63 jili All amounts in Canadian dollars unless otherwise stated. VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESSWIRE / November 26, 2024 / RE Royalties Ltd . (TSX.V:RE)(OTCQX:RROYF) ("RE Royalties" or the "Company"), a global leader in renewable energy royalty-based financing, today announced that it has sent the notice of meeting, information circular, and proxy form (the "Meeting Materials") for the Company's upcoming Annual General Meeting to be held on December 13, 2024 at 10:00 am PST at the Company's head office in Vancouver, B.C. (the "Meeting") to shareholders of the Company. However, due to the ongoing Canada Post labour dispute, the Meeting Materials may not be delivered on time to shareholders at their address. Copies of the Meeting Materials including the form of proxy have been filed and are available on the Company's SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca and on the Company's website at https://www.reroyalties.com/agm If you are a registered shareholder, please contact Yanne Yu at Computershare Investor Services Inc. at 1-800-564-6253 to obtain your proxy form control number to cast your vote for the upcoming AGM. If you hold shares through an intermediary such as a brokerage firm, please contact your intermediary directly for a copy of the proxy form. The voting deadline for the Company's upcoming AGM is 10:00 am, Pacific Time, on December 11, 2024 prior to the Meeting. On Behalf of the Board of Directors, Bernard Tan CEO About RE Royalties Ltd. RE Royalties Ltd. acquires revenue-based royalties over renewable energy facilities and technologies by providing non-dilutive financing solutions to privately held and publicly traded companies in the renewable energy sector. RE Royalties is the first to apply this proven business model to the renewable energy sector. The Company currently owns over 100 royalties on solar, wind, battery storage, energy efficiency and renewable natural gas projects in Canada, United States, Mexico, and Chile. The Company's business objectives are to provide shareholders with a strong growing yield, robust capital protection, high rate of growth through re-investment and a sustainable investment focus. For further information, please contact: Investor and Media Contact: RE Royalties Ltd. Talia Beckett, VP of Communications and Sustainability T: (778) 374‐2000 E: taliabeckett@reroyalties.com www.reroyalties.com Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange), nor any other regulatory body or securities exchange platform, accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. This news release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy the securities in any jurisdiction, nor shall there be any offer or sale of the securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful. The securities being offered have not been approved or disapproved by any regulatory authority nor has any such authority passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of the short form base shelf prospectus or the prospectus supplement. The offer and sale of the securities has not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "U.S. Securities Act") or any state securities laws and may not be offered or sold in the United States or to United States persons absent registration or an applicable exemption from the registration requirements of the U.S. Securities Act and applicable state securities laws. Forward Looking Statements This news release includes forward-looking information and forward-looking statements (collectively, "forward-looking information") with respect to the Company and within the meaning of Canadian securities laws. Forward looking information is typically identified by words such as: believe, expect, anticipate, intend, estimate, postulate, and similar expressions, or are those, which, by their nature, refer to future events. This information represents predictions and actual events or results may differ materially. Forward-looking information may relate to the Company's future outlook and anticipated events or results and may include statements regarding the Company's financial results, future financial position, expected growth of cash flows, business strategy, budgets, projected costs, projected capital expenditures, taxes, plans, objectives, industry trends and growth opportunities including financing. The reader is referred to the Company's most recent filings on SEDAR as well as other information filed with the OTC Markets for a more complete discussion of all applicable risk factors and their potential effects, copies of which may be accessed through the Company's profile page at www.sedar.com . SOURCE: RE Royalties Ltd. View the original on accesswire.com

Is the world more dangerous than ever for travelers? A global risk expert weighs inDeal on Elgin Marbles ‘still some distance’ away, says George OsborneFBI investigating ‘numerous bomb threats’ against Trump administration nomineesManchester City’s crisis deepened as they surrendered a three-goal lead late in the game to draw 3-3 against Feyenoord in the Champions League. Pep Guardiola’s side avoided the indignity of a sixth successive defeat in all competitions and looked on course for a welcome victory thanks to a double from Erling Haaland – the first from the penalty spot – and a deflected effort from Ilkay Gundogan. Yet Guardiola was left with his head in hands as Feyenoord roared back in the last 15 minutes with goals from Anis Hadj Moussa, Sergio Gimenez and David Hancko, two of them after Josko Gvardiol errors. FULL-TIME | A point apiece. 🩵 3-3 ⚫️ #ManCity | #UCL pic.twitter.com/6oj1nEOIwm — Manchester City (@ManCity) November 26, 2024 Arsenal delivered the statement Champions League win Mikel Arteta had demanded as they swept aside Sporting Lisbon 5-1. Arteta wanted his team to prove their European credentials, and goals from Gabriel Martinelli, Kai Havertz, Gabriel, Bukayo Saka and Leandro Trossard got their continental campaign back on track in style following the 1-0 defeat at Inter Milan last time out. A memorable victory also ended Sporting’s unbeaten start to the season, a streak of 17 wins and one draw, the vast majority of which prompted Manchester United to prise away head coach Ruben Amorim. Putting on a show at Sporting 🌟 pic.twitter.com/Yi9MgRZEkl — Arsenal (@Arsenal) November 26, 2024 Paris St Germain were left in serious of danger of failing to progress in the Champions League as they fell to a 1-0 defeat to Bayern Munich at the Allianz Arena. Kim Min-jae’s header late in the first half was enough to send PSG to a third defeat in the competition this season, leaving them six points off the automatic qualification places for the last 16 with three games to play. Luis Enrique’s side, who had Ousmane Dembele sent off, were deservedly beaten by Bayern who dominated chances and possession. 🔔 FULL TIME – Victory at home! +3 in the #UCL 👏❤️ #FCBayern #MiaSanMia | #FCBPSG #UCL pic.twitter.com/BYE23dXXih — FC Bayern (@FCBayernEN) November 26, 2024 Elsewhere, Atletico Madrid were 6-0 winners away to Sparta Prague, Julian Alvarez and Angel Correa each scoring twice whilst there were also goals from Marcos Llorente and Antoine Griezmann. Barcelona ended tournament debutants Brest’s unbeaten start with a 3-0 victory courtesy of two goals from Robert Lewandowski – one a penalty – and Dani Olmo. Lewandowski’s first was his 100th Champions League goal, only the third man to reach the mark after Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi. A Castello Lukeba own goal saw Inter Milan go top of the standings with a narrow 1-0 win over RB Leipzig at San Siro, whilst Bayer Leverkusen were emphatic victors against Red Bull Salzburg, Florian Wirtz scoring twice to move Xabi Alonso’s side into the automatic qualification places. Atalanta continued their strong start, albeit whilst conceding a first goal in Europe this season in a 6-1 win away to Young Boys, whilst Tammy Abraham scored the decisive goal as AC Milan beat Slovan Bratislava 3-2.

