry leaders oppose Americans repairing their own vehicles, most coverage focused on the politics.

I was more interested in what happened afterward.

If manufacturers truly support independent repairs, why remove provisions governing the very data modern repairs increasingly depend upon?

Because the deeper you dig into the latest right-to-repair fight, the more one question keeps surfacing: Why are automakers fighting so hard to control information generated by vehicles consumers already own?

Follow the money

Follow the money, and the picture becomes much clearer.

The U.S. automotive service market generates roughly $200 billion annually. Service departments are among the industry's most reliable profit centers. As vehicles become more software-driven and connected, automakers have discovered that selling the car no longer has to end the customer relationship. Software subscriptions, connected services, maintenance plans, warranty work, and dealership repairs all create recurring revenue long after the vehicle leaves the showroom.

There's nothing wrong with companies pursuing new revenue streams. The problem begins when protecting those revenue streams limits consumer choice.

That's why the latest legislative fight deserves attention.

Stripped for parts

The debate centers on H.R. 7389, the Motor Vehicle Modernization Act of 2026. Supporters describe it as a way to modernize regulations while preserving independent repair access. On the surface, that sounds like good news for consumers.

Then something interesting happened. One of the most important parts of the broader right-to-repair debate disappeared.

Language covering telematics — the wireless vehicle data increasingly needed for diagnostics, calibrations, software updates, and repairs — was stripped from the bill before it advanced through committee. For many independent repair advocates, that wasn't a technical detail. It was the entire fight.

That raises an obvious question. If manufacturers truly support independent repairs, why remove provisions governing the very data modern repairs increasingly depend upon?

The answer may have less to do with repairs than with control. For decades, owning a vehicle meant deciding who repaired it. Consumers chose their mechanic. Independent shops competed with dealerships. Competition kept prices down and choices open.

Modern vehicles work differently.

Data-driven

Today's cars constantly generate data. They monitor component performance, transmit diagnostics, receive software updates, and communicate through manufacturer-controlled networks.

Control the data, and you gain influence over the repair process. That's why automakers, dealers, independent repair shops, aftermarket suppliers, consumer advocates, and lawmakers are all fighting over the same issue.

Manufacturers argue that unrestricted access creates cybersecurity risks. Those concerns shouldn't be dismissed. Modern vehicles are vastly more complex than the cars many of us grew up driving.

But independent repair shops aren't asking for access to nuclear launch codes. They're asking for the information needed to diagnose, repair, calibrate, and maintain vehicles consumers legally purchased. This is key in an era when more and more repairs require access to software rather than simply a wrench.

Viewed alongside other industry trends, the picture becomes even clearer. Vehicle telematics continue expanding. Subscription-based features are becoming common. Driving data has become valuable to insurers and analytics companies. Manufacturers can now change vehicle functionality through over-the-air software updates.

Each development can be defended on its own. Taken together, they suggest an industry steadily increasing its influence over vehicles long after they are sold.

RELATED: Cheap Chinese cars: Trojan horse built to undermine US security?

Jade Gao/Bettmann/Getty Images

Taking ownership

That's why the right-to-repair debate increasingly looks less like a repair issue and more like an ownership issue.

Farmers confronted the same problem years ago as manufacturers restricted repairs on modern agricultural equipment. Purchasing expensive machinery no longer guaranteed the ability to fix it without manufacturer involvement.

The auto industry now appears headed toward a similar crossroads.

Technology has unquestionably made vehicles better. They're safer, more efficient, and more capable than ever before. But technology also changes incentives. Every connected system creates opportunities for convenience, recurring revenue, data collection, and greater manufacturer control.

What makes H.R. 7389 so important isn't what remains in the bill — it's what was removed. The fight over telematics reveals where this debate is headed next.

The future isn't really about brake pads or oil changes. It's about who controls vehicle data, who profits from it, and ultimately who decides what owners are allowed to do with products they have already purchased.

