Are Electric Vehicles and Batteries Bad for the Environment?
In mid-March 2022, a widely circulated meme was sent to our editorial team for investigation, which we determined contains a mixture of true, false, and unproven claims. In a nutshell, the post argued that eco-friendly electric vehicles (EVs) were bad for the environment, and presented several vague, unsupported facts in an attempt to bolster the argument.  The Facebook post we received appeared to have started circulating online on March 12, 2022. The fact-checking website Lead Stories located a complete version of the post, which we have archived.  Lead Stories complete version archived   The entirety of the post is too long to share here, but we have broken out its primary claims below. For help evaluating them, we spoke with Elena Krieger, director of research at PSE Healthy Energy, a multidisciplinary research and policy institute focused on the adoption of evidence-based energy policy. entirety of the post Elena Krieger It is true that batteries store electricity produced elsewhere, but what that electricity is generated by depends on the electric grid that the battery is connected to. (For more background on this, read "Energy Storage: How It Works and Its Role in an Equitable Clean Energy Future," by the Union of Concerned Scientists.)  Energy Storage: California has specifically designed its Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) to encourage charging at times when grid emissions are low, pointed out Krieger. As Jeff St. John wrote in an article for Green Tech Media, the goal of projects like SGIP are to incentivize power-producing technologies that contribute less to greenhouse gas emissions, such as solar or wind, than fossil fuels do. There are controversies with the technology, such as concerns that natural-gas-fueled generators used werent reducing the consumption of fossil fuels. SGIP encourage charging Green Tech Media Battery facilities also allow for power from renewable sources to be produced when the wind is blowing windmills or the sun is shining on solar panels before being stored for later use during times of high consumption. allow An electric vehicle has zero tailpipe emissions, noted Krieger. However, emissions from both greenhouse gases and health-damaging air pollutants throughout the course of the vehicles use depend on how and where the vehicle is produced, what electricity is used to charge the vehicle, and how the vehicle is disposed of. Union of Concerned Scientists analyzed data from 2018 and affirmed that EVs produce significantly fewer emissions than gasoline: affirmed Based on where EVs have been sold, driving the average EV produces global warming pollution equal to a gasoline vehicle that gets 88 miles per gallon (mpg) fuel economy. Thats significantly better than the most efficient gasoline car (58 mpg) and far cleaner than the average new gasoline car (31 mpg) or truck (21 mpg) sold in the US. And our estimate for EV emissions is almost 10 percent lower than our previous estimate two years ago. Now 94 percent of people in the US live where driving an EV produces less emissions than using a 50 mpg gasoline car. almost 10 percent lower than our previous estimate two years ago Data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EPA) show that 22% of electricity generated in the U.S. was from coal plants in 2021, up from 19% the year before, so the first part of this statement is incorrect, explained Krieger. Data The second part implies that the generation is proportional to vehicle charging. This assumption may be invalid for two reasons: 1) EV adoption is very high in places like California, which has minimal coal in its power mix, and 2) it depends on when the vehicles are charged, and which power plants dominate at the time the vehicles are charged. It is true that there are rechargeable and single-use batteries, both of which contain toxic materials of varying degrees. No technology is zero impact, but some battery chemistries use fewer toxic materials than others. For example, Tesla is phasing out cobalt from its batteries, albeit likely due to outside pressure, because cobalt is often mined by children in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). More on that below, explained Krieger.  phasing out It is estimated that more than 70% of the worlds cobalt is produced in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Foreign-owned firms, primarily Chinese, account for about 60% of global cobalt demand to be used in the rechargeable battery industry to be used in cars and electronic devices. Cobalt mining does come with environmental complications that may outweigh its use in rechargeable electronics. The nonpartisan research group Wilson Center reports that quick cobalt extraction contributes to global warming, while mining operations generate incredibly high carbon dioxide and nitrogen dioxide emissions, both of which can contribute to the greenhouse effect. 60% of global cobalt reports contribute to the greenhouse effect Human rights groups have documented severe human rights issues in mining operations, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. It is estimated that of the 255,000 Congolese mining for cobalt, 40,000 are children. Council on Foreign Relations estimated Cobalt increases battery life and has been a popular choice for EV batteries, but the U.S. Geological Survey notes that the mineral is also used in a plethora of other goods, including airbags, petroleum and chemical industries, paints, varnishes, dyes, and magnets, among many other goods and processes.  popular choice notes Snopes spoke with Brandon Baxley, an LA-based engineer and physicists, who said that Einsteins formula is not the best concept to apply in this case.  Einsteins formula is more about how much total possible energy can be extracted from mass like, for example, in a nuclear explosion. It isnt relevant to something like this, said Baxley. If [the original poster] is referencing Einsteins formula, that means they arent entirely clear on the physics of the theory.  However, that doesnt mean the argument is entirely incorrect. Baxley noted that in this case, the theory of kinetic energy is a more appropriate concept. This follows that it would take the same amount of energy to move two vehicles of equal weight regardless of whether they are powered by gas or electricity  Over the last four decades, the average weight of a vehicle in the U.S. has increased from about 3,200 pounds to nearly 4,200 pounds for a variety of reasons, one of which is due to heavier battery packs in electric vehicles, according to a 2020 report by the EPA. Heavier vehicles require more energy to move than lower-weighted vehicles, but weight is just one component in addition to other factors like velocity and speed.  EPA I assume nickel-metal oxide is meant to refer to nickel-metal hydride, which is common in older Priuses. Nickel-cadmium batteries were common for small electronics but aren't used in cars or laptops or anything and are less common now. Lead-acid batteries, such as those used to start most cars, are also rechargeable. Nearly all lead-acid batteries are recycled, although it's worth noting these facilities aren't always safely managed, explained Kireger. Nearly all See, for example, the Excide plant in LA that was polluting a largely low-income Latino community for decades. Lithium-ion batteries are currently recycled at a low rate, largely because it is cheaper to make new batteries than recycle old ones, although there are a lot of start-ups working in this space (e.g. Redwood Materials, founded by former Tesla CTO). This is an area that needs additional funding, research, and regulations. polluting Redwood Materials Krieger explained that many batteries self-discharge at some rate (some higher than others), meaning that if a battery is left unused for a long period of time, it will likely have a lower state of charge over time. She furthered:  The "ruined flashlight" sounds like some kind of side-reaction occurred over time, likely producing materials that put stress on the battery and caused it to rupture, leaking out battery acid that damaged the surrounding casement. In terms of batteries being "run down," typically a battery is considered "dead" when it hits some threshold where the voltage of the battery drops below a certain level. The poster is correct that you could theoretically drain a battery even more if you hooked it up to a circuit. The battery isn't exactly "leaking" electricity to the outside. It is likely undergoing additional electrochemical reactions that, ideally, wouldn't occur. I think what typically comes out is the electrolyte, not the electrode materials, since the electrolyte is more likely to be a liquid. You certainly shouldn't touch the electrolyte. It's often acidic. In Oakland, at least, you're not supposed to throw batteries in trash; you're supposed to put them in a separate bag on your trash can so that the hazardous waste can be managed properly and not just thrown in a landfill. I do agree that you shouldn't just throw a lithium-ion battery in a landfill. Ideally, we learn low-energy and cost-effective ways to recycle them all. Lead-acid batteries, as noted, are usually recycled, and I think that is promising for our ability to manage the future lithium-ion battery waste stream.  Getty Images  This point is part of the continued debate over whether renewable energies like solar panels and wind turbines can be considered green as they require extractive resources to build, many of which can be harmful to human health.  debate  solar panels Silicon derived from quartz is the primary material used in the production of solar cells, a process that produces greenhouse gas emissions and requires manufacturers to handle toxic chemicals. Solar panels can also be sourced and made from a variety of materials, including silicon-based panels, gallium arsenide, cadmium-telluride (often referred to as "thin film", etc.  primary material These aren't usually all made at once (except in relatively rare multi-junction cells); instead, most manufacturers make silicon cells, and some others use other semiconductors such as cadmium telluride. Some parts of these are recycled, some aren't. The production process, like any materials processing, does need to be conducted in a way that protects environmental and human health, said Kreiger.  recycled The EPA notes that many of the materials are easily recyclable, including glass (about 75% of a solar panel), the aluminum frame, copper wire, and plastic junction box. Toxic chemicals, including cadmium, may also be present in solar panels that can make recycling more difficult. Even so, at least one U.S. manufacturer runs dedicated recycling facilities that recover semiconductor material like cadmium and tellurium.  