ANOTHER SEVENTIES MOVIE
Leaning San Francisco skyscraper is tilting 3 inches per year as engineers rush to implement fix


Tim Fitzsimons
Mon, January 10, 2022

The engineer trying to stabilize the Millennium Tower, a luxury residential skyscraper in San Francisco that is sinking into the ground and now leaning over two feet off of center, said the building is now tilting three inches per year.

Structural engineer Ronald O. Hamburger made the comments Thursday at a city hearing in which he pitched an updated fix for the building's foundation, NBC Bay Area reported.

The 58-story, 645-foot tall tower — opened to residents in 2009 — is now tilting 26 inches north and west at Fremont and Mission Streets in the heart of San Francisco’s financial district, according to NBC Bay Area.

Residents were informed that the building is settling unevenly and more than anticipated in 2016. The tower sits beside the Salesforce Transit Center, a bus terminal and potential future rail terminus for California’s high speed rail network currently under construction.

But efforts to stabilize the sinking and leaning skyscraper seemed to worsen matters. Engineers halted construction on the fix in summer 2021 so they could “determine why increased foundation movement was occurring and how this could be mitigated.”

To relaunch the stabilization, Hamburger on Thursday proposed slashing the number of support piles beneath the tower from 52 to 18 to "minimize additional building settlement."

A letter to the Millennium Tower’s general manager last month said the new, quicker fix was needed after engineers identified two potential causes for apparent worsening of the building’s settlement: “vibration of the soils associated with pile installation activity, and unintentional removal of excessive soil as the piles were installed.”

Hamburger said the 18 steel piles will be anchored into bedrock 250 feet under the tower, cutting through rapidly compressing clay and sand soil that the building's foundation sits upon today.

In a question and answer document, the engineer said if more than 18 piles are installed, "the construction schedule will be extended, and the building will settle and tilt a little more during this period."

"We judge that the 18-pile solution offers an optimal solution between additional settlement and benefit gained."

In an exclusive investigation, NBC Bay Area reported Wednesday that an expert review of the perimeter pile upgrade plan found there was a one- to four-day-long delay in summer 2021 between excavating the soil for the existing six pilings and injecting grout to minimize soil collapse.

That gap between excavating and injecting grout went against protocol and "could very well explain the comparatively rapid settlement and tilting that occurred during pile installation in August."

In an email, Douglas Elmets, spokesperson for the Millennium Tower Homeowners Association, said the perimeter pile plan won't stop the building's sinking "until the piles are driven into bedrock and attached to the foundation, which will occur later this year."

In a Thursday letter to the Millennium Tower Association, the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection said it had approved the new 18-pile plan, writing that it is "satisfied that the associated settlement and tilt remain within safe ranges and support [Hamburger's] proposal to continue the retrofit using the modified installation procedures."

SFDBI said they would inspect between each pile installation to ensure work was proceeding as expected.

NBC News reported in 2016 via a public records request that the Millennium Tower was previously expected by its builders to settle a maximum of 5.5 inches by the year 2028.

In 1973, 'Soylent Green' envisioned the world in 2022. It got a lot right.


A poster for the 1973 film “Soylent Green.” (LMPC/LMPC via Getty Images)

George Bass
Sun, January 9, 2022,

The year is 2022. Our overpopulated planet is experiencing catastrophic climate change, megacorporations have excessive power over the government, and clean living is a luxury only the 1 percent can afford.

It may read like a scan of the front-page headlines, but these predictions were laid out half a century ago in the dystopian film "Soylent Green."

Subscribe to The Post Most newsletter for the most important and interesting stories from The Washington Post.

Hundreds of films have attempted to visualize the future; most didn't do a great job. "Freejack" (1992) imagined widespread time-traveling assassins by 2009, while box office bomb "The Postman" (1997) predicted 2013 would be post-apocalyptic.

But about 50 years ago, Hollywood's prognosticators seemed to hit on the truth.

In 1972, the "Planet of the Apes" franchise released its fourth film, "Conquest of the Planet of the Apes." It's set in the year 1991 and imagines Earth in the grip of a lethal pandemic. Draw your own AIDS/SARS/Zika/covid comparisons.