The fix is in

For more than a century, vehicle ownership had a simple meaning. You bought the car. You decided who repaired it, how long you kept it, and what modifications you made.

Today, that definition is becoming less clear. The question isn't whether modern vehicles should be secure. Of course they should. The question isn't whether repairs have become more complicated. They have.

The real question is whether ownership still means what consumers think it means. Because if automakers are willing to fight this hard over repair data today, consumers should pay close attention to what comes next.

The right-to-repair battle may ultimately be remembered as the moment Americans discovered that ownership in the connected-car era no longer carries the assumptions previous generations took for granted.

The latest 'solution' to reckless driving could limit freedom for all of us



If a driver is so dangerous that the government needs to electronically control his car, why is he still allowed to drive?

That's the question New York lawmakers don't seem interested in answering.

Today the threshold is 16 violations. Tomorrow it could be 10.

Gov. Kathy Hochul (D) recently signed legislation requiring certain repeat speeding offenders to install GPS-based speed-limiting technology in their vehicles. Under the new law, drivers who rack up 16 or more speed-camera violations within a year can be ordered to install an Intelligent Speed Limiter that prevents their vehicle from exceeding posted speed limits. Drivers who refuse can ultimately lose their vehicle registration.

Reckless legislation

At first glance, the proposal sounds reasonable. Most Americans agree that chronic reckless drivers should face serious consequences. But the real question is not whether dangerous drivers deserve punishment. The real question is why someone with 16 speeding violations still has driving privileges in the first place.

New York already has speeding laws. It already has fines, insurance penalties, license points, court appearances, and suspension mechanisms. If a driver has accumulated enough violations to be considered such a serious threat that the state now wants to electronically control their vehicle, then why weren't existing laws sufficient to remove that driver from the road?

That question goes directly to the heart of the issue. Rather than addressing the apparent failure of existing enforcement systems, lawmakers have chosen to create an entirely new layer of technology, surveillance, and government oversight. Instead of asking why repeat offenders remain licensed, they're asking the public to accept the idea that government should have a greater role in controlling privately owned vehicles.

That's a significant shift, and it deserves far more scrutiny than it has received.

Pre-crime preview

The legislation relies on Intelligent Speed Assistance technology, commonly referred to as ISA. The system uses GPS data and digital mapping to determine the posted speed limit on a roadway and can prevent a vehicle from exceeding that speed. Unlike traditional enforcement, where a driver is punished after breaking the law, this technology is designed to intervene before the driver can make the decision.

The automotive industry is already moving toward an unprecedented level of connectivity. Modern vehicles collect enormous amounts of information. They receive over-the-air software updates, communicate with manufacturers, monitor driving behavior, and increasingly operate as rolling computers. Consumers have already watched vehicle ownership evolve into something that looks increasingly like a subscription service, with features activated remotely and software determining how products function.

Now government is entering the equation with technology designed to control how a vehicle operates.

That should concern anyone who values personal privacy and consumer rights.

Starting small

Supporters insist the law applies only to a small group of repeat offenders. That's true today. The problem is that government programs rarely remain confined to their original scope. Nearly every major regulatory program begins with a narrowly defined target. Politicians identify a group that few people are willing to defend, implement a new policy, and assure the public that the measure will be limited. Once the infrastructure exists, however, expanding it becomes significantly easier than creating it.

Today the threshold is 16 violations. Tomorrow it could be 10. Later it could be expanded to fleet vehicles, commercial operators, or other categories of drivers. Once the principle is accepted, the debate shifts from whether government should have this authority to how broadly it should be applied.

Imperfect technology

The practical questions surrounding this law are equally troubling. GPS technology is useful, but it is not infallible. Speed-limit databases are not always current. Construction zones change. Temporary restrictions appear. Road conditions evolve faster than mapping systems can update.

What happens when the speed-limit database is wrong? What happens when a roadway has recently changed and the system hasn't been updated? What happens when a driver needs rapid acceleration to avoid an accident?

