Dancing Astronaut presents the Top 100 Electronic Tracks of 2021 - Dancing Astronaut - Dancing Astronaut

mivo.indah.link

by: Ross Goldenberg Dec 30, 2021

Plain and simple, 2021 was an anomaly not just for dance music, but also for music as a whole. A bulk of 2020 was spent imagining how releases would eventually translate to the in-person format again, and this contemplation carried over well into the new year, with no immediate end in sight. With the concert calendar in an interminable limbo all the way from January until the spring and summer months, artists continued to ride the unrestrained creative waves that they’d previously mounted—minus the time constraints of touring schedules. The music released throughout the course of the year consistently reflected the ingenuity that was the result of long and unimpeded periods in the studio. And even with concerts now (somewhat) back in full swing, it feels as if that mindset has yet to change.

Although in-person music programming was in stasis at the beginning of the year, original releases were anything but. 2021 was given a head start the very second that the New Year’s Eve ball dropped, when, in the early moments of January 1, Hardwell and Blasterjaxx decided to expeditiously secure a spot on our eventual reflection of the year’s most memorable tracks. Their long-awaited “Bootshaus ID” was a welcome starting point to a sweeping release record that we’d have to somehow narrow down to Dancing Astronaut‘s top 100 releases of 2021 when the time came. And if all went accordingly to plan this year, Dancing Astronaut‘s most-anticipated IDs of the year would hopefully provide 15 other releases that would join the Dutch duo’s bigroom collision, with 11 of those unreleased cuts clearing the release board when the year was all said and done. Gorgon City and DRAMA’s late-January delivery of “You’ve Done Enough” set the ID release train in motion. Later, Bleu Clair and OOTORO‘s “Beat Like This”—which STMPD RCRDS was kind enough to let us premiere— Porter Robinson‘s “Look at the Sky”; ILLENIUM, Nurko, and Valerie Broussard’s “Sideways”; Alesso’s “Somebody To Use”; Ophelia Records‘ “Pantheon”; RL Grime and ISOxo‘s “Stinger”; Dom Dolla‘s “Pump the Brakes”; and David Guetta, MORTEN, and John Martin‘s “Impossible” all received the green release light. But that was simply a trace amount of the 2021 productions that could be deemed Track-of-the-Year worthy, and while these 10 songs—and hundreds upon hundreds of others—were deserving of that sought-after title, only one now wears the crown as we reach 2021’s final hours.

“The track of the year conversation may be open and shut before its eventual winner even arrives.” This is how we prefaced “One More Day” on that forenamed list of our most-anticipated 2021 releases and the sentence now rings as true as ever. We knew it when Seven Lions introduced it at The Gorge Amphitheatre a year and a half ago, we knew it when it arrived in March, and we know it now that our Track of the Year couldn’t have been anything other than Jason Ross, Blanke, and Chandler Leighton‘s three-headed magnum opus of melodic-bass, “One More Day.”

“One More Day” shined brightly on the never-ending trail of Ophelia Records originals that amounted to its selection as Dancing Astronaut‘s 2021 Label of the Year, and considering the amount of times that we’ve tweeted about the track in 2021, “One More Day” vaulting from our favorite unreleased ID to our favorite release this year should come as anything but a surprise. While we stream “One More Day” for the 1,000,000th time, enjoy it—as well as 99 of our other top releases (in alphabetical order) of 2021—in our complete playlist below.

Featured image: Alex Varsa

Tags: 2021 tracks of the year

Categories: Features, Music

Adblock test (Why?)

"Electronic" - Google News
December 31, 2021 at 08:58AM
https://ift.tt/3pEJXdV

Dancing Astronaut presents the Top 100 Electronic Tracks of 2021 - Dancing Astronaut - Dancing Astronaut
"Electronic" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3dmroCo
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Joint Agency Workshop - Electric Program Investment Charge Administrative Costs - California Energy Commission

mivo.indah.link

The California Energy Commission (CEC), Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE), and San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) will host a workshop to discuss a framework for defining and consistently tracking administrative costs associated with the Electric Program Investment Charge (EPIC). EPIC has invested approximately $160 million annually in new technology breakthroughs to transform the electricity sector to meet California’s energy and climate policy goals and bring increased benefits to electric ratepayers of the state’s three largest investor-owned utilities (IOUs) – PG&E, SCE, and SDG&E.

This is a staff workshop; a quorum of commissioners from the CEC, California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) may participate, but no votes will be taken. The workshop will be held remotely, consistent with Assembly Bill 361 (Rivas, Chapter 165, Statutes of 2021) to improve and enhance public access to state agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options. The public can participate in the workshop consistent with the direction provided below.

Please note that the CEC aims to begin promptly at the start time posted and the end time is an estimate based on the agenda proposed. The workshop may end sooner or later than the posted end time depending on various factors.

Notice and Agenda

Remote Attendance

Remote Attendance Instructions
The workshop may be accessed by clicking the Microsoft Teams link below. After you register, you will immediately receive an email from noreply@teams.registration.microsoft.com. Please click on the Join Event button in that email to join the workshop and be sure to check your Spam folder if the email does not arrive in your inbox. If you experience difficulties joining, please visit https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/office/join-a-meeting-in-teams-1613bb53-f3fa-431e-85a9-d6a91e3468c9 or contact the Public Advisor at publicadvisor@energy.ca.gov or by phone at (916) 957-7910.

Link to Workshop:
EPIC Administrator Workshop Registration Link (https://tinyurl.com/35r7x4d4)

Use the “raise hand feature” located on the upper-right area of the screen to indicate you want to speak and an event facilitator will indicate when your line is open and ready for you to make a comment or ask a question.

To Participate by Telephone (audio only), dial (415) 906-0873 or (213) 279-1466. When prompted, enter the ID: 323 261 224#. To enter the comment queue, dial *5 to “raise your hand” and *6 to mute/unmute your phone line when called on.

Adblock test (Why?)

"electric" - Google News
December 30, 2021 at 08:11AM
https://ift.tt/3eGuOm1

Joint Agency Workshop - Electric Program Investment Charge Administrative Costs - California Energy Commission
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Here's whether it's actually cheaper to switch to an electric vehicle or not—and how the costs break down - CNBC

mivo.indah.link

With gas prices up over 58% compared to last year, you might be thinking about switching to an electric car to save money. 

But considering that electric vehicles tend to be more expensive than gas-fueled cars, and that electricity has its own costs, is it actually cheaper to go electric? The short answer is yes — although it also depends on your driving habits, where you live and the type of vehicle you buy, too. You may even want to consider a hybrid vehicle that has both a gas and electric engine.

Here's a look at how the costs of electric vehicles compare to gas-only cars.

Electric vehicles have a higher upfront cost 

The average transaction price for an electric vehicle (EV) is $56,437, according to Kelley Blue Book — roughly $10,000 higher than the overall industry average of $46,329 that includes gas and EVs. In terms of pricing, an EV is equivalent to an entry-level luxury car. 