But "Soylent Green," released in 1973 and based on a novel by Harry Harrison, was even more eerily prescient. It's set in the then-far-off future of 2022. It stars Charlton Heston - known for playing Moses in "The Ten Commandments" (1956) and for being the five-time president of the National Rifle Association - as Thorn, a New York police detective. And the planet he inhabits looks a lot like ours.

The plot centers on a murder investigation. But let's examine which of the film's social predictions have come true now that we've reached the year of its setting.

- Synthetic food

As long ago as "The Jetsons" in 1962, TV shows and movies have depicted humans ditching meals for nutrition pills. In "Soylent Green," it's a switch we make out of necessity: Overconsumption has caused fresh produce to become scarce. A head of lettuce, two tomatoes and a leek retail for $279, and a sliver of beef is the ultimate luxury.

The general public is forced to live off products from the Soylent corporation, whose wares contain "high-energy vegetable concentrate" - and are dismissed by one elderly customer as "tasteless, odorless crud." Its latest artificial meal is Soylent Green, a "miracle food of high-energy plankton gathered from the oceans of the world." It proves popular enough to be rationed to a single day of sale per week, but as Thorn discovers, it's not what it seems to be. (We won't spoil the ending, though if you know anything about the film, it's probably the horrifying revelation about Soylent Green.)

That grisly denouement didn't deter crowdfunders from investing in software engineer Rob Rhinehart's real-life Soylent meal replacements in 2013. Soylent today is available in powder and bar form. It "meets the Food and Drug Administration's standards for a whole raft of healthy claims," Ars Technica reported in 2014. Soylent Nutrition did temporarily stop sales of its powders and bars in 2016 after reports of gastrointestinal illness were traced to the products' use of flour made from algae - not plankton, exactly, but close. Today, Soylent is available to purchase online and in chains including Walmart and 7-Eleven, but it has yet to spark the same frenzied feeding riot of its namesake in the movie.

- Overcrowding

"Soylent Green" opens with photographs showing how modern Americans evolved from frock-coated settlers to fishermen, farmers and early town-dwellers. The slide show then blurs into a rush of cities with heaving sidewalks, smog-cloaked traffic jams and even Tokyo-style "professional pushers" cramming commuters onto subway trains. A title card tells us the population of New York City is 40 million; an exasperated Thorn at one point remarks, "There are 2 million guys out of work in Manhattan alone - just waiting for my job!"

There are similarities between the movie's universe and life in the Big Apple today. Manhattan saw an influx of homeless residents last June when the city attempted to ease crowding in shelters. And as shown on screen, police can be efficient (or overzealous, depending on your perspective) when it comes to clearing protesters. (Predictions of rampant crime, mercifully, have not materialized: Thorn notes that the city logs 137 homicides per day, while NYPD's CompStat report lists five from Dec. 27, 2021, to Jan. 2.)

The super-rich, however, get a better deal in reality than in the film, where they're confined to living in the Chelsea West apartments if they want to keep away from the masses. Each door in the luxury tower block is automated, the penthouse butler is dressed in garish hunting pink, and the height of decadence is a fresh shower. Not exactly the private wine cellars and porte-cochere that you'll find today in buildings such as 15 Central Park West.

- Climate change

Perhaps influenced by the 1972 heat wave in the Northeast and the first oil crisis of the early 1970s, "Soylent Green" imagines a sweltering future where the temperature never dips below 90. Margarine spoils in the fridge, and a sickly fog, similar to London's historical "pea-soupers," hangs in the air, forcing the city's last remaining trees to be shielded under a tent. Whether these calamities are the fault of humankind or a natural disaster isn't made clear, but in the source novel, it's implied to be the former.

To Thorn, a scorched existence is normal - he grew up in the sticky 21st century, after all - but he's still mesmerized when he discovers the wealthy murder victim's fresh soap and an air conditioner than can make the room "cold, like winter used to be."

In reality, of course, the climate catastrophe isn't limited to cities. Wildfires recently raged through Colorado, leaving hundreds homeless, while a huge swath of the West, from New Mexico to Idaho, is in the grips of a megadrought.

Britain just recorded its warmest New Year's Eve on record. Last November saw Delhi enter a temporary lockdown - not for covid but to mitigate the Indian capital's notorious air pollution.

- Assisted dying

Between the food shortages, staggering inequality, oppressive temperatures and stairwells lined with sleeping homeless people, life in "Soylent Green" isn't a picnic. Perhaps that's why authorities in the movie have legalized assisted dying.

