Consider applying the concept of time-domain multiplexing to this problem. Modern electric lights are pulsed---either by reason of the AC that power them, or the more rapid pulses applied to LEDs to increase their efficiency. If the pulsing of all lights in an area were synchronized, there would be brief dark periods between the light ones. Astronomers would only need to use cameras with synchronized periods of sensitivity, or for telescopes, synchronized shutters.

It seems to me they could (rapidly) cycle the lighting between:
(1) Just the green back-light (any color should do fine, actually)
(2) Just the full-spectrum scene lighting (no back-light)
(3) GoTo (1)
The cameras for capturing outlines versus actors would need to be synchronized with the lighting cycles of course.

One could additionally send an inverted copy of the output signal through a dummy load, so that the power consumption remains constant.

It should help the cause, if commercial and private jets would each release a few pounds of white dust or smoke at their highest altitudes. These particles would hopefully remain aloft and effective long enough to make the (slight) added expense worthwhile. This same concept could also be applied to encouraging plankton growth in the oceans, by having ships spread fertilizer during their normal travels.

I'm surprised Neil DeGrasse Tyson hasn't decided that Pluto isn't a "real" streaming service and got it put out of business. (Note: I actually agree with the decision on the (former) planet Pluto. ...just making a joke here...)

Could it help to have software designed for testing media and data files for potential parsing and processing issues before publishing? This could be viewed as debugging data as opposed to debugging software. Data which is "bug-free" and perhaps also in a file format designed to allow faster code, could speed up computers indirectly. The speed up would be due the processing algorithms not needing to continually check data for errors. There would need to be some flexibility in the data formats to allow for circumventing problematic portions of a file/stream when it fails testing. One would also need a way to distinguish data as tested.

It sounds like they would benefit from miniature, low-power air conditioners to feed a cool breeze through an air-hose into something like loose-fitting bodysuits. This would help prevent energy emergencies (by using less energy) and make them more pleasant whenever they did occur. We might all need those eventually. If the air passed through such a suit was vented to the outside of the building, one could save even more energy by circulating cool air from a basement or other underground space without concern for any radon that air might contain (assuming mere skin contact is safe, that is).

If each algorithm tends to be unfair to different users, they could cycle through the group of algorithms. This would spread out the inevitable unfairness "fairly." I'm assuming that the overhead of changing algorithms is negligible.

Although air has poor qualities as a refrigerant,it would have a few advantages which could make up for its technical deficiencies.

For one, rather than a heat-transfer coil to cool a living space, the cold air from the evaporator could be introduced (in carefully controlled amounts) to the ambient air. This could consitute part of a rebreather system (the other parts being a filter for CO2, and so on...) which would save the thermal cost of exchanging the inside air with fresh air (and cooling that fresh air).

Another advantage, is the availability of liquid nitrogen to cool refrigerators and CPUs.

A more generally-effective approach would be a CRISPR-injected monitoring system within each cell which would test for the cell's current metabolic rate. If the rate exceeded a critical threshold, the monitoring system would kill its host cell (unless it was possible to repair it somehow). Such a monitoring system might function by producing a substance which could be metabolized by the cell, then measuring how long it took to decrease to a specific, lower concentration. To be on the safe side, each test should require an external trigger, as also should the "self-destruct" feature.

The next step in their plan is finding a way to transform humans into mice.

Do they do spectral analysis of individual UFOs? I've have never heard of anyone doing so.
Even if cheap spectroscopy instruments were used, the results could be corrected afterward mathematically.
Another possibility is that the lights are modulated, either for efficiency (as we do with LEDs using pulses), or
to transmit information.
Studying both of these aspects of their emitted light could help to distinguish between hoaxes and possible
genuine ET visitors. Of the apparent non-hoaxes, we could learn something more about their technology.

Spraying a thin layer of thin oil (about a mm, maybe), followed quickly by foam might be better. The oil would provide electrical insulation and keep air from reaching the lithium. It would of course catch fire very quickly if there is much accumulated heat, but that's where the foam comes in---it smothers the oil flames.

Rather than eternally quibbling over offensive words, we could instead institute a national or worldwide "swear-jar" system. In this system, some payment would be placed in a bank account for each utterance or occurrence of an offensive word. The total amount collected would be given to those people (as a class, not individually) expected to be offended by the words. Similar practices could also be applied to occurrences of such symbols as swastikas and statues, for example. This system might actually make the offensive words and symbols welcomed.

What is very obvious, if only from all the recent wildfires, is that forest litter is a fuel. If this fuel was first collected from expertly
selected areas, fire breaks could be formed to contain or slow the progress of wildfires before they started. After the recom-
mended fire breaks were formed, collection areas could be less constrained.

The forest litter, which we've already identified as a fuel, could be used for many purposes: generating electricity, heating
homes, conversion to methane or bio-diesel, and so on. It might be possible to use it for such things as mulch, or something
resembling particle board, for example.

Of course burning the material as fuel would produce CO2, but if we didn't it would all be converted to CO2 just the same,
through decay or by wildfires. The decay process also produces some methane.

Energy obtained from forest litter would be energy we wouldn't need from other sources, resulting in a net decrease in green-
house gas production. This all means that there should be a great net benefit from the collection and usage of forest litter.

So, the advantages: Fighting wildfires largely by prevention; an almost inexhaustable fuel source, and less greenhouse gases.

There would likely need to be infrastructure and methods developed to make it practical, though.