To save time charging EVs and extend battery life, many drivers also install what's known as "Level 2" chargers in their home, for a total cost of around $2,000, including installation. With a Level 2 charger, it will take less than eight hours to charge your vehicle, according to JD Power.

Most EVs come with a Level 1 charging cable that can be plugged into a common 120-volt household electric outlet, but it can take up to 40 hours to fully charge your vehicle. It's cheaper, but less convenient.

Tax credits can the lower cost of an electric vehicle

While surveys show that the price gap between EVs and gas-fueled vehicles is expected to shrink in the next decade, that will depend on continued improvements in battery technology, which could result in cheaper production costs.

In the meantime, customers can offset some of the premium paid for EVs through tax credits. The federal government offers a non-refundable tax credit worth $2,500 to $7,500 for newly purchased electric vehicles made after 2010. 

However, the credit only applies to the first 200,000 vehicles a manufacturer sells. Tesla and General Motors already surpassed this number, so no credit is available from these manufacturers. A list of electric vehicles that still qualify for the federal tax credit can be found here. 

It's also possible that your state offers its own tax credit or rebate. The EV advocacy group Plug In America has an interactive map that shows electric car incentives in each state. New York, for example, offers a rebate worth up to $2,000.

Electric vehicles tend to have cheaper fuel and maintenance costs

While EVs usually have higher upfront purchase prices, owners can save a lot on operating expenses. A 2020 Consumer Reports study found that EV owners, on average, spend 60% less on fuel compared to internal combustion engine vehicles.

This calculation includes the average use of commercial charging stations (11 visits per 15,000 miles, for a car with a range of 200 miles), which can be two to three times more expensive than charging your car at home. Rates vary when charging at commercial stations, but the total cost per session is roughly $10-45 to fully recharge your car's battery.

As for charging at home, domestic electricity rates vary by state, based on a number of factors like regulation and how the electricity is generated, but the average monthly cost is about $25 per month.

And since EVs have fewer parts than gas-fueled cars (there's no oil to change, no spark plugs to replace), they tend to have lower maintenance costs as well. A recent report by the analytics firm We Predict reveals that after 36 months on the road, service costs were 31% lower for electric cars and light trucks when compared to similar gasoline-based vehicles. 

So which is cheaper overall? 

A U.S. Department of Energy report shows that after 15 years, electric cars generally cost less than similar gas-only models, when you factor in the price, maintenance, financing, repairs, the federal tax break and fuel costs. The electric version of a small SUV costs $0.4508 per mile, $0.0219 less than the $0.4727 per mile rate you get with a similar gas-based model.

Based on the average lifespan of a car — 200,000 miles, according to Car and Driver — the cost of a gas-fueled car would then be $90,160, while a similar EV would be $94,540, for a difference of $4,380. Note that this total does not include a possible state tax breaks, however, since they were not included as part of the study.

While EVs are generally cheaper than their gas counterparts in the long run, newer EVs with a battery range above 300 miles can end up costing more. Electric light duty vehicles that cover 300 miles with one battery charge have a per mile cost four cents higher than similar gas models, although that's mostly because they're newer, cutting-edge electric vehicles that are sold at luxury car prices.

While cheaper, electric vehicles come with trade-offs

One of the biggest knocks against EVs is that charging the car's battery isn't convenient if you don't have access to commercial charging stations or at least a Level 2 charger at home. And even with the faster Level 3 chargers that you find at commercial stations, it can still take up to 30 minutes to fully charge your EV.

"Time is money if you have to sit around a couple hours waiting for your car to charge," says Matt DeLorenzo, senior managing editor for Kelley Blue Book. "That's the competitive disadvantage EVs have, they're inflexible when it comes to refueling requirements, whereas a gas car you just have a few minutes at a gas station and you're back on the road."

Since there are only around 46,000 commercial charging stations compared to 150,000 gas stations, potential buyers will want to make sure one is available nearby, using this interactive map. And since the average range of EVs is under 200 miles, you might want to consider a hybrid electric vehicle if you frequently drive long-haul trips. A hybrid has both an electric motor and a gas engine, which allows you to switch between the two depending on the how far you plan to drive.

"If you only have one car, I think you're better off owning a plug-in hybrid," suggests DeLorenzo. "With gas at $5 a gallon [in some parts of California], you'd get a car with 30-50 miles of electric range, and if you only commute 15-20 miles, you could use it mostly as an electric vehicle. But if you have a road trip, or there's a power failure, you have a gas engine to fall back on."

Sign up now: Get smarter about your money and career with our weekly newsletter

Check out: How a 26-year-old expat in Seoul, South Korea lives on $24,000 a year

Adblock test (Why?)

"electric" - Google News
December 29, 2021 at 11:41PM
https://ift.tt/316TuB4

Here's whether it's actually cheaper to switch to an electric vehicle or not—and how the costs break down - CNBC
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

The Sun Belt is making a big play for the hot electric vehicle market - NPR

mivo.indah.link

Enlarge this image

Rivian has made only a few hundred electric pickups. But investors are betting on its future. Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

With two gleaming pickup trucks and the Georgia Capitol's gold dome behind him, Gov. Brian Kemp announced a $5 billion electric vehicle plant was coming to Georgia.

At the rollout event earlier this month, Kemp called his state the economic engine of the Southeast "and now a world leader in electric vehicles and electric mobility."

A bold statement, to be sure, but the company Kemp helped lure to Georgia is indeed a big deal. Rivian is one of the hottest electric vehicle startups. And while it has produced only a few hundred pickup trucks so far, the California company is already valued more than Ford Motor Co. Amazon has committed to buying 100,000 of Rivian's electric delivery vans.

Companies like Rivian are helping drive the automotive industry's electric future. When they look to build new plants, states go all out to woo them. Sun Belt states like Georgia see an opening to chip away at the auto dominance Michigan and the Motor City have cemented for over a century.

So why did Georgia win Rivian's splashy new investment and the 7,500 jobs that the company says will come with it?

Well, there's money ... lots of it. And while details of Rivian's deal with Georgia aren't public yet, incentive packages from state and local governments typically include tax breaks, cheap, shovel-ready megasites, infrastructure upgrades and workforce training.

For context, Georgia recently landed SK Battery, a South Korean company now building a battery plant, with $300 million in incentives.

But that's not everything.

"The growing population, the younger population, the diverse population that's what the Midwest does not have right now," says Nathaniel Horodam, with the Atlanta-based Center for Transportation and the Environment.

He says the auto industry has a growing footprint in the Southeast.

"Whether that's Kia in Georgia, Toyota, Hyundai Honda in Alabama, BMW, Volvo in South Carolina," Horodam says.

In all of those states union strength is low, and that's enticing for many companies.

"That has played a major factor in really the rebirth of manufacturing all across the Southern belt of states," says Pat Wilson, Georgia's economic development commissioner, who helped secure the Rivian deal.

The Sun Belt has attracted other new investment in electric vehicles, especially from startups.

Tesla is building a "gigafactory" in Texas. And Georgia had already landed one big battery plant.

Wilson thinks Rivian will attract more suppliers and more electric car companies to Georgia.