One scene shows widows collecting "death benefits," implying that your family will be rewarded if you opt out. It's a moment that catches the eye of Sol Roth (Edward G. Robinson), who attends a clinic where he's welcomed by a glamorous assistant. He's asked to choose his favorite color and soundtrack, takes a mouthful of medicine and is placed in bed while an orderly pushes two buttons on a console. A wall-sized TV then plays a montage of pacifying imagery (grazing stag, golden dawns, rivers) as the character exchanges a tender "I love you" with Thorn. (Robinson himself would die 12 days after shooting wrapped.)

A controversial subject at the time, assisted dying is legal today in Canada, Colombia, Australia and parts of Europe. In 2018, 142 people traveled from Germany, France and Britain to Switzerland's Dignitas facility to make use of the country's physician-assisted suicide policy that does not set a minimum age, diagnosis requirement or qualifying symptoms.

- Screen time

While Thorn's leisure time is spent savoring the beans, lettuce and apples he has pilfered from his latest crime scene, the elite of "Soylent Green" have a more novel way to unwind: video games. In the luxury apartment of a Soylent board member, a sleek cabinet contains Computer Space, which in real-life 1971 had become the very first coin-operated arcade game.

Thank goodness the 2022 we find ourselves in today offers a wider array of high-tech escapism. But is our world as bleak as the film predicted 49 years ago?

"Soylent Green" might not be the most unnerving look at tomorrow - that honor will forever be held by Mick Jackson's "Threads" (1984) and its unflinching account of a nuclear holocaust - but it is one that guessed how ugly we might become if we continued to allow ourselves to be run by greed. Unlike in "Threads," we've avoided pushing the big red launch button. We're happy to keep pushing the buttons on our digital devices instead.

- - -

George Bass is a feature writer based in Britain who has contributed to the Guardian, the New York Times, the New Scientist and the Financial Times.

People are running out of money

Rick Newman

·Senior Columnist

Mon, January 10, 2022, 

One mystery of the labor shortage is the missing paycheck: How long can people choosing not to work last without an income?

Nobody’s sure, but clues are emerging. The economy continues to recover from the COVID wipeout, and hiring remains strong. Yet Americans are beginning to report more difficulty paying routine bills, not less, and it’s probably related to the end of federal relief measures that kept millions above water during the last 20 months.

In the Census Bureau’s “household pulse” survey last May, 46.7% of respondents said they had no difficulty paying usual household expenses. By December, that had fallen to 39.9%. During the same time period, the portion saying it’s a little, somewhat or very difficult to pay those bills rose from 45.9% to 49.9%. (The remaining 10% or so did not answer the question.)

Since the economy has been steadily improving, the deterioration in household finances isn’t due to worsening unemployment or falling incomes. But the last stimulus payments went out in the first half of 2021, and emergency federal jobless benefits ended in September. With inflation at 6.8%, buying power is also eroding at the same time aid is drying up. 

“There are people who are running out of money," says Philippa Dunne of TLR Analytics. "It's getting harder for them to pay their bills. The expiration of expanded unemployment insurance benefits and stimulus payments have taken a toll on household finances."

[Is your financial situation getting worse? We'd like to hear about it.]

There seem to be plenty of jobs for people who need to work. Employers report 10.6 million job openings, nearly the most ever. Unfilled jobs hit unprecedented levels in 2021, as COVID-related anomalies wrought havoc with the labor force. Some parents who want to work must now deal with unpredictable school schedules and an acute shortage of affordable child care. Several million potential workers may still be too concerned about catching COVID on the job to return. Federal aid money has given millions more a financial cushion that could delay a return to work or let them hold out for a better job longer than they may have been able to get before. A record-high quit rate—the portion of workers choosing to leave their jobs—suggests workers have newfound leverage, and they’re using it.

A hiring sign for McDonald's is displayed at Florham Park, New Jersey, U.S. September 10, 2021. Stimulus money may have made workers reluctant to take low-wage jobs. Picture taken September 10, 2021. REUTERS/Conway G. Gittens

If jobs are there for the taking, people starting to feel a financial pinch should have no trouble nabbing a paycheck or finding new work that pays more or offers better flexibility. But the door to work might not be as wide open as aggregate data suggests. Job-seekers say companies seem to post some listings just to see if they can lure a dream candidate, who never materializes, leaving those jobs open indefinitely. Not all employers are boosting pay and benefits. Some parents can’t find any job offering enough flexibility to let them care for kids or sick family members.

