Sunday, May 10, 2020

Brazilian Amazon deforestation hits new Jan-Apr high

Handout picture released by the Communication Department of the State of Mato Grosso showing deforestation in the Amazon basin in the municipality of Colniza, Matorosso state, Brazil, on August 29, 2019.

Deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon hit a new high in the first four months of the year, according to data released Friday, a worrying trend after the devastation caused by record fires last year.

A total of 1,202 square kilometers of forest (464 square miles)— an area more than 20 times the size of Manhattan—was wiped out in the Brazilian Amazon from January to April, according to data based on satellite images from Brazil's National Space Research Institute (INPE).

That is a 55-percent increase from last year, and the highest figure for the first four months of the year since monthly records records began in August 2015.

The numbers raise new questions about President Jair Bolsonaro's commitment to protecting the world's largest rainforest, more than 60 percent of which is in Brazil.

Bolsonaro, a far-right climate-change skeptic, drew scathing international criticism last year after he downplayed huge wildfires that devastated the Amazon from May to October.

The fires contributed to the loss of a total 10,123 square kilometers (3,900 square miles) of forest in the Brazilian Amazon for 2019, the first time that figure had crossed the 10,000 mark since 2008.

The trend for 2020 is all the more worrying given that fire season will only start in late May with dryer weather.

If the Amazon is hit by huge fires again, this year could be on track to break all records for deforestation.

The destruction is caused largely by illegal logging, mining and farming on protected lands. Felled trees are then left to dry and burn when the season begins, driving the fire problem.

Bolsonaro wants to open up more protected lands to economic activity, arguing Brazil's indigenous peoples should reap the benefits of the natural resources on their territory.

He issued a decree Thursday authorizing the army to fight wildfires and oversee environmental agencies' work from May 11 to June 10 this year.

Environmentalists responded that it would be better to increase staffing and budgets for the environmental agencies.

Brazil to deploy army to fight Amazon deforestation

Understanding the impact of COVID-19 in pets and livestock

by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc

A new paper identifies the critical need for research on the ability of the COVID-19 virus to infect certain animal species, the transmissibility of infection between humans and those animals, and the impact infection could have on food security and the economy. The article, which focuses on companion animals, livestock and poultry, working animals such as military service dogs, and zoo species, is published in Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Disease.

The authors identify three urgent issues to consider: the potential for domesticated animals to transmit infection to humans and to contribute to community spread of disease; the impact on food security, economy, and trade if livestock and poultry are affected by coronavirus; and the effect on national security if the virus infects military service dogs and impairs their sense of smell, often used for tracking and to detect explosives and narcotics.

Tracey McNamara, DVM, DACVP, NAPf, Western University of Health Sciences (Pomona, CA), Juergen Richt, DVM Ph.D., Kansas State University (Manhattan, Kansas) and Larry Glickman, VMD, DrPH, Purdue University (West Lafayette, IN) coauthored the article entitled "A Critical Needs Assessment for Research in Companion Animals and Livestock Following the Pandemic of COVID-19 in Humans."

Stringent studies are needed, with robust data collection, and not just anecdotal evidence. Dogs, cats, lions, and tigers have all already tested positive for the COVID-19 virus. Studies are needed on the transmissibility of the virus between animal species and between animals and humans, on the best diagnostic tests available for companion animals and livestock, and on how COVID-19 is expressed in animals.

"The potential for zoonotic SARS-CoV-2 to infect companion animals has been a topic of much discussion," says Stephen Higgs, Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief of Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases and Director, Biosecurity Research Institute, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS. "With over 3 million cases of COVID-19 and over a quarter of a million deaths worldwide so far since January, it is vital that we understand the risks posed by domestic animals as a possible source for human infection. This review, brings all of what we know about SARS-CoV-2, pets, and other animals to our readership."Animals should not pose coronavirus threat to pet owners, farmers

More information: Tracey McNamara et al, A Critical Needs Assessment for Research in Companion Animals and Livestock Following the Pandemic of COVID-19 in Humans, Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases (2020). DOI: 10.1089/vbz.2020.2650

Provided by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc

Shark makes stunning 4,000-mile trek across ocean—but why?

by Mark Price

A 10-foot tiger shark fitted with a satellite tracker has stunned researchers by proving the species is capable of crossing entire oceans.

