5 hand signals in badminton
Nicaragua OKs reform to boost powers of president, wifeThe confidential briefing note is part of the tranche of documents made public in the annual release of State papers from the Irish National Archives. An Irish Department of Foreign Affairs official focusing on justice and security created the list in October 2002. The document starts by referencing a 1999 interview given by George Mitchell, the chairman of the Good Friday Agreement negotiations, in which he claimed the British and Irish governments, as well as Northern Ireland’s political parties, had leaked information to manipulate public opinion. However, he further accused the NIO of attempting to sabotage the process by leaking information on British Government policy to the media. Mr Mitchell, a former US senator, is said to have expressed alarm and anger over the frequency of leaks from the NIO – saying they were uniquely “designed to undermine the policy of the British Government of which they were a part”. The Irish civil servant notes Mr Mitchell himself was subjected to an attempted “smear” when he first arrived in Northern Ireland, as newspaper articles falsely claimed his chief of staff Martha Pope had had a liaison with Sinn Fein representative Gerry Kelly with ulterior motives. The Irish civil servant goes on to list several “leaks”, starting with the publication of a proposed deal in a newspaper while “intense negotiations” for the Downing Street Declaration were under way. Next, the Department lists two “high-profile and damaging leaks issued from the NIO”. A so-called “gameplan” document was leaked in February 1998, showing papers had been prepared weeks before the Drumcree march on July 6, 1997. In the preceding years, there had been standoffs and clashes as nationalists opposed the procession of an Orange parade down Garvaghy Road in Portadown. The gameplan document showed then secretary of state for Northern Ireland Mo Mowlam, who was publicly expressing a desire for a negotiated solution to the 1997 parade, advocated “finding the lowest common denominator for getting some Orange feet on the Garvaghy Road”. In 1997, a large number of security forces were deployed to the area to allow the march to proceed. The incident sparked heightened tension and a wave of rioting. The document further describes the release of a document submitted by the NIO’s director of communications to the secretary of state as a “second major leak”. It claims a publicity strategy was released to the DUP in the aftermath of the Good Friday Agreement and showed how the UK Government would support a yes vote in a referendum following any talks agreement. In addition, it is claimed unionists used leaked sections of the Patten report on policing to invalidate its findings ahead of its publication in 1999. The report recommended the replacement of the Royal Ulster Constabulary with the Police Service of Northern Ireland, the changing of symbols, and a 50-50 recruitment policy for Catholics and Protestants. At the time, UUP leader David Trimble said the recommendations would lead to a corruption of policing in Northern Ireland. Chris Patten, chairman of the independent commission on policing, said some of the assertions were a “total fabrication” and designed to “muddy the waters” to create a difficult political atmosphere. Elsewhere, the author notes it was leaked to the media there was serious disagreement between the governments of the UK and Ireland on the composition of that commission – with not a single name submitted by the Irish side being accepted by the other. The author notes this incident, still under the heading “NIO leaks”, was believed by British officials to have emanated from the Irish side. The report turns to leaks of other origin, claiming “disgruntled Special Branch officers in Northern Ireland” were blamed by the British Government for a series of releases about the IRA which were designed to damage Sinn Fein in the 2001 general election in Northern Ireland. One senior Whitehall source was quoted in the Guardian as complaining that Special Branch was “leaking like a sieve” after details of an IRA intelligence database containing the names of leading Tories – described at the time as a “hit list” – was passed to the BBC in April 2002. The briefing note adds: “This was followed days later by a leak to The Sunday Telegraph which alleged that senior IRA commanders bought Russian special forces rifles in Moscow last year. “The newspaper said it was passed details by military intelligence in London.” The briefing note adds that other Special Branch leaks were associated with the Castlereagh break-in. The final incident in the document notes the Police Ombudsman’s Report on the Omagh bombing was also leaked to the press in December 2001. Then Northern Ireland secretary John Reid said at the time: “Leaks are never helpful and usually malicious – I will not be commenting on this report until I have seen the final version.” The reason for creating the list of leaks, which the Irish National Archives holds in a folder alongside briefing notes for ministers ahead of meetings with officials from the UK Government and NIO, is not outlined in the document itself. – This document is based on material in 2024/130/6.
Canadians face a fresh wave of scams as fraudsters seize on the Canada Post strike to try to trick victims out of their cash. The last few weeks have seen an “exponential” rise in attempted fraud, ranging from phishing emails to deepfake phone calls, says Octavia Howell, chief information security officer at Equifax Canada. “Any time there is a major political event, a major strike or anything like that, we’ll see an uptick,” she said in a phone interview. “Not only is there a Canada post strike ... it’s the holidays.” Scams related to parcels and deliveries typically tick up in step with online shopping orders this time of year, but the work stoppage at Canada Post has led to even more fraud attempts amid the confusion around shipments, Howell said. Comprehensive figures on the latest batch of scams are not yet available from Equifax Canada, but the credit bureau’s daily updates have marked the rise nonetheless. Rather than the roughly half-dozen daily consumer fraud reports of previous increases, Equifax Canada’s investigations team is filing up to “87 in one report in one day coming from the same IP addresses,” said Howell. She called the trend “insidious.” “We’re seeing exponential growth in the amount of scams that are actually happening ... because, one, holidays, and then two, people aren’t able to get their shipments out.” Mail carriers walked off the job on Nov. 15, halting deliveries of letters and packages at the start of the holiday shipping season. Canada Post cautions users that it never reaches out about a delivery via text or email unless it has been requested to. The Crown corporation has asked Canadians to be on guard for telltale signs of a phishing scam or fraud attempt, including poor grammar, imagery inconsistent with Canada Post logos and a tracking number at odds with its standard format. The Better Business Bureau similarly cautioned users when the strike kicked off. “Watch out for fake package delivery offers during Canada’s postal strike,” the non-profit said in a release last month. It advised potential victims to verify delivery services, avoid unsolicited shipment offers from little-known companies and check for accreditation by the bureau before selecting a service. It also noted that scammers may send false messages claiming to be from Canada Post or another carrier asking for payment for undelivered items or offering “priority service.” “Do not click on links in unsolicited emails or texts. Instead, visit the official website of the courier service for updates,” the bureau said. Canada Post recommends customers contact the Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre if they receive a suspicious email, text or call related to the postal service.Syrian rebels overthrew President Bashar Assad on Dec. 8, ending his family’s more than 50 years of rule in the country. Assad reportedly fled to Russia, where he was granted political asylum. One image shared across social media appears to show Assad and his wife arriving in Russia after fleeing Syria. A video shared thousands of times appears to show the aftermath of his plane after it crashed. A graphic image of a man being tortured has been shared with claims it shows a real scene from inside one of the notorious prisons in Syria. Does this image show Assad and his wife arriving in Russia? Syria Stream video from Feb. 10, 2023 RevEye , a reverse image search tool No, this image doesn’t show Assad and his wife arriving in Russia. It’s from February 2023 and was taken in Syria. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov confirmed to TASS, a Russian news agency, that Assad and his family were granted political asylum in Russia, but VERIFY has been unable to find any photographic evidence of their arrival in the country. The image being shared is nearly two years old. Using RevEye, VERIFY conducted a reverse image search and found the image was lifted from this video posted to YouTube on Feb. 10, 2023 by Syria Stream , a channel that posts Syrian news footage. The video shows Assad visiting a hospital in Aleppo, Syria, on Feb. 10, 2023, after a 7.8 magnitude earthquake hit the region. When comparing the viral image and the 2023 video, Assad and his wife are wearing the same outfits, standing with the same people and walking through the same hallway. Does this video posted on social media show the aftermath of Assad’s plane crash? Video posted to X on Sept. 3, 2024 Indian Air Force X post from Sept. 2, 2024 InVid and RevEye , video and photo forensics tools No, this video doesn’t show the aftermath of Assad’s plane crash. The video predates Assad’s ousting from the Syrian government. This video doesn’t show the aftermath of Assad’s plane crashing. It shows a different plane crash and is unrelated to the recent events in Syria. Using InVid , a video forensics tool, VERIFY analyzed the video and conducted a reverse image search of each frame. The same video was posted to X on Sept. 3, 2024 , appearing to show an Indian Air Force plane crash near the Indian border with Pakistan. The original post says, “A MiG-29UPG of the #India 's Air Force crashed last night near the border with #Pakistan , tallying at the 6th crash of the IAF in 2024 till date.” The Indian Air Force confirmed the crash , saying the IAF MiG-29 crashed after a malfunction and the pilot was able to eject safely. TASS, a Russian news agency, reported that Assad and his family members arrived in Moscow, and did not die in a plane crash. Does this image show a real scene of torture under Assad’s reign in Syria? Dana News and Akharin Khabar , Persian news sites Egrat Museum’s Instagram page RevEye , a reverse image search tool No, the image doesn’t show a real scene of torture under Assad’s reign. It is actually a wax museum exhibit in Iran. Human rights organizations have long accused Assad and the Syrian government of torture, but this image does not show that. It’s actually an image of an exhibit at the Ebrat Museum in Tehran, Iran. The museum, a former prison, uses wax mannequins to portray human rights abuses carried out by the SAVAK, Iran’s pre-revolution intelligence agency. Nearly identical images from the exhibit, featured in Persian news articles about the museum, match the scene falsely claimed to depict Syria. The museum has posted images of similar wax figures on Instagram. What we can VERIFY about the ‘TikTok ban’ bill Yes, an Italian village is offering $1 homes to Americans following the election What we can VERIFY about Enron’s return to the internet The VERIFY team works to separate fact from fiction so that you can understand what is true and false. Please consider subscribing to our daily newsletter , text alerts and our YouTube channel . You can also follow us on Snapchat , Instagram , Facebook and TikTok . Learn More » YouTube Snapchat Instagram Facebook TikTok Text: 202-410-8808
Ireland blamed Northern Ireland Office for ‘damaging leaks’, records show
Hoda Kotb drops ‘clue’ she’s back with her ex in new photos of cozy Christmas decor inside new suburban NYC homeNASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Jacob Ognacevic had 25 points in Lipscomb's 112-54 victory over Division-III Asbury on Sunday night. Ognacevic added 12 rebounds for the Bisons (8-5). Charlie Williams scored 16 points while shooting 7 for 8, including 2 for 3 from beyond the arc. Will Pruitt shot 4 for 10, including 2 for 6 from beyond the arc to finish with 10 points. The Eagles were led in scoring by Cameron Jones, who finished with 19 points and seven rebounds. Johnathan Combs added 11 points for Asbury. Ben McNew also put up seven points. Lipscomb scored its most points since a 113-74 win over Asbury on Nov. 11, 2023. The Bisons topped the 100-point plateau four times last season. ___ The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by and data from . The Associated PressFBR’s Future
Irish civil servants compiled a list of “major leaks” they claimed originated from the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) and Special Branch officers in the region, records show. The confidential briefing note is part of the tranche of documents made public in the annual release of State papers from the Irish National Archives. An Irish Department of Foreign Affairs official focusing on justice and security created the list in October 2002. The document starts by referencing a 1999 interview given by George Mitchell, the chairman of the Good Friday Agreement negotiations, in which he claimed the British and Irish governments, as well as Northern Ireland’s political parties, had leaked information to manipulate public opinion. However, he further accused the NIO of attempting to sabotage the process by leaking information on British Government policy to the media. Mr Mitchell, a former US senator, is said to have expressed alarm and anger over the frequency of leaks from the NIO – saying they were uniquely “designed to undermine the policy of the British Government of which they were a part”. The Irish civil servant notes Mr Mitchell himself was subjected to an attempted “smear” when he first arrived in Northern Ireland, as newspaper articles falsely claimed his chief of staff Martha Pope had had a liaison with Sinn Fein representative Gerry Kelly with ulterior motives. The Irish civil servant goes on to list several “leaks”, starting with the publication of a proposed deal in a newspaper while “intense negotiations” for the Downing Street Declaration were under way. Next, the Department lists two “high-profile and damaging leaks issued from the NIO”. A so-called “gameplan” document was leaked in February 1998, showing papers had been prepared weeks before the Drumcree march on July 6, 1997. In the preceding years, there had been standoffs and clashes as nationalists opposed the procession of an Orange parade down Garvaghy Road in Portadown. The gameplan document showed then secretary of state for Northern Ireland Mo Mowlam, who was publicly expressing a desire for a negotiated solution to the 1997 parade, advocated “finding the lowest common denominator for getting some Orange feet on the Garvaghy Road”. In 1997, a large number of security forces were deployed to the area to allow the march to proceed. The incident sparked heightened tension and a wave of rioting. The document further describes the release of a document submitted by the NIO’s director of communications to the secretary of state as a “second major leak”. It claims a publicity strategy was released to the DUP in the aftermath of the Good Friday Agreement and showed how the UK Government would support a yes vote in a referendum following any talks agreement. In addition, it is claimed unionists used leaked sections of the Patten report on policing to invalidate its findings ahead of its publication in 1999. The report recommended the replacement of the Royal Ulster Constabulary with the Police Service of Northern Ireland, the