Financial strains could get worse. Another important element of federal relief—an expanded child tax credit—expired in December and it’s not clear Congress will renew it. The baseline child tax credit remains in place, but the expansion was worth hundreds or thousands of dollars extra to qualifying families. It also allowed those families to claim half the credit in advance, through a monthly bank-account direct deposit or check in the mailbox. The December Census survey showed 39% of child tax credit recipients—nearly 20 million households—spent the money, most likely on necessities. Thirty-eight percent said they used the money to pay down debt and just 26% said they saved it.

[Click here to get Rick Newman’s stories by email.]

One surprise of the COVID pandemic was a broad improvement in household finances, when many economists expected soaring unemployment to make things much worse. Roughly $6 trillion in relief programs passed by Congress gets much of the credit. Consumers also became frenetic savers, since it was hard to spend money when businesses shut down or it felt unsafe to go out. The saving rate rocketed from 8.3% before the pandemic to a high of 33.8% in April 2020. It stayed elevated for the next 15 months, providing a financial cushion as businesses struggled to get back to normal.

That cushion is evaporating. The saving rate in November fell to 6.9%, and Census data shows that more people are now using credit cards to pay for routine expenses. A saving supercycle has now yielded to “dissaving,” when people spend down their surplus and start to borrow more.

None of this means the economy is in particular trouble in 2022, since growth remains solid and robust hiring should resume once the Omicron COVID variant begins to retreat. But tougher economic times for at least some Americans will shape political decisions in 2022 and probably impact the upcoming midterm elections.

There are murmurs in Washington about another round of aid for business and perhaps some consumers still struggling. If it happens, it won’t be nearly as big as last year’s $2 trillion package, but it would reignite disputes between liberal politicians who think Washington should do much more and conservatives who think it has already gone way too far.

Also lingering is President Biden’s “build back better” legislation, which Democrats are revamping in the hope it can pass by the end of February. One of the biggest issues is whether to reauthorize the expanded child tax credit for another year or longer, or revert permanently back to the baseline credit. That bill could also include child care assistance and other measures that might help sidelined workers get back in the action. The question for 2022 is how much help they actually need. 

Rick Newman is a columnist and author of four books, including "Rebounders: How Winners Pivot from Setback to Success.” Follow him on Twitter: @rickjnewman. You can also send confidential tips.

U.S. reports 1.35 million COVID-19 cases in a day, shattering global record


Long lines for testing for COVID-19 continue in California

Mon, January 10, 2022
By Lisa Shumaker

(Reuters) - The United States reported 1.35 million new coronavirus infections on Monday, according to a Reuters tally, the highest daily total for any country in the world as the spread of the highly contagious Omicron variant showed no signs of slowing.

The previous record was 1.03 million cases on Jan. 3. A large number of cases are reported each Monday due to many states not reporting over the weekend. The seven-day average for new cases has tripled in two weeks https://tmsnrt.rs/2WTOZDR to over 700,000 new infections a day.

The record in new cases came the same day as the nation saw the number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients also hit an all-time high, having doubled in three weeks, according to a Reuters tally.

There were more than 136,604 people hospitalized with COVID-19, surpassing the record of 132,051 set in January last year.

While the Omicron variant is potentially less severe, health officials have warned that the sheer number of infections could strain hospital systems, some of which have already suspended elective procedures as they struggle to handle the increase in patients and staff shortages.

The surge in cases has disrupted schools, which are struggling with absences of staff, teachers and bus drivers.

Chicago canceled classes for a fourth day as the district and teachers failed to agree on how to deal with increased infections.

New York City suspended service on three subway lines as a large number of workers were out sick, according to its Twitter account. Companies' plans for workers to return to office have also been derailed.

Deaths are averaging 1,700 per day, up from about 1,400 in recent days but within levels seen earlier this winter.

A redesigned COVID-19 vaccine that specifically targets the Omicron variant is likely needed, Pfizer Inc's CEO said on Monday, adding his company could have one ready to launch by March.

