poker game with friends

poker game with friends Forthright and fearless, the Nobel Prize winner took pot-shots at former prime minister Tony Blair and ex-US president George W Bush among others. His death came after repeated bouts of illness in which images of the increasingly frail former president failed to erase memories of his fierce spirit. Democrat James Earl “Jimmy” Carter Jr swept to power in 1977 with his Trust Me campaign helping to beat Republican president Gerald Ford. Serving as 39th US president from 1977 to 1981, he sought to make government “competent and compassionate” but was ousted by the unstoppable Hollywood appeal of a certain Ronald Reagan. A skilled sportsman, Mr Carter left his home of Plains, Georgia, to join the US Navy, returning later to run his family’s peanut business. A stint in the Georgia senate lit the touchpaper on his political career and he rose to the top of the Democratic movement. But he will also be remembered for a bizarre encounter with a deeply disgruntled opponent. The president was enjoying a relaxing fishing trip near his home town in 1979 when his craft was attacked by a furious swamp rabbit which reportedly swam up to the boat hissing wildly. The press had a field day, with one paper bearing the headline President Attacked By Rabbit. Away from encounters with belligerent bunnies, Mr Carter’s willingness to address politically uncomfortable topics did not diminish with age. He recently said that he would be willing to travel to North Korea for peace talks on behalf of US President Donald Trump. He also famously mounted a ferocious and personal attack on Tony Blair over the Iraq war, weeks before the prime minister left office in June 2007. Mr Carter, who had already denounced George W Bush’s presidency as “the worst in history”, used an interview on BBC radio to condemn Mr Blair for his tight relations with Mr Bush, particularly concerning the Iraq War. Asked how he would characterise Mr Blair’s relationship with Mr Bush, Mr Carter replied: “Abominable. Loyal, blind, apparently subservient. “I think that the almost undeviating support by Great Britain for the ill-advised policies of President Bush in Iraq have been a major tragedy for the world.” Mr Carter was also voluble over the Rhodesia crisis, which was about to end during his presidency. His support for Robert Mugabe at the time generated widespread criticism. He was said to have ignored the warnings of many prominent Zimbabweans, black and white, about what sort of leader Mugabe would be. This was seen by Mr Carter’s critics as “deserving a prominent place among the outrages of the Carter years”. Mr Carter has since said he and his administration had spent more effort and worry on Rhodesia than on the Middle East. He admitted he had supported two revolutionaries in Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo, and with hindsight said later that Mugabe had been “a good leader gone bad”, having at first been “a very enlightened president”. One US commentator wrote: “History will not look kindly on those in the West who insisted on bringing the avowed Marxist Mugabe into the government. “In particular, the Jimmy Carter foreign policy... bears some responsibility for the fate of a small African country with scant connection to American national interests.” In recent years Mr Carter developed a reputation as an international peace negotiator. He won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his commitment to finding peaceful solutions to international conflicts, his work with human rights and democracy initiatives, and his promotion of economic and social programmes. Mr Carter was dispatched to North Korea in August 2008 to secure the release of US citizen Aijalon Mahli Gomes, who had been sentenced to eight years of hard labour after being found guilty of illegally entering North Korea. He successfully secured the release of Mr Gomes. In 2010 he returned to the White House to greet President Barack Obama and discuss international affairs amid rising tensions on the Korean peninsula. Proving politics runs in the family, in 2013 his grandson Jason, a state senator, announced his bid to become governor in Georgia, where his famous grandfather governed before becoming president. He eventually lost to incumbent Republican Nathan Deal. Fears that Mr Carter’s health was deteriorating were sparked in 2015 when he cut short an election observation visit in Guyana because he was “not feeling well”. It would have been Mr Carter’s 39th trip to personally observe an international election. Three months later, on August 12, he revealed he had cancer which had been diagnosed after he underwent surgery to remove a small mass in his liver. Mr Obama was among the well-wishers hoping for Mr Carter’s full recovery after it was confirmed the cancer had spread widely. Melanoma had been found in his brain and liver, and Mr Carter underwent immunotherapy and radiation therapy, before announcing in March the following year that he no longer needed any treatment. In 2017, Mr Carter was taken to hospital as a precaution, after he became dehydrated at a home-building project in Canada. He was admitted to hospital on multiple occasions in 2019 having had a series of falls, suffering a brain bleed and a broken pelvis, as well as a stint to be treated for a urinary tract infection. Mr Carter spent much of the coronavirus pandemic largely at his home in Georgia, and did not attend Joe Biden’s presidential inauguration in 2021, but extended his “best wishes”. Former first lady Rosalynn Carter, the closest adviser to Mr Carter during his term as US president, died in November 2023. She had been living with dementia and suffering many months of declining health. “Rosalynn was my equal partner in everything I ever accomplished,” Mr Carter said in a statement following her death. “She gave me wise guidance and encouragement when I needed it. As long as Rosalynn was in the world, I always knew somebody loved and supported me.”76ers' star Paul George sidelined the next 2 games with bone bruise in left kneeThe Chicago Cubs have acquired three-time All-Star outfielder Kyle Tucker from the Houston Astros in exchange for corner infielder Isaac Paredes, No. 7 Cubs prospect and third baseman Cam Smith and right-handed pitcher Hayden Wesneski, per ESPN's Jeff Passan . Tucker, who turns 28 in January, has posted a per-162 game average of 35 home runs and 111 RBI over his past four seasons. He's also registered an .888 OPS and 145 OPS+ during that time. He's been one of the greatest outfielders in the game, and now he makes his home in Chicago, which looks to make the playoffs for the first time since 2020. There's questions about the ripple effects of this move, namely what it potentially means for outfielder Cody Bellinger, who could be heading out of town, maybe to the New York Yankees. And then there are the Astros, who lose a superstar in Tucker and are trending in the wrong direction after getting swept out of the playoffs in the American League Wild Card Series. This is ultimately another monster move in a dramatic hot stove season to say the least. Here are some winners and losers from the trade. With Tucker now on the Cubs, one can guess that Cody Bellinger's days in Chicago could be numbered. There's already plenty of speculation connecting Bellinger to the New York Yankees, a team his father Clay Bellinger played for from 1999-2001. Jon Heyman of the New York Post and ESPN's Jesse Rogers connected the two. The Yankees have a dire need for an outfielder with Juan Soto leaving for the New York Mets. They also need corner infield help, and Bellinger could be a fit at first as well. Bellinger's left-handed power bat could take great advantage of the short porch in right field as well. It wouldn't be a surprise to see him crack 30-plus home runs in the Bronx. He hasn't hit over 30 since smacking 39 during his 2017 rookie season and adding 47 more during his 2019 NL MVP campaign, but some time in New York could rejuvenate that power. Bellinger has two years and $52.5 million remaining on his contract , so this wouldn't break the bank for the Yanks, who in theory have a lot of money they'd be willing to spend after seeing their $760 million offer to Juan Soto get rejected. Ultimately, a Bellinger-Yankees move here would be a huge win. It also almost seems inevitable to getting done. Sure, the Cubs are paying a price for a player who could very well be a one-year rental. Simply put, though, Tucker is a great ballplayer. Teams shouldn't just let chances to acquire great ballplayers to go by the wayside. Plus, the Cubs haven't won a playoff series since 2017. They had the resources to make a move and try to put an end to that slump. Chicago has the talent in place to make a run. Even though the Cubs went just 83-79 last season, it's not as if they were that far off from competing in the playoffs. Tucker can certainly get them there. Credit ultimately goes to Chicago for making a huge improvement to the team's roster and getting this done. And as for Tucker, he's in a great spot. Not only is he reportedly happy to be a Cub, but he's surrounded by talent that can help vault him to another excellent year. And that could push Tucker to a monster contract in free agency, whether that be with Chicago or someone else. Yes, the Astros are getting talented players back. Paredes, who is entering his age-26 season, has managed a .776 OPS and 119 OPS+ over his past three seasons. His defensive versatility certainly makes him a valuable asset. The 21-year-old Smith was a first-round 2024 draft pick who just posted a 1.004 OPS in 32 games over Single- and Double-A ball. The 26-year-old Wesneski allowed only a .198 batting average in relief last year, and he also struck out 67 batters in 67.2 innings. That all being said, losing Tucker stings. Obviously, the Astros would have preferred signing the impending free agent to a long-term deal and keeping him. That's not happening, though. One can't help but wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the Astros' perennial playoff and World Series contention days. Tucker is gone. Alex Bregman could very well be gone in free agency (although adding Paredes and Smith certainly helps). Pitcher Framber Valdez' name has been thrown around in trade rumors . Former superstar ace/future Hall of Famer Justin Verlander is now a free agent, and his best pitching days are behind him at age 42. Jose Altuve, another future Hall off Famer entering his age-35 season, just posted his lowest OPS (.790) over a full season since 2023. Houston snuck into the playoffs as AL West champions at 88-73 before being swept two games to zero by the Detroit Tigers. At this point, the Astros' first losing season since 2014 is on the table.

