sports wear attire

Nonesports wear attire 。

Israeli hospital says Netanyahu has undergone successful prostate surgery

Judge rejects an attempt by Trump campaign lawyer to invalidate guilty plea in Georgia election case

WBBL 2024 Live Streaming in India: Watch Melbourne Stars vs Adelaide Strikers Online and Live Telecast of Women’s Big Bash League Cricket MatchNo. 2 Ohio State takes control in the 2nd half and runs over No. 5 Indiana

None

F.P. Report GUJRANWALA: The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) Gujranwala has apprehended two suspects, Muhammad Aslam and Saeed Ahmed, involved in the Greece boat tragedy and human smuggling operations. According to the FIA spokesperson, Muhammad Aslam is a key member of an international human smuggling gang and was directly involved in the Greece boat incident. He defrauded victims by promising safe passage to Europe, amassing a total of PKR 8.5 million. Aslam, along with accomplices, first transported the victims to Libya and later attempted to send them to Greece via boat, which tragically capsised, leaving many victims missing. Saeed Ahmed, apprehended in a separate operation in Gujrat, was involved in creating fake travel documents and charging hefty amounts for them. FIA Gujranwala Zone Director stated that modern technology was employed to track and arrest the culprits. Investigations have commenced, and efforts are underway to arrest other gang members. Raiding teams have been formed as part of an ongoing crackdown against elements linked to the Greece boat tragedy. Authorities reiterated their commitment to dismantling human smuggling networks and ensuring justice for the victims.In a significant move, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is all set to host the Indian Premier League (IPL) 2025 player auction, marking its first significant venture into cricket . The auction will be held on Sunday, November 24, and Monday, November 25, at Abady Al Johar Arena, also known as Benchmark Arena, in Jeddah . A total of 574 players have been selected from an initial pool of 1,574 names. Of the 574 players, 366 are Indian, while 208 are overseas, including three from associate nations. The auction will see 318 Indian uncapped players and 12 uncapped overseas players in contention. Featuring notable players such as Indian wicketkeeper Rishabh Pant, veteran England fast bowler James Anderson, and New Zealand all-rounder Rachin Ravindra. Saudi Arabia’s holding of the IPL auction signals its intention to elevate cricket alongside football, golf, and boxing in its sports investment portfolio under the Vision 2030 project. This is not the first time the player auction is venturing out of India. In 2023, the player auction was held at the Coca-Cola in Dubai.

Srinagar, Nov 23: National Conference (NC) President Dr Farooq Abdullah and party Vice President and Chief Minister Omar Abdullah have paid rich tributes to the journalist and the father figure of press in Kashmir Khwaja Sonaullah Bhat on his 15th death anniversary, a press release said. Dr Farooq Abdullah said, “Khwaja Sahib was a pioneer of objective journalism, introducing street sales of newspapers. A true trendsetter, he never wavered in his commitment to truth and human values. Khawaja Sahib’s daily column in the Aftab newspaper, ‘Khazar Souchta Hai Wular Kay Kinaray,’ addressed numerous societal issues. I offer my heartfelt tributes to him and pray that the Almighty elevates his status in Jannat.” Omar Abdullah, praised Khwaja Sonaullah Bhat as one of the trailblasers of journalism in Kashmir. He emphasised that his contributions to journalism will serve as a guiding light for future generations. He concluded by offering his prayers for his soul to rest in the highest realms of Jannat. Among others Party’s General Secretary Ali Muhammad Muhammad Sagar, Additional General Secretary Dr Sheikh Mustafa Kamal, Treasurer Shammi Oberoi, Advisor to CM Nasir Aslam Wani, Chief Spokesperson Tanvir Sadiq, State Spokesperson Imran Nabi Dar, Provincial President Showkat Mir, social media and media cell functionaries have also paid glowing tributes to Khawaja Sanaullah Bhat and prayed for peace to his soul in the highest echelons of Jannat. Meanwhile, Chief Patron Jamait-e-Hamdani Moulana Riyaz Hamdani and Publicity Secretary G M Mir Saqi paid rich tributes to Khawaja Sonaullah Bhat and recounted his immense contribution to journalism in J&K.JMU_Y.Knight 6 pass from Barnett (Ruelas