(Reporting by Lisa Shumaker in Chicago, Aparupa Mazumder and Akriti Sharma in Bengaluru; Editing by Cynthia Osterman and Himani Sarkar)

There’s no excuse good enough to have let Florida’s warehouse of COVID tests expire | Editorial

HE COULD HAVE GIVEN THEM TO TEXAS

THEY NEED THEM😲



the Miami Herald Editorial Board
Mon, January 10, 2022, 

Florida allowed up to a million rapid COVID tests to expire in a warehouse, and Gov. Ron DeSantis’ excuses just don’t add up.

The DeSantis administration has said that the demand for tests fell off late in 2021. That’s true, as far as it goes. But demand came roaring back after Thanksgiving, when the omicron variant took hold. In Miami and other parts of the state, there were lines of cars snaking around parking lots. People waited for hours. Some ran out of gas. Store shelves were stripped of at-home test kits, with some big chains resorting to limits on the number we could buy.

That happened before the government’s tests expired in the final week of December.

So why didn’t the governor offer to distribute the tests to counties and cities back then? Open more testing sites, even? Or just, you know, make the issue public in case someone, somewhere, could use the tests before they expired?

State points fingers

Kevin Guthrie, the director of Florida’s Division of Emergency Management, tried some fancy footwork to explain the expired tests during a Jan. 6 press conference. He said the state had been waiting to see if the Food and Drug Administration and the company that makes the rapid tests, Abbott, would extend the expiration date by three months. He said the state had gotten a similar extension prior to that.

OK, fine. They asked for an extension and didn’t get an answer. But as the expiration date on the tests edged closer and closer, why didn’t the administration take action? If it had been monoclonal antibody treatment, which DeSantis has pushed relentlessly, we bet he would have been shouting it from the rooftops.

The blame-shifting and misdirection at the news conference continued. After Guthrie tried to say it was the federal government’s fault for not issuing another extension, DeSantis tried another tack. He pointed out that the Abbott tests required someone trained to administer them, and that at-home tests are better because they don’t require a trained person to use them.

Again, fine. But we didn’t imagine those lines for medical staff-administered tests at official Miami-Dade County sites in the weeks leading up to Christmas. Clearly, the need was there.

That brings us to politics. The expired tests came to light after Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried, a Democrat running for governor against DeSantis, started talking about them on social media. She accused the governor Dec. 30 on Twitter of stockpiling COVID tests that were about to expire, calling the situation either “negligent, or heartless.” It wasn’t until that Jan. 6 press conference that Desantis and Guthrie acknowledged that, actually, yes, they did have up to a million expired tests in a warehouse.
Less testing foolish

The backdrop to all of this is that the governor and his surgeon general, Joseph Ladapo, recently started advocating for less COVID testing. Ladapo, with DeSantis at his side, said on Jan. 3 that it was time to “unwind the testing psychology” (though Miami roundly ignored him, with a record-breaking 70,236 COVID tests that day.) We’re not scientists, but if you test less, you’re going to find less COVID. In effect, you’ll be creating an artificially rosier picture of the infection level. We wonder whom that would help.

And driving home the administration’s odd reasoning, DeSantis’ spokeswoman, Christina Pushaw, tweeted on Jan. 6: “Think about it. Before COVID, did anyone go out and seek testing to determine if they were sick? @GovRonDeSantis,” Well, we thought about it and the answer is obvious. We get colonoscopies, we get mammograms, we get X-rays and eye exams — all in the name of prevention, all to make sure things are in good working order. We do our best not to get sick.

Pushaw wrote the Editorial Board Monday that the “governor/governor’s office is not the custodian of COVID tests. Managing the procurement and logistics of COVID tests has always fallen to the Department of Health and Division of Emergency Management.”

Nope, sorry, that doesn’t wash. Both of those agency chiefs answer to the governor.

She noted that the state will be sending a million at-home tests to nursing homes and assisted-living facilities, apparently part of its new “low value” and “high value” testing strategy.

She also said it was a good thing that those tests were stockpiled, in case they were needed. The Division of Emergency Management, she wrote, “was over-prepared. It is a good thing that COVID cases were so low in Florida last fall that there wasn’t enough demand to use up the tests before they expired.”

We don’t have a quarrel with stockpiling tests for future use. And, yes, it is good that the demand was low in the fall. But by December, it was a vastly different story in Florida. And none of that explains why the state failed to act when the tests were getting close to expiration with no extension in sight.