None

Fastly Stock Gets IBD Rating Upgrade

Patriots rookie tight end to make NFL debut vs. Dolphins?Yolo County launches bridge initiative as first pilot location for public sector apprenticeship programsSecretaries of State are being told that any outgoings which are not contributing towards one of Labour’s “priorities” must be cut as Rachel Reeves vows to wield “an iron fist against waste.” In letters sent by Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones, departments will be told to brace for “difficult” spending decisions in order to restore trust in the Government’s handling of the public finances. Every pound of departmental spending will be face a “line-by-line review” involving external finance experts from banks and think tanks in order to ensure it represents value for money, the Treasury said. The Chancellor will on Tuesday launch the next round of Government spending, and is expected to warn departments that they “cannot operate in a business-as-usual way when reviewing their budgets for the coming years”. She will insist that areas focused on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s “plan for change”, which includes targets to improve living standards across the country and build 1.5 million homes, must be prioritised. Ms Reeves said: “By totally rewiring how the Government spends money we will be able to deliver our plan for change and focus on what matters for working people. “The previous government allowed millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to go to waste on poor value for money projects. We will not tolerate it; I said I would have an iron grip on the public finances and that means taking an iron fist against waste. “By reforming our public services, we will ensure they are up to scratch for modern day demands, saving money and delivering better services for people across the country. That’s why we will inspect every pound of Government spend, so that it goes to the right places and we put an end to all waste.” Under the Treasury’s plans, departments will ensure budgets are scrutinised by “challenge panels” of external experts including former senior management of Lloyd’s Banking Group, Barclays Bank and the Co-operative Group. These panels, which will also involve think tanks, academics and the private sector, will advise on which spending “is or isn’t necessary”, the ministry said. The Treasury said work has already begun, with an evaluation of the £6.5 million spent on a scheme that placed social workers in schools finding “no evidence of positive impact on social care outcomes”. “Departments will be advised that where spending is not contributing to a priority, it should be stopped,” it said. “Although some of these decisions will be difficult, the Chancellor is clear that the public must have trust in the Government that it is rooting out waste and that their taxes are being spent on their priorities.” Ms Reeves had already announced efficiency and productivity savings of 2% across departments in her autumn budget as she seeks to put the public finances on a firmer footing. In a speech in east London, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden hinted at a further squeeze. “At the Budget the Chancellor demanded efficiency and productivity savings of 2% across departments – and there will be more to come,” he said. “As we launch the next phase of the spending review at its heart must be reform of the state in order to do a better job for the public.”

Australia’s economic future will be at risk if we stop the wind and solar construction to build nuclear. Big energy-intensive manufacturing industries such as aluminium smelters would likely be forced to close, and the risk of blackouts from forcing coal generators to stay on line would be huge. Wind, solar and firming can clearly do the job. Every hurdle from reliability to inertia has been overcome. There is no need and no reason to change course. Certainly economics is not a reason. To summaries, building a nuclear industry in Australia: • Makes blackouts more likely by forcing coal stations, already expensive to maintain, that require government support and are increasingly unreliable to go for much longer. The idea of replacing the coal plants with gas while we wait is likely not very realistic, largely because gas plants themselves are expensive and hard to permit and because if asked to run in shoulder mode they are not very efficient and require lots of gas. And right now we are already looking at importing LNG. If the nuclear plants are 5, 10 or 15 years late, as is entirely possible, it would require heroic assumptions to see the coal fleet managing the gap. More to the point it’s a completely avoidable and unnecessary risk. Australia is well set on its transition path. There are some inevitable cost up and downs but no show stoppers have been identified. Every hurdle from reliability to inertia has been overcome. There is no need and no reason to change course. Certainly economics is not a reason. • Increases emission costs by between even in the very unlikely event the plants are built on time as compared to the present ISP. • The nuclear plants stand a good chance of being well over budget and late. That’s because: ° Globally that is often but not always the case. By and large the nuclear industry is one of the most likely global industries to be late and over budget. There is no real nuclear expertise in Australia; ° It will have to be more or less forced on an industry set on a different course; ° It will likely be government owned and developed and the record on that in Australia is poor; ° In general for most capital intensive industries there is an Australia cost premium relative to global averages. This in the end will disadvantage us compared to other countries in terms of the cost of energy. • Likely will destroy the value of CER (consumer energy resources – rooftop solar, home batteries and EVs) in Australia. • Will result in the temporary halt in the transition to a firmed VRE system which is already 20 years down the track with a penetration rate of say 50% within 18 months. • Equally the LNP and by comparison Frontier don’t appear to have done the work or to understand the demand forecasts. The LNP bleat on about EVs, but the real differences are hydrogen, large industrial loads and business demand. One suspects that the aluminium industry in Australia will die if it has to wait for nuclear. • Finally the old concept of baseload is changing, but in my opinion firming costs are cheaper the bigger the portfolio. This implies firming should sit at least with a large gentailer or possibly with a State or even Federal Govt. The biggest, by far, reason for the electricity industry to push back against the ideological LNP Nuclear plan is its far, far too risky. Australia has a plan to decarbonise. It’s not a perfect plan, no plan survives first contact, but it’s capable of and is in fact being achieved. We are roughly already at 40% VRE. We have at least 20 years experience at developing and integrating wind, solar, behind the meter assets and batteries. We know the issues around transmission and social license and cost and reliability. There are well developed plans for each issue and a wealth of industry finance and expertise. The assets to take us from 40% VRE to 50% are already under construction, some are just starting to enter service. The insurance finance to add another 12 GW of VRE and 4 GW of firming assets (essentially batteries) is already either awarded or in tender through the CIS. The LNP wants to bring this to a crashing halt, keep our few, increasingly ageing and unreliable coal stations going for another 20 years while it starts up an industry in which Australia has zero comparative advantage and zero experience. Only in politics could conmen say things with such a straight face. The risk of the coal stations failing is very high. Other stations like Eraring have full ash dams. Yallourn is already on Government support, Vales Point and particularly Mt Piper have coal supply issues. Gladstone Power Station in Queensland is ready to close. And so on. It simply isn’t prudent for Australia to depend on these stations as a group to do another 20 years. It’s a completely unacceptable risk that politicians want to expose Australians to, purely for the sake of politics. I could, but won’t. go into the politics. It is quite sufficient to point out the risk, and really I could close this note at this point completely confident that the argument is made. The LNP might argue that they would build more gas stations. To start with they take time and planning and secondly: Where is the gas? Wherever it comes from it will be expensive. By all means build a peaker or two but it’s a sideshow to the main game, which is bulk energy and shifting it through time and space. For what it’s worth. the following figure shows the closing of the Crocodile jaws. The top jaw is coal and gas generation and the bottom jaw is wind, solar and hydro. The jaws didn’t close much this year, due to wind drought and some utility solar price constrained off but they surely will next year as about 2.5 GW of wind currently in commissioning gets to full production and some more solar farms as well. In addition there is 6 GW, count them, 6 GW of batteries under construction. Using a 180 day moving average allows the informed view to see the Winter v Spring Summer impact. Like many another analyst I’m prepared to look at any technology on its merits. If Frontier Economics had any interest at all in bringing the industry to their point of view then the report is an abysmal failure. Its failings are so obvious that it hardly needs me to do a me to, but I have. As I’ve stated before, a presumption of bias can be attached to the report for three reasons. There are lots of estimates of the cost of carbon. These range from the Gillard Government’s cost which the LNP revoked adjusted to $ of today which Frontier states would be about $40/t, through to the European price presently around Euro 68 = $A113/t, through to a major, multi author estimate published in Nature with a mean of $US185/t = $A 296/t (but the range is US$ 44 to $US 413/t) to the USA official estimate of $US 51 =81.54 AUD $A 81/t