kick), 11:02. JMU_Phifer 37 pass from Barnett (Ruelas kick), 14:08. APP_FG Hughes 22, 12:19. APP_E.Wilson 4 pass from Aguilar (Moore kick), 7:31. JMU_FG Ruelas 45, 2:49. APP_Jackson 64 pass from Aguilar (Moore kick), 1:20. APP_Hetzel 61 punt return (Moore kick), :31. JMU_FG Ruelas 51, 7:46. APP_Marshall 1 run (Moore kick), 1:53. APP_FG Moore 40, 10:30. RUSHING_James Madison, Pettaway 13-83, W.Knight 12-60, Barnett 13-27, Malary 1-2. Appalachian St., Marshall 24-107, Haywood 3-19, Castle 3-18, Aguilar 5-4, (Team) 2-(minus 2). PASSING_James Madison, Barnett 20-35-1-223. Appalachian St., Aguilar 12-24-0-216. RECEIVING_James Madison, Y.Knight 5-60, Dollison 4-49, Pettaway 4-28, Ross 2-28, Phifer 1-37, Kyle 1-7, W.Knight 1-5, Malary 1-5, Thompson 1-4. Appalachian St., Jackson 5-162, E.Wilson 4-32, Hetzel 1-10, Larkins 1-6, Stroman 1-6. MISSED FIELD GOALS_None.Plan for ‘super junior’ to tackle immigration issueNorth Korean leader Kim Jong Un vowed to implement the “toughest” anti-U.S. policy, state media reported Sunday, less than a month before Donald Trump takes office as U.S. president. Trump’s return to the White House raises prospects for high-profile diplomacy with North Korea. During his first term, Trump met Kim three times for talks on the North's nuclear program. Many experts however say a quick resumption of Kim-Trump summitry is unlikely as Trump would first focus on conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. North Korea's support for Russia's war against Ukraine also poses a challenge to efforts to revive diplomacy, experts say. During a five-day plenary meeting of the ruling Workers’ Party that ended Friday, Kim called the U.S. “the most reactionary state that regards anti-communism as its invariable state policy.” Kim said that the U.S.-South Korea-Japan security partnership is expanding into “a nuclear military bloc for aggression." “This reality clearly shows to which direction we should advance and what we should do and how,” Kim said, according to the official Korean Central News Agency. It said Kim's speech “clarified the strategy for the toughest anti-U.S. counteraction to be launched aggressively” by North Korea for its long-term national interests and security. KCNA didn't elaborate on the anti-U.S. strategy. But it said Kim set forth tasks to bolster military capability through defense technology advancements and stressed the need to improve the mental toughness of North Korean soldiers. The previous meetings between Trump and Kim had not only put an end to their exchanges of fiery rhetoric and threats of destruction, but they developed personal connections. Trump once famously said he and Kim “fell in love.” But their talks eventually collapsed in 2019, as they wrangled over U.S.-led sanctions on the North. North Korea has since sharply increased the pace of its weapons testing activities to build more reliable nuclear missiles targeting the U.S. and its allies. The U.S. and South Korea have responded by expanding their military bilateral drills and also trilateral ones involving Japan, drawing strong rebukes from the North, which views such U.S.-led exercises as invasion rehearsals. Further complicating efforts to convince North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons in return for economic and political benefits is its deepening military cooperation with Russia. According to U.S., Ukrainian and South Korean assessments, North Korea has sent more than 10,000 troops and conventional weapons systems to support Moscow's war against Ukraine. There are concerns that Russia could give North Korea advanced weapons technology in return, including help to build more powerful nuclear missiles. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said last week that 3,000 North Korean troops have been killed and wounded in the fighting in Russia's Kursk region. It was the first significant estimate by Ukraine of North Korean casualties since the North Korean troop deployment to Russia began in October. Russia and China, locked in separate disputes with the U.S., have repeatedly blocked U.S.-led pushes to levy more UN sanctions on North Korea despite its repeated missile tests in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions. Last month, Kim said that his past negotiations with the United States only confirmed Washington’s “unchangeable” hostility toward his country and described his nuclear buildup as the only way to counter external threats.