notes The cited windmill is also slightly off and depends on the size and model the a turbine in question. For example, the Haliade-X turbine, which is among the largest in production, caps out to just over 900 tons. Wind turbines last an average of 25 years and about 85% of component materials  including steel, copper wire, electronics, and gearing  can be recycled, according to an article published by the Union of Concerned Scientists. As of this writing, it is true that used blades cannot be recycled. It is also true that windmills are energy intensive and that the blades are largely not recyclable. As we have previously reported, some windmills may not recoup their energy-construction costs, but it is untrue to say that no windmills will generate as much energy as was invested in building them. In some cases, a well-situated windmill could pay back the energy costs in under three years.  Haliade-X turbine 900 tons article cannot be recycled blades are largely not recyclable may not recoup their energy-construction costs generate well-situated windmill The question is: how long must a windmill generate energy before it creates more energy than it took to build it? At a good wind site, the energy payback day could be in three years or less; in a poor location, energy payback may be never, wrote earth scientist David Hughes in his 2009 book, Carbon Shift: How Peak Oil and the Climate Crisis Will Change Canada (and Our Lives).  Data in the meme appears to be quoted from the Tesla website (900 pounds, 6,831 cells; this is old and likely varies by model). As Krieger notes, its difficult to generalize the weight and amount of materials in any given EV as each manufacturer uses a different chemistry and the chemistries are constantly changing. website A 2021 article published in Nature suggested that many EV batteries contain eight kilograms of lithium, 35 kilograms of nickel, 20 kilograms of manganese, and 14 kilograms of cobalt  but many companies are moving away from cobalt or advancing various technologies and the usage of certain materials. Nature  An aerial view of Moss Landing in California with the power plant pictured in the center. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Digital Visual Library  U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Digital Visual Library It appears that the original poster is referencing the Moss Landing battery project that replaced an old gas plant. Currently, it measures 400 megawatts, and operators are considering doubling it. Exactly what that expansion looks like remains to be determined.  battery project that While some of the power charging this facility might come from solar and wind, there's no guarantee it will do so. It just charges and discharges from the grid. It might charge more with solar, since we're starting to see a surplus in the middle of the day, and it might help integrate wind power, and it might do other things like help limit the need for gas plants to ramp up quickly to meet the evening peak, explained Krieger. In short, the post claiming that EVs are no better for the environment than other energy sources is a form of copypasta in which social media users copy and paste content without verifying the claims made within it. A look through social media confirmed that the uncited facts had been reposted numerous times. While there are elements of truth to the post, it largely overgeneralizes the science behind batteries and EVs and does not list sources to verify the claims. As such, we have rated this claim as a Mixture.  copypasta A Bit About Batteries. 30 Nov. 2006, https://www.tesla.com/pt_PT/blog/bit-about-batteries. Are Electric Vehicles Really Better for the Climate? Yes. Heres Why. The Equation, 11 Feb. 2020, https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/are-electric-vehicles-really-better-for-the-climate-yes-heres-why/. Are Solar Panels Toxic or Bad For the Environment? | EnergySage. Solar News, 1 Feb. 2018, https://news.energysage.com/solar-panels-toxic-environment/. Are Windmill Turbine Blades Buried in Wyoming Landfill? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wind-turbine-blades-landfills/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Author: Elena Krieger, PhD. PSE | Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers for Healthy Energy, https://www.psehealthyenergy.org/about/staff/elena-krieger/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Calma, Justine. Tesla to Make EV Battery Cathodes without Cobalt. The Verge, 22 Sept. 2020, https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/22/21451670/tesla-cobalt-free-cathodes-mining-battery-nickel-ev-cost. Castelvecchi, Davide. Electric Cars and Batteries: How Will the World Produce Enough? Nature, vol. 596, no. 7872, Aug. 2021, pp. 33639. www.nature.com, https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-02222-1. Cobalt Use in Batteries - Google Search. https://www.google.com/search?q=cobalt+use+in+batteries&rlz=1C5CHFA_enUS910US910&oq=cobalt+use+in+batteries&aqs=chrome.0.0i512j0i22i30l5.2996j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Copypasta. Snopes.com, https://www.snopes.com/collections/copypasta/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Could Anti-Solar Panels Use Deep Space to Generate Power at Night? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/anti-solar-panels-night-power/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Cutting the Carbon From Californias Self-Generation Incentive Program | GTM Squared. https://www.greentechmedia.com/squared/dispatches-from-the-grid-edge/cutting-the-carbon-from-californias-self-generation-incentive-program. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Did California Tell Residents Not To Charge Electric Cars Due to Power Shortage? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/california-electric-cars-charge/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Did Total Collapse in Wind and Solar Energy Leave Germany in Need of Coal-Fired Power? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/total-collapse-wind-solar-germany/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Do Windmills Consume More Energy to Build Than They Ever Produce? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wind-idiot-power/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Does Antarctica Have Functioning Wind Turbines? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wind-turbines-antarctica/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Electricity Data Browser. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=2,0,1&fuel=vtvv&geo=g&sec=g&linechart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.TSN-US-99.A&columnchart=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.COW-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NG-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.NUC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.HYC-US-99.A~ELEC.GEN.WND-US-99.A&map=ELEC.GEN.ALL-US-99.A&freq=A&ctype=linechart&ltype=pin&rtype=s&maptype=0&rse=0&pin=. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Expansion Plan to Take Worlds Biggest Battery Storage Project to 3GWh Capacity. Energy Storage News, 25 Jan. 2022, https://www.energy-storage.news/expansion-plan-to-take-worlds-biggest-battery-storage-project-to-3gwh-capacity/. Fact Check: Electric Vehicles DO Pollute -- But Engineers Are Reducing Impacts | Lead Stories. https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/2022/03/fact-check-electric-vehicles-do-pollute-but-engineers-are-reducing-impacts.html. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Gaines, Linda. The Future of Automotive Lithium-Ion Battery Recycling: Charting a Sustainable Course. Sustainable Materials and Technologies, vol. 12, Dec. 2014, pp. 27. ScienceDirect, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.susmat.2014.10.001. Governor Proposes $454 Million to Clean up Exide Battery Recycling Plant. Daily News, 18 May 2021, https://www.dailynews.com/2021/05/17/governor-proposes-454-million-to-clean-up-exide-battery-recycling-plant. Gulley, Andrew L., et al. Chinas Domestic and Foreign Influence in the Global Cobalt Supply Chain. Resources Policy, vol. 62, Aug. 2019, pp. 31723. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.03.015. How Energy Storage Works | Union of Concerned Scientists. https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/how-energy-storage-works. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Katz, Cheryl. The Batteries That Could Make Fossil Fuels Obsolete. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20201217-renewable-power-the-worlds-largest-battery. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. New Data Show Electric Vehicles Continue to Get Cleaner. The Equation, 8 Mar. 2018, https://blog.ucsusa.org/dave-reichmuth/new-data-show-electric-vehicles-continue-to-get-cleaner/. Redwood Materials. Redwood Materials, https://www.redwoodmaterials.com. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Self-Generation Incentive Program. https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/electrical-energy/demand-side-management/self-generation-incentive-program. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. The DRC Mining Industry: Child Labor and Formalization of Small-Scale Mining | Wilson Center. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/drc-mining-industry-child-labor-and-formalization-small-scale-mining. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/drc-mining-industry-child-labor-and-formalization-small-scale-mining. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. The Greenhouse Effect | Center for Science Education. https://scied.ucar.edu/learning-zone/how-climate-works/greenhouse-effect. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. US EPA, OLEM. Solar Panel Recycling. 23 Aug. 2021, https://www.epa.gov/hw/solar-panel-recycling. Vries, Eize de. Haliade-X Uncovered: GE Aims for 14MW. https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1577816?utm_source=website&utm_medium=social. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Haliade-X Uncovered: GE Aims for 14MW. https://www.windpowermonthly.com/article/1577816?utm_source=website&utm_medium=social. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Were Frozen Wind Turbines in Texas a Major Factor in Power Outages? Snopes.Com, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/wind-turbines-texas-power-outages/. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Why Cobalt Mining in the DRC Needs Urgent Attention. Council on Foreign Relations, https://www.cfr.org/blog/why-cobalt-mining-drc-needs-urgent-attention. Accessed 28 Mar. 2022. Wind Turbine Blades Dont Have To End Up In Landfills. The Equation, 30 Oct. 2020, https://blog.ucsusa.org/james-gignac/wind-turbine-blades-recycling/.