through to the AER estimate of $A 75/t in 2025 rising to $221 by 2040. And finally there is the set of numbers adopted by the AER which rise strongly over time and which I have used Frontier could have used any of these numbers, but they don’t. The extra carbon emissions are not regarded as a cost worth considering in Frontier’s numbers! On my numbers the NPV of the increased emissions is between $57 bn and $72bn. The method for calculating this was: I might add that the social cost of carbon is normally calculated with discount rates of 2%-4% given that the damage is long lasting but I haven’t considered the methodological issues around that here. The overall point remains that there can be no excuse whatsoever for Frontier ignoring the cost difference. Frontier could have used some other carbon price estimate, but there is no doubt that carbon emissions have a cost, that is why we decarbonising and not considering that cost renders the Frontier exercise fairly useless. In an AFR article, Frontier’s Danny Price states that the AER carbon cost does not represent the “economic cost”, and produces not a shred of evidence to support this view. The comment seems to me to be revealing of the underlying philosophy of Frontier that global warming is overstated as an issue. Some of the justified criticism of Frontier is in the way it adds up “real costs”. For instance: However, since the use of “real costs” for investment analysis is in any event fatally flawed from the outset and contrary to the laws of Finance, and because I think Price knows that perfectly well, I tend not to worry about methodological flaws of “real costs”. Equally, Steve Hamilton in his excellent noted that AEMO incurs its capital costs from today onwards but the the nuclear costs are only start to be incurred from 2035. In NPV terms costs that are incurred later have a lower NPV than costs that incurred earlier, and Steve noted that if we just compared costs in 2050 there is only a 12% difference between the nuclear and AEMO difference. However, in NPV terms, if we allow for the difference in carbon costs, these differences matter less. In effect Frontier defers capital spending improving NPV but incurs carbon costs which reduce NPV. It’s just that Frontier doesn’t count the carbon cost. Also, once the capital spending on VRE has been made the annual operating costs fall sharply compared to existing coal. Wind opex, for instance, is around A$10/MWh compared to say A$50/MWh for existing black coal, maybe less for brown coal. However, in my opinion it’s unlikely that AEMO captures all the maintenance capital expenditure required on end of life coal assets that are not just end of life but also have to be ever more flexible, ever more capable of ramping. I won’t take the time to illustrate this issue, but just look at the costs being incurred by AGL, and the Government support offered to Yallourn and Eraring. Frontier estimates a nuclear cost today in Australia of A$10,000/Kw, which then falls by 1% per year from today. So the A$10,000 is effectively a misleading number. In that Frontier’s estimate of cost is actually in real terms as Hamilton calculates about A$8,500/KW in 2040 and continues to fall. I don’t have any problem with learning rates in an industry: Solar, wind, batteries and many, many other technologies have a learning rate, representing the reduction in unit costs for a doubling of installed capacity. But I think any reasonable person would question whether it’s appropriate to apply a learning rate to an industry that hasn’t even started in Australia and where the year 0 number is still very much in question. And, to the best of my knowledge, there hasn’t been much of a global learning rate in nuclear, although there may be one in China. In fact academic articles suggest that the experience curve for nuclear depends on the time and country. One oft cited reference is “How Big Things Get Done” by Betty Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner, 2023. A key figure from that book is: The horizontal axis represents on time, expectations, further to the right is more on time, the vertical axis shows on budget. industries in the bottom left quadrant tend to have “fat tails” which means that the outcomes vary. Perhaps in China nuclear goes well, but in the UK or the USA it goes badly. On average it goes badly. Solar and wind go well. The figure is based, I believe on data summarised in the following table. The fact that olympics and nuclear have cost over runs most of the time surely cannot be a surprise to anyone. To me this is so intuitively obvious as to not need stating. Wind and solar projects take a couple of years to build, the technologies are modular, capable of being repeated and relatively small scale. Even a 1 GW wind farm represents 150 concrete pouring, each more or less the same, 150 turbines erected each the same way and so on. And Australia has done 1000s of turbines already. By contrast, Lucas Heights notwithstanding, Australia has absolutely zero nuclear experience or expertise, nuclear plants require much more planning, contracts that inevitably will need to be renegotiated and so on. The mind truly boggles. And in the end we would have zero comparative advantage. Whatever Australia’s nuclear cost it wont be lower than anyone else’s. How could it be? Modern nuclear plants with higher levels of automation might employ 500-800 people. According to a rough industry source about 50% -70% of those jobs will be in operations, maintenance and technical support. Roughly 25%-50% of the people will be engineers of one kind of another. Uranium mining and processing is not going to be taking place where nuclear plants are located. The idea that coal miners will down tools and suddenly start working in a nuclear plant is something only an LNP ideologue could truly believe. Of course, like any business, there will be second order GDP multiplier effects. However, I think it’s reasonable to assume that both the primary and secondary GDP impacts of building out regional REZs will be higher per $ of capital expenditure because by and large they come off a lower base. Building out the Central West Orana renewable energy zone in NSW will have major impacts, not all good, and not all sustainable on the regional economy. But for ever after the regional economy will have a more diversified industry base that, in my opinion, will enable it to better withstand the vicissitudes of the Australian climate and its ever more extreme drought and flood cycles. As far as I know the electricity industry in Australia has expressed zero interest in nuclear and obviously some parts of the industry that are busy building wind and solar will be actively opposed. Clearly this in itself is likely to raise costs. That is, the nuclear plants will have to be forced on the industry to a greater or lesser extent. Again although the plans are very vague the understanding is that they will Goverment funded and owned. Leaving aside all questions of ideology, in my opinion having the Goverment manage the program rather than industry means that there will be less expertise at almost every stage. I could rant on about this, the mind truly does boggle a bit at the possible negative outcomes, but perhaps it is sufficient to say that having the Goverment step into this area where it has no expertise raises the odds of cost and delay outcome substantially. Frontier provided no shapes to their demand or supply forecasts, just the annual totals. This has led to questions on how 13 GW of flat supply will impact the output of other fuels. Price stated that once the 13 GW was forced in the system, it was “re optimised” and the capacity factors, 90% in the case of nuclear, are a model output. And to be fair there is presently must run coal generation in the system which effectively provides a level of flat supply. That level continues to decline, and at least in Spring, the must run nature of coal already forces prices below zero and results in utility solar spillage. As to what fuel gets spilled that is a matter so far of policy and economics. Utility solar, and wind contracts can be written so that negative prices are not covered, the CIS has such a contract. Each contract for differences may have its own wording and since I don’t see any of them I’m cautious about generalising. AEMO provides via the ISP, as Frontier does not, half hourly demand traces by region and POE (10% and 50%). ITK has spent more time than I care to admit looking at these demand traces over the past four years and puzzling over what and what not is included in say “OPSO modelling”. A good starting document is: and for the half hourly data we want Section 6 starting at p57. AEMO is thorough with its demand forecasting, but that does not make the outcomes reliable, that’s the point really, some things are just hard to forecast no matter how thorough. Still, I find its well worth reading that Section 6 several times, because as Dylan sang way back in the early 1960s “dont criticise what you cant understand”. And this stuff ain’t that easy to understand. The following figure shows the shape of average daily demand in 2050 for both the Progressive and Stepchange scenarios with the horizontal red line showing average nuclear output at 90% capacity factor. It’s fair to say that rooftop supply is always a bit out of place on a demand figure but that is the way its done. Operational demand is gross demand less rooftop supply. Time of day averages are just averages. Particularly in the step change case in the ISP view of the world much of the lunch time surplus goes to charging storage to meet some elements of demand in non solar hours. The way I’ve constructed this figure in the Progressive case nuclear replaces virtually all the exiting rooftop and a significant portion of utility supply. In the Step Change scenario it’s still cutting out quite a bit. And that’s out in 2050 when in either Progressive or Step demand is a lot higher than in 2025. It seems intuitive that if nuclear is supplying say 50% of operational demand (more in the Progressive case) that some other sources of supply are going to be running at fairly low capacity factors. However, Frontier’s modelling apparently doesn’t show that.. This