placeholder

Generally, if corporations or government have to release bad news, they choose to do it on Friday for obvious reasons.

In the past, even the conservative justices have ruled that judges should not overrule the FDA on medical questions. But since these justices have also demonstrated a willingness to ignore their principles when convenient, I wouldn't get all surprised if in some way they support that judge in Texas.

Wow! This could be huge. Although, its hugeness depends on the price of the battery per KWH. If it costs 3 times as much on that basis probably not of much significance for EVs. But for regional aviation it could still be huge. There's a company called Alice Air that offers an electric plane with a range of 650 with battery that has a capacity of 260 KWH. Given that the battery from CATL not only has nearly double that capacity but is also lighter that should effectively double its range or allow for an aircraft that can hold a lot more passengers. Given that its top speed is 276 mph, probably the latter is more likely. https://insideevs.com/news/336485/this-electric-aircraft-features-a-900-kwh-battery-650-mile-range/

So apparently the MacMickmanus report contends that the UK govt report on food inflation is too low.

Thank you for your rebuttal. To back this up and to counter the govt report, will you be sharing with us your report on the prices in your local ASDA?

False. Brexit was inaugurated on Feb 1, 2020. As for all those new trade agreements, economists will tell you that it's a universal economic law that the closer geographically nations are, the more trade that they will engage in with each other. Economists have labeled this phenomenon "gravity". Of course, this doesn't mean that the size of various trading partners is negligible, but rather that proximity will affect the amount of trade. So good luck with all those trade agreements.

You left out the part about a 6% increase.

Wrong question gets a wrong answer.

But we don't actually build volcanoes, do we?

Me, too. By the end of 2021, Brexit had already cost UK households a total of £5.8 billion in higher food bills – new LSE research Leaving the European Union (EU) added an average of £210 to household food bills over the two years to the end of 2021, costing UK consumers a total of £5.8 billion, new research from the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) at the London School of Economics finds. And since low-income households spend a greater share of their income on food than richer families, these Brexit-driven price rises had a proportionately greater impact on the poorest people. A previous report by CEP researchers found that leaving the EU increased the price of food products by six per cent. https://www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-news-from-LSE/2022/l-December-22/By-the-end-of-2021-Brexit-had-already-cost-UK-households-a-total-of-5.8-billion-in-higher-food-bills-–-new-LSE-research

The last major climate conference was held in exotic and glamorous... wait for it... Glasgow. IMO the reason why you and others invoke such things as how the rich and powerful live rather than focus on the science and the actual numerical figures is because it excuses your lack of actual knowledge. Instead of writing IMO you should write instead IMUO. Which stands for "in my uninformed opinion".

What are cities doing to turn themselves into 15 minutes cities?

I hear the parking lot at Walmart is beautiful this time of year.

In other words, you've got nothing.

So they wouldn't have to own a car. So streets wouldn't be congested with traffic. So pedestrians wouldn't be confined to narrow sidewalks because some of the streets would be returned to them.

Wrong question.

I'll give him another tip. The science behind this comes from the 19th century before global warming was even suspected. So no political agenda.

It's in the case of temperatures it's all about rising rate of change. What is so hard to understand about that?

I think it's obvious why it's not enough to produce only one's conclusions. Facts and reasoning are essential. You haven' shared either.

Really? I guess you have a point. Winds and sunlight aren't cheap. They're free. But not abundant? really?

Tenure of new Michigan GOP chair who spread Beyoncé paganism conspiracy theory is off to a rocky start Karamo has claimed in the past that Beyoncé was secretly recruiting Black Americans to Paganism through a new album; that “demonic possession is real” and transferred via “intimate relationships”; and that acceptance of gay and transgender Americans will lead to the acceptance of pedophilia. She has said that the leaders of the Black Lives Matter movement are “Marxist witches”; that the theory of evolution is “one of the biggest scams ran on us in human history”; and that doing drugs is “witchcraft.” She has compared abortion to Pagan child sacrifice. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/11/politics/kfile-michigan-gop-chair-kristina-karamo-comments/index.html After the January 6th United States Capitol attack she called it a false-flag operation, saying that "this is completely Antifa posing as Trump supporters...anybody can buy a MAGA hat and put on a t-shirt and buy a Trump flag”.[10]... Karamo lost to incumbent Democrat Jocelyn Benson. She lost by 14 percentage points and refused to concede the election.[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristina_Karamo

Of course, right now there aren't enough solar and wind power plants. It's not like fingers can be snapped and they magically appear. But in the next 5 years more than 90% of global energy expansion will come from either wind or solar. https://www.iea.org/news/renewable-power-s-growth-is-being-turbocharged-as-countries-seek-to-strengthen-energy-security

You sure about that? https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.GDP.PUSE.KO.PP?locations=DE And I'm not sure what gave you the strange idea that solar and wind aren't abundant? Maybe you don't get outdoors much?

Thanks for the Pavlovian response. Someday you will catch me out not being able to back what I allege. Sadly, for you today is not that day. Richest 1%'s emissions twice that of poorest 50%: analysis The richest one percent of people are responsible for more than twice as much carbon pollution as the poorest half of the world's population—3.1 billion people—new research showed Monday. Despite a sharp decrease in carbon emissions due to the pandemic, the world remains on pace to warm several degrees this century, threatening poor and developing nations with the full gamut of natural disasters and displacements. An analysis led by Oxfam showed that between 1990 and 2015, when annual emissions ballooned 60 percent, that rich nations were responsible for depleting nearly a third of Earth's carbon budget. https://phys.org/news/2020-09-richest-emissions-poorest-analysis.html

Spelling police everyone!! Run for the hills!