risk

Edison blacks out more customers to stop utility-sparked fires

Southern California Edison has cut power to hundreds of thousands of its customers this year, more than ever before, as it attempts to stop its electric lines from sparking wildfires.

The utility has told communities in fire-prone areas in recent weeks that they should expect more of the power shutoffs than in prior years and that the outages could last for longer periods of time.

The Rosemead-based company said it had lowered the wind speed that triggers the blackouts, and added tens of thousands of customers to the areas subject to them, after the devastating Jan. 7 Eaton fire. The inferno, which killed 19 people in Altadena, ignited in high winds under an Edison transmission line.

“You should be ready for the power to cut off at any moment,” Ian Anderson, a government relations manager for Edison, told the Moorpark City Council at an October meeting. He urged residents to buy generators and said the utility doesn’t reimburse customers for spoiled food and other losses if it believes the blackouts were required by “an act of God.”

“But PSPS is not an act of God,” responded Moorpark Councilmember Renee Delgado, using the acronym for public safety power shutoffs. “It’s a choice SCE is making.”

Bar chart shows SoCal Edison customers that lost power. In 2025, 534,000 customers were de-energized, up from 137,000 in 2024.

For more than a decade, California utilities have used the shutoffs to stop their equipment from sparking fires. The intentional outages have become so established in California’s wildfire prevention plans that Edison now faces lawsuits saying that it failed to shut off some of its lines before the Eaton fire.

Yet in recent months, the utility has heard a chorus of complaints from communities including Moorpark and Malibu that it is blacking out customers even when the winds are calm. And the utility often has failed to warn people of the coming outages, making it impossible for them to prepare, according to filings at the state Public Utilities Commission.

“You guys have put us into a Third World situation,” Scott Dittrich, a resident of Malibu, said at a Sept. 30 meeting that the city had with Edison to address the shutoffs.

Kathleen Dunleavy, an Edison spokeswoman, said the company recognizes that “any power outage is a hardship.”

But the outages are needed because they have prevented fires in dangerous weather, she said. “Our commitment is to keeping our communities safe,” she added.

This year, Edison has cut off 534,000 customers to prevent fires, according to data it filed with state regulators. That’s almost four times the 137,000 customers subject to the blackouts in 2024.

Under state rules, utilities can use the outages only as a measure of last resort — when the risk of electrical equipment igniting a fire is greater than the dangerous hazards the blackouts cause.

Disconnecting a neighborhood or city can cause far more than just inconvenience.

Traffic lights no longer work, causing perilous intersections. During a Dec. 10 outage in Moorpark, a utility truck failed to stop at a nonworking light on State Route 118, crashing into a sedan. The driver was injured and had to be extracted from the truck by emergency responders, according to the city’s report to state regulators.

The shutoffs also leave residents who have medical problems without the use of needed devices and refrigerators to store medications.

And they can cut off communication, stopping residents from getting evacuation warnings and other emergency messages.

During the Eaton and Palisades fires, the power shutoffs, as well as outages caused by wind and fire damage, “significantly disrupted the effectiveness of evacuation messaging,” according to a recent review of Los Angeles County’s emergency performance.

In the last three months of last year, Edison received 230 reports of traffic accidents, people failing to get needed medical care and other safety problems tied to the shutoffs, according to the company’s reports.

Dunleavy said Edison turned off the power only when staff believed the risk of fire exceeded the outages’ consequences.

Nonetheless, Alice Reynolds, president of the Public Utilities Commission, told Edison last month that she had “serious concern” about how the utility was leaving more customers in the dark.

Reynolds wrote in a letter to Steve Powell, the utility’s chief executive, that records showed that the company de-energized not just a record number of residential customers in January, but also more than 10,000 crucial facilities such as hospitals. The longest blackout lasted for 15 days, she said.

“There is no question that power outages — particularly those that are large scale and extended over many days — can cause significant hardship to customers, jeopardizing the safety of customers with medical needs who rely on electricity and disrupting businesses, critical facilities, and schools,” she wrote.

Reynolds said she would require Edison executives to hold biweekly meetings with state regulators where they must show how they planned to limit the scope and duration of the blackouts and improve their notifications to customers of coming shutoffs.

Powell wrote back to her, acknowledging “that our execution of PSPS events has not always met expectations.”

“SCE remains committed to improving its PSPS program to help customers prepare for potential de-energizations and reduce the impacts,” he wrote.