remains an unresolved issue. The numbers appear to show that with nuclear meeting 50% of Progressive Scenario demand in 2050 that capacity factors of other fuels will be impacted even with storage demand included. Frontier says this is not really the case and they have the gold standard PLEXOS modelling to prove it. One potential path to reconciliation would be for Frontier to show more results including those with behind the meter PV and storage and some average daily shapes, but I’m not holding my breath. Frontier did such a poor job the first time round the wise course for them would be to retire from the field and not give their many critics more oxygen. I spent time this year working with AEMO’s demand forecasts. In my view not enough attention is paid to demand as virtually all the mainstream focus is on supply and or price. But price represents the intersection between supply and demand, and the primary way to decarbonise an economy is to decarbonise electricity and then electrify other energy sources. AEMO makes the job hard because their demand portal would, I suspect, confuse even Edward Teller. At the risk of a minor digression, the Progressive demand case assumes that most large industrial loads (LIL) close around 2030. That would be the Tomago and Boyne Island and Portland aluminium smelters. Is that really what the LNP wants to happen? Here are the LIL forecasts for the two scenarios and then the state by state forecast for the Progressive scenario. Assuming, rarely a good decision, that I’ve successfully navigated AEMO’s demand portal and the recut and supposedly easier to follow analysis I show at then I get the following main item comparison between he various demand scenarios in 2050. Note that sum EV load is cotained in the res_sum row below. Nevertheless the point remains that talking about EVs maybe good politics for the LNP, even in Ted O’Brien’s Sunshine coast electorate where there are many EVs but it doest go to the major differences in the scenarios. Ignoring Green Energy Exports (everyone does) you can see that in fact the main differences between Progressive Change and Central are: Traditionally energy intensive businesses in Australia, primarily aluminium smelters, negotiate heavily discounted electricity prices with State Govt’s in return for investment in smelters. Traditionally, there has been a role for base load in the large industrial loads sector. However, in my opinion, the way to provide the firmed power has changed and the same result can be achieved, arguably at a lower cost, especially when carbon emissions are accounted for. As of today the State Govt contracts have often been transferred to private entities eg to AGL and other generators in Victoria in respect of the Portland smelter. However, there is no way the private sector is going to incur losses to support an aluminium smelter. The smelters remain a big industry collectively consuming around 9%-10% of electricity (the share relative to operational supply is higher). The relevance of the term “baseload” is best understood in the context of say an aluminium smelter which in Australia typically wants a flat supply, that is a supply every half hour of about 0.9 GW. Traditionally in Australia a coal generator backed up by contracts in the market and a retailers general supply portfolio was the the way it was done. For instance in QLD the Gladstone Power Station is 42% owned by Rio, in Victoria Portland smelter traditionally contracted with Loy Yang A, although that has now changed. In Tasmania the Bell Bay smelter, surely one of the older smelters in the world, contracted with Hydropower of Tasmania. In each case though there is a State Government providing a subsidy one way or another in the background. As the coal stations go away, several questions arise, but the one of relevance here is how to provide the smelter with its flat load without a coal station. So far the emerging answer seems to be that the smelter will provide the VRE itself, but will depend on the State Govt to provide the firming. For instance in February 2024 Rio announced a deal to buy 80% of the 1.4 GW Bungaban wind project and 100% of the 1.1 GW Calliope solar farm, but so far Rio has not announced any firming of this energy. The output of the two projects should be around 6 TWh per year – enough to power most of the smelter when generating. Clearly there will be too much generation at some points and too little at others, and the missing link is the management of the difference. What it shows to my way of thinking is a requirement for all the parties to think beyond a simple contract for difference whereby Rio buys power from the market and the QLD Govt subsidies the purchases. Now there is a more complex situation seemingly requiring the State and Rio to work more closely together. Ultimately, in a renewables based system, the rule is that the bigger the portfolio the lower the firming cost. That is the cost of firming total QLD supply is lower than the cost of firming just the smelter. According to the oldest rule of finance that risk should go to the party best placed to manage it, it’s therefore entirely reasonable for QLD to carry the firming cost. My point here is that Rio and the State Govt don’t need to think about “Baseload coal” or “Baseload nuclear” – the need is to understand the best way to firm QLD’s excellent solar and wind resource and to allow Rio to access that firmed cost.Megyn Kelly unleashed an attack against Caitlin Clark after the WNBA star talked about ways white privilege seeps into women’s basketball during an interview published in Time magazine this week. The former Fox News personality took to X, formerly Twitter, to spew inflammatory remarks about Clark’s comments. In the interview, Clark said that she recognized her privilege as a white person in the league and that it’s important to elevate Black players. The publication had named the Indiana Fever player its 2024 Athlete of the Year on Tuesday. “Look at this. She’s on the knee all but apologizing for being white and getting attention,” Kelly wrote on X . “The self-flagellation. The ‘oh pls pay attention to the black players who are REALY the ones you want to celebrate.’ Condescending. Fake. Transparent. Sad.” But Clark never apologized for being white. She acknowledged that Black WNBA players — who make up the majority of players in the league — haven’t received the same level of mainstream attention, opportunities or coverage that she has. When reports emerged in the spring that Clark was nearing a reported eight-figure Nike deal, many questioned why the league’s most valuable player, A’ja Wilson, who is Black, hadn’t gotten a signature shoe deal . (Wilson announced a shoe deal with Nike the following month.) People have also called attention to Clark’s growing list of endorsement deals and the rookie’s perceived marketability in a league that’s predominantly Black. But the Fever star doesn’t seem to be bothered by Kelly’s criticism. She told sportscaster Maria Taylor in an interview on Wednesday that she blocks out the “noise” and that she’s “comfortable in my own skin” when asked to address Kelly’s remarks. Here’s what Kelly’s missing with her social media comments. In the Time interview, Clark celebrated her own talents, accomplishments and influence in women’s basketball, as well as the accolades and opportunities that have followed. But she also recognized that two things can be true: She is an outstanding basketball player, and talented Black players who have built the league should get more recognition than they do. “I want to say I’ve earned every single thing, but as a white person, there is privilege,” Clark said. “A lot of those players in the league that have been really good have been Black players. This league has kind of been built on them.” “The more we can appreciate that, highlight that, talk about that, and then continue to have brands and companies invest in those players that have made this league incredible, I think it’s very important,” she added. “I have to continue to try to change that.” “The more we can elevate Black women, that’s going to be a beautiful thing,” Clark said in the interview. Clark has undeniably had an immense effect on women’s basketball. She became the all-time leading scorer in NCAA Division 1 basketball during her time playing college basketball with the Iowa Hawkeyes. And when South Carolina’s women’s basketball team defeated Iowa in the NCAA women’s championship game in April, South Carolina coach Dawn Staley credited Clark for “lifting up” women’s basketball. Clark, who was the No. 1 pick in the 2024 WNBA draft, is also often credited for playing a significant role in the WNBA’s recent record-breaking attendance and TV ratings — dubbed the “Caitlin Clark effect.” But Black players have largely built and grown the league since the first WNBA game was played in 1997, with many groundbreaking moments since. In 2002, Lisa Leslie became the first WNBA player to dunk in a game . In 2008, Candace Parker was the first player to get MVP and Rookie of the Year in the same season. In 2017, Rebekkah Brunson set a WNBA record winning five titles. WNBA players have also been leaders in championing LBGTQ rights and bringing racial injustice protests to professional sports. In 2014, the WNBA became the first professional sports league to launch an official Pride campaign . Ajhanai “AJ” Keaton , an assistant professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who studies race and gender marginalization, told the New Pittsburgh Courier in September that she believes the heightened coverage surrounding Clark has to do with race and gender politics. “I believe that race is a guiding politic,” she said. “But I think it’s also gender, and I think we can’t ignore the way race and gender politics play into this. Caitlin Clark being a white woman, right? Being a white woman from the Midwest, being heterosexual, representing something to white America, right?” People have also called out the fact that masculine-presenting WNBA players have been excluded from certain sponsorship opportunities. Victoria Jackson , a sports historian and clinical associate professor at Arizona State University, explained to The Associated Press