In the fall of 2021, a series of videos started circulating on social media that supposedly showed a charitable campaign from Germany encouraging donations to feed hungry Americans. One posting of this claim on TikTok racked up more than 9 million views: TikTok racked up more than 9 million views   While many social media users claimed that this "Great Nations Eat" campaign had been produced in Germany (some claimed China) in an effort to raise funds to feed hungry Americans, this video actually originated in the United States. This video comes from a 2015 campaign produced by the American charity Share Our Strength. The "Great Nations Eat" campaign was created by Share Our Strength and the creative agency BBG (Bartle Bogle Hegarty). In a news release, the group writes that it purposefully mirrored the public service announcements (PSAs) that often air in the United States to raise money to feed people in developing countries in an attempt to evoke an emotional reaction from American audiences.  Great Nations Eat Share Our Strength Billy Shore, CEO and founder of Share Our Strength, told Fast Company in 2015: Fast Company This was really to try to think a little more disruptively to get peoples attention, to go right to the heart of the issue that people are not aware hunger is a problem in the United States ... Id say that historically theres been a genre of media around hunger that looks kind of alikestories of kids in rural areas like Appalachia or Alabama ... Those stories are important and compelling, but they all have the same kind of message. The idea was to do something different, and point out that America cant be great on an empty stomachreally tap into this notion that it has to do with our strength as a nation, as a people, as a society. Its not just about these childrenas important as that isbut it really impacts all of us. The non-profit wrote in a news release at the time of the campaign's debut: news release All of the advertising for the Great Nations Eat launch was created by the award-winning creative agency, BBH (Bartle Bogle Hegarty) New York. As the goal of the campaign was first and foremost awareness, the creative allows for the facts to evoke the emotion. The campaign PSAs use an unconventional approach to contrast the problem of hunger in America versus other countries, surprising viewers with the facts. While these ads were not actually produced in China, Germany, or Slovenia, the message in these ads  that millions of people in the United States are food insecure  is true. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), more than 10% of U.S. households (which amounts to about 38.3 million people) were food insecure in 2020. The USDA writes: writes Food insecure  At times during the year, these households were uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food. Food-insecure households include those with low food security and very low food security. 10.5 percent (13.8 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2020.Unchanged from 10.5 percent in 2019. [...] 38.3 million people lived in food-insecure households. Here is one of the American-produced "Great Nations Eat" ads that is presented as if China made this ad to feed hungry Americans:  Here's another version of this ad "from Germany":  Millions of Americans truly struggle with hunger. While these ads were created to make it seem as if China, Germany, and other countries had released PSAs to feed hungry Americans, these videos were actually produced by an American charity and were designed to play on the tropes of similar PSAs. Anders Anglesey. German-Language Ad Asking to Help Feed Poor Americans Goes Viral. Newsweek, 9 Nov. 2021, https://www.newsweek.com/german-ad-asking-feed-americans-goes-viral-tiktok-1647405. Great Nations Eat Launches Unprecedented Billion Impression Media Campaign in 2015 to Transform the Conversation Around Hunger in America. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/great-nations-eat-launches-unprecedented-billion-impression-media-campaign-in-2015-to-transform-the-conversation-around-hunger-in-america-300104454.html. Accessed 10 Nov. 2021. Ha, Thu-Huong. Video: What If Other Countries Saw the Same PSAs about Hungry Americans That Americans See about Them? Quartz, https://qz.com/473786/video-what-if-other-countries-saw-the-same-psas-about-hungry-americans-that-americans-see-about-them/. Accessed 10 Nov. 2021. Peters, Adele. These Anti-Hunger Ads Ask People In Other Countries To Donate To Help Feed Americans. Fast Company, 15 July 2015, https://www.fastcompany.com/3048452/these-anti-hunger-ads-ask-people-in-other-countries-to-donate-to-help-feed-americans. Silva, Christianna. Food Insecurity In The U.S. By The Numbers. NPR, 27 Sept. 2020. NPR, https://www.npr.org/2020/09/27/912486921/food-insecurity-in-the-u-s-by-the-numbers. USDA ERS - Key Statistics & Graphics. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/key-statistics-graphics.aspx. Accessed 10 Nov. 2021. Former car czar Steven Rattner, who actuallyhates the nicknamehe earned overseeing the auto bailout, is pushing back againstproclamationsof a flourishing American manufacturing industry. Again. Rattner wrote an eye-catchingNew York Timesop-edin January calling the industrys post-recession jobs gains a trickle, arguing we need to get real about the so-called renaissance partly because wages for auto workers and manufacturers dropped far more than the average private-sector worker since the end of the recession in June 2009. He revisited some of those points in a March 30, 2014, appearance on ABCsThis Week, which took a break from coverage of Russia and the missing Malaysianplane to examine the state of Made in the USA. We certainly want these kinds of advanced manufacturing jobs. But remember this, manufacturing wages today in America on a per-hour basis are actually a bit lower than average wages in the economy as a whole, he said. And what I mean by that is there are lots of really good high-paying jobs in sectors like education, like IT, like health care, service sectors that are not just entry-level jobs, they are really high-paying jobs, and this is our competitive advantage. Manufacturing jobs are typically seen as a source of higher pay for people who dont earn college degrees, and President Barack Obama put an emphasis on them in his State of the Union address. So PunditFact wondered if Rattner is right: Are per-hour wages in manufacturing a little smaller than average wages for the rest of the American economy? Rattner pointed toU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics datafor average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees in the private sector, which make up about four-fifths of total private-sector employment. The most recent data for February 2014 shows the average hourly private-sector wage was $20.50. The manufacturing industry average was, as Rattner said, a bit lower at $19.43. Hourly wages are almost $3 higher for employees who produce durable goods, such as cars, phones and computers, than those who make nondurable goods, or things like food, gas and clothes. Weekly wages tell a different story, with manufacturers earning almost $122 more a week than the total worker average in February. The reason for the discrepancy between hourly and weekly wages is simple: Manufacturers work more hours. Anyone can work more hours and make more money, Rattner said. But manufacturers also earn more money an hour when you factor in supervisors.BLS data for Februaryshow average hourly earnings are $24.31 for all private-sector employees and $24.72 for manufacturing employees -- the opposite of what Rattner said. Which dataset is better? The question can incite an economists quarrel. Dean Baker, a liberal economist and co-director of the Center for Economic Policy Research, took issue with isolating a dataset that excludes supervisors, saying analysts see the distinction as arbitrary and are increasingly using the whole workforce for their research. The manufacturing industry has a lower percentage of production employees (70.1 percent) than the average for the private-sector workforce (82.7 percent), which accounts for the higher pay when using Rattner's measure, Baker said. Rattner argues viewing the data his way is more representative of the typical workers earnings without being influenced by the top of the pay scale. Another liberal economist and former Obama administration adviser, Jared Bernstein of the Center for Budget Policies and Priorities, faulted Rattner for excluding benefits on top of wages. Manufacturing workers often have benefits, he said. AnotherBLS source for wage data(yes, there are a lot of them) shows that when looking at total compensation (wages plus benefits), manufacturing workers earn $35.14 an hour, which is higher than the $28.44average for careers in the service-providing industry and $29.63 for all private-sector workers in December 2013. Since it's widely believed that workers trade off benefit pay for lower wages, it's a mistake to just consider wages in this sort of comparison when you're dealing with an industry that pays benefits (as opposed to say, fast food), Bernstein said. Matthew Lavoie, National Association of Manufacturers spokesman, said 97 percent of the groups 12,000 members provide health insurance. Rattner conceded manufacturers earn more than service-industry workers when benefits are included in hisNew York Timescolumn. In our interview with Rattner, he anticipated these objections to his claim. But my point remains the same: The perception that manufacturing jobs are better jobs is out of date, Rattner wrote. Note also that over the past year, per-hour wages for all industries rose by 50 cents per hour but in manufacturing, they rose by only 21 cents per hour. The trend is not manufacturing's friend, as myNYTpiecepointed out. Our ruling Rattner was careful onThis Weekto single out data for per-hour wages when he argued manufacturers are not paid as much as the rest of workforce. His claim relies on the most recent data for production workers in the manufacturing industry, who earn about $1 less than the average of their private-sector counterparts. However, factoring in supervisors shows manufacturers make 41 cents more per hour. Adding benefits gives manufacturers more of an edge. We wont take sides and say what dataset we think is best. What we can say is that Rattner makes an accurate point by one measure. On balance, we rate the claim Mostly True. In March 2020, as the coronavirus continued to spread around the globe, a viral message circulated on social media that was supposedly written by a doctor in Italy about how the new virus had impacted hospitals in the country. Silvia Stringhini, an epidemiologist, shared a translated version of this post on Twitter. A screenshot of Stringhini's first few tweets appear below. The full thread can be viewed here: shared here   Stringhini's viral tweets are a translated version of a real Italian-language Facebook post from Dr. Daniele Macchini, an intensive care unit physician at the Humanitas Gavazzeni hospital in Bergamo.  