BridgingApps® and Sentara Health Plans Creating Transition Tool for Children and Youth with Special Health NeedsSpanish Standings

None

Diane Moss lost her home in the Santa Monica Mountains after power lines ignited the apocalyptic Woolsey Fire in 2018. Since then, she’s pressed for a safer electric grid in California. “It’s so easy to forget the risk that we live in — until it happens to you,” said Moss, a longtime clean energy advocate. “All of us in California have to think about how we better prepare to survive disaster, which is only going to be more of a problem as the climate changes.” In recent years, California’s power companies have been doing just that: insulating power lines and burying lines underground, trimming trees, deploying drones and using risk-detection technology. As wildfires across the U.S. intensify , California is on the leading edge of efforts to prevent more deadly and destructive fires ignited by downed power lines and malfunctioning equipment. Customers have shouldered a hefty price for wildfire safety measures. From 2019 through 2023, the California Public Utilities Commission authorized the three largest utilities to collect $27 billion in wildfire prevention and insurance costs from ratepayers, according to a report to the Legislature. And the costs are projected to keep rising: The three companies — Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric — continue to seek billions more from customers for wildfire prevention spending. Rates are expected to continue outpacing inflation through 2027 . Fire safety projects are a big part of the reason that Californians pay the highest electric rates in the nation, outside of Hawaii. Other reasons include rooftop solar incentives, new transmission systems and upgrades for electric vehicles. High electric bills have helped fuel a statewide affordability crisis alongside soaring housing prices, expensive groceries and costly gasoline. Small businesses are feeling the burden, along with the state’s poorest residents: One in three low-income households served by the three utilities fell behind in paying their power bills this year. California’s three investor-owned utilities are regulated monopolies, so when they spend money on costs related to wildfires, they recover it through customers’ bills. The price of electricity has ignited debate about how much California families should bear for the cost of wildfire prevention, whether utilities are balancing risk and affordability and whether the money is being spent wisely. Loretta Lynch, a former head of the state utilities commission, said lack of oversight is a problem, with the commission “rubber-stamping outrageous costs” and allowing the companies to “address wildfires in the most expensive, least effective way possible.” One of the biggest controversies is whether the utilities should be spending so much on burying power lines, an extremely costly and slow process. Last year, a state audit concluded that the utilities commission and the state’s advocates office must do more to verify whether utilities were completing the work they sought payment for. The three companies say the billions of dollars in spending is necessary as climate change worsens wildfires across the state . Utility equipment has caused less than 10% of the state’s fires but nearly half of its most destructive fires, according to the utilities commission . PG&E, which a few years ago came out of bankruptcy triggered by its liability for several deadly, destructive fires, has adopted the stance that “catastrophic wildfires shall stop.” The company, which serves the most high-risk areas in California, is the state’s largest spender on wildfire prevention. PG&E plans to bury 10,000 miles of power lines in its highest-risk areas — work that is highly contentious because it is costly and slow. The company has buried 800 miles since 2021 , with each mile costing between $3 and $4 million. Last year, the commission approved a $3.7 billion plan for PG&E to bury 1,230 miles of lines through 2026. Sumeet Singh, PG&E’s chief operating officer, told CalMatters that the utility is concerned about rates, too. He said the company is “very committed to stabilizing our customer rates as we go forward without compromising safety. I think that’s clear, that it’s a non-negotiable....There’s a pretty robust process, and oversight, that we are under.” Kevin Geraghty, chief operating officer of SDG&E, called the wildfire spending process “the most highly-scrutinized, regulatory utility process I have ever been involved in, in my life.” Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order in October aimed at tackling the high costs of electricity, asking state agencies to evaluate their oversight of wildfire projects and ensure that the utilities are focused on “cost-effective” measures. He is seeking proposals for changes in rules or laws by Jan. 1. The spark for the increased spending came seven years ago, after California suffered one of its worst droughts and a series of devastating wildfires in 2017 and 2018, many ignited by utility equipment. Sixteen fires were caused by PG&E equipment during a rash of October 2017 fires that decimated Napa, Sonoma and other Northern California counties. That December, the Thomas Fire , sparked by Southern California Edison equipment, engulfed parts of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. But the devastation of 2017 was only a prelude to an even graver year. On Nov. 8, 2018, the Camp Fire leveled the town of Paradise, killing 85 people, making it the deadliest wildfire in state history. The Camp Fire was caused by the failure of an old metal hook attached to a PG&E transmission tower. An intense wind event pushed the fire at a rate of roughly 80 football fields per minute at its peak. The company in 2020 pleaded guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter for its role in the disaster. The same day as the destruction in Paradise, another fire ignited some 470 miles south. In the Simi Hills of Ventura County, Southern California Edison wires in two separate locations made contact with others, triggering “arc” flashes that rained hot metal fragments and sparks onto the dry brush below. These triggered two blazes, which soon merged to form the Woolsey Fire. Santa Ana winds spread the conflagration across parched terrain, with swaths of the nationally protected Santa Monica Mountains reduced to ash. Moss, the clean energy advocate, evacuated her home with her son that day. Her husband, clinging to hope, stayed until the blaze threatened to swallow him whole. Their neighborhood near Malibu, with its heavily wooded surroundings, was no match for the inferno. “My husband stayed until the last minute, when it just — it looked like it could cost him his life,” Moss said. “Everybody else left, and just about all of us lost.” Three people died. Moss’ home was gone, reduced to a hollowed out structure and charred rubble, along with about 100,000 acres of parkland and wilderness , more than any other fire in recorded history for that area. In 2019, downed PG&E lines ignited Sonoma County’s Kincade Fire . Then two years later, the Dixie Fire , also caused by PG&E equipment, became the second largest wildfire in California history, burning 963,000 acres north of Chico. The 2021 Dixie Fire, which claimed one life and destroyed 1,311 structures, was the last catastrophic wildfire in California confirmed to be caused by