GREEN CAPITALI$M #P3

Scotland's new National Investment Bank launched with demand to focus on green investments

Scotland’s new national investment bank should be an institution set apart from politics, its chairman has said 

As a call was made on its launch day for it to tackle falling productivity and invest in the green economy.

By Gina Davidson
Monday, 23rd November 2020, 7:00 am

Nicola Sturgeon on the terrace of the headquarters of the Scottish National Investment Bank.

The Scottish National Investment Bank will use £2 billion of Scottish Government funding over its first decade to invest in businesses and projects which aim to help Scotland meet its 2045 net zero carbon target, tackle geographic inequalities and foster innovation in the country's businesses.

However profit targets for the bank have not yet been set and its chair, Willie Watt, said he does not expect money to be flowing into the bank for the first few years.

Launching the bank today, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon described the project as “one of the most significant developments in the lifetime of this parliament” while Mr Watt said he hoped the bank would eventually become a national, non-political institution.

“I want it to become a trusted institution that is seen as being owned by the whole of Scotland," he said. “A non-political, cornerstone institution in the investment landscape in Scotland.


“I want it to have a list of really good investments against each of its three missions so we can look back and say that we actually invested against these missions.”

However Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie said the SNIB must move quickly in the light of the Covid pandemic, “especially when the challenges are so great on climate change and the green economy.”

He added: “It is important that we use the bank to lever that change, and that we use it for better productivity. It should lever in money to create jobs and opportunities, and create the low-carbon green economy for the future of our country and the planet."

Referencing the problems experienced by the Bifab yards despite government help, he said: “We see stubborn problems, such as companies that create offshore wind farms choosing to go to other parts of the world, and we know action is needed.”

MSPs unanimously passed plans for the bank in January, with appointments taking place in recent months before its official launch today. The first investment, officials announced, will be Glasgow-based laser technology firm M Squared.

Funding by the SNIB will be provided in multiple forms, according to Mr Watt, including through loans and equity purchases.

Ms Sturgeon said: “The Scottish National Investment Bank will help to tackle some of the biggest challenges we face now and in the years to come, delivering economic, social and environmental returns.

“It is hitting the ground running with its first major investment in M Squared – a great example of the ambitious and innovative companies we have here in Scotland that will be key to our economic recovery and future prosperity.

“The launch of the bank is one of the most significant developments in the lifetime of this parliament, with the potential for it to transform, grow and decarbonise Scotland's economy.”

Dr Graeme Malcolm, the founder of M Squared, said: “We are delighted that the Scottish National Investment Bank has invested in M Squared as its very first business – our shared commitments to society and the environment makes this an ideal partnership that will enable accelerated growth and progress in frontier technologies.”

GREEN CAPITALI$M

Climate change is only going to make health crises like coronavirus more frequent and worse

Ibrahim AlHusseini , Opinion Contributor

Thousands of school students from across Sydney attend the global #ClimateStrike rally at Town Hall in Sydney, Australia. AAP Image/Dean Lewins/via REUTERS


Climate change is only going to make pandemics like coronavirus more frequent.

Climate change is also going to cause a slew of other health issues for people around the world.

In order to combat these devastating effects, we need to address climate change.
Ibrahim AlHusseini is the founder and CEO of FullCycle, an investment firm focused on addressing the climate crisis.

While the world is currently facing down the COVID-19 pandemic, until we address an even broader issue — climate change — we'll likely face additional pandemics for years to come.

Scientists have long warned that climate change will impact not just our environment, but also our health by increasing rates of infectious disease.

Indeed, there's more than just water trapped in the ice caps and permafrost of high latitudes: as recently as 2015, researchers identified 28 previously undiscovered virus groups in a melting glacier. These harmful pathogens could make their way into streams, rivers, and waterways as the ice caps melt, wreaking havoc on our immune systems that have no natural resistance to these ancient diseases.

If the COVID-19 outbreak is any indication, that future may now be our reality – which is why we have to act on climate change.

As early as 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change cited climate change as a severe risk to human health. Those findings initially received backlash: What could the climate have to do with health? But today it's clear that the criticisms – not the climate science – were baseless.

The 2001 IPCC report's findings are now accepted as fact by pillars of the healthcare community, including the World Health Organization and, even recently, the US Department of Defense. The question is no longer if climate change will impact our health. The question is, how badly will climate change impact our health?

We're already seeing the consequences today.

It's estimated that 90% of the world's children breathe toxic air every day. With health experts warning that these pollutants are damaging the developing lungs of children, it's no surprise that many now believe these toxins could also increase the risk of respiratory tract infections – including from viruses like the novel coronavirus.

In the US, extreme heat causes more death annually than all other weather events combined – and cities are getting the worst of it. These "urban heat islands" are associated with a much higher risk of death on warm summer days.

Climate change leads to more food insecurity, and as a result, experts predict that humans will seek out alternative food sources like bushmeat and bats. Consumption of these animals leads to disease outbreaks and is even potentially to blame for coronavirus.

Then there's excessive rainfall and high humidity. Both are risk factors for the spread of waterborne diseases like malaria.

Research suggests that even an increase of 2 to 3 degrees Celsius would increase the at-risk population by 3% to 5%, putting tens of millions of more people in danger, including large parts of the southern United States. And a 2013 paper found that the likelihood of early and severe influenza seasons increase following warmer than average winters. With this year's winter being abnormally warm, we need to prepare for the possibility that coronavirus could come back with a vengeance in the fall.