changing of symbols, and a 50-50 recruitment policy for Catholics and Protestants. At the time, UUP leader David Trimble said the recommendations would lead to a corruption of policing in Northern Ireland. Chris Patten, chairman of the independent commission on policing, said some of the assertions were a “total fabrication” and designed to “muddy the waters” to create a difficult political atmosphere. Elsewhere, the author notes it was leaked to the media there was serious disagreement between the governments of the UK and Ireland on the composition of that commission – with not a single name submitted by the Irish side being accepted by the other. The author notes this incident, still under the heading “NIO leaks”, was believed by British officials to have emanated from the Irish side. The report turns to leaks of other origin, claiming “disgruntled Special Branch officers in Northern Ireland” were blamed by the British Government for a series of releases about the IRA which were designed to damage Sinn Fein in the 2001 general election in Northern Ireland. One senior Whitehall source was quoted in the Guardian as complaining that Special Branch was “leaking like a sieve” after details of an IRA intelligence database containing the names of leading Tories – described at the time as a “hit list” – was passed to the BBC in April 2002. The briefing note adds: “This was followed days later by a leak to The Sunday Telegraph which alleged that senior IRA commanders bought Russian special forces rifles in Moscow last year. “The newspaper said it was passed details by military intelligence in London.” The briefing note adds that other Special Branch leaks were associated with the Castlereagh break-in. The final incident in the document notes the Police Ombudsman’s Report on the Omagh bombing was also leaked to the press in December 2001. Then Northern Ireland secretary John Reid said at the time: “Leaks are never helpful and usually malicious – I will not be commenting on this report until I have seen the final version.” The reason for creating the list of leaks, which the Irish National Archives holds in a folder alongside briefing notes for ministers ahead of meetings with officials from the UK Government and NIO, is not outlined in the document itself. – This document is based on material in 2024/130/6.
South Korean authorities seek warrant to detain impeached President Yoon in martial law probeJanux shares surge on promising JANX007 prostate cancer trial
Garrett Wilson clearly isn't happy. And his future with the New York Jets seems murkier than ever. Read this article for free: Already have an account? To continue reading, please subscribe: * Garrett Wilson clearly isn't happy. And his future with the New York Jets seems murkier than ever. Read unlimited articles for free today: Already have an account? Garrett Wilson clearly isn’t happy. And his future with the New York Jets seems murkier than ever. The star wide receiver wants to win more than anything, but three losing seasons to start his NFL career have taken their toll. Wilson has been an extremely bright spot for the Jets during that span, setting team receiving records and establishing himself as one of the top players in the NFL at his position. He’s the fourth-most targeted player in the league this season. But he still believes he could do more — and that he can help the Jets (4-11) win. Wilson had six catches for 54 yards on Sunday in New York’s 19-9 loss to the Los Angeles Rams. Four of his seven targets came during the Jets’ final drive. Davante Adams had 13 targets and clearly has been the favorite target of Aaron Rodgers — not surprising since they played together eight years in Green Bay. But Wilson has seemed almost an afterthought lately. “I don’t know, to be honest with you, man,” Wilson said after the game when asked why he wasn’t more involved in the offense. “I’ve just got to go out and put my best foot forward and hope that things fall my way. I’d love to be involved, love to make an impact on the game, but if people see it differently, then it’s out of my control. “So, just trying to do what I can do.” That came a few days after Wilson was noncommittal on whether he can see himself staying with the Jets long term if they offer him a contract extension after the season. He had a similar response after the game. “At the end of the day, we’ve got to find ways to get Garrett the ball more often,” interim coach Jeff Ulbrich said Monday. “He’s one of the best players on our team, if not one of the best players in this league, especially at his position, so the progression for a lot of different reasons from a coverage standpoint took (Rodgers) off Garrett, but at the same time, we’ve got to find ways to get him the ball, for sure.” Wilson is due for an extension after this season, but the Jets have control over his contract through the 2027 season. There are rumblings that Wilson, who ranks among the league leaders with 90 receptions and 987 yards receiving, could seek a trade. The Jets’ next general manager and coach will have to make decisions on the futures of several players, including Rodgers, but Wilson also will be a priority in the team’s offseason conversations. “If you weren’t frustrated, I think that would bother me to an extent,” Ulbrich said. “I think he’s just one of those ultimate competitors that wants the ball, not for selfish reasons. Just from the standpoint he knows he can help our team win if he does have the ball in his hands.” What’s working Fast starts. The Jets have scored touchdowns on their opening possession in each of their last two games after previously not doing so all season. What needs help With the team out of the playoff hunt, Ulbrich was aggressive. The Jets went for it on fourth down five times against the Rams and converted just twice. Two of the stops led to points for Los Angeles. After Breece Hall was stuffed on fourth-and-1 at the Jets 33 in the second quarter, the Rams kicked a field goal to tie it. On their first possession of the second half, the Jets went for it on a fourth-and-4 from the Rams 13 instead of kicking a field goal. But Rodgers’ fade pass to Adams was incomplete, ending a 14-play, 78-yard drive. Los Angeles followed by kicking another tying field goal. Stock up CB D.J. Reed. The veteran defensive back has arguably been the Jets’ best cornerback this season. Reed is scheduled to be a free agent during the coming offseason and could be in for a big payday. Whether to bring him back will be a major topic of conversation for the Jets’ new regime. Stock down K Anders Carlson. He briefly provided some stability as the Jets’ fourth kicker this season but has struggled lately. Carlson missed an extra point, his second of the season, and was wide right on a late 49-yard field goal try that would’ve made it a one-score game and given the Jets a chance at a comeback attempt against the Rams. Ulbrich said there’s a chance there could be another change this week. Injuries Rookie LT Olu Fashanu is dealing with a foot injury. The first-round pick was seen on crutches after the game, but Ulbrich said Fashanu was still getting tests done to determine the severity of the injury. ... DT Quinnen Williams was inactive with a hamstring injury. He tested it before the game and was scratched. Ulbrich said there’s a chance he’ll play this week. ... CB Sauce Gardner (hamstring) and S Tony Adams (ankle) left the game with injuries. Key number Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. 0 — The Jets scored 9 points and had no punts in the loss to Los Angeles. They joined the 1991 Colts — a 16-7 loss to the Patriots in the season opener — as the only teams in the Super Bowl era to score fewer than 10 points and not punt. What’s next The Jets travel for their last road game of the season to Buffalo, where they’ll take on the AFC East rival Bills. ___ AP NFL: https://apnews.com/hub/NFL Advertisement AdvertisementEdwards Lifesciences Corporation Investors: Please contact the Portnoy Law Firm to recover your losses. December 13, 2024 Deadline to file Lead Plaintiff Motion.