Cost of building a home in Australia jumps $100,000 in four yearsHello! Welcome back! The worst of the NBA Cup-related scheduling confusion is now behind us, so hopefully, we can just focus on what should be a fun final three games. I went deep last week on how the NBA Cup schedule impacted Fantasy, so we should be able to spend only a couple of sentences on that this week. Fantasy-wise, Week 9 is straightforward: there are fewer games than usual and no games at all on Tuesday* or Wednesday, so any extra games you can fit into your Fantasy lineup will matter more. Weekly managers target teams with extra games. Daily managers, target teams playing on Friday's and Sunday's small three-game slates (no team plays both days). *The NBA Cup Championship is on Tuesday, but will not count towards Fantasy matchups As always, the players in this article must be rostered in less than two-thirds of CBS leagues. Players are listed in the order that I recommend adding them, assuming they are equally good fits for your team. Adds for all leagues Herb Jones, Pelicans (67% rostered) Jones, at 67% rostered, is basically the universe's way of begging me to include him in this column. Longtime readers will know of my deepest affection for the skinny second-round fourth-year defensive ace. He just returned from a month-long absence due to a shoulder injury and has been atypically points-y in his first few games back. But even if the 16 points per game of his first three appearances doesn't last (and it already dropped in Game 4 Thursday night), he's still worth rostering due to his ability to contribute nearly three stocks per game. Last season, he got up to 1.5 3s per game, and he chips in enough rebounds and assists to avoid causing any harm. Also, the Pelicans are apparently cursed (do you have an alternative explanation for how many things have gone wrong for them this year?), so he should continue to get extra minutes and usage while his teammates miss games. Goga Bitadze , Magic (57% rostered) Wendell Carter has been back for eight games now, and Bitadze continues to start. This marks the first time in Bitadze's six-year career (citation needed) that a coach has had the ability to bench Bitadze and chosen not to. Coach Jamahl Mosley has elected to go with a twin towers approach, starting Carter alongside Bitadze. Paolo Banchero (oblique) nominally plays power forward most often, but he's versatile enough that it's conceivable all three players could start simultaneously as long as Franz Wagner (oblique) is still out. Banchero is due for a re-evaluation soon, with the expectation that he'll return shortly thereafter. Bitadze's current role appears safe at least until Banchero returns, and possibly even longer – until Wagner returns in mid-to-late January. I spent all those words focused on Bitadze's role because that's always been the only question with him. He's an excellent, well-rounded, per-minute Fantasy producer. Since Carter has returned, Bitadze is averaging 11-10-3 with 1.1 steals and 1.9 blocks. And he's taken on a much larger role in the first two games without Wagner. As long as Bitadze is playing good minutes, he's an all-league must-add. And he's currently playing good minutes. Vasilije Micic , Hornets (34% rostered) LaMelo Ball (calf) and Tre Mann (back) are both expected to miss at least another week, giving Micic at least a few more games as the starting point guard. Even including the dreadful "let's see if rookie KJ Simpson can handle it ok, good to know he definitely cannot" dud game on December 3, Micic is still averaging 12-3-7 with 2.2 3s through his six starts. And those numbers look a lot better without the December 3rd experiment, which seems unlikely to be repeated. It's rare to find this many assists on the waiver wire. Even if he turns into a pumpkin after Ball and Mann come back, the short-term boost in assists is valuable enough to prioritize him above the two potentially long-term additions below. T.J. McConnell , Pacers (33% rostered) Looking through McConnell's box scores lately, my reaction is a combination of the Arrested Development " her? " and the Star Wars " they fly now? ". T.J. McConnell scores now? Him? It's not just the 30-point explosion last Sunday, either. McConnell has scored at least 12 points in six straight and in nine of his last 11. He's averaging 14.2 points during that stretch, along with his typically solid assists and steals contributions. And he's doing this while playing just 22.2 minutes per game. McConnell's biggest drawback was always his low scoring, but if Indiana has found a way to get more points out of him, then