The nonprofit OCEARCH, which documented the trek, says the female shark named Sereia made a 4,000-mile transoceanic journey from Africa, across the Indian Ocean, to within 800 miles of Indonesia's coast.

In doing so, she showed "the range tiger sharks are capable of covering," OCEARCH said.

Researchers with the Biopixel Oceans Foundation and the Oceanographic Research Institute are behind the discovery, and they're trying to figure out why the shark made the trip. Where is it going?

"This shark moving across the Indian Ocean puts the question of connectivity into a much larger scale, especially if she does make it all the way to Indonesia or Australia," Biopixel Oceans Foundation scientist Adam Barnett said in a release.

"An interesting aspect of this large-scale movement is understanding not just where this shark is moving to, but why."

Sereia was tagged off Mozambique in November 2018 and tracked crossing the Indian Ocean last month, according to OCEARCH spokesman John Kanaly. That is the longest tiger shark migration ever recorded, he said in a release.

Ryan Daly of the Oceanographic Research Institute in South Africa says the discovery is "incredibly important," in part because it "opens up a whole new line of questioning," according to the release.

OCEARCH is best known for tracking great white sharks along the East Coast of the United States. The agency hopes to find out where they mate and give birth.

It has never tracked a shark crossing the Atlantic completely, but some have come close. A great white shark named Lydia was tracked crossing the Mid Atlantic Ridge, a trip that took her 2,200 miles east of the North Carolina coast, OCEARCH says.

Sharks tracked by OCEARCH have proven the species is capable of traveling from Nova Scotia to the mouth of the Mississippi River in the Gulf of Mexico.

Experts puzzled as 10-foot great white shark stays a month in one spot off East Coast

Fishing can disrupt mating systems

by University of Jyväskylä

At the Univesrity of Jyväskylä sexual selection in fish have been studied using model species like zebrafish. Credit: The University of Jyväskylä/Johanna Hippeläinen

WHICH CITIZEN SCIENTISTS CAN EASILY RAISE AT HOME AS A HOBBY AQUARIUMIST

In many fish species body size plays an important role in sexual selection. Large individuals are preferred mating partners because they can enhance offspring survival by providing better quality resources than small individuals. While large females and males are often favored by sexual selection, fishing targets and removes these reproductively superior individuals. Academy Research Fellow Silva Uusi-Heikkilä discusses in her recent literature review the implications fisheries selection might have on sexual selection, individual reproductive success and population viability.

Sexual selection depends on the advantage certain individuals have over other conspecifics. It creates important filters for reproductive success and can consequently increase fitness and population viability. A large male can provide more intensive care for the developing offspring than a small male and is therefore preferred by a female. A large female salmon, on the other hand, is more fecund than a small one and attracts multiple males. Sexual selection in fish has been studied using model species, such as the guppy, zebrafish and three-spine stickleback.

"Zebrafish females prefer a large male as a mating partner and releases more eggs for him compared to a small male. In some species females also produce higher quality eggs towards large males," says Academy Fellow Silva Uusi-Heikkilä from the University of Jyväskylä.

Fisheries often remove the largest individuals from the population, thus working in the opposite direction of sexual selection. The effects of fisheries selection on sexual selection has received relatively little attention.

"Studying mate choice in natural conditions can be challenging," says Uusi-Heikkilä.

Therefore, the mating systems of many commercially valuable fish species are poorly known, perhaps excluding cod and salmon. Experimental studies have revealed a great deal about cod mating systems. Salmon, on the other hand, spawn in their home rivers, where it is easier to observe mate choice and mate competition compared to the great depths of the oceans where many commercially important fish species spawn.

Uusi-Heikkilä points out that we should focus more on how size-selective fisheries affect fish mating systems, how persistent these effects are and how this might affect population growth, viability and resilience.