The Saints are making contingency plans to play without QB Derek Carr as they try to stay alive
Australia’s economic future will be at risk if we stop the wind and solar construction to build nuclear. Big energy-intensive manufacturing industries such as aluminium smelters would likely be forced to close, and the risk of blackouts from forcing coal generators to stay on line would be huge. Wind, solar and firming can clearly do the job. Every hurdle from reliability to inertia has been overcome. There is no need and no reason to change course. Certainly economics is not a reason. To summaries, building a nuclear industry in Australia: • Makes blackouts more likely by forcing coal stations, already expensive to maintain, that require government support and are increasingly unreliable to go for much longer. The idea of replacing the coal plants with gas while we wait is likely not very realistic, largely because gas plants themselves are expensive and hard to permit and because if asked to run in shoulder mode they are not very efficient and require lots of gas. And right now we are already looking at importing LNG. If the nuclear plants are 5, 10 or 15 years late, as is entirely possible, it would require heroic assumptions to see the coal fleet managing the gap. More to the point it’s a completely avoidable and unnecessary risk. Australia is well set on its transition path. There are some inevitable cost up and downs but no show stoppers have been identified. Every hurdle from reliability to inertia has been overcome. There is no need and no reason to change course. Certainly economics is not a reason. • Increases emission costs by between even in the very unlikely event the plants are built on time as compared to the present ISP. • The nuclear plants stand a good chance of being well over budget and late. That’s because: ° Globally that is often but not always the case. By and large the nuclear industry is one of the most likely global industries to be late and over budget. There is no real nuclear expertise in Australia; ° It will have to be more or less forced on an industry set on a different course; ° It will likely be government owned and developed and the record on that in Australia is poor; ° In general for most capital intensive industries there is an Australia cost premium relative to global averages. This in the end will disadvantage us compared to other countries in terms of the cost of energy. • Likely will destroy the value of CER (consumer energy resources – rooftop solar, home batteries and EVs) in Australia. • Will result in the temporary halt in the transition to a firmed VRE system which is already 20 years down the track with a penetration rate of say 50% within 18 months. • Equally the LNP and by comparison Frontier don’t appear to have done the work or to understand the demand forecasts. The LNP bleat on about EVs, but the real differences are hydrogen, large industrial loads and business demand. One suspects that the aluminium industry in Australia will die if it has to wait for nuclear. • Finally the old concept of baseload is changing, but in my opinion firming costs are cheaper the bigger the portfolio. This implies firming should sit at least with a large gentailer or possibly with a State or even Federal Govt. The biggest, by far, reason for the electricity industry to push back against the ideological LNP Nuclear plan is its far, far too risky. Australia has a plan to decarbonise. It’s not a perfect plan, no plan survives first contact, but it’s capable of and is in fact being achieved. We are roughly already at 40% VRE. We have at least 20 years experience at developing and integrating wind, solar, behind the meter assets and batteries. We know the issues around transmission and social license and cost and reliability. There are well developed plans for each issue and a wealth of industry finance and expertise. The assets to take us from 40% VRE to 50% are already under construction, some are just starting to enter service. The insurance finance to add another 12 GW of VRE and 4 GW of firming assets (essentially batteries) is already either awarded or in tender through the CIS. The LNP wants to bring this to a crashing halt, keep our few, increasingly ageing and unreliable coal stations going for another 20 years while it starts up an industry in which Australia has zero comparative advantage and zero experience. Only in politics could conmen say things with such a straight face. The risk of the coal stations failing is very high. Other stations like Eraring have full ash dams. Yallourn is already on Government support, Vales Point and particularly Mt Piper have coal supply issues. Gladstone Power Station in Queensland is ready to close. And so on. It simply isn’t prudent for Australia to depend on these stations as a group to do another 20 years. It’s a completely unacceptable risk that politicians want to expose Australians to, purely for the sake of politics. I could, but won’t. go into the politics. It is quite sufficient to point out the risk, and really I could close this note at this point completely confident that the argument is made. The LNP might argue that they would build more gas stations. To start with they take time and planning and secondly: Where is the gas? Wherever it comes from it will be expensive. By all means build a peaker or two but it’s a sideshow to the main game, which is bulk energy and shifting it through time and space. For what it’s worth. the following figure shows the closing of the Crocodile jaws. The top jaw is coal and gas generation and the bottom jaw is wind, solar and hydro. The jaws didn’t close much this year, due to wind drought and some utility solar price constrained off but they surely will next year as about 2.5 GW of wind currently in commissioning gets to full production and some more solar farms as well. In addition there is 6 GW, count them, 6 GW of batteries under construction. Using a 180 day moving average allows the informed view to see the Winter v Spring Summer impact. Like many another analyst I’m prepared to look at any technology on its merits. If Frontier Economics had any interest at all in bringing the industry to their point of view then the report is an abysmal failure. Its failings are so obvious that it hardly needs me to do a me to, but I have. As I’ve stated before, a presumption of bias can be attached to the report for three reasons. There are lots of estimates of the cost of carbon. These range from the Gillard Government’s cost which the LNP revoked adjusted to $ of today which Frontier states would be about $40/t, through to the European price presently around Euro 68 = $A113/t, through to a major, multi author estimate published in Nature with a mean of $US185/t = $A 296/t (but the range is US$ 44 to $US 413/t) to the USA official estimate of $US 51 =81.54 AUD $A 81/t through to the AER estimate of $A 75/t in 2025 rising to $221 by 2040. And finally there is the set of numbers adopted by the AER which rise strongly over time and which I have used Frontier could have used any of these numbers, but they don’t. The extra carbon emissions are not