Alan Zweibel

Research has shown that gas prices have historically been a key driver in wholesale electricity prices rises. According to Griffith University, the historical correlation between gas prices and electricity prices was 0.9 over 2012-2021 and gas prices influenced 50%-90% of pricing intervals in the NEM. More recent analysis by CEIG also highlighted the correlation between gas prices and electricity prices. Recent outages at coal-fired power stations have also been driving up wholesale prices, as highlighted by AEMO in Q4 2024 and Baringa. When these power stations have outages – which occur more frequently as they age – more expensive gas-powered generation will often be used to fill the gap. https://ieefa.org/resources/whats-really-driving-high-power-bills-hint-its-not-renewables-and-how-can-we-reduce-them

Researchers found that, in the sunniest countries, solar costs as little as €0.023 to produce one unit of power. Even in the UK, which sits 50 degrees north of the equator and is infamous for its dreary weather, solar came out victorious as the cheapest option for “large-scale energy generation”. Due to the price of lithium-ion batteries falling by 89 per cent since 2010, the study also found that making solar-plus-storage systems is now equally as cost-effective as gas power plants. https://www.euronews.com/green/2025/10/08/solar-energy-named-the-worlds-cheapest-power-source-what-it-means-for-europe

There’s a battle underway to win the energy export market between the world’s two largest economies: The US wants the world to buy its fossil fuels, while China wants to sell the world its clean energy technologies. For now, there is a clear winner: China. The country’s exports of electric vehicles, solar panels, batteries and other carbon-cutting technology has been climbing for years. Exports hit a record in August, with $20 billion in products shipped globally, according to a new report from the think tank Ember. https://archive.ph/TcklX

Federal prosecutors investigating former FBI Director James Comey for allegedly making false statements to Congress determined that a central witness in their probe would prove "problematic" and likely prevent them from establishing their case to a jury, sources familiar with their findings told ABC News. Daniel Richman -- a law professor who prosecutors allege Comey authorized to leak information to the press -- told investigators that the former FBI director instructed him not to engage with the media on at least two occasions and unequivocally said Comey never authorized him to provide information to a reporter anonymously ahead of the 2016 election, the sources said. Comey, who was indicted last month on charges of making a false statement and obstruction related to 2020 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, is due to appear in a Virginia courtroom for the first time for his arraignment Wednesday -- but Justice Department officials have privately expressed that the case could quickly unravel under the scrutiny of a federal judge and defense lawyers. https://abcnews.go.com/US/central-witness-undermines-case-james-comey-prosecutors-concluded/story?id=126311648

And Jesus is coming back any day now.

John Durham, the former special counsel who spent nearly four years examining the origins of the FBI investigation into President Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and its alleged ties to Russia, told federal prosecutors investigating James Comey that he was unable to uncover evidence that would support false statements or obstruction charges against the former FBI director, sources familiar with the matter told ABC News. Federal prosecutors in Virginia met remotely with Durham in August to understand the findings of his investigation, according to sources familiar with the meeting, and his conclusions raise the prospect that Durham -- who was once elevated by Trump and other Republicans believing he would prosecute high-level officials involved with the investigation of the president's 2016 campaign -- could now become a key figure aiding Comey's defense. The prosecutors also met with a team of lawyers at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Washington, D.C., who had investigated Comey for years -- including calling him to testify before a grand jury in 2021 -- but were unable to identify any chargeable offenses committed by Comey, sources familiar with the meeting said. https://abcnews.go.com/US/special-counsel-john-durham-undercut-case-james-comey/story?id=126164120

A senior federal prosecutor in Virginia has privately told colleagues she intends to reject efforts to bring criminal charges against New York Attorney General Letitia James, despite mounting pressure from President Donald Trump, according to MSNBC, citing two people familiar with the matter. Elizabeth Yusi, who oversees significant prosecutions in the Norfolk office of the Eastern District of Virginia, has concluded there is no probable cause to pursue a mortgage fraud case against James... James’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, refuted the claim, providing documentation that James had explicitly stated the home was not her primary residence on the loan application and in communications with her broker. https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-virginia-prosecutor-letitia-james-charges-ag-10836008

President Donald Trump is deploying the Justice Department to punish and prosecute his perceived enemies and advance his political agenda. But his color commentary — and that of senior members of his administration — about the cases is threatening to derail them in court. Public comments by Trump and high-ranking officials including Attorney General Pam Bondi and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem have already become flashpoints in high-profile cases https://www.politico.com/news/2025/10/05/trump-administration-prosecutions-00594310

Women who were vaccinated against COVID during pregnancy had a 34% lower risk of severe preterm birth before 28 weeks; vaccination also was associated with a 9% lower risk of neonatal intensive care admission and a 17% lower risk of congenital anomalies. The findings speak "directly to the question that families fear the most -- does vaccination harm the baby?" Zargarzadeh noted during her presentation. "And the answer is clear and evidence-based. Clearly, no." https://www.medpagetoday.com/meetingcoverage/aap/117720 Well, the thing is, Bobby Kennedy knows a guy who knows a guy who says different.

Do I really need to spell out for you how an analogy works?

Stop evading the issue. This is about the ACA.

Yes you're correct. But as you well know, the issue is the continuation of the enhanced subsidies.

I offered you counter evidence to this claim you originally made, and will you can do is make the same claim again. I guess you don't have much use for rationality.

The Democrats are voting against the continuing resolution because they want to extend the ACA. Illegal aliens were never eligible to enrol in the ACA in the first place. Their vote has nothing to do with your claim about illegal aliens and health care.

First off, you missed the point completely. Whether or not that issue was addressed is irrelevant. The fact is that illegal immigrants were already barred. So it would make no difference. And the reason I don't know is that I couldn't find any evidence that your claim was true. Since you made that claim, prove it. Although, even if you do, it wouldn't have changed anything regarding their access to Obamacare.

White House Senses Political Risk on Healthcare Despite Shutdown Bravado President Trump’s team is concerned Republicans will be blamed for allowing healthcare subsidies to expire, increasing costs for millions. Ending subsidies would raise premiums for over 20 million people. White House aides are discussing proposals to extend Affordable Care Act subsidies, but Trump hasn’t yet made a decision. https://archive.ph/IdIpi

Good thing Trump didn't get passed massive tax cuts that would cut revenue and lead to an increase in the deficit.

I don't know whether or not there was anything about barring illegal aliens from enrolling in the ACA or Medicaid. There was certainlly no need to. That because illegal aliens already were not eligible. "Undocumented immigrants are not eligible to enroll in federally funded coverage including Medicaid, CHIP, or Medicare or to purchase coverage through the ACA Marketplaces." https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/key-facts-on-health-coverage-of-immigrants/

Name the bill.

Identify the bill in question. The one you claimed passed with Democratic support.

https://www.kff.org/uninsured/key-facts-about-the-uninsured-population/

Prove it.

Pretty silly argument. Biden didn't mean for them to be temporary, it was just that given the very slim Democratic majorities in the House and Senate it was the best he could do. But even it was, so what? You think it's impossible for the Congress to extend it? There was nothing Trump could do about it? Because if that's the case, how do you explain the fact that provisions of Trump's tax plan from his first term were about to expire but he managed to extend them and even expand their scope. And that's for a bill that is very unpopular with most Americans.

You know, there's a joke that Brazilians tell about their country: Brazil is the land of the future and always will be. When it comes to SMRs that means that 2030 is actually a very unlikely date. Whereas battery technology keeps on improving way ahead of projections.