Without that extra 2% cash discount, it would have been $420k and change. Nice.

1LikeChix&Dix

It did. Not a bad password but pretty easy to guess.

There may some breaks in that armor if you look at their recent actions that sound a lot like Musk speaking through them.

Amazing that they still have problems with whompy wheels after all these years.

More like kerosene.

The example shows an interior room which would indeed be warmer. There are two which could be what they want you to select.

I have a similar memory from a later blizzard. A friend visited to sleep over the first night of the storm and ended up staying 5 days until the roads were cleared enough to pass. Several dozers got stuck trying to clear the roads into the valley we lived.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_1997_North_American_storm_complex

No, you don’t get it. They’re not cheese-eating surrender-monkeys because of their military record but because…

checks notes

… they didn’t support the unjustified invasion of Iraq.

Devours a basket of chili cheese freedom fries

It’s because Saw VII ate IX.

It would be interesting to see them update that with current data since global PV installations are estimated at 392 GW for 2023.

It is unrealistic to imagine that we could jump into a full-scale infrastructure replacement in one year. To set the scale, the U.S. uses about 3 TW of continuous power. A 1% drop corresponds to 30 GW of power. Our modest 2% replacement therefore would require the construction of about 60 new 1 GW power plants in a single year, or a rate of one per week! Worldwide, we quadruple this number.

What capability have we demonstrated in the past? In 2010, global production of solar photovoltaics was 15 GW, which is only about 6% of what we would need to fill a world-wide energy gap of 2% per year. Even on a tear of 50% increase per year, it would take 7 years to get to the required rate. Wind installations in 2010 totaled 37 GW, or 14% of the 2% global requirement. It would take 5 years at a breakneck 50% per year rate of increase to get there. When France decided to go big on nuclear, they built 56 reactors in 15 years. In doing so, they replaced 80% of their electricity consumption, which translates to about 30% of their total energy use. So this puts them at about 2% per year in energy replacement.