regarded as a cost worth considering in Frontier’s numbers! On my numbers the NPV of the increased emissions is between $57 bn and $72bn. The method for calculating this was: I might add that the social cost of carbon is normally calculated with discount rates of 2%-4% given that the damage is long lasting but I haven’t considered the methodological issues around that here. The overall point remains that there can be no excuse whatsoever for Frontier ignoring the cost difference. Frontier could have used some other carbon price estimate, but there is no doubt that carbon emissions have a cost, that is why we decarbonising and not considering that cost renders the Frontier exercise fairly useless. In an AFR article, Frontier’s Danny Price states that the AER carbon cost does not represent the “economic cost”, and produces not a shred of evidence to support this view. The comment seems to me to be revealing of the underlying philosophy of Frontier that global warming is overstated as an issue. Some of the justified criticism of Frontier is in the way it adds up “real costs”. For instance: However, since the use of “real costs” for investment analysis is in any event fatally flawed from the outset and contrary to the laws of Finance, and because I think Price knows that perfectly well, I tend not to worry about methodological flaws of “real costs”. Equally, Steve Hamilton in his excellent noted that AEMO incurs its capital costs from today onwards but the the nuclear costs are only start to be incurred from 2035. In NPV terms costs that are incurred later have a lower NPV than costs that incurred earlier, and Steve noted that if we just compared costs in 2050 there is only a 12% difference between the nuclear and AEMO difference. However, in NPV terms, if we allow for the difference in carbon costs, these differences matter less. In effect Frontier defers capital spending improving NPV but incurs carbon costs which reduce NPV. It’s just that Frontier doesn’t count the carbon cost. Also, once the capital spending on VRE has been made the annual operating costs fall sharply compared to existing coal. Wind opex, for instance, is around A$10/MWh compared to say A$50/MWh for existing black coal, maybe less for brown coal. However, in my opinion it’s unlikely that AEMO captures all the maintenance capital expenditure required on end of life coal assets that are not just end of life but also have to be ever more flexible, ever more capable of ramping. I won’t take the time to illustrate this issue, but just look at the costs being incurred by AGL, and the Government support offered to Yallourn and Eraring. Frontier estimates a nuclear cost today in Australia of A$10,000/Kw, which then falls by 1% per year from today. So the A$10,000 is effectively a misleading number. In that Frontier’s estimate of cost is actually in real terms as Hamilton calculates about A$8,500/KW in 2040 and continues to fall. I don’t have any problem with learning rates in an industry: Solar, wind, batteries and many, many other technologies have a learning rate, representing the reduction in unit costs for a doubling of installed capacity. But I think any reasonable person would question whether it’s appropriate to apply a learning rate to an industry that hasn’t even started in Australia and where the year 0 number is still very much in question. And, to the best of my knowledge, there hasn’t been much of a global learning rate in nuclear, although there may be one in China. In fact academic articles suggest that the experience curve for nuclear depends on the time and country. One oft cited reference is “How Big Things Get Done” by Betty Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardner, 2023. A key figure from that book is: The horizontal axis represents on time, expectations, further to the right is more on time, the vertical axis shows on budget. industries in the bottom left quadrant tend to have “fat tails” which means that the outcomes vary. Perhaps in China nuclear goes well, but in the UK or the USA it goes badly. On average it goes badly. Solar and wind go well. The figure is based, I believe on data summarised in the following table. The fact that olympics and nuclear have cost over runs most of the time surely cannot be a surprise to anyone. To me this is so intuitively obvious as to not need stating. Wind and solar projects take a couple of years to build, the technologies are modular, capable of being repeated and relatively small scale. Even a 1 GW wind farm represents 150 concrete pouring, each more or less the same, 150 turbines erected each the same way and so on. And Australia has done 1000s of turbines already. By contrast, Lucas Heights notwithstanding, Australia has absolutely zero nuclear experience or expertise, nuclear plants require much more planning, contracts that inevitably will need to be renegotiated and so on. The mind truly boggles. And in the end we would have zero comparative advantage. Whatever Australia’s nuclear cost it wont be lower than anyone else’s. How could it be? Modern nuclear plants with higher levels of automation might employ 500-800 people. According to a rough industry source about 50% -70% of those jobs will be in operations, maintenance and technical support. Roughly 25%-50% of the people will be engineers of one kind of another. Uranium mining and processing is not going to be taking place where nuclear plants are located. The idea that coal miners will down tools and suddenly start working in a nuclear plant is something only an LNP ideologue could truly believe. Of course, like any business, there will be second order GDP multiplier effects. However, I think it’s reasonable to assume that both the primary and secondary GDP impacts of building out regional REZs will be higher per $ of capital expenditure because by and large they come off a lower base. Building out the Central West Orana renewable energy zone in NSW will have major impacts, not all good, and not all sustainable on the regional economy. But for ever after the regional economy will have a more diversified industry base that, in my opinion, will enable it to better withstand the vicissitudes of the Australian climate and its ever more extreme drought and flood cycles. As far as I know the electricity industry in Australia has expressed zero interest in nuclear and obviously some parts of the industry that are busy building wind and solar will be actively opposed. Clearly this in itself is likely to raise costs. That is, the nuclear plants will have to be forced on the industry to a greater or lesser extent. Again although the plans are very vague the understanding is that they will Goverment funded and owned. Leaving aside all questions of ideology, in my opinion having the Goverment manage the program rather than industry means that there will be less expertise at almost every stage. I could rant on about this, the mind truly does boggle a bit at the possible negative outcomes, but perhaps it is sufficient to say that having the Goverment step into this area where it has no expertise raises the odds of cost and delay outcome substantially. Frontier provided no