in May that it’s important to dissect why Clark has been labeled a “generational talent.” “Whenever we’re making those cases, I immediately think, well, who are the other generational talents we’ve had? And I think too often the athletes that could be placed in that category who have been Black women have not had that sort of gushing attention,” Jackson said. “And especially the kind of general public, crossover saturation that Caitlin Clark has had.” “There are overlapping, intersecting reasons for why that is. But I think we can’t not think about it if the goal here is to have equitable treatment of the athletes in the sport,” Jackson said. Clark herself has recognized the impact Black WNBA players have made in the league. During her appearance on “Saturday Night Live” in April, she took a moment to honor five Black WNBA greats: Sheryl Swoopes, Cynthia Cooper, Lisa Leslie, Dawn Staley and Maya Moore, whom she called her “basketball hero.” And in recent years, Black WNBA players, such as Wilson, Chicago Sky player Angel Reese and Phoenix Mercury player Brittney Griner, have also notably helped popularize the sport. Black players say they’ve been receiving more racist abuse online — and it needs attention In September, Connecticut Sun player Alyssa Thomas and coach Stephanie White called out the unprecedented number of racist and homophobic comments they said players have faced since WNBA viewership increased this past season. Thomas, who is Black, said that the attacks had mostly come from the Fever fan base. “I think that in my 11-year career, I never experienced the racial comments like from the Indiana Fever fan base,” she said, adding “basketball is headed in a great direction, but we don’t want fans that are going to degrade us and call us racial things.” Reese, who has often been pitted against Clark and villainized in narratives about their sports rivalry , has similarly called out the racist vitriol over the past few years. She wrote in a post on X in September that she’s been told to “save the tears” and “stop playing victim” anytime she’s spoken out about the attacks. The WNBA released a statement at the time saying the league “will not tolerate racist, derogatory, or threatening comments.” Clark has also previously condemned racist comments from WNBA fans. During a news conference in September, she called the situation “definitely upsetting.” Other news outlets have retreated behind paywalls. At HuffPost, we believe journalism should be free for everyone. Would you help us provide essential information to our readers during this critical time? We can't do it without you. Can't afford to contribute? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read. You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again . We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you. Whether you give once or many more times, we appreciate your contribution to keeping our journalism free for all. You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again . We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you. Whether you give just one more time or sign up again to contribute regularly, we appreciate you playing a part in keeping our journalism free for all. Already contributed? Log in to hide these messages. “Those aren’t fans; those are trolls,” she said. Related From Our PartnerReuters says it has seen the proposals the Trump transition team is recommending for the transportation sector, and they include taking the portions of the Inflation Reduction Act that deal with electric vehicles and EV charging infrastructure, ripping them out by the roots, and throwing them in the trash. In addition, the transition team is recommending sweeping changes to strengthen measures that will blocking cars, components, and battery materials from China. The recommendations, which have not been previously reported, come as the US electric vehicle transition stalls and China’s heavily subsidized EV industry continues to surge in part because of its superior battery supply chain. On the campaign trail, Trump vowed to ease regulations on gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles and roll back what he called Biden’s EV mandate. It was never a mandate at all, but the truth and MAGAlomaniacs have a fraught relationship that allows them to say anything they want and their so-called base will lap it up like a cat with sweet cream. Being incurious and willing to accept every lie and distortion you hear is a hallmark of the Red Hat squadron. The transition team also recommends imposing tariffs on all battery materials sourced from anywhere outside the United States and then negotiating individual exemptions with allies, the document shows. Taken together, Reuters says, the recommendations are a stark departure from Biden administration policy, which sought to balance encouraging a domestic battery supply chain, separate from China, with a rapid EV transition. The transition team plan would take the money now flowing into building charging stations and making EVs affordable and redirecting it into national defense priorities, including securing supplies and materials needed to manufacture batteries from sources that have not been tainted with the stain of Chinese technology. It’s the old “yellow peril” trope updated for the 21st century. The Trump transition team has been assigned the task of crafting a strategy for swift implementation of new automotive policies. The team also calls for eliminating the Biden administration’s $7500 tax credit for consumer EV purchases. If implemented, the changes could substantially impact the production and sale of electric cars in the US at a time when many legacy automakers, including General Motors, Ford, and Stellantis, have committed more than $100 billion to the EV revolution. Hyundai and Kia have also introduced a wide range of electric cars to the US market. Cutting government EV support could also hurt sales of Tesla, the dominant seller of electric cars in the US, but Elon Musk — who spent more than a quarter of a billion dollars helping to elect Trump — has said that losing subsidies would hurt rivals more than Tesla. Apparently the great and powerful Musk has forgotten that he was once the champion for electric cars and is happy to see his rivals — and the environment — suffer if it means more billions in his pocket. The transition team calls for clawing back whatever funds remain from Biden’s $7.5 billion plan to build charging stations and shifting the money to battery minerals processing and the “national defense supply chain and critical infrastructure.” While batteries, minerals, and other EV components are “critical to defense production,” electric vehicles “and charging stations are not,” the document says. The Defense Department — which will soon be headed by Ron DeSantis, who knows as much about running the military as most people know about nuclear fusion — in recent years has highlighted US strategic vulnerabilities because of China’s dominance of the mining and refining of critical minerals, including graphite and lithium needed for batteries and rare earth metals used in both EV motors and military aircraft. A 2021 government report said the US military faces “escalating power requirements” for weapons and communication equipment, among other technologies. “Assured sources of critical minerals and materials” are “critical to U.S. national security,” the report found. Trump transition team spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said voters gave Trump a mandate to deliver on campaign promises, including stopping government attacks on gasoline-powered cars. “When he takes office, President Trump will support the auto industry, allowing space for both gas powered cars and electric vehicles,” Leavitt said in a statement. Automakers globally have been shifting toward electric vehicles in part to comply with stricter government limits on climate-damaging tailpipe pollution. But the transition team recommendations would allow automakers to produce more gasoline vehicles by rolling back emissions and fuel economy standards championed by the Biden administration. The transition team proposes shifting those regulations back to 2019 levels, which would allow an average of about 25% more emissions per vehicle mile than the current 2025 limits, and the average fuel economy to be about 15% lower. That is wonderful news for the oil companies that paid big bucks to get Trump elected, but not for people with lungs, as the fine particulates created when gasoline and diesel are burned can cross directly into the bloodstream, causing untold health issues, especially for young children and older Americans. Naturally, the proposal also recommends blocking California from setting its own more restrictive vehicle emissions standards, which more than a dozen other states have adopted. Trump barred California from setting tougher requirements during his first term, a policy that Biden reversed. California has asked the Environmental Protection Agency for another waiver to incorporate a stronger set of requirements beginning in 2026. Those requirements would eventually lead to all vehicles sold in California to be electric, plug-in hybrids, or hydrogen -powered by 2035. The current EPA has not yet approved California’s request, but this week the US Supreme Court dismissed an appeal by several Red States to force their worldview on the citizens of California. Nothing says “states rights” like barring another state from exercising its best judgement about what is best for its citizens. Many of the transition team proposals appear aimed at encouraging domestic battery production, primarily for defense-related interests, Reuters says. Others appear aimed at protecting automakers, even those producing EVs, in the United States. The proposals include: Instituting tariffs on “EV supply chain” imports including batteries, critical minerals, and charging components. The proposal viewed by Reuters said the administration should use Section 232 tariffs, which target national security threats, to limit imports of such products. Waiving environmental reviews to speed up “federally funded EV infrastructure projects,” including battery recycling and production, charging stations, and critical mineral manufacturing. Expanding export restrictions on EV battery technology to adversarial nations. Providing support for exports of U.S.-made EV batteries through the Export-Import Bank of the United States. Using tariffs as a “negotiating tool” to open foreign markets to U.S. auto exports, including EVs. Eliminating requirements that federal agencies purchase EVs. A Biden policy requires all federal acquisitions of cars and smaller trucks to be zero-emission vehicles by the end of 2027. Ending DOD programs aimed at purchasing or developing electric military vehicles. In addition, the Trumpies intend to cancel the contract the US Postal Service signed with Oshkosh Defense to manufacture battery-electric postal vehicles . Can’t have postal workers enjoying better health or postal patrons benefiting from lower operating costs when there are oil companies to protect, now can we? They bought and paid for this new government and expect to reap their just rewards. You might think most Americans would be upset about rules that will allow new cars to get worse fuel economy. People lose their minds if the price of gas goes up a nickel, but apparently they don’t care a flying fig leaf if they have to buy more gas to keep their chariots running. Logic and common sense have no role to play in the deliberations of the incoming administration or its supporters. CleanTechnica's Comment Policy LinkedIn WhatsApp Facebook Bluesky Email Reddit