utility equipment. The number of fires triggered by the companies’ equipment fluctuates from year to year, driven by the huge variability in California’s weather. But data from 2014 through 2023 indicate there were substantially fewer fires last year than in other recent years. SDG&E equipment caused 16 fires after its high of 32 fires in 2015, Southern California Edison had 90 fires, compared to a 2021 high of 173, and PG&E reported 374 fires after a high of 510 in 2020. PG&E also reported that fires in its highest-risk areas trended down every month of 2023 compared to the same months in previous years. But that progress reversed this year, with 62 fires reported by August in high-risk areas, compared to 65 in all of 2023. (PG&E would not provide 2024 fire data to CalMatters.) Caroline Thomas Jacobs, inaugural director of the state Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, established in 2021 to oversee utility safety, said progress can be hard to measure. Nevertheless, she said she has seen a cultural shift at electric companies in recent years, with a more focused approach in high-risk areas and an environment that empowers workers to prioritize safety. “It just takes the wrong ignition ... under the right conditions, to have a catastrophic fire,” Thomas Jacobs said. “But are we in a better place? The numbers seem to indicate we’re moving in the right direction.” PG&E has installed more than 1,500 weather stations and 600 AI-enabled cameras to detect severe weather and ignitions, Singh said. Enhanced safety systems now cut power to lines within a tenth of a second. The utility also has cleared vegetation, ordered power shutoffs during high-risk times, insulated lines and buried some lines underground. “Where do we see the greatest risk?” Singh said the company asks itself, and “what is the most cost-effective way to be able to reduce that risk for every dollar that’s spent?” Southern California Edison said since its investments began in 2019, the risk of catastrophic wildfire in its system has dropped between 85 and 90%. The company plans to bury 600 miles of lines in high-risk areas but it is relying much more on less-expensive insulating technology, which already has been used on more than 6,000 miles of lines. SDG&E began prioritizing wildfire prevention, including underground and insulated lines, a decade ahead of the other two utilities, after its lines sparked three major fires in 2007. The company has avoided a catastrophic fire since 2007, despite operating in one of the nation’s most fire-prone regions. “We continue to double down, and do and do more tomorrow than we did yesterday,” said Brian D’Agostino, the utility’s vice president of wildfire and climate science. “We don’t take a single day without a fire for granted.” Critics say the scramble to address the wildfire crisis has left the state vulnerable to overspending by utilities. About two months before the Camp and Woolsey fires, outgoing Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018 signed a $1 billion plan to thin forests and clear out the tinderbox of California’s dead and dying trees. That measure came too late to prevent the devastation. But it opened the door to increased spending by utilities beyond limits set in the highly deliberative process known as their general rate cases, which determine what Californians pay. Newsom and the Legislature in 2019 created a $21 billion wildfire fund paid for by Wall Street investors and California ratepayers to help PG&E exit bankruptcy and protect utilities from being financially threatened by the wildfires they cause. The utilities cannot access the state’s $21 billion fund unless their wildfire plans are approved by the energy safety office. One problem, critics say, is that the safety plans are approved by one government entity while the spending to carry them out is approved by another. “We now have this very odd system,” said Lynch, who served on the utilities commission from 2000 through 2004. “The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety reviews the plans, puts out guidelines, but then the (commission) still has to ratify the plans, so that the utilities can take money from their ratepayers.” On a temperate, clear morning in the Sierra Nevada foothills east of Placerville in October, a PG&E construction crew donned yellow jackets and safety helmets and went about the work of burying power lines along a narrow, wooded road. Overhead lines snaked through thick trees in this area — prime fire risk territory. The workers buried the lines in a trench that had been dug using a heavy piece of equipment designed to cut hard concrete and soil. Once those power lines are buried and activated, their risk of fires are all but eliminated. Burying lines in high-risk areas improves reliability amid rising wildfire risks and extreme weather, PG&E’s Singh said. Though it’s pricier up front, it eliminates the yearly expense of trimming trees and vegetation, which makes it a better, long-run value for customers, he said. “Underground is a no-brainer when you look at it from that lens,” Singh said. But the high cost and the time it takes to do the work has left some skeptical. The company has buried 800 miles of wires underground since 2021, and plans to bury more than 1,600 by the end of 2026. It aims to get the cost per mile down to $2.8 million by the end of 2026 from $3 million at the end of 2023. Michael Campbell, assistant deputy director of energy for the public advocates office, a state entity that represents utility customers, said PG&E should consider other means of preventing wildfire, like insulated wires, otherwise known as “covered conductors.” This can be deployed more quickly and at a lower cost, he said, and is effective when combined with operational techniques like fast trip settings and power safety shutoffs. “In some areas, (burying power lines) really is the correct approach to minimize risk. But it’s also very slow and very expensive, and so there’s a need to address safety in as many miles as quickly as possible, to reduce overall risk,” Campbell said. The utilities commission has taken a proof-of-concept approach: The commission scaled back PG&E’s plan to bury 2,000 miles through 2026 to 1,230. The commission approved installing covered conductors, or insulated power lines, over 778 miles. Lynch is skeptical of utilities and their big projects because they can profit from them, and Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, says too much spending is going unchecked. The sense of urgency following fires paved the way for the multi-billion surge in spending. The commission authorized PG&E, for instance, to spend $4.66 billion on wildfire costs from 2020 through 2022, but the company ultimately spent $11.7 billion and is seeking payment through utility bills, according to The Utility Reform Network. Audits of nearly $2.5 billion in 2019 and 2020 wildfire spending found some costs from PG&E , Southern California Edison and SDG&E may already have been covered by previously approved rates, or more documentation was needed to confirm they had not been covered. The utilities challenged many of the findings, saying they didn’t plan to claim some of the costs, and disputed the auditor’s conclusions as well as some of their calculations. In interviews with CalMatters, representatives for all three utilities said the process in place to oversee wildfire spending at the utilities commission