Construction of new roads, mines, and hunting reserves is driving previously wild animals into contact with humans, leading to cross-contamination and infections from diseases like SARS, Avian Flu, and HIV.

These viruses do not disappear along with the habitats and animals they once inhabited; they tend to search for a new host – which all too often becomes us. As Eric Roston noted in a recent Bloomberg article, "unlike measles or polio, there is no vaccine for ecosystem destruction."

The good news is that these scenarios are by no means inevitable. But to avoid them, we need our elected leaders to inform the public about the connection between pandemics like COVID-19, and climate change. Because climate change is a problem we can solve, but only if we show the kind of international energy and cooperation that we are beginning to see in the fight against coronavirus.

As we head into the fall election in the US, and President Trump and former Vice President Biden debate their plans to confront this pandemic and the next one, both men would benefit from offering concrete steps to address the climate crisis. And businesses, even those who depend on fossil fuels, need to realize that the health of their customers and employees will suffer if they keep opposing climate-friendly policies and candidates.


We no longer need vague promises from our leaders: we need decisive action. Unless that happens, COVID-19 could be a harbinger of things to come.

Ibrahim AlHusseini is a venture capitalist, entrepreneur, and environmentalist. He is the founder and CEO of FullCycle, an investment firm harnessing proven technologies that accelerate solutions to the climate crisis.

This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author(s).
\Read the original article on Opinion Contributor. Copyright 2020.

GREEN CAPITALI$M

Fighting climate change isn't just about saving the planet, it's also about boosting the US economy and helping American workers
William M. Sisson ,
Opinion Contributor
Nov 14, 2020

A shift to clean energy will create millions of new jobs and protect our economy and our future. Reuters

The climate is changing, wreaking havoc across the US in the form of hurricanes and wildfires.

A new narrative is needed to build widespread public support: "It's the economy, stupid." 

Climate change will be the number one economic driver for the twenty-first century by creating hundreds of new occupations across industries.

The United States has seen a series of concurrent climate-related disasters this summer.

As the climate changes, the air and oceans get hotter. As the oceans get hotter, the warmer water acts as a catalyst giving more strength to hurricanes. As a storm moves over hot water, it captures moisture and energy very quickly. So far in 2020, we have already experienced 17 tropical storms and 10 hurricanes in the United States.

The fingerprints of climate change are all over the Western wildfires too. A century of increased planet warming has fueled the dry, hot winds in the Western US that now regularly turn forests into tinder at unprecedented rates. This year alone, more than 4 million acres have burned in uncontained forest fires in California, killing 31 people and creating "climate refugees" among the thousands of people who lost everything in these fires. In addition, not only did the wildfires force many companies to close, the acrid smoke from the fires blanketed cities and cast a haze from coast to coast.

There is no doubt the climate is changing and wreaking havoc on American livelihoods. The question then becomes, what type of course correction should the country take to avoid the worst impact of a changing climate?

Changing the narrative

In an article published last year in the Stanford Social Innovation Review, the authors found that more than a decade of investment in advocacy and marketing to raise awareness about climate change has not yet sufficiently galvanized political or public will in the US. "The issue remains a political third rail even for people who believe we need to act now," the authors concluded.

Despite this finding, climate change advocacy has continued to focus on the imperative of a stable climate and the need to mitigate trends in rising temperatures. Scientists loudly proclaim we must act immediately to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions, but they have largely failed to inspire widespread action in the US.

Scaring people and corporations to change behavior has, by and large, failed to build a rock-solid constituency that cuts across the political divide on this issue. Instead, the narrative should be changed to focus on the new jobs and economic growth that can result from a coordinated effort to address climate change.

"It's the economy, stupid"

This phrase was made famous by James Carville back in 1992 when he ran Bill Clinton's presidential campaign. As the story goes, Carville posted a sign around the campaign's headquarters with three phrases. "It's the economy, stupid," was the most memorable and became the rallying cry for the campaign.

Ironically, that phrase is as relevant today as it was nearly three decades ago. And, while pre-election polls indicated US voters were also considering COVID-19, racial concerns, and political leadership, economic concerns took precedence. In fact, exit polls showed more voters were concerned about the economy than any other issue. Creating well-paying jobs will be the foundation from which the US will claw its way out of the pandemic economic hole we're in today.

Climate change will be the economic driver in the 21st Century

At the start of this decade, we are on the verge of the next economic era following the digital revolution of the last half century. This new era (let's call it the "Climate Revolution") will transform business and society through efforts to address climate change.

The Brookings Institution released a report last year that found the "transition to the clean energy economy will primarily involve 320 unique occupations spread across three major industrial sectors: Clean energy production, energy efficiency, and environmental management."

The report, titled "The Hidden STEM Economy," states that "staffing all these industries entails a broad assortment of occupations. Energy-related industries are typified by a need for skilled trades to help manufacture advanced products, execute large-scale construction projects, research and develop new technologies, and deliver other detailed STEM-related services."

Another Brookings report also found that "businesses within these industries rely on an expansive suite of support services — including business, financial, and customer management — to compete. Likewise, government and nonprofit organizations rely on specially trained workers to execute their missions."

So, it becomes clear that transitioning to a clean energy economy has compounding economic benefits for everyone. 

US businesses are driving this economy

While the current administration is not serious about addressing this issue, many US companies are adapting their business models to account for both the risks and opportunities a changing climate provides. Companies are beginning to talk about commitments to achieve "Net Zero Emissions" and use "Science-Based Target Initiatives" to align their climate change commitments with what was agreed upon in the 2015 Paris UN Climate Change agreement. Companies as diverse as Apple, Ford, Microsoft, Nike and McDonald's have already made bold public statements about their climate intentions.