Mysterious googly eyes go viral after appearing on public art in OregonThree-game skid over, NC State faces winless Coppin StateEli Lilly announces $15 billion buyback, dividend hikeStatement By The Prime Minister On The Passing Of Jimmy Carter

Cabinet ministers have been warned they must find more savings in their departments as the Chancellor said “every pound” of Government spending will be scrutinised in a major budget review. Secretaries of State are being told that any outgoings which are not contributing towards one of Labour’s “priorities” must be cut as Rachel Reeves vows to wield “an iron fist against waste.” In letters sent by Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones, departments will be told to brace for “difficult” spending decisions in order to restore trust in the Government’s handling of the public finances. Every pound of departmental spending will be face a “line-by-line review” involving external finance experts from banks and think tanks in order to ensure it represents value for money, the Treasury said. The Chancellor will on Tuesday launch the next round of Government spending, and is expected to warn departments that they “cannot operate in a business-as-usual way when reviewing their budgets for the coming years”. She will insist that areas focused on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s “plan for change”, which includes targets to improve living standards across the country and build 1.5 million homes, must be prioritised. Ms Reeves said: “By totally rewiring how the Government spends money we will be able to deliver our plan for change and focus on what matters for working people. “The previous government allowed millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to go to waste on poor value for money projects. We will not tolerate it; I said I would have an iron grip on the public finances and that means taking an iron fist against waste. “By reforming our public services, we will ensure they are up to scratch for modern day demands, saving money and delivering better services for people across the country. That’s why we will inspect every pound of Government spend, so that it goes to the right places and we put an end to all waste.” Under the Treasury’s plans, departments will ensure budgets are scrutinised by “challenge panels” of external experts including former senior management of Lloyd’s Banking Group, Barclays Bank and the Co-operative Group. These panels, which will also involve think tanks, academics and the private sector, will advise on which spending “is or isn’t necessary”, the ministry said. The Treasury said work has already begun, with an evaluation of the £6.5 million spent on a scheme that placed social workers in schools finding “no evidence of positive impact on social care outcomes”. “Departments will be advised that where spending is not contributing to a priority, it should be stopped,” it said. “Although some of these decisions will be difficult, the Chancellor is clear that the public must have trust in the Government that it is rooting out waste and that their taxes are being spent on their priorities.” Ms Reeves had already announced efficiency and productivity savings of 2% across departments in her autumn budget as she seeks to put the public finances on a firmer footing. In a speech in east London, Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden hinted at a further squeeze. “At the Budget the Chancellor demanded efficiency and productivity savings of 2% across departments – and there will be more to come,” he said. “As we launch the next phase of the spending review at its heart must be reform of the state in order to do a better job for the public.”Games on a college basketball schedule don't contrast much more than the two NC State has this week. The Wolfpack (6-3) host Coppin State (0-10) on Tuesday in Raleigh, N.C., then hit the road to challenge No. 10 Kansas on Saturday. NC State enters its unusual week after snapping a three-game skid with an 84-74 overtime win at home Saturday against Florida State in its Atlantic Coast Conference opener. Transfers Marcus Hill and Dontrez Styles each had their season high, scoring 23 and 21 points, respectively. They scored 13 of NC State's 14 points in overtime. "Dontrez Styles was tremendous," Wolfpack coach Kevin Keatts said. "In the second half, he made play after play." Hill, who was the top scorer last year at Bowling Green (20.5 points per game), and Styles, who was the second-leading scorer last year at Georgetown (12.8 ppg), combined to hit 14 of 25 shots and pull down 11 rebounds. The win followed defeats to then-No. 13 Purdue and BYU, both by double-digit margins, in the Rady Children's Invitational and a 63-59 loss to Texas in the SEC/ACC Challenge. "The little things that impact the game are defending, making free throws and blocking out," Keatts said. "We handled that much better than we did against Texas." Coppin State arrives in Raleigh on a 23-game losing streak dating to January -- the longest current run of futility in Division I. Each of the Eagles' losses this season have come by double-digit margins, though they have been more competitive lately, falling to Baltimore rival Loyola (Md.) 68-57 and at Wagner 65-52 last week. Julius Ellerbe III has been one of Coppin's most reliable players lately, scoring a combined 20 points in the last two games. He had 16 points and 12 rebounds in a loss to George Mason last month. Teammate Peter Oduro recorded a double-double, with 16 points and 10 rebounds, in last month's loss at Saint Joseph's. "These things take time," Coppin State second-year coach Larry Stewart said. "It takes time to establish your culture. It takes time to get the right players in your system." --Field Level Media

( ) - When I heard about AI glasses that let you "see" what people are saying, I was skeptical. But after trying them on, I was proven wrong. The give you closed captions for the real world. The right lens has a small, transparent display that shows you conversations, but you can still see the people you're talking to. "The mission is... using the technology to help others," said Ting Chen, vice president of marketing for the company behind the glasses. The glasses are lightweight but a bit thicker than your typical spectacles. They connect wirelessly to a smartphone, which uses the Hearview app to listen to what people are saying. Those conversations are transcribed in near real time using AI, and then the words are displayed on the tiny see through screen. The system seems to be very accurate and works with 13 languages - and although there is a bit of a delay, it won't necessarily matter if you can't hear the words being spoken out loud. The glasses come in one style but can be outfitted with a magnetic sunglass clip or prescription lenses. The battery lasts about 7 hours on a charge. The result is impressive and potentially very useful for the hard of hearing. "So far, overwhelmingly positive. The folks who have purchased the glasses, used it in the community, they loved it," said Chen. The downside? The price. Hearview glasses retail for about $2,000, but are often on sale for less. The company says the price could come down as the tech evolves. Various other big tech firms are working on glasses that could perform similar functionality - including Apple's Vision Pro, Meta's Project Orion and Snapchat's Spectacles. However, all of those solutions are either still in development or, in the case of Vision Pro, too bulky and pricey to be used on the go. "This is a very, very powerful new tool so that it can enrich the life of many (in the) deaf community," concluded Chen. Up next, Hearview is working on AI that can translate sign language into text. To remove this article -Ministers warned of cuts as ‘every pound’ of spending to face reviewMatt Gaetz says he won't return to Congress next year after withdrawing name for attorney general WASHINGTON (AP) — Matt Gaetz is not coming back to Congress. The Florida Republican said Friday he has no intention of serving another term in the House now that he is no longer President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for attorney general. Gaetz withdrew as the nominee this week amid growing fallout from the allegations of sexual conduct against him. Gaetz denies the allegations. Gaetz didn't lay out his plans now that he's out of office, saying only, “I’m still going to be in the fight, but it’s going to be from a new perch." After Gaetz's withdrawal on Thursday, Trump named former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi to lead the Justice Department. Vance takes on a more visible transition role as he works to boost Trump's most controversial picks WASHINGTON (AP) — After several weeks working behind