Given a paragraph, generate a claim that is supported by the given paragraph. 1) The claim must contain information from within the paragraph. 2) A sentence within the paragraph can be used as a claim. 3) The claim should not have contradictions within the paragraph. 4) The claim should be at most one sentence long.

Example Input: Central to the plan to protect the city, some or all of the 78 barriers will one day be raised when the sea rises more than 110 centimeters (43 inches), to prevent damaging high tides from pushing into the lagoon city, a world heritage site built picturesquely — but somewhat precariously — upon more than 120 islands. Concerns that high tides are becoming more frequent because of climate change have increased the urgency. While the concept is simple, its realization has been anything but. The system of movable underwater barriers, dubbed Moses, has been beset by corruption, cost overruns and delays. Projected at 1.8 billion euros ($2 billion) and meant to be completed by 2011, the project has so far cost 5.5 billion euros and is running a decade behind schedule. In the wake of last month’s flooding of Venice, the worst in 53 years, the consortium that oversees construction of Moses is eager to demonstrate that the project — after years of bad news — is on track and will be fully operational by the end of 2021. Venetians say they cannot afford to be wrong. Skeptics and critics say they may be. A recent test of the deepest expanse of barriers — at the Malamocco entrance to the lagoon — was declared a success by the New Venice Consortium. It was the last of the four sections of barriers to be completely raised — but so far only in calm seas. The real test will come when all four are raised at once, and not only in serene waters, but under flood conditions. That isn’t scheduled to take place until the end of next year. It took six years to test each of the four movable sea walls covering the three openings to the lagoon, partly because work was slowed by a 2014 corruption scandal that implicated the three main contractors and sent 35 people to jail. Work is continuing largely with the original subcontractors now contracting directly with the consortium, which itself has been placed under government control as a result of the scandal. The fact that the barriers have not yet been physically tested in rough seas is a concern to critics. Paolo Vielmo, an offshore marine engineer who has long criticized the project, said that tests carried out in a laboratory in the Netherlands in the 1990s indicated that the barriers, under certain conditions, would oscillate out of control — possibly even breaking apart. “Its behavior is not predictable,’’ Vielmo said. He said that the trials so far declared successful have been under only modest sea conditions that fail to represent anywhere near the threat of the phenomenon of extreme oscillation called subharmonic resonance. Vielmo and two other offshore engineers have compiled a report for the Codacons consumer and environment protection advocacy group, which is asking officials to run additional calculations to see if the project is indeed viable. And if it is not, Codacons says Moses should be stopped. “We don’t want to delay by one minute the possibility to make Moses operational. But we say we cannot make it operational until we are sure it will work,’’ said Franco Conte, president of Codacons in Venice. “Naturally, the Venetian community is exasperated and they say, ‘If we did 95%, let’s do 100% and see if that works.’ But that is unconscionable. If we don’t know if it works, we cannot experiment.”  The barrier system is made up of giant flood gates, each 20 meters (66 feet) long. The gates are attached by hinges to giant cement blocks placed on the seabed along the three openings from the sea into the lagoon, Malamocco, Chioggia and the Lido. The gates can be lifted to create a temporary barrier in high tides. Once the water has receded, they can be lowered again — allowing shipping traffic to continue and for the tidal system to flush out the lagoon. The idea behind the project was to create a mobile system that would not impede views of the unique and protected landscape. But Moses has suffered criticism from the start that there were simpler, cheaper systems that could have been deployed. Venetians have been waiting since the record 1.94-meter (6.36-foot) flood of 1966 for a system to protect them from regular inundations. The flooding in November, the second-worst recorded, proved the urgency. In the 150 years that they have been recording the tide levels in Venice, two high tides above 1.5 meters have never been recorded in a year. In November, there were three in one week. Climate scientists note that exceptional tides — those over 1.4 meters — have become much more frequent in the past two decades, with more than half of all recorded occurring since 2000. “One has to realize the kind of existential question that that serious flooding has given rise to,” said Jane Da Mosto, an environmental scientist and executive director of the non-profit group We Are Here Venice, which is working to defend the city against myriad issues, including depopulation, cruise traffic through St. Mark’s basin and overtourism. “People are asking: will Venice be defendable against these kinds of episodes?’’  It’s not just the still-uncalculated damage to landmarks like St. Mark’s Basilica, where corrosive salt water creeps through porous brick and tile. It’s also the boxes of ruined belongings and piles of soaked mattresses discarded in alleyways and loaded onto motorboats and trash barges for disposal. The relentlessness of the Venetian fall and winter tides make one-third of ground floors uninhabitable in the historic canal city. “I am very old, I cannot say that I want to die, but I certainly do not want to be witness to the fact that it does not work,” 84-year-old resident Paola Scarpa said of the Moses barriers, as she walked to check on a family property in the Canareggio neighborhood on a recent December morning. “It would be a pain too great.”  ___  Associated Press journalist Trisha Thomas contributed to this report.