shapes to their demand or supply forecasts, just the annual totals. This has led to questions on how 13 GW of flat supply will impact the output of other fuels. Price stated that once the 13 GW was forced in the system, it was “re optimised” and the capacity factors, 90% in the case of nuclear, are a model output. And to be fair there is presently must run coal generation in the system which effectively provides a level of flat supply. That level continues to decline, and at least in Spring, the must run nature of coal already forces prices below zero and results in utility solar spillage. As to what fuel gets spilled that is a matter so far of policy and economics. Utility solar, and wind contracts can be written so that negative prices are not covered, the CIS has such a contract. Each contract for differences may have its own wording and since I don’t see any of them I’m cautious about generalising. AEMO provides via the ISP, as Frontier does not, half hourly demand traces by region and POE (10% and 50%). ITK has spent more time than I care to admit looking at these demand traces over the past four years and puzzling over what and what not is included in say “OPSO modelling”. A good starting document is: and for the half hourly data we want Section 6 starting at p57. AEMO is thorough with its demand forecasting, but that does not make the outcomes reliable, that’s the point really, some things are just hard to forecast no matter how thorough. Still, I find its well worth reading that Section 6 several times, because as Dylan sang way back in the early 1960s “dont criticise what you cant understand”. And this stuff ain’t that easy to understand. The following figure shows the shape of average daily demand in 2050 for both the Progressive and Stepchange scenarios with the horizontal red line showing average nuclear output at 90% capacity factor. It’s fair to say that rooftop supply is always a bit out of place on a demand figure but that is the way its done. Operational demand is gross demand less rooftop supply. Time of day averages are just averages. Particularly in the step change case in the ISP view of the world much of the lunch time surplus goes to charging storage to meet some elements of demand in non solar hours. The way I’ve constructed this figure in the Progressive case nuclear replaces virtually all the exiting rooftop and a significant portion of utility supply. In the Step Change scenario it’s still cutting out quite a bit. And that’s out in 2050 when in either Progressive or Step demand is a lot higher than in 2025. It seems intuitive that if nuclear is supplying say 50% of operational demand (more in the Progressive case) that some other sources of supply are going to be running at fairly low capacity factors. However, Frontier’s modelling apparently doesn’t show that.. This remains an unresolved issue. The numbers appear to show that with nuclear meeting 50% of Progressive Scenario demand in 2050 that capacity factors of other fuels will be impacted even with storage demand included. Frontier says this is not really the case and they have the gold standard PLEXOS modelling to prove it. One potential path to reconciliation would be for Frontier to show more results including those with behind the meter PV and storage and some average daily shapes, but I’m not holding my breath. Frontier did such a poor job the first time round the wise course for them would be to retire from the field and not give their many critics more oxygen. I spent time this year working with AEMO’s demand forecasts. In my view not enough attention is paid to demand as virtually all the mainstream focus is on supply and or price. But price represents the intersection between supply and demand, and the primary way to decarbonise an economy is to decarbonise electricity and then electrify other energy sources. AEMO makes the job hard because their demand portal would, I suspect, confuse even Edward Teller. At the risk of a minor digression, the Progressive demand case assumes that most large industrial loads (LIL) close around 2030. That would be the Tomago and Boyne Island and Portland aluminium smelters. Is that really what the LNP wants to happen? Here are the LIL forecasts for the two scenarios and then the state by state forecast for the Progressive scenario. Assuming, rarely a good decision, that I’ve successfully navigated AEMO’s demand portal and the recut and supposedly easier to follow analysis I show at then I get the following main item comparison between he various demand scenarios in 2050. Note that sum EV load is cotained in the res_sum row below. Nevertheless the point remains that talking about EVs maybe good politics for the LNP, even in Ted O’Brien’s Sunshine coast electorate where there are many EVs but it doest go to the major differences in the scenarios. Ignoring Green Energy Exports (everyone does) you can see that in fact the main differences between Progressive Change and Central are: Traditionally energy intensive businesses in Australia, primarily aluminium smelters, negotiate heavily discounted electricity prices with State Govt’s in return for investment in smelters. Traditionally, there has been a role for base load in the large industrial loads sector. However, in my opinion, the way to provide the firmed power has changed and the same result can be achieved, arguably at a lower cost, especially when carbon emissions are accounted for. As of today the State Govt contracts have often been transferred to private entities eg to AGL and other generators in Victoria in respect of the Portland smelter. However, there is no way the private sector is going to incur losses to support an aluminium smelter. The smelters remain a big industry collectively consuming around 9%-10% of electricity (the share relative to operational supply is higher). The relevance of the term “baseload” is best understood in the context of say an aluminium smelter which in Australia typically wants a flat supply, that is a supply every half hour of about 0.9 GW. Traditionally in Australia a coal generator backed up by contracts in the market and a retailers general supply portfolio was the the way it was done. For instance in QLD the Gladstone Power Station is 42% owned by Rio, in Victoria Portland smelter traditionally contracted with Loy Yang A, although that has now changed. In Tasmania the Bell Bay smelter, surely one of the older smelters in the world, contracted with Hydropower of Tasmania. In each case though there is a State Government providing a subsidy one way or another in the background. As the coal stations go away, several questions arise, but the one of relevance here is how to provide the smelter with its flat load without a coal station. So far the emerging answer seems to be that the smelter will provide the VRE itself, but will depend on the State Govt to provide the firming. For instance in February 2024 Rio announced a deal to buy 80% of the 1.4 GW Bungaban wind project and 100% of the 1.1 GW Calliope solar farm, but so far Rio has not announced any firming of this energy. The output of the two projects should be around 6 TWh per year – enough