But bumping someone who's going 45 when you're going 90 will result in a major accident.

The one going 90 should have watched where he was going. Unless it's more important to pay attention to what's behind you than to what's in front of you?

It would be good if the USA adopted the Autobahn's rule of cruising in the right lane and passing only on the left, to separate fast moving traffic from slow moving traffic.

The driver's handbook in California explicitly states that you should at all times keep up with traffic, even if it means exceeding the speed limit a little bit, so that all cars are driving at roughly the same speed.

The 2014 manual says, on page 69:

Driving slower than other vehicles or stopping suddenly can be just as dangerous as speeding, if not more dangerous, because you may cause a rear end collision or cause other drivers to swerve to avoid hitting your vehicle. If you are in the fast lane and you notice vehicles moving to the right lane to pass you, or a line of vehicles is forming behind you, the best thing to do is move into the right lane, when it is safe, and let the vehicle(s) pass.

From the link I posted above:

Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be driven in the right-hand lane for traffic...

(emphasis added)

If a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, peeping tom laws already say you cannot look or take photos. So it doesn't appear that the proposed law will bring any meaningful benefit. It's bloatware.

"[E]nergy companies [are feeling] the pinch from...weak demand..."

"[M]any EU countries...are facing an energy capacity crunch"

The above two quotes contradict each other. The first says there's weak demand, but the second says there's a "capacity crunch" (a shortage) which means there's too much demand. So which is it, a surplus of energy or a shortage of energy? It can't be both.

Resolving this contradiction will lead to the real problem. Then we can think about ways to solve it.

For years, Southern California Edison imported electricity from the Four Corners Power Plant, a coal-fired facility in northwestern New Mexico... [a few months after the carbon market took effect in 2013] the company sold its interest in the coal plant to an Arizona utility (APS, 2013)... this transaction will not reduce net greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere. The coal plant will keep emitting pollution just as before--only now it serves customers in Arizona, not California.

As other states follow California's lead, it will become more and more difficult for coal plants to stay in operation.