The Hate U Give Soundtrack Mp3 ((HOT)) Download
Azarias Alvarez
I hate this. It is annoying and time-consuming. I also don't know how to stop it or prevent it from happening. It also affects my Release Radar and Discover Daily - two playlists containing almost nothing I enjoy listening.
Connect your themes and methods of Responsibility, Common Sense, Personalizing Your Client, Reasonableness, Arguing Pain and Suffering, and Giving a Number with the one starting point that ties them all together and gives you credibility: Love!
S2: We expect today will likely be the peak for demand across the state and across the entire West. So to put it in perspective , the all time high by the California Independent System operator happened in 2017 and it was 50,117 , I believe. And today , right now the forecast is 51,145. Should give you an idea that's actually a pretty significant bump over historical high.
S3: This is KPBS Midday Edition. I'm Maureen CAVANAUGH with Jane Heineman. Governor Newsom has begun to sign a new package of climate action bills , including one to extend the life of the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant. The governor submitted six climate bills with only weeks to go in the legislative session , and lawmakers passed five of them before the session ended last week. Among the new measures are efforts at carbon removal and capture and new interim steps to meet already established carbon reduction goals. But a proposal to cut California's greenhouse gas emissions even more aggressively did not get lawmakers approval. Joining me is Nadia Lopez. She's environment reporter for Cal Matters. And , Nadia , welcome. Hi. The proposal to keep Diablo Canyon nuclear plant open beyond its closure date of 2025 , that's the one that's gotten the most publicity. And I'm wondering , did the legislators give the governor everything he wanted on that extension ? Well , not necessarily. So the Devil Canyon , billed as the eight for six , it was signed on Friday. That's not a surprise , though , because Newsom and his administration had said that it was one of its biggest priorities. So the bill would keep the plant open until 2030 and give me a $1.4 billion loan to do so. The bill was very similar to draft legislation that Newsom proposed a few weeks ago on August 12. But it does have some key differences. They're minor , but they still are important. Newsom wanted to extend the life of the plant for ten years , but legislators in both the Senate and Assembly were opposed to that idea , and they compromised on five years. The bill also includes stronger protections for ratepayers and alone would be allocated in smaller increments. So lawmakers have to approve spending in excess of 600 billion. The heat wave seems to be making the governor's case as to why he wanted this source of energy to continue , isn't it ? That's right. He issued an emergency order last week. And then he has repeatedly said that the state's inability to provide a consistent and reliable source of power , especially during these extreme heat events , are one factor that made him reconsider keeping the plant open. And as we all experience the state's inability to avoid rolling blackouts during the 2020 heat wave was also a huge concern that some people think prompted the governor to consider keeping the plant open as well. But some environmentalists have the same concerns about Diablo Canyon , don't they ? Yeah. So safety issues are a huge concern for opponents and many residents who live close to the plant down in San Luis Obispo. So the storing of spent , nuclear waste , proximity to fault lines and the threat of earthquakes , these were already issues that are part of the reason why PJM initially agreed to six years ago to close the plant in 2025. And besides that , environmentalists also say that the plant's extension could delay those really important investments in renewable energy. What has to happen now to actually keep the plant open ? PGE has until today to apply for federal funding. Biden during the spring , announced that a $6 billion program is available to help struggling nuclear power plants stay afloat. Okay , so another controversial climate bill passed last week. It's the one aimed at setting up regulations for carbon capture and storage. And this is one the oil industry likes. Why is that so ? There are different controversial practices as to how to reach net zero emissions as the state wants to do by 2045. What it means , basically , is that an existing polluting facility , such as an oil refinery , can build certain infrastructure on their facilities in order to capture emissions before they hit the atmosphere. So on smokestacks. But that's a controversial practice because some environmentalists say it's unproven. And in addition to that , it could be used for things such as enhanced oil recovery , which would prolong the life of the fossil fuel industry. The bill that passed would direct the California Air Resources Board to develop a program and set regulations for this practice carbon capture , utilization and storage. And in addition , that could pave the way for other sorts of carbon removal practices to occur at these facilities as well. Kind of a companion bill passed to a bill to increase natural carbon