The central idea of the text is to inform about the problems and solutions for solar energy production faced by Elon Musk.
<h3>“How Tesla’s Batteries Can Change the Solar Power Game”</h3>
The main idea of the text is to talk about "The dream of a solar-powered society has tormented us for decades." however, there are several problems to be faced "Grid operators need a way to store the sun's energy to smooth out the supply during the night and when it's cloudy."
But great minds are working to solve these problems. "Even though the panels and storage are spread across many rooftops, they are effectively roped together into a single 10-megawatt power plant that APS can control.
With this information, we can conclude that the text aims to inform the advances in technologies for obtaining clean energy.
Learn more about Solar power in brainly.com/question/1420731
<span>As the fiscal year comes to a close, it’s well worth our time to take a close look at the way local
governments are budgeting tax dollars. With high unemployment rates and rising rents and
food costs across the nation, every one of those dollars matters immensely—and none of them
should be wasted on funding for public art. I’ll be the first to admit that, even during difficult economic times, </span>
<span>people need the arts to offer commentary, philosophy, and amusement. I am, in fact, a great supporter of the arts, and I regularly donate to arts organizations. The arts need money; they just don’t need government
money.
Cutting government funding for public art frees up tax dollars for indispensable government
necessities that protect the safety and well-being of citizens, such as road building and
maintenance, healthcare, housing, and education. Directing would-be arts funding into other
programs is not only beneficial for those areas in need of more crucial government support; it is
also good for artists and the art itself.
Art is, by its very nature, expressive and controversial. The best art represents an individual
point of view that is critical, imaginative, and eye-opening. This kind of ingenuity requires
freedom and independence on the part of the artist. When the government provides funding
for public art projects, the artist loses freedom. When using public funds, the artist is
constrained by the need to represent the point of view of the government and to gratify the
general public. There are countless stories of public art pieces being altered, censored, or even
destroyed when the public exerted its authority over the work. Naturally, this situation results
in a loss of personal freedom for the artist and an abundance of mediocre public artwork.
The financial solution to producing high-quality, provocative art is private funding. If we allow
the market to drive the production of art, artists and art-lovers will have a greater influence on
the art being created and shown to the public. Already, private funding accounts for most art
being created in America. In 2008, a record-breaking 858 million public dollars was spent on the
arts by local governments in the United States. This sum pales in comparison to the 12.79
billion private dollars donated to the arts in the same year. And the high number of private
dollars donated to artists is of course supplemented by the money that collectors spend on
buying art in auction houses and galleries. Statistics show us that art can and does flourish
without public funding. In fact, for centuries great masterpieces have been created without
government money. Masters such as Shakespeare and Leonardo da Vinci had private funders,
and their masterpieces continue to influence generations around the world.
In light of this evidence, I offer a strong suggestion for the coming fiscal year: Let’s stop the
move towards government-funded public art projects and encourage private donors to invest in
the creation of high-quality, uncensored art. We don’t need public art pieces that incite
controversy, upset some of the taxpayers who helped pay for them, and give the government
the power of censorship. We need public funding to provide the necessities of health, safety, and education to our nation’s citizens. We also need a thriving private art market that allows
artists financial independence and freedom of expression.</span>
Answer:
The vertebrate forelimb of human, bird, and bat may not appear to have much in common, but a closer examination of the anatomy shows that the same bones were applied to a variety of different jobs in each of these species. Evolution doesn't plan ahead. It can only work with what's available. The color coding shows the way the bony elements were modified in each species. You might think that the two wings would be more similar in design because of the job they do but, in fact, the bird wing and human arm are more similar on the interior. However, the bird "hand" is reduced, whereas the bat and human hand have more in common. See if you can find a similar image of a dolphin or whale flipper for another comparison.
Natural selection is a mechanism of evolution. Organisms that are more adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and pass on the genes that aided their success. This process causes species to change and diverge over time.
Homologous structures are structures that are similar in related organisms because they were inherited from a common ancestor. These structures may or may not have the same function in the descendants.
Answer:
1. Is correct
Explanation:
Woden is the god wednesday was named after.