was robust and thorough. Geraghty, of SDG&E, said the process is transparent, with public comment periods and hearings. Regarding critics who say wildfire prevention should be cheaper and faster, “every one of them had that voice, had that say, had that transparency through this entire process,” he said. Some expenses, such as operating costs, have an immediate impact on how much people pay in their bills. But other costs, such as long-term investments in insulating or burying power lines, are stretched out over years, meaning they add to bills for decades to come . Over time, these capital costs are growing due to factors like depreciation and the returns utilities are allowed to generate. This creates a compounding effect, meaning wildfire-related capital costs will take up an increasing share of what California customers are charged in the future. The burden of the rising bills is hitting many Californians hard. Roshonda Wilson, of Oakland, couldn’t afford to pay her power bill even though she said she watches television only after sunset, refrains from running unnecessary appliances and is hyper-aware of every energy-consuming action in her household. At one point PG&E turned her power off this year. “I couldn’t catch up,” she said. On the other hand, Moss — who has weathered not just the trauma of losing her home near Malibu but also the difficult process of rebuilding — says the expensive wildfire prevention work is critical to prevent more tragedies. “Even though (burying power lines) is costly and time-consuming, the cost and time of not doing it is starting to seem more devastating to a broader swath of people,” Moss said. Nevertheless, the rate hikes have alarmed climate activists who fear rising power bills in California may trigger a backlash against the state’s effort to switch to renewable energy, and influence other states, too. “The state, we fear, will start to lose the political will to keep pushing on,” said Mohit Chhabra, a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The problem with that is not that California will be a few years late — we can handle that. But the impact on all the other states who are looking at California.” Natasha Uzcátegui-Liggett and Miguel Gutierrez Jr. contributed to this report.Percentages: FG .421, FT .875. 3-Point Goals: 12-28, .429 (Zilinskas 5-10, Dudukovich 2-4, Walker 2-5, Brown 1-2, Craig 1-3, Millender 1-3, Rutland 0-1). Team Rebounds: 4. Team Turnovers: 2. Blocked Shots: None. Turnovers: 8 (Brown 2, Millender 2, Dudukovich, Goode, Walker, Zilinskas). Steals: 5 (Goode 2, Garner, Millender, Walker). Technical Fouls: None. Percentages: FG .456, FT .788. 3-Point Goals: 5-25, .200 (Riley 3-11, Bryant 1-2, Ford 1-4, Lee 0-1, Smith 0-1, Colon 0-2, Downey 0-4). Team Rebounds: 4. Team Turnovers: None. Blocked Shots: 4 (Moodie 3, Lee). Turnovers: 8 (Ford 4, Greer 2, Crosby, Moodie). Steals: 4 (Ford 2, Bryant, Lee). Technical Fouls: None. A_320 (6,000).

PHILADELPHIA — Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, said he was “shocked” by President-elect Donald Trump’s choice of anti-vaccine activist and former presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to run the Department of Health and Human Services. Calling Kennedy an “agent of chaos in the vaccination world,” Offit asserted that under Kennedy, a vaccine denier , “children could suffer that chaos.” Trump announced Kennedy’s selection last week. The move follows Kennedy’s decision in August to endorse Trump and withdraw his own independent candidacy in key states, including Pennsylvania. “I’m going to let him go wild on health,” Trump said of Kennedy at an October rally in New York. “I’m going to let him go wild on food. I’m going to let him go wild on medicines.” For years, Kennedy, a conspiracy theorist, has said that vaccines cause autism , a falsehood that has been disproven multiple times by dozens of scientists around the world. “RFK Jr. is a dangerous man,” Offit said. “This decision is completely and utterly depressing.” Offit and Kennedy connected 20 years ago when Kennedy called to ask whether thimerosal , a compound safely used as a preservative in vaccines, caused cancer. “I assured him it was untrue — that it had been removed from all vaccines by 2001,” said Offit, coinventor of the rotavirus vaccine, which attacks the virus that can lead to fatal diarrhea in children. But Kennedy disregarded Offit’s expertise, and has been blaming vaccines for autism ever since. “RFK Jr. has become a science denialist,” Offit said. “If you present him with science, he’ll ignore it if it goes against a bias he has.” Kennedy’s team did not comment after receiving a list of questions, as well as Offit’s statements. As head of HHS, Kennedy wouldn’t have direct authority to ban vaccines, according to reporting by The Hill . But Offit and others say he’ll stay have powerful influence over the agencies that regulate vaccines, with the authority to reduce funding, or remove protections vaccine makers usually have. Kennedy has promised to “ Make America Healthy Again ,” imitating Trump’s slogan. Aside from his pledge to “expose the flaws in vaccine science,” Kennedy said he’d battle chronic disease in America by “breaking the stranglehold of the processed food lobby,” and working to “clear out corruption” at America’s health agencies, which could involve eliminating entire departments. Kennedy has also proposed combating the chronic disease epidemic by addressing the root causes such as poor diet, environmental toxins, and inadequate healthcare. He’s also called to reduce harmful chemicals and toxins from America’s food, water, and air. In October, Kennedy said in a post on the social platform X the he won’t “take anyone’s vaccines away from them. I just want to be sure every American knows the safety profile, the risk profile, and the efficacy of each vaccine. That’s it.” Offit doesn’t find reassurance in this promise, arguing that Kennedy’s selection will help amplify anti-vaccine rhetoric. “Just the mere fact he’s being considered for this job will validate some parents’ fears about vaccinations. Even now in kindergarten, measles and whooping cough vaccines are being refused by parents in some cases.” Kennedy has spread other health misinformation , saying: the use of vaccinations is akin to the Holocaust ; the coronavirus vaccine is the “ deadliest” created by man; drinking water can change children’s gender identity ; fluoride in water can lower IQ ; the coronavirus was “ethnically targeted” to prevent Jews and Chinese people from succumbing to COVID-19; WiFi causes cancer; drinking raw milk, which can contain E. coli and listeria, should be encouraged ; and antidepressants are to blame for school shootings. Kennedy will sometimes further confuse people by denying saying things he has. For example, he recently said he’s “never been anti-vaccine,” and that “no vaccine” is safe and effective. But last November, FactCheck.org , part of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, said that’s incorrect . The nonprofit discovered a Lex Fridman podcast Kennedy had done in July 2023 in which he said, “There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective.” Offit said he can’t understand Kennedy’s nomination. “Why would you put this person in charge of agencies based on science? He makes things up. He’s just a liar.” ©2024 The Philadelphia Inquirer, LLC. Visit at inquirer.com . Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Israeli strikes on a Gaza tent camp kill at least 21 people, hospital saysNoneDiane Moss lost her home in the Santa Monica Mountains after power lines ignited the apocalyptic Woolsey Fire in 2018. Since then, she’s pressed for a safer electric grid in California. “It’s so easy to forget the risk that we live in — until it happens to you,” said Moss, a longtime clean energy advocate. “All of us in California have to think about how we better prepare to survive disaster, which is only going to be more of a problem as the climate changes.” In recent years, California’s power companies have been doing just that: insulating power lines and burying lines underground, trimming trees, deploying drones and using risk-detection technology. As wildfires across the U.S. intensify , California is on the leading edge of efforts to prevent more deadly and destructive fires ignited by downed power lines and malfunctioning equipment. Customers have shouldered a hefty price for wildfire safety measures. From 2019 through 2023, the California Public Utilities Commission authorized the three largest utilities to collect $27 billion in wildfire prevention and insurance costs from ratepayers, according to a report to the Legislature. And the costs are projected to keep rising: The three companies — Pacific Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric — continue to seek billions more from customers for wildfire prevention spending. Rates are expected to continue outpacing inflation through 2027 . Fire safety projects are a big part of the reason that Californians pay the highest electric rates in the nation, outside of Hawaii. Other reasons include rooftop solar incentives, new transmission systems and upgrades for electric vehicles. High electric bills have helped fuel a statewide affordability crisis alongside soaring housing prices, expensive groceries and costly gasoline. Small businesses are feeling the burden, along with the state’s poorest residents: One in three low-income households served by the three utilities fell behind in paying their power bills this year. California’s three investor-owned utilities are regulated monopolies, so when they spend money on costs related to wildfires, they recover it through customers’ bills. The price of electricity has ignited debate about how much California families should bear for the cost of wildfire prevention, whether utilities are balancing risk and affordability and whether the money is being spent wisely. Loretta Lynch, a former head of the state utilities commission, said lack of oversight is a problem, with the commission “rubber-stamping outrageous costs” and allowing the companies to “address wildfires in the most expensive, least effective way possible.” One of the biggest controversies is whether the utilities should be spending so much on burying power lines, an extremely costly and slow process. Last year, a state audit concluded that the utilities commission and the state’s advocates office must do more to verify whether utilities were completing the work they sought payment for. The three companies say the billions of dollars in spending is necessary as climate change worsens wildfires across the state . Utility equipment has caused less than 10% of the state’s fires but nearly half of its most destructive fires, according to the utilities commission . PG&E, which a few years ago came out of bankruptcy triggered by its liability for several deadly, destructive fires, has adopted the stance that “catastrophic wildfires shall stop.” The company, which serves the most high-risk areas in California, is the state’s largest spender on wildfire prevention. PG&E plans to bury 10,000 miles of power lines in its highest-risk areas — work that is highly contentious because it is costly and slow. The company has buried 800 miles since 2021 , with each mile costing between $3 and $4 million. Last year, the commission approved a $3.7 billion plan for PG&E to bury 1,230 miles of lines through 2026. Sumeet Singh, PG&E’s chief operating officer, told CalMatters that the utility is concerned about rates, too. He said the company is “very committed to stabilizing our customer rates as we go forward without compromising safety. I think that’s clear, that it’s a non-negotiable....There’s a pretty robust process, and oversight, that we are under.” Kevin Geraghty, chief operating officer of SDG&E, called the wildfire spending process “the most highly-scrutinized, regulatory utility process I have ever been involved in, in my life.” Gov. Gavin Newsom issued an executive order in October aimed at tackling the high costs of electricity, asking state agencies to evaluate their oversight of wildfire projects and ensure that the utilities are focused on “cost-effective” measures. He is seeking proposals for changes in rules or laws by Jan. 1. The spark for the increased spending came seven years ago, after California suffered one of its worst droughts and a series of devastating wildfires in 2017 and 2018, many ignited by utility equipment. Sixteen fires were caused by PG&E equipment during a rash of October 2017 fires that decimated Napa, Sonoma and other Northern California counties. That December, the Thomas Fire , sparked by Southern California Edison equipment, engulfed parts of Ventura and Santa Barbara counties. But the devastation of 2017 was only a prelude to an even graver year. On Nov. 8, 2018, the Camp Fire leveled the town of Paradise, killing 85 people, making it the deadliest wildfire in state history. The Camp Fire was caused by the failure of an old metal hook attached to a PG&E transmission tower. An intense wind event pushed the fire at a rate of roughly 80 football fields per minute at its peak. The company in 2020 pleaded guilty to 84 counts of involuntary manslaughter for its role in the disaster. The same day as the destruction in Paradise, another fire ignited some 470 miles south. In the Simi Hills of Ventura County, Southern California Edison wires in two separate locations made contact with others, triggering “arc” flashes that rained hot metal fragments and sparks onto the dry brush below. These triggered two blazes, which soon merged to form the Woolsey Fire. Santa Ana winds spread the conflagration across parched terrain, with swaths of the nationally protected Santa Monica Mountains reduced to ash. Moss, the clean energy advocate, evacuated her home with her son that day. Her husband, clinging to hope, stayed until the blaze threatened to swallow him whole. Their neighborhood near Malibu, with its heavily wooded surroundings, was no match for the inferno. “My husband stayed until the last minute, when it just — it looked like it could cost him his life,” Moss said. “Everybody else left, and just about all of us lost.” Three people died. Moss’ home was gone, reduced to a hollowed out structure and charred rubble, along with about 100,000 acres of parkland and wilderness , more than any other fire in recorded history for that area. In 2019, downed PG&E lines ignited Sonoma County’s Kincade Fire . Then two years later, the Dixie Fire , also caused by PG&E equipment, became the second largest wildfire in California history, burning 963,000 acres north of Chico. The 2021 Dixie Fire, which claimed one life and destroyed 1,311 structures, was the last catastrophic wildfire in California confirmed to be caused by utility equipment. The number of fires triggered by the companies’ equipment fluctuates