closed doors, Vice President-elect JD Vance returned to Capitol Hill this week in a new, more visible role. He's been helping Donald Trump’s most contentious Cabinet picks try to win confirmation in the Senate, where he has served for the last two years. Vance spent part of Wednesday at the Capitol with Rep. Matt Gaetz sitting in on meetings with Trump’s controversial choice for attorney general. On Thursday, Vance was back, this time accompanying Pete Hegseth. Vance is expected to accompany other nominees for meetings over the coming weeks as he tries to leverage the two years he has spent in the Senate to help push through Trump’s picks. Beyond evangelicals, Trump and his allies courted smaller faith groups, from the Amish to Chabad Donald Trump’s lock on the white evangelical vote is legendary, but he didn't focus exclusively on large religious voter blocs. He and his allies also wooed smaller religious groups, away from the mainstream. He posted a tribute to Coptic church members on social media and met with members of Assyrians for Trump — two smaller Christian communities with Middle Eastern roots. He visited the grave of the revered late leader of an Orthodox Jewish movement. His allies sought votes from the separatist Amish community. While Trump won decisively, the outreaches reflected aggressive campaigning in what was expected to be a tight race. NATO and Ukraine to hold emergency talks after Russia's attack with new hypersonic missile KYIV, Ukraine (AP) — NATO and Ukraine will hold emergency talks Tuesday after Russia attacked a central city with a hypersonic ballistic missile that escalated the nearly 33-month-old war. Ukraine's parliament canceled a session Friday over the security threat. In a stark warning to the West, President Vladimir Putin said in a nationally televised speech Thursday that the attack with the intermediate-range Oreshnik missile was retaliation for Kyiv’s use of U.S. and British longer-range missiles capable of striking deeper into Russian territory. Putin said Russia is launching production of the Oreshnik, saying it's so powerful that several of them fitted with conventional warheads could be as devastating as a strike with strategic — or nuclear — weapons. Texas education board approves optional Bible-infused curriculum for elementary schools AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Texas’ education board has voted to allow Bible-infused teachings in elementary schools. The approval Friday follows other Republican-led states that have pushed this year to give religion a larger presence in public classrooms. The curriculum adopted by the Texas State Board of Education is optional for schools to adopt, but they’ll receive additional funding if they do so. Parents and teachers who opposed the curriculum say the lessons will alienate students of other faith backgrounds. Supporters argue the Bible is a core feature of American history and that teaching it will enrich learning. 2 convicted in human smuggling case after Indian family froze to death on US-Canada border FERGUS FALLS, Minn. (AP) — A jury has convicted two men of charges related to human smuggling for their roles in an international operation that led to the deaths of a family of Indian migrants who froze while trying to cross the Canada-U.S. border during a 2022 blizzard. Harshkumar Ramanlal Patel and Steve Shand each faced four charges related to human smuggling before being convicted on Friday. Patel is an Indian national. Shand is an American from Florida. They were arrested after the family froze while trying to cross the desolate border during a 2022 blizzard. Storm inundates Northern California with rain, heavy snow. Thousands remain in the dark in Seattle HEALDSBURG, Calif. (AP) — Heavy rain from a major storm prompted evacuations from communities near a Northern California river that forecasters say could break its banks Friday, as the storm keeps dumping heavy snow in the region's mountains where some ski resorts opened for the season. The storm reached the Pacific Northwest earlier this week, killing two people and knocking out power to hundreds of thousands before moving through Northern California, where several roads were closed due to flooding and strong winds toppled some trees. Forecasters are warning about the risk of flash flooding and rockslides in areas north of San Francisco as the region was inundated by this season’s strongest atmospheric river. Archaeologists discover 4,000-year-old canals used to fish by predecessors of ancient Maya WASHINGTON (AP) — Using drones and Google Earth imagery, archaeologists have discovered a 4,000-year-old network of earthen canals in what’s now Belize. The research published Friday in Science Advances shows that long before the ancient Maya built temples, their predecessors were already altering the landscape of Central America’s Yucatan peninsula. The ancient fish canals were used to channel and catch freshwater species such as catfish. These structures were used for around 1,000 years — including during the “formative” period when the Maya began to settle in permanent farming villages and a distinctive culture started to emerge. California case is the first confirmed bird flu infection in a US child Health officials are confirming bird flu in a California child — the first reported case in a U.S. minor. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced confirmatory test results on Friday. Officials say the child had mild symptoms, was treated with antiviral medication and is recovering. The child’s infection brings the reported number of U.S. bird flu cases this year to 55, including 29 in California. State officials have said the child lives in Alameda County, which includes Oakland, and attends day care, but released no other details. Giants release quarterback Daniel Jones just days after benching him EAST RUTHERFORD, N.J. (AP) — The Daniel Jones era in New York is over. The Giants quarterback was granted his release by the team just days after the franchise said it was benching him in favor of third-stringer Tommy DeVito. New York president John Mara said Jones approached the team about releasing him and the club obliged. Mara added he was “disappointed” at the quick dissolution of a once-promising relationship between Jones and the team. Giants coach Brian Daboll benched Jones in favor of DeVito following a loss to the Panthers in Germany that dropped New York's record to 2-8.Monty Rakusen/DigitalVision via Getty Images Thesis In mid-December, Gentex Corporation ( NASDAQ: GNTX ) announced the all-cash acquisition of their smaller competitor Voxx International ( NASDAQ: VOXX ) in a move that will expand on the in-house product lineup. With forecasted organic growth Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

// NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO UNITED STATES NEWSWIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES // VANCOUVER, BC , Dec. 13, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- BioVaxys Technology Corp. (CSE: BIOV) (FRA: 5LB) (" BioVaxys " or the " Company ") is pleased to announce that it has closed the first tranche (the " First Tranche ") of its previously announced non-brokered private placement (the " Private Placement ") with the issuance of 2,200,000 units (the " Units ") of the Company at a price of $0.05 per Unit for aggregate gross proceeds of $110,000 . Each Unit consist of one (1) common share in the capital of the Company (each, a " Share ") and one (1) whole Share purchase warrant (each, a " Warrant "), whereby each Warrant is convertible into one additional Share at an exercise price of $0.15 until December 13, 2026 , being the date that is 24 months from the date of issue. The Company intends to use the net proceeds of the First Tranche for working capital. No finder's fees were paid in connection with the First Tranche. All securities issued pursuant to the First Tranche are subject to a statutory hold period expiring April 14, 2025 , being the date that is four months and one day from the date of issuance in accordance with applicable securities legislation In addition, the Company announces that it has entered into a debt settlement agreement with an arm's-length consultant of the Company to settle an aggregate of $500,000 in debt owed to the consultant by issuing 5,000,000 Shares at a deemed price of $0.10 per Share (the " Debt Settlement "). The board of directors of the Company has determined that it is in the best interests of the Company to settle the outstanding debt through the issuance of Shares in order to preserve the Company's cash for working capital purposes. All securities proposed to be issued pursuant to the Debt Settlement will be subject to a statutory hold period of four months from the date of issuance in accordance with applicable securities legislation. Closing of the Debt Settlement is conditional upon a number of conditions, including receipt of all applicable corporate and regulatory approvals, including the acceptance of the Canadian Securities Exchange. This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy of any securities in the United States . The securities described herein have not been, and will not be, registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933 , as amended (the " U.S. Securities Act "), or any state securities laws, and may not be offered or sold within the United States except in compliance with the registration requirements of the U.S. Securities Act and applicable state securities laws or pursuant to available exemptions therefrom. About BioVaxys Technology Corp. BioVaxys Technology Corp. ( www.biovaxys.com ), a company registered in British Columbia, Canada , is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company dedicated to improving patient lives with novel immunotherapies based on the DPXTM immune-educating technology platform and it's HapTenix© 'neoantigen' tumor cell construct platform, for treating cancers, infectious disease, antigen desensitization, and other immunological fields. DPXTM is a patented antigen delivery platform that can incorporate a range of bioactive molecules to produce targeted, long-lasting immune responses enabled by various formulated components. The DPX platform facilitates antigen delivery to regional lymph nodes and has been demonstrated to induce robust and durable T cell and B cell responses in pre-clinical and clinical studies for both cancer and infectious disease. BioVaxys' common shares are listed on the Canadian Securities Exchange under the stock symbol "BIOV", on the Frankfurt Bourse (FRA: 5LB), and quoted in the US on the OTC Markets. For more information, visit www.biovaxys.com and connect with us on X and LinkedIn. ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD Signed " James Passin " James Passin , Chief Executive Officer Phone: +1 740 358 0555 Cautionary Statements Regarding Forward Looking Information This news release includes certain "forward-looking information" and "forward-looking statements" (collectively " forward-looking statements ") within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included herein, without limitation, the statements relating to the Private Placement and the Debt Settlement, including the expected use of proceeds from the Private Placement and related issuance of the Shares for the Debt Settlement, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are frequently, but not always, identified by words such as "expects", "anticipates", "believes", "intends", "estimates", "potential", "possible", and similar expressions, or statements that events, conditions, or results "will", "may", "could", or "should" occur or be achieved. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, and actual results and future events could differ materially from those expressed or implied in such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements reflect the beliefs, opinions and projections on the date the statements are made and are based upon a number of assumptions and estimates, primarily the assumption that BioVaxys will be successful in developing and testing vaccines, that, while considered reasonable by BioVaxys, are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, political and social uncertainties and contingencies. Many factors, both known and unknown, could cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from the results, performance or achievements that are or may be expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and the parties have made assumptions and estimates based on or related to many of these factors. Such factors include, without limitation, the impact of any changes that may affect the anticipated use of proceeds from the Private Placement and the ability of the Company to obtain the necessary approvals to proceed with the Debt Settlement. BioVaxys does not assume any obligation to update the forward-looking statements of beliefs, opinions, projections, or other factors, should they change, except as required by applicable securities laws. The Canadian Securities Exchange has not reviewed, approved nor disapproved the contents of this press release and does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. Logo - https://mma.prnewswire.com/media/2415135/5078410/BioVaxys_Technology_Corp_Logo.jpg SOURCE BioVaxys Technology Corp.None

Cummins VP Sharon Barner sells $798,402 in stockATLANTA (AP) — Jimmy Carter, the peanut farmer who tried to restore virtue to the White House after the Watergate scandal and Vietnam War, then rebounded from a landslide defeat to become a global advocate of human rights and democracy, has died. He was 100 years old . The Carter Center said the 39th president died Sunday afternoon, more than a year after entering hospice care , at his home in Plains, Georgia, where he and his wife, Rosalynn, who died in November 2023, lived most of their lives. The center said he died peacefully, surrounded by his family. As reaction poured in from around the world, President Joe Biden mourned Carter’s death, saying the world lost an “extraordinary leader, statesman and humanitarian” and he lost a dear friend. Biden cited Carter’s compassion and moral clarity, his work to eradicate disease, forge peace, advance civil and human rights, promote free and fair elections, house the homeless and advocacy for the disadvantaged as an example for others. “To all of the young people in this nation and for anyone in search of what it means to live a life of purpose and meaning – the good life – study Jimmy Carter, a man of principle, faith, and humility,” Biden said in a statement. “He showed that we are a great nation because we are a good people – decent and honorable, courageous and compassionate, humble and strong.” Biden said he is ordering a state funeral for Carter in Washington. A moderate Democrat, Carter ran for president in 1976 as a little-known Georgia governor with a broad grin, effusive Baptist faith and technocratic plans for efficient government. His promise to never deceive the American people resonated after Richard Nixon’s disgrace and U.S. defeat in southeast Asia. “If I ever lie to you, if I ever make a misleading statement, don’t vote for me. I would not deserve to be your president,” Carter said. Carter’s victory over Republican Gerald Ford, whose fortunes fell after pardoning Nixon, came amid Cold War pressures, turbulent oil markets and social upheaval over race, women’s rights and America’s role in the world. His achievements included brokering Mideast peace by keeping Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin at Camp David for 13 days in 1978. But his coalition splintered under double-digit inflation and the 444-day hostage crisis in Iran. His negotiations ultimately brought all the hostages home alive, but in a final insult, Iran didn’t release them until the inauguration of Ronald Reagan, who had trounced him in the 1980 election. Humbled and back home in Georgia, Carter said his faith demanded that he keep doing whatever he could, for as long as he could, to try to make a difference. He and Rosalynn co-founded The Carter Center in 1982 and spent the next 40 years traveling the world as peacemakers, human rights advocates and champions of democracy and public health. Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002, Carter helped ease nuclear tensions in North and South Korea, avert a U.S. invasion of Haiti and negotiate cease-fires in Bosnia and Sudan. By 2022, the center had monitored at least 113 elections around the world. Carter was determined to eradicate guinea worm infections as one of many health initiatives. Swinging hammers into their 90s, the Carters built homes with Habitat for Humanity. The common observation that he was better as an ex-president rankled Carter. His allies were pleased that he lived long enough to see biographers and historians revisit his presidency and declare it more impactful than many understood at the time. Propelled in 1976 by voters in Iowa and then across the South, Carter ran a no-frills campaign. Americans were captivated by the earnest engineer, and while an election-year Playboy interview drew snickers when he said he “had looked on many women with lust. I’ve committed adultery in my heart many times,” voters tired of political cynicism found it endearing. The first family set an informal tone in the White House, carrying their own luggage, trying to silence the Marine Band’s traditional “Hail to the Chief" and enrolling daughter, Amy, in public schools. Carter was lampooned for wearing a cardigan and urging Americans to turn down their thermostats. But Carter set the stage for an economic revival and sharply reduced America's dependence on foreign oil by deregulating the energy industry along with airlines, trains and trucking. He established the departments of Energy and Education, appointed record numbers of women and nonwhites to federal posts, preserved millions of acres of Alaskan wilderness and pardoned most Vietnam draft evaders. Emphasizing human rights , he ended most support for military dictators and took on bribery by multinational corporations by signing the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. He persuaded the Senate to ratify the Panama Canal treaties and normalized relations with China, an outgrowth of Nixon’s outreach to Beijing. But crippling turns in foreign affairs took their toll. When OPEC hiked crude prices, making drivers line up for gasoline as inflation spiked to 11%, Carter tried to encourage Americans to overcome “a crisis of confidence.” Many voters lost confidence in Carter instead after the infamous address that media dubbed his “malaise" speech, even though he never used that word. After Carter reluctantly agreed to admit the exiled Shah of Iran to the U.S. for medical treatment, the American Embassy in Tehran was overrun in 1979. Negotiations to quickly free the hostages broke down, and then eight Americans died when a top-secret military rescue attempt failed. Carter also had to reverse course on the SALT II nuclear arms treaty after the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979. Though historians would later credit Carter's diplomatic efforts for hastening the end of the Cold war, Republicans labeled his soft power weak. Reagan’s “make America great again” appeals resonated, and he beat Carter in all but six states. Born Oct. 1, 1924, James Earl Carter Jr. married fellow Plains native Rosalynn Smith in 1946, the year he graduated from the Naval Academy. He brought his young family back to Plains after his father died, abandoning his Navy career, and they soon turned their ambitions to politics . Carter reached the state Senate in 1962. After rural white and Black voters elected him governor in 1970, he drew national attention by declaring that “the time for racial discrimination is over.” Carter published more than 30 books and remained influential as his center turned its democracy advocacy onto U.S. politics, monitoring an audit of Georgia’s 2020 presidential election results. After a 2015 cancer diagnosis, Carter said he felt “perfectly at ease with whatever comes.” “I’ve had a wonderful life,” he said. “I’ve had thousands of friends, I’ve had an exciting, adventurous and gratifying existence.” Sanz is a former Associated Press reporter.

Trump's lawyers rebuff DA's idea for upholding his hush money conviction

Ministers warned of cuts as ‘every pound’ of spending to face review

Timeline: Jimmy Carter, 1924-2024