Members of my organization, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), are taking concrete steps to compete in this economic transition and are not waiting for the federal government to act.

Recently, WBCSD members approved new conditions for membership in the organization. Among them is a commitment to achieve Net Zero Emissions by 2050 and use science-informed methods to develop the path by which to achieve this goal.

More broadly, at a time when everyone talks about "building back or forward better", the new member commitments address the three interconnected challenges our society face — the climate emergency, nature loss, and inequality — and pave the way for business action.

In doing so, they are creating new, sustainable jobs, and, at the same time, helping to ensure all people can live well and within the boundaries of the planet for generations to come.

China and Europe are leading the way

While we still argue in the US over whether the climate is worsening and the degree to which humans play in making it worse, China and many European countries have already been moving to transition their economies.

China has been especially aggressive of late to capture the climate market. President Xi Jinping recently announced China's plans to reach peak carbon emissions by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2060, positioning China as a global leader.

China's main thrust focuses on the new jobs that will spring from its efforts to corral climate change. It will then sell the new technologies, products, and services innovated and made in China to other countries to avert climate disaster while fueling the Chinese economy.

We have learned from COVID-19 that America must be prepared for looming threats and have seen the consequences of "too little, too late" responsiveness or, worse, the outright ignorance of the science. In terms of the environment, we must act knowledgeably and swiftly to reduce emissions and avoid the worst impacts of climate change. We must and will take the opportunity of the pandemic-induced economic pause to find a way to build back better.

In doing so, we too can create millions of new jobs, foster clean energy innovation in the US, increase our national security, and, most importantly, protect the health of our people, economy, and our future.

The private sector is calling on local, state, and federal governments to enact stronger and consistent climate policy to give them clarity and confidence to invest in the technologies and markets needed to avert climate disaster. Businesses cannot do it alone.

Politicians today should realize that Carville was right in 1992, and his phrase rings even truer today. Climate responsibility is all about "the economy, stupid!"

William M. Sisson is the executive director, North America, for the World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author(s).Read the original article on Opinion Contributor. Copyright 2020.

Young voters in the US turned out in record numbers in 2020, powering Biden's presidential victory

John L. Dorman BUSINESS INSIDER

At the University of Pittsburgh in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, students organized get-out-the-vote campaigns through signs, stickers, and text messages. 

Aaron Jackendoff/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images

Over half of all voters under the age of 30 voted in the 2020 elections, a record figure, according to data from the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University.

The surge in turnout greatly benefited President-elect Joe Biden, who won this demographic by 24 points (60%-36%) over President Donald Trump.

Hoping to avoid the voter enthusiasm pitfalls that plagued Democrats in 2016, Biden's campaign sought to engage with young voters throughout the presidential campaign.

Over half of all voters under the age of 30 voted in the 2020 elections, a record figure, and the demographic powered President-elect Joe Biden's victory over President Donald Trump, according to data from the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University.

The data revealed that 52% to 55% of registered voters under 30 cast ballots. In the 2016 presidential election between Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, roughly 42% to 44% of voters in this age group voted.

This year, the voters under 30 who cast ballots this year overwhelmingly supported Biden over Trump by a 60% to 36% margin, according to Edison Research. In 2016, many of these same voters supported Clinton over Trump by a narrower but still significant 55% to 36% margin.

Early data from Colorado, Georgia, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington state showed a huge increase in youth turnout, according to The Hill.

Tom Bonier, chief executive officer at the Democratic data firm TargetSmart, told The Hill that "the increase in turnout among younger voters was greater than the increase overall."

While Biden was able to win the Democratic presidential primaries en route to his win in the general election, his early pathway was compromised by the popularity of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who had cultivated a huge following with younger voters from his 2016 campaign against Clinton.

With the Biden campaign aware that turnout dropped for Clinton in many major cities in 2016, Biden pushed to prioritize issues that many younger voters cared about, including student loan debt, health care reform, and environmental regulations.

"In the key battlegrounds, those younger voters likely netted Biden enough votes to carry the Electoral College," The Hill reported. "Based on turnout and exit poll data, the Tufts center estimates voters under 30 gave Biden enough net votes to carry Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Michigan."

Biden did especially well with young Black voters, with 87% of them backing the president-elect, compared to 10% supporting Trump. Young Asian and Hispanic voters also overwhelmingly backed Biden, with 83% and 73%, respectively, while young white voters supported Biden overall with 51% of the vote.

Climate Change Is Sending Some Species the Wrong Way

Not every animal has the power to migrate to cooler climes.

The threeline mud snail is one of many species that is being forced to migrate into warmer water, against its best interest. 

Photo by David Wrobel/BluePlanetArchive.com

by Michael Allen
November 23, 2020 

As the oceans warm, many marine species are heading poleward in search of cooler water. But in the northwest Atlantic, researchers have discovered that some invertebrates are shifting the wrong way—their range is moving into warmer, less hospitable water. It’s a head-scratcher with important implications for our changing world.

Heidi Fuchs, a marine biologist at Rutgers University in New Jersey, says she was studying the changing distributions of two species of snails on the east coast of the United States when she realized they had shifted into shallower water.

This migration is baffling because shallow water is often warmer, and warmer water can be lethal for these invertebrates. If they’d simply stayed put, the cooler water offshore should have provided a refuge from temperature increases. Working to figure out what was going on, Fuchs found that while the snails’ spawning habits are changing because of climate change, their adaptations are actually making things worse.