post Humanitas Gavazzeni A screenshot of a portion of Macchini's post appears below. The full post can be viewed here, and a translated version appears in full at the bottom of this article: viewed   Macchini explained that hospitals in Italy were overwhelmed with new cases, urged people to stop downplaying the disease as just a "bad flu," and asked those who were "unafraid" of the disease to consider how it will impact older populations. Macchini also complimented the cooperative efforts of medical professionals at the hospital, writing that there were "no more surgeons, urologists, orthopedists," just doctors who "suddenly become part of a single team to face this tsunami that has overwhelmed us." Here's Macchini's message in full (translated via Google): In one of the constant emails that I receive from my health department on a more than daily basis now these days, there was also a paragraph entitled "doing social responsibly", with some recommendations that can only be supported. After thinking for a long time if and what to write about what is happening to us, I felt that the silence was not at all responsible. I will therefore try to convey to people "not involved in the work" and further away from our reality, what we are experiencing in Bergamo during these pandemic days from Covid-19. I understand the need not to create panic, but when the message of the danger of what is happening does not reach people and I still feel who cares about the recommendations and people who gather together complaining about not being able to go to the gym or to be able to do soccer tournaments I shudder. I also understand the economic damage and I am also worried about that. After the epidemic, the tragedy will start again. However, apart from the fact that we are literally also devastating our NHS from an economic point of view, I allow myself to raise the importance of the health damage that is likely throughout the country and I find it nothing short of "chilling" for example that a red zone already requested by the region has not yet been established for the municipalities of Alzano Lombardo and Nembro (I would like to clarify that this is pure personal opinion). I myself looked with some amazement at the reorganizations of the entire hospital in the previous week, when our current enemy was still in the shadows: the wards slowly "emptied", the elective activities interrupted, the intensive therapies freed to create as many beds as possible. Containers arriving in front of the emergency room to create diversified routes and avoid any infections. All this rapid transformation brought into the corridors of the hospital an atmosphere of surreal silence and emptiness that we still did not understand, waiting for a war that was yet to begin and that many (including me) were not so sure would never come with such ferocity . (I open a parenthesis: all this in silence and without publicity, while several newspapers had the courage to say that private health care was not doing anything). I still remember my night guard a week ago passed unnecessarily without turning a blind eye, waiting for a call from the microbiology of the Sack. I was waiting for the outcome of a swab on the first suspect patient in our hospital, thinking about what consequences it would have for us and the clinic. If I think about it, my agitation for one possible case seems almost ridiculous and unjustified, now that I have seen what is happening. Well, the situation is now nothing short of dramatic. No other words come to mind. The war has literally exploded and the battles are uninterrupted day and night. One after the other the unfortunate poor people come to the emergency room. They have far from the complications of a flu. Let's stop saying it's a bad flu. In these 2 years I have learned that the people of Bergamo do not come to the emergency room at all. They did well this time too. They followed all the indications given: a week or ten days at home with a fever without going out and risking contagion, but now they can't take it anymore. They don't breathe enough, they need oxygen. Drug therapies for this virus are few. The course mainly depends on our organism. We can only support it when it can't take it anymore. It is mainly hoped that our body will eradicate the virus on its own, let's face it. Antiviral therapies are experimental on this virus and we learn its behavior day after day. Staying at home until the symptoms worsen does not change the prognosis of the disease. Now, however, that need for beds in all its drama has arrived. One after another, the departments that had been emptied are filling up at an impressive rate. The display boards with the names of the sick, of different colors depending on the operating unit they belong to, are now all red and instead of the surgical operation there is the diagnosis, which is always the same cursed: bilateral interstitial pneumonia. Now, tell me which flu virus causes such a rapid tragedy. Because that's the difference (now I'm going down a bit in the technical field): in the classical flu, apart from infecting much less population over several months, cases can be complicated less frequently, only when the VIRUS destroying the protective barriers of the Our respiratory tract allows BACTERIA normally resident in the upper tract to invade the bronchi and lungs, causing more serious cases. Covid 19 causes a banal influence in many young people, but in many elderly people (and not only) a real SARS because it arrives directly in the alveoli of the lungs and infects them making them unable to perform their function. Sorry, but to me as a doctor it doesn't reassure you that the most serious are mainly elderly people with other pathologies. The elderly population is the most represented in our country and it is difficult to find someone who, above 65 years of age, does not take at least the tablet for pressure or diabetes. I also assure you that when you see young people who end up in intubated intensive care, pronated or worse in ECMO (a machine for the worst cases, which extracts the blood, re-oxygenates it and returns it to the body, waiting for the organism, hopefully, heal your lungs), all this tranquility for your young age passes there. And while there are still people on social networks who pride themselves on not being afraid by ignoring the indications, protesting that their normal lifestyle habits are "temporarily" in crisis, the epidemiological disaster is taking place. And there are no more surgeons, urologists, orthopedists, we are only doctors who suddenly become part of a single team to face this tsunami that has overwhelmed us. The cases multiply, we arrive at the rate of 15-20 hospitalizations a day all for the same reason. The results of the swabs now come one after the other: positive, positive, positive. Suddenly the emergency room is collapsing. Emergency provisions are issued: help is needed in the emergency room. A quick meeting to learn how the first aid management software works and a few minutes later they are already downstairs, next to the warriors on the war front. The PC screen with the reasons for the access is always the same: fever and difficulty breathing, fever and cough, respiratory failure etc ... The exams, radiology always with the same sentence: bilateral interstitial pneumonia, bilateral interstitial pneumonia, bilateral interstitial pneumonia. All to be hospitalized. Someone already to intubate and go to intensive care. For others it is late ... Intensive care becomes saturated, and where intensive care ends, more are created. Each fan becomes like gold: those of the operating rooms that have now suspended their non-urgent activity become places for intensive care that did not exist before. I found it incredible, or at least I can speak for the HUMANITAS Gavazzeni (where I work) how it was possible to implement in such a short time a deployment and a reorganization of resources so finely designed to prepare for a disaster of this magnitude. And every reorganization of beds, wards, staff, work shifts and tasks is constantly reviewed day after day to try to give everything and even more. Those wards that previously looked like ghosts are now saturated, ready to try to give their best for the sick, but exhausted. The staff is exhausted. I saw fatigue on faces that didn't know what it was despite the already grueling workloads they had. I have seen people still stop beyond the times they used to stop already, for overtime that was now habitual. I saw solidarity from all of us, who never failed to go to our internist colleagues to ask "what can I do for you now?" or "leave that hospitalization alone." Doctors who move beds and transfer patients, who administer therapies instead of nurses. Nurses with tears in their eyes because we are unable to save everyone and the vital signs of several patients at the same time reveal an already marked destiny. There are no more shifts, schedules. Social life is suspended for us. I have been separated for a few months, and I assure you that I have always done my best to constantly see my son even on the day of disassembly at night, without sleeping and postponing sleep until when I am without him, but for almost 2 weeks I have not voluntarily I see neither my son nor my family members for fear of infecting them and in turn infecting an elderly grandmother or relatives with other health problems. I'm happy with some photos of my son that I regard between tears and a few video calls. So be patient too, you can't go to the theater, museums or gym. Try to have mercy on that myriad of older people you could exterminate. It is not your fault, I know, but of those who put it in your head that you are exaggerating and even this testimony may seem just an exaggeration for those who are far from the epidemic, but please, listen to us, try to leave the house only to indispensable things. Do not go en masse to make stocks in supermarkets: it is the worst thing because you concentrate and the risk of contacts with infected people who do not know they are. You can go there as you usually do. Maybe if you have a normal mask (even those that are used to do certain manual work) put it on. Don't look for ffp2 or ffp3. Those should serve us and we are beginning to struggle to find them. By now we have had to optimize their use only in certain circumstances, as the WHO recently suggested in view of their almost ubiquitous impoverishment. Oh yes, thanks to the shortage of certain devices, I and many other colleagues are certainly exposed despite all the means of protection we have. Some of us have already become infected despite the protocols. Some infected colleagues have in turn infected family members and some of their family members already struggle between life and death. We are where your fears could make you stay away. Try to make sure you stay away. Tell your elderly or other family members to stay indoors. Bring him the groceries please. We have no alternative. It's our job. In fact, what I do these days is not really the job I'm used to, but I do it anyway and I will like it as long as it responds to the same principles: try to make some sick people feel better and heal, or even just alleviate the suffering and the pain to those who unfortunately cannot heal. I don't spend a lot of words about the people who define us heroes these days and who until yesterday were ready to insult and report us. Both will return to insult and report as soon as everything is over. People forget everything quickly. And we're not even heroes these days. It's our job. We risked something bad every day before: when we put our hands in a belly full of blood of someone we don't even know if he has HIV or hepatitis C; when we do it even though we know it has HIV or hepatitis C; when we sting with the one with HIV and take the drugs that make us vomit from morning to night for a month. When we open with the usual anguish the results of the tests at the various checks after an accidental puncture hoping not to be infected. We simply earn our living with something that gives us emotions. It doesn't matter if they are beautiful or ugly, just take them home. In the end we only try to make ourselves useful for everyone. Now try to do it too though: with our actions we influence the life and death of a few dozen people. You with yours, many more. Please share and share the message. We must spread the word to prevent what is happening here in Italy. Shortly after Macchini's post went viral, the Italian government announced new restrictions on public travel in an effort to stop the spread of the disease.  announced Beaumont, Peter and Ian Sample.  "From Confidence to Quarantine: How Coronavirus Swept Italy."
  The Guardian.  10 March 2020. Lemon, Jason.  "Doctor in Coronavirus-Stricken Italy Details What's Happening In His Hospital."
  Newsweek.  10 March 2020. Steinbuch, Yaron.  "Italian Doctor at Heart of Illness Shares Chilling Coronavirus Thoughts."