These are not hypothetical concerns. They are the types of real-world situations automotive engineers consider every day. Yet lawmakers frequently discuss speed-limiting technology as though vehicles operate in a controlled environment where every situation can be anticipated by software. The reality is far more complicated.

RELATED: Gone in 60 seconds: How high-tech thieves can steal your car

Jeff Greenberg/Getty Images

Punishing cars, not drivers

Then there is the issue of fairness.

One of the most overlooked aspects of this legislation is its reliance on camera enforcement. Traditional traffic stops identify the driver. Automated camera systems identify the vehicle. Those are not the same thing. Families share cars. Businesses operate fleets. Vehicles are borrowed, rented, and loaned every day. Yet policymakers continue to build enforcement systems around the vehicle itself rather than the individual behind the wheel.

That distinction matters because accountability should be directed at the person responsible for the behavior, not simply the machine involved.

There is also a financial component that deserves attention. Installation costs for these systems can run into the thousands of dollars, with additional fees for monitoring, maintenance, administration, and compliance. Government officials often frame these costs as penalties for offenders, but every new regulatory program creates opportunities for vendors, contractors, software providers, installers, and administrators.

Whenever government mandates a new technology, there is almost always an industry waiting to benefit from it.

New York is hardly alone in pursuing this approach. Washington State has adopted its own Intelligent Speed Assistance requirements for certain offenders. Virginia and Washington, D.C., have moved in a similar direction, while Illinois lawmakers have advanced proposals involving mandatory speed-limiting technology. What once appeared to be an isolated experiment is rapidly becoming a national trend.

As more states adopt similar programs, lawmakers should answer a basic question: Why create a technological workaround instead of enforcing the penalties already available under existing law?

Accountability ... or control?

The answer may be uncomfortable. Suspending licenses removes the driver from the system. Technological monitoring keeps the driver in the system while creating new layers of oversight and control. One approach focuses on accountability. The other focuses on management.

Those are fundamentally different philosophies.

New York's "super speeder" law is being sold as a narrowly targeted safety measure. Maybe that's how it begins. The larger concern is where it ends. Once government gains the authority to electronically regulate how privately owned vehicles operate, future expansions become much easier to justify.

The most important question isn't whether a driver with 16 violations deserves punishment. It's whether Americans are comfortable creating the technological infrastructure that allows government to control how a privately owned vehicle operates.

Today, lawmakers call it a solution for super speeders. Tomorrow, it could become something much broader.

Stellantis’ China gamble could reshape America’s auto industry forever



Chinese cars are a security risk.

That's the message Washington has been sending the American consumer: Cheaper vehicles aren't worth exposing sensitive data to theft. Hence the massive tariffs aimed at China.

The difference is that Stellantis is now openly telling investors that these partnerships are central to its long-term strategy.

But while America was focused on keeping brands like BYD and NIO out of local dealerships, the global auto industry quietly found another way in.

And Stellantis just made that strategy official.

Ties that bind

The parent company of Jeep, Ram, Dodge, Chrysler, and Fiat has embraced deeper partnerships with Chinese automakers and suppliers as part of its global restructuring effort. New CEO Antonio Filosa is betting the company's future on partnerships, software integration, shared manufacturing, AI systems, and Chinese EV technology.

That should concern every American consumer, every UAW worker, every supplier, and every policymaker. The issue is no longer simply about cars built in China. It's about China becoming embedded inside the future of the American auto industry itself.

Stellantis recently announced a roughly $1.17 billion partnership with China's Dongfeng Group to build new-energy vehicles at a Wuhan manufacturing plant beginning in 2027. The agreement includes future Peugeot and Jeep models for China and other global markets.

But that's only part of the story.

FaST and furious

At its recent Investor Day presentation, Stellantis unveiled its "FaSTLAne 2030" strategy, a $70 billion restructuring plan featuring 60 new models, expanded AI integration, autonomous-driving development, and manufacturing partnerships stretching across China, Europe, India, and North America.

The message from Filosa was unmistakable: Partnerships will be "embedded" in Stellantis' future strategy.

