jili60
Customers of UK energy firms who drive electric vehicles are facing higher electricity costs to recharge their cars . This follows the latest rise in the energy price cap by the regulator Ofgem. Marc Dal Cin, energy expert at EV Charger Installation, has told Digital Journal that charging an electric vehicle at home increases the home electricity bill, since the overall energy consumption goes up. The average UK energy tariff is around 32p per kWh for home charging. A full charge for a popular model like the Nissan Leaf 3.ZERO e+ will cost approximately £17, while a larger vehicle such as the Mercedes-Benz EQE will cost £24.50. Over the course of a year, this could add up to around £884 for weekly charges, following the energy price cap increase. Cin advises that charging at home is remains more economical than using public charging stations, which average 48p per kWh. Cin offers several tips for EV drivers looking to reduce their charging costs: Switch to a Time-of-Use Tariff Cin explains: “Many energy providers offer tariffs with cheaper rates during off-peak hours, usually at night. By scheduling your EV charging during these hours, you can significantly lower your costs.” Use Smart Charging Cin states: “Investing in a smart charger allows you to set charging times and optimise energy use. This helps avoid peak energy prices, and some systems even adapt to use renewable energy when it’s most available.” Monitor Your Charging Habits Cin adds: “Only charge your EV when necessary and avoid overcharging the battery. Charging too frequently or unnecessarily can lead to higher electricity bills.” Compare Energy Tariffs Cin outlines: “Regularly review your energy provider and compare tariffs to ensure you’re on the best deal. With prices fluctuating, switching providers can lead to significant savings.” By following these steps, Cin expects electric vehicle drivers to be able to mitigate the impact of rising electricity prices and ensure they continue to enjoy the savings associated with driving electric vehicles. Dr. Tim Sandle is Digital Journal's Editor-at-Large for science news.Tim specializes in science, technology, environmental, business, and health journalism. He is additionally a practising microbiologist; and an author. He is also interested in history, politics and current affairs.
After a two-year process, lawmakers approved a broad package of state rules last week governing how public schools should operate. But many public school educators say they aren’t happy. Known as the “minimum standards for public school approval,” the rules govern virtually every aspect of public school administration, from class sizes to curriculum requirements. They must be updated every 10 years or they will expire. This year’s update has divided lawmakers along party lines and pitted school administrators and board members against the State Board of Education and the Department of Education. The department, which crafted the rules, says they provide flexibility for school districts around curriculum and other areas, and create new opportunities for innovative types of learning in public schools. Critics — who include teachers unions, the N.H. School Administrators Association, and the N.H. School Boards Association — say the rules dilute the state’s curriculum requirements for schools by removing some specific mandates. That could pave the way for schools in lower-income, higher property tax towns to cut back on instruction in order to contain costs, critics say. “Our specific concerns remain as well — including the removal of class size maximums, the removal of subject area requirements, and inconsistent application of competency terminology and differentiated instruction,” wrote the Manchester Board of School Committee in a Sept. 23 letter to the State Board of Education asking that it reject the latest changes. Members of the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (JLCAR) met Thursday and approved the final rules on a party-line 6-4 vote, with Republicans voting in favor of the rules and Democrats opposing them. Here’s a guide to major changes in the rules. A focus on competency-based instruction Under the new rules, high school students will still need 20 credits in order to graduate. But the types of classes and the way in which they are assessed will be slightly different. According to the current rules, in order to pass a course, a student must demonstrate “knowledge and skills on an assessment” approved either by the school district or the Department of Education if no school district exists. The new rules have different metrics: Students could complete either “a collection of evidence” demonstrating their achievement of competency, or an assessment approved by the school district or state department. The approach adheres to a broader philosophy held by the National Center for Competency-Based Learning, a nonprofit advocacy group based in New Hampshire that has advised the Department of Education under a contract and helped craft the new rules. The center’s president, Fred Bramante, joined State Board of Education members for a series of listening sessions across the state in 2023 to talk about the competency-based approach and explain