  New York Post.  10 March 2020. Correction [11 March 2020]: This article originally referred to an unrelated Twitter thread by Jason Van Schoor. This reference has been removed. Stoking their long-running feud, California Gov. Jerry Brown recently jabbed at former Texas Gov. Rick Perry, saying Golden State is growing a hell of a lot faster than Texas. Brown made this claim in the middle of an impassioned defense of climate change science at the American Geophysical Union conference on Dec. 14, 2016, in San Francisco. Weve proved in California that the economy grows. And it grows in part because of the climate rules that weve adopted, Brown said. Perry, a climate change skeptic, was recently selected U.S. energy secretary by President-elect Trump. While Texas governor, he repeatedly visited California in an attempt to lure jobs to the Lone Star State, with the promise of less regulation and lower costs. In his speech, Brown said Perrys critiques about Californias job-killing red tape dont hold up. Now remember our new secretary of energy, he was coming to California to say: Come to Texas because we have all the jobs in Texas. Well, Rick: I got some news for you, California is growing a hell of a lot faster than Texas, and we have more sun than you have oil! Gov. Jerry Brown makes his claim about California growing a hell of a lot faster than Texas at about the 13:00 minute mark in the video above. With Browns reference of Perry, we took his faster than Texas claim to mean faster economic growth with a focus on jobs. We decided to zero-in on job growth rates in California and Texas, while also weighing GDP and unemployment trends in the states. Well leave the fun comparison of sunshine to oil for Brown and Perry to wrestle with another day. Our research We concede theres no definition for what a hell of a lot faster growth looks like. Still, well do our best to sort out the governors claim. Browns spokeswoman pointed us to several news articles detailing Californias recent economic improvements. Looking solely at 2015 job growth rates, Browns claim appears to hold up. In that year, California added 483,000 jobs, posting a jobs growth rate of 3 percent, based ondatawe crunched from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That pace was twice as fast as Texas 1.5 percent job growth rate. Californias rapid employment gains have slowed somewhat to about 2 percent this year through November. That may not qualify as a hell of a lot faster, but its still greater than Texas roughly 1.6 percent job growth rate so far this year. The business website Kiplinger.com forecast California would rank10th in the nationamong states for fastest job growth in 2016. It noted that Texas was not on its Top 10 list. It wasnt long ago, however, that Texas outpaced California. In 2014, Texas recorded a 3.7 percent job growth rate, ahead of Californias 2.9 percent pace. Looking to the future, Californias job gains may slow. The closely watchedUCLA Anderson Forecastpredicts jobs to grow by only 1.5 percent in the state during 2017 and just 0.8 percent in 2018. Because Brown used the phrase is growing, well judge him on the most recent figures, not future forecasts. Overall economy While the pace of job growth is important, its not the only measurement of a states economic health. And Browns claim could be interpreted as Californias overall economy, not just jobs, is growing much faster than the economy in Texas. In August, PolitiFact Texas took adeep lookat the economies of both California and Texas to evaluate a June claim by Julin Castro, the U.S. secretary of Housing and Urban Development, that Today, California is kicking our butt, creating more jobs and more economic growth than Texas. It rated the claim True, citing greater jobs, per capita income and GDP growth rates in California. It noted Texas had a lower jobless rate. Building on that fact check, we looked at the most recent economic figures for both states to see if the assessment still holds. We found that Californias GDP grew faster than Texas in the first two quarters of this year, at rates of 2 percent and most recently 2.2 percent compared with Texas 1.3 percent and its most recent quarter, a negative 0.8 percent, according toa news release in Decemberby the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis. It was a different story in 2015 when Texas GDP expanded by 4.8 percent (a figure that was recently revised upward) compared with Californias 3.8 percent GDP expansion. Comparingunemployment rates, Texas, at 4.6 percent in November, has consistently fared better than California, where the rate was 5.3 percent in November, and has hovered well above 5 percent this year. California had one more economic bright spot in 2015: Per capita personal income grew at twice the rate as in Texas,5.4 percentto2.6 percent, according to federal data. Our ruling Gov. Jerry Brown recently claimed California is growing a hell of a lot faster than Texas. We took this to mean economic growth with a focus on the pace of job creation. Californias 3 percent job growth rate in 2015, which doubled Texas pace, definitely fits into Brown's colorful claim. But Californias rate has slowed to about 2 percent so far this year, closer to Texas 1.6 job growth rate. Other economic metrics show California faring better than Texas in several, though not all, categories: Californias GDP expanded faster than Texas GDP in the first two quarters of this year, though Texas had a faster GDP growth rate in 2015. Also, per capita income grew twice as fast in California as Texas in 2015, also backing Browns statement. Texas, however, has consistently held a lower jobless rate than California in recent years. Brown, like the states economy in recent years, is on the right track. Although California has expanded jobs and its economy faster than Texas in many cases, there are a few cases where that growth has been strong but not necessarily a hell of a lot faster. We rate Browns statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/158c502a-4b3e-463d-906f-529da13e2451 Claim:  An Indiana Congressman is introducing legislation to change the name of Interstate 69. Status:  False. Example:  [Hoosier Gazette, 2004] John Hostettler, the Congressman representing the 8th district of Indiana, has been convinced by local religious groups to introduce legislation in the House that would change the name of an Interstate 69 extension to a more moral sounding number. There are plans to extend the interstate from Indianapolis through southwestern Indiana all the way through Texas into Mexico in the coming years.  While most believe this highway will be good for the states economy, religious conservatives believe "I-69" sounds too risqu and want to change the interstates number. [Rest of article here.] here Origins:  Despite   the disclaimer on the site of the Hoosier Gazette, a number of its satirical articles have been mistaken for real news (such as a report that a Kinsey Institute study found that having children lowers the IQ of parents).   disclaimer Hoosier Gazette report Now yet another entry from the Hoosier Gazette has made the news, this one proclaiming that Indiana Congressman John Hostettler is attempting to introduce legislation to rename Interstate 69 (because the pronunciation of its common abbreviation, I-69, sounds like a slang term for a sexual position).  The spoof has caused no small amount of consternation at Congressman Hostettler's office, where aides have been kept busy handling calls about the fictional legislation: entry John Hostettler Interstate 69 sexual position U.S. Rep. John Hostettler's office is fielding outraged calls about an Internet hoax that says he's proposed changing the name of Interstate 69 to Interstate 63 for religious reasons.  Hostettler spokesman Michael Jahr said Monday he had been fielding calls about the story all day.  "There is no truth in the story about any legislation changing the name of I-69," he said. "The Web site is satirical in nature, and any suggestion otherwise is absurd." The Hoosier Gazette has also published a sampling of responses to their I-69 article, many of them submitted by readers who didn't get the joke. responses Last updated:  21 November 2004    Sources:   Wehrman, Jessica.  "Hostettler's Office Fields Hoax Calls."   Evansville Courier & Press.  16 November 2004. DidTravis Allen, arguably the most conservative candidate for California governor, donate campaign money to three of the states leading liberal Democrats? Thats the Republican-on-Republican attack levied by John Coxs campaign for governor in arecent TV adthat goes after Allen, an Orange County assemblyman whos positioned himself as a GOP populist. Heres the full text of the ad, which includes three attacks on Allen: Narrator: For Republicans, the race for governor is crystal clear: Theres conservative businessman John Cox, leading the opposition to Jerry Browns Sanctuary State and chairman of the initiative campaign to repeal the gas tax. Then theres career politician Travis Allen. He gave campaign donations to Jerry Brown. Gavin Newsom and Barbara Boxer. And on the floor vote, Allen refused to join Republicans opposing driver licenses for illegal aliens. The conservative choice is clear: John Cox for governor. The ad was paid for by John Cox for Governor 2018. Well examine the other two attacks on Allen in future fact-checks. In this piece, well focus on the claim he donated to top Democrats. Background on GOP rivals Recent polls show growing support for Coxs campaign for governor, less than a week after President Trumpendorsedthe San Diego businessman. A surveyreleased Wednesday nightfrom the Public Policy Institute of California shows Newsom, the states lieutenant governor, leading Cox, 25 percent to 19 percent. Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was third, at 15 percent, followed by Allen with 11 percent,  State Treasurer John Chiang at 9 percent and former state schools chief Delaine Eastin with 6 percent. Coxand Allen have sparred at campaign events over who is the most conservative candidate. Theyve both criticized Californias Democratic leadership over the gas tax increase and sanctuary state protections. The top two candidates in the June 5 primary, regardless of party affiliation, will move on to the November runoff. Donating to Democrats? The ad accuses Allen of donating to three of the states top Democrats. The irony, of course, is that Allens run for governor has centered on criticizing those same politicians, particularly Brown and Newsom. We found clear evidence supporting the claim, though Coxs ad ignores the fact that the contributions took place nearly a decade ago, before Allen ran for elected office, and that he also donated to Republicans. Campaign finance records show that in October 2010, Allen donated $1,000 to Jerry Brown for Governor, through Wealth Strategies Group, his wealth management firm in Huntington Beach. In August 2010, Allen gave $100 to Gavin Newsom for Lieutenant Governor. And, in October 2010, he donated $250 to Barbara Boxer for Senate. SOURCE: Campaign finance records from the California Secretary of State'swebsite. Asked about this, a spokeswoman for Allens campaign said in an email that the contributions took place before Travis was an elected official, as a businessman, he purchased tickets to some events. A November 2017 Mercury-Newsarticlesummarized these and additional donations Allen made to Democrats in 2010 and 2011. He told the paper at that time: As a businessman I was invited to some events by friends, and I purchased tickets to these events. Attending these events, however, opened my eyes to the damage the Democrats were doing to California, and brought about my decision to do everything in my power to stop them, including running for public office. Similar claim In April 2016, PolitiFact California ratedMostly Truea similar claim about then Presidential candidate Donald Trump donating to Democrats. Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz, at the time Trumps rival for the Republican presidential nomination, claimed Trump has given $12,000 to Jerry Brown, Gavin Newsom and Kamala Harris. Campaign finance data showed the claim was accurate, though we noted Cruz left out that the donations took place long before Trump announced his run for president. The contribution to Jerry Brown took place in 2006, while the donations to the other Democrats took place in 2009, 2011 and 2013. Our ruling In a recentTV ad, John Coxs campaign for governor claimed rival GOP candidate Travis Allen donated to three of Californias top Democrats. Campaign records prove the claim, though the contributions took place a decade ago, before Allen entered politics. The statement is accurate but needs this clarification. We rate it Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. Around 8:30 p.m. on Dec. 10, 2021, a tornado tore through Madison County, Illinois, before striking an Amazon warehouse in Edwardsville where night workers were beginning their shift. The powerful tornado ripped off the building's roof, caused two of its 40-foot-high concrete walls to collapse, leaving six people dead in its wake.  As news of this tragic incident circulated on social media, so did an image supposedly showing a text message thread between Larry Virden, one of the worker's who died, and his girlfriend, Cherie Jones. In one message, Virden writes, "Amazon won't let us leave."   This appears to be a genuine image of a text message thread. While many people encountered this as a standalone image on social media, this image was first published in a local news broadcast from Fox 2 News after Jones provided it to the station. You can see the original news report below:  Jones spoke more about this text message in an interview with the New York Post: New York Post I got text messages from him. He always tells me when he is filling up the Amazon truck when he is getting ready to go back  I was like OK, I love you. Hes like, well Amazon wont let me leave until after the storm blows over.' [...] We heard the tornado didnt touch down until 8:39 so he had 20 minutes to get home ... I messaged him and that was the last text message I got from him ... I told him where we live, it was only lightning at the time. After that, I got nothing from him. Jones, however, didn't fault Amazon for his death. Instead, she said she viewed it as a "what if" situation, saying: "what if they would have let him leave? He could have made it home." It should also be noted that this text message was sent in the brief timespan (about 20 minutes) between the first tornado warning and the tornado striking the warehouse. As New York Times reporter Karen Weise noted, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) guidance is for people to "seek shelter" after these warnings.  A spokesperson for Amazon told us that Amazon's leaders on the ground followed this OSHA guidance and worked to get people to take shelter after these warnings were issued.  The spokesperson said:  OSHA guidance clearly states to take shelter immediately when theres a tornado warning. Our leaders on the ground followed their training and did just that, moving quickly to get people to take shelter immediately. That likely saved many lives from this storm. The site got tornado warnings between 8:06 and 8:16, and site leaders directed people on site to immediately take shelter. At 8:27, the tornado struck the building. Our team worked quickly to ensure employees and partners could get to the designated shelter in place area, and we want to thank them for everything they were able to do. In the wake of the deadly tornado, Amazon faced some criticism for not having an adequate safety plan in place. The BBC reported: reported Now, questions are being raised over whether adequate shelter was available, whether workers were advised to go there immediately, and whether the shifts should have gone ahead that evening at all, given the warnings of severe weather. The Edwardsville site received tornado warnings between 20:06 and 20:16 local time (01:06 and 01:16 GMT) before the tornado struck the building at 20:27, Amazon said in a statement when contacted by the BBC, with events "happening incredibly fast". The company said that the team worked "incredibly quickly" to ensure as many employees and partners could reach the "shelter in place" site. OHSA has opened an investigation into the collapse. OSHA spokesman Scott Allen told ABC News that the investigation will be complete within six months. ABC News OSHA investigates all workplace fatalities, and we are supporting them, an Amazon spokesperson said. Amazon, which is donating $1 million to the Edwardsville Community Foundation to help the community rebuild after the tornado, also said in a statement: statement "Were deeply saddened by the news that members of our Amazon family passed away as a result of the storm in Edwardsville, IL. Our thoughts and prayers are with the victims, their loved ones, and everyone impacted by the tornado. We also want to thank all the first responders for their ongoing efforts on scene. Were continuing to provide support to our employees and partners in the area.   2 Workers Killed after Collapse at Amazon Warehouse in Edwardsville. FOX 2, 11 Dec. 2021, https://fox2now.com/news/illinois/multiple-workers-trapped-after-collapse-at-amazon-warehouse-in-edwardsville/. Amazon Criticised over Safety at Tornado-Hit Warehouse. BBC News, 13 Dec. 2021. www.bbc.com, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-59641784. Amazon Worker Who Died in Warehouse Collapse Wasnt Allowed to Leave, Girlfriend Says. New York Post, 13 Dec. 2021, https://nypost.com/2021/12/12/amazon-worker-texted-girlfriend-he-wasnt-allowed-to-leave-warehouse/. OSHA Investigating after 6 Killed by Tornado at Amazon Facility. ABC News, https://abcnews.go.com/Business/dead-amazon-facility-tornado-pummels-illinois/story?id=81721932. Accessed 14 Dec. 2021. OSHA Opens Investigation after Amazon Warehouse Collapses during Tornado, Killing 6. PBS NewsHour, 13 Dec. 2021, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/osha-opens-investigation-after-amazon-warehouse-collapses-during-tornado-killing-6. Weise, Karen, and Eric Berger. At Amazon Site, Tornado Collided With Companys Peak Delivery Season. The New York Times, 12 Dec. 2021. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/12/technology/amazon-tornado-edwardsville.html. Updated [Dec. 12, 2021]: Added a statement from Amazon about OSHA guidelines. Linda Chavez-Thompson kicked off her campaign for the Democratic nomination for lieutenant governor by assailing the personal wealth of incumbent Republican David Dewhurst, whos jet-fueled three winning statewide campaigns partly from personal funds.Chavez-Thompson, whose background lies in labor unions, said Jan. 4: I know I will be an underdog against Lt. Gov. Dewhurst, who is a comfortable millionaire. But most Texans are not millionaires. See her single out the Lone Star state's wealth stereotype at the 1:08 mark of the video at right, which was posted on YouTube by the Texas Tribune.Thanks go to Chavez-Thompson for stating the obvious. We here at PolitiFact aren't millionaires and expect most Texans aren't, either.Still, Chavez-Thompson caused us to wonder: How many Texans are millionaires? And are many Texans well off compared to people elsewhere?We found that the latest statistics on Texas millionaires date back a few years. In 2004, according to an Internal Revenue Service estimate posted online in 2008, Texas was home to 108,000 individuals whose net worth was $1.5 million or more. (Why the $1.5 million benchmark? We don't know, but we suspect that a meager $1 million doesn't go as far as it used to. )Karl Eschbach, the state demographer, peeked at the same analysis and offered a quick caveat: The estimate was reached before the nation entered a recession partly driven by plunging home values, fueling drops in net worth.In 2004, 1 in 208 Texans were in the $1.5-million wealth tier--about 1/2 of 1 percent of the state's nearly 22.5 million residents. Texas ranked 37th nationally in its share of individuals with net worth of $1.5 million or more. Connecticut ranked first, Florida second, the District of Columbia third.Eschbach noted that the wealthiest people in Texas were better off than their rich counterparts in most states. In 2004, Texas ranked 18th in the average net worth of individuals whose net worth was $1.5 million or more. The average net wealth of such Texans was more than $4.5 million.We also found a 2001 estimate, based on an IRS sampling of federal tax returns, suggesting Texas was home to 182,000 millionaires, amounting to less than 1 percent of its 21.3 million residents that year.California was the heady home to 572,000 millionaires, New York to 317,000 and Florida to 249,000Even Illinois had more millionaires, at 185,000, making us scratch our heads: When was the last time peacock-proud Texans had to fret about keeping up with residents of the Land of Lincoln?In her campaign kickoff speech, Chavez-Thompson didnt recap the less salutary fact that Texas families rated as poorer than families nationally. In 2007, according to the Census Bureau, half of American households had income exceeding $50,740 and half made less than that. Texas had a median household income of $47,548.Of course, Texas still had enclaves of wealth. According to the bureaus study, the Dallas suburb of Plano was a nationally prominent pocket of lucre, with a median household income of $84,492.At the other end of the scale, the state retained bastions of poverty along the Mexico border. Residents of El Paso County had median household incomes of $34,980 while residents of Hidalgo and Cameron counties had median incomes of $30,295 and $29,347, respectively, both ranking worse off than other U.S. counties.As of 2008, nearly 16 percent of Texans (3.8 million residents) lived in poverty, with 22.5 percent of children living in poverty, according to the Austin-based Center for Public Policy Priorities, which advocates for government aid to low-income residents. Nationally, 13.2 percent of residents lived in poverty, including 18.2 percent of children.Eschbach said sizing up the state's wealth is no cinch.You have a lot of major corporations headquartered here. You've got a lot of wealth creation, Eschbach said. In that respect, we certainly aren't the wealthiest state or the poorest state. We do have a large representation of very disadvantaged people. At the same time, we have a robust economy.Much debate lies in the details. Yet to Eschbach and the rest of Texas, Chavez-Thompson's statement was no surprise.We rate her statement True. On June 29, 2023, the Supreme Court "severely limited, if not effectively ended, the use of affirmative action in college admissions," as described by Amy Howe at SCOTUS Blog: described By a vote of 6-3, the justices ruled that the admissions programs used by the University of North Carolina and Harvard College violate the Constitution's equal protection clause, which bars racial discrimination by government entities. [...] Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that college admissions programs can consider race merely to allow an applicant to explain how their race influenced their character in a way that would have a concrete effect on the university. But a student "must be treated based on his or her experiences as an individual  not on the basis of race," Roberts wrote. [...] Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joined the Roberts opinion. Clarence Thomas' concurrence with the majority opinion led several media outlets to rehash an assertion that, at least for a period of time in the 1980s when he was chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Thomas's views on affirmative action programs were ambivalent  if not opportunist. This claim has been in recirculation since the Supreme Court announced that they had added cases challenging affirmative action to their docket: media outlets This claim recirculation  (@tonywolfness/Twitter) That claim appears to have first been raised following Thomas' nomination to the Supreme Court  in a July 14, 1991 New York Times article titled "On Thomas's Climb, Ambivalence About Issue of Affirmative Action." That article cited a line from a January 1983 speech given by Thomas to employees of the EEOC: article In a 1983 speech to staff members at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which he then headed, he said that affirmative action laws were of "paramount importance" to him. "But for them, God only knows where I would be today," he said. "These laws and their proper application are all that stand between the first 17 years of my life and the second 17 years." Though repeated in this way by several media outlets both during Thomas' Supreme Court nomination process in the 1990s and again in 2023, this is an incorrect paraphrase of Thomas's statements. Thomas's full remarks were published as a law article in the Journal of Labor Law in April 1983. repeated published When read with the full context of this speech, it is clear that the "them" used in the phrase "but for them" referred not to affirmative action laws in particular, but to equal employment opportunity laws  as articulated in the Civil Rights Act of 1964  more generally. The speech, broadly, was a defense of the EEOC's work during the Reagan administration, which faced criticism over a massive reduction in discrimination claims pursued under its leadership. faced criticism Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act  a landmark bill signed during the Lyndon Johnson Administration  prohibits discrimination by employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The EEOC, which first began operations in 1965, was created as part of the 1964 Act as the agency tasked with investigating and enforcing Title VII violations. Title VII in 1965 Over the years, the EEOC has expanded to investigate and enforce violations of other Federal anti-discrimination laws including those against discrimination against pregnant women, age discrimination, and disability discrimination. By the end of the Carter administration, the EEOC had expanded considerably under chairwoman Eleanor Norton's tenure, as described in a March 1981 report: report Thanks in part to Ms Norton's streamlined methods, which enabled EEOC to process 50,000 cases per year during her tenure, she views the equal-employment field as "very stable now. We have had 10 years of extraordinary and deep court cases to build the law." "Even if they disbanded EEOC tomorrow," she said, "and there is no way they could, there would still be thousands of court cases presented each year based on precedent." Norton, here, was referencing an unpublished report commissioned by the Reagan transition team that was extremely critical of the EEOC, as reported by The Washington Post in January 1981: reported A Reagan administration advisory panel has urged that equal employment opportunity law and procedures to be changed so that much more evidence would be required to find a business guilty of discrimination and no business could be forced to adopt an "affirmative action" plan against its will. The advisory unit attacked the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for having created a new racism in America in which every individual is judged by race." The group was led by J.A. Parker, a black and head of the Lincoln Institute, a conservative think tank that deals with black issues. Its unpublished report was sent to the then-president-elect last month. Following Reagan's inauguration, the chairmanship of the EEOC office was vacant until early 1982, when Thomas was tapped to lead the EEOC. Democrats, at the time, were skeptical of Thomas' commitment to alleviating discrimination. These concerns were not helped by a massive decline in cases pursued under Thomas, or by the massive reduction in the EEOC budget under Reagan, as reported in a 1983 article: was tapped skeptical 1983 article In Fiscal Year 1982, there was upwards of 70 percent fewer cases filed in court than in 1981 on behalf of grieved workers. EEOC employees report that, because of a lack of staff and resources, cases often receive perfunctory investigation and in many instances, charges have been dismissed or "no caused" because they would prove too difficult or time-consuming to process. The speech in question, delivered to employees of the EEOC, was a response to these criticisms and an attempt to clarify to his staff what Thomas felt the role of the EEOC should  and should not  be. In his remarks, Thomas cited "the changing nature of discrimination," and heralded inroads his EEOC had made in fighting age and gender discrimination: speech It should not be surprising that many of our most prominent cases involve allegations of age and sex discrimination, many resulting from reductions in force and forced retirement. This does not mean that charges of race, national origin, or religious discrimination are not filed with the EEOC and that the EEOC does not bring suit in such cases. It only means that there is now a special public and judicial sensitivity to cases involving age and women. Importantly, the speech is explicitly critical of the discourse surrounding affirmative action, and the policies Thomas advocated represented, at best, a muted skepticism toward the concepts' then-present use: represented No one in his right mind seriously questions the legal and moral bankruptcy of discrimination. The same unanimity of opinion does not exist for affirmative action. Affirmative action has been and will continue to be a subject of hot debate because mere mention of the term divides interest groups into two warring camps: one hotly in favor and one hotly opposed. [...] In their haste to condemn each other, the camps lose sight of the nature and purpose of equal employment opportunity laws. [...] This divisive debate results in general confusion and misunderstanding about affirmative action which, in turn, tends to undermine the effectiveness and legitimacy of the enforcement of civil rights laws. As the lead agency in the enforcement of federal equal employment opportunity laws, the EEOC cannot stand by and allow confusion about affirmative action to undermine our enforcement efforts. We must attempt to bring out and clarify the issues obscured by this debate. [...] Much of the heated debate and public confusion over affirmative action, in fact, stems from the confusion between flexible goals and inflexible quotas, and the use of these two distinct terms interchangeably. Thomas, in his speech, expressed the view that "too much posturing" had taken place over the debate about affirmative action, but he also affirmed that affirmative action programs had been "critical to minorities and women in this society." The section of the speech paraphrased to claim that Thomas was once amenable to affirmative action followed the above remarks: followed It is my view that too much posturing has taken place on issues such as affirmative action, which are critical to minorities and women in this society. The problems which we face in the area of equal employment opportunity must be solved. For the most part, they must be solved by applying legal principles of paramount importance to me. But for them, God only knows where I would be today. [...] These laws and their proper application are all that stand between the first 17 years of my life and the second. The reference to the "first 17 years" of his life is an allusion to statements Thomas made in the opening of this speech, when Thomas referenced "the fact that the Chairman of the EEOC spent 17 years of his life (one-half) under strict segregation." This connection, along with the broader context of the speech, makes it clear that "these laws" are those contained in the 1964 Civil Rights Act. opening The 1964 Civil Rights Act ended segregation when Thomas was a few months shy of 17. It also created the "equal employment opportunity laws" at issue under Title VII that provide the EEOC the audience of his speech  with its legal authority. At the end of his speech, during this second allusion to the end of segregation, Thomas warned against the improper use of those laws, even when used with good intention: shy of 17 I abhor any effort to twist, bend, or distort them [legal principles] for any reasons, whether such distortions are said to help or hurt minorities or women. No one should be permitted to turn these laws on their heads just because they have good intentions. These laws and their proper application are all that stand between the first 17 years of my life and the second. In sum, Thomas did not present anything more than a muted acknowledgement of the EEOC's role in some forms of affirmative action, and the laws or principles he was referring to in remarks that have since gone viral did not concern affirmative action specifically, but the principles contained within the 1964 Civil Rights Act more broadly. 1964 Civil Rights Act That Thomas, who recently ruled against the use of racial quotas in college admissions, would have described affirmative action as "critical to minorities and women in this society" has been painted as an example of Thomas' hypocrisy on affirmative action. The portion of the speech often cited to make this point is mischaracterized, even if that point has validity. Specifically, the 1991 reporting in The New York Times reported, as its primary scoop, that Yale Law School had a 10 percent minority goal the year in which Thomas applied to and was accepted into the program: 1991 reporting Judge Clarence Thomas, who came to prominence as a fierce black critic of racial preference programs, was admitted to Yale Law School under an explicit affirmative action plan with the goal of having blacks and other minority members make up about 10 percent of the entering class, university officials said. Under the program, which was adopted in 1971, the year Judge Thomas applied, blacks and some Hispanic applicants were evaluated differently from whites, the officials said. Nonetheless, they were not admitted unless they met standards devised to predict they could succeed at the highly competitive school. [...] "We did adopt an affirmative action program and it was pretty clearly stated," said Prof. Abraham S. Goldstein, who was dean of the Law School from 1970 to 1975. Thomas has also acknowledged this part of his history, as reported in 1980 by The Washington Post. "The worst experience of his life," he reportedly explained at the time, "was attending college and law school with whites who believed he was there only because of racial quotas for the admission of blacks." as reported Frank Washington, a Yale friend interviewed by Newsweek in 1991, said that Thomas had, in private, "recognized that affirmative action helped to get him into law school, but on the basis of economic deprivation rather than race." interviewed While there are separate arguments to be made of the notion that Thomas' views on affirmative action are hypocritical due to his personal benefit from such programs, removing context from a speech to make it sound like that alleged hypocrisy was more overtly stated is misleading. Because the laws and principles Thomas was referring to were those contained in the 1964 Civil Rights Act and not any specific affirmative action legislation, the claim is False. Bella, Timothy. "The Time Clarence Thomas Said Affirmative Action Was 'Critical' for Society." Washington Post, 1 July 2023. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2023/06/30/clarence-thomas-affirmative-action/. "Black Conservatives, Center Stage." Washington Post. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1980/12/16/black-conservatives-center-stage/c5b44552-ad84-4a40-9b3c-3e88fdfa3589/. Accessed 5 July 2023. Clarence Thomas in 1983: "God Only Knows Where" I Would Be If Not for Affirmative Action - Alternet.Org. https://www.alternet.org/clarence-thomas-1983-affirmative-action/. Accessed 5 July 2023. Current Litigation Trends and Goals at the EEOC - ProQuest. https://www.proquest.com/openview/1a991116c071ffe6a6547f7505c13f63/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1816463. Accessed 5 July 2023. "Eagleton Backs EEOC Nominee With Reluctance." Newspapers.Com, 1 Apr. 1982, https://www.newspapers.com/article/st-louis-post-dispatch-eagleton-backs-e/127670235/. "Federal Agency Reformer Leaves with No Misgivings." Newspapers.Com, 10 Mar. 1981, https://www.newspapers.com/article/arizona-republic-federal-agency-reformer/127564899/. "New EEOC Nomination." Newspapers.Com, 1 Mar. 1982, https://www.newspapers.com/article/athol-daily-news-new-eeoc-nomination/127670013/. "Regan Undermines EEOC Enforcement." Newspapers.Com, 5 Feb. 1983, https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-atlanta-voice-regan-undermines-eeoc/127667015/. Rich, Spencer. "Reagan Panel, Citing 'New Racism,' Urges Easing of EEOC Rules." Washington Post, 30 Jan. 1981. www.washingtonpost.com, https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1981/01/30/reagan-panel-citing-new-racism-urges-easing-of-eeoc-rules/dfd79721-7bbc-4ef0-91a3-ee5425904abe/. "Supreme Court Strikes down Affirmative Action Programs in College Admissions." SCOTUSblog, 29 June 2023, https://www.scotusblog.com/2023/06/supreme-court-strikes-down-affirmative-action-programs-in-college-admissions/. "Timeline of Important EEOC Events." US EEOC, https://www.eeoc.gov/youth/timeline-important-eeoc-events. Accessed 5 July 2023. "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964." US EEOC, https://www.eeoc.gov/statutes/title-vii-civil-rights-act-1964. Accessed 5 July 2023. In the summer of 2020, readers asked us to examine widely shared Facebook posts that claimed the Kroger supermarket chain was refusing to give customers cash change, and thereby overcharging them.  