Since 2019, Edison has charged billions of dollars to customers for wildfire prevention work, including increased equipment inspections and the installation of insulated wires, which it said would reduce the need for the shutoffs.

Just four months before the Eaton fire, at an annual safety meeting, Edison executives told state regulators that the utility’s fire mitigation work had been so successful that it had sharply reduced the number of shutoffs, while also decreasing the risk of a catastrophic wildfire by as much as 90%.

A year later, at this year’s annual safety meeting in August, those risk reduction estimates were gone from the company’s presentation. Instead, Edison executives said they expected the number of shutoffs to increase this year by 20% to 40%. They added that the average size of the areas subject to the outages could be twice as large as last year.

The executives blamed “below average rainfall and extended periods of high winds” for increasing the risk that the company’s equipment could start a fire.

“The weather is getting more difficult for us,” Jill Anderson, Edison’s chief operating officer, said at the meeting.

Some customers have questioned whether the utility’s increasingly unreliable electricity lines should be solely blamed on the weather. They say the shutoffs have seemed more and more random.

The Acton Town Council told the utilities commission in January that Edison was blacking out residents when dangerous conditions “do not exist.”

At the same time, the council wrote, Edison had cut power to neighborhoods served by wires that had been undergrounded, an expensive upgrade that Edison has said would prevent the need for the shutoffs.

Edison’s Dunleavy said that although the Acton homes in those neighborhoods were served by underground lines, they were connected to a circuit that had overhead lines, requiring them to be turned off.

“We try to reroute as much as possible to minimize disruptions,” she said.

At the Moorpark City Council meeting, residents spoke of how the repeated outages, some lasting for days, had caused children to miss school and businesses to close their doors and lose revenue.

The residents also spoke of how their electric bills continued to rise as they had spent more days in the dark.

Joanne Carnes, a Moorpark resident, told Anderson, Edison’s government relations manager, that her last monthly bill was $421.

“Why are we paying more than a car payment,” she asked, “for a service that is not able to provide power?”

Source link

Trump’s Tariffs Put Africa’s Key Economies at Risk

US tariffs are hitting African exports hard. Now, governments and businesses must devise a Plan B to expand trade and grow their economies.

US President Donald Trump is not an Africa enthusiast; he has mocked Lesotho as a place “nobody has ever heard of ” and has never set foot on the continent.

In July, however, Africans were hopeful that Trump was mellowing. At a summit in Washington with the presidents of five African nations, he announced a shift from “aid to trade” in US efforts to strengthen ties with the continent.

Pivoting US-Africa relations toward trade and investment to foster self-reliance and mutual prosperity and move away from traditional aid dependency was critical, Trump said. He had already dismantled USAID, the principal US foreign aid agency, leaving a trail of negative social effects on the continent.

Many took this seeming pledge to expand trade with skepticism. And a few weeks later, Trump unveiled the Reciprocal Tariff Rate, sending shockwaves across 22 African nations suddenly slapped with duties ranging from 15% to 30%, that started on August 7.

South Africa, Algeria, and Libya were the worst hit, their tariffs set at 30%, while Tunisia got a rate of 25%. Tiny Lesotho and crisis-ridden Chad and Equatorial Guinea were not spared as their new rates hit 15%.

Bintu Zahara Sakor, a doctoral researcher at Norway’s Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), notes the contraction of promising more trade with Africa and then imposing punitive tariffs that are bound to be damaging to the continent.


“Diversification could empower Africa to dictate its trade narratives.”

Zahara Sakor, PRIO


“This mixed messaging creates uncertainty for African businesses and investors,” she says. The endgame is stifling the very trade the US purports to promote.

The Biggest Economies In The Crosshairs

While targeting only about half of the continent’s countries, two of its biggest economies, South Africa (30%) and Nigeria (15%), are on the list. Most of the others are grappling with extreme poverty and challenges of job creation. Among them is Botswana (15%), whose economy is in a recession.

By the numbers, African exports to the US are not substantial, accounting for only 1.5% of the continent’s collective GDP. Africa’s $34 billion of exports to the US are a mere 1.2% of total US imports and a drop in the ocean when juxtaposed with Washington’s $3.2 trillion global trade volume.

But the numbers don’t tell the whole story. For the past 25 years, US-Africa trade relations were defined primarily by duty-free access under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA). With his new tariff schedule, Trump has discarded AGOA, damaging the prospects for future exports cutting across automobiles, machinery, textiles, apparel, minerals, and agricultural products, among others.