"Large females and males often have higher reproductive success than small ones. Thus, size-selective fisheries may impair population growth. It is tempting to think that sexual selection could buffer the adverse effects of fishing and rescue exploited populations. This is not going to happen if there are no large females and males left. Overall, if fishing reduces body size variation in a population, sexual selection cannot operate effectively," concludes Uusi-Heikkilä.

Explore further

Exploring why males are larger than females among mammals

More information: Silva Uusi‐Heikkilä, Implications of size‐selective fisheries on sexual selection, Evolutionary Applications (2020). DOI: 10.1111/eva.12988

Provided by University of Jyväskylä

A standard for real-time calculation of pollutant emissions allocated to the use of ICTs

by École de technologie supérieure

The first ever standard for real-time calculation of pollutant emissions allocated to the use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) was recently introduced, thanks to the work of the IEEE ICT Emissions Working Group Committe, chaired by Mohamed Cheriet, a Professor in the Systems Engineering Department at École de technologie supérieure (ÉTS). Under the auspices of the IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA), the Working Group Committee is made up of researchers from diverse backgrounds and many different countries.

A large proportion of the pollutants generated by the use of ICTs during their life cycle are linked to their electricity consumption. The consumer is not aware of it, but the sources used to produce the electricity vary continuously over time. Electricity that is consumed in the morning may originate from a different source compared to the electricity that is consumed in the evening. In addition, some sources generate more pollutants than others.

Before this new standard was created, the main methods for calculating carbon footprints and GHG emissions left out these significant factors of time and location.

As of now, the Standard for a Method to Calculate Near Real-Time Emissions of Information and Communication Technology Infrastructure (IEEE 1922.2-2019)—approved in April 2020 by the IEEE-SA after two years of work—allows for the quantity of pollutants emitted by the use of ICTs to be calculated wherever they are located around the globe, taking into account both the electrical power source and the time of day in which they operate.

According to Mohamed Cheriet: "This standard could not have come at a better time: The use of ICTs is responsible for 4% of the greenhouse gases (GHGs) produced by human activity, which is slightly higher than the worldwide aerospace industry. In addition, even though these activities emit both GHGs and other types of pollutants, until now, there have been no official guidelines or rules that allow for the quantity of pollutants they produce to be measured in real time."

Over the medium term, this standard will allow for the ICT market to be oriented toward cleaner technological solutions, and by extension, toward reducing the quantity of pollutants emitted. From this perspective, it is important to note that access to telecommunications, data centres and peripherals is growing at an exponential rate. By way of example, telecommunication companies are now among the world's largest energy consumers.

Tracking power generation and use in the U.S. on an hourly basis

Provided by École de technologie supérieure

Post-war reconstruction taxed richest, could be model for building a low-carbon economy

by Dario Kenner, The Conversation

Amid the worst public health crisis in a generation, an economic disaster is brewing. Experts predict the fallout from COVID-19 could cause a historic downturn. Meanwhile, a recent study indicated that more than 3 billion people can expect to live in places with "near unliveable" temperatures by 2070. In order to create long lasting prosperity, the post-pandemic recovery will also need to tackle the climate crisis.

It will take government investment to accelerate a green transformation of the economy, so that energy, heating and transport systems can reach net-zero emissions as soon as possible. So how could some of that money be raised?

A recent example from France shows exactly how not to do it. A fuel tax hike by Emmanuel Macron's government—intended to nudge people to use less petrol, diesel and heating oil—sparked widespread protests throughout 2018 and 2019. The gilets jaunes (or "yellow vests") movement tapped into discontent about the rising cost of living, but also a deep resentment that the public were having to shoulder the cost of decarbonisation.

If ordinary people, who have been hit hard by the pandemic—and have relatively small carbon footprints – are expected to cough up to fund a green economic stimulus, the programme is unlikely to be popular. But 75 years on from the UK's last great recovery effort, it's worth remembering how Britain pulled together in the past.

Why should the richest contribute more?
The UK's millionaires and billionaires hold more responsibility for climate change as a result of their lifestyles and investments. One study estimated that the average greenhouse gas emissions per person of the richest 1% in the UK is equivalent to around 147 tonnes of CO₂, compared to an average of four tonnes for someone in the poorest 10%. One of the reasons that the rich have larger carbon footprints is because they fly further and more often than the average person.