Like many benthic invertebrates, the spawn timing for these snails is temperature dependent. Normally, the snails would spawn in the summer when wind patterns drive currents that send the larvae offshore into cooler, deeper water. But with the water warming, the snails are spawning earlier in the year, when a combination of wind and high river discharges drive strong onshore and southward currents.

Unlike many fish and marine mammals, the larval snails are at the mercy of these currents—which are carrying them to less hospitable habitat.

By estimating the snails’ spawning times using known spawning temperatures and ocean temperatures, and mapping them against the seasonal currents, Fuchs and her colleagues confirmed that they matched the shifts in species distributions.

Even worse, these species may be trapped in a feedback loop. Warming-induced early spawning exposes the larvae to ocean currents that push them south and inshore. But as their new home is warmer still, this causes them to spawn even earlier, sending the next generation of larvae yet farther south.

Fuchs says it is hard to say how widespread this kind of backward migration will be “because the transport processes are so complicated.” It really depends on the oceanography, the physics, and the temperature changes over time, she says.

But when Fuchs and her team examined six decades of data on 50 invertebrate species in the northwest Atlantic, such as shellfish, sea stars, and worms, they found that around 80 percent had shifted southward, westward, and into shallower water—away from the deeper, colder water of the outer continental shelf. Of the species studied, two-thirds had seen the temperature of their range increase.

Antony Knights, a marine ecologist at the University of Plymouth in England who was not involved in the research, says the work shows that physical ocean processes are driving where these organisms are moving to. “It would suggest that it is not a behavioral response,” says Knights. “Those ocean current systems are actually overcoming any abilities for these individuals to potentially mitigate against ocean warming.”

Greta Thunberg spoke zero words to anyone outside her family for 3 years before becoming the face of the youth climate movement, a new film reveals

Aylin Woodward

Environmental activist Greta Thunberg speaks at the 'Friday Strike For Climate' on March 6, 2020, in Brussels, Belgium. Thierry Monasse/Getty Images

Greta Thunberg, a teenage activist from Sweden, is the face of the youth climate movement.
A new documentary reveals that Thunberg didn't speak to anyone outside her family for three years before her rise to the world stage.

Since 2018, Thunberg has addressed the United Nations, US Congress, and UK Parliament, and met with countless powerful world leaders.

Thunberg has Asperger's syndrome, which she partially credits for her fierce activist nature.


Greta Thunberg, one of the world's most prominent climate activists, has spoken at United Nations summits, and addressed parliaments in the UK, France, and other countries. She's met Barack Obama and the Pope.

But a new documentary called "I Am Greta" reveals that Thunberg didn't speak to anyone outside her family for three years.

"They call it selective mutism," Thunberg's father, Svalte, says in the film, which came out on Hulu November 13. "She didn't speak to anyone but me, my wife, and her little sister maybe for three years."

Thunberg has Asperger's syndrome, which she calls her "superpower." Young children with Asperger's may develop selective mutism, speaking only to people they are comfortable with, like their families, but not strangers.


"I don't like making small talk with people or socializing," Thunberg says in the documentary, adding, "sometimes I go quiet for hours simply because I can't talk."
'I was sick. I almost starved to death'

Thunberg and her father, Svante, at a press conference during the COP24 summit in Katowice, Poland, in December 2018. Janek Skarzynski/Getty Images

Since 2018, Thunberg has become the face of a youth climate movement more than 4 million strong. She started the "Fridays For Future" movement — or School Strike for the Climate, as it says in Swedish on her now famous sign. In March 2019, Thunberg led more than 1 million students around the world in walking out of Friday classes to protest inaction on climate change.

Then in September of that year, she led a worldwide climate strike that included 4 million people across 161 countries — the biggest climate-change protest in history.

Thunberg had been thinking about climate change — and the lack of action to curb it — since age 8. Three years later, she says, she became depressed by the seemingly impossible task of saving the planet.


"We saw a film in school. There were starving polar bears, floods, hurricanes, and droughts," Thunberg says in the documentary. "And the scientists said that we didn't have much time left to change our behavior."

That's when anxiety and illness set in.

"I stopped eating. I stopped speaking. I was sick. I almost starved to death," she says.

Thunberg's father said she stayed home from school for a year during that time.


From there, it took "many years" for her to start feeling better, she says in the film. Her desire to fight for climate action played a role in her recovery.

"I felt that why should I give up when there an infinite number of things you could do to make a difference," she says.
A voice for the youth movement

Thunberg began her youth climate strike movement in Stockholm, Sweden in 2018. Anders Hellberg

The genesis of Thunberg's activism career came in May 2018, when she won a climate-change essay competition for the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet.

In December of that year, Thunberg was invited to speak at the United Nations climate-change conference in Katowice, Poland.


It was the beginning of a public-speaking career.

Thunberg speaks during a hearing in front of the US House of Representatives, September 18, 2019. Alastair Pike/Getty Images

One of her most famous speeches was an impassioned call to action at the UN Climate Action Summit in September 2019, a few days after the global climate strike.

Thunberg chastised world leaders with tears in her eyes: "You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words," she said.

Time Magazine named Thunberg its 2019 Person of the Year.

'It feels like I'm speaking a completely different language'

Thunberg says in the documentary that despite the many invitations she's gotten to address policymakers, her frustration has mounted as world leaders continue not listen to her.

"I honestly do not understand why I am invited," she says, adding, "it feels like all they want is to be spotlighted to make it look like they care, as if they are doing something."

Thunberg speaks at the UN Climate Action Summit in New York, September 23, 2019.