“What we are witnessing under Trump is US imperialism,” argues Patrick Bond, professor of sociology at South Africa’s University of Johannesburg. The damages the tariffs inflict on the continent will be immense, he predicts.

Case in point is South Africa. The US is its second-largest trading partner after China, and its agricultural and automobile manufacturing industries bear the brunt of the tariffs. According to data from NAAMSA, South Africa’s auto industry lobbying group, the US is the third-largest destination for the country’s auto exports. South Africa shipped approximately $1.9 billion worth of vehicles to the US market in 2024, accounting for 6.5% of total exports. Owing to tariffs, however, auto exports have plummeted by an average of 60% this year.

South Africa is warning that a staggering 100,000 jobs are at risk from the new duties, devastating for a country with a 33% unemployment rate and where crime is among the highest globally. The only bright spot is the exemption of platinum, gold, and other minerals, which will continue to be zero-rated.

The situation is worse in Lesotho, which ranks among the poorest nations in the world with youth joblessness at 48%. The government has declared a “state of disaster,” reckoning the US tariffs will devastate the textile and apparels industry, which employs 40,000 people.

Lesotho is one of Africa’s largest garment exporters to the US, thanks to the AGOA. In 2024, it exported goods worth a cumulative $237.2 million to the US market, 75% of that garment exports. The industry accounts for roughly 20% of GDP.

Devising A Plan B

Trump’s tariffs call for “swift policy responses” to safeguard the continent’s long-term economic prospects, Sakor urges. The AGOA was set to expire on September 30; while Congress holds the power to renew it, the current administration is not concealing its aversion to the pact. With the new tariffs, the era of regional duty-free market access under the AGOA is over. In its place, Washington wants a shift toward bilateral deals that extract concessions like market access for US goods or alignment on geopolitical issues.

“US-Africa trade relations may become more fragmented and conditional, focusing on select ‘friendly’ nations with lower tariffs or new free trade agreements [FTAs],” Sakor says. Countries like Morocco, which has a binding FTA with the US, and Kenya, which is currently negotiating one, were among those spared the backlash.

Bintu Zahara Sakor, a doctoral researcher at PRIO

With the US playing hard ball, Africa is at a point where it must devise a Plan B for future trade policy. One starting point could be deepening intra-Africa trade by accelerating implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA).

On paper, AfCFTA has the potential to boost intracontinental trade to 53% from around 18% currently, growing the manufacturing sector by $1 trillion, generating income worth $470 billion, and creating a whopping 14 million jobs by 2035, according to the African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank).

Six years after the agreement was signed, however, the continent has yet to record any tangible benefits. Last year, trade was valued at $208 billion, a 7.7% increase from 2024, according to Afreximbank. Compounding the difficulties are disintegrating regional economic community blocs and rising non-tariff barriers.

“AfCFTA is encouraging in theory, but has not yet delivered mutually advantageous market opportunities,” observes Bond. For this reason, Africa could be forced onto a different course of action: strengthening trade ties with China while exploring opportunities in other global markets.

Over the past 25 years, China has risen to become Africa’s largest trading partner. Last year, trade with the people’s republic was valued at $294.3 billion, a staggering increase from $13.9 billion in 2000, according to Chinese government data. The amount dwarfs US-Africa twoway trade, which was valued at $104.9 billion in 2024.

Chinese engagement has been a mixed blessing. Beijing has flooded Africa with cheap goods, rendering nascent industries uncompetitive. This, combined with the lessons of Washington’s volatile behavior, suggests that the continent needs to cultivate balanced and reciprocal agreements with multiple trading partners.

“Diversification could empower Africa to dictate its trade narrative,” Sakor says, arguing that this is critical if the continent is to foster sustainable growth outside of unilateral preferences like AGOA. The European Union, Russia, India, Japan, South Korea, and the Middle East are some of the markets that offer Africa opportunities for deeper trade ties, Sakor notes.

Africa must decide whether to accept the higher US tariffs as the cost of doing business, build its ties further with China and Russia, or take a more diverse approach. The latter two, obviously, would only alienate the continent further from Washington.

Source link

State emergency officials say new rules and delays for FEMA grants put disaster response at risk

State officials on the front lines of preparing for natural disasters and responding to emergencies say severe cuts to federal security grants, restrictions on money intended for readiness and funding delays tied to litigation are posing a growing risk to their ability to respond to crises.

