I wonder why they didn't just publish what they found the way Adam Schiff did?

For those who may have "forgotten": https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/devin-nunes-exploring-legal-remedies-after-adam-schiff-released-phone-records

What exactly is this "storage" you speak of?

Batteries at scale is not an answer and you know it.

Yeah after he remembers how to tie his shoes

Yawn

Funny how the original post was moderated "Troll" and this gets moderated "Interesting." Has the CCP taken over Slashdot moderation?

It sounds so innocuous - only non political speech is limited.

Sorry to say that the CCP, like all communist parties, takes a very broad view of what constitutes political speech. It goes well beyond "replacing the CCP or making porn"

That even you admit that the CCP finds "making porn" to be a political act is telling.

This is how BeauHD chooses what to post.

1. Google search for topic I'm interested in
2. Choose the result that says what I want to hear
3. Post!

That's why, even thought basic income is a bad idea that has failed over and over, the only thing you see on Slashdot is a positive take.

Also from the linked article:
"In India, which has some of the world’s best conditions for generating solar power, the mismatch is pronounced because demand for electricity swells after people go home and switch on air conditioners in the evening, when solar plants aren’t working."

"Solar’s big problem: It generates power only when the sun shines. Wind power, similarly, works only with wind. So displacing fossil fuels could require cheaper ways to store energy. And the more renewables in the power-transmission grid, the more the grid will need to be rebuilt to accommodate those special characteristics.

That inefficiency is why the IEA forecasts the amount of power solar generates to rise to only 11% of the world’s total by 2040, around half that of coal or natural gas."

It is remarkable to hear a voice from Harvard of all places expressing confidence in the voice of the general public.

This small pile of rubbish tells us a lot about the BBC and very little about the world around us or the world of Blade Runner

You're talking about Google?

Your assumption of pure motives from a "non-profit" advocacy group is unjustified. The management of "friends of the earth" get paid too, and the more donations they bring in the more secure and comfortable their position will be. They have direct financial interest in motivating donors with urgent calls for action.

Remember that the only difference between for profit and so call "non-profit" enterprises is that the former has a class of people ("owners") who have a claim on their profits. Non-profits must bring in the dough to continue in operation just like a for profit business. The real difference is that, without owners, those in control of non-profits have more latitude in directing the resources of the enterprise to their own benefit.

Tell them to save the world on their own time.

This study's tendentious conclusions aren't the only ones you could come to

https://cei.org/blog/science-reporters-get-it-wrong-moderate-alcohol-consumption-isnt-dangerous

You can count on the socialist puritans at the guardian to spoil any party