from year to year, driven by the huge variability in California’s weather. But data from 2014 through 2023 indicate there were substantially fewer fires last year than in other recent years. SDG&E equipment caused 16 fires after its high of 32 fires in 2015, Southern California Edison had 90 fires, compared to a 2021 high of 173, and PG&E reported 374 fires after a high of 510 in 2020. PG&E also reported that fires in its highest-risk areas trended down every month of 2023 compared to the same months in previous years. But that progress reversed this year, with 62 fires reported by August in high-risk areas, compared to 65 in all of 2023. (PG&E would not provide 2024 fire data to CalMatters.) Caroline Thomas Jacobs, inaugural director of the state Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety, established in 2021 to oversee utility safety, said progress can be hard to measure. Nevertheless, she said she has seen a cultural shift at electric companies in recent years, with a more focused approach in high-risk areas and an environment that empowers workers to prioritize safety. “It just takes the wrong ignition ... under the right conditions, to have a catastrophic fire,” Thomas Jacobs said. “But are we in a better place? The numbers seem to indicate we’re moving in the right direction.” PG&E has installed more than 1,500 weather stations and 600 AI-enabled cameras to detect severe weather and ignitions, Singh said. Enhanced safety systems now cut power to lines within a tenth of a second. The utility also has cleared vegetation, ordered power shutoffs during high-risk times, insulated lines and buried some lines underground. “Where do we see the greatest risk?” Singh said the company asks itself, and “what is the most cost-effective way to be able to reduce that risk for every dollar that’s spent?” Southern California Edison said since its investments began in 2019, the risk of catastrophic wildfire in its system has dropped between 85 and 90%. The company plans to bury 600 miles of lines in high-risk areas but it is relying much more on less-expensive insulating technology, which already has been used on more than 6,000 miles of lines. SDG&E began prioritizing wildfire prevention, including underground and insulated lines, a decade ahead of the other two utilities, after its lines sparked three major fires in 2007. The company has avoided a catastrophic fire since 2007, despite operating in one of the nation’s most fire-prone regions. “We continue to double down, and do and do more tomorrow than we did yesterday,” said Brian D’Agostino, the utility’s vice president of wildfire and climate science. “We don’t take a single day without a fire for granted.” Critics say the scramble to address the wildfire crisis has left the state vulnerable to overspending by utilities. About two months before the Camp and Woolsey fires, outgoing Gov. Jerry Brown in 2018 signed a $1 billion plan to thin forests and clear out the tinderbox of California’s dead and dying trees. That measure came too late to prevent the devastation. But it opened the door to increased spending by utilities beyond limits set in the highly deliberative process known as their general rate cases, which determine what Californians pay. Newsom and the Legislature in 2019 created a $21 billion wildfire fund paid for by Wall Street investors and California ratepayers to help PG&E exit bankruptcy and protect utilities from being financially threatened by the wildfires they cause. The utilities cannot access the state’s $21 billion fund unless their wildfire plans are approved by the energy safety office. One problem, critics say, is that the safety plans are approved by one government entity while the spending to carry them out is approved by another. “We now have this very odd system,” said Lynch, who served on the utilities commission from 2000 through 2004. “The Office of Energy Infrastructure Safety reviews the plans, puts out guidelines, but then the (commission) still has to ratify the plans, so that the utilities can take money from their ratepayers.” On a temperate, clear morning in the Sierra Nevada foothills east of Placerville in October, a PG&E construction crew donned yellow jackets and safety helmets and went about the work of burying power lines along a narrow, wooded road. Overhead lines snaked through thick trees in this area — prime fire risk territory. The workers buried the lines in a trench that had been dug using a heavy piece of equipment designed to cut hard concrete and soil. Once those power lines are buried and activated, their risk of fires are all but eliminated. Burying lines in high-risk areas improves reliability amid rising wildfire risks and extreme weather, PG&E’s Singh said. Though it’s pricier up front, it eliminates the yearly expense of trimming trees and vegetation, which makes it a better, long-run value for customers, he said. “Underground is a no-brainer when you look at it from that lens,” Singh said. But the high cost and the time it takes to do the work has left some skeptical. The company has buried 800 miles of wires underground since 2021, and plans to bury more than 1,600 by the end of 2026. It aims to get the cost per mile down to $2.8 million by the end of 2026 from $3 million at the end of 2023. Michael Campbell, assistant deputy director of energy for the public advocates office, a state entity that represents utility customers, said PG&E should consider other means of preventing wildfire, like insulated wires, otherwise known as “covered conductors.” This can be deployed more quickly and at a lower cost, he said, and is effective when combined with operational techniques like fast trip settings and power safety shutoffs. “In some areas, (burying power lines) really is the correct approach to minimize risk. But it’s also very slow and very expensive, and so there’s a need to address safety in as many miles as quickly as possible, to reduce overall risk,” Campbell said. The utilities commission has taken a proof-of-concept approach: The commission scaled back PG&E’s plan to bury 2,000 miles through 2026 to 1,230. The commission approved installing covered conductors, or insulated power lines, over 778 miles. Lynch is skeptical of utilities and their big projects because they can profit from them, and Mark Toney, executive director of The Utility Reform Network, says too much spending is going unchecked. The sense of urgency following fires paved the way for the multi-billion surge in spending. The commission authorized PG&E, for instance, to spend $4.66 billion on wildfire costs from 2020 through 2022, but the company ultimately spent $11.7 billion and is seeking payment through utility bills, according to The Utility Reform Network. Audits of nearly $2.5 billion in 2019 and 2020 wildfire spending found some costs from PG&E , Southern California Edison and SDG&E may already have been covered by previously approved rates, or more documentation was needed to confirm they had not been covered. The utilities challenged many of the findings, saying they didn’t plan to claim some of the costs, and disputed the auditor’s conclusions as well as some of their calculations. In interviews with CalMatters, representatives for all three utilities said the process in place to oversee wildfire spending at the utilities commission was robust and thorough. Geraghty, of SDG&E, said the process is transparent, with public comment periods and hearings. Regarding