You're right: civilian nuclear programmes are not cost effective compared with renewables. But, there's also the military aspect to this too. Military nuclear benefits by hiding/sharing some of the costs, industrial infrastructure, training, expertise, supply chains, etc with a civilian programme. If there was no civilian nuclear programme, the defence budget would be much bigger to fund things like the nuclear navy.

The UK is at 46% renewables, and that number is increasing rapidly. Why hasn't it collapsed yet?
https://ourworldindata.org/gra...

Spain is at 56%:
https://ourworldindata.org/gra...

Iceland is at 100% renewables:
https://ourworldindata.org/gra...

You fail.

itâ(TM)s literally the only site I can think of that canâ(TM)t properly display text.

There, fixed it for you.

I prefer the Martian bear.

Way more than cheaper rides.
* App to summon
* Automatic driver mapping to pickup
* Predictable arrival for pickup
* Predictable arrival for drop off
* No BS routing and you knew the cost before pickup/dropoff.

Back in the day I called for cabs ahead of time and had them fail to show up 25% of the time. I've never lived in a dangerous area, so that wasn't it. They just were not reliable or predictable. Uber saw a huge opening for a service and they took it. They also saw a huge opportunity for destroying the existing market solution in an anti-competitive and illegal way and took that, too - banking on the notion that government would not act fast enough to stop them. And they were right.

Forgetting he exists would be the best punishment.

Rename the North Atlantic to the English Pond, and have King Charles scribble his name in a giant black marker on the bill when it makes its royal ascent.

Whitehall's taste for secrecy is 'needlessly' straining relations between the two allies.

Never mind the thin skinned orange man baby and the effect heâ(TM)s having on relations with all his back stabbing and attacking of allies! Perhaps look a closer to home and fix your own house first.

Why does the UK need to respond to what some American politicians think?

That was about their opinion shows, not their news shows. That case was specifically about Tucker Carlson.

Those kinds of arguments weren't saving Fox from the Dominion lawsuit, though. If they seemed like to have worked, Fox wouldn't have settled for almost $800 million right before trial.

Hastert doesn't have a law named after him. There's the Hastert Rule, which is an informal rule that no bill should be brought before the House to vote on it unless it already has the support of the majority of the majority party.

Hastert was convicted of structuring withdrawals to avoid reporting requirements and making false statements. The charges themselves were not inherently about homosexuality, though it came about from him covering up his same-sex abuse of a minor, and the indictment didn't mention the sexual abuse, and his allocution under the plea deal didn't initially mention it. He did admit it under pressure from the judge, who seemed to start to lean against accepting his plea without him admitting to the molestation, for which he could not be charged because the statute of limitations had expired decades prior.

Hastert has never come out as gay. Most child molesters, even those who molest the same sex, never identify as homosexual.

Yes, Don-boy, I called you a fuckup. Tell the FCC to ban the internet.

There has been erosion over many years, but Trump is doing it's best to make it one right now.

Lucky for us he's an utter fuckup.

I'm more interested in the game than in the packaging.

These are the same thing these days!

After Expedia bought Hotels.com, they killed off their rewards scheme and all their prices went up against others like Booking.com. They backtracked on the rewards scheme, but it's still not as good as it was before. They also made things like the login experience harder (why are they sending me 2FA emails instead of text messages, which are faster and auto populate in my browser almost immediately?!).

I haven't booked through Hotels.com for years because they are more expensive. Expedia gives the same results for hotels, so it's pointless. I only use Expedia to search for flights because it's more reliable than sites like Skyscanner, but then I go to the airline's website and book direct. I'd rather deal directly with the airline if there's a last minute problem with the flights than have to try to get Expedia to help.