God, you don't think that the issues in California might be slightly different from the issues in Texas this last winter?

Let's go over some of them since you seem to not be capable of deducing them yourself:

1. Texas grid collapsed because they didn't winterize their shit, even after getting a report from the Department of Energy telling them that exactly what happened could happen if they don't winterize their shit.

2. It wasn't just wind power that failed Texas. The natural gas pumps froze too. Is that the fault of wind power? Boilers in thermal power generating stations froze. Did wind power do that? You see where I'm going with this?

3. California is having energy delivery issues because they've lost a massive amount of generation that comes from the Pacific Northwest due to wildfires buring 150,000 acres where the grid intertie lines run through. So yeah that's totally California's fault for not doing... what now? Thinking 50 years in the future from when it was built in the Kennedy Administration?

4. The entire discussion here is about distributed generation versus centralized generation with power line distribution. You are arguing for centralized generation, and citing difficulties with power line distribution as your reason why. It really shows that you don't have a god damn clue what you're talking about because the California situation right now wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem with further deployment of distributed generation. You are arguing against your own point and don't even know it.

5. I really don't know what you're on about with 10k square foot homes in LA and what that has to do with anything. Don't you think that someone with a 10,000 square foot home in the LA area (which would be fantastically expensive - on the order of $5M in a shitty part of town and >2x that for the hills or Pallisades - just may have the ability to install however much solar and battery they need in order to not give a fuck about rolling blackouts. Or backup diesel generation. Or really any other kind of energy source because they're fucking rich and probably already did years ago, so they aren't part of the demand issue.

1. 20% conversion of sunlight to electricity is 100% more than what a roof would convert without the panels. Are you using that roof area for anything else? No? Then solar is still a significant net gain in energy generation.

2. Just because a solution doesn't work that good north of the Arctic Circle (why you chose that as a point of argument is just beyond my capacity to understand) doesn't mean it isn't a perfectly good solution for people that happen to never be above the Arctic circle. Which is the vast majority of everyone. And you know what? My EV probably isn't suited for driving around north of the Arctic Circle every single day of the year either, yet it still meets my needs when I'm not there, which is always.

3. Solar panels are far less expensive than they were even just 10 years ago when literal gigawatts of residential solar was being deployed, and are far more resilient to debris and hail strikes than ever. Stop using 15 year old arguments against modern products. I'd bet there are problems with generators that use carburetor intakes too, which nobody cares about because fuel injection has been a thing for decades.

Yeah, I hate that I lose all that space on my roof. I have so many other uses for it!

1. Wind turbines only freeze if the operators are penny pinching incompetents (Texas). No shortage of wind power across Wyoming, Iowa, Illinois; and I hear those are very temperate climates that never go below freezing. Northern Europe, also known for it's mild and temperate winters, seem to have no problem with wind either.

2. Your knock on solar assumes a 100% (or close to it) solar powered energy infrastructure, which literally nobody is advocating for. Therefore this is a straw man argument and will be ignored.

More importantly, while TCO might be higher for distributed rooftop solar, the ROI is still underneath the capital cost over the lifetime of the panels, so it's still a net win regardless of TCO. TCO literally doesn't matter if ROI is positive and you can afford the capital costs. And affordability is what is being targeted by most government programs through energy rebates and tax incentives.

High voltage DC interties actually help to break a cascade failure because you can far more easily control how much energy is being transmitted through it, and you don't have to worry about cycle synchronization between the grids that are connected. That doesn't discount literally anything you said, but it's worth noting that tying regional grids together with HVDC would allow a better level of resiliency against crazy massive blackouts like the Northeast blackout a decade or so ago.

Yeah, it lost everywhere except where high voltage DC interties exist, and have since the 1960s. Here is one such example. Do you suppose they built and created that whole thing to use DC over a thousand miles because it would be interesting, or to prove a point? No, they did it because it happens to be very efficient at high voltages.

1960s technology, dude. Go learn basic grid infrastructure which is highly available on Wikipedia before you call names and look like an absolute fucking moron.

Is that panel lifetime longer than the life of the loan? It is.

Will the panels pay back more in energy generation than the cost of the loan? It will, even in the upper midwest and mid-atlantic where energy is cheap from local natgas and coal.

So what's the problem again?

Which means "both".

I'm really not sure why centralized generation needs to go away if a more distributed generation pattern starts to rise. I mean, we all know that energy usage is fixed and not growing at all... /s

Illinois also has recreational pot, plenty of clean water, and a world-class city if you're looking for it. And the median home cost is 1/3 of California's.

You'll have some snow to deal with, but that's what a $250 snow blower is for. It's half of one month's savings on the mortgage payment.

... which is why you want to target a protein sequence that doesn't change much.

We have a whole lot of samples of influenza over the years, shouldn't be that difficult to find a few candidates.

You don't understand probability very well, do you?

Executive Orders are only capable of mandating what the Congress has given the Executive the power to do. So while they are not explicitly democratic, the democratic process of sending Representatives into Congress, that then democratically passed legislation enabling the Executive to order things is. And if an EO oversteps it's authority, the Judiciary can (and has) tossed them out as being outside the bounds of what the Executive has been granted power to do.

Don't like it? Talk to your representation in Congress, as they have the ultimate authority to reign it in. And if they don't listen, vote for someone else next year.

Losing a seat in Congress doesn't necessarily mean that people are leaving en masse, it just means your state grew in population slower than others.

Each seat in Congress is representing roughly 710k people as of 2020, and it's retabulated every 10 years. The United States Census Bureau says that California's population is up 1.5M in the last 10 years.

So, is the Census just massively wrong according to you (in which case you had better come with some pretty compelling evidence to back that assertion), or do you think that maybe with a fixed number of seats in Congress, that perhaps other states just grew more than California according to the algorithm used to apportion seats (it's not direct division because each state gets at least one Representative according to the Constitution)?

You probably shouldn't talk about analytical ability if you can't see the very simple math that goes into apportioning Congressional seats which was figured out in the 1700s, and then use that as the lead-in to your other unsubstantiated opinions. It's not a good look.

Comparing California to mainland China and coming up with "heaven" is like comparing basically any decent city / state in the US to mainland China and coming up with the same answer.

Seriously, there's lots of places that would be like "heaven" in comparison, and still don't get snow and aren't ovens. And also don't have absolutely ridiculous costs of living.