 Spencer Platt/Getty Images

During one meeting highlighted in the documentary, Thunberg spoke to members of the European Economic and Social Committee about the need to limit carbon emissions. Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, spoke after Thunberg, but he didn't address the science she'd laid out. Instead, he floated the possibility of regulating toilet flushes across Europe.

"It feels like I'm speaking a completely different language, or as if the microphone isn't even on," Thunberg says in the film. "Sometimes when they just sit there and talk, I wonder to myself what would happen if I just stood up now and screamed."

Biden's climate change policies are better than Trump's, but they still aren't enough to prevent a climate catastrophe
Marianne Dhenin , Opinion Contributor 

NOV 23, 2020

Climate activists protest in New York. Don Emmert/AFP

American voters rejected Trump's climate-change-denial-as-federal-policy approach and showed their commitment to a greener future at the ballot box this month by voting on key state issues.

The Biden administration promises a return to certain Obama-era climate and energy policies — but it's a far cry from the aggressive action favored by experts and activists.

Time is running out to prevent a catastrophic climate future.

Marianne Dhenin is a freelance writer covering social justice, politics, and the Middle East. 

The Trump administration has been a disaster for the environment.

On just his fourth day in office, President Trump signed executive orders reviving the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines after construction on both had been halted, meeting the demands of Indigenous activists and other protestors who argued that the projects had not undergone requisite environmental review and would threaten local water sources and increase carbon emissions. Trump also barred the Environmental Protection Agency from sharing its research with the public less than a week after his inauguration.

Trump later announced the United States' withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. And last month, judges heard arguments in what The New York Times called Trump's "biggest climate rollback" — an attempt to replace Obama-era regulations on planet-warming emissions from coal plants with much weaker rules, which the American Lung Association claims violate the Clean Air Act. Altogether, Trump's rollbacks are estimated to increase carbon pollution in the United States by 1.8 tons between 2020 and 2035.

But on election day, voters rejected Trump's dangerous climate and energy policy reversals and outright climate change denial and showed that they're committed to a greener future. And this backlash didn't just come in the form of the presidential vote.

How Americans voted this year

Voters in Michigan committed to increasing spending on restoration and conservation of public lands with Proposal One, the Use of State and Local Park Funds Amendment, which was backed by a broad coalition of local and national environmental groups, including the National Wildlife Federation and the Nature Conservancy.

Those in Nevada approved Question Six, a constitutional amendment requiring utilities to draw at least 50% of their electricity from renewable resources in the next ten years. Voters passed the amendment not once but twice because, in Nevada, any amendment to the state Constitution has to be approved in two consecutive elections. The success of Question Six means there's now a constitutional amendment and a bill mandating 50% renewables after Governor Steve Sisolak signed SB358 on Earth Day last year.

Even in Louisiana, where Trump garnered nearly 60% of the vote, grassroots organizers prevailed over Big Oil as voters rejected a constitutional amendment that would have saved the oil and natural gas industry billions of dollars.

As in Louisiana, voters elsewhere made clear that they will not be swayed by the fossil fuel industry interfering in their politics and backed candidates committed to climate action.


Candidates who support the Green New Deal, including the original members of the Squad — Reps. Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, and Rashida Tlaib — and others, like Rep. Mike Levin, in swing districts, kept their seats. Young progressives who ran on climate justice platforms also made their mark in places as diverse as the South Bronx — where 29-year-old Amanda Septimo beat out three-decade incumbent Carmen Arroyo for a seat in the New York State Assembly — and Grants Pass, Oregon, a rural Republican stronghold where 28-year-old Vanessa Ogier flipped a seat on the city council.
Will a Biden administration follow suit on climate action?

While voters showed that they are eager for climate action, it is difficult to know if a Biden administration will honor their mandate. Of course, Biden claims he supports "a clean energy revolution and environmental justice." And during his first speech as president-elect, he emphasized the role that his administration would have to play in a "battle to save the climate."

In a speech on the campaign trail in May, Biden boasted that he backed one of the earliest climate bills in US history — which is true! But as Zoya Teirstein wrote for Grist, between Biden's early senate days when he supported the Global Climate Protection Act of 1986 and now, "Biden's most notable climate-related accomplishment was serving as Barack Obama's sidekick for eight years." (And, remember, the Obama administration's climate record isn't perfect either.)

The truth is, Biden's record on climate has had environmentalists worried since he launched his campaign last year. It seems they were right to be concerned. Throughout his campaign, Biden has waffled on the Green New Deal — while his website calls it a "crucial framework for meeting … climate challenges," he said in the first presidential debate that he does not support it. He also spent the last few weeks of his campaign defending fracking, which is perhaps unsurprising considering Biden is being advised on climate policy by bigwigs with connections to the fossil fuel industry. On Tuesday, news broke that Biden had selected Rep. Cedric Richmond, another ally of the oil and gas industry, to lead the Office of Public Engagement and act as a special adviser within his administration, further angering climate activists.


So, what can Americans expect from the 46th President of the United States, who is slated to lead the nation for what could be half of the world's remaining years to prevent an irreversible climate catastrophe? Likely a return to Obama-era policies of regulating emissions and coordinating with other nations (Biden has already promised to re-enter the Paris Agreement).

While that may be leagues better than what Trump has accomplished on climate issues, it is not the kind of decisive action that experts and activists are calling for, nor that Americans voted for in down-ballot races this month.

If Americans want the Biden administration to take aggressive action against climate change, they may need to take their demands from the ballot box out into the street. The young climate activists who have galvanized the climate movement in recent years are already planning on it.