"There's a whole ecosystem that has to be created in the United States, so every time you form a piece of that ecosystem, it helps with the next one," Wilson says.

The ecosystem needed to build cars and trucks already exists, according to Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. And she says it's in Michigan. Georgia and the Southeast are hardly the only places vying for all this new investment.

"It's time to put the world on notice that Michigan remains the center of high tech electric vehicle production in the U.S.," Whitmer said in September.

Michigan alone attracted more auto investment in the decade after the Great Recession than the entire South combined. And the state has scored some big electric vehicle projects. GM is expected to invest in a battery plant outside Lansing, Mich., and Ford will churn out all-electric F-150 pickups from its River Rouge Plant in Dearborn.

Still, most investments so far in Michigan have been from legacy automotive companies, not the buzzy startups. This fall, Michigan launched new incentive programs designed to compete for those projects, spurred in part by losing out on electric vehicle investments from Detroit-based Ford and GM being made in Tennessee and Kentucky.

"The amount of investment going on in the auto industry right now is off the charts, and every state is trying to be that future capital of electrification," says Kristen Dziczek, senior vice president for research at the Center for Automotive Research in Michigan.

The Biden administration has set a target for half of all new vehicles to be electric by 2030. While governors may claim their state will lead the electric vehicle future, Dziczek says it's anyone's game.

"It's not entirely clear who owns this landscape," she says. "That's why I'm like, everything's up for grabs.

Whatever geographic reshuffling happens could shape the industry for decades to come.

This new Rivian plant guarantees Georgia, at least, will be a real player.

Adblock test (Why?)

"electric" - Google News
December 28, 2021 at 07:01PM
https://ift.tt/3z4ZhDU

The Sun Belt is making a big play for the hot electric vehicle market - NPR
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Moonbike’s light electric snowmobile is bringing its electric snow sports to the US - Electrek

mivo.indah.link

The French company Moonbike is preparing to bring its fun-looking snow transporter to the US, just in time for winter riding.

The Moonbike may have “bike” in its name, though it’s hard to call it a true snow bike.

But don’t let that rear track fool you. It’s not really a traditional snowmobile either, in that it rides on a single forward ski instead of two.

No matter what you call it, it sure does look like fun.

Powered by a 3 kW electric motor, the Moonbike blasts up to a top speed of 42 km/h (26 mph).

That’s not going to compete well with a true electric snowmobile, but it’s definitely easier to toss the 82 kg (182 lb) ride in the back of a truck or SUV. Thus the Moonbike seems better suited for local snow shenanigans than true snowmobiling duty.

The single 2.5 kWh battery pack offers up a maximum of one hour of use on sport mode or 1.5 hour of use with easier riding in Eco mode. According to the company, that means around 20 km (12 miles) in sport mode or 35 km (22 miles) in eco mode.

There’s also an option for a 5 kWh battery that doubles the range and adds another 12 kg (25 lb) of weight to the Moonbike.

A full charge takes around five hours on a standard wall plug, or around half that time with the faster charger option.

Pricing starts at $8,500 in the US, with deliveries listed as “in advance of and during the 2021-22 winter season.” I guess that means they’ll be rolling out soon, if I’m reading that correctly.

The company says it is producing 400 Moonbikes for “both European and American markets,” so it sounds like they are currently in the process.

We’ve seen other electric snow bikes before, but usually not quite this capable.

Canadian company Envo has a neat snow-kart offering of its own, as well as a kit that allows riders to convert their own bicycle into an electric snow bike.

And we’re also beginning to see the introduction of full-size electric snowmobiles with enough power to rival many electric cars.

But the Moonbike definitely fills that gap as a bike-shaped tool for snow sports that’s likely to give riders one heck of an experience.

---

Subscribe to Electrek on YouTube for exclusive videos and subscribe to the podcast.

Adblock test (Why?)

"electric" - Google News
December 28, 2021 at 02:55PM
https://ift.tt/3qrT1C9

Moonbike’s light electric snowmobile is bringing its electric snow sports to the US - Electrek
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Global Electronic Contract Manufacturing and Design Market - GlobeNewswire

mivo.indah.link

New York, Dec. 27, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Reportlinker.com announces the release of the report "Global Electronic Contract Manufacturing and Design Market By Services Type, By Industry Vertical, By Regional Outlook, Industry Analysis Report and Forecast, 2021 - 2027" - https://www.reportlinker.com/p06193305/?utm_source=GNW
Many organizations utilize these services to test, make and distribute products and offer return & repair services. Electronic contract manufacturing utilizes different sorts of manufacturing abilities and productive features regarding product engineering, assembly of the circuit board & hardware, component design, and process engineering among others. The vendors of outsourcing services, mainly in the electronics industry, make particular products on a contract basis and have increased substantially in the last couple of years. In addition, electronic contract manufacturing services majorly cover technologies and sub-technologies such as servers, computers, consumer devices, networking, and telecommunications.

The electronics industry has witnessed a major transition wherein companies working in this industry outsource their manufacturing aspect to maintain a low cost. Additionally, OEMs also utilize contract manufacturing with an aim to plunge into an untapped market in a cost-effective manner. The majority of the electronic manufacturing and design service vendors try and maintain good relation with the customers, which would be helpful in the design and pre-production process that results in decreased new product launch time.

The IT & Telecom market dominated the Global Electronic Contract Manufacturing And Design Services Market by Industry Vertical 2020, and would continue to be a dominant market till 2027; thereby, achieving a market value of $323,295.3 million by 2027. The Consumer Electronics market would experience a CAGR of 8.2% during (2021 - 2027). Additionally, The Healthcare market is poised to grow a CAGR of 10.6% during (2021 - 2027).

The Electronic Manufacturing market dominated the Global Electronic Contract Manufacturing And Design Services Market by Services Type 2020, and would continue to be a dominant market till 2027; thereby, achieving a market value of $366,071.9 million by 2027. The Electronics Assembly market is experiencing a CAGR of 9.1% during (2021 - 2027). Additionally, The Electronic Design & Engineering market would exhibit a CAGR of 9.7% during (2021 - 2027).

Based on Services Type, the market is segmented into Electronic Manufacturing, Electronics Assembly, Electronic Design & Engineering, Others. Based on Industry Vertical, the market is segmented into IT & Telecom, Consumer Electronics, Healthcare, Industrial, Automotive, Aerospace & Defense, Power & Energy and Others. Based on Regions, the market is segmented into North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, and Latin America, Middle East & Africa.

COVID-19 Impact Analysis

As COVID-19 became a global health emergency, it harshly affected the lives of millions and the economies of almost every country around the world. As the onset of the global pandemic was in China, the country has been severely affected by the virus.

The majority of the workers in the Chinese factories travel from the far-flung areas and reaching the factories had become a major problem for them due to the social distancing and other quarantine restrictions. As electronic manufacturing in China is more to be a manual process, and products like tablets or mobile phones and notebook computers need many people to physically touch every product during the manufacturing and assembly process, the possibility of transmission of the virus is quite high. As a result, the majority of the workers are not willing to return to the work, causing delays in production as well as the manufacturing process.