Example Output: Venice tide barriers pass another test but skeptics remain.

Example Input: On July 10 2020, a number of Facebook users shared posts like the one below — purportedly screenshots from the profile of a user, Richard Rose, who initially adopted the position of a “COVID denier” before dying from it on July 4 2020:Circulating Posts About Richard Rose’s Posts and DeathIn the post above, four chronological posts attributed to Rose appeared, alongside the following status update from the poster:There’s obviously no shortage of people who believe that following COVID-19 protocols makes you look weak. The insecurity and ignorance that fuels these outspoken acts of bravado are a separate conversation, but If you have a moment, please follow the last three months in the life of Richard Rose: https://www.facebook.com/rickrose2007In a post dated April 28 2020, Rose was quoted as refusing to buy or wear a mask, vowing not to buy into that “damn hype.” On June 12 2020, a post captured Rose’s check-in to “Put-in-Bay, South Bass Island” in Ohio — alongside a remark that it was “not that packed lol.”Two posts attributed to Rose were dated July 1 2020, the first of which was about Rose’s illness in the preceding days. In the second, Rose disclosed he was quarantined for fourteen days after testing positive for COVID-19.A fifth and final screenshot included a smiling photograph of a genial-looking man and the words “Richard Rose, III Obituary.” Visible in that image were the dates of Rose’s birth and death: July 25 1982 and July 4 2020.A similar collection of screenshots shared by the page “Guess what he says next” on July 10 2020 was shared thousands of times in just a few hours. In place of the two July 1 2020 posts, a single July 2 2020 post attributed to Rose was included:On July 7 2020, somebody claiming to be a friend of Rose’s wrote:This was my friend Richard Rose. Rick was diagnosed with COVID-19 on July 1. Rick lost his life 3 days later on July 4th. Rick was healthy as far as we know and was only in his 30’s. Rick was like a lot of my friends, and didn’t feel the need to wear a mask because he was young and healthy. Please know that this virus is real. Just because you don’t personally know someone effected yet doesn’t mean it’s not real.Rick Rose’s Facebook PagePosts seen in the screenshots were available and initially open to comments on public posts. It appeared that Rose’s Facebook page was memorialized at some point on July 10 2020, judging by the amount of activity to that date — a flood of engagement which ceased when the page was memorialized.On April 28 2020, Rose posted the status commonly shared first in the circulating posts, in which he said “I’m not buying a fucking mask,” and “I’ve made it this far by not buying into that damn hype”:On June 13 2020, Rose commented “it’s not that packed lol” on his check-in post:On June 29 2020, Rose expressed concern Halloween might “not happen” in 2020:The posts seen from July 1 and 2 2020 also were visible on Rose’s timeline:Rose’s final post appeared on July 3 2020, a meme that read:When you see me in heaven don’t shit yourselves you judgmental pricks.Comments on the post between July 4 2020 and July 7 2020 appeared to be solely from Rose’s friends, expressing shock and grief at his death. On July 10 2020, a number of new comments — apparently spurred by posts about his comments and death — appeared:Does he still think it’s a hoax though?An Obituary for Richard Rose IIICrosser Funeral Home in Port Clinton, Ohio published an obituary for Rose, archived here. It confirmed the cause of Rose’s death and included details about his life:Richard Donald Rose, III July 25, 1982 – July 4, 2020 Born in Port Clinton, Ohio Resided in Port Clinton, OhioRichard Donald Rose, III, 37, of Port Clinton passed away Saturday, July 4, 2020 due to complications of Covid-19 at his home. He was born July 25, 1982 in Port Clinton. He graduated from Port Clinton High School. He served his country in the United States Army for nine years serving two tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. He enjoyed social media, online streaming, paranormal and his two cats Dale and Tucker. He was a fan of NASCAR, Dirt Track Racing and Georgia Bulldogs Football. Surviving are his mother and step-father: Tina and Kenny Heschel of Port Clinton; sister: Krystal Campbell of Genoa; brother: K. C. Heschel of Concord, NC; half-sister: Melissa Rose of Port Clinton. He was preceded in death by his grandparents: Carl and Marla Kessler, Cooper and Janice Heschel, Richard Rose, Mildred DeBlase. Funeral services will be conducted 11:00 am Wednesday, July 8, 2020 at Neidecker, Crosser & Priesman Funeral Home & Cremation Service, 1124 Fulton St. Port Clinton, OH where visitation will be held Tuesday from 2:00 – 4:00 and 6:00 – 8:00pm. Interment will be at Riverview Cemetery, Port