                                   ---30---

Marianne Dhenin is a freelance writer covering social justice, politics, and the Middle East. She holds a master's degree in human rights law and justice and is earning a doctorate in Middle East history. Follow her on Twitter: @mariannedhe.


This is an opinion column. The thoughts expressed are those of the author(s).Read the original article on Opinion Contributor. Copyright 2020.

#EV

Autonomous delivery startup Gatik just raised a $25 million Series A and will now work with Canadian retail giant Loblaw, in addition to Walmart
Joe Williams

Gatik and Loblaw joined forces to launch Canada's first autonomous delivery fleet. Gatik

Canadian retail giant Loblaw and startup Gatik are teaming up to launch an autonomous delivery fleet as the startup raises a $25 million Series A. 

Loblaw, which operates over 2,000 stores in Canada, will initially deploy Gatik five vans that will drive roughly 186 miles per week and still include a human companion. 

While Gatik CEO Gautam Narang declined to comment on the size of the Loblaw deal, he said the bulk of the firm's agreements are "multi-year partnerships" worth "multi-million dollars" each.

Canadian grocery giant Loblaw is partnering with startup Gatik to deploy the country's first autonomous delivery fleet, according to an announcement Monday.

Silicon Valley-based Gatik also has an ongoing partnership with Walmart and has raised roughly $30 million to-date, including a $25 million Series A round led by Wittington Ventures and Innovation Endeavors, also announced on Monday. Gatik declined to release its valuation, but PitchBook last pegged it at $58 million.

Loblaw operates over 2,000 stores in Canada and pulled in nearly $12 billion in revenue last year. Initially, the company will deploy five Gatik vans, which will each drive roughly 186 miles per week to deliver goods from a distribution center to physical retail stores. The vans operate autonomously as much as possible, though humans are still onboard.

The partnership pushes Gatik's total number of vehicles on the road for customers to 15. Overall, the startup's fleet has completed more than 30,000 revenue-generating autonomous orders since its founding in 2016.

While Gatik CEO Gautam Narang declined to comment on the size of the Loblaw deal, he said the bulk of its agreements are "multi-year partnerships" worth "multi-million dollars" each.

For Loblaw, the partnership could improve logistics operations, making it easier, for example, to get goods to stores, enabling faster pickup for the end-customer. The need for speed became apparent this year when consumers flooded retailers at the start of the pandemic. In fact, Gatik says the outbreak led to as much as a 90% increase in e-commerce orders among its customers.

Because of COVID-19, clients "wanted us to deploy these vehicles ahead of schedule. They wanted us to deploy more vehicles," said Narang.

The venture also helps Garik test its vans in a vastly different climate compared to the weather around Walmart's headquarters in Arkansas. Like other autonomous vehicle companies, the underlying technology supporting Gatik's fleet is shared, meaning that something a van learns on the road in Canada is shared with those in other parts of North America.

"The kind of conditions that we have in Canada are really attractive for us just from a winterization standpoint," Narang said.

The goal for Gatik is to perfect its tech to handle fixed, repeatable routes so that eventually humans won't need to ride along. While that strategy ultimately won't work for pedestrian vehicles, where there is too much variability, it could for Gatik because enterprises are often shipping items from brick-and-mortar distribution centers on the same paths each time. For Loblaw, the vans will use its automated picking facility in Toronto as a hub before exiting across five different spokes.

"This is our way of constraining the autonomy problem," Narang said. "By over-optimizing our technology on these routes, we can basically get to the market faster."

Gatik is targeting middle-mile delivery, so between where the goods arrive at the distribution center to the location where it will be delivered to the consumer — what Narang says is a segment that "was hugely underserved and it's very expensive for the retailers."

"These retailers are deploying multiple trucks with multiple drivers ... that's very costly," he added. "We are making their supply chain more efficient."

This Swedish startup created an electric, autonomous freight vehicle that it says will hit roads next year
Brittany Chang 

The Next Gen Pod. Einride

Einride has created what it calls the world's first electric autonomous heavy cargo transport vehicle that has been driven on public roads: the Pod.

The Pod comes in four variations for four different uses, and two of the variants will be delivered to customers next year.

The Sweden-based company has now worked with names like Oatly, Coca-Cola, Lidl, and DB Schenker.

"What sets us apart is our full-scale approach to sustainable autonomous freight development that's based on the needs of our customers, allowing us to tailor these solutions for real-world use," Einride's CEO and Robert Falck told Business Insider in an email interview.

Einride created the Pod, an autonomous electric heavy cargo transport vehicle.

There are, of course, other automakers and startups venturing into the autonomous cargo delivery segment. However, according to Einride's CEO and founder Robert Falck, unlike other companies, Einride's Pods are "customer and use-tailored."

"What sets us apart is our full-scale approach to sustainable autonomous freight development that's based on the needs of our customers, allowing us to tailor these solutions for real-world use," Falck wrote to Business Insider in an email interview. "We believe the strongest business case is to remove the driver from the vehicle to operate it remotely, and operate only with electric drivetrains to improve sustainability and reduce costs."

Read more: Tesla has released 'full self-driving' in beta — here's how experts rank it, Waymo and 16 other power players in the world of self-driving cars


And unlike other makers, the Sweden-based company's Pod is the world's first electric autonomous transport vehicle to be driven on public roads, according to its maker.

According to Einride, the Pod lineup and the company's "Freight Mobility Platform" offers several benefits, such as a slash in emissions and operational costs, and an increase in safety. The use of Einride's Pod and platform — which will be available in US — also provides a 200% productivity boost compared to the diesel vehicles that companies use today, according to Einride.

