This seems to be the catch.

Modern trains are infinitely more comfortable than modern planes, so they do not need to match planes in travel times. A modern train features silent travel, ample leg room, unpressurized air and no seat belts. Reliability is key and that does require infrastructure investment.

Rail infrastructure will always require subsidies but the costs do not have to be astronomical. Meanwhile, the cost of air traffic emissions are carried by society, which can't go on much longer.

> Drinking water, also known as potable water, is water that is safe to drink or use for food preparation.

40-50L per day would seem to about cover one person's essential uses of potable water.

Even if the mRNA vaccines are safe, we depend on J&J and AZ doses for our reopening plans in Europe. We can expect economic damage from any wait for alternative vaccine doses.

On top of that we can speculate that healthcare workers are more likely to seek treatment than the average vaccine recipient and they are healthy adults of average age.

1. Nuclear power is far more expensive than renewables, due to the high costs for construction and dismantling. This does not dismiss your argument, because running a nuclear power plant is fairly cheap. The costs therefore speak towards keeping nuclear power plants running as long as they remain safe.

2. Existing nuclear power plants use huge quantities of fresh water for cooling. The required water quantity and temperature make nuclear power plants prone to droughts, which can cause shutdowns, and to flooding events, which can shut down or damage the plant. Both droughts and floods are increasing in frequency due to climate change. This speaks towards closing down power plants that are particularly vulnerable. In any case, grid operators need to be able to mitigate nuclear power plant outages. The cost of nuclear power is even less attractive when overcapacity is needed to accommodate potential outages.

And if you feel so inclined, you can express your understanding to that person who feels that they have been wronged because of their background. Chances are they have been right far more often than they have been wrong and it's very stressful having to deal with an ever-present potential for unprovoked adversity.

It should be a very small burden on you to acknowledge their situation.

To return to the topic, Coinbase doesn't lose a breath acknowledging their Black employees who did file complaints. If they had any sympathy for these employees — which they should have even if they were not wronged for being Black — why didn't they express it in the statement?

If you open the original Guardian article, you have to look no further than the third paragraph to read why the EU concluded that the previous ban was not enough.