Clinton, OH. Memorial contributions may be given to the family. Online condolences may be shared with the family at www.neideckercrosserpriesman.com[. ]SummaryIt is true that a man named Richard Rose (who appeared to go by “Rick”) published a Facebook post in April 2020, expressing his belief that the use of masks to cut down on COVID-19 transmission was “damn hype.” We did not find extensive posting from Rose about the pandemic. It is further true that Rose posted about his illness on July 1 and 2 2020, and he died of complications from COVID-19 on July 4 2020. His last post referenced “heaven,” but chronologically he appeared to go from viewing his diagnosis as an inconvenience on July 1 2020 to dying three days later. Rose’s page was memorialized on the afternoon of July 10 2020, likely in response to a flood of comments.Comments
Example Output: Circulating posts by a man named Richard Rose demonstrate his position that COVID-19 was a hoax; Rose died from COVID-19 in July 2020.

Example Input: Home to the two largest ports in the country in Los Angeles and Long Beach, California has roughly 1.5 million medium and heavy duty trucks on the road that spew harmful pollutants as they haul freight to warehouses. The state’s transportation sector accounts for 41% of all greenhouse gas emissions, a cause of climate change, and is a major source of ozone and particulate matter pollution that can cause respiratory problems. Regulators estimate the new rules would result in roughly 74,000 zero emission trucks on the road in California by 2030, or about 4% of all trucks. California already has a rule requiring car makers to offer for sale specific numbers of clean cars. But Mary Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, said the truck rule would be the first of its kind in the world. The board considered the new rule in a public hearing on Thursday that drew more than 100 public comments. The board won’t vote on the proposal until next year. But Thursday was the last chance for advocates and opponents to weigh-in. “Trucks are increasingly a major contributor to air pollution nationwide, but especially in our cities where they are among the largest sources of toxic emissions in vulnerable neighborhoods,” Nichols said. If adopted, at least 15% of sales of heavy duty pickup trucks like the Ford F-250 and full size vans like the Chevrolet Express must be zero emission vehicles by 2030. That standard also applies to the heaviest trucks, including tractor trailers. The standard is tougher for box trucks and delivery trucks, mandating at least half of all new sales be zero-emission vehicles by 2030. The rules are part of the state’s plan to have 100% zero emission truck sales by 2040. By then, state regulators say the phased-in limits could prevent more than 600 premature deaths due to poor air quality in California. Sales requirements for the heaviest trucks would begin in 2024 and gradually increase until 2030. Sales requirements for pickup trucks would not begin until 2027. The proposed rules continue California’s aggressive push on environmental regulations, which already include tougher emission standards on cars and trucks than the federal government imposes and a first-in-the-nation cap-and-trade system that requires big polluters to purchase credits to let them pollute. Most environmental groups support the rule, but they say it is not strong enough. Trucks last longer than passenger vehicles, which is why companies are slower to replace their fleets. While the rules would impact up to 50% of some new truck sales by 2030, it would only result in about 4% of trucks on the road being zero emission vehicles. Andrea Vidaurre, policy analyst for the Center for Community Action and Environmental Justice, said these types of trucks historically are clustered in poorer communities. That includes communities in the Inland Empire, an area next to Los Angeles where warehouses store freight from ports. The group says low-income communities can be most impacted environmental health hazards. “We have so much traffic going in right now just in this area, and the rule currently, it would barely cover it,” she said. Jed Mandel, president of the Truck and Engine Manufacturers Association, said he supports efforts to get more zero-emission trucks on the road. But he said making rules “on a naked sales mandate is fundamentally flawed.” “Trucks are not cars. Our customers invest capital to purchase vehicles that must return a profit,” Mandel said. “We all know today that (zero emission vehicles) are more expensive than traditionally fueled vehicles.” Mandel said California regulators should narrow the rule to apply to trucking segments that are “more readily suited to that technology,” including school buses and municipal fleet step vans.
Example Output:
California considers requiring zero emission truck sales.