critics who say wildfire prevention should be cheaper and faster, “every one of them had that voice, had that say, had that transparency through this entire process,” he said. Some expenses, such as operating costs, have an immediate impact on how much people pay in their bills. But other costs, such as long-term investments in insulating or burying power lines, are stretched out over years, meaning they add to bills for decades to come . Over time, these capital costs are growing due to factors like depreciation and the returns utilities are allowed to generate. This creates a compounding effect, meaning wildfire-related capital costs will take up an increasing share of what California customers are charged in the future. The burden of the rising bills is hitting many Californians hard. Roshonda Wilson, of Oakland, couldn’t afford to pay her power bill even though she said she watches television only after sunset, refrains from running unnecessary appliances and is hyper-aware of every energy-consuming action in her household. At one point PG&E turned her power off this year. “I couldn’t catch up,” she said. On the other hand, Moss — who has weathered not just the trauma of losing her home near Malibu but also the difficult process of rebuilding — says the expensive wildfire prevention work is critical to prevent more tragedies. “Even though (burying power lines) is costly and time-consuming, the cost and time of not doing it is starting to seem more devastating to a broader swath of people,” Moss said. Nevertheless, the rate hikes have alarmed climate activists who fear rising power bills in California may trigger a backlash against the state’s effort to switch to renewable energy, and influence other states, too. “The state, we fear, will start to lose the political will to keep pushing on,” said Mohit Chhabra, a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The problem with that is not that California will be a few years late — we can handle that. But the impact on all the other states who are looking at California.” Natasha Uzcátegui-Liggett and Miguel Gutierrez Jr. contributed to this report.

We are going to push ourselves – Marco Silva wants even more from FulhamThe legal hurdles that lie ahead for Google’s forced sale of ChromeRams WR Demarcus Robinson not suspended, will play Sunday after arrest on DUI suspicionHarley-Davidson, Inc. Declares Dividend

NoneFormula 1 on Monday at last said it will expand its grid in 2026 to make room for an American team that is partnered with General Motors. “As the pinnacle of motorsports, F1 demands boundary-pushing innovation and excellence. It’s an honor for General Motors and Cadillac to join the world’s premier racing series, and we’re committed to competing with passion and integrity to elevate the sport for race fans around the world," GM President Mark Reuss said. "This is a global stage for us to demonstrate GM’s engineering expertise and technology leadership at an entirely new level.” The approval ends years of wrangling that launched a U.S. Justice Department investigation into why Colorado-based Liberty Media, the commercial rights holder of F1, would not approve the team initially started by Michael Andretti. Andretti in September stepped aside from leading his namesake organization, so the 11th team will be called Cadillac F1 and be run by new Andretti Global majority owners Dan Towriss and Mark Walter. The team will use Ferrari engines its first two years until GM has a Cadillac engine built for competition in time for the 2028 season. Towriss is the the CEO and president of Group 1001 and entered motorsports via Andretti's IndyCar team when he signed on financial savings platform Gainbridge as a sponsor. Towriss is now a major part of the motorsports scene with ownership stakes in both Spire Motorsports' NASCAR team and Wayne Taylor Racing's sports car team. Walter is the chief executive of financial services firm Guggenheim Partners and the controlling owner of both the World Series champion Los Angeles Dodgers and Premier League club Chelsea. “We’re excited to partner with General Motors in bringing a dynamic presence to Formula 1," Towriss said. “Together, we’re assembling a world-class team that will embody American innovation and deliver unforgettable moments to race fans around the world.” Mario Andretti, the 1978 F1 world champion, will have an ambassador role with Cadillac F1. But his son, Michael, will have no official position with the organization now that he has scaled back his involvement with Andretti Global. “The Cadillac F1 Team is made up of a strong group of people that have worked tirelessly to build an American works team,” Michael Andretti posted on social media. “I’m very proud of the hard work they have put in and congratulate all involved on this momentous next step. I will be cheering for you!” The approval has been in works for weeks but was held until after last weekend's Las Vegas Grand Prix to not overshadow the showcase event of the Liberty Media portfolio. Max Verstappen won his fourth consecutive championship in Saturday night's race, the third and final stop in the United States for the top motorsports series in the world. Grid expansion in F1 is both infrequent and often unsuccessful. Four teams were granted entries in 2010 that should have pushed the grid to 13 teams and 26 cars for the first time since 1995. One team never made it to the grid and the other three had vanished by 2017. There is only one American team on the current F1 grid — owned by California businessman Gene Haas — but it is not particularly competitive and does not field American drivers. Andretti’s dream was to field a truly American team with American drivers. The fight to add this team has been going on for three-plus years and F1 initially denied the application despite approval from F1 sanctioning body FIA. The existing 10 teams, who have no voice in the matter, also largely opposed expansion because of the dilution in prize money and the billions of dollars they’ve already invested in the series. Andretti in 2020 tried and failed to buy the existing Sauber team. From there, he applied for grid expansion and partnered with GM, the top-selling manufacturer in the United States. The inclusion of GM was championed by the FIA and president Mohammed Ben Sulayem, who said Michael Andretti’s application was the only one of seven applicants to meet all required criteria to expand F1’s current grid. “General Motors is a huge global brand and powerhouse in the OEM world and is working with impressive partners," Ben Sulayem said Monday. "I am fully supportive of the efforts made by the FIA, Formula 1, GM and the team to maintain dialogue and work towards this outcome of an agreement in principle to progress this application." Despite the FIA's acceptance of Andretti and General Motors from the start, F1 wasn't interested in Andretti — but did want GM. At one point, F1 asked GM to find another team to partner with besides Andretti. GM refused and F1 said it would revisit the Andretti application if and when Cadillac had an engine ready to compete. “Formula 1 has maintained a dialogue with General Motors, and its partners at TWG Global, regarding the viability of an entry following the commercial assessment and decision made by Formula 1 in January 2024,” F1 said in a statement. “Over the course of this year, they have achieved operational milestones and made clear their commitment to