Market Growth Factors

Fulfilling the demands of various customers

Some of the key growth catalysts for the electronics contract manufacturing and design market are the integration of modern skills, economies of varying levels, and focus on competencies. Contract companies obtain a large number of contracts from various clients. By fulfilling the demands of a huge customer base helps the manufacturers to garner a large amount of crude materials at reduced costs. Also, companies can reap the benefit of the fact that capabilities of the contract manufacturers to develop the electronic products, unlike the hirer organization.

Contract manufacturing brings down labor and fixed costs

Companies working in the electronics space must manage fixed as well as labor costs in order to make all the components of the electronics. The main manufacturing units of electronic manufacturing services (EMS) are dedicated to developing and assembling fragile electronic components. Considering a secondary location with completely varied needs contributes to the fixed location costs and the requirement to recruit new employees, hence remarkably increasing the expenses of the companies.

Market Restraining Factors

Less control over manufacturing

Companies moving to CMs have to give up control over the entire manufacturing process. While giving this control to CMs, companies often face the risk of losing crucial knowledge and skills around the production techniques. Without consistent monitoring, companies lose the right and insight to identify any issues in the manufacturing process. As companies do not have control over manufacturing operations, they cannot manage the supply chain process, which may result in massive revenue loss during the time of fluctuation.

Service Outlook

In 2020, the Electronic manufacturing segment acquired the maximum revenue share in the market. The electronic design and engineering segment would display a promising growth rate during the forecasting period. This is attributed to the rising preferences of OEMs to outsource the requirements regarding designing. The demand for electronic circuit boards has been increased with the rising significance of these boards in a wide range of electronic devices like tablets and mobile phones. This factor is likely to act as a key driver for the overall market during the forecast period.

End-User Outlook

The demand for electronic contract manufacturing services would grow due to increasing applications across non-technical end-user segments like healthcare, industrial, automotive, and aerospace and defense. Moreover, the growing demand for electrical vehicles has increased the requirement to outsource their electronic component manufacturing, hence fueling the growth of the electronic contract manufacturing and design services market in the automotive industry.

Regional Outlook

The region is likely to showcase the fastest growth rate during the forecasting period. In addition, China has been a leading country in the regional market. Moreover, China is the hub for electronics manufacturing and dominates the APAC region in this respect. Factors such as a wide-scale availability of raw materials and low-cost labor are anticipated to fuel the growth & demand for electronic contract manufacturing and design in the regional market. Hence, the APAC region would continue to flourish due to these factors over the forecast period.

The major strategies followed by the market participants are Partnerships. Based on the Analysis presented in the Cardinal matrix; Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd. is the major forerunners in the Electronic Contract Manufacturing and Design Market. Companies such as Benchmark Electronics, Inc., Plexus Corporation, Flextronics International, Ltd. are some of the key innovators in the Market.

The market research report covers the analysis of key stake holders of the market. Key companies profiled in the report include Benchmark Electronics, Inc., Plexus Corporation, Flextronics International, Ltd., Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd., Celestica, Inc. (Onex Corporation), Sanmina Corporation, Fabrinet, Jabil, Inc., Venture Corporation Limited, and Compal Electronics, Inc.

Recent Strategies Deployed in Electronic Contract Manufacturing and Design Market

Partnerships, Collaborations, and Agreements:

Oct-2021: Celestica came into a partnership with ECM, a software and technology firm that is changing the global electric motor and generator industries. The partnership aimed to introduce patented Printed Circuit Board (PCB) stator solution of ECM to the Aerospace and Defense (A&D) market.

Sep-2021: Plexus partnered with BioSig Technologies, a company that develops medical devices. The partnership aimed to help BioSig to introduce the Pure EP System to market. Following the partnership, the two companies would strengthen their vision of developing products that create a better world.

Sep-2021: Plexus formed a partnership with Hanwha Phasor, a provider of antennas for satellite communications in flight, on land, and at sea. Through this partnership, Plexus would offer Hanwha Phasor product development support and design for test development, manufacture, and supply chain optimization services in the run-up to product launch.

Sep-2021: Hon Hai Precision teamed up with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s, one of the world’s largest semiconductor companies. Through this collaboration, Hon Hai aimed to accelerate its electronic control units (ECUs). Following the collaboration, Hon Hai would use the technology of TSMC in its ECU production platform to create lithium battery management chips and body control modules.

Sep-2021: Flextronics teamed up with Advanced Manufacturing Industry Action Group of World Economic Forum. The collaboration aimed to strengthen Flex’s strategic commitment to put investments in advanced technologies, practices, and groups that accelerate the evolution of advanced manufacturing.

Aug-2021: Benchmark Electronics formed a partnership with AEye, the worldwide leader in adaptive, high-performance LiDAR solutions. Under this partnership, Benchmark Electronics would work with AEye from design stages to the last manufacturing of the complicated scan block, a component crucial to the secure function of autonomous vehicles which supports its vision of addressing complicated challenges with its customers to assist in developing advanced and high-quality products.

Jul-2021: Viking Enterprise Solutions, a subsidiary of Sanmina Corporation, formed a partnership with Kalray, a leading provider of a new generation of processors specialized in Intelligent Data Processing from Cloud to Edge. Through this partnership, the two companies would co-develop FLASHBOX, a new generation of storage arrays. The partnership aimed to offer the latest generation of storage array solutions for Cloud and Edge with Kalray’s K200-LP best-of-breed smart storage acceleration card.

Jul-2021: Sanmina Corporation signed an agreement with FARO Technologies, a global leader of 3D measurement, imaging, and realization solutions for 3D Metrology, AEC (Architecture, Engineering & Construction), and Public Safety Analytics markets. The agreement aimed to outsource its manufacturing capabilities to Sanmina Corporation. Following the agreement, the two companies would fulfill the customer demand during the transition process.

May-2021: Fabrinet formed a partnership with Luminar Technologies and Celestica. The partnership aimed to offer Iris in series production and support in-house advanced manufacturing facility of Luminar based in Orlando, Florida, that makes process and manufacturing technology and techniques to install into production with its manufacturing alliances.

May-2021: Flextronics joined hands with EMist, a company that develops intelligent electrostatic disinfectant sprayers. The collaboration aimed to rapidly and profoundly scale up production of its EX-7000 Backpack Disinfectant Sprayer. Through this collaboration, Flextronics would support EMist to make design changes that ramp up production on the unit floor and offer a critical product to market rapidly.

Acquisitions and Mergers:

Nov-2021: Celestica took over PCI, an electronics manufacturing services (EMS) provider in Asia. The acquisition aimed to support Celestica’s focus on engineering-focused engagements, including full product development in the domains of human-machine interface, telematics, IoT, and embedded systems.

Oct-2021: Hon Hai Precision took over Lordstown Motors, an American electric vehicle automaker. Through this acquisition, Hon Hai Precision aimed to accelerate its entry into North America where it formed a contract manufacturing agreement with Fisker Motors and is in talks with other potential EV partners including Apple.