Sitting on your hands while trying to blame the other guy isn’t a great look for a governor running for reelection. And it sure isn’t serving the people of Florida.

US Insurers To Cover Cost Of At-Home Covid Tests
The change comes into effect on Saturday, Jan. 15.

VERONIKA BONDARENKO

Taking an at-home COVID-19 test is about to get a lot less expensive for the average person — starting on Saturday, private insurance providers will be obligated to cover their costs.

In a new policy change brought forth by President Joe Biden, private insurance providers will have to cover the price of up to eight at-home tests per policy holder or dependent.

An at-home test, in which a person swabs one's nose and swirls it around in a sample to obtain an immediate positive or negative results, typically costs around $24 for a set of two packs.

As part of a push to increase testing and curb spread by knowing who should avoid going out, the move only applies to at-home testing as medically-recommended PCR and rapid antigen tests should already be covered by insurers.

Right now, most people who buy COVID-19 tests would get reimbursed after submitting receipts. In the same announcement, the Biden administration encouraged insurance companies to work out arrangements with popular pharmacies like CVS ( (CVS) - Get CVS Health Corporation Report) and Walgreens ( (WBA) - Get Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc Report) so that free tests can be picked up by visitors directly.

"This is all part of our overall strategy to ramp up access to easy-to-use, at-home tests at no cost,” Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra said in a statement to the Associated Press. "By requiring private health plans to cover people’s at-home tests, we are further expanding Americans’ ability to get tests for free when they need them."

But while the change will settle the financial problem of at-home testing for some people, actually obtaining one may be another issue altogether — there are currently nationwide shortages due as omicron infections rise. The changes come into effect on Jan. 15; tests purchased after that period will need to be reimbursed.

NORTHERN ONTARIO

Nuclear Waste Management Organization studies road and rail for shipping used fuel bundles

The NWMO has released two planning documents but says they will be revised in years to come

Gary Rinne
a day ago

Hundreds of truckloads of used nuclear fuel bundles could be delivered annually to the Ignace area by truck, rail or both (NWMO photo)

TORONTO — If everything goes according to plan, by the 2040s more than 650 truckloads of spent nuclear fuel could be shipped to Northwestern Ontario on the highway each year.

But the number of trucks carrying used fuel rods would be reduced significantly – to fewer than 250 annually – if the Nuclear Waste Management Organization opted to ship by rail as well.

The NWMO's newly-released preliminary transportation plan provides an overview of transport requirements for both the proposed Ignace-area storage site and the South Bruce site.

However, until a final site selection is made, its preliminary focus is on all-road options.

That's because there is no existing rail infrastructure to the South Bruce location, which makes the use of trucks to that site more likely than the hybrid option.

There are currently more than three million spent fuel bundles in interim storage facilities at eight facilities across Canada.

By the time the country's existing nuclear reactors stop operating, the number of used bundles will increase to 5.5 million.

The preliminary shipping plan includes a detailed description of the containers that could be used, and how they are tested for their ability to withstand the impact of a collision.

The NWMO on Wednesday also released its Transportation Planning Framework which it said sets out its objectives and considerations for transporting nuclear fuel. The document was adjusted after public feedback on a draft issued in 2020.

It said key updates include more discussion of the importance of Indigenous voices in the planning process, and an acknowledgement that people have concerns about existing infrastructure gaps and impacts.

Transportation Engagement Manager Caitlin Burley said NWMO knows the transportation of used fuel is a subject of broad public interest, and it wants to hear from Canadians including Indigenous people "about what they want to see in a safe and socially acceptable transportation plan."

Burley said the planning framework and the preliminary plan are intended to advance NWMO's public dialogue as it develops more detailed site-specific plans in the coming years.

"Like everything else we do, we are interweaving western science and Indigenous knowledge into our transportation planning approaches," Burley added.

The organization expects to decide between Ignace and South Bruce sometime in 2023.

The transportation of used nuclear fuel in Canada is jointly regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and Transport Canada.

Regulatory requirements are based on international standards.

NWMO said it will revise its plans every three years over the next two decades to consider evolving best practices and new technologies.

It plans to choose between Ignace and South Bruce sometime next year.

 

The organization has developed a tight working relationship with the Township of Ignace, and has offered that community as well as South Bruce millions of dollars for local infrastructure projects.

 

The current Ignace council recently announced it will leave it to the next council to decide whether to accept a nuclear waste repository nearby.

 

South Bruce, on the other hand, plans to hold a referendum.

 

NWMO continues to consult with Indigenous groups including Wabigoon Lake First Nation near Dryden, whose Chief said in October that "we still hold the authorization to stop the project."

Biden Interior Department defends Trump-era coal-mining plans

The Biden administration in a Friday court filing defended a Trump-era policy that advocates say disregarded a court order to consider coal alternatives in the Powder River Basin

.

In a 2018 decision, the U.S. Federal District Court in Montana ordered the Trump Bureau of Land Management to revise its resource management plans (RMPs) for its field offices in Miles City and Buffalo.

The RMPs outline the amount of coal that is to be sold to companies, mined and burned. The Powder River Basin, an area in Montana and Wyoming that includes Miles City, accounts for more than 40 percent of all coal produced nationwide.

In the decision, the court found that the Bureau of Land Management did not properly consider alternatives that restricted the amount of coal available for strip mining. It also ordered the agency to disclose environmental effects associated with downstream burning of fossil fuels as well as the effects of methane emissions on climate in the short term.

Two years later, while former President Trump was still in office, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) responded to the order but did not consider the costs of alternatives the earlier ruling had required.

In its filing Friday, the agency argued it had properly considered alternatives in compliance with the order.

"BLM's consideration of alternatives that made reduced acreages available for further consideration for coal leasing complied with the Court 's order and with [the National Environmental Policy Act]," the agency said in the filing. After the ruling, agency officials wrote, "Based on the results of the coal-screening processes, both Field Offices considered alternatives that would reduce the amount of acreage available for coal development."

Between them, the two field offices considered a total of five alternatives, the filing claimed.

In a statement Monday, a coalition of environmental groups blasted the filing, saying it ran contrary to the administration's stated goals of tightening environmental regulations rolled back under the Trump administration.

The coalition had earlier filed a brief in support of a motion ordering the Bureau of Land Management to conduct a new analysis.

The organizations involved included the Western Organization of Resource Councils, the Montana Environmental Information Center, the Powder River Basin Resource Council, the Northern Plains Resource Council, the Center for Biological Diversity and WildEarth Guardians as well as attorneys with Earthjustice, the Western Environmental Law Center and the Sierra Club.

"President Biden promised to hold polluters accountable and accelerate the transition to clean and renewable energy. But while the president calls climate change 'code red for humanity,' the administration's BLM is doubling down on Trump-era policies that prop up a dying coal industry at the expense of American taxpayers," the coalition said in a statement. "Why does the Biden administration want to hide the devastating public health impacts of burning federal coal? And if it cares about fighting climate change, why would it refuse to even consider ways to reduce the mining of publicly owned coal?"

YouTube Removes QAnon Videos Falsely Claiming Donald Trump Is Mussolini's Nephew

YouTube has removed viral QAnon videos that promoted the false claim that Donald Trump is the nephew of fascist dictator Benito Mussolini.

© Getty A split photo of Donald Trump and Benito Mussolini. Conspiracy influencers claimed that Donald Trump is Benito Mussolini's nephew.

The two-part conspiratorial Jesus Strand series, uploaded in October 2021, racked up more than 300,000 views on YouTube until it was removed last week after Newsweek alerted the platform.

In the videos, Dallas QAnon leader Michael Protzman and other conspiracy theory influencers, who between them have tens of thousands of followers on social media, promoted numerous bogus beliefs, which included that Trump was related to the infamous Italian dictator.

Over a series of increasingly fantastical claims, the hosts in the videos claimed Jesus Christ had numerous descendants, including assassinated presidents Abraham Lincoln, John F. Kennedy and World War II General George S. Patton.

Further bizarre claims made were that Trump was secretly the son of General Patton, thereby also a member of Christ's bloodline and was the nephew of Mussolini.

One conspiracy influencer said: "Our beloved President Donald Trump is a general like his father George S. Patton, a builder like his uncle Benito Mussolini, and a unifier like his great grandfather Abraham Lincoln."

In the clip, Mussolini's dictatorship is whitewashed with claims his imperialist campaigns in Africa were done to improve the standard of living in Ethiopia and Libya.

But in reality, Mussolini's campaign's in Africa underpinned the expansionist motives of the Axis powers ahead of World War II, and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians.

