Reducing pollution is a goal even if it is not the goal. Clean air is important.

To answer your question: Yes.

Natural gas emits 50 to 60 percent less carbon dioxide (CO2) when combusted in a new, efficient natural gas-power plant compared with emissions from a typical new coal plant.

BUT... it is important to note that this depends on the type of generator in use. Older gas generators burned inefficiently and released a lot of methane into the atmosphere -making them overall about 4% worse than a modern clean-burning coal generator.

They specified the timezone.
News from the future!

Well, the summary does say it is happening FRIDAY, so stay tuned!

Because that is the narrative that you are being sold. They are other so it is good to hate them... even for things that they don't do. Just indirectly attribute something to them and call it harmful to someone and you can feel good about hating them.

It is by design. It is a distraction to give us focus for our hate. Otherwise we might change something.

Boiling the frog.

One step on the path to normalizing martial law in the USA.

That's the one I was thinking of! Thank you

Echo chambers are comfortable, but conflict drives engagement.

"Someone on the internet is WRONG, I must do something about it!"

Posse Comitatus Ac... ooh shiny. What were we talking about?

Chasing the curve never works out well. Starting a multi-year education process because there is a demand for trained workers NOW! is not a good plan. Odds are the need will be filled before you are ready.

Educate for a career path, not for a particular job. Be enough of a generalist that you can pivot with the market and do what needs to be done; over time you will develop a long list of skills and demonstrate an ability to learn new skills as needed.

Few of us turn out to be the top specialists in any given field.

For your completely unbiased opinion. Knowing this advice is sponsored by someone with absolutely no conflict of interest makes me happy.

Because that's what Apple users want.

For most iPhone customers, the walled garden is a feature. They want Apple to control it. They want it to be safe. They want ONE app to perform a function. They do not want to choose among several apps that do the same thing in different ways with different features. They want that one app to be Apple approved, and preferably made by Apple. They want it to be simple to do the thing their friend does: "get the app from the app-store, click there and type this, and... done".

I am happier with my Pixel. I can install what I want, from where I want, to do what I want, how I want... but my wife, and her friends, and her mom, and her friends, and my mom, and her friends... they are all iPhone people and they all really like the sameness of their iPhones.

On second thought, forget the CPU.

In American law, the details of exact wording and comma placement are what counts. We argue over the priority of subordinate phrases and how that could effect the interpretation of a law. (see the arguments regarding the Second Amendment for an example) In America, we can violate the spirit of the law as long as we follow the letter of the law.

In European law, the intent of the law (as long as it is made sufficiently clear) is what counts. Supporting documents are frequently available to document the intent of the laws. Regulators will provide guidance instead of directions ("don't poison people" vs "less than 30ppm"). Businesses and individuals are expected to figure out the details of compliance.

I believe the French answered that question in the 1790s. Vive la revolution!

That was the point. Soft power and influence. Every medical station supplying care and every bag of food handed out, had an American flag and the letters USA printed on it. Every person knew that it was the USA keeping their family alive.

When some new resource is discovered in their lands, and the world wants to mine it to build future technology, who do you think they will grant the rights to? Who do you want them to grant the rights to? USA or China?