to power most of the smelter when generating. Clearly there will be too much generation at some points and too little at others, and the missing link is the management of the difference. What it shows to my way of thinking is a requirement for all the parties to think beyond a simple contract for difference whereby Rio buys power from the market and the QLD Govt subsidies the purchases. Now there is a more complex situation seemingly requiring the State and Rio to work more closely together. Ultimately, in a renewables based system, the rule is that the bigger the portfolio the lower the firming cost. That is the cost of firming total QLD supply is lower than the cost of firming just the smelter. According to the oldest rule of finance that risk should go to the party best placed to manage it, it’s therefore entirely reasonable for QLD to carry the firming cost. My point here is that Rio and the State Govt don’t need to think about “Baseload coal” or “Baseload nuclear” – the need is to understand the best way to firm QLD’s excellent solar and wind resource and to allow Rio to access that firmed cost.LONGMONT, Colo. , Dec. 23, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- S&W Seed Company (Nasdaq: SANW ) today announced it has closed a new $25 million revolving credit agreement with ABL OPCO LLC ("Mountain Ridge") which replaces an existing facility with CIBC Bank USA . In connection with the Company's entry into the Mountain Ridge credit agreement, MFP Partners L.P. ("MFP"), S&W Seed Company's largest shareholder, provided a letter of credit with a face amount equal to $13 million . The MFP letter of credit is being used as collateral to support S&W's obligations under the Mountain Ridge credit agreement providing the Company with borrowing base credit under the Mountain Ridge credit facility. "S&W has implemented a number of strategic initiatives over the past few months to exclusively focus on its core U.S.-based operations, led by our high margin sorghum trait portfolio with Double Team, while at the same time aligning our cost structure to drive the business toward near-term profitability," commented Vanessa Baughman , S&W's Chief Financial Officer. "I believe today's announcement is a strong endorsement from both our largest shareholder and new strategic banking partner in the future of S&W and the opportunity it represents going forward. I look forward to the continued execution of our growth and profitability initiatives as we enter calendar 2025." S&W also entered into a stock purchase agreement with MFP pursuant to which the Company repurchased 200,000 shares of the Company's common stock directly from MFP in a private, non-underwritten transaction. The Repurchased Shares were retired and restored to the status of authorized but unissued shares of the Company. The Company also granted MFP the right to designate one individual, who shall be a representative of MFP reasonably acceptable to the Company, to attend all meetings of the Company's Board of Directors and all committees of the Board in a non-voting, observer capacity, subject to certain exceptions. Full details of the Mountain Ridge and associated agreements is available on Form 8-K to be filed with the SEC available at www.sec.gov . About S&W Seed Company Founded in 1980, S&W is a global multi-crop, middle-market agricultural company headquartered in Longmont, Colorado . S&W's vision is to be the world's preferred proprietary seed company which supplies a range of sorghum, forage and specialty crop products that supports the growing global demand for animal proteins and healthier consumer diets. S&W is a global leader in sorghum seeds with significant research and development, production and distribution capabilities. S&W also has a commercial presence in proprietary alfalfa, and through a partnership, is focused on sustainable biofuel feedstocks primarily within camelina. For more information, please visit www.swseedco.com . Safe Harbor Statement This release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. "Forward-looking statements" describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as "may," "future," "plan" or "planned," "will" or "should," "expected," "anticipates," "draft," "eventually" or "projected." Forward-looking statements in this release include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the expected benefits of the Mountain Ridge credit facility, our success in executing our growth and profitability initiatives, including our success in aligning our cost structure to drive our business toward near-term profitability, and our go forward business plan. You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risk that the Mountain Ridge credit facility may not provide the anticipated benefits; the risk that our go forward business plan may not be successful and our strategic initiatives may not achieve the expected results; and the risks associated with our ability to successfully optimize and commercialize our business. These and other risks are identified in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including, without limitation, our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2024 and in other filings subsequently made by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. All forward-looking statements contained in this press release speak only as of the date on which they were made and are based on management's assumptions and estimates as of such date. We do not undertake any obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of the receipt of new information, the occurrence of future events or otherwise. Company Contact: Mark Herrmann , Chief Executive Officer S&W Seed Company Phone: (720) 593-3570 www.swseedco.com Investor Contact: Robert Blum Lytham Partners, LLC Phone: (602) 889-9700 [email protected] www.lythampartners.com SOURCE S&W Seed Company
OpenAI Details Plans for Becoming a For-Profit CompanyNASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Jacob Ognacevic had 25 points in Lipscomb's 112-54 victory over Division-III Asbury on Sunday night. Ognacevic added 12 rebounds for the Bisons (8-5). Charlie Williams scored 16 points while shooting 7 for 8, including 2 for 3 from beyond the arc. Will Pruitt shot 4 for 10, including 2 for 6 from beyond the arc to finish with 10 points. The Eagles were led in scoring by Cameron Jones, who finished with 19 points and seven rebounds. Johnathan Combs added 11 points for Asbury. Ben McNew also put up seven points. Lipscomb scored its most points since a 113-74 win over Asbury on Nov. 11, 2023. The Bisons topped the 100-point plateau four times last season. The Associated Press created this story using technology provided by Data Skrive and data from Sportradar .Jimmy Carter had the longest post-presidency of anyone to hold the office, and one of the most active. Here is a look back at his life. 1924 — Jimmy Carter was born on Oct. 1 to Earl and Lillian Carter in the small town of Plains, Georgia. 1928 — Earl Carter bought a 350-acre farm 3 miles from Plains in the tiny community of Archery. The Carter family lived in a house on the farm without running water or electricity. 