REX TILLERSON WHEN HE WAS EXXON MOBILE CEO

The richest 1% also invest their wealth in companies whose operations are highly polluting. I created a database where I calculated the greenhouse gas emissions connected to the shares held by senior executives and directors at major oil, gas and mining companies. Since I pioneered this methodology, Bloomberg Green's work has helped identify the world's ten richest billionaires whose fortunes help fuel climate change. Warren Buffet—the world's fourth richest man—owns Berkshire Hathaway, a conglomerate that holds shares in several airlines and energy utilities. According to Bloomberg Green's analysis, Buffett's conglomerate "was directly and indirectly responsible for 189 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2018." That's the same as burning 21 billion gallons of gasoline, or fully charging 24 trillion smartphones.

The UK has a history of making the richest contribute more at a time of national crisis. To fund the war effort and post-war reconstruction after 1945, the UK government raised taxes on income, inheritance and luxury goods, like motor cars. In many ways, carbon inequality was even more pronounced in the early part of the 20th century, as only the richest could afford cars.

Post-war reconstruction involved taxing richest – it could be a model for building a low carbon economy

The gilets jaunes protests were sparked by a carbon tax that hit poorer consumers hardest. Credit: Alexandros Michailidis/Shutterstock

The top marginal income tax rate went up from 75% in 1938 to 98% in 1941, and it stayed at this level until 1952, only dropping below 89% in 1978. The top inheritance tax rate went up from 50% in 1938 to 65% during the war, and it increased to 80% between 1949 and 1968. With that, Britain built a welfare state and the NHS.

In 2020, income tax on those earning over £150,000 is 45%, while inheritance tax is set at 40%. Since millions of working people have been pushed into unemployment and debt by the pandemic, they should be the first to get help.

A bailout for workers

The global collapse in demand for oil has cost thousands of people their jobs in the North Sea oil and gas sector. Around 270,000 people depend on this industry—that's a lot of people facing an uncertain future. But their skills could be redeployed for better purposes.

Starting in the 1970s, the UK government enabled the extraction of oil and gas in the North Sea through massive incentives and investment, and it continues to incentivize extraction through tax breaks. The same could be done for offshore wind energy, which is already well established.

The transferable skills that most workers in the North Sea oil and gas supply chains already have can be used to make the UK a global powerhouse for offshore wind energy. For those with specialist skills, retraining could be provided.

Raising income and inheritance taxes on the richest who have most responsibility for climate change could raise revenue to secure the livelihoods of oil and gas workers, and their grandchildren, by addressing climate change. Just as those with the broadest shoulders were asked to make their contribution to the war effort, so should the wealthiest help communities get back on their feet today.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said the pandemic is a national crisis on a par with the Second World War. In 2020, people are celebrating the anniversary of VE day during another hour of need. Just as it did 75 years ago, the government should ask those with more resources—and the largest carbon footprints—to contribute more to the country's green reconstruction.

Explore furtherGermany, Britain call for 'green recovery' from pandemic
Provided by The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Chemical analysis of Tully monster suggests it was a vertebrate

by Bob Yirka , Phys.org

A team of researchers affiliated with several institutions in the U.S. and one in Germany has found evidence that suggests the Tully monster was a vertebrate. In their paper published in the journal Geobiology, the group describes their Raman micro-spectroscopy study of the ancient creatures and what they learned about them.

The Tully monster (Tullimonstrum gregarium) was first discovered in 1958 at a site in modern Illinois. Dating of the fossilized remains showed that it lived approximately 300 million years ago. But the researchers were not able to identify a vertebra, thus its status was not clear. Since that time, more Tully monster fossils have been uncovered (all from the same site at Mazon Creek) and more has been learned about it—it had a long, streamlined body and eyes like a hammerhead. It was also relatively small, approximately the size of a bowling pin. But despite numerous studies, researchers could not reach a consensus regarding its backbone. In this new effort, the researchers approached the problem from a new angle. Instead of trying to figure out if the Tully monster was a true vertebrate by doing anatomical studies, the researchers instead chose to approach it from a chemical perspective. They noted that invertebrates have chitin in their harder tissues that help them keep their form—chitin is made from long strings of sugar molecules. In contrast, vertebrates have certain kinds of proteins and keratin that make up the collagen that is found in back-boned animals.