one of Fantasy Basketball's best handcuffs can be rostered even without an injury to Tyrese Haliburton . Max Strus , Cavaliers (21% rostered) Strus (ankle) is close to making his season debut. As is common knowledge for anyone reading the fifth player blurb on a mid-December Fantasy basketball article, the Cavaliers' team build is basically "four stars and hope." Last year, they decided that Strus was their best option to round out the starting lineup. He was third on the team (including the stars) in minutes per game. He was second on the team (excluding the stars) in FGA. The roster hasn't meaningfully changed, and I still view Strus as the best fifth starter. There may be some ramp-up time, and we should always be careful not to assume a player will simply recreate their career-best season. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if he eventually settled in close to last season's 12-5-4 with 2.4 3s and 0.9 steals. Justin Champagnie , Wizards (8% rostered) It's pretty rare for a fourth-year undrafted pro who still hasn't hit 700 career minutes to casually drop a top 70 Fantasy week. Taking advantage of a decimated roster that's what East-coast Champagnie (his twin, a Spur, is in the "other recommendations" below) just accomplished. We should be highly skeptical of his ability to maintain this kind of production, but we also shouldn't ignore it. Ride this wave for as long as it lasts. Royce O'Neale , Suns (39% rostered) It looks like Kevin Durant (ankle) is trending towards returning soon, possibly in time for Friday's game, so this recommendation may already be too late to help anyone. When Durant is playing, O'Neale is an end-of-the-other-recommendations-list-level guy. But O'Neale has put up 19-7-2 with 4.7 3s in the three games Durant has missed, making him an easy all-leagues start. If Durant remains out, keep riding O'Neale. Other recommendations : Rui Hachimura , Lakers (57% rostered); Caris LeVert , Cavaliers (42% rostered); Al Horford , Celtics (46% rostered); Kevin Huerter , Kings (26% rostered); Moe Wagner , Magic (48% rostered); Julian Champagnie , Spurs (54% rostered); Anthony Black , Magic (21% rostered); Obi Toppin , Pacers (21% rostered) Just Say No Kelly Olynyk , Raptors (19% rostered) Olynyk made his season debut last week, and his roster rate immediately doubled. He actually played pretty well, and managers who started him are probably pleased with his output. But, folks, come on. He played just 14, 15, and 12 minutes in his first three appearances. He's not going to continue averaging double his career per-minute averages in steals, blocks, and 3s – as he did in his first two games. If his per-minute productivity normalizes without a massive minutes boost, he's nowhere near the Fantasy radar. Last season, Olynyk and Jakob Poeltl only played together for nine games. During those, Olynyk averaged 10-4-3 with 1.6 steals, 0.6 blocks, and 0.6 3s. That's not worth a roster spot in most leagues. He probably needs more like 24ish minutes to remain rosterable in deep leagues and closer to 29-30 to crack a standard league lineup. That's most likely not happening while the Raptors are healthy. If Olynyk's roster rate was in the low-single-digits, then sure, there would be some managers who could consider taking a chance on him. But his roster rate is already way above where it should be – if he's still available in your league, I'm confident your league isn't deep enough for you to consider him. Deep league special Duncan Robinson , Heat (14% rostered) Robinson got promoted into the starting lineup three and a half weeks ago, and his minutes and production increased as a result. The data is a little muddled due to the various injuries the Heat have dealt with – most notably to Nikola Jovic , who missed eight of those 11 games with an ankle injury – and Robinson's numbers have definitely been worse in the games Jovic has played in. That said, Robinson is averaging 12-3-3 with 2.4 3s in 25 minutes since the promotion. I'd absolutely rather add Cason Wallace if he's still available, but his roster rate is bordering on too high for this section, and I already covered him last week . Other recommendations: Cason Wallace, Thunder (19% rostered); Brandon Clarke , Grizzlies (13% rostered); Matas Buzelis , Bulls (18% rostered); Davion Mitchell , Raptors (12% rostered)