It’s all causing confusion, frustration and concern. The federal government shutdown isn’t helping.

“Every day we remain in this grant purgatory reduces the time available to responsibly and effectively spend these critical funds,” said Kiele Amundson, communications director at the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency.

The uncertainty has led some emergency management agencies to hold off on filling vacant positions and make rushed decisions on important training and purchases.

Experts say the developments complicate state-led emergency efforts, undermining the Republican administration’s stated goals of shifting more responsibility to states and local governments for disaster response.

In an emailed statement, the Department of Homeland Security said the new requirements were necessary because of “recent population shifts” and that changes to security grants were made “to be responsive to new and urgent threats facing our nation.”

A new wrinkle tied to immigration raids

Several DHS and FEMA grants help states, tribes and territories prepare for climate disasters and deter a variety of threats. The money pays for salaries and training, and such things as vehicles, communications equipment and software.

State emergency managers say that money has become increasingly important because the range of threats they must prepare for is expanding, including pandemics and cyberattacks.

FEMA, a part of DHS, divided a $320 million Emergency Management Performance Grant among states on Sept. 29. But the next day, it told states the money was on hold until they submitted new population counts. The directive demanded that they omit people “removed from the State pursuant to the immigration laws of the United States” and to explain their methodology.

The amount of money distributed to the states is based on U.S. census population data. The new requirement forcing states to submit revised counts “is something we have never seen before,” said Trina Sheets, executive director of the National Emergency Management Association, a group representing emergency managers. “It’s certainly not the responsibility of emergency management to certify population.”

With no guidance on how to calculate the numbers, Hawaii’s Amundson said staff scrambled to gather data from the 2020 census and other sources, then subtracted he number of “noncitizens” based on estimates from an advocacy group.

They are not sure the methodology will be accepted. But with their FEMA contacts furloughed and the grant portal down during the federal shutdown, they cannot find out. Other states said they were assessing the request or awaiting further guidance.

In its statement, DHS said FEMA needs to be certain of its funding levels before awarding grant money, and that includes updates to a state’s population due to deportations.

Experts said delays caused by the request could most affect local governments and agencies that receive grant money passed down by states because their budgets and staffs are smaller. At the same time, FEMA also reduced the time frame that recipients have to spend the money, from three years to one. That could prevent agencies from taking on longer-term projects.

Bryan Koon, president and CEO of the consulting firm IEM and a former Florida emergency management chief, said state governments and local agencies need time to adjust their budgets to any kind of changes.

“An interruption in those services could place American lives in jeopardy,” he said.

Grant programs tied up by litigation

In another move that has caused uncertainty, FEMA in September drastically cut some states’ allocations from another source of funding. The $1 billion Homeland Security Grant Program is supposed to be based on assessed risks, and states pass most of the money to police and fire departments.

New York received $100 million less than it expected, a 79% reduction, while Illinois saw a 69% reduction. Both states are politically controlled by Democrats. Meanwhile, some territories received unexpected windfalls, including the U.S. Virgin Islands, which got more than twice its expected allocation.

The National Emergency Management Association said the grants are meant to be distributed based on risk and that it “remains unclear what risk methodology was used” to determine the new funding allocation.

After a group of Democratic states challenged the cuts in court, a federal judge in Rhode Island issued a temporary restraining order on Sept. 30. That forced FEMA to rescind award notifications and refrain from making payments until a further court order.

The freeze “underscores the uncertainty and political volatility surrounding these awards,” said Frank Pace, administrator of the Hawaii Office of Homeland Security. The Democratic-controlled state received more money than expected, but anticipates the bonus being taken away with the lawsuit.

In Hawaii, where a 2023 wildfire devastated the Maui town of Lahaina and killed more than 100 people, the state, counties and nonprofits “face the real possibility” of delays in paying contractors, completing projects and “even staff furloughs or layoffs” if the grant freeze and government shutdown continue, he said.

The myriad setbacks prompted Washington state’s Emergency Management Division to pause filling some positions “out of an abundance of caution,” communications director Karina Shagren said.

A series of delays and cuts disrupts state-federal partnership

Emergency management experts said the moves have created uncertainty for those in charge of preparedness.

The Trump administration has suspended a $3.6 billion FEMA disaster resilience program, cut the FEMA workforce and disrupted routine training.

