" Trump's executive order on Lake Ontario, one of the five Great Lakes of North America, applies to U.S. federal usage about the lake, and does not govern what Canada, international bodies or other organizations call the lake."
Its pretty much just like a tarriff that only Americans have to pay?
I think the correct response for Carney would be to rename the USA "Mexico Jr".
Hate the CT, but impacting a large animal at speed isn't going to end well for anyone involved, regardless of how safe the vehicle is.
If I'm not mistaken, I think I remember that Swedish Volvos were specifically engineered to be able to crash into a Moose and save the car driver. I think they have a special Moose crash simulation / test dummy.
Wine consultant Leon Deans said distillation could be a viable option to remove the oversupply, but may require government support because the cost of distilling the wine could be higher than the revenue from the ethanol.
If you consider that:
cost of distilling bakes in the thermodynamic and energy costs of raising the temperatures of the wine to separate the alcohol
the price for the pure alcohol is fungible with the market price of any other liquid fuel or alcohol on a per-energy equivalence
This seems like it's a net energy negative process where the total amount of energy available to the society drops where you do this. This is exactly why it loses money.
Basically:
you buy some energy some place
wine producers take product they already made that has no market value and use the energy input to make something they can sell, using up that original energy
the energy coming out is lower than what you started with in step 1, but you sell the energy for less money
this loses energy AND money, but the government subsidies make the money side not a problem
This cuts wine makers in on the deal in a way where the market makes this feasible despite the underlying thermodynamic losses.
NOTE: the grapes and wine that were originally grown, the harvesting, bottling etc also have thermodynamic and material costs that are totally external to this analysis. The farm itself bought fuel when it made the wine, that's all not ibcluddd into the ethanol calculus. When you consider the total investment with a wider boundary you can start to cost many additional resources like time, water, wages, insurance, financial interest and on and on.
This comes from a recent interview you can listen to here or read here.
The absolutely most interesting thing from this interview is not the hash smoking detail.
The part that is more important is that Carlson states early on in the interview that he feels that the American president was being blackmailed by Israel into engaging in the Iran war. Carlson basically comes out and implies that the president is compromised and manipulated and knows it, and he had no choice. He doesn't specifically speculate on how they are controlling Trump. But he says that he's shocked at the media failure to investigate this. Its really worth listening to this section of the interview. He met Trump 3X and deeply discussed Iran in the weeks before the fighting.
The only thing that comes immediately to mind is that Israel has the Epstein files and are threatening to release them. But it could be something else of course.
If shit properly hits the fan, I suspect things are going to be way more desperate.
To be a little more precise, people have studied this question carefully at a planetary scale.
The total agricultural production possible in the absense of artificial inputs like fertilizers, pesticides, diesel tractors, cold storage and refrigerated supply chains etc is around no more than 3billion people running off solar inputs and natures nutrient cycles and the amount of land and water available.
So for example, in the green revolution, land and agriculture technology increased a modest amount, but artificial fossil inputs into the existing technology system increased 90-fold. Most of the gains in food production are because it's now based on fossil energy and nutrients rather than natural sources.
Currently, today ~40% of all the human food supply molecules come from fossil fuels and are incorporated into the plants and animals we eat.
So it's not "just" a land management issue, or urbanization. Humanity is literally on artificial life support. There is no simple, survivable way out of this commitment. Fundamentally this is far, far from penciling out any other way we know how to survive. Humanity population passed some threshold for change around 3-4 generations ago.
You can pry my demand destruction from my cold hands by crashing the economy and laying me off!