Tarkov is not hitting 1.0 this year. Despite initially teasing that Escape From Tarkov would hit 1.0, and thus a full release, this year, game director Nikita Buyanov has now confirmed that the upcoming wipe will not be the full launch of Tarkov, with that now presumably targeted for next year. This time last year, Nikita teased that the story content that will arrive alongside the full launch of Escape From Tarkov would be added to the game in 2024, suggesting that the 1.0 version of Tarkov would also arrive this year. However, in a new interview, Nikita has confirmed that the upcoming wipe will not be a surprise 1.0 launch. “No, version 1.0 won’t arrive with the New Year’s patch,” said Nikita in an interview where he also discussed the future of Escape From Tarkov Arena . “We are moving towards the release, and we are currently preparing patch 0.16.0.0 for release.” Despite some speculation from the community that the upcoming wipe could be a surprise 1.0 launch, it now seems that will certainly not be the case, with a full launch in 2025 being much more likely. That shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise, as you would expect the dev team to announce the full release well in advance to try to drum up some extra hype heading into the launch window, and with seemingly less than a week to go before the wipe hits, that wouldn’t be an effective marketing strategy. However, that doesn't mean that the upcoming wipe will be disappointing, with lots of new toys to play with being added to Tarkov . It will be slightly smaller than a usual wipe patch, given that a lot of the team is creating content for the full launch, but there will still be some cool new weapons , a rework to Customs and the Unity 2022 engine update that should make some technical improvements to Tarkov, which is starting to show its age. Oleksandr Usyk Vs. Tyson Fury 2 Results: Winner, Scorecards, Reaction Today’s NYT Mini Crossword Clues And Answers For Sunday, December 22 NYT ‘Strands’ Today: Hints, Spangram And Answers For Sunday, December 22nd We are expecting the Escape From Tarkov wipe to arrive next week , likely on December 26th given they tend to arrive on Thursdays. However, as we have seen before, there is still a chance that it could be delayed until Battlestate Games announces the official release date. But before then you can still enjoy some entertaining pre-wipe events in Tarkov such as one that gives you a free Kappa container , another that increased cultist spawns and today’s addition that had made the AA-12 shotgun much easier to get.

Challenging the traditional approach to human-robot interactionCENTURION: Kagiso Rabada turned batting hero as he and Marco Jansen took South Africa to a dramatic two-wicket win over Pakistan on the fourth day of the first Test at SuperSport Park on Sunday. Needing 148 to win, South Africa crashed to 99 for eight against superb bowling by Mohammad Abbas. The 34-year-old Abbas took a career-best six for 54. But Rabada, so often a match-winner as a bowler, went on the attack as a batsman, hitting an unbeaten 31 off 26 balls, while Jansen provided solid support in making 16 not out. Mohammad Abbas, Khurram Shahzad rock South Africa at start of chase Abbas bowled unchanged for 19.3 overs – four of them on Saturday when he took his first two wickets – in a spell of unremitting accuracy on a pitch which gave seam bowlers help throughout the match. It was a remarkable comeback for Abbas, whose previous Test appearance was against the West Indies in Kingston in August 2021. But it was not quite enough for Pakistan, seeking their first win in South Africa in 18 years. The result ensured qualification for South Africa in the final of the World Test championship final in England next year. Aiden Markram and Temba Bavuma batted solidly at the start of the day after resuming on 27 for three. Markram and Bavuma put on 43 for the fourth wicket, with Bavuma surviving on 14 – and getting six runs – when he hooked Abbas to fine leg, where Naseem Shah stepped over the boundary in catching the ball. Markram looked secure but was bowled by Abbas for 37 by a virtually unplayable ball which kept low and seamed back off the pitch. Bavuma and David Bedingham added another 34 runs until Bavuma uncharacteristically charged down the pitch at Abbas and was given out caught behind for 40. He walked off immediately but Ultra Edge technology showed the only ‘spike’ was when the ball brushed his trouser pocket. It was the first of four wickets which fell for three runs in 12 balls. Naseem Shah bowled Kyle Verreynne and Abbas had Bedingham and Corbin Bosch caught behind off successive deliveries. Rabada and Jansen saw South Africa through to lunch at 116 for eight – then polished off the match in just 5.3 overs after the interval, with each stroke cheered by the home spectators.

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.