Reservations are now open for the autonomous electric transport (AET) vehicles, which can be be mass produced and "commercialized."



According to Einride, the exterior design and its rounded edges make the vehicle aerodynamic without decreasing its interior storage capacity.

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride

“We designed the Pod from the ground up to present the best possible business case for road freight utilizing autonomous and electric technology,” Falck told Business Insider in the email interview. “If we’re going to make transport both sustainable and cost-competitive, AET solutions like the Pod are the only way forward.”

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride


The road-legal Pod has no cab for a driver. According to Falck, not having a driver's area reduces costs and the impact on the electric drivetrain, making the price of the Pod comparable to diesel trucks.

The Next Gen Pod. Einride

"With our recent brand identity project, a central focus was on the symbiotic relationship between software and hardware in freight mobility," Einride's CMO and co-founder Linnéa Kornehed said in a statement. "It's a symbol of our accomplishments in pioneering the category of AET, but also emphasizes our commitment to developing software solutions that make the transition to sustainable freight seamless."

The Next Gen Pod. Einride


Einride is offering four different Pod types that all have varying uses.

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride


For example, AET 1, the "fenced' level, is good for use in "closed facilities" with set operational routes and times. The AET 1 can reach up to almost 19 miles-per-hour, has a range between about 81 to 112 miles, and has a payload of 16 tons.

The Next Gen Pod. Einride

Source: Einride


The AET 2, designated for "nearby" use, is good for the aforementioned closed spaces, as well as travel on public roads between two close locations. The AET 2 has the same payload, range, and miles-per-hour specs as the AET 1.

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride

Source: Einride

The pre-orders for AET 1 and AET 2 are now available, and Einride will begin shipping the vehicles to customers next year. The other two Pod types, the AET 3 and AET 4, are also available for reservations, but Enride will not begin shipping these two until 2022 to 2023.

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride


The AET 3, classified for "rural" use, can be operated on less crammed main and back roads between two locations. This vehicle can travel at almost 28 miles-per-hour, has a range between 124 to 186 miles, and has a payload of up to 16 tons.

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride


The AET 4, labeled for "highway" use, is faster at almost 53 miles-per-hour and can be operated on freeways and "major roads." The AET 4 has the same aforementioned specs as the AET 3.

The Next Gen Pod. Einride

Source: Einride


Each AET level has different "operational fees" at varying costs. For example, the vehicles all cost $10,000 to reserve, but the AET 1 has a monthly $18,000 operational charge, and the AET 4's monthly fee is higher at $22,500.

The Next Gen Pod. Einride


These additional monthly fees allow customers to use Eirnride's "freight mobility platform which will plan and operate the Pods, overseen by Einride-certified remote operators," according to the company. The platform also provides information like the vehicle's location, route, and energy.

Einride's platform. Einride

Source: Einride (1) (2)


Customers like Oatly, Bridgestone, Coca-Cola, and Lidl have already expressed interest in Einride's line of products, which also includes "traditional" electric trucks.

The Next Gen Pod at the Top Gear track. Einride

SEE ALSO: An air ambulance service tested the use of a paramedic using a jet suit to reach injured hikers

More: autonomous vehicle electric vehicle Einride 

UK

PM's defence of Priti Patel sparked Home Office fury, union says

Civil servants angry at ‘double standards applied to home secretary over bullying report’

Peter Walker Political correspondent
THE GUARDIAN
Mon 23 Nov 2020 04.37 GMT
 

The home secretary, Priti Patel. Photograph: Dominic Lipinski/PA


Top Home Office civil servants are furious at Boris Johnson’s decision to keep Priti Patel as home secretary despite an internal report that concluded she had bullied officials, their union has said.

As the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, defended Patel on Sunday, saying ministers sometimes had to be “direct” in pushing forward change, the FDA union said members in the Home Office had complained about what they felt were double standards.

Sir Alex Allan, the prime minister’s adviser on ministerial standards, quit his post on Friday after Johnson contradicted his report by vigorously defending the home secretary and keeping her in her role.

In a published summary of the long-delayed report, Allan said Patel’s conduct had “amounted to behaviour that can be described as bullying”, and highlighted instances of shouting and swearing. He concluded she had breached the ministerial code, even if unintentionally.

The FDA’s general secretary, Dave Penman, said members had stressed that they would lose their jobs if they were officially found to have to have breached their equivalent code of conduct.

“They are contractually bound by the civil service code, and they would be sacked if they broke it,” Penman said. “And here’s the ministerial code, the one thing that governs the conduct of ministers, and despite the fact that she was found to have broken it, the prime minister gives no sanction. A lot of people are furious at what they see as double standards.”

One of the justifications Johnson used for defending Patel was the element of Allan’s report that said she had been unaware of the impact of her behaviour because no Home Office official had complained about her.

Play Video
0:30 Priti Patel: I'm sorry that my behaviour has upset people – video

Sources have said, however, that Allan sought to interview the former top Home Office civil servant Sir Philip Rutnam, who resigned after clashing with Patel, but government officials blocked him.

Johnson has ordered ministers and MPs to defend Patel. Asked about her behaviour on BBC One’s Andrew Marr Show, Sunak said: “I don’t think shouting is an effective way to get the best out of people. But it is necessary sometimes to be direct in order to drive progress in an organisation, particularly under stressful circumstances.

“On a personal level, I’ve worked closely with Priti and found her to be entirely kind and very focused and passionate about what she does.”