That should have set off alarms in Washington.

Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno (R) has been leading the effort to block Chinese vehicles and components from gaining a foothold in the United States because of concerns over technology and supply-chain dependence. Yet while lawmakers debate tariffs, one of America's best-known automakers is openly moving deeper into partnerships with China.

For years, Americans were told tariffs would stop China from gaining influence over the U.S. auto market. But tariffs mainly target finished vehicles imported directly from China. They do little to prevent American or European automakers from incorporating Chinese-developed batteries, software, electronics, and EV platforms into vehicles sold under Western brands.

Beneath the badge

Consumers may soon be driving vehicles wearing Jeep, Dodge, Chrysler, or Ram badges while much of the underlying technology comes from Chinese partnerships: batteries, semiconductors, AI systems, autonomous-driving technology, and connected-car software.

To control these is to control the modern automotive supply chain. China already dominates large portions of that ecosystem, and many legacy automakers increasingly appear to believe they cannot compete globally in EVs without Chinese involvement.

For the UAW and the industrial Midwest, the implications are enormous.

For decades, organized labor fought outsourcing to lower-cost countries. But the shift toward electric vehicles creates a different challenge. EVs generally require fewer moving parts than traditional internal-combustion vehicles, reducing demand for engines, transmissions, and many of the suppliers that support them. If battery production, electronics, and software also migrate overseas, the economic consequences could ripple through the entire manufacturing base.

America's automotive economy extends far beyond assembly plants. It includes steel suppliers, logistics companies, plastics manufacturers, tool-and-die shops, engineering firms, rail networks, repair facilities, dealerships, and thousands of small businesses. When supply chains move, entire local economies move with them.

RELATED: America's salvage yards are on fire — and drivers are the ones getting burned

Andy Cross/Getty Images

If you can't beat 'em ...

Stellantis' own strategy reflects that trend.

By the end of the decade, the company wants half its global production running on just three platforms. Its new STLA One architecture will support more than 30 models while integrating advanced software, steer-by-wire systems, AI capabilities, and connected cockpit technologies.

At the same time, Stellantis plans to cut more than 800,000 units of manufacturing capacity in Europe while aggressively restructuring operations around efficiency and lower costs.

Even more revealing is its expanding relationship with Leapmotor, the Chinese EV company in which Stellantis already owns a controlling stake through a joint venture. What began as a distribution agreement has expanded into manufacturing cooperation and joint sourcing designed to improve "cost competitiveness."

Rolling computers

The auto industry has seen this pattern before.

Detroit once dominated global manufacturing before outsourcing and offshoring reshaped the landscape. Today's version isn't just about where vehicles are assembled. Modern cars are rolling computers connected to cellular networks, cloud services, cameras, microphones, GPS systems, and over-the-air software updates.

That is why national security concerns now collide directly with automotive policy.

The Biden administration imposed 100% tariffs on Chinese EV imports and proposed restrictions on connected vehicle technology because of concerns over data collection and infrastructure security. Those concerns are legitimate. Modern vehicles collect extraordinary amounts of information, including location data, driving behavior, communications, and other personal information.

Now, imagine foreign-developed software integrated into millions of connected vehicles operating across the United States.

That concern helps explain why Moreno's proposal to block Chinese vehicles and components represents a major escalation in the debate over America's automotive future.

His message is straightforward: Chinese companies should not gain a strategic foothold inside the U.S. auto industry.

China syndrome

President Trump spent years warning about unfair Chinese trade practices and the hollowing out of American manufacturing. His tariffs forced companies to rethink supply chains and brought China's influence into the political spotlight.

Yet despite those efforts, many automakers continued moving deeper into China's EV ecosystem because executives saw lower costs, faster development, and access to advanced battery technology.

Stellantis is hardly alone. Ford has partnered with CATL. Volkswagen expanded its ties with Xpeng. General Motors continues to rely on Chinese-linked battery supply chains, and Tesla maintains an enormous manufacturing footprint in China.