Other lawsuits also are complicating decision-making. A Manhattan federal judge last week ordered DHS and FEMA to restore $34 million in transit security grants it had withheld from New York City because of its immigration policies.

Another judge in Rhode Island ordered DHS to permanently stop imposing grant conditions tied to immigration enforcement, after ruling in September that the conditions were unlawful — only to have DHS again try to impose them.

Taken together, the turbulence surrounding what was once a reliable partner is prompting some states to prepare for a different relationship with FEMA.

“Given all of the uncertainties,” said Sheets, of the National Emergency Management Association, states are trying to find ways to be “less reliant on federal funding.”

Angueira writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Is IBM’s Stock at Risk for a Tariff Downturn?

With “International” literally in its name, you’d think IBM would be panicking about tariffs. Think again — the numbers tell a different story.

Trade tariffs are mixing up the global economy in 2025. The Trump administration has issued double-digit import fees on goods from most countries, with even higher rates in markets like China and India. Some of these tariffs are currently in effect, while others are pending, with a patchwork of countermeasures issued by the targeted countries. To keep an eye on this messy situation, check out The Motley Fool’s tariff and trade investigation tracker — a living document that does all the hard data-tracking work for you.

Few companies are more international than IBM (IBM 1.82%) — Big Blue even has “international” in its name. It runs research labs on six continents, has more employees in India than the United States, and runs business offices in more than 170 countries. Almost exactly half of IBM’s revenues were collected in the Americas in 2024, which also includes Canada and Latin America.

Surely this global giant must feel the pinch from criss-crossing tariff policies, right? As it turns out, IBM isn’t too concerned with the ongoing trade tensions.

A hand dressed in an American-flag sleeve blocks several trade containers featuring various international flags.

Image source: Getty Images.

How exposed is IBM to the tariff tango?

There are different ways to figure out IBM’s tariff exposure. I could take the complicated web of current and future tariff rates, apply them to each of IBM’s products and services in various countries, and create an intimidating spreadsheet. Or I could look for management’s statements about the tariff challenge.

The company helped me out by addressing the unpredictable tariff policies in the first-quarter earnings call. This call took place on April 23, three weeks after Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariff announcement.

“Over the last several years, we have strategically diversified and streamlined our supply chain,” said CFO Jim Kavanaugh. “Goods imported to the U.S. represent less than 5% of our overall spend and under current U.S. tariff policy, the impact to IBM is minimal.”

Why IBM shrugs at tariff headlines

That brief statement means a couple of things to me:

  • It’s IBM’s only official discussion of tariffs in 2025, even though the trade expenses have shifted significantly since April. In other words, the tariff issue is hardly worth mentioning.
  • Applying tariff rates to “less than 5%” of IBM’s global spending is not exactly nothing, of course. I’d hate to cover that multimillion-dollar bill from my personal accounts. IBM still builds mainframe computers, requiring parts from tariff-laden countries like China or the European Union. But the cost of products and services stopped at 16.3% of total revenues last year, and 5% of that gross expense ratio is less than 1% of IBM’s incoming revenues. Even if every tariff were a beefy 100% surcharge, that’s a pretty manageable extra cost — and most of the international trade fees are far smaller.

IBM plays it safe anyway

I’m still waiting for IBM to issue further updates about the tariff situation, but I’m not holding my breath in anticipation. Yes, the company is tremendously global, but it can still operate comfortably without running into game-changing tariff expenses.

At the same time, IBM is taking action to minimize even this modest financial impact. Kavanaugh also noted that IBM is looking into alternative sources for tariff-laden components. Every dollar counts, you know.

Furthermore, Big Blue announced a $150 billion American investment plan at the end of April. The company will move significant manufacturing and research assets to domestic soil over the next five years, starting with $30 billion of mainframe development and quantum computing research operations. Again, the tariffs don’t really hurt, but it can’t be a bad idea to minimize the financial sting anyway. Plus, this homebound manufacturing move might unlock unrelated favors from the Trump team.

So, it makes sense to take some tariff-dodging action, but IBM would barely notice the extra costs anyhow. I don’t expect Big Blue to suffer a tariff-related downturn any time soon.

Anders Bylund has positions in International Business Machines. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends International Business Machines. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Source link

Hailey Bieber and Selena Gomez risk awkward run at glam Hollywood gala just HOURS after exchanging ‘swipes’ 

SELENA Gomez and Hailey Bieber risked an awkward run in at a glam Hollywood gala, just hours after the women exchanged swipes. 