Margaret Pomeranz is one of Australia’s most iconic movie reviewers, along with her long-time on-air partner, David Stratton. I spoke to her on Thursday. Fitz : Margaret, long-time listener, first-time caller ... Thanks so much for your time. MP : A pleasure, but I’m not quite sure exactly what you want. Margaret Pomeranz. Credit: Eddie Jim Fitz : Margaret, I want to draw on your enormous expertise in films to quickly find the gold nuggets that I know are out there, but can never find. Sometimes I stumble across fabulous films that have never got any fanfare whatsoever, and it occurs to me that you’d be the one who knows where the other beauties are. MP : Well, after your general text yesterday, I’ve racked my brain, and I’ve certainly come up with a list of 10, but a couple of them are foreign language films. Fitz : Even better. Before we get to the list, though ... did you stumble into being a famous movie reviewer, or was it the star you steered by until you got there? MP : Hah! I was absolutely dragged protesting into that role. I was producing David Stratton doing movie reviews for SBS, and I wanted a woman to join him because I didn’t want it to just be a male judgment. And I couldn’t find a woman that David Stratton accepted. And the one that he wanted was, I think, reviewing for one of the women’s magazines, and she didn’t want to do it. And so he said, “why don’t you give it a try?” And I said, “no, I just want to produce” and then the SBS head of programming came down on me and insisted, so it was truly ... accidental. I’d never been in front of camera before. Pomeranz with long-time collaborator and friend, David Stratton. Credit: Fitz : And when did you realise that in the case of you and Stratton, one plus one equals three, in the sense of having a chemistry between you which made you more than the sum of your parts? MP : Well, I don’t think we truly gelled for about five years because I was so nervous, and it took me time to be able to relax in front of camera. Fitz : So you became an iconic duo, just like Roy and HG. In their case, they never socialised much off-camera, so as to keep their on-air stuff fresh. Did you spend much time with David Stratton when the cameras weren’t rolling? MP : We did, but never excessively, apart from when we went to things like the Cannes and Venice film festivals when we would certainly see a great deal of one another. Back in Australia, we saw a bit of each other until he moved up to the Blue Mountains, which I was really shitty about, actually ... Fitz : And how do you judge the current state of the movie business globally and in Australia? MP : Well, I think the Australian film industry is really healthy. It’s almost like it’s got the confidence in itself. Globally, on the one hand, I’m sick of those Marvel Comics being translated to the screen, but on the other hand, you can get really good ones, like the one that Taika Waititi directed, Thor: Ragnarok . That was terrific, so you can’t be narrow-minded about such films. Some are extremely good. Jeff Bridges in Peter Weir’s brilliant Fearless. Credit: Warner Bros Fitz : And where are your professional energies going right now? MP : Nowhere! I am trying to get out of stuff, not into stuff. Fitz : Two more quick questions, then we can rip in. I read a blurry report that you might have had a cameo role in Priscilla, Queen of the Desert . Is that correct? MP : Yes, but blink and you’ll miss me, right? I had known the director, Stephan Elliott, for some time, and he said, would I play a part in his film? And I said, “all right, as long as I’m not playing anybody’s mother”. Not long afterwards, I was in Venice at the film festival, and a fax arrived for me, saying he wanted me in Priscilla, indeed playing someone’s mother, but ... “you’re playing Guy Pearce’s mother”. So I said, “oh, all right!” Fitz : Meantime, I loved your review on Charlie Pickering’s The Weekly on ABC of Married at First Sight , where you said, “It’s a groundbreaking social experiment in which mentally fragile halfwits marry toxic famed tarts”. Is there anything you’d like to add to that? Or is that about it? MP : [ Laughs. ] No, that’s about it. Fitz : OK, let’s get to the nub of it. Can you please gimme the 10 films few of us have seen yet, but bloody well should? Dannielle Hall and Damian Pitt in Beneath Clouds. Credit: © Bunya Productions MP : Well, my first one is the Australian film Beneath Clouds (2002) . That was Ivan Sen’s debut feature about two Indigenous kids, played by Damian Pitt and Dannielle Hall, who accidentally join up as they head for various reasons to Sydney from country NSW . Sen had made a series of really fantastic shorts when he was at the film school, and once he was out he made this. It looks fabulous. It’s heart-rendingly great, but very little seen. I’m always moved by the