The difference is that Stellantis is now openly telling investors that these partnerships are central to its long-term strategy.

If America loses control of automotive batteries, semiconductors, software platforms, AI systems, and electronics manufacturing, the consequences could extend far beyond the auto business. This remains one of the country's largest manufacturing sectors and one of its biggest sources of middle-class industrial employment.

Consumers were promised that the EV transition would spark a manufacturing renaissance. Instead, America risks becoming increasingly dependent on foreign-controlled supply chains for many of the most important technologies inside next-generation vehicles.

The next generation of cars may still wear familiar American badges while relying heavily on Chinese-developed batteries, software, and technology underneath the sheet metal.

That's the issue Washington is finally beginning to confront.

The real battle is no longer about where vehicles are assembled. It's about who controls the technology inside them, who owns the supply chains behind them, and whether America still intends to build the next generation of vehicles itself.

America's salvage yards are on fire — and drivers are the ones getting burned



No matter what kind of car we prefer, most American drivers can agree on one thing: We don't need another reason for vehicle ownership to become more expensive.

New vehicle prices remain painfully high. Used cars still cost more than they did just a few years ago. Insurance premiums continue to climb, and repair bills that once seemed unthinkable have become routine. For many families, keeping an older vehicle on the road isn't a preference anymore — it's a financial necessity.

An insurer may choose to repair rather than total a vehicle because recycled components make the economics work.

That's why a little-noticed trend deserves far more attention than it's getting: America's salvage yards are burning.

Junk science

Most drivers never set foot in a salvage yard, but many have unknowingly benefited from one. Salvage yards provide recycled engines, transmissions, body panels, mirrors, wheels, electronic modules, and countless other components that offer affordable alternatives to buying new parts.

Without them, many repairs would cost significantly more.

That matters because modern vehicles have become dramatically more expensive to fix. A headlight is no longer just a bulb and a lens — it may include LED arrays, cameras, and sensors costing thousands of dollars to replace. Bumpers house radar systems. Side mirrors contain blind-spot monitoring equipment. Even relatively minor collisions can generate repair bills that shock vehicle owners.

For decades, the salvage industry has quietly helped offset those costs.

Most people think of a scrapyard as the final resting place for totaled vehicles. In reality, these facilities function as warehouses of reusable inventory. Every wrecked vehicle contains components that can help repair another one, extending the life of cars already on the road and giving consumers lower-cost alternatives to factory-new parts.

When a salvage yard loses thousands of vehicles and reusable components to a fire, the consequences extend far beyond the property itself. Repair shops lose inventory. Insurers lose salvage value. Consumers lose affordable options.

Eventually, those costs work their way through the system.

More expensive repairs contribute to higher insurance claims. Parts shortages can increase repair times and rental-car costs. And families trying to keep an aging vehicle running are left with fewer choices and bigger bills.

That's why these fires deserve more scrutiny than they typically receive.

Batteries included

Industry groups have reported a growing number of fires at recycling facilities in recent years, with lithium-ion batteries frequently cited as a contributing factor. Given the proliferation of batteries in electric vehicles, hybrids, e-bikes, power tools, and consumer electronics, those concerns are understandable. Damaged or improperly handled lithium-ion batteries can ignite and burn intensely.

But determining the actual cause of individual fires matters. Some incidents are quickly linked to batteries, while others remain under investigation or are ultimately attributed to different causes. Before broad conclusions are drawn, it's important that investigators establish the facts.

The larger issue is that automotive recyclers have become an increasingly important part of keeping transportation affordable.

Americans are holding onto their vehicles longer than ever because replacing them has become so expensive. That makes access to quality recycled parts more valuable than ever. A driver with a 12-year-old SUV may not need a brand-new factory transmission if a properly inspected recycled unit is available at a fraction of the cost. Likewise, an insurer may choose to repair rather than total a vehicle because recycled components make the economics work.

Remove enough inventory from the marketplace, and those calculations begin to change.