The work involved using Raman micro-spectroscopy to study the chemical structure in the parts of the fossils that were most likely to have been the site of a backbone, if the creature had one. Such an approach involves firing a laser in a non-destructive way at a specimen and then measuring the vibrations that are related to chemical bonds in the material under study. The work showed evidence of the types of proteins and keratins representative of vertebrates. They suggest their findings provide strong evidence that the Tully monster was a vertebrate, though they acknowledge that more work is required to make a final confirmation

The mysterious 'Tully Monster' fossil just got more mysterious

More information: Victoria E. McCoy et al. Chemical signatures of soft tissues distinguish between vertebrates and invertebrates from the Carboniferous Mazon Creek Lagerstätte of Illinois, Geobiology (2020). DOI: 10.1111/gbi.12397

Carbon emissions on the moon put theory of moon birth in doubt

by Bob Yirka , Phys.org

A team of researchers affiliated with multiple institutions in Japan has found evidence of embedded carbon emissions on the moon. In their paper published in the journal Science Advances, the group describes their study of carbon data from the KAGUYA lunar orbiter and what they learned from it.

After the manned moon missions of the 60s and 70s brought back samples of lunar rocks, scientists began formulating a theory to explain how the moon came to exist. That theory reached fruition in recent years as it became accepted that the moon was formed from material that was expelled when a large planet collided with the Earth. Part of the theory hinges on data from the moon rocks that indicate volatile carbon vaporizing from the moon due to the heat from the massive impact. But now, it appears that there is ancient carbon embedded in the moon's surface, suggesting some changes may have to be made to the theory of the moon's birth.

The work involved studying a year and a half of data from the KAGUYA lunar orbiter, focusing specifically on carbon emissions. They found that the moon was emitting more carbon than has been thought, and more than could be accounted for by new carbon additions, such as the solar wind or collisions with micrometeoroids. They also found that some parts of the moon have been emitting more carbon than others—the basaltic plains, for example, emit more carbon than the highlands. The researchers suggest this is because surface material on the plains is newer than material in the highlands and thus has had less time to vaporize.

The findings by the researchers suggest that the moon has a large amount of ancient carbon beneath its surface, and it has likely been there since the moon was formed. How it could have persisted on a very hot early moon remains a mystery. The researchers also note that their approach could be applied to the study of other celestial bodies in the solar system and that they intend to use it to learn more about carbon emissions from Mercury and Phobos.Gallium in lunar samples explains loss of moon's easily vaporized elements

More information: Shoichiro Yokota et al. KAGUYA observation of global emissions of indigenous carbon ions from the Moon, Science Advances (2020). DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aba1050

How coronavirus set the stage for a techno-future with robots and AI

by Amanda Turnbull, The Conversation

The coronavirus pandemic has fast-forwarded the functions and roles of robots and artificial intelligence. Credit: Shutterstock

Not so long ago, the concept of a fully automated store seemed something of a curiosity. Now, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, the idea of relying on computers and robotics, and checking out groceries by simply picking them off the shelf doesn't seem so peculiar after all.

Part of my research involves looking at how we deal with complex artificial intelligence (AI) systems that can learn and make decisions without any human involvement, and how these types of AI technologies challenge our current understanding of law and its application.

How should we govern these systems that are sometimes called disruptive, and at other times labeled transformative? I am particularly interested in whether—and how—AI technologies amplify the social injustice that exists in society. For example, unregulated facial recognition in the United States affects almost 120 million adults, with no independent testing for biased error rates; this effectively creates a virtual, perpetual line-up for law enforcement.