Aug-2021: Hon Hai Precision along with its subsidiaries FIH Mobile and Stellantis formed a joint venture named Mobile Drive. Mobile Drive aimed to offer a smart cockpit solution for vehicles.

Aug-2021: Compal plans to acquire Cal-Comp USA, a company that develops and manufactures electronic assemblies. Through this acquisition Compal would strengthen the competitiveness of its car and electronics business.

Jun-2021: Hon Hai Precision took over around 5 percent stakes in Dagang NeXchange Berhad, a Malaysia-based investment holding company. The acquisition aimed to extend its position in electric vehicle and semiconductor development in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) market in the future as part of its "3 plus 3" initiative.

May-2021: Hon Hai announced a joint venture with Yageo Group named XSemi Corporation. This joint venture aimed to expand the businesses into the semiconductor industry which also includes product development and sales.

Feb-2021: Jabil acquired Ecologic Brands, a leading vendor of sustainable packaging specializing in the paper bottle and paper-based packaging solutions. The acquisition aimed to integrate the unique paper bottle technology of Ecologic with advanced manufacturing solutions and the global scale of Jabil, thereby assisting all consumer brands to significantly decrease plastics in packaging across the world.

Geographical Expansions:

Aug-2021: Celestica expanded its geographical reach by establishing its AbelConn Electronics facility in Maple Grove, Minn, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Celestica. Through this new facility, the company would offer rapid volume manufacturing, prototyping, and engineering support to the defense and aerospace industries.

Mar-2021: Plexus expanded its geographical footprint by establishing a new manufacturing plant in Bangkok, Thailand. Through this launch, the company aimed to become receptive for potential growth opportunities within the APAC region, specifically because of the extremely proficient workforce and established supply chain of Thailand.

Feb-2021: Jabil expanded its geographical reach by opening its new healthcare manufacturing unit in the Dominican Republic capital city of Santo Domingo. Through this expansion, the company aimed to recruit local talent and be part of the biggest global healthcare manufacturing solutions vendor.

Jun-2020: Benchmark Electronics expanded its geographical footprints by virtually opening its latest advanced electronics manufacturing facility in Phoenix. The new facility would manufacture solutions for high-reliability RF, photonics, and high-speed electronic systems in various market verticals such as aerospace & defense, computing, medical, complex industrial, and advanced telecommunications.

Mar-2020: Sanmina expanded its geographical reach by expanding its manufacturing plant in Thailand. Through this expansion, the company would bring innovations for the latest technological products across the networking, automotive/LIDAR, data center, 5G, and aerospace & defense markets.

Scope of the Study

Market Segments covered in the Report:

By Services Type

• Electronic Manufacturing

• Electronics Assembly

• Electronic Design & Engineering

• Others

By Industry Vertical

• IT & Telecom

• Consumer Electronics

• Healthcare

• Industrial

• Automotive

• Aerospace & Defense

• Power & Energy

• Others

By Geography

• North America

o US

o Canada

o Mexico

o Rest of North America

• Europe

o Germany

o UK

o France

o Russia

o Spain

o Italy

o Rest of Europe

• Asia Pacific

o China

o Japan

o Taiwan

o India

o South Korea

o Singapore

o Rest of Asia Pacific

• LAMEA

o Brazil

o Argentina

o UAE

o Saudi Arabia

o South Africa

o Nigeria

o Rest of LAMEA

Companies Profiled

• Benchmark Electronics, Inc.

• Plexus Corporation

• Flextronics International, Ltd.

• Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd.

• Celestica, Inc. (Onex Corporation)

• Sanmina Corporation

• Fabrinet

• Jabil, Inc.

• Venture Corporation Limited

• Compal Electronics, Inc.

Unique Offerings

• Exhaustive coverage

• Highest number of market tables and figures

• Subscription based model available

• Guaranteed best price

• Assured post sales research support with 10% customization free
Read the full report: https://www.reportlinker.com/p06193305/?utm_source=GNW

About Reportlinker
ReportLinker is an award-winning market research solution. Reportlinker finds and organizes the latest industry data so you get all the market research you need - instantly, in one place.

__________________________

Adblock test (Why?)

"Electronic" - Google News
December 27, 2021 at 05:37PM
https://ift.tt/3pvAjdO

Global Electronic Contract Manufacturing and Design Market - GlobeNewswire
"Electronic" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3dmroCo
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Here comes GM's Hummer electric pickup - MarketWatch

Electronic Frontier Alliance Defending Local Communities: 2021 in Review - EFF

mivo.indah.link

In another year of masking up, local communities have found enough footing to push back on surveillance tech and fight for our digital rights. Members of the Electronic Frontier Alliance have continued to innovate by organizing workshops and trainings for neighbors, overwhelmingly online, and made important headway on issues like more equitable broadband access, surveillance oversight, and even banning government use of face recognition.

The Electronic Frontier Alliance (EFA) is an information-sharing network of local groups that span a range of organizational models. Some are fully volunteer-run, some are affiliated with a broader institution (such as student groups), and others are independent non-profit organizations. What these groups all share in common is an investment in local organizing, a not-for-profit model, and a passion for five guiding principles:

• Free Expression: People should be able to speak their minds to whomever will listen.
• Security: Technology should be trustworthy and answer to its users.
• Privacy: Technology should allow private and anonymous speech, and allow users to set their own parameters about what to share with whom.
• Creativity: Technology should promote progress by allowing people to build on the ideas, creations, and inventions of others.
• Access to Knowledge: Curiosity should be rewarded, not stifled.

Since first forming in 2016, the alliance has grown to 73 member groups across 26 states. It's not possible to review everything these grassroots groups have accomplished over the last year, but this post highlights a number of exemplary victories. We hope they will inspire others to take action in the new year.

Advocacy

Pushing Back on Police Surveillance

EFA members have been vital in the fight against government use of face recognition technology. This type of biometric surveillance comes in many forms, and is a special menace to civil liberties. Since 2019, when San Francisco became the first city to ban government use of this technology, more than a dozen municipalities nationwide have followed suit, including Portland and Boston last year. In 2021, these victories continued with the passage of bans in Minneapolis and Kings County, Washington, which were won by a close collaboration between EFA members, local ACLU chapters, other local community groups, and the support of EFF.

Alliance member Restore the Fourth Minnesota (RT4MN), and the rest of the Twin Cities-based Safety Not Surveillance (SNS) coalition, successfully advocated to pass their ban on government use of face recognition technology in Minneapolis. During the year-long fight for the ban, the coalition built widespread community support, took the argument to the local press, and won with a unanimous vote from the city council. The SNS coalition didn’t rest on its laurels after this victory, but instead went on to mobilize against increased state funding to the local fusion center, and to continue to advocate for a Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS) ordinance. These campaigns and other impressive work coming out of Minnesota are covered in more detail in EFF’s recent interview with a RT4MN organizer.

In California, Oakland Privacy won one of the first victories of the year, when its City Council voted to strengthen their anti-surveillance bill in January. The Citizens Privacy Coalition of Santa Clara County has been organizing for CCOPS policies across the San Francisco Bay, fighting for democratic control over the acquisition and use of surveillance tech by local government agencies.