Hailey, who’s married to the singer’s ex, Justin Bieber, appeared to throw shade at Selena’s Rare Beauty brand this week. 

SELENA Gomez and Hailey Bieber risked an awkward run in at a glam Hollywood galaCredit: Getty
It came just hours after the women exchanged swipesCredit: Getty
Selena attended the event alongside husband Benny BlancoCredit: Getty

The 28-year-old Rhode Beauty founder told WSJ Magazine she “doesn’t feel competitive with people she’s not inspired by”.

On Saturday, Selena, 33, spoke out, penning a post on her Instagram before quickly deleting it.

“She can say what she wants, it doesn’t affect my life whatsoever,” she snapped.

Just hours after Selena’s post, the two women appeared at the 2025 Academy Museum Gala in LA

Read More on Selena Gomez

SAVAGE SWIPE

Selena Gomez hits back at Hailey Bieber saying ‘she can say what she wants’

They both stunned on the carpet as they posed for photos. 

Hailey opted for a brown corset dress and attended the glamorous event alongside best pal Kendall Jenner

She arrived shortly after Selena, who is Justin’s ex girlfriend, rocked up to the carpet. 

Selena looked sensational in a floor length black gown, and attended with husband Benny Blanco. 

Selena’s now-deleted statement continued: “It’s just about relevance not intelligence. Be kind. All brands inspire me.

“There is room for everyone. And hopefully we can all stop.”

On Hailey, she still urged fans to “leave the girl alone”.

Hailey and Justin tied the knot in 2018 and welcomed their son Jack in 2024.

Selena previously dated Justin on and off from around 2010, with the two girls embroiled in constant feud rumors.

They attempted to put the nastiness to bed in 2022 by posing for a snap together, but fans still aren’t convinced.

In June, they noticed that Hailey and Selena unfollowed each other on Instagram.

Speaking in her WSJ interview, Hailey referenced the comparisons again, saying: “It’s always annoying being pitted against other people.

SOAP ROMANCE

Max Bowden snogs ex-Corrie actress Katie McGlynn on ‘very intimate’ night out


HORROR ORDEAL

I haven’t peed for 18 months & NEVER will after UTI left me feeling suicidal

“I didn’t ask for that. When people want to see you a certain way and they’ve made up a story about you in their minds, it’s not up to you to change that.”

It comes after Selena tied the knot with her husband Benny Blanco last month.

Selena deleted her post on Instagram, shortly after posting what appeared to be a response to Hailey

Source link

Air passengers warned packing viral flight snack in hand luggage could risk £5,000 fine

A TikTok user has shared a ‘travel hack’ that shows how to get an açaí bowl through security – but experts have warned that it could result in a hefty fine

Social media platforms, particularly TikTok, have become a hub for so-called “travel hacks.”

Holidaymakers often turn to these online content creators for tips on how to make the most of their flights and hotel stays.

However, much of the advice found online should be taken with a pinch of salt, especially if it doesn’t come from a qualified expert.

This has been the case with one passenger’s video, which has caught the attention of travellers worldwide and has now been viewed over a million times.

In the clip, she reveals how she manages to get her açaí bowl past security: by freezing it before packing it in her hand luggage, reports Chronicle Live.

The post sparked confusion in the comments section, with one viewer asking: “Wait, how did you get this through security?”, and another warning, “Pretty sure this is still considered a liquid.”

Now, travel experts are weighing in – and they have one clear warning.

According to Amanda Parker, spokesperson for Netflights, freezing açaí bowls or similar liquids to bypass security screening isn’t just ineffective – it could result in your snack being confiscated or, worse, a hefty fine.

“According to official government guidelines, you’re not allowed to carry frozen items in your hand luggage,” explained the travel specialist.

Even though this açaí bowl is frozen, it’s still considered a liquid and security will treat it as a liquid. “Your treat may start to thaw when you pass through airport security, and if it exceeds the 100 ml liquid limit, it’ll be going straight in the bin. Plus, the spillage while you carry it, not worth the hassle.”

Mary Berry’s twist to ‘marry me’ chicken makes it juicer and sweeter with 1 ingredient

Apple cake with sultanas is an easy and quick weekend bake

Furthermore, the risk continues beyond security, as the contents of the bowl could also cause issues at customs for those returning to the UK. Many popular toppings and ingredients, including dairy, seeds, and fresh fruit, breach UK border regulations.

