The IRA is getting gutted and Trump is trying to force coal plants to stay open. Even if Kamala did absolutely nothing, that would still be much better for the climate. 1.3% is not a big number.

Vance represents the tech bro “libertatian” wing with Thiel and those ghouls. Musk fits right in.

Maybe the study was more robust that this article suggests, but this doesn’t tell me anything. Humans are amazing at regulating our remperature via sweat, so I have zero doubt that normal healthy people will have the same internal and even skin temps wearing different color clothing in different conditions. If the group wearing e.g. dark codlors just sweat X% more to compensate, we can’t draw any conclusions at all. Clothing is complicated, since airflow and moisture retention matter significantly, but we know for a fact that lighter colors reflect more energy than darker colors.

This is not the whole story because not every heating day is equally cold. I have a high end cold climate heat pump in Colorado (which works great btw). I use about 1/3 of my total annual heating energy in January, despite heating for >6 months of the year. I’ll use 10% of my annual energy budget for a long weekend if its -10F, and that’s all heat pump (I don’t even have backup strip heat). It would be 20% if i was using electric resistnace for those 4 days. Electric resistance is really not great, so folks really should get the best heat pumps they can that cover the coldest normal days. It’s fine to install strips as a true backup but you’re going to have some very high bills and high carbon if you’re using it 20-30 days/year. If its hydro/nuclear power you’ll still come ahead on carbon but that’s not the case everywhere.

This is a bit dramatic. There are plenty of sanely sized cars available, and its not like everyone yearns for them but is forced into a suburban. Last time I checked you could still buy a corolla, an H-RV, a leaf, crosstrek, civic, Prius, several minis, a Mazda 3, BMW 1, etc. If people literally just bought rav4s instead of giant SUVs the average vehicle size would be significantly smaller, even though the rest of world thinks those are huge too.

People that finance literally will pay less each month for the car. I don’t understand the semantics game here to avoid calling this a “discount”. If you pay less each month it’s ok to call it a discount. I’d argue neither scenario justifies a news story, but the Tesla demand cliff is trendy (justifiably so of course, fuck Nazis) so here we are.

You’re just playing semantics. Lots of customers finance cars. Before the “discount” they had to pay $X/month, now they pay $(X-discount)/month. They literally pay less each month because of the discounted, subsidized rates. It’s a discount for folks that finance through Tesla. I’m not sure why you think you’re the only person that understands the simple concept of interest here. You’ve just decided that the definition of discount only applies to MSRP arbitrarily. Is a point of sale tax credit not a discount either?

Look I get it, I love cycling and own a few nice bikes ($1-4k) but let’s not pretend that the value is there at $11k. Outside of world tour riders, there’s no way you’re actually faster or more comfortable at $11k than about $5k. You already get carbon frame/wheels and near top of the line components for $5k-ish. So to OPs question, to me that’s the upper limit for what fancy bikes should cost for actual normal humans. Realistically 2k for road/gravel, maybe 3k for MTB is jusy barely slower and almost imperceptively less nice than 5k bikes. “High end” is only meaningful if there are actual tangible benefits that come along with the price tag. I support anyone out there on bikes, i just think $11k is a bit silly in a world with this much wealth inequality. I’m sure some folks think the exact same thing about me and my bikes tbf. Have fun and be safe out there.