There is no requirement that the windows serve this purpose. Mine don't. I don't find this to be a reasonable response.
I can speak a bit to what I have in mind to do. It's too early to speak too much about how I intend to get those particular things passed but am looking into it.
I am studying the NEPA question, will hopefully have posts in a month or two after Manchin's reforms are done trying to pass. There are a lot of options both for marginal reforms and for radical reimagining. Right now, as far as I can tell, no one has designed a outcome-based replacement that someone could even consider (as opposed to process based) and I am excited to get that papered over time, as well as looking in detail to what marginal changes would have the most real impact.
NRC is more straightforward in terms of what to do, you order them to approve plants if they're safe, and do general permitting reforms, although details still matter. I am partial to 'hold nuclear plants to only require they be much safer than other power plants' although it's still early. I do think that there will be far more opportunity here going forward due to the course of events.
Yes, there are lesser goals that I could hit with 90% probability. Note that in that comment, I was saying that 2% would make the project attractive, rather than saying I put our chances of success at 2%. And also that the bar there was set very high - getting a clear attributable major policy win. Which then got someone willing to take the YES side at 5% (Ross).
Our funding sources are not public, but I will say at this time we are not funded in any way by FTX or OP.
I am confident that the container stacking rules caused major damage when compared to better stacking rules. If we had a sensible stacking rule across LB/LA from the start I am confident there would have been far less backlog.
What is less clear is the extent to which the rules changes that were enacted mitigated the problem. While LB made some changes on the day of the post, LA didn't act and LB's action wasn't complete. Thus there was some increase in permitted stacking but it was far from what one would have hoped for. And Elizabeth is right that we did not see a difference in port backlog that we can definitively link to the partial change that was enacted.
Good stuff. This is going to be the first work of fiction linked in a weekly post of mine.
Somewhat tempted to write the rationalfic version of this story, because these characters are missing all the fun.
Naming things in politics is much more about not shooting yourself in the foot than anything else - you can't win that way but you can lose, and [plant] research is a standard option. Can always change later if we find something awesome. I learned from MetaMed that obsessing over finding the right name is not worth it, and this was (1) available (2) short (3) sounds nice and (4) is a good metaphorical plant.
This is a full energy top priority effort.
I will continue the blog as part of that effort, it is the reason I am in position to be able to do this, and I will continue to attend to other commitments because life is complicated, but the effective barrier is 'I can only do so much in a week on this type of stuff no matter what anyway.'
Oh, yeah, I forgot to edit this copy, it's fixed now.
I much prefer to create a post that defines the jargon, you can then link to it as needed. I keep meaning to make a glossary page when I have time, as another tool.