final image in a film, and in this one, it’s just heartbreakingly good. Have you seen it? Fitz : No, never heard of it, but I will see it soon! Next? MP : OK, going down the list, I loved Locke (2013) by Stephen Knight. Tom Hardy gives an outstanding performance in this film in which he is the only presence on screen. He plays a man driving to a construction site who takes 38 phone calls from various people as his life falls apart. Fitz : Hang on, just one actor? So when the screen credits roll for actors, there’s one person? MP : Yes, apart from voice actors. Fitz : That sounds like that famous first film by Steven Spielberg, Duel , with the menacing truck being the key presence monstering the poor bloke in front. Go on, next? MP : Number three is Fearless (1993) , by Peter Weir, starring Jeff Bridges and Rosie Perez as survivors of a plane crash who each experience the impact of the aftermath. Have you seen that? The 1997 film Gattaca imagines a future class divide between the enhanced (as played by Uma Thurman) and the unenhanced. Credit: Getty Images Fitz : No! Look, if it’s not Shawshank Redemption or the like, you may presume I haven’t seen it, but want to. I want you to educate me and mine on the finer things in films so we can say to our friends, “I can’t believe you haven’t seen those wonderful films, Beneath Clouds , Locke , and Fearless ! What kind of bogan ignoramus are you?” MP : [ Small groan. ] Number four is District 9 (2009). This totally original, low-budget science fiction film from South African writer/director Neill Blomkamp has it all – a wild imagination, drama, pathos, compassion, with a few laughs thrown in, as a man organising the relocation of a camp of segregated aliens becomes one of them. Fitz : You see, Margaret? Don’t despair, I’ve heard of it! MP : So is that all right? Fitz : Yes, please go on. MP : I’ve chosen Nashville (1975). A gigantic tapestry of music, betrayal and politics set in the country music capital of the world and is the work of director Robert Altman. It has a multi-character cast and was the film that excited me most when I first saw it. It is still my favourite film of all time. I fell in love with Robert Altman when I saw it in Sydney, even though it was on screens for just a week, and it was gone. I dragged people to it, and then it disappeared. Fitz : If you say it is your favourite of all time, that is some recommendation. Next, please? MP : Gattaca (1997) . This debut science fiction film from New Zealand born writer/director Andrew Niccol explores the ethics of genetic engineering. Niccol wrote The Truman Show , but when he went to Hollywood, they wouldn’t let him direct it and gave him Gattaca to direct instead. It stars Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman and is riveting. Lust, Caution, directed by Ang Lee, is set in China during the Japanese occupation. Fitz : Not that you care, but I broadly hate sci-fi. Still, I will give it a go. MP : The Hill (1965) is a gruelling portrayal of men struggling to survive a military prison camp in North Africa during World War II, and it stars Sean Connery in one of his best performances. I don’t like prison movies much, but this one has stayed with me. Fitz : I like Shawsha... actually, never mind. Does The Hill have a happy ending? You’ll despair to hear, Marge, my tastes are so plebeian: I genuinely like films where the hero and the heroine and go through lots of struggles and get to kiss in the final frame – with the exception of Brokeback Mountain , where it was the two heroes. MP : [ Small pause. ] I absolutely adored Brokeback Mountain . I saw that in Venice, and when everybody else was rushing off to the next screening, I was just stayed sitting there alone, still absorbing it, it was so wonderful. But, moving on. I love tough films. And the one that I love most is The Lives of Others (2006), the debut film from German writer/director Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck about the impact that Stasi agents, East Germany’s secret police, have on a group of artists and intellectuals. A really powerful cinema experience. Fitz : Next? MP: Lust, Caution (2007) Ang Lee’s beautiful, emotionally powerful film is set in China during the Japanese occupation. It’s about a young student’s relationship with a high-ranking collaborator despite the fact that she’s part of a group that aims to assassinate him. And the next one after that is a soft one for you, Peter. I’ve chosen Chef (2014) , written, directed by and starring Jon Favreau. It’s the story of a celebrity chef in an upmarket restaurant who loses his temper as he’s not prepared to conform. So he starts up a food truck with the help of his son and estranged wife. And you’ll be thrilled to hear, Peter, this one has a happy ending. Loading Fitz : Excellent! And that’s our 10. So the last