In Missouri, Privacy Watch St. Louis has taken a leadership role in pushing for a CCOPS bill that was introduced in the city council earlier this year. The group also worked with the ACLU of Missouri to educate lawmakers and their constituents about the dangers and unconstitutionality of another bill, Board Bill 200, which would have implemented aerial surveillance (or "spy planes") similar to a Baltimore program. Early this year, the city’s Rules Committee unanimously voted against the bill.

EFA members also targeted another dangerous form of police surveillance: acoustic gunshot detection, the most popular brand of which is ShotSpotter. One of the most prominent voices is Chicago-based Lucy Parsons Labs which has brought the harms to light in their research and use of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Lucy Parsons Labs discusses this and more of their incredible work in their own year in review post. They went on to coordinate with Oakland Privacy and other EFA members to organize protests against another ShotSpotter program.

In New York City, alliance member Surveillance Technologies Oversight Project (STOP) uncovered a secret NYPD slush fund used to purchase invasive surveillance technology with no public oversight. In collaboration with Legal Aid NYC, STOP blew the whistle on $159 million of unchecked surveillance spending, ranging from face recognition to x-ray vans. Also, STOP, the Brennan Center, EFF, and other leading civil society advocates held the NYPD accountable for its inadequate compliance with the POST Act. The 2020 law required greater NYPD transparency in its implementations of surveillance technologies.

Defending User Rights

In addition to protecting privacy from state surveillance, EFA members also turned out to ensure users’ rights were protected from unfair and shady business practices.

In July, the Biden Administration instructed the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to advance Right to Repair policies, leading to a rare public hearing and vote. Called on by fellow repair advocates such as iFixit, USPIRG, and other members of the repair association, EFA members were able to rapidly mobilize to submit public comments. Following the outpouring of support, the FTC unanimously voted to enforce Right to Repair law, to defend consumers’ rights to repair their own devices without the threat of being sued by the manufacturer or patent holder. The fight for Right to Repair is far from over for local advocates, with state legislation still being considered nationwide.

Back in Oakland, organizers successfully ensured the passage of a service provider choice ordinance by unanimous vote. The new law makes sure that Oakland renters are not constrained to the internet service provider (ISP) of their landlord, but can instead freely choose their own provider. This blocks the kickback schemes many landlords enjoy, where they share revenue with Big ISPs or receive other benefits in exchange for denying competitors physical access to rented apartments. As a result, residents are stuck with whatever quality and cost the incumbent ISP cares to offer. This win in Oakland replicates the earlier success in San Francisco and gives tenants a choice, and smaller local ISPs an opportunity to compete. In the fight for internet access, EFA members like the Pacific Northwest Rural Broadband Alliance have also been working to set up smaller local options to extend broadband access in Montana without relying on Big ISPs that often ignore rural areas.

Electronic Frontier Alliance members were also active in advocacy campaigns to press corporations to change policies that restrict consumer access and privacy. Several groups signed onto a letter calling on PayPal to offer transparency and due process when deciding which accounts to restrict or close.

And earlier this year, when Apple revealed plans to build an encryption backdoor into its data storage and messaging systems, many EFA groups leapt into action. They helped collect over 25,000 signatures in opposition. Also, in Portland, Boston, Chicago, San Francisco, and New York, alliance members joined EFF and Fight for the Future in a nationwide series of rallies demanding Apple cancel their plans for these policies that could be disastrous for user privacy. This wave of pressure led Apple to retract some of its planned phone-scanning and pause its planned scanning of user iCloud Photos libraries.

Building community

While we celebrate each time Alliance members make headlines, we also recognize the extensive work they pour into strengthening their coalitions and building strong community defense. This is, of course, particularly difficult when we cannot safely come together in person, and organizers deal with extra hurdles to rebuild their work in an accessible online format.

Fortunately, in 2021 many allies hit their stride, and found opportunity in adversity. With so many local events going virtual, local groups leaned on their relationships in the EFA despite being in different parts of the country. These are just a few of the unique event collaborations we saw this year:

• Aspiration Tech again hosted their annual collaborative gathering of grassroots activists and software developers with their unique co-created convening
• Canal Alliance hosted a panel of partners, including EFF, Digital Marin, the Institute of Local Self Reliance, and Media Alliance, to discuss how communities can take action on the digital divide issues exacerbated by the pandemic.
• CyPurr Collective maintained their monthly Brooklyn Public Library events, connecting the community to digital security experts such as EFF’s Eva Galperin, Albert Fox Cahn from EFA member S.T.O.P., and 2021 Pioneer Award winner Matt Mitchell.
• EFF-Austin held many online workshops, including one featuring Vahid Razavi from Ethics in Tech for an event discussing ethical issues with companies in Silicon Valley.
• Ethics in Tech hosted several all-day events featuring other EFA members, including a recent event with Kevin Welch from EFF-Austin.
• Portland’s Techno-Activism Third Mondays hosted a number of great workshops, including a three-part panel on online privacy, why people need it, and how to fight for it.
• RT4MN hosted a number of workshops throughout the year, including a recent panel on drone and aerial surveillance.
• S.T.O.P. held great online panels online in collaboration with NYC partners, tackling topics that included: face recognition and predictive policing; how AI training causes law enforcement biases; how artists can organize against police surveillance; and punitive workplace surveillance faced by warehouse workers.

In addition to events hosted by EFA members, the EFF organizing team held space for EFA groups to collaborate remotely, including our first EFA Virtual Convening in August. In lieu of regular in-person meet-ups, which are essential to creating opportunities for mutual support, EFF hosted a virtual "World Café" style break-out session where EFA members and EFF staff could learn from each other's work and brainstorm new future collaborative projects.

New members

This past year we also had the opportunity to expand the alliance and establish a new presence in Montana, North Carolina, and Tennessee, by welcoming six impressive new members:

• Calyx Institute, New York, NY: A technology non-profit with the mission of developing, testing and distributing free privacy software, as well as working to bridge the digital divide.
• Canal Alliance, San Rafael, CA: Advocates for digital equity for immigrant communities.
• DEFCON Group 864, Greenville, NC: The newest DEFCON group in the alliance, with a mission to provide learning opportunities and resources for everyone interested in information security.
• Devanooga, Chattanooga, TN: A non-profit community group for current or aspiring developers and designers.
• Pacific Northwest Rural Broadband Alliance, Missoula, MT: A non-profit foundation dedicated to building fast, affordable, community-powered broadband networks.
• PrivaZy Collective, Wellesley, MA: A community-centered student group addressing online privacy issues as faced by Gen Zers.

Looking forward

The fight for our digital rights continues, and maintaining a robust and vigilant network of organizers is essential to that struggle. EFF will continue to work with groups dedicated to promoting digital rights in their communities, and offer support whenever possible. To learn more about how the EFA works, check out our FAQ page, and consider joining the fight by having your group apply to join us.

