So... creation of greenhouse gasses is not pollution?
According to SCOTUS, it isn't, under the existing laws of the US.
And I doubt Congress would change that anytime soon. Until then, the EPA only gets to regulate CO2 coming from facilities it already regulates under existing laws.
Well then Congress shouldn't give them that power? That was the court's finding, that Congress had already authorized the EPA to regulate any gases produced at a plant that also produces named pollutants. So CO2 gets lumped in with the rest under their blanket authority over existing polluters. Which is why they struck down the ability to expand their authority to non-polluting entities. It was outside their existing jurisdiction.
Congress does that a lot, authorizes blanket authority, and then bitches when it gets exercised. It's like they don't read the bills they pass or something...
I know it is Slashdot and the summary is misleading about it "adding 100kg over a Tesla battery" but if you actually read the article you would learn that the idea is not to replace the existing Li-ion battery but to have this as well as a reserve. As you point out most people only drive short trips for which a Li-ion battery is well suited. This is just to provide a power for long distance driving.
Or, you know, if people would just actually read the summary, which states that the Li-ion battery would still be retained for short-range trips...
I'm sure I could have worded the 100kg bit better to state that the 100kg is IN ADDITION TO the existing weight of the Li-ion battery... but I guess
And if I type in Winnipeg (75% of the pop of all of SK), it says there's no results available?
Didnt apple make a big fuss about google using the term "appstore"? so google changes the name to "googleplay" Now Apple decides to use the term "carplay"??? Let me guess, now a new lawsuit on google for using the word "play"
Can't argue you could confuse an "appstore" style online software download site with a car navigation system though. Apple at least had a smidgen of a legal argument over "appstore".
Mhh how about Apple changing the iPhone connector once more? Yehaaaw your Mercedes is now obsolete lol. Let's do it, "it's good for the economy" (TM).
Depends how they sync. If it's over USB, there are adapters. If it's over Bluetooth... it should still work.
As opposed to every other navigation system, some of which even make you use a mouse-type controller on the dash to browse through the myriad of available controls.
There are traffic engineering standards that describe this in every state and the country itself. However, that doesn't prevent a person with revenue generation intent from tampering when they install or maintain the signal, even remotely I suppose these days. If the same team that operates the things is also in charge of auditing the settings for compliance with standards.....you see where this is leading
That's no different than letting the police do the testing when you challenge their radar guns' accuracy. Have an independent review system. Then if someone challenges the RLC, you have documentation to back up the claim that the yellow timer is reasonable for that intersection.
And once you've done all that, and you still have people running the red?
My city did all of the above, and now people run the red because they know the other side doesn't get the green right away, so it's "OK".
Then have the camera ticket in that instance. But switching the times lower to gain more tickets is that antithesis of safer.
So why not mandate a standard for yellow light length based on speed, so you eliminate the potential conflict of cities "tweaking" it to maximize fine returns. Instead we get the boneheaded idea that we should just ban the cameras, as if they were the problem...