One widely shared post from July 9 stated that: post "Kroger will no longer keep coins in the drawer. Starting tomorrow. We will take them, but we can't give change. You can round up to the nearest dollar and donate it to the food bank, or round up and it goes onto your Kroger card as a credit. So it begins ..."   One week later, Facebook users began sharing a post that purported to describe a contentious transaction and conversation at a Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois. The post claimed that, in light of a coin shortage, Kroger was rounding up the price of items to the next dollar, where a customer pays in cash, and then refusing to give out change, thus effectively overcharging customers: users began sharing post ... Stopped by Kroger today for just a gallon of milk. Seems due to this "Change Shortage", their new policy is to round every cash purchase UP to the next full dollar! I can even accept if they insisted on they could not "give" any coin back.It cost $2.41. I offered $2.50 payment. The clerk refused the quarters, explained "due to change shortage" policy & demanded another dollar instead. I offered the $2.50 again.Clerk: "Your total is $3.00."Me: The total is $2.41, which $2.50 adequately covers & I don't care to give up the 9 cent, but I do NOT accept being up charged 60 cent while you refuse to take the coins I am offering.Clerk: it's $3.00 So literally the clerk was insisting I pay the $3 or they were refusing the sale. WTF ?!?...   A nationwide coin shortage did take place in the summer of 2020, contrary to a prevalent conspiracy theory that falsely claimed the crisis was fabricated or manufactured in order to usher in a cashless economy as part of a broader push towards a "New World Order." That conspiracy theory reared its head in the Kroger post, which included the line, "This is how being FORCED into a Cashless economy begins!" did take place conspiracy theory Remarkably, it is not clear what Kroger's company policy was with regard to providing cash change to customers, at the time the Bourbonnais Facebook post was originally published, in the early hours of July 16.  Initially, a spokesperson for the company provided Snopes a statement which asserted that, in light of the ongoing nationwide coin shortage, Kroger was offering customers the option of receiving the amount of their change in the form of loyalty card credit or rounding up their total and donating the remainder to charity, as well as the existing options of paying by credit or debit card, or paying by cash and getting cash change. The statement read: "We remain committed to providing our customers with an uplifting shopping experience and the freedom and flexibility to choose their payment method, including cash, during this unprecedented time. The Federal Reserve is experiencing a significant coin shortage across the U.S., resulting from fewer coins being exchanged and spent during the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many retailers and businesses, we are adjusting to the temporary shortage in several ways while still accepting cash. "Customers can switch their payment type (e.g., use debit or credit vs. cash), and through our upgraded technology, we can now load coin change to their loyalty card for use during the next shopping trip, provide coin change at a lane with coins available or round up their order to support The Kroger Co. Zero Hunger | Zero Waste Foundation, a public charity committed to creating communities free of hunger and waste." [Emphasis is added.] However, after this fact check was first published, we became aware of contradictory public statements attributed to Kroger earlier in July. In a July 15 article, KABC-TV reported that Kroger had "announced this week that they will not be returning coin change to customers who pay with cash." The article attributed the following statement to the company: KABC-TV "Currently our stores are collecting donations... by allowing customers to round up their order total to the next dollar... For customers that choose not to donate, our cashiers will load the coin value due back through their loyalty card. Customers can redeem the amount on their next transaction. We know this is an inconvenience for our customers and we appreciate their patience." That statement made no mention of the continued possibility of customers receiving their coin change as coin change, an omission which naturally indicates that Kroger policy at that time was to not provide customers with coin change.  On July 10, a named company spokesperson appears to have told another news outlet that Kroger policy was to no longer give out coin change. WXIX reported that: "Kroger spokesperson Erin Rofles confirmed Friday the grocer will no longer return coin change to customers. Instead, the remainders from cash transactions will be applied to customers loyalty cards and automatically used on their next purchase." WXIX We asked Kroger to explain these glaring discrepancies in the company's various public articulations of its policy on coin change. A spokesperson said that the statement initially provided to Snopes (which asserted that company policy was to give customers the option of receiving coin change) was "first issued on July 13," suggesting the company had been consistent in its messaging on the subject. We found the same wording in a series of tweets the company sent to a customer on July 14. Nevertheless, the company also told KABC-TV the opposite in an article published the following day.  tweets In one particularly egregious example of the confusion surrounding Kroger's articulation of its policy, on July 14 the company actually posted two different sets of tweets in response to the same customer's inquiries on Twitter. In one pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that customers could either have their change loaded on to their loyalty card or donated to charity (no mention of coin change). In a second pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that the company could accept a credit or debit card as payment, or load the customer's change on to their loyalty card, or have it donated to charity, or they could "provide coin change at a lane with coins available."  sets of tweets The company spokesperson suggested to Snopes that news articles reporting that Kroger was no longer giving out coin change might have been based on signs that have been erected inside Kroger supermarkets. The spokesperson provided the following example, which reads: ATTENTION CUSTOMERS:The Federal Reserve is currently experiencing a coin shortage. Please consider Rounding Up for Zero Hunger ZeroWaste, using exact change or another form of payment. We apologize for any inconvenience this maycause and appreciate your help.   A sign that apologizes to customers for the inconvenience associated with an ongoing nationwide coin shortage, suggests three ways to avoid the need to provide change, and omits to mention that customers can still get their change in coin form is very obviously likely to create the perception that Kroger no longer gives out coin change.  We asked Kroger for exact details on whether, when and how its policy on coin change had changed; as well as whether, when, and how those changes had been communicated to Kroger's regional divisions, in-store employees, and paying customers. We will update this fact check if we receive a response to those questions.  In its initial statement to Snopes, Kroger gave us the clear impression that its policy on coin change was unambiguous, made no mention of any existing confusion or misinformation over that policy, and made no mention whatsoever that the company and its spokespersons had previously made directly contradictory public statements about that policy.  In reality, Kroger and its spokespersons had indeed issued contradictory and confusing public statements, and had done so before the original "Bourbonnais" Facebook post was published in the early hours of July 16. As a result, we are changing the rating in this fact check from "false" to "Mixture." It's not entirely clear what took place at the Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois, specifically, but it appears to have been at least similar to the description in the widely shared Facebook post. A spokesperson for the company told Snopes:  "The associate who engaged with this customer was newly trained to the cashier role and misunderstood the various ways were adapting to the temporary national coin shortage. It is an isolated event, and weve since coached the associate and contacted the customer." This appears to be a tacit admission by the company that, in the specific instance highlighted in the Facebook post, the cashier did incorrectly insist on receiving $3 in cash for the milk, but that this was not in keeping with the company's policy, although as we outlined above, the company's public articulation of its policy on coin change has not been consistent. The image of a receipt that accompanied the viral Facebook post was dated July 15, and indicates that the customer in question paid $3 in cash for a $2.41 container of milk (after tax). A line in the receipt labelled "change shortage" had $0.59 next to it, and the "change" line had 0.00 next to it. That indicates that the customer did not receive cash change.  Shortly after midnight on July 16, a person who lives near Bourbonnais, whose name we are withholding because their original Facebook post was private, published what appears to be the original version of the subsequently widely shared post. (That original version of the post began "Stopped by Kroger today" while versions published later began "Stopped by Kroger yesterday," and the edit history of the post shows that a photograph of the receipt that showed the name of the cashier was replaced with a photograph showing the cashier's name obscured -- both signs that the post was published by the customer in question).  We contacted that person, whose identity we verified. In an email to Snopes, that person reiterated the version of events presented in the original Facebook post. The customer clarified that it was not possible to purchase the milk with a debit or credit card because the patron lives on "a cash basis." To complicate matters further, on July 22 a Facebook page with the name "KROGER-Bourbonnais" published responses to the viral post, explaining that the company was "currently allocating the remaining change that you would typically receive after your purchase to your Kroger Loyalty Card," but later wrote that "we are not rounding up ... it was just a mistake of [sic] a cashier." explaining later Those posts were not written by an authentic Kroger company account, a spokesperson told Snopes, adding "Our social media team isnt affiliated with it." Mac Guill, Dan. "Did a Nationwide US Coin Shortage Occur in Summer 2020?"
  Snopes.com.  8 July 2020. Grider, Geoffrey.  "Remember the Psy-Op Called the Great Toilet Paper Shortage? Now We Are Pretending There's a National Coin Shortage ..."
  NowTheEndBegins.com.  11 July 2020. Updated [23 July 2020]: Rating changed from "false" to "Mixture." Article substantially updated to include Kroger's previous, contradictory public articulations of its policy on coin change.