sequestration. What would it do ? So another bill would also help remove carbon existing carbon dioxide from the air. But to do so with nature based options , what that basically means planting more trees. You really. On Forest's Urban Greenery projects to help nature suck out carbon from the air. Tell us about the new bill to put buffer zones around oil wells and gas drilling. Yes , this was also a big win for environmental justice groups. Lawmakers approved SB 1137 to establish health and safety buffer zones around new oil and gas wells. This was a key bill and Newsom's climate package , similar restrictions had failed to pass or move forward in the past. This was due to a lot of lobbying from the oil and gas industry , as well as some trade unions. And this bill basically establishes these regulations , those setbacks between those production sites and residential neighborhoods that include schools , that include houses and so forth , other sensitive areas. And it also requires the operators of these facilities to take some steps at existing wells within that buffer zones to monitor toxic leaks and emissions and install alarm systems. Now , this bill was argued as a social justice issue. Why is that ? There's some evidence that indicates that people who live near these wells are at much higher risk for a lot of health problems like asthma , respiratory illness and some cancers. And the majority of those living near these oil facilities are people of color , communities of color. So a lot of environmental justice groups say that these communities are bearing the brunt of pollution. Why did the governor wait until the last minute in this two year legislative session to submit this climate action package ? That's a good question. The governor has in recent times made climate a huge priority during his administration. And you know as well , there are some rumors and speculation that he's also trying to raise his national profile. And climate has proven to be one of the most talked about and biggest issues of our time. So to amplify his image on the promise of a progressive climate policy is one reason some people believe that he's decided to take action now. I've been speaking with Nadia Lopez , environment reporter for Calmatters. Nadia , thank you. Thank you so much.
S1: There's a bill headed to Governor Gavin Newsom's desk. Simply , Bill 587 , which passed the state legislature , would require social media platforms to report hate content data and have transparent policies on that data. The Anti-Defamation League says their recent online hate and harassment report highlights the need for this legislation. Jeffrey Abrams , regional director of ADL Los Angeles , joins us now. Jeffrey , welcome.
S2: What has become crystal clear as a result of their conduct , as a result of things like the Facebook whistle blower who make clear that Facebook , for example , knew knows that their product harms people. But what they don't do is make it transparent. What are their policies against hate speech ? How are they enforcing that hate hate speech ? This bill would remove that lack of transparency. It would require social media platforms to report twice a year to the state attorney general. What are your policies ? How are you enforcing it ? How are people who have complaints able to interact with your platform ? Is it with people ? Is it with a automated auto generated response ? What this bill will require is that social media companies give the public give organizations like ADL , give researchers and academic. A window into how the spread of hate online is impacting our society.
S1: You know , hate based harassment often can turn to violence. So does this bill go far enough ? Federal law enforcement agencies in particular have had the authority to surveil extremist activities online , and yet hate motivated violence has been difficult for them to prevent in some cases.
S2: There won't be a final step until there's really a radical readjustment and revision to Section 230 of the CDA , the Communications Decency Act , at a federal level. But there is not the appetite in the current Congress to take this on. We know we have seen firsthand that rhetoric hate online spills over into the streets.
S2: It's akin to any product in the marketplace. Think of cars. There was a time when seatbelts were not in cars. But as a matter of policy , it was decided. It was determined that too many lives would be lost because there were no seatbelts. So the product there was then a modification so that every car has to have a seatbelt. Why ? It saves lives. And the same goes for social media platforms. What they are peddling right now is costing lives. And if they won't take their own responsibility for it and they have not , then there's no choice. But for a government action like this to take place that doesn't violate any rights. It has. It's completely content neutral. These are , by the way , not public government entities. They're companies. So it's really and it's a complete misnomer to think this has anything to do with the First Amendment. They are private companies. They can choose whether to spread hate or choose not to spread hate. They've chosen an alternative to make money. And the time has come for this to stop.
df19127ead