its benefits. Moving forward, the rules echo the philosophy: “Credits shall be awarded for achievement of competencies. Credits shall not be awarded based on time spent achieving these competencies.” Bramante says the format will ensure that instruction is thorough and not constrained to an assessment or a number of hours of class time. But some educators have complained that the approach is not always feasible for every school’s budget, and that the standards for what counts as competency can be vague. Expansion of ‘extended learning opportunities’ The new rules also include a greater emphasis on “extended learning opportunities,” part of a policy shift in recent years that aligns with the school choice movement. Extended learning opportunities (ELOs) allow students to obtain credits for classes outside of the school classroom. A program known as Learn Everywhere — implemented in 2020 — allows the State Board of Education to approve programs that can count toward credits, without the power for local school boards to override the decision. And while the current rules include a basic requirement for school boards to pass policies laying out how the school district will engage with students on creating and supporting ELOs, the new rules go into more detail over how the school district should implement ELOs. The use of the word “opportunity” extends beyond ELOs; in the section of the new rules outlining middle school and high school curriculum requirements, subject areas and courses are referred to as “learning opportunities.” The new rules require school boards to require a “program of studies with learning opportunities offered to high school students” in arts education, English language arts, mathematics, science, and a number of other common subjects. State Board Chairman Drew Cline and department officials say the change is rhetorical. Critics have claimed it is part of a shift toward external private sector educational opportunities for students. A change to class size determinations One of the most contentious changes in the new rules involves class sizes. Currently, the state’s rules state that class sizes “shall be” capped at certain amounts for different grade levels: 25 for kindergarten to grade two, and 30 for grades three to 12. The new rules are somewhat more nuanced. They include the same caps, but they also say “the local school board shall establish student-educator ratios that promote student learning for each learning opportunity and learning level based upon school safety policies, content, instructional method, (and) the characteristics of learners.” By changing the language from “shall be” to “shall establish” ratios “based upon,” critics say the department has given wiggle room for school boards. Cline says that interpretation is false. Addressing the legislative committee, Cline said an earlier version had removed the class size caps and allowed school boards much more flexibility — a move meant to respond to the post-pandemic reality for many school districts. But after pushback, the state board relented. “We incorporated the existing class size caps into the rule, and they are still there,” he said. Subject descriptions ‘aligned to’ curriculum frameworks The current rules describe a number of curriculum areas for specific subjects, such as arts education, mathematics, and English language arts, and lay out specific requirements for each subject that school boards are required to follow. The new rules largely eliminate those lists of required elements. Instead, they simplify the direction to school boards. “Each school’s arts education program shall have (competencies) and curriculum aligned to ‘K-12 Curriculum Framework for the Arts,’ April 2001 edition, as referenced in Appendix II,” the new rules for arts education state. In a Nov. 19 letter to the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules, Milton Superintendent Karin Cevasco argued that by taking the required elements out of the rules themselves and requiring that districts “align” to the existing standards, the state could be creating the conditions for schools to have looser standards. “Elimination of content area standards will further the divide of the haves and the have nots in our state,” Cevasco wrote. “Children in property rich town will have access to curriculum resources that are proven to set high standards for future success, while students in property poor towns will fall further behind with the elimination of the Arts and any curriculum resource deemed too rich for the teaching of science, math, and literacy.” The State Board of Education is supposed to update the academic standards for each of those subjects as well. Cline said the board is planning to do so, but has been slowed down by the process of updating the minimum standards. Each subject can take a while, he said; the board started work on the social studies framework before the pandemic. The academic standards are not as stringent as the rules passed by JLCAR last week and are not as high a priority, Cline said. “It’s a conveyor belt, right?” he said. “So every state board meeting, we have new rules that have expired or are going to expire that we have to update, and that’s a lot of work.”