“There are restrictions on bringing food back to the UK, too. Meat, dairy, fish, fruit, veg, nuts and seeds are all no-nos,” Amanda warned. “You could face a £5,000 fine if you break these rules. Since açaí bowls are typically topped with nuts, seeds, and dairy, it’s crucial not to freeze your açaí bowl for your flight back to the UK, as you could pay the price.”

Source link

Major supermarket chain set to close branch with another 34 stores at risk after ‘struggling financially’

A MAJOR supermarket chain is set to close one of its branches soon, with another 34 also on the way out.

The food store announced the “difficult decision” it has made to close the store next month.

The Co-operative Food store in Ashby.

1

Co-op has confirmed the date of its Leicestershire store closureCredit: Google

Co-op in Leicestershire’s Derby Road in Ashby-de-la-Zouch will permanently close its doors on Saturday, November 22.

A statement from a Co-op spokesperson read: ” ‘Our store in Ashby-de-la-Zouch will close next month.

“Our priority is to fully support colleagues, who have been informed.

“We would like to thank the community for its support of this store.”

The supermarket giant has come under some fire for some time now for having two of its stores in close proximity with the Ashby Town Centre.

This came after the Central Co-op moved from the top of Market Street to near the existing Co-op.

The spokesperson added: “We carry-out reviews of our existing store locations, and, sometimes, only after very careful consideration, we take the difficult decision to close a store.”

The Central Co-op will remain open, with the next nearest one approximately three miles away in Moira, Swadlincote, Derbyshire.

It comes as the supermarket could shutter another 34 of its stores due to financial struggles.

The Sun previously reported that stores in Braintree, Chelmsford, Basildon, Thurrock and Southend are among other locations that are at risk.

Co-op Faces Uncertain Future: 34 Stores at Risk Amid Financial Struggles

Chelmsford Star Co-op said it is “struggling financially” and needs to merge with the larger Central Co-op society.

Issues are also said to have been “exacerbated” by increases in National Insurance contributions and the living wage.

Late last year, Co-op announced plans for a “portfolio reshape” which included relocation of stores.

The Co-operative has over 7,000 registered branches owned by 17 million members, and is reported to contribute around £35 billion annually to the British economy.

Co-op as an organisation organisation has, like most companies, been hit by the cost of living.

In December last year it was announced 19 Co-operative stores would be shut down across the UK due to “financial sustainability issues”.

The locations, based in various areas around Central England, include Leicestershire, YorkshireNorfolk and the West Midlands.

B&M bought three of the 19 stores, while Samy Ltd, a convenience retailer, snapped up 16.

OTHER CO-OP NEWS

This comes as Co-op is rolling out a major change to stores across the country.

The supermarket giant is replacing paper product tags with electronic labels throughout its whole estate over the coming months.

The retailer has already made the change in 340 branches but will roll out the tags more widely.

The chain said 1,500 stores will have the labels by the end of the year and will be rolled out across all its nearly 2,400 by the end of 2026.

The electronic labels are designed and created by VusionGroup, which also works with Asda.

Steven Logue, Co-op’s head of operations, said: “With convenience at the heart of everything we do Co-op is committed to continually exploring innovative technology that can improve how we operate.”

Co-op said the new electronic labels will show allergen and nutritional information and products’ country of origin, as well as deals and savings.

How to save money on your supermarket shop

THERE are plenty of ways to save on your grocery shop.

You can look out for yellow or red stickers on products, which show when they’ve been reduced.

If the food is fresh, you’ll have to eat it quickly or freeze it for another time.

Making a list should also save you money, as you’ll be less likely to make any rash purchases when you get to the supermarket.

Going own brand can be one easy way to save hundreds of pounds a year on your food bills too.

This means ditching “finest” or “luxury” products and instead going for “own” or value” type of lines.

Plenty of supermarkets run wonky veg and fruit schemes where you can get cheap prices if they’re misshapen or imperfect.

For example, Lidl runs its Waste Not scheme, offering boxes of 5kg of fruit and vegetables for just £1.50.

If you’re on a low income and a parent, you may be able to get up to £442 a year in Healthy Start vouchers to use at the supermarket too.

Plus, many councils offer supermarket vouchers as part of the Household Support Fund.

Source link