brand the 11th team GM/Cadillac, and that GM will enter as an engine supplier at a later time. Formula 1 is therefore pleased to move forward with this application process." Yet another major shift in the debate over grid expansion occurred earlier this month with the announced resignation of Liberty Media CEO Greg Maffei, who was largely believed to be one of the biggest opponents of the Andretti entry. “With Formula 1’s continued growth plans in the US, we have always believed that welcoming an impressive US brand like GM/Cadillac to the grid and GM as a future power unit supplier could bring additional value and interest to the sport," Maffei said. "We credit the leadership of General Motors and their partners with significant progress in their readiness to enter Formula 1."NEW YORK and SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 26, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Nasdaq Private Market (NPM) , a leading provider of secondary liquidity solutions to private companies, employees, and investors, announced today that it has promoted Rotem David , Parul Dubey, Sharif Khaleel , and Chris Setaro to new roles on its Executive Leadership Team. Rotem David has been promoted to Chief Product and Technology Officer (CPTO) . At NPM, he is an active member of the company’s Executive Leadership Team. In Mr. David’s new role, he will lead NPM’s product and technology divisions worldwide, responsible for setting and executing the product roadmap as well as effectively bridging the gap between product vision and technical feasibility. He will oversee tech infrastructure, engineering, QA, and product. Mr. David has spent more than 10 years building out NPM’s portfolio of products which offers liquidity and data across various transaction and client types. Prior to NPM, he held lead engineering roles at SecondMarket and Nasdaq, Inc and is credited with helping to pioneer the first tender offer solution revolutionizing the way private companies provide secondary liquidity to their shareholders. Parul Dubey has been promoted to Managing Director and Head of the Private Client Group . In her new role, she now joins the Executive Leadership Team. Ms. Dubey will lead the development of NPM’s retail business to service individuals, family offices, and mid-sized entities. Previously, she was General Manager of the Capital Markets division, where she helped build the business from inception. Ms. Dubey was instrumental in launching several capstone products, including buy-side auctions and SecondMarketTM. Prior to NPM, she worked at Wellington Management as an Investment Specialist responsible for global fund launches and distribution for private equity and healthcare hedge funds. Ms. Dubey also held investment roles at a buyout firm and served on the Board of Steven Feller P.E. (a portfolio company). She started her career at PIMCO, servicing managed separate accounts for sovereign wealth funds, central banks, and family offices in the Middle East and Africa. Sharif Khaleel has been promoted to Managing Director and Head of Institutional Trading . At NPM, he is an active member of the company’s Executive Leadership Team. In his new role, Mr. Khaleel will lead the trading desk, overseeing relationships with institutional clients and broker-dealers. He has nearly 25 years of financial services experience. Prior to NPM, Mr. Khaleel was a Managing Director at Zanbato, where he specialized in executing institutionally sized blocks of private securities. Earlier in his career, he served as a Senior Portfolio Trader at BNY Mellon. Mr. Khaleel has also held various roles on the buy side, including Derivatives and Risk Analyst at Stillwater Investment Management, Senior Trader at Farallon Capital Management, and International Portfolio and Macro Trader at BlackRock, where he spent over four years. Chris Setaro has been promoted to Chief Compliance, Regulatory, and Risk Officer . At NPM, he is an active member of the company’s Executive Leadership Team. Mr. Setaro will now oversee all compliance, regulatory affairs, and risk management functions for the company worldwide. Prior to NPM, he was a Senior Vice President and the Head of Global Risk at Forge Global Inc. Previously, Mr. Setaro was the Global Chief Compliance Officer of SharesPost, Inc. and Chief Compliance Officer for its broker-dealer subsidiary SharesPost Financial Corporation. Earlier in his career, he was a Vice President at Nasdaq, Inc. serving as the Chief Compliance Officer for several of its broker-dealers. “As our business continues to evolve, we are focused on adding talented people and valuable resources to strengthen our company and core products. I am confident that Rotem, Parul, Sharif, and Chris will each position us for continued success and accelerate our ambitions to be a key partner to participants across the private market ecosystem,” said Tom Callahan, Chief Executive Officer, Nasdaq Private Market . “I am proud of their commitment to NPM thus far and look forward to their future contributions.” NPM partners with some of the world’s fastest-growing, venture-backed private companies to facilitate company-sponsored liquidity programs. Its electronic SecondMarket TM trading marketplace is gaining adoption by sellers and buyers who trade private company shares. The company’s Transfer and Settlement product efficiently manages share transfer activity from match through settlement for some of the most sophisticated private companies and investors. Its private market premium data product Tape DTM helps investors and entities better evaluate global investment opportunities. As an industry-leading provider in the secondary market, NPM has executed $55+ billion in transactional value across 760+ company-sponsored liquidity programs for venture-backed private companies as well as 200,000+ individual eligible shareholders and investors. About Nasdaq Private Market Nasdaq Private Market provides liquidity solutions for private companies, employees, and investors throughout each stage of the pre-IPO lifecycle. In 2013, the company was founded within Nasdaq, Inc. Today it is an independent company with strategic investments from Nasdaq, Allen & Company, Bank of America, BNP Paribas, Citi, DRW Venture Capital, Goldman Sachs, HiJoJo Partners, Morgan Stanley, UBS, and Wells Fargo. Learn more at www.nasdaqprivatemarket.com . Visit LinkedIn and X for the latest company news. Media Contacts Nasdaq Private Market Amanda Gold Chief Marketing Officer Amanda.Gold@npm.com Disclosures and Disclaimers NPM is not: (a) a registered exchange under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; (b) a registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940; or (c) a financial or tax planner and does not offer legal or financial advice to any user of the NPM website or its services. Securities-related services are offered through NPM Securities, LLC, a registered broker-dealer and alternative trading system, and member FINRA/SIPC. Transactions in securities conducted through NPM Securities, LLC are not listed or traded on The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, nor are the securities subject to the same listing or qualification standards applicable to securities listed or traded on The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC. Please read these other important disclosures and disclaimers about NPM found here: https://www.nasdaqprivatemarket.com/disclosures-disclaimer/