RELATED: 10 tactics to beat even the pushiest car salesman

Mark Sullivan/Getty Images

Free to fix

This also intersects with the broader right-to-repair movement. Much of that debate centers on software access and diagnostic tools, but those issues address only part of the problem. Consumers also need access to reasonably priced replacement parts. Salvage yards provide competition in the marketplace and help prevent repair costs from becoming even more prohibitive.

Independent repair shops understand this better than anyone. Their ability to source quality recycled components often allows them to save customers thousands of dollars compared with using factory-new parts. If those options disappear, many repairs simply stop making financial sense.

The result is simple: Consumers either pay more or replace vehicles they otherwise could have kept on the road.

Insurance companies face similar challenges. Every totaled vehicle contains recoverable value through parts recycling and salvage sales. When that inventory is destroyed before it can be reused, that value disappears as well.

Where there's fire ...

Viewed in isolation, a scrapyard fire is local news. Viewed as part of a broader pattern, it becomes a warning about the fragile supply chain that keeps older vehicles on the road.

As vehicles become more technologically sophisticated and more expensive to repair, the automotive recycling industry becomes more — not less — important. Yet most people only notice it when dramatic images of smoke and flames appear on the evening news.

The next time headlines report another salvage-yard fire, look beyond the blaze itself. Ask what inventory was lost, how many future repairs depended on those parts, and what replacing them will ultimately cost.

Because in the automotive world, expenses rarely disappear. They get passed along.

And in the end, the people most likely to pay are the ones who can least afford another hit to their household budget: ordinary American drivers just trying to get a few more years out of their vehicles.

America needs mechanics; here's where to apply



Lauren Fix ("Yes, that's my real name") has been taking apart cars since she was 10 years old. It started when she watched her father, a former General Motors engineer who went on to create the stainless steel brake, work on cars in their garage.

"I'd go, 'What are you doing?'" remembers Fix. "He never said, 'Go away' ... he'd say, 'Want to help?'"

She did. Since then, Fix has wracked up a wealth of experience. "I'm an ASE certified technician. I don't wrench on cars, but I've taken the test. But I'm also an engineer, mechanical engineer. I've designed and developed braking and suspension components. I've worked on cars, restored cars, my whole life."

In 1989, she and her husband, Paul Fix, founded Classic Tube, which prototypes and fabricates pre-bent automotive tubing in its upstate New York factory.

While the auto repair field has certainly changed since Fix was coming up, she says it offers greater opportunity than ever. Here she tells Align where to look — and what employers are looking for.

Dealer's choice

"If I were going to be a mechanic today, I would look to work at a dealer," Fix tells Align. "Typically, the pay is better."

To do so, you'll probably need certification from the National Institute for Automotive Service Excellence. ASE certification requires at least two years of work in the certification area and successful completion of the relevant ASE tests.

"The ASE tests are great. They're matter-of-fact; they don't try to trick you. It's not an SAT test. It's literally, do you know what you're talking about or don't you? If this happens, what would you do?"

It's also possible to get a dealer to train you on the job. "It depends on the person," says Fix. "If you are really good, you don't mind working on your own car, and you really know this stuff, you could probably get hired by a dealer. They'll pay for your training because they need good people that they can count on. It's sort of like the [military] service, you know, you give us four, we'll give you four. In this case, it would probably be less than two years of training. You start with the basic stuff. You're going to be doing oil changes. And then, you work your way up."

With experience comes compensation. "You can make $100 ,000 a year easily if you know your stuff, you're really good and efficient and effective, and you're working at a high-end brand [like] Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi."

Gamers especially might enjoy the work, says Fix, as much of auto repair today involves navigating a vehicle's on-board diagnostics system, sometimes even with VR technology. "These are all very much computer-oriented jobs," says Fix. "It really does require someone who can think like [a gamer]."