1941 — He graduated from Plains High School and enrolled at Georgia Southwestern College in Americus. 1942 — He transferred to Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta. 1943 — Carter’s boyhood dream of being in the Navy becomes a reality as he is appointed to the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland. 1946 — He received his naval commission and on July 7 married Rosalynn Smith of Plains. They moved to Norfolk, Virginia. 1946-1952 — Carter’s three sons are born, Jack in 1947, Chip in 1950 and Jeff in 1952. 1962-66 — Carter is elected to the Georgia State Senate and serves two terms. 1953 — Carter’s father died and he cut his naval career short to save the family farm. Due to a limited income, Jimmy, Rosalynn and their three sons moved into Public Housing Apartment 9A in Plains. 1966 — He ran for governor, but lost. 1967 — Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter’s fourth child, Amy, is born. 1971 — He ran for governor again and won the election, becoming Georgia’s 76th governor on Jan. 12. 1974 — Carter announced his candidacy for president. 1976 — Carter was elected 39th president on Nov. 2, narrowly defeating incumbent Gerald Ford. Democratic presidential candidate Jimmy Carter embraces his wife Rosalynn after receiving the final news of his victory in the national general election, November 2, 1976. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images) New-elected President Jimmy Carter gives a press conference after being elected 39th President of the United States, on November 05, 1976 in Plains, Georgia. (Photo by GENE FORTE / CONSOLIDATED NEWS PICTURES / AFP) (Photo by GENE FORTE/CONSOLIDATED NEWS PICTURES/AFP via Getty Images) Supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Jimmy Carter hold up signs during a rally on may 15, 1976 in New York. – Carter was elected on December 21, 1976 39th President of the United States, 51% voice against 48% for incumbent Republican president Gerald Ford. (Photo by CONSOLIDATED NEWS / AFP) (Photo by -/CONSOLIDATED NEWS/AFP via Getty Images) Chief Justice Warren Burger administers the oath of office to Jimmy Carter (R), flanked by his wife Rosalynn, as the 39th President of the United Sates on January 20, 1977. (Photo by CONSOLIDATED NEWS / AFP) (Photo by -/CONSOLIDATED NEWS/AFP via Getty Images) Democratic presidential candidate Jimmy Carter embraces his wife Rosalynn after receiving the final news of his victory in the national general election, November 2, 1976. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images) 1978 — U.S. and the Peoples’ Republic of China establish full diplomatic relations. President Carter negotiates and mediates an accord between Egypt and Israel at Camp David. 1979 — The Department of Education is formed. Iranian radicals overrun the U.S. Embassy and seize American hostages. The Strategic Arms Limitations Treaty is signed. 1980 — On March 21, Carter announces that the U.S. will boycott the Olympic Games scheduled in Moscow. A rescue attempt to get American hostages out of Iran is unsuccessful. Carter was defeated in his bid for a second term as president by Ronald Reagan in November. 1981 — President Carter continues to negotiate the release of the American hostages in Iran. Minutes before his term as president is over, the hostages are released. 1982 — Carter became a distinguished professor at Emory University in Atlanta, and founded The Carter Center. The nonpartisan and nonprofit center addresses national and international issues of public policy. 1984 — Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter volunteer one week a year for Habitat for Humanity, a nonprofit organization that helps needy people in the United States and in other countries renovate and build homes, until 2020. He also taught Sunday school in the Maranatha Baptist Church of Plains from the mid-’80s until 2020. 2002 — Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. 2015 — Carter announced in August he had been diagnosed with melanoma that spread to his brain. 2016 — He said in March that he no longer needed cancer treatment. 2024 — Carter dies at 100 years old. Sources: Cartercenter.org, Plains Historical Preservation Trust, The Associated Press; The Brookings Institution; U.S. Navy; WhiteHouse.gov, Gallup[OPINION] Navigating the pitfalls of domestic politics: AFP’s role in a state in distress
Thompson-Herro fight leads to ejections of multiple players and coaches in Heat's victory in Houstonpeshkov Our idea of shorting Palantir ( NYSE: PLTR ) failed to materialize and we exited our position at a loss when the stock crossed its pre-2024 all-time high levels recently. We explained the reasoning behind our short idea in Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.Chad votes in general election after three years of army ruleElon Musk, Tesla's CEO, has expressed concerns about MacKenzie Scott's charitable donations, adding to the growing debate over billionaire philanthropy and its impact on society. In a recent social media exchange, Musk voiced his unease about Ms Scott's philanthropic activities, specifically her massive donations totalling $19 billion over the past five years. Notably, MacKenzie Scott is the ex-wife of Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. While some have praised her generosity, others, like Musk, have raised questions about the potential influence of concentrated wealth on societal norms and public policy. Responding to a post by author John LeFevre, Musk simply wrote, "Concerning." The post by Mr LeFevre read, "MacKenzie Scott (Bezos) does not get enough attention for the impact she's having on the state of the world. Her primary causes are EquityTM, sewing racial division and supporting illegal immigration. Her method is “trust-based philanthropy" - giving $16 billion in no strings attached grants to over 2,500 NGOs and nonprofits." See the tweet here: Concerning https://t.co/C11Lnm8XeH — Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 23, 2024 Musk had previously criticised Ms Scott‘ with a now-deleted social media post, suggesting that "super-rich ex-wives who hate their former spouse" could potentially contribute to the decline of Western civilization. The comment was widely seen as a thinly veiled reference to MacKenzie Scott. Shortly after Musk's comment, Ms Scott announced an additional $640 million in donations to 361 organizations, further solidifying her commitment to philanthropy. Notably, Ms Scott has become one of America's most prolific philanthropists. Through her organization, Yield Giving, she has donated over $19 billion to more than 2,450 nonprofits since 2019. Ms Scott's philanthropic efforts have focused on supporting organizations that promote equity, social justice, and LGBTQ+ rights. As of June 2024, Ms Scott's net worth stands at $36.1 billion, with a 4% stake in Amazon. Her philanthropic approach has been praised by many, including Melinda French Gates, who has publicly backed Scott's rapid-giving approach. Track Latest News Live on NDTV.com and get news updates from India and around the world
- Previous: 5 hand signals
- Next: 9 hand