The conspiracy influencers further claimed the banking Rothschild and Rockefeller families are among numerous groups who are hunting down members of Christ's bloodline.

In a bid to connect the outlandish beliefs, the influencers referred to gematria, a form of numerology that connects words or phrases to a number sequence.

Through this practice, Protzman linked the words (such as Jesus) to phrases and words associated with the QAnon conspiracy theory.

Protzman has continued to use gematria with his followers who remain in Dallas after they descended on the city in November last year in the hope of seeing John F. Kennedy alive, despite him having died in a plane crash back in 1999.

The claims made in the video series about Christ's bloodline have no basis in fact and are not seriously considered among any of the major Christian denominations.

After Newsweek approached YouTube with information about the QAnon references in the video, part one of the series was removed, although part two remained on the platform.

Since 2018, YouTube has removed tens of thousands of QAnon-related content and accounts as it considers the online movement to be "used to justify real-world violence."

A YouTube spokesperson said in a first statement sent to Newsweek on December 30: "We removed one video flagged to us by Newsweek for violating our harassment policy, which prohibits content that targets someone by suggesting they are complicit in a conspiracy theory that is used to justify real-world violence, including QAnon.

"We enforce our policies rigorously and since 2018, we've removed tens of thousands of QAnon-videos and terminated hundreds of channels."

Newsweek then sent an additional message to YouTube, which mentioned cases where QAnon references were made and part two was later removed on January 4.

In a second statement, YouTube told Newsweek: "Upon further review, we removed the second video for violating our harassment policy."

While the viral videos have been removed, Newsweek has found the clips have been re-uploaded by smaller accounts back onto the platform.

The Jesus Strand video series has also been found on the online video service Rumble as well as being shared in Telegram groups linked to Protzman.

Newsweek has contacted YouTube and Rumble for further comment.

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M

Lawsuit accuses 16 major universities, including Yale and Northwestern, of illegally collaborating to limit students' financial aid
asheffey@businessinsider.com (Ayelet Sheffey) 

© Provided by Business Insider Yale University in New Haven, Connecticut, in 2015. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton/File Photo

A suit accuses 16 universities of illegally restricting financial aid, The Wall Street Journal said.

It said schools, including Yale, illegally weighed students' abilities to pay when determining aid.

The plaintiffs seek damages and an end to schools' collaboration in calculating financial need.

A new lawsuit accuses major universities, including Ivy League schools, of engaging in illegal behavior that restricts students' access to federal aid.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that five former students were suing 16 schools in the US, including Yale, Georgetown, and Columbia, accusing them of engaging in price-fixing and unfairly cutting off some students from financial aid by collaborating on financial-need calculations.

The Journal reported that schools are legally allowed to collaborate on their financial-aid formulas, but the lawsuit said the schools weighed the students' ability to pay in some situations, which is not permitted under the law. Attorneys in the suit said more than 170,000 former students who received partial financial aid from the 16 schools could be eligible to become plaintiffs in the case.

Other defendants in the lawsuit include Northwestern University, Brown University, the University of Chicago, Dartmouth, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

"While conspiring together on a method for awarding financial aid, which raises net tuition prices, defendants also consider the wealth of applicants and their families in making admissions decisions," Eric Rosen, a partner at one of the firms that filed the suit, told The Journal.

Representatives for all of the mentioned schools either declined to comment on pending litigation or did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

There's historical precedent for the type of anticompetitive behavior accused in the lawsuit. In 1991, all members of the Ivy League were charged with price-fixing, which is when competitors get together to set the price of a product, often making prices higher for consumers. As a result, Congress passed legislation that exempted those schools from antitrust violations as long as the collaborations on aid were need-blind — meaning not taking into account the student's ability to pay. This led to the creation of the 568 Presidents Group, a group of universities that meets a few times a year to discuss aid calculations on a need-blind basis.

But the new lawsuit argues that schools are collaborating on financial aid and admissions practices that aren't completely need-blind.

"Under a true need-blind admissions system, all students would be admitted without regard to the financial circumstances of the student or student's family," the lawsuit said. "Far from following this practice, at least nine Defendants for many years have favored wealthy applicants in the admissions process."

The Journal reported that the lawsuit is seeking damages and a permanent end to the schools' collaboration in determining and awarding financial aid.