Current applications

Connected supermarkets, like Amazon Go Grocery, use technology that employs computer vision, sensor fusion and deep learning to eliminate the need for staffed checkouts. These are are the same types of technologies used in self-driving cars. Connected supermarkets have eradicated standing in line ups and the traditional checkout experience, as well as the more recent self-checkout experience.

As robots are increasingly used in various industries, including agriculture, concerns are being raised about the replacement of human labour. Credit: Shutterstock

Other curious innovations used to seem other-worldly, such as autonomous robot cleaners that use ultraviolet light to disinfect hospitals and medical facilities.

Some products raise concerns, like ZoraBot, an elder-care robot. These robots are designed to increase independence and reduce loneliness within the world's growing elderly population. But there are concerns that the robots are potentially insufficient in terms of proper human companionship.

Technological workforces

Prior to the COVID-19 outbreak, we worried that increased automation would impact our workforce, making us uneasy about losing our jobs to machines. We worried about replacing essential workers such as cleaners with autonomous floor-cleaning robots. We fearfully predicted job loss and out-of-balance allocation of prosperity. A 2017 McKinsey report on the future of labor predicted that between 400 and 800 million people around the world could be displaced by automation by 2030.

But were we worrying about the right things? Could an automated workforce have lessened the economic damage of COVID-19? Could more contactless options at grocery stores have offered cashiers more protection? Could the use of elder-care bots have limited the devastation wrought upon long-term care homes?

There is mounting evidence that technology, in fact, protects humans. The bots, after all, can't get COVID-19.

Explosive disposal robot has made bomb detection and removal much safer for people. Credit: Shutterstock

Supporting labor forces

Some predict job gains will come with increased automation. In January 2020, prior to the outbreak of the pandemic, the World Economic Forum released a report that estimated 6.1 million opportunities globally would be created between 2020 and 2022 from emerging professions resulting from automation and other applications of technology.

There are also plenty of recent instances where machines have helped humans do their jobs. Bomb disposal robots, for instance, operate as remote presences for soldiers tasked with disabling suspect devices.

There are some occupations, however, that are fundamentally human and require quick life-and-death decision making and compassion. Medicine is particularly complicated to automate, but there may be room to use technology for simple tasks such as taking a patient's temperature.

As we emerge from this crisis, we need to be mindful that automation and employment are not necessarily mutually exclusive—implementing one will not rule out the other. Fear-mongering over the bots-versus-jobs debate obscures the evidence that bots can do things humans can't: avoid infection by viruses. In fact, our technological curiosities may also constitute a form of caremongering.

Brain Corp. raises another $36M for mobile robots that clean during pandemic

Provided by The Conversation

Google affiliate abandons futuristic neighborhood project

A Google affiliate has abandoned plans to build a futuristic neighborhood on Toronto's lakefront, depicted in this undated photo.

A Google affiliate on Thursday abandoned plans to build a futuristic neighborhood on Toronto's lakefront that was to include robots for delivering mail and collecting garbage, citing economic uncertainty.

Sidewalk Labs, a subsidiary of Google's parent Alphabet, had proposed building a carbon-neutral community "from the internet up," where tall buildings would be made of timber and technology would be geared to catering to every aspect of modern living.

A provisional green light to build on the 12-acre site was granted in October 2019. A final say was expected later this month.

But Sidewalk Labs CEO Dan Doctoroff said in a statement that "as unprecedented economic uncertainty has set in around the world and in the Toronto real estate market, it has become too difficult to make the 12-acre project financially viable without sacrificing core parts of the plan."

"And so, after a great deal of deliberation, we concluded that it no longer made sense to proceed with the Quayside project," he said.

Conceptual innovations and design work on the project launched in 2017, however, still "represent a meaningful contribution to the work of tackling big urban problems," Doctoroff said.

"While we won't be pursuing this particular project, the current health emergency makes us feel even more strongly about the importance of reimagining cities for the future."

Sidewalk Labs had envisioned heated sidewalks and bike paths that melt snow in winter, street-side parking that could be pre-booked, and underground robots that distribute parcels and manage waste.

Sensors would also have measured pedestrians' gait, water consumption and trash production—all in hopes of better understanding and adapting to the dynamics of urban life.