thing is this. We’ve talked about films that you know are great, that should be more widely celebrated. What about films where everybody loves them except you? I hate to say it, but the best example for me is the one you’re in: Priscilla, Queen of the Desert . Yes, all the actors are great, and Hugo’s a personal friend. But I just never understood the level of acclaim it received. MP : [ Laughing. ] Of course it was the one I was in! But, yes, I don’t always like what everybody else likes. I don’t necessarily like what David Stratton likes. I actually talked to him this morning about the list I just gave you, and I think he approves of just about all the ones on my list, but not all. Generally, I think that within seconds of a film opening, you know whether you’re in good hands with a director or not, and it’s really weird that some films just scream: “I am no good!” from the very beginning. Fitz : And the blockbuster that you detest? MP : A really popular film that everyone else loved was the remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre . It’s only one of the two films I’ve ever walked out of. Fitz : And what is the other, please? MP : I will tell you, but it’s not for publication. [ We go into the Cone of Silence. ] Fitz: Oh! Oh, I see ... Thank you, indeed. I, and my readers, shall report back before Chrissie on what we think of your list. In the meantime, we are in your debt. At least we hope so. Save Log in , register or subscribe to save articles for later. License this article Five Minutes with Fitz Opinion For subscribers Peter FitzSimons is a journalist and columnist with The Sydney Morning Herald. Connect via Twitter . Most Viewed in Culture LoadingKey Roles Of Metal Brackets In Manufacturing And Future Trends

ATLANTA — The judge overseeing the Georgia election interference case against Donald Trump and others on Friday rejected an attempt by former Trump campaign lawyer Kenneth Chesebro to invalidate his guilty plea. Chesebro, Trump and 17 others were charged in August 2023 in a sprawling indictment that accused them of participating in a sweeping scheme to try to illegally overturn Trump’s loss in the 2020 presidential election in Georgia. Chesebro pleaded guilty to a single conspiracy count a few months later after reaching a deal with prosecutors just before he was to go to trial. His lawyer t his month asked Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee to invalidate the plea after McAfee in September tossed out the charge to which he had pleaded guilty. Defense attorney Manny Arora wrote that a failure to invalidate the plea would violate Chesebro’s constitutional right to due process. McAfee’s order denying that request said the motion was procedurally defective “in more ways than one.” He noted that while Chesebro’s filing challenges the validity of the indictment, he “already submitted a plea in response to this indictment — one of guilt.” While Chesebro did raise a pretrial challenge prior to his plea, he did not make the argument that ultimately caused the judge to throw out that charge. Arora had also argued in his filing that his request could be considered a “motion in arrest of judgment.” But McAfee said that, technically, no judgment has been rendered against Chesebro because he was sentenced under Georgia’s First Offender Act, which “defers further proceedings while the charge remains pending for the duration of the sentence.” Under that law, if Chesebro completes his probation without violating the terms or committing another crime, his record will be wiped clean. The request is also too late, McAfee wrote, because a motion in arrest of judgment must be filed during the term when a judgment is entered. Asked for comment, Arora wrote in an email that he was traveling for another case and hadn’t yet seen McAfee’s ruling. Prosecutors have said Chesebro was part of a plot to have a group of 16 Georgia Republicans sign a certificate falsely saying that Trump had won Georgia and declaring themselves the state’s “duly elected and qualified” electors. He pleaded guilty in October 2023 to one felony charge of conspiracy to commit filing false documents related to the the filing of that document with the federal court in Atlanta. Chesebro was one of four people to plead guilty in the case in the months following the indictment. The rest have pleaded not guilty. The case against Trump and the remaining defendants is mostly on hold pending a pretrial appeal of an order allowing Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to remain on the case despite what defense attorneys say is a conflict of interest. Even if the appeals court rules in Willis’ favor, the fate of the case against Trump is unclear since he is set to be sworn in again as president next month.'Really disheartening': the dire situation Hunter renters face