The Lakers' six-game win streak came to a frustrating end Thursday night against Orlando, leaving the team in low spirits according to guard Max Christie. The 119-118 loss, sealed by Franz Wagner's late three-pointer, dropped Los Angeles to fourth in the competitive Western Conference. Ron Chenoy-Imagn Images "It's a tough loss," Christie told ESPN's Dave McMenamin. "We were bummed out but we're onto the next game. We got Denver tonight, who is still a good team. We don't want to dwell on Orlando. So we turned the page and we're ready to go tonight." The defeat highlighted several ongoing concerns for the 10-5 Lakers. Poor free throw shooting (17-of-26), defensive rebounding issues (15 offensive boards allowed), and inconsistent role player production all contributed to squandering what should have been a winnable game. Wagner took full advantage, torching the Lakers for 37 points, 11 assists, and 6 rebounds on 50% shooting. In a Western Conference where 11 teams sit at .500 or better, these types of losses could prove costly. With LeBron James' window closing, the Lakers are reportedly exploring frontcourt upgrades, with names like Jonas Valanciunas, Walker Kessler, and Robert Williams III emerging as potential targets. The Lakers will look to bounce back tonight at Crypto.com Arena against their playoff nemesis Denver Nuggets (10:30 PM EST), before a challenging road back-to-back against Phoenix (Tuesday, 10:00 PM EST) and Victor Wembanyama's Spurs (Wednesday, 8:30 PM EST). Related: Stephen A. Smith Challenges LeBron's Media Criticism: "Not Wrong, Just Not Complete"
How queen bees and wasps set our backyards abuzz in readiness for summerAfter a trouble-plagued application overhaul, U.S. Department of Education officials have released next year’s Free Application for Federal Student Aid, more than a week before its Dec. 1 target date. After last year’s rollout disaster, Education Department officials claim to have improved the application process following feedback from stakeholders. More than 167,000 students have successfully submitted their FAFSA application since Oct. 1, following four rounds of testing. The department can now “say with confidence” that the application is working and will serve as “the gateway to college access and affordability to millions of students.” “Already, over 650,000 more applicants are eligible for Pell Grants, and more students are receiving Pell Grants, this school year compared to last year,” Miguel Cardona, U.S. secretary of education, said in a news release. “We stand ready to help millions more students complete the FAFSA and get the financial aid they need to pursue their dreams of a college education.” Thousands of students faced numerous challenges when attempting to complete their financial aid application last year, following a form overhaul meant to simplify the application process, which instead made things more difficult. As a result, 29 percent fewer students completed their application in May compared with the same time in 2023. The department said it has made various improvements to ensure the same issues don’t occur during this year’s application cycle. Staffing has been increased by almost 80 percent to ensure students and their families can connect with representatives when calling for financial aid support. More than 700 agents have been added to the department’s contact center and an additional 225 agents are set to be hired in the coming weeks, to offset long wait times faced by callers last year. “We need a better FAFSA form to deliver financial aid to students going to college and other forms of education after high school,” James Kvaal, the undersecretary of education, said. “Thank you to everyone who has helped the 2025-26 FAFSA launch successfully and ahead of schedule, including students and families, Department staff, and financial aid administrators and counselors across the country.” While last year’s technical glitches have been addressed with the FAFSA form and system now in a “strong position,” one group was left vulnerable in the wake of the technical errors that occurred. Students whose parents did not have a Social Security number were reported to be blocked from filling out the financial aid form, resulting in nearly 9 percent fewer high school seniors and first-time applicants according to a recent report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. The office of Federal Student Aid suspended the identity verification process that had barred contributors without Social Security numbers from logging into the online financial aid form for the 2025-26 application. However, ahead of his inauguration in January, President-elect Donald Trump’s administration has announced plans to shut down the Department of Education, posing significant threats of financial aid cuts, as well as plans to begin mass deportations. According to Stephen Barker, communication director for OneGoal — a Chicago nonprofit that assists students to enroll and graduate from postsecondary programs — this could leave mixed-status families vulnerable. OneGoal is looking carefully at the implications for students applying for financial aid for the first time or those from mixed-status families, Barker said, where one or more of their contributors don’t have Social Security numbers. While the National College Attainment Network has signaled that students “should use caution” when completing their FAFSA form, Barker said OneGoal doesn’t believe it’s “responsible to advise students whether they should or should not submit their FAFSA.” Instead, the nonprofit is being as transparent with students as possible about the potential risks. The Higher Education Act prohibits the use of students’ data for any purpose other than determining financial aid eligibility and awards to students. But with the incoming Trump administration signaling its priorities, Braker said there’s no way to ensure “this administration is not going to sort of supersede or overturn the rules of the Higher Education Act in order to sort of use this as a lever for accessing information.” “We can’t imagine a scenario where that’s likely, but we’re not policy experts, and can’t say for sure what an unpredictable administration is going to do,” Braker said. “We’re going to make sure that students have the information that they need and then they’re going to have to work with their families and their school counselors to determine if it’s safe for them to fill this out and provide that information.”