In an interview with Sky, Sunak defended Johnson’s decision to overrule the report’s conclusions. “It is right that the prime minister, as the person who is in charge and runs the government, is able to receive that report, go through the findings and make a decision that he think is right, weighing up all the considerations,” he said.

“That’s what he’s done. The home secretary has offered a full and unreserved apology for what’s happened and I think at that point we can move on and focus on the things that people want us to do, which is keeping their streets safe and that’s what the home secretary is doing, that’s what the government is doing.”

Integrity is supposed to keep British ministers in line. It’s clearly not enough
Alex Thomas

Read more

Labour said Patel could not remain in her post. The shadow business minister, Lucy Powell, said: “She has been found by an independent inquiry of breaking the ministerial code and I think if you are found to be breaking the ministerial code, your position is completely untenable.

“I think it’s appalling that the prime minister has decided to back her instead of sacking her, and that’s what he should have done.

“It’s not that bullying can’t exist in all political parties, of course it can and it does – believe me it does – but it’s how you deal with it, it’s how you tackle it and it’s whether you show the leadership and the tough decisions that you need to take to root it out.”

Donald Trump's refusal to concede reveals hidden danger facing America
23 Nov, 2020 

US President Donald Trump. Photo / AP
news.com.au
By: Alexis Carey

Donald Trump's antics in the wake of the November 3 election have kept even those with only a passing interest in politics entertained for weeks on end.

But while it's easy to be sucked into the spectacle of the Trump circus, it masks a very real threat that could come back to bite America in the future.

According to a string of experts, including Griffith University political scientist Professor John Kane, voter fraud allegations had been part of the Trump campaign's game plan well before Americans headed to the polls.

But while it's now all but certain the 74-year-old will be prised from the White House on January 20, his actions have exposed serious cracks in the system – and could pave the way for a savvier and more destructive player to take advantage of the chaos to seize power down the track.

DANGEROUS GAME PLAN

Kane said the Trump campaign began laying the groundwork for its so far baseless election fraud allegations well in advance.

"When all the polls started going against him and it was clear he would not win unless he had another strategy, he started to attack mail-in voting, which they had lots of because you've got a Covid crisis on your hands," Kane told news.com.au.

"There was absolutely no evidence at all, but he started hammering on and on and on about his rigged election mantra, and he was clearly setting the stage for when he did lose."

Kane said the Trump team also initially pursued the "crazy" strategy of demanding counting be stopped early in some areas when Trump pulled ahead because of the so-called "red mirage".

That was created as the majority of Republican supporters tended to vote in person, while Democrat votes trickled in later via mail-in ballots.

Kane believes Trump now privately accepts that it's game over, but that he continues to push the election fraud conspiracy theory in an effort to save face.

Meanwhile, most Republicans are sticking by him as they do not want to offend their supporters who back the outgoing President.

"It's getting increasingly uncomfortable for Trump himself and you can see from his attendance at the G20 Summit that he has mentally checked out," he claimed.

"He knows it's all over but he has a reputation to maintain."

'VAST THREAT'

But while it's tempting to view the ongoing Trump saga as little more than an entertaining spectacle, Kane argued that Trump's behaviour was creating a potential future hazard in a post published on Medium this month.

Supporters of President Trump protest against the results of the election at the Capitol in Austin, Texas. Photo / AP

"Trump's relative triviality may lead us to think he cannot pose such a vast threat," he wrote.

"Perhaps, yet he has exposed chinks and vulnerabilities in the constitutional fabric of the American politics that, if left unaddressed, may be ruthlessly and devastatingly exploited by some future demagogue more astute and more determined than Trump."

He told news.com.au Trump's "attempted coup" exposed the cracks in America's political system, and that a savvier player with an agenda could potentially take advantage of those very cracks to seize power in future.

"There's no getting around it – he's trying to rob an election from the person who won it," Kane said.

"Trump is incompetent and bumbling … but what he has done is shown up the cracks in the system and he has shown that things many people thought were impossible are not.

"If you have someone with real political talent and an agenda, Trump has shown how far you can push the system."

He said Trump's behaviour proved a great deal of the political system was built on "honour" and that if a leader chose not to do the honourable thing, there was "no comeback".

"It's concerning for all American people – the situation is hilarious on one level, but it's actually genuinely scary," Kane said.

'FANATICAL FOLLOWING'

So what would it take for a future tyrant to take advantage of Trump's groundwork?

According to Kane, there would need to be several key factors at play – an economic crisis, disillusioned masses and a "charismatic character willing to do practically anything" who had the military on side.


"The kind of fanatical following Trump did achieve is very rare and it grows out of dissatisfaction with the system," he said.

President-elect Joe Biden, accompanied by Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, speaks at The Queen theatre in Wilmington. Photo / AP

"We see this kind of scenario in coups around the world, and it's one a determined autocrat could make use of.

"When opportunities come around, ruthless people grab them, and all it would take would be for someone with some political nous to challenge (the system) after Trump."

Kane said Trump's repeated "lies" and support of conspiracy theories was also "a worry" as it encouraged the public to disregard reality and eroded trust in institutions and processes without justification, although he hoped the "fake news" hysteria would fizzle out once Trump was removed from office.

WHAT NEXT?

Meanwhile, President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris are quietly preparing to take over the leadership, with Biden previously describing Trump's refusal to concede "an embarrassment".

Once the votes are certified in each state, the Biden administration will commence on January 20 at noon during an inauguration ceremony which will take place in Washington DC – with or without Trump's blessing.