Women wanted

Those who prefer to deal with people should consider becoming a service writer or a parts manager. Women are especially in demand for these jobs and can often get signing bonuses. "Typically, [a customer walking into a dealership] will go to the female because they think a guy's going to try and upsell them on a bunch of stuff they don't want."

And upselling is part of the job, although best accomplished with a delicate touch. "It's upselling, not hard selling," says Fix. "It's looking at the service schedule on the computer [and saying,] 'Hey, listen, when's the last time you had your oil changed? It looks like you haven't been here in a while. We can rotate your tires ... check your brakes. Let us do your 60,000 mile inspection."

Four types of people the industry loves to hire

According to Fix, there are four categories of potential employees the automotive repair industry finds particularly attractive:

1. High school graduates eager to start a career

"[Let's say you're] high school educated, not great at taking tests, don't want to go to college, not interested in the expense. 'I want a job now. I want to start making money today.'

Perfect. Work in the auto industry. We'd love to have you."

2. Military veterans

"You return from the service. Maybe you have some skills [you've learned]. Maybe you just can't find a job.

Don't you worry, there'll be a dealer who will hire you in a minute. They love military veterans because they understand procedure, they understand hierarchy, and they can follow directions."

3. Low-level, nonviolent offenders

"These are people who did stupid things," says Fix. "They learned their lesson." If you're an ex-convict committed to making a fresh start, you may find the industry particularly welcoming.

Vehicles for Change, for example, is a Maryland-based non-profit that provides automobiles for families in need. It also runs Full Circle, a job training program designed to help men and women transition from prison to lives as skilled auto mechanics. "[They become] responsible citizens," says Fix. "Many of them go on to create their own shops," says Fix, and end up "hiring people that they know they can trust."

4. Native Spanish speakers

"Whether you like it or not," says Fix, "there are people strolling across the border, and there are a lot of Spanish-speaking people, and there's a lot of Spanish-speaking people that would like to have their cars repaired. ... They typically keep their cars a lot longer.

So, those people also need to communicate with other people that speak the same language. And they prefer that common conversation that I can speak Spanish to you. I'm Latino, you're Latino."

"It doesn't matter what my opinion is [on the border crisis]. The fact is they're here. We'd rather have them [be] productive citizens paying taxes than living off the government dole."

Work with your hands? You're in demand

"If you're in any of those categories or you know someone that is, don't think, 'I got nothing,'" counsels Fix.

"No. You have something. There is an opportunity for you. It gives you a good education on the job, with a paycheck. You get all kinds of benefits.

And [some of the] dealer groups really appreciate and support their employees. And it can lead to other opportunities.

You could even get a job on the [assembly] line. You don't have to have an education. If you want to work at a production line for Honda in St. Mary's, Ohio, you go there, you apply like everybody else. They need people; everybody's in need of people who want to work with their hands. You could be into HVAC. You could be into plumbing. You could be into electrical."

Scholarships and other resources

Finally, Fix advises would-be mechanics to explore the wealth of affordable or even cost-free training options. The non-profit TechForce Foundation awards millions in grants each year for technicians beginning or furthering their careers. It also offers scholarships in partnership with Ford.

Automotive Scholarships is another resource Fix recommends, as is the Specialty Equipment Market Association.

Above all, don't underestimate the opportunities that are out there for someone who wants to work with cars.

"If you look at the Dow Jones, half of the Dow is impacted by the auto industry. You're not just talking the car or the dealership. You're talking about, like, tires; oil; battery companies; Nvidia, which does a lot of the technology; all of that builds in. And so, the impact is quite bigger than people realize."

Androids are marching onto the production line at BMW



Restless chrome androids are set to march onto the production line at BMW.

The German automotive company recently signed a commercial agreement with the California-based robot manufacturer Figure to use its humanoid automatons in "automotive manufacturing environments."

The Figure 01 is a 5'6" android that weighs 132.2 pounds and can supposedly work for five hours before requiring a recharge. According to the company, the humanistic simulacrum can move at a speed of nearly 2.7 mph and can lift up to 44 pounds. In addition to stumbling about where humans once worked and lifting boxes, the android can apparently also open doors, use tools, and climb stairs.