Learn more about some of our EFA members in these profiles:

This article is part of our Year in Review series. Read other articles about the fight for digital rights in 2021.

Adblock test (Why?)

"Electronic" - Google News
December 23, 2021 at 08:56PM
https://ift.tt/32g0YCD

Electronic Frontier Alliance Defending Local Communities: 2021 in Review - EFF
"Electronic" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3dmroCo
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Who Invented Electric Christmas Lights? | Antique Information & History Education | lancasterfarming.com - Lancaster Farming

mivo.indah.link

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

Who Invented Electric Christmas Lights? | Antique Information & History Education | lancasterfarming.com  Lancaster Farming

"electric" - Google News
December 24, 2021 at 04:04PM
https://ift.tt/32CIvQw

Who Invented Electric Christmas Lights? | Antique Information & History Education | lancasterfarming.com - Lancaster Farming
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Judge rules in favor of Rappahannock Electric Co-op in transparency fight - Fauquier Times

mivo.indah.link

A judge denied a petition seeking greater transparency in the operations of Rappahannock Electric Cooperative’s board of directors Tuesday but said trial statements indicated the organization is “not as cooperative as it should be.”

The ruling, issued by Judge Joseph J. Ellis in Spotsylvania Circuit Court, was the culmination of a more than three-year legal fight by a group of REC members, led by retired Department of Justice lawyer Seth Heald, to amend the cooperative’s bylaws.

The most significant of the changes would have required all board of directors meetings to be open to cooperative members, except for executive sessions during which confidential or sensitive information could be discussed. That amendment would also have required the board to give 72 hours notice before any meeting and to livestream their meetings.

A second amendment would have altered the system of electing board members and required directors to reveal the candidates for whom they cast “proxy” votes, or votes that members cede to the board to cast as they choose. Currently, the board relies on secret balloting to allot proxy votes.

Finally, a third would have required directors’ annual compensation to be published every year in the co-op magazine and set a 60-day notice period for any board vote on changes to compensation.

“These are modest proposals. They are proposals that have proved workable in other electric cooperatives,” said Evan Johns, an attorney with Appalachian Mountain Advocates representing Heald and his co-plaintiffs, during arguments Tuesday.

However, Rappahannock Electric Cooperative, Virginia’s largest co-op with more than 140,000 members, has staunchly resisted the changes, arguing that they would fundamentally prevent the cooperative from fulfilling its duties under state law.

“This would greatly hinder the operational efficiency and effectiveness of the cooperative,” REC Board of Directors Chairman Christopher Shipe told the court Tuesday during trial.

Tuesday’s proceedings trace back to 2018, when Rappahannock Electric Cooperative refused to give Heald a petition form to collect 500 signatures required to put his bylaw proposals to a membership vote. Several of the same proposals had previously been rejected by the board in 2012, eventually contributing to Heald’s decision to launch the “Repower REC” campaign to reform Rappahannock’s governance process.

The campaign is one of several efforts nationwide to reform electric cooperatives, which trace their roots to the New Deal and provide electricity to millions of rural and increasingly suburban people.

A group of Rappahannock Electric Cooperative members are pushing for more transparency from the board of the co-op, Virginia’s biggest. The co-op’s service area is in yellow. (Rapphannock Electric Cooperative website)

Unlike investor-owned utilities, cooperatives are nonprofit and owned by their members. Electric cooperatives are built around seven basic principles, of which one is democratic member control.

“We operate under democratic procedures in the boardroom,” Shipe testified Tuesday. “We’re a cooperative, but we’re a private business organized under the cooperative principles.”

However, he contended that open meetings would be “unworkable.” Not only must the board of directors regularly deal with sensitive contract and grid information not appropriate for public consumption, he contended, but opening meetings could expose the co-op to “safety and security” risks, including of cyberattacks.

“The world we operate in is full of threats and full of risks,” Rappahannock CEO and President John Hewa testified later.

Furthermore, opening up board meetings to member observation could politicize the co-op’s operations and complicate decision-making “because of things being misconstrued, misstatements and things being taken out of context and tracked,” Shipe told the court.

“Is the risk of constant exposure to litigation something that would cause paralysis on the board?” Andy Sherrod, a Hirschler Fleishcher attorney representing the REC, asked.

“Definitely,” Shipe responded.

Attorneys for Heald and his co-plaintiffs — retired educator Michael Murphy and retired Brig. Gen. John Levasseur, a former REC board member — noted that numerous other electric cooperatives around the nation have open board meetings and are still able to function. Some states, such as Colorado, require electric co-ops to open up board meetings to members.

One secret 2018 report by a task force convened by the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, the trade association for electric cooperatives, stated that “on balance, the task force supports permitting members to attend board of directors meetings, other than portions of meetings at which legal, employee and other confidential matters are addressed.”

Hewa later described the task force report as less specific recommendations for how every co-op should function and more “intended to invoke and further encourage discussion in corporate boardrooms.”

Most prominently, the nation’s largest electric co-op, Pedernales Electric Cooperative in Texas, began holding open, live-streamed board meetings over a decade ago after widespread scandals involving the board’s leadership triggered a class-action lawsuit, the criminal conviction of a top official and state as well as congressional hearings on electric cooperative governance.

In Virginia, the Powell Valley Electric Cooperative, which has approximately 33,000 members spanning counties in Southwest Virginia and Tennessee, also began holding open board meetings in 2018.

PVEC member William Kornrich of Sneedville, Tenn., who has been involved in governance reforms at that co-op, testified that he has attended roughly 30 board meetings since Powell Valley opened them up to observation and that the co-op has continued to operate without major problems. Board members go into executive session to discuss confidential and sensitive matters three to four times per year, he said, and typically spend about an hour to an hour and a half in open session each month.

But Rappahannock Electric Cooperative officials said that they didn’t believe more than 10 percent of their board’s business could be done in public.

“It is my view that outside the consent agenda we’d have to go into some kind of executive session. It is not appropriate for open meetings,” said Shipe. “Open meetings would preclude us from fulfilling our statutory requirements.”

Hewa, the Rappahannock CEO, who previously served as CEO of Pedernales Electric Co-op after the institution of reforms there, said in response to questions from Heald’s attorneys that “over 50 percent” of that board’s business had been conducted in executive session, but not as much as 90 percent.

Co-op leaders said Rappahannock’s size meant its situation was not comparable to Powell Valley. Furthermore, Hewa pointed out that unlike Pedernales, Rappahannock Electric Cooperative is regulated by the state and subject to federal disclosure requirements as a federal borrower through the Rural Utilities Service.

“I believe Rappahannock is the most wisely and truly transparent cooperative out there,” Hewa said.

‘All things necessary and incidental’ but ‘not absolute’

Throughout the full day of trial, Ellis said his role was not to determine whether the proposed bylaws were “good” or “bad” or whether they might complicate the work of Rappahannock Electric’s board, but whether they would fundamentally prevent that board from fulfilling its statutory role.

In particular, Ellis pointed to a September 2020 ruling in the case by Spotsylvania Judge William Glover that led to many of the disputes going to trial this December.

