They're little sea puppies that are perfectly happy to cruise around while you swim with them. At least that's the grey nurse sharks we get in aus. The ones you're describing sound more like wobbegongs or similar. The grey nurses need to be in highly oxygenated water.

Grey nurses also used to have a rep as "man eaters" but that was just because of how they looked,not any actual attacks

Ah yes, let's take the low life area and make it 0 life

That and incentivise smart devices like water heaters that run when power is cheap, which is effectively a rudimentary battery

Huh, when I initially read "petty bourgeois" I thought you'd got the term wrong, but when I looked it up to check its a common anglicisation of "petite bourgeois".

I find the latter more intuitive, as it's "little bourgeois", but both are right.

Sort of, but honestly the vapes have created a new generation of smokers and they should have banned them much sooner (unless you have a prescription and actual plan to use them to quit smoking). They were much easier for new people to get into and we went from smoking dying out to a sizeable number of young smokers.

The tobacco companies have done very well out of vaping

Except worse because they mix inventory so it's easier for sellers to get away with scams

The way musk marketed it was as a "self driving" feature, not a driving assist. Yes with all current smart assists you need to be carefully watching what it's doing, but that's not what it was made out to be. Because of that I'd still say tesla is responsible.

Probably because there have been a lot more make chess players in general historically. It's still a long way from an even split today and was probably even more imbalanced.

The cost of the power it generates in 50 years aren't lower than the day it opens. If you amortise the cost of the plant over its life nuclear is stupid expensive per watt produced. It's expensive enough that renewables + storage is cheaper. Renewables + storage is also a lot quicker to build than nuclear.

Even after the uptick in cost of renewables in the last year (which was dramatic) they're still the cheapest new build power (even accounting for the integration costs). As an example here's the most recent annual csiro report on energy costs by type. It doesn't include full scale nuclear today because it's known to be unviable, but even 2030 projections on "if smrs are commonly deployed at scale" they're predicted to be a lot more expensive than renewables with integration costs.

https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/energy-data-modelling/gencost

If you mean renewables by that, it's hardly hypothetical or unproven. I'm in Australia and south Australia and Tasmania (two of our states) have fully renewable grids, Tasmania for the past 7 years. South Australia does still occasionally pull from an interconnect but most of the time they're exporting a bunch of power.

Renewables with storage are cheaper and faster to build than nuclear and that's from real world costs. Nuclear would be fine if it wasn't so stupidly expensive.

Coal isn't the cheapest though. For new build power renewables + storage are. That is to say, the incremental cost of running a coal plant isn't that massive, but cost to build + fuel one amortised over the lifetime is more than renewables + storage.

So yes, you can enforce "adequate regulation" and nuclear will still be the most expensive.

Yes, however with that it'd be more expensive to administer taxation on bicycles etc. Than what they'd bring in... So not really worth doing at all.