Costco plans to eliminate its popular book sections from most of its over 600 locations in the U.S. starting in January. The bulk retailer made this decision to focus on more efficient stocking practices. According to The New York Times, Costco executives explained that, unlike other items that can be stocked using forklifts, books require manual handling as they are displayed on tables. This move is part of several adjustments Costco has implemented to adapt to changing consumer needs. Earlier this year, the retailer announced a price increase for membership fees and introduced a policy requiring membership ID cards to be scanned for entry. The popular Gold Star membership saw a $5 increase, rising from $60 to $65 in September. Another factor influencing the decision was the growing trend of customers purchasing books online through platforms like Amazon and other websites. Despite the change, the company has left room for the possible return of books if sales in the remaining stores perform well. Books will still be available in 100 Costco locations year-round, according to Publishers Weekly. "If book sales do well at stores where they remain, books could return to more locations. However, if sales continue to lag, additional book sections may be removed," the company stated. Executives are also closely monitoring the performance of book sales at competing retailers, particularly for high-demand titles like Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour, which is exclusively available at Target. Get Latest News Live on Times Now along with Breaking News and Top Headlines from US News, World and around the world.None
AI Revolutionizes Mahakumbh Mela 2025: Enhanced Safety and Security Measures
Flowserve Corp. stock rises Thursday, still underperforms market
West Virginia knocks off No. 3 Gonzaga in overtime
Peavy's 24 help Georgetown beat Albany 100-68
Canada’s health-care system does not perform on par with other countries that have universal health care, according to a new report. It looks at 40 indicators in four categories, including availability of resources, use of resources, access to resources, and quality and clinical performance. Using 2022 data, the report found that Canada ranked 28 out of 30 when it comes to the availability of doctors, and ranked 25 out of 30 for the number of hospital beds and psychiatric beds open. The country ranked low for the availability of technology, according to the report, with a 27 out of 31 rank for the number of MRI machines available per one million people and 28 out of 31 for the number of CT scanners available. Canada also has some of the longest wait times compared to other countries, the report found. When compared to nine other universal health-care countries, Canada ranked second from the bottom, in eighth place, for the number of patients who had to wait more than a month to see a specialist (65.2 percent). The country was the lowest out of the nine when looking at the number of patients who had to wait two months or longer for non-emergency surgery (58.3 percent). Canada ranked six out of nine for the percentage of patients who said cost was a barrier to get access to medical and dental care, the report said. The report also looks at how much Canada spends on health care compared to other high-income Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. It found that Canada spends more than the majority of OECD countries that have universal health-care systems. The country ranked four out of 31 for the highest expenditure on health care as a percentage of GDP, and ranked nine out of 31 for highest health-care expenditure per capita, the authors wrote. “The data examined in this report suggest that there is an imbalance between the value Canadians receive and the relatively high amount of money they spend on their healthcare system,” the report authors wrote. “Although Canada ranks among the most expensive universal-access health-care systems in the OECD, its performance for availability and access to resources is generally below that of the average OECD country, while its performance for use of resources and quality and clinical performance is mixed.”
Trump and recess appointments: A procedural and legal quagmire
- Previous:
- Next: jilipark app download latest version