— (@)

Robert Engelhorn, president and CEO of BMW Manufacturing, said in a statement, "The automotive industry, and with it the production of vehicles, is evolving rapidly. BMW Manufacturing is committed to integrating innovative technologies in our production systems to drive our future forward as an industry leader and innovator."

"The use of general purpose robot solutions has the potential to make productivity more efficient, to support the growing demands of our consumers, and to enable our team to focus on the transformation ahead of us," added Engelhorn.

Brett Adcock, CEO and founder of Figure, said, "Single-purpose robotics have saturated the commercial market for decades, but the potential of general purpose robotics is completely untapped. Figure's robots will enable companies to increase productivity, reduce costs, and create a safer and more consistent environment."

Figure's agreement with BMW reportedly allows for a staged deployment. First, the robotics company will look for "initial use cases" where its androids can be deployed. Once opportunities for automation are identified — likely areas presently occupied by inspirited human workers — Figure's androids will be trotted out, beginning with the car company's facility in Spartanburg, South Carolina.

Adcock told Axios, "I think the next 24 months you'll start seeing humanoid robots in the real world."

The relative cost of this replacement workforce will likely be driven down by fierce competition. After all, Figure's deal with BMW may be the first of its kind, but it's not the only android game in town.

Sanctuary AI, a Vancouver-based company, has created a general-purpose robot called Phoenix. Powered by the Carbon AI control system, Phoenix has a competitive payload of 55 pounds and a max speed of 3 mph.

Norway's OpenAI-backed 1X has already made its EVE android available for purchase. EVE is 6'2", 192 pounds and has a top speed of 9 mph. It tops the Figure 01 on battery life with a six-hour run time and can lift 33 pounds. While autonomous, human operators can also reportedly control a fleet of EVEs, tapping into their cameras.

Ix admits on its website that its androids can automate jobs traditionally performed by humans, suggesting that those put out of work "can also be trained for more complex roles."

Boston Dynamics' Atlas is another competitor in the field, albeit a headless one. Atlas can travel at 2.5 m/s, weighs 196 pounds, and is nearly five feet tall. Unlike other androids, Atlas is relatively nimble and capable of performing various acrobatic feats.

Tesla's Optimus bot appears to be lagging behind the pack of job-killers. Nevertheless, South African billionaire Elon Musk recently indicated Optimus can now fold a shirt.

— (@)

Markets and Markets reported last year that the size of the global android market last year was $1.8 billion. It is, however, projected to grow to $13.8 billion by 2028. This growth is expected to be driven largely by demands in the medical and hospitality sectors. There will reportedly also be opportunities for android deployment in different fields of rescue operations.

The announcement of the Figure-BMW android deal came just days ahead of the release of a MIT study that suggested that the threat of AI automation soon taking over various human jobs — hyped by previous reports — may be overblown

After conducting a cost breakdown of what it would take to replace various workers on vision-based tasks with AI-powered systems, the researchers concluded, "We find that at today's costs US businesses would choose not to automate most vision tasks that have 'AI Exposure,' and that only 23 [percent] of worker wages being paid for vision tasks would be attractive to automate."

Neil Thompson, co-author of the study and an investigator at MIT Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, noted that the study indicated "a more gradual integration of AI into various sectors, contrasting with the often hypothesized rapid AI-driven job displacement."

Adcock suggested to Axios that Figure 01 "can do basically everything a human can."

The Figure CEO is not the only one who appears bullish on the prospect of a tin man workforce.

The Wall Street Journal indicated earlier this month that expensive union contracts have prompted greater interest among carmakers in automation.

Laurie Harbour, president of Michigan manufacturing consulting firm Harbour Results, told the Journal, "Automation is the future. More so than we've ever seen."

"There's robots in every factory," United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain recently told Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.). "The companies have used technology as a way to cut jobs instead of interjecting robots and technology to make our jobs easier."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!