“The board cannot prevent a vote on bylaws changes simply on the theory that the proposed alteration or repeal would impinge on the ability of the board to conduct its business,” Glover wrote. “However, there may be proposals which would alter the existing bylaws to the extent that the board could not continue to execute its statutory role.”

The Virginia Utility Cooperatives Act defines the principal purpose of electric co-ops as “making energy, energy services and other utility services available at the lowest cost consistent with sound economy and prudent management of the business of such cooperative and such other purposes as its membership shall approve.”

The act also grants a cooperative’s board of directors the power “to do all things necessary or incidental in conducting the business of the cooperative,” including the power “to make its own rules and regulations as to its procedure.”

But, Judge Ellis cautioned, “the power of the Rappahannock Electric Cooperative is not absolute. It’s not.”

Late in the day, he told Hewa that it was hard to understand how it was in the highest and best interest of co-op members to be “completely locked out” of the board of directors’ decision-making process.

However, the case took a twist when Ellis determined that he was required to look at the three bylaw proposals as a slate, rather than on an individual basis.

Consequently, he said, if he found that any one of the proposals would fundamentally prevent the board from fulfilling its statutory role, he would have to reject all of them.

“I don’t know if I have a choice,” he said, before telling Heald’s attorneys, “I understand your dismay.”

Ultimately Ellis ruled that the provision in the first bylaw amendment requiring 72 hours notice before a meeting, without any accommodation for emergencies, would prevent the board from fulfilling its role. Rappahannock had argued that such a change would bar the board from meeting even in the case of a hurricane or other storm producing widespread outages, a concern echoed by Ellis.

“Having said that, let me point out this is named a cooperative for a reason,” the judge continued. “And certainly the attitudes I’ve heard today express to this court that it’s not as cooperative as it should be.”

After the trial, Shipe said that he didn’t agree with Ellis’ assessment of Rappahannock’s cooperative spirit and that he was “sorry that was the judge’s impression.”

Nevertheless, both he and Hewa applauded the ruling, with Shipe saying that “the judge was trying to find the right balance in this case” and that the full slate of bylaws “was a bridge too far in its entirety.”

“Maybe we can find some compromise,” he said.

Heald said he was “extremely disappointed” in the case’s outcome and that the plaintiffs were evaluating whether or not they would appeal. During the trial, their attorneys disputed Ellis’ interpretation of the law as requiring him to assess the proposals as a slate.

“The way hurdles have been thrown in our path all along the way makes it seem really unlikely that the bylaw amendment process is an effective tool for reforming a co-op if it really wants to fight your reforms,” said Heald. “Maybe legislation is a better way to handle it.”

Adblock test (Why?)

"electric" - Google News
December 23, 2021 at 11:15PM
https://ift.tt/32fgtL6

Judge rules in favor of Rappahannock Electric Co-op in transparency fight - Fauquier Times
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq

Electric Vehicles Provide Lower Carbon Emissions Through Additional Channels - Tech Explorist

mivo.indah.link

Global transportation is the single largest energy user and uses CO₂ emissions, chiefly driven by light-duty vehicles (LDVs). To curb emissions, many countries, including the United States (U.S.), are increasingly promoting alternative fuel vehicles, which are typically characterized by lower tailpipe emissions. However, concerns over potentially growing emissions from energy production and vehicle manufacturing have been voiced. These emissions occur–offsite or indirectly and include generating electricity to charge electric vehicles.

A recent study from the Yale School of the Environment published in Nature Communications found that the total indirect emissions from electric vehicles pale compared to the indirect emissions from fossil fuel-powered vehicles.

This is in addition to the direct emissions from combusting fossil fuels — either at the tailpipe for conventional vehicles or at the power plant smokestack for electricity generation — showing electric vehicles have a clear advantage emissions-wise over conventional vehicles.

“The surprising element was how much lower the emissions of electric vehicles were,” says postdoctoral associate Stephanie Weber. “The supply chain for combustion vehicles is just so dirty that electric vehicles can’t surpass them, even when you factor in indirect emissions.”

Weber was part of the study led by Paul Wolfram, ’21 Ph.D. Now a postdoc with the Joint Global Change Research Institute at the University of Maryland, including YSE economics professor Ken Gillingham and Edgar Hertwich, an industrial ecologist from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology and a former YSE faculty member.

The research team combined concepts from energy economics and industrial ecology — carbon pricing, life cycle assessment, and modeling energy systems — to find if carbon emissions were still reduced when indirect emissions from the electric vehicle supply chain were factored in.

“A major concern about electric vehicles is that the supply chain, including the mining and processing of raw materials and the manufacturing of batteries, is far from clean,” says Gillingham. “So, if we priced the carbon embodied in these processes, the expectation is electric vehicles would be exorbitantly expensive. It turns out that’s not the case; if you level the playing field by also pricing the carbon in the fossil fuel vehicle supply chain, electric vehicle sales would actually increase.”

“The introduction of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard in California, which regulates all fuel and electricity production and combustion emissions, shows that transport policy in practice can at least partly address indirect vehicle emissions. However, not a single transport policy exists to date that consistently regulates all sources of vehicle emissions along the entire supply chain. We use the terms ‘supply chain emissions’ and ‘life–cycle emissions’ synonymously. Both are defined as the sum of direct, or tailpipe, emissions, and indirect emissions.” Study quotes.

The research team gathered data using a National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) created by the Energy Information Administration, which models the entire U.S. energy system using detailed information from the current domestic energy system and a forecast of the future of the electric system. Wolfram completed a life cycle assessment that provided outputs of indirect emissions, which were then plugged into the NEMS model to see how a carbon tax on these indirect emissions would change the behavior of consumers and manufacturers. Weber assisted in modifying the NEMS code.

According to Wolfram, the study shows that “the elephant in the room is the supply chain of fossil fuel-powered vehicles, not that of electric vehicles.” He notes that the faster we switch to electric vehicles, the better — at least in countries with a sufficiently decarbonized electricity supply, like the U.S.

Gillingham, whose research has focused extensively on alternative energy adoption in transportation, says this research provides a better understanding of how comprehensive carbon pricing — which includes the entire supply chain — can shift consumers toward electric vehicles.

“Our work represents a step towards a holistic inclusion of dynamic life–cycle relationships in integrated modeling frameworks. Future research could include additional potentially important factors and processes, such as the deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) at fuel refineries, differences in emission intensities of hydrocarbons, synthetic liquid fuels, net–negative emission pathways of energy production, and low–carbon steel production using hydrogen from renewable sources.” Study quotes.

Journal Reference

1. Wolfram, P., Weber, S., Gillingham, K. et al. Pricing indirect emissions accelerates low—carbon transition of US light vehicle sector. Nat Commun 12, 7121 (2021). DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-27247-y

Adblock test (Why?)

"electric" - Google News
December 23, 2021 at 12:49PM
https://ift.tt/3EnpluT

Electric Vehicles Provide Lower Carbon Emissions Through Additional Channels - Tech Explorist
"electric" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2yk35WT
https://ift.tt/3bbj3jq