Amoxtli

Trump got elected because of immigration of all types. His tariffs reflect America First policy. He is a populist, and he believes in the common things, as Joe Six Pack does. Bernie Sanders is a populist as well, but he is a socialist. In both cases, the voter is thinking that the system has failed, or is failing. The Bernie supporter believes capitalism has failed, and the Trump supporter believes that liberal economics has failed. In both cases, they want what they think is "fairness". They both believe there is a zero-sum game, and the pie is shrinking, or not distributed evenly, and that we are reaching some kind of peak that will usher in decline. Both sides believe their country is in decline. I am not saying the US does not have problems, but the liberal elites failed to address the issue of living costs and in my opinion, general price increase while having a foreign policy that seems to disconnect them from domestic issues. Both sides will have suicidal policies, thinking they will address the problem, that is free trade, and lack of sufficient wealth redistribution. Why did you think Obama ran on "hope and change"? He himself is a liberal that ran on America being on the decline.

Well, why do you not have any friends? At least Zuckerberg is trying to make you feel good about yourself.

You obviously missed the context entirely.

The study the article is talking about, is a possible solution to cover California's solar energy glut problem during the day, because the state doesn't have enough batteries. It is a case study. In trying to do that, it may create other problems, such as infrastructure to get people to charge their cars during the day while they work. This means employers must pay or get somebody to pay for chargers at the work place, adding onto more costs onto the employee and/or employer. Nighttime charging may be cheaper and more convenient, but remember, the study wants you to capture all the wonder solar power during the day, not use potential green house gases from natural gas at night. The more complexity, the more problems you have.

I don't think the author of this article understands what he wrote about, or purposely omitting key things about grid balancing. The problem with rooftop solar incentives is they encourage solar production during the day when the sun is out, but do nothing when the sun settles. California has to switch to other types of energy such as batteries, natural gas plants, etc. for the evening. The grid is already saturated with energy during the day, even into negative prices. Utilities are paying into these rooftops, perhaps at retail prices, for something that does not address the energy gaps through the 24-hour timeline of power generation. In simple terms, California's rooftop solar does not balance out the system over a timescale, with diminishing returns. At least, the article was stamped as an opinion piece, increasing the likelihood of it being a biased article that delves into conspiracy theories that California, and its regulated utility companies just want to screw people. There you go.

Mexico has nothing else better to do.

What does that have to do with this article?

4 years later, it would be as if nothing happened, and life goes on. Well, goodbye.

That's your problem, not mine, and what is the fairy tale behind human rights? I didn't know that AI could be consciously racist.

You need to pay up for your speed racing.