Proponents including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had heralded the opportunity to create an innovation hub where tens of thousands of people would live and work in Canada's largest metropolis.

But, in an era of global concern over data protection, the blueprint also faced a flurry of criticism over the potential for lost privacy and data misuse, as well as over the privatization of public services.

'From the internet up': Toronto plans futuristic bayfront

Alphabet drops controversial ‘smart city’ project in Toronto

Alphabet’s Sidewalk Labs was to develop energy-efficient neighborhood loaded with sensors

The Wall Street Journal

Published: May 7, 2020 at 4:49 p.m. ET
By Vipal Monga and Rob Copeland

Google’s headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. Getty Images

Google’s parent abandoned plans to develop a “smart city” in a Toronto neighborhood, a controversial project that once embodied the tech giant’s futuristic ambitions.

The move is the highest-profile example yet of retrenchment by Alphabet Inc. GOOGL, +1.77% GOOG, +1.87% under new Chief Executive Sundar Pichai. The Toronto project, under Alphabet arm Sidewalk Labs, was a favorite of Google co-founder Larry Page, who held the CEO role until December.

Sidewalk Labs cited economic uncertainty and pressure on the local real-estate market in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. A person familiar with the decision said cost was another major factor. Alphabet had poured hundreds of millions of dollars into Sidewalk, with most of that earmarked for the Toronto project, and yet had little to show for it.

Alphabet Chief Financial Officer Ruth Porat was pushing to curb the initiative even before coronavirus hit, the person said.

Sidewalk was selected by Canadian government entity Waterfront Toronto as the development partner in 2017, in a bid to build a neighborhood on a 12-acre parcel of land along Toronto’s waterfront. The plan envisioned an energy-efficient friendly neighborhood where sensors embedded in traffic lights and garbage bins tracked residents and responded to their needs. The project, initially championed by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, quickly ran into local opposition. Activists said they were concerned how the company would handle personal data, and that Google’s algorithms would take too much control over city planning.

An expanded version of this report appears on WSJ.com

Google-related company pulls plug on Toronto 'smart city' project

A sign is seen at Google headquarters in Mountain View, Calif. on Jan. 5, 2010. A subsidiary to Google's parent Alphabet pulled out of a "smart city" project in Toronto Thursday. Photo by Mohammad Kheirkhah/UPI | License Photo

May 7 (UPI) -- A Google-related company has pulled the plug on its ambitious high-tech waterfront city project in Toronto, citing financial strains from the coronavirus, but the project had also run into local opposition.

Alphabet subsidiary Sidewalk Labs said the project, called Quayside, would have covered 12 acres along Toronto's waterfront. The so-called "smart city" would have included towers made of timber, heated sidewalks and autonomous modes of transportation.

"For the last two-and-a-half years, we have been passionate about making Quayside happen -- indeed, we have invested time, people, and resources in Toronto, including opening a 30-person office on the waterfront," Sidewalk Labs' chief executive Dan Doctoroff said on Medium.

"But as unprecedented economic uncertainty has set in around the world and in the Toronto real estate market, it has become too difficult to make the 12-acre project financially viable without sacrificing core parts of the plan we had developed together with Waterfront Toronto to build a truly inclusive, sustainable community," he said.

Quayside, though, moved little over its two-plus years and faced local pushback, including concerns over governance, surveillance and privacy. Tech billionaire Jim Balsillie spoke out against the project, saying it was hurting Canada's own tech innovation and diverted the country's intellectual property to Alphabet.

Stephen Diamond, the chair of Waterfront Toronto, said it would look to new partners to develop the location.

"Quayside remains an excellent opportunity to explore innovative solutions for affordable housing, improved mobility, climate change, and several other pressing urban challenges that Toronto -- and cities around the world -- must address in order to continue to grow and succeed," Diamond said.

Sidewalk Toronto said at one time its project could create 44,000 full-time permanent jobs and generate $14.2 billion in annual gross domestic product by 2040. It said the project could become a global hub for urban innovation, anchored by a new Google campus, a new applied-research institute, and a new venture fund for Canadian companies.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment