 |
| AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM |
Friday, December 11, 2020
Lebanese judge charges PM, ex-ministers over Beirut Port Explosion
By Ellen Francis and Tom Perry
Thu., December 10, 2020
By Ellen Francis and Tom Perry
Thu., December 10, 2020
FILE PHOTO: Lebanese Prime Minister Hassan Diab speaks to the media outside Beirut's international airport
BEIRUT (Reuters) - The judge investigating the Beirut port explosion has charged Lebanon's caretaker Prime Minister Hassan Diab and three former ministers with negligence over the blast that killed 200 people and devastated swathes of the capital.
Diab, whose cabinet resigned over the August blast after taking office in early 2020, said his conscience was clear and accused the judge of breaching the constitution.
Four months after one of the largest non-nuclear explosions on record, which injured thousands of people, victims are still awaiting the result of the investigation. Lebanese leaders had promised it would come within days.
The explosion added to the challenges facing Lebanon, where decades of waste and corruption have triggered the country's worst ever financial crisis.
Lebanon's sectarian leaders are still haggling over who will be in the new cabinet.
Judge Fadi Sawan called Diab and former finance minister Ali Hassan Khalil in for questioning next week, along with former public works ministers Ghazi Zeaiter and Youssef Finianos, state news agency NNA said on Thursday.
DIVIDED OPINION
Zeaiter, who said he would comment once he was officially informed, headed the public works ministry in 2014, soon after the Rhosus ship carrying tonnes of ammonium nitrate arrived at Beirut port.
The highly explosive chemicals were stored for years in poor conditions at the port, which lies in the heart of the capital.
There was no immediate comment from Finianos.
Khalil, a top aide to Lebanon's influential Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, said he had no role in the case as former head of the finance ministry, which oversees customs.
He said on Twitter that he was surprised by the judge's allegations which "violated the constitution and the law".
Families of some of the victims say Judge Sawan told them he had sent Berri a memo calling for immunity to be lifted from several former ministers and premiers, but the speaker had not accepted his proposal.
The judicial council that appointed Sawan said on Thursday he sent a letter last month telling parliament his investigation had revealed "serious suspicions" linked to some government officials. Parliament replied it found no such suspicions based on the information provided, the council said.
Sawan decided to interrogate a number of officials "as defendants", including ministers, and was doing his job to find the culprits, it said.
A parliamentary office statement in November said that when asked about the letter, parliament speaker Berri said: "We have done what needs to be done and replied to him".
The probe has sparked legal debate in Lebanon about whether ministers enjoy immunity in this case.
Thursday's move showed Sawan sided with those saying immunity does not apply, said Nizar Saghieh, head of The Legal Agenda, a research and advocacy organisation.
"This is a positive thing, meaning it has opened the door to bringing the ministers to account."
A senior judicial source said it was up to a special court, which includes seven lawmakers and eight judges, to indict the ministers rather than Sawan.
Several officials have been detained since the blast, including the port and customs chiefs, with dozens testifying as witnesses, including Diab.
But many Lebanese remain sceptical that senior politicians will be held to account, fearing the truth will never emerge from a system riven by corruption.
Security officials had warned Diab and President Michel Aoun the nitrate could destroy the capital if it exploded, according to documents seen by Reuters and senior security sources.
Aoun has said he had no direct authority over the port.
(Additional reporting by Laila Bassam and Samia Nakhoul; Writing by Ellen Francis; Editing by Alison Williams, Edmund Blair and Alexander Smith)
BEIRUT (Reuters) - The judge investigating the Beirut port explosion has charged Lebanon's caretaker Prime Minister Hassan Diab and three former ministers with negligence over the blast that killed 200 people and devastated swathes of the capital.
Diab, whose cabinet resigned over the August blast after taking office in early 2020, said his conscience was clear and accused the judge of breaching the constitution.
Four months after one of the largest non-nuclear explosions on record, which injured thousands of people, victims are still awaiting the result of the investigation. Lebanese leaders had promised it would come within days.
The explosion added to the challenges facing Lebanon, where decades of waste and corruption have triggered the country's worst ever financial crisis.
Lebanon's sectarian leaders are still haggling over who will be in the new cabinet.
Judge Fadi Sawan called Diab and former finance minister Ali Hassan Khalil in for questioning next week, along with former public works ministers Ghazi Zeaiter and Youssef Finianos, state news agency NNA said on Thursday.
DIVIDED OPINION
Zeaiter, who said he would comment once he was officially informed, headed the public works ministry in 2014, soon after the Rhosus ship carrying tonnes of ammonium nitrate arrived at Beirut port.
The highly explosive chemicals were stored for years in poor conditions at the port, which lies in the heart of the capital.
There was no immediate comment from Finianos.
Khalil, a top aide to Lebanon's influential Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, said he had no role in the case as former head of the finance ministry, which oversees customs.
He said on Twitter that he was surprised by the judge's allegations which "violated the constitution and the law".
Families of some of the victims say Judge Sawan told them he had sent Berri a memo calling for immunity to be lifted from several former ministers and premiers, but the speaker had not accepted his proposal.
The judicial council that appointed Sawan said on Thursday he sent a letter last month telling parliament his investigation had revealed "serious suspicions" linked to some government officials. Parliament replied it found no such suspicions based on the information provided, the council said.
Sawan decided to interrogate a number of officials "as defendants", including ministers, and was doing his job to find the culprits, it said.
A parliamentary office statement in November said that when asked about the letter, parliament speaker Berri said: "We have done what needs to be done and replied to him".
The probe has sparked legal debate in Lebanon about whether ministers enjoy immunity in this case.
Thursday's move showed Sawan sided with those saying immunity does not apply, said Nizar Saghieh, head of The Legal Agenda, a research and advocacy organisation.
"This is a positive thing, meaning it has opened the door to bringing the ministers to account."
A senior judicial source said it was up to a special court, which includes seven lawmakers and eight judges, to indict the ministers rather than Sawan.
Several officials have been detained since the blast, including the port and customs chiefs, with dozens testifying as witnesses, including Diab.
But many Lebanese remain sceptical that senior politicians will be held to account, fearing the truth will never emerge from a system riven by corruption.
Security officials had warned Diab and President Michel Aoun the nitrate could destroy the capital if it exploded, according to documents seen by Reuters and senior security sources.
Aoun has said he had no direct authority over the port.
(Additional reporting by Laila Bassam and Samia Nakhoul; Writing by Ellen Francis; Editing by Alison Williams, Edmund Blair and Alexander Smith)
Beirut explosion: Acting prime minister among four charged over deadly blast in Lebanon
Bel Trew and Gemma Fox
Thu., December 10, 2020, THE INDEPENDENT
Hundreds of thousands were left homeless in the blast(AFP/Getty)
Lebanon’s caretaker prime minister and three former ministers have been charged over the massive port explosion in Beirut in August, that killed over 200 people and destroyed swathes of the city.
Judge Fadi Sawan filed the charges against Hassan Diab and former finance minister Ali Hassan Khalil, as well as Ghazi Zeiter and Youssef Fenianos, both former ministers of public works.
All four were charged with negligence leading to deaths over the 4 August explosion at Beirut port, which killed more than 200 people and injured thousands. Some 300,000 people were left homeless.
The explosion was likely caused by 2,750 tonnes of ammonium nitrate that had been poorly stored at the port for years, with the knowledge of politicians, top security officials and even the prime minister and president.
The investigating judge had faced mounting criticism from the public for the secretive investigation and the fact that no senior political figures had been held to account. Before Thursday’s indictment, those detained over the blast were around 30 low-to mid-level security officials and port and customs officials.
Mr Diab, whose cabinet resigned over the August blast after taking office in early 2020, rejected Judge Sawan’s decision saying his conscience was clear and accused the judge of breaching the constitution.
His office has indicated they will not comply, saying in a statement that the judge had violated the constitution by overstepping the role of parliament, which has a special court to indict ministers.
Mr Zeiter said he would comment once he was officially informed. He headed the public works ministry in 2014, soon after the Rhosus cargo ship carrying tonnes of ammonium nitrate arrived at Beirut port.
There was no immediate comment from Mr Fenianos, who followed Mr Zeitar taking up the role as transport and public works minister in 2016 until the beginning of 2020.
Mr Khalil, a top aide to Lebanon's influential parliament speaker Nabih Berri, said he had no role in the case as former head of the finance ministry, which oversees customs.
He said on Twitter that he was surprised by the judge’s allegations which “violated the constitution and the law”.
The probe has sparked legal debate in Lebanon about whether ministers enjoy immunity in this case.
Families of some of the victims say Judge Sawan told them he had sent Mr Berri a memo calling for immunity to be lifted but the speaker had not accepted his proposal.
The judicial council that appointed Sawan said on Thursday he sent a letter last month telling parliament his investigation had revealed “serious suspicions” linked to some government officials. Parliament replied it found no such suspicions based on the information provided, the council said.
Sawan subsequently decided to interrogate a number of officials “as defendants”, including ministers, and was doing his job to find the culprits, it said.
The news was welcomed by Michel el Murr, head of the search and rescue for the Lebanese fire crew, who lost several colleagues and friends in the blast. He said it was a “positive development” that the prime minister and senior ministers would be questioned as they knew about the dangerous stockpile and had apparently failed to do anything about it.
“We hope this means we will get more answers about what happened and we will be a step closer to justice,” he told The Independent.
Diab, a former university professor, resigned a few days after the blast, which has been described as one of the largest and most devastating non-nuclear explosion in modern history.
Both Khalil and Fenanios were sanctioned by the US in September this year, the first two officials to be subjected to those outside of Hezbollah group.
Agencies contributed to this report
Read More
The horrors that followed the Beirut blast truly shocked me
Seven years of neglect, and 13 minutes of chaos, that destroyed Beirut
How Russel Crowe helped a Beirut restaurant reopen
World Bank warns of 'prolonged depression' in Lebanon
Judge files charges against 2 over Lebanon port blast
Bel Trew and Gemma Fox
Thu., December 10, 2020, THE INDEPENDENT
Hundreds of thousands were left homeless in the blast(AFP/Getty)
Lebanon’s caretaker prime minister and three former ministers have been charged over the massive port explosion in Beirut in August, that killed over 200 people and destroyed swathes of the city.
Judge Fadi Sawan filed the charges against Hassan Diab and former finance minister Ali Hassan Khalil, as well as Ghazi Zeiter and Youssef Fenianos, both former ministers of public works.
All four were charged with negligence leading to deaths over the 4 August explosion at Beirut port, which killed more than 200 people and injured thousands. Some 300,000 people were left homeless.
The explosion was likely caused by 2,750 tonnes of ammonium nitrate that had been poorly stored at the port for years, with the knowledge of politicians, top security officials and even the prime minister and president.
The investigating judge had faced mounting criticism from the public for the secretive investigation and the fact that no senior political figures had been held to account. Before Thursday’s indictment, those detained over the blast were around 30 low-to mid-level security officials and port and customs officials.
Mr Diab, whose cabinet resigned over the August blast after taking office in early 2020, rejected Judge Sawan’s decision saying his conscience was clear and accused the judge of breaching the constitution.
His office has indicated they will not comply, saying in a statement that the judge had violated the constitution by overstepping the role of parliament, which has a special court to indict ministers.
Mr Zeiter said he would comment once he was officially informed. He headed the public works ministry in 2014, soon after the Rhosus cargo ship carrying tonnes of ammonium nitrate arrived at Beirut port.
There was no immediate comment from Mr Fenianos, who followed Mr Zeitar taking up the role as transport and public works minister in 2016 until the beginning of 2020.
Mr Khalil, a top aide to Lebanon's influential parliament speaker Nabih Berri, said he had no role in the case as former head of the finance ministry, which oversees customs.
He said on Twitter that he was surprised by the judge’s allegations which “violated the constitution and the law”.
The probe has sparked legal debate in Lebanon about whether ministers enjoy immunity in this case.
Families of some of the victims say Judge Sawan told them he had sent Mr Berri a memo calling for immunity to be lifted but the speaker had not accepted his proposal.
The judicial council that appointed Sawan said on Thursday he sent a letter last month telling parliament his investigation had revealed “serious suspicions” linked to some government officials. Parliament replied it found no such suspicions based on the information provided, the council said.
Sawan subsequently decided to interrogate a number of officials “as defendants”, including ministers, and was doing his job to find the culprits, it said.
The news was welcomed by Michel el Murr, head of the search and rescue for the Lebanese fire crew, who lost several colleagues and friends in the blast. He said it was a “positive development” that the prime minister and senior ministers would be questioned as they knew about the dangerous stockpile and had apparently failed to do anything about it.
“We hope this means we will get more answers about what happened and we will be a step closer to justice,” he told The Independent.
Diab, a former university professor, resigned a few days after the blast, which has been described as one of the largest and most devastating non-nuclear explosion in modern history.
Both Khalil and Fenanios were sanctioned by the US in September this year, the first two officials to be subjected to those outside of Hezbollah group.
Agencies contributed to this report
Read More
The horrors that followed the Beirut blast truly shocked me
Seven years of neglect, and 13 minutes of chaos, that destroyed Beirut
How Russel Crowe helped a Beirut restaurant reopen
World Bank warns of 'prolonged depression' in Lebanon
Judge files charges against 2 over Lebanon port blast
CANADA
Commons passes assisted-dying bill after Conservatives end filibuster
Thu., December 10, 2020 The Canadian Press
OTTAWA — A bill to expand access to medical assistance in dying was approved Thursday by the House of Commons after the Conservatives ended a days-long filibuster.
Bill C-7 passed by a vote of 212-107, with the support of all but four Liberals — two of whom voted against and two of whom abstained — and all Bloc Québécois, New Democrat and Green MPs.
Nearly all Conservative MPs voted against the bill, including Leader Erin O'Toole. Just 15 supported it and one abstained.
Independent MP Jody Wilson-Raybould also voted against the proposed changes to the current law, which she introduced as the Liberals' justice minister in 2016.
The Senate, where opinion on the bill is deeply divided, now has just one week to deal with it before a court-imposed deadline of Dec. 18.
The Conservatives spent four days putting up speaker after speaker to debate the bill at third reading, after similarly dragging out debate on the justice committee's report on the bill.
As a result, passage of the bill Thursday came almost two weeks later than the government had planned and it remains to be seen whether the Senate can whip the bill through all stages of its legislative process in just one week.
"It certainly would have been better had this bill been there (in the Senate) earlier. There's absolutely no question about that and the Conservatives will have to answer for that," Justice Minister David Lametti said after the vote.
"It is difficult, I understand, but certainly not impossible."
Still, Lametti acknowledged he's "definitely worried" that some Conservative senators will drag out proceedings in the upper house, just as their caucus colleagues did in the Commons.
And should the Senate amend the bill in any substantive way, Lametti conceded it's "a fair point" that it would have to come back to the Commons where MPs would likely demand more lengthy debate.
The Commons is scheduled to break Friday until late January but could be recalled if necessary.
The upper house is not expected to begin second reading debate on the bill until Monday. If senators vote to approve the bill in principle, it must then go to the Senate's legal and constitutional affairs committee.
The committee last week conducted a pre-study of the bill, hearing from numerous witnesses, in a bid to help expedite the bill's passage through the Senate. But it may yet call more witnesses and must still give the bill clause-by-clause scrutiny and consider proposed amendments.
And then it must be debated and voted on again by senators in the chamber as a whole.
Some Conservative senators have echoed the concerns of their caucus colleagues in the Commons that the bill ignores the vehement opposition to the bill by disability rights groups, who fear it sends a message that life with a disability is not worth living.
But other senators, including some Conservatives, have argued the bill is unconstitutional because it is still too restrictive and, in particular, because it would expressly prohibit assisted dying for anyone suffering solely from a mental illness.
The bill is intended to bring the law into compliance with a Quebec Superior Court ruling last fall, which struck down a provision allowing medical assistance in dying only to those whose natural death is reasonably foreseeable.
It would drop the near-death requirement but set out two sets of eligibility criteria, making it easier for those near death to receive an assisted death but setting up more restrictive conditions for those who are not.
If the bill is not passed by next Friday, Lametti warned it will create a legal void in Quebec, in which people who are not near death will be allowed to receive an assisted death without any of the safeguards that Bill C-7 would have imposed.
As well, he said medical practitioners in the province will have no certainty as to whether they were acting legally in providing the procedure.
Moreover, he said all intolerably suffering Canadians who are near death would lose the benefit of the more relaxed rules proposed by the bill.
"These kinds of voids are very serious and so I'm very worried and I'm asking senators to really put their shoulders to the wheel in good faith and let's try to get this across the finish line."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 10, 2020.
Joan Bryden, The Canadian Press
Legislation to expand access to medically assisted death clears House, moves to Senate
Thu., December 10, 2020
Legislation to expand access to medically assisted death clears House, moves to Senate
A contentious bill that would expand access to medical assistance in dying (MAID) has passed in the House of Commons and will now head to the Senate as a court-imposed deadline looms on Dec. 18.
MPs voted 212 to 107 in favour of the legislation. Several Conservative MPs supported it, while a handful of Liberal MPs voted against it or abstained.
The government introduced C-7 in February in response to a September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling which found that the law's precondition for obtaining a physician-assisted death — that the individual seeking it must face a "reasonably foreseeable" natural death — was unconstitutional.
The bill proposes to remove that requirement. It also disqualifies those whose sole underlying condition is a mental illness from obtaining an assisted death.
Justice Minister David Lametti said that while he is pleased the bill passed, he's disappointed that Conservatives delayed its passage and limited the time the Senate has to consider it.
"I'm asking senators to really put their shoulders to the wheel in good faith and let's get this across the finish line," he said.
WATCH / Justice minister fears C-7 won't pass Senate quickly
The Conservatives had worked to delay passage of the bill, arguing the government was trying rush through life-and-death legislation that fails to offer safeguards to protect the vulnerable.
Senate committee reports on pre-study
The bill now heads to the Senate, which is set to rise for the holiday break next week. It's not clear if the bill will pass in time to meet the court deadline before the break.
Lametti admitted he is worried about the tight timeframe.
"It is difficult, I understand, but definitely not impossible," he said.
The House of Commons rises this week for the break, but Lametti said it would be required to return if the Senate were to propose amendments to the bill.
Conservative Sen. Denise Batters said the Senate must not be "pressured" into passing C-7.
She said the government should have appealed the Quebec court ruling. She said the Dec. 18 deadline was artificially imposed and criticized the government for proroguing Parliament for six weeks instead of prioritizing the important piece of legislation.
The government already has received two extensions from the court, and Batters said it could request a third.
"If Bill C-7 does not pass, and I hope it doesn't, the Liberals will have only themselves to blame," she said.
Because of the compressed timeline, the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee conducted a pre-study of C-7 that heard from 81 witnesses, including ministers, regulatory authorities, advocacy groups, legal and medical practitioners and other stakeholders. It also received 86 written submissions.
That committee released a report today outlining a summary of opinions it heard from witnesses, including concerns about Charter of Rights compliance, safeguards to protect the vulnerable and access to proper health care and support services.
The report says the committee heard from major national disability organizations which argued that removing "reasonably foreseeable natural death" would "single out disability" in violation of Charter-entrenched equality rights. They said a constitutional challenge likely would be launched if the bill passes.
MPs also heard similar concerns from groups representing Canadians with disabilities.
A July report from Health Canada on medical assistance in dying in Canada showed that nearly 14,000 Canadians had received MAID since 2016. In 2019, MAID accounted for 2 per cent of deaths in Canada.
A planned parliamentary review of the regime was delayed due to COVID-19, but is expected to begin next year.
A contentious bill that would expand access to medical assistance in dying (MAID) has passed in the House of Commons and will now head to the Senate as a court-imposed deadline looms on Dec. 18.
MPs voted 212 to 107 in favour of the legislation. Several Conservative MPs supported it, while a handful of Liberal MPs voted against it or abstained.
The government introduced C-7 in February in response to a September 2019 Superior Court of Quebec ruling which found that the law's precondition for obtaining a physician-assisted death — that the individual seeking it must face a "reasonably foreseeable" natural death — was unconstitutional.
The bill proposes to remove that requirement. It also disqualifies those whose sole underlying condition is a mental illness from obtaining an assisted death.
Justice Minister David Lametti said that while he is pleased the bill passed, he's disappointed that Conservatives delayed its passage and limited the time the Senate has to consider it.
"I'm asking senators to really put their shoulders to the wheel in good faith and let's get this across the finish line," he said.
WATCH / Justice minister fears C-7 won't pass Senate quickly
The Conservatives had worked to delay passage of the bill, arguing the government was trying rush through life-and-death legislation that fails to offer safeguards to protect the vulnerable.
Senate committee reports on pre-study
The bill now heads to the Senate, which is set to rise for the holiday break next week. It's not clear if the bill will pass in time to meet the court deadline before the break.
Lametti admitted he is worried about the tight timeframe.
"It is difficult, I understand, but definitely not impossible," he said.
The House of Commons rises this week for the break, but Lametti said it would be required to return if the Senate were to propose amendments to the bill.
Conservative Sen. Denise Batters said the Senate must not be "pressured" into passing C-7.
She said the government should have appealed the Quebec court ruling. She said the Dec. 18 deadline was artificially imposed and criticized the government for proroguing Parliament for six weeks instead of prioritizing the important piece of legislation.
The government already has received two extensions from the court, and Batters said it could request a third.
"If Bill C-7 does not pass, and I hope it doesn't, the Liberals will have only themselves to blame," she said.
Because of the compressed timeline, the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee conducted a pre-study of C-7 that heard from 81 witnesses, including ministers, regulatory authorities, advocacy groups, legal and medical practitioners and other stakeholders. It also received 86 written submissions.
That committee released a report today outlining a summary of opinions it heard from witnesses, including concerns about Charter of Rights compliance, safeguards to protect the vulnerable and access to proper health care and support services.
The report says the committee heard from major national disability organizations which argued that removing "reasonably foreseeable natural death" would "single out disability" in violation of Charter-entrenched equality rights. They said a constitutional challenge likely would be launched if the bill passes.
MPs also heard similar concerns from groups representing Canadians with disabilities.
A July report from Health Canada on medical assistance in dying in Canada showed that nearly 14,000 Canadians had received MAID since 2016. In 2019, MAID accounted for 2 per cent of deaths in Canada.
A planned parliamentary review of the regime was delayed due to COVID-19, but is expected to begin next year.
Scientists looking for rare whale stumble across entirely new species of whale
Harry Cockburn
Thu., December 10, 2020
Harry Cockburn
Thu., December 10, 2020
Researchers believe they have found a previously unknown species of beaked whale in waters off Mexico's western coast (Reuters)
Scientists searching for a little-known species of beaked whale, which has only ever been found dead, believe they have stumbled across another new species of whale off Mexico’s western Pacific coast.
If confirmed, the new species would be a significant new discovery, and one among some of the planet’s largest mammals.
The research team spotted three of the whales while on the lookout for Perrin’s beaked whale, specimens of which have only ever been seen when they’ve been washed up dead on the shore.
The team, led by the non-profit Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, were near Mexico's remote San Benito Islands on 17 November, when they saw the whales.
But they didn’t initially realise they were looking at what could be a previously unrecognised species.
Watch: Researchers say they spotted new whale species
JAY BARLOW: We saw something
“These animals popped to the surface right next to the boat,” Jay Barlow, a marine mammal biologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego told Reuters.
“It was just a phenomenal encounter. It's very rare to even see a beaked whale, and to find a friendly group of beaked whales, it's even rarer,” he said.
It was only when they later studied the photographs they took of the animals that they realised they could be looking at a species which has never been described before.
The whales’ teeth were unusually placed, Dr Barlow said, and underwater recordings of the whales’ calls also suggested they were unique.
This potential new species both look and sound different from the approximately 23 other known species, Dr Barlow said.
Speaking to PA, Dr Barlow said: “We saw something new. Something that was not expected in this area, something that doesn't match, either visually or acoustically, anything that is known to exist.”
Scientists searching for a little-known species of beaked whale, which has only ever been found dead, believe they have stumbled across another new species of whale off Mexico’s western Pacific coast.
If confirmed, the new species would be a significant new discovery, and one among some of the planet’s largest mammals.
The research team spotted three of the whales while on the lookout for Perrin’s beaked whale, specimens of which have only ever been seen when they’ve been washed up dead on the shore.
The team, led by the non-profit Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, were near Mexico's remote San Benito Islands on 17 November, when they saw the whales.
But they didn’t initially realise they were looking at what could be a previously unrecognised species.
Watch: Researchers say they spotted new whale species
JAY BARLOW: We saw something
“These animals popped to the surface right next to the boat,” Jay Barlow, a marine mammal biologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego told Reuters.
“It was just a phenomenal encounter. It's very rare to even see a beaked whale, and to find a friendly group of beaked whales, it's even rarer,” he said.
It was only when they later studied the photographs they took of the animals that they realised they could be looking at a species which has never been described before.
The whales’ teeth were unusually placed, Dr Barlow said, and underwater recordings of the whales’ calls also suggested they were unique.
This potential new species both look and sound different from the approximately 23 other known species, Dr Barlow said.
Speaking to PA, Dr Barlow said: “We saw something new. Something that was not expected in this area, something that doesn't match, either visually or acoustically, anything that is known to exist.”
The possibly new species of beaked whale seen from the boat
Simon Ager/Sea Shepherd/CONANP/ Reuters
The research team took three water samples in the vicinity of the animals in hopes of getting an “environmental DNA sample from their sloughed skin cells,” which will be submitted for laboratory analysis.
This could help determine whether it is a new species.
Researchers hope to mount another trip next year to see if they can find both the new beaked whales and Perrin's beaked whale.
Beaked whales are named for their pointy, beak-like snouts, which resemble those of dolphins.
They are found mostly in remote waters, such as those off the San Benito Islands.
Despite their large size – growing up to five metres (16.4 feet) long, they can be difficult for humans to observe as they tend to swim and feed mostly at depths of over 900 metres (3,000 feet), surfacing only occasionally for air.
At such depths, the animals have a better chance of avoiding their main predator, killer whales.
The research team took three water samples in the vicinity of the animals in hopes of getting an “environmental DNA sample from their sloughed skin cells,” which will be submitted for laboratory analysis.
This could help determine whether it is a new species.
Researchers hope to mount another trip next year to see if they can find both the new beaked whales and Perrin's beaked whale.
Beaked whales are named for their pointy, beak-like snouts, which resemble those of dolphins.
They are found mostly in remote waters, such as those off the San Benito Islands.
Despite their large size – growing up to five metres (16.4 feet) long, they can be difficult for humans to observe as they tend to swim and feed mostly at depths of over 900 metres (3,000 feet), surfacing only occasionally for air.
At such depths, the animals have a better chance of avoiding their main predator, killer whales.
Hyundai Motor Group to Acquire Controlling Interest in Boston Dynamics from SoftBank Group, Opening a New Chapter in the Robotics and Mobility Industry
NEWS PROVIDED BY Hyundai Motor Group
Dec 11, 2020
Hyundai Motor Group to acquire controlling interest in Boston Dynamics, valued at $1.1 billion, with the goal of advancing robotics and mobility to realize progress for humanity
The combination of the highly complementary technologies of Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics, and the continued partnership of SoftBank Group, will propel development and commercialization of advanced robots
The robotics technologies will lend synergies to autonomous vehicles, UAMs and smart factories
Hyundai Motor Group, together with Boston Dynamics, will create robotics value chain ranging from robot component manufacturing to smart logistics solutions
BOSTON and SEOUL, South Korea and TOKYO, Dec. 11, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Hyundai Motor Group and SoftBank Group Corp. (SoftBank) today agreed on main terms of the transaction pursuant to which Hyundai Motor Group will acquire a controlling interest in Boston Dynamics in a deal that values the mobile robot firm at $1.1 billion. The deal came as Hyundai Motor Group envisions the transformation of human life by combining world-leading robotics technologies with its mobility expertise. Financial terms were not disclosed.
NEWS PROVIDED BY Hyundai Motor Group
Dec 11, 2020
Hyundai Motor Group to acquire controlling interest in Boston Dynamics, valued at $1.1 billion, with the goal of advancing robotics and mobility to realize progress for humanity
The combination of the highly complementary technologies of Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics, and the continued partnership of SoftBank Group, will propel development and commercialization of advanced robots
The robotics technologies will lend synergies to autonomous vehicles, UAMs and smart factories
Hyundai Motor Group, together with Boston Dynamics, will create robotics value chain ranging from robot component manufacturing to smart logistics solutions
BOSTON and SEOUL, South Korea and TOKYO, Dec. 11, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Hyundai Motor Group and SoftBank Group Corp. (SoftBank) today agreed on main terms of the transaction pursuant to which Hyundai Motor Group will acquire a controlling interest in Boston Dynamics in a deal that values the mobile robot firm at $1.1 billion. The deal came as Hyundai Motor Group envisions the transformation of human life by combining world-leading robotics technologies with its mobility expertise. Financial terms were not disclosed.
Hyundai Motor Group to Acquire Controlling Interest in Boston Dynamics from SoftBank Group, Boston Dynamics' Spot® and Atlas
Hyundai Motor Group to Acquire Controlling Interest in Boston Dynamics from SoftBank Group, Boston Dynamics' Atlas
Hyundai Motor Group to Acquire Controlling Interest in Boston Dynamics from SoftBank Group, Boston Dynamics' Spot®
Under the agreement, Hyundai Motor Group will hold an approximately 80% stake in Boston Dynamics and SoftBank, through one of its affiliates, will retain an approximately 20% stake in Boston Dynamics after the closing of the transaction. Hyundai Motor Group's affiliates - Hyundai Motor Co., Hyundai Mobis Co. and Hyundai Glovis Co. - and Hyundai Motor Group Chairman Euisun Chung respectively participated in the acquisition.
By establishing a leading presence in the field of robotics, the acquisition will mark another major step for Hyundai Motor Group toward its strategic transformation into a Smart Mobility Solution Provider. To propel this transformation, Hyundai Motor Group has invested substantially in development of future technologies, including in fields such as autonomous driving technology, connectivity, eco-friendly vehicles, smart factories, advanced materials, artificial intelligence (AI), and robots.
Advanced robotics offer opportunities for rapid growth with the potential to positively impact society in multiple ways. Boston Dynamics is the established leader in developing agile, mobile robots that have been successfully integrated into various business operations. The deal is also expected to allow Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics to leverage each other's respective strengths in manufacturing, logistics, construction and automation.
"We are delighted to have Boston Dynamics, a world leader in mobile robots, join the Hyundai team. This transaction will unite capabilities of Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics to spearhead innovation in future mobility. The synergies created by our union offer exciting new pathways for our companies to realize our goal - providing free and safe movement and higher plane of life experiences for humanity," said Euisun Chung, Chairman of Hyundai Motor Group. "We will also contribute to the society by enhancing its safety, security, public health amid global trends of aging society and digital transformation."
Masayoshi Son, Representative Director, Corporate Officer, Chairman & CEO of SoftBank Group said, "Boston Dynamics is at the heart of smart robotics. We are thrilled to partner with Hyundai, one of the world's leading global mobility companies, to accelerate the company's path to commercialization. Boston Dynamics has a very bright future and we remain invested in the company's success."
"Boston Dynamics' commercial business has grown rapidly as we've brought to market the first robot that can automate repetitive and dangerous tasks in workplaces designed for human-level mobility. We and Hyundai share a view of the transformational power of mobility and look forward to working together to accelerate our plans to enable the world with cutting edge automation, and to continue to solve the world's hardest robotics challenges for our customers," said Robert Playter, CEO of Boston Dynamics.
Boston Dynamics produces highly capable mobile robots with advanced mobility, dexterity and intelligence, enabling automation in difficult, dangerous, or unstructured environments. The company launched sales of its first commercial robot, Spot® in June of 2020 and has since sold hundreds of robots in a variety of industries, such as power utilities, construction, manufacturing, oil and gas, and mining. Boston Dynamics plans to expand the Spot product line early next year with an enterprise version of the robot with greater levels of autonomy and remote inspection capabilities, and the release of a robotic arm, which will be a breakthrough in mobile manipulation.
Boston Dynamics is also entering the logistics automation market with the industry leading Pick™, a computer vision-based depalletizing solution, and will introduce a mobile robot for warehouses in 2021.
An Outstanding Platform for Boston Dynamics's future growth
Headquartered in Seoul, South Korea, Hyundai Motor Group is a global automotive group operating in the automobile, steel, construction, machine tools, logistics, and other industries. With more than 16,000 employees working in 40 facilities across 10 states, including its $1.8 billion auto manufacturing plant in Alabama, Hyundai Motor Group is a well-established investor, manufacturer, and innovator in the United States.
Hyundai Motor Group's decision to acquire Boston Dynamics is based on its growth potential and wide range of capabilities. Boston Dynamics possesses multiple key technologies for high-performance robots equipped with perception, navigation, and intelligence. Also, Boston Dynamics is located in Boston and Silicon Valley, both major robot cluster regions, which is advantageous to sourcing key robotics talents and collaborating with competent partners.
Hyundai Motor Group's AI and Human Robot Interaction (HRI) expertise is highly synergistic with Boston Dynamics's 3D vision, manipulation, and bipedal/quadruped expertise.
Hyundai Motor Group will provide Boston Dynamics a strategic partner affording access to Hyundai Motor Group's in-house manufacturing capability and cost benefits stemming from efficiencies of scale. Boston Dynamics will benefit substantially from new capital, technology, affiliated customers, and Hyundai Motor Group's global market reach enhancing commercialization opportunity for its robot products.
Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics: Spearheading advancement in Robotics
Hyundai Motor Group's acquisition of Boston Dynamics showcases its continued commitment to achieve free and safe movement for humanity through open innovation.
Hyundai Motor Group believes that the robotics market has potential for significant growth in the future. Hyundai Motor Group plans to invest in logistics robots to enhance efficiency and establish logistics automation, as well as service robots, which have broad usage potential beyond commercial use in areas such as public security and safety. In health-related public services, robots can be used to offer freedom of mobility for the disabled or the elderly.
The investment in Boston Dynamics furthers Hyundai's portfolio of technology that addresses opportunities for both service robots and logistics robots. Service robots like Spot have the potential to perform dull, dirty, and dangerous tasks in settings where automation has been challenging to implement. With its computer vision solution, Pick, for depalletizing and its mobile warehouse robot in development, Boston Dynamics will expand Hyundai's footprint in logistics robots.
Over time, Hyundai Motor Group plans to expand its presence into the humanoid robot market with the aim of developing humanoid robots for sophisticated services such as caregiving for patients at hospitals.
Hyundai Motor Group envisions robotics technologies to lend synergies to the new mobility solutions such as autonomous driving and UAM as well as smart factory platforms it hopes to develop in the near future. Furthermore, the other Hyundai Motor Group entities are expected to contribute their respective manufacturing, R&D and logistics capabilities to help generate a new robotics-focused value chain that is anticipated to create synergies with Boston Dynamics.
Hyundai Motor Group has been steadily investing in and developing robots with its proprietary technologies. At CES 2017, Hyundai Motor Company revealed MEX, which helps paraplegic patients walk once more. In 2018, Hyundai Motor introduced VEX and CEX, aimed to help alleviate the burden of workers in the workplace. Hyundai also demonstrated its capabilities in service robots by its pilot program of hotel service robot in June of 2019. It plans to deploy sales service robots into operation next year. Robotics Lab of Hyundai is devoted to the research and development of robots, while its affiliates continue to work on the commercial production of industrial robots.
The transaction, subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions, is expected to close by June of 2021.
Under the agreement, Hyundai Motor Group will hold an approximately 80% stake in Boston Dynamics and SoftBank, through one of its affiliates, will retain an approximately 20% stake in Boston Dynamics after the closing of the transaction. Hyundai Motor Group's affiliates - Hyundai Motor Co., Hyundai Mobis Co. and Hyundai Glovis Co. - and Hyundai Motor Group Chairman Euisun Chung respectively participated in the acquisition.
By establishing a leading presence in the field of robotics, the acquisition will mark another major step for Hyundai Motor Group toward its strategic transformation into a Smart Mobility Solution Provider. To propel this transformation, Hyundai Motor Group has invested substantially in development of future technologies, including in fields such as autonomous driving technology, connectivity, eco-friendly vehicles, smart factories, advanced materials, artificial intelligence (AI), and robots.
Advanced robotics offer opportunities for rapid growth with the potential to positively impact society in multiple ways. Boston Dynamics is the established leader in developing agile, mobile robots that have been successfully integrated into various business operations. The deal is also expected to allow Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics to leverage each other's respective strengths in manufacturing, logistics, construction and automation.
"We are delighted to have Boston Dynamics, a world leader in mobile robots, join the Hyundai team. This transaction will unite capabilities of Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics to spearhead innovation in future mobility. The synergies created by our union offer exciting new pathways for our companies to realize our goal - providing free and safe movement and higher plane of life experiences for humanity," said Euisun Chung, Chairman of Hyundai Motor Group. "We will also contribute to the society by enhancing its safety, security, public health amid global trends of aging society and digital transformation."
Masayoshi Son, Representative Director, Corporate Officer, Chairman & CEO of SoftBank Group said, "Boston Dynamics is at the heart of smart robotics. We are thrilled to partner with Hyundai, one of the world's leading global mobility companies, to accelerate the company's path to commercialization. Boston Dynamics has a very bright future and we remain invested in the company's success."
"Boston Dynamics' commercial business has grown rapidly as we've brought to market the first robot that can automate repetitive and dangerous tasks in workplaces designed for human-level mobility. We and Hyundai share a view of the transformational power of mobility and look forward to working together to accelerate our plans to enable the world with cutting edge automation, and to continue to solve the world's hardest robotics challenges for our customers," said Robert Playter, CEO of Boston Dynamics.
Boston Dynamics produces highly capable mobile robots with advanced mobility, dexterity and intelligence, enabling automation in difficult, dangerous, or unstructured environments. The company launched sales of its first commercial robot, Spot® in June of 2020 and has since sold hundreds of robots in a variety of industries, such as power utilities, construction, manufacturing, oil and gas, and mining. Boston Dynamics plans to expand the Spot product line early next year with an enterprise version of the robot with greater levels of autonomy and remote inspection capabilities, and the release of a robotic arm, which will be a breakthrough in mobile manipulation.
Boston Dynamics is also entering the logistics automation market with the industry leading Pick™, a computer vision-based depalletizing solution, and will introduce a mobile robot for warehouses in 2021.
An Outstanding Platform for Boston Dynamics's future growth
Headquartered in Seoul, South Korea, Hyundai Motor Group is a global automotive group operating in the automobile, steel, construction, machine tools, logistics, and other industries. With more than 16,000 employees working in 40 facilities across 10 states, including its $1.8 billion auto manufacturing plant in Alabama, Hyundai Motor Group is a well-established investor, manufacturer, and innovator in the United States.
Hyundai Motor Group's decision to acquire Boston Dynamics is based on its growth potential and wide range of capabilities. Boston Dynamics possesses multiple key technologies for high-performance robots equipped with perception, navigation, and intelligence. Also, Boston Dynamics is located in Boston and Silicon Valley, both major robot cluster regions, which is advantageous to sourcing key robotics talents and collaborating with competent partners.
Hyundai Motor Group's AI and Human Robot Interaction (HRI) expertise is highly synergistic with Boston Dynamics's 3D vision, manipulation, and bipedal/quadruped expertise.
Hyundai Motor Group will provide Boston Dynamics a strategic partner affording access to Hyundai Motor Group's in-house manufacturing capability and cost benefits stemming from efficiencies of scale. Boston Dynamics will benefit substantially from new capital, technology, affiliated customers, and Hyundai Motor Group's global market reach enhancing commercialization opportunity for its robot products.
Hyundai Motor Group and Boston Dynamics: Spearheading advancement in Robotics
Hyundai Motor Group's acquisition of Boston Dynamics showcases its continued commitment to achieve free and safe movement for humanity through open innovation.
Hyundai Motor Group believes that the robotics market has potential for significant growth in the future. Hyundai Motor Group plans to invest in logistics robots to enhance efficiency and establish logistics automation, as well as service robots, which have broad usage potential beyond commercial use in areas such as public security and safety. In health-related public services, robots can be used to offer freedom of mobility for the disabled or the elderly.
The investment in Boston Dynamics furthers Hyundai's portfolio of technology that addresses opportunities for both service robots and logistics robots. Service robots like Spot have the potential to perform dull, dirty, and dangerous tasks in settings where automation has been challenging to implement. With its computer vision solution, Pick, for depalletizing and its mobile warehouse robot in development, Boston Dynamics will expand Hyundai's footprint in logistics robots.
Over time, Hyundai Motor Group plans to expand its presence into the humanoid robot market with the aim of developing humanoid robots for sophisticated services such as caregiving for patients at hospitals.
Hyundai Motor Group envisions robotics technologies to lend synergies to the new mobility solutions such as autonomous driving and UAM as well as smart factory platforms it hopes to develop in the near future. Furthermore, the other Hyundai Motor Group entities are expected to contribute their respective manufacturing, R&D and logistics capabilities to help generate a new robotics-focused value chain that is anticipated to create synergies with Boston Dynamics.
Hyundai Motor Group has been steadily investing in and developing robots with its proprietary technologies. At CES 2017, Hyundai Motor Company revealed MEX, which helps paraplegic patients walk once more. In 2018, Hyundai Motor introduced VEX and CEX, aimed to help alleviate the burden of workers in the workplace. Hyundai also demonstrated its capabilities in service robots by its pilot program of hotel service robot in June of 2019. It plans to deploy sales service robots into operation next year. Robotics Lab of Hyundai is devoted to the research and development of robots, while its affiliates continue to work on the commercial production of industrial robots.
The transaction, subject to regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions, is expected to close by June of 2021.
Study says $33 per person yearly could save 40 species in Saint John River watershed
Thu., December 10, 2020
HALIFAX — A new study says 40 species could be saved from disappearing from the Saint John River watershed if $33 per New Brunswick resident is spent annually on conservation measures over the next quarter century.
The estimate is based on a method called "priority threat management," where scientists identify species at risk, put price tags on conservation strategies that might save them and offer options based on cost and benefit.
The work by a University of British Columbia team was published Wednesday in the journal "Conservation Science and Practice," with the findings cited by the World Wildlife Fund in an accompanying report outlining the options.
The method pioneered by UBC ecologist Tara Martin has already been applied to one third of Australia, along with Saskatchewan’s South of the Divide region and, in British Columbia, the Fraser River estuary, the Kootenay bioregion and the Central Coast.
The study of the 55,000-square-kilometre watershed in New Brunswick was carried out in consultation with 28 experts from government agencies, Indigenous communities, environmental groups, scientific institutions and industry.
The nine groups of species identified included birds, fish, insects, trees and plants, ranging from American eels to cobblestone beetles to black foam lichen.
"If we invest now, we have a relatively good chance of securing those species, but if we don't, all of those groups are likely to be lost," Martin said in an interview on Wednesday.
The WWF report recommends a combination of 15 conservation strategies that would cost $25.8 million per year for 25 years — leading to the $33 per resident estimate.
It also notes two other options, one where six of the nine ecological groups, including 34 species, could be preserved at a cost of $8.7 million per year, and another protecting five of the nine ecological groups, including 30 species, at a cost of $1.2 million per year.
Removal of the Mactaquac Dam, combined with discharge management and improved fish passage for an added five dams, would represent about three quarters of the annual cost of the most expensive option.
According to the study, the strategies create a greater than 60 per cent chance of survival for seven of nine groups of species.
Martin says while 60 per cent isn't a guarantee of survival, it means ecologists are "hopeful" the existence of species ranging from wood turtles, bank swallows and shortnose sturgeon can be secured by 2046.
The researchers concluded there wasn't a clear strategy available at this time for preserving bats, such as the little brown myotis, and a group of forest trees that include butternut, black ash, and eastern hemlock.
These two groups, "are considered unlikely to recover in the region, even with the implementation of all conservation strategies," the WWF concluded in its report. "Consequently, these species will require added funding over the long term to invest in new, innovative solutions and technologies to ensure their survival."
Some strategies, such as bringing in measures to encourage conservation in land management and forestry, benefited a larger number of species. Martin notes the forestry industry needs to have common standards to ensure forests with a healthy mix of old and newer growth trees.
"At the moment the forests are quite homogenized. There's not a lot of diversity," the researcher said.
For woodlot owners, this could translate into measures such as governments assistance to encourage landowners to avoid cutting some woodlands required by species at risk, she said.
Other species, such as the Atlantic salmon, require much more costly measures, including the removal of the Mactaquac Dam, which adds almost $20 million a year to the total cost.
"We don't value all species equally," said Martin.
Simon Mitchell, vice president of resilient habitats at the WWF Canada, says it simply makes sense to know the costs of preserving species, in part because it illustrates that the actions are affordable.
"We're currently making choices on which species get to survive and which get left behind. This process is simply making those choices more obvious," he said in an interview Tuesday.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 10, 2020.
Michael Tutton, The Canadian Press
Thu., December 10, 2020
HALIFAX — A new study says 40 species could be saved from disappearing from the Saint John River watershed if $33 per New Brunswick resident is spent annually on conservation measures over the next quarter century.
The estimate is based on a method called "priority threat management," where scientists identify species at risk, put price tags on conservation strategies that might save them and offer options based on cost and benefit.
The work by a University of British Columbia team was published Wednesday in the journal "Conservation Science and Practice," with the findings cited by the World Wildlife Fund in an accompanying report outlining the options.
The method pioneered by UBC ecologist Tara Martin has already been applied to one third of Australia, along with Saskatchewan’s South of the Divide region and, in British Columbia, the Fraser River estuary, the Kootenay bioregion and the Central Coast.
The study of the 55,000-square-kilometre watershed in New Brunswick was carried out in consultation with 28 experts from government agencies, Indigenous communities, environmental groups, scientific institutions and industry.
The nine groups of species identified included birds, fish, insects, trees and plants, ranging from American eels to cobblestone beetles to black foam lichen.
"If we invest now, we have a relatively good chance of securing those species, but if we don't, all of those groups are likely to be lost," Martin said in an interview on Wednesday.
The WWF report recommends a combination of 15 conservation strategies that would cost $25.8 million per year for 25 years — leading to the $33 per resident estimate.
It also notes two other options, one where six of the nine ecological groups, including 34 species, could be preserved at a cost of $8.7 million per year, and another protecting five of the nine ecological groups, including 30 species, at a cost of $1.2 million per year.
Removal of the Mactaquac Dam, combined with discharge management and improved fish passage for an added five dams, would represent about three quarters of the annual cost of the most expensive option.
According to the study, the strategies create a greater than 60 per cent chance of survival for seven of nine groups of species.
Martin says while 60 per cent isn't a guarantee of survival, it means ecologists are "hopeful" the existence of species ranging from wood turtles, bank swallows and shortnose sturgeon can be secured by 2046.
The researchers concluded there wasn't a clear strategy available at this time for preserving bats, such as the little brown myotis, and a group of forest trees that include butternut, black ash, and eastern hemlock.
These two groups, "are considered unlikely to recover in the region, even with the implementation of all conservation strategies," the WWF concluded in its report. "Consequently, these species will require added funding over the long term to invest in new, innovative solutions and technologies to ensure their survival."
Some strategies, such as bringing in measures to encourage conservation in land management and forestry, benefited a larger number of species. Martin notes the forestry industry needs to have common standards to ensure forests with a healthy mix of old and newer growth trees.
"At the moment the forests are quite homogenized. There's not a lot of diversity," the researcher said.
For woodlot owners, this could translate into measures such as governments assistance to encourage landowners to avoid cutting some woodlands required by species at risk, she said.
Other species, such as the Atlantic salmon, require much more costly measures, including the removal of the Mactaquac Dam, which adds almost $20 million a year to the total cost.
"We don't value all species equally," said Martin.
Simon Mitchell, vice president of resilient habitats at the WWF Canada, says it simply makes sense to know the costs of preserving species, in part because it illustrates that the actions are affordable.
"We're currently making choices on which species get to survive and which get left behind. This process is simply making those choices more obvious," he said in an interview Tuesday.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 10, 2020.
Michael Tutton, The Canadian Press
CANADA
Parliament Budget officer provokes fresh round of suspicion over Trans Mountain profitability
Thu., December 10, 2020
Canada’s parliamentary budget officer has provoked a fresh round of suspicion about the long-term profitability of the Trans Mountain oil pipeline and expansion project.
The Dec. 8 report by Yves Giroux concludes that the government’s decision in 2018 to purchase and run the pipeline remains a profitable move only if Ottawa doesn’t take further steps to combat climate change, and if the planet maintains its unquenchable thirst for oil.
Both such scenarios are not guaranteed. The government itself has repeatedly said it will make its climate policy more stringent, including by ratcheting up its emissions target for 2030. And everyone from the fossil fuel giant BP to the oil export group OPEC have slashed their long-term oil demand forecasts.
The report caused NDP finance critic Peter Julian to call on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Tuesday to “stop rolling the dice on Trans Mountain” and to invest any further funding into “clean energy production.”
The federal government says it is not its intention to maintain ownership of the pipeline system for longer than it takes to complete the expansion project, “and beyond if that is necessary to protect the government’s investment,” as former finance minister Bill Morneau put it in 2018.
The government says it intends to divest from the asset after engagement with Indigenous communities, and that it remains committed to investing any earned dollars into clean energy projects.
Meanwhile, Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson has said there are “lots of different forecasts” concerning global energy demand, and that the next two decades will be a period of “transition” away from carbon-polluting fuels.
Giroux's report is an update to one his office published in January 2019, which indicated the government faced a significant risk of having overpaid for the project after shelling out “at the higher end” of its value.
Tuesday's report asserts that “the profitability of the Trans Mountain assets is highly contingent on the climate policy stance of the federal government.” If climate policy “continues to become more stringent,” wrote Giroux, it is possible for the value of the Trans Mountain assets to turn negative.
The Trudeau Liberals have tabled legislation, currently at second reading in the House of Commons, to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Net-zero emissions means that any carbon pollution emitted from burning fossil fuels like coal, oil or natural gas are offset with other initiatives like carbon-capture technology.
As well, Giroux noted that four-fifths of the pipeline’s use has been secured in the form of long-term contracts with energy companies to carry their fossil fuels, with the companies having agreed to pay even if they don’t provide the material for transport.
But, he added, “there is uncertainty around how much of the remaining 20 per cent capacity of the expanded pipeline system will be used.”
The tolls that the pipeline charges energy firms for this remaining space are higher than for the long-term contracts, but there is no requirement for shippers to use it, wrote Giroux.
There is also uncertainty around whether shippers will reapply for more long-term contracts after their existing ones expire.
Canada’s parliamentary budget officer has provoked a fresh round of suspicion about the long-term profitability of the Trans Mountain oil pipeline and expansion project.
The Dec. 8 report by Yves Giroux concludes that the government’s decision in 2018 to purchase and run the pipeline remains a profitable move only if Ottawa doesn’t take further steps to combat climate change, and if the planet maintains its unquenchable thirst for oil.
Both such scenarios are not guaranteed. The government itself has repeatedly said it will make its climate policy more stringent, including by ratcheting up its emissions target for 2030. And everyone from the fossil fuel giant BP to the oil export group OPEC have slashed their long-term oil demand forecasts.
The report caused NDP finance critic Peter Julian to call on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on Tuesday to “stop rolling the dice on Trans Mountain” and to invest any further funding into “clean energy production.”
The federal government says it is not its intention to maintain ownership of the pipeline system for longer than it takes to complete the expansion project, “and beyond if that is necessary to protect the government’s investment,” as former finance minister Bill Morneau put it in 2018.
The government says it intends to divest from the asset after engagement with Indigenous communities, and that it remains committed to investing any earned dollars into clean energy projects.
Meanwhile, Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson has said there are “lots of different forecasts” concerning global energy demand, and that the next two decades will be a period of “transition” away from carbon-polluting fuels.
Giroux's report is an update to one his office published in January 2019, which indicated the government faced a significant risk of having overpaid for the project after shelling out “at the higher end” of its value.
Tuesday's report asserts that “the profitability of the Trans Mountain assets is highly contingent on the climate policy stance of the federal government.” If climate policy “continues to become more stringent,” wrote Giroux, it is possible for the value of the Trans Mountain assets to turn negative.
The Trudeau Liberals have tabled legislation, currently at second reading in the House of Commons, to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. Net-zero emissions means that any carbon pollution emitted from burning fossil fuels like coal, oil or natural gas are offset with other initiatives like carbon-capture technology.
As well, Giroux noted that four-fifths of the pipeline’s use has been secured in the form of long-term contracts with energy companies to carry their fossil fuels, with the companies having agreed to pay even if they don’t provide the material for transport.
But, he added, “there is uncertainty around how much of the remaining 20 per cent capacity of the expanded pipeline system will be used.”
The tolls that the pipeline charges energy firms for this remaining space are higher than for the long-term contracts, but there is no requirement for shippers to use it, wrote Giroux.
There is also uncertainty around whether shippers will reapply for more long-term contracts after their existing ones expire.
Canada expects its crude oil production to continue climbing over the next two decades, but it could peak in 2039, according to federal energy regulator projections. In that scenario, the capacity coming from other pipelines would be more than enough to handle future crude oil growth, it said.
“In light of certain scenarios for oil supply in recent energy market projections, there is a risk that shippers will choose to not re-enter into committed contracts in the 2040s,” wrote Giroux.
If energy firms don’t re-enter these contracts, the tolls would change to equal the total cost of providing service, Giroux said — meaning a “less lucrative” outcome for Trans Mountain and a lowered value.
Analysts have also raised concerns about the long-term ability of Canada’s oilpatch to sell its mostly heavy, sulphur-rich crude oil to markets outside the United States, where 98 per cent of Canada’s oil exports are destined.
Finally, there are questions about when exactly the expanded pipeline will open for business, and whether the COVID-19 pandemic will delay the effort.
Giroux pointed out that the Crown corporation that owns and operates the pipeline has indicated in company reports that the pandemic “may increase certain risks related to development of the expansion project schedule.”
This past fall, sworn statements to regulators and construction plans appeared to indicate that Trans Mountain missed a key window for work near waterways to begin this year, meaning that construction could be delayed by two months or more.
The company has remained steadfast in its position, as it said again last month, that the expansion project’s schedule “remains intact with a planned in-service date of December 2022.”
Carl Meyer / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada’s National Observer
Carl Meyer, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, National Observer
“In light of certain scenarios for oil supply in recent energy market projections, there is a risk that shippers will choose to not re-enter into committed contracts in the 2040s,” wrote Giroux.
If energy firms don’t re-enter these contracts, the tolls would change to equal the total cost of providing service, Giroux said — meaning a “less lucrative” outcome for Trans Mountain and a lowered value.
Analysts have also raised concerns about the long-term ability of Canada’s oilpatch to sell its mostly heavy, sulphur-rich crude oil to markets outside the United States, where 98 per cent of Canada’s oil exports are destined.
Finally, there are questions about when exactly the expanded pipeline will open for business, and whether the COVID-19 pandemic will delay the effort.
Giroux pointed out that the Crown corporation that owns and operates the pipeline has indicated in company reports that the pandemic “may increase certain risks related to development of the expansion project schedule.”
This past fall, sworn statements to regulators and construction plans appeared to indicate that Trans Mountain missed a key window for work near waterways to begin this year, meaning that construction could be delayed by two months or more.
The company has remained steadfast in its position, as it said again last month, that the expansion project’s schedule “remains intact with a planned in-service date of December 2022.”
Carl Meyer / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada’s National Observer
Carl Meyer, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter, National Observer
The Paris Agreement at 5: Time’s running out. How to get the world back on track to meet its climate goals
Margot Hurlbert,
Margot Hurlbert,
Canada Research Chair, Climate Change, Energy and Sustainability, University of Regina
Thu., December 10, 2020
Thu., December 10, 2020
The Paris Agreement on climate change, signed on Dec. 12, 2015, by almost 200 states, was hailed as the turning point to keep global warming in check. Progress, however, has been insufficient. (UNclimate change/flickr), CC BY-SA
COVID-19 has dramatically changed how we live our lives, reducing air travel and automobile use. But even these significant socio-economic changes are not the long-term changes needed to address climate change. We are still set to overshoot Paris Agreement target to keep the global temperature rise this century to below 2C and to pursue a limit of 1.5C.
Bigger lifestyle, technology and land-use changes must be adopted if we are to meet the target. And while the technology exists, the imagination necessary to achieve success may be lacking.
Five years ago, the Paris Agreement united countries around the world, each making individual pledges, called Nationally Determined Contributions, to lower carbon emissions. But these pledges haven’t been enough.
As a researcher studying climate change, energy and sustainability policy, solving the complex problem of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions keeps me up at night.
Addressing climate change is urgent
“The window of opportunity, the period when significant change can be made, for limiting climate change within tolerable boundaries is rapidly narrowing,” the authors of the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land wrote in 2019.
The world’s remaining carbon budget — the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that can be released and keep the world below its 2C threshold — could be depleted by 2028 unless thoughtful decarbonization of the economy occurs with post-COVID-19 recovery.
At this point, if the world does not begin to reduce the amount of carbon being released into our atmosphere, we will likely be unable to meet our Paris Agreement commitments. This means in five years we must be close to achieving net-zero carbon emissions.
It is clear urgent action is required — a combination of new technology (clean and renewable), energy efficiency and societal change. Stated policies only get us part way there, and more measures are required, including valuing nature’s contribution to people, rainwater harvesting, ensuring conservation easements, afforestation and reforestation, and protecting soils and wetlands.
COVID-19 has dramatically changed how we live our lives, reducing air travel and automobile use. But even these significant socio-economic changes are not the long-term changes needed to address climate change. We are still set to overshoot Paris Agreement target to keep the global temperature rise this century to below 2C and to pursue a limit of 1.5C.
Bigger lifestyle, technology and land-use changes must be adopted if we are to meet the target. And while the technology exists, the imagination necessary to achieve success may be lacking.
Five years ago, the Paris Agreement united countries around the world, each making individual pledges, called Nationally Determined Contributions, to lower carbon emissions. But these pledges haven’t been enough.
As a researcher studying climate change, energy and sustainability policy, solving the complex problem of climate change and greenhouse gas emissions keeps me up at night.
Addressing climate change is urgent
“The window of opportunity, the period when significant change can be made, for limiting climate change within tolerable boundaries is rapidly narrowing,” the authors of the IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land wrote in 2019.
The world’s remaining carbon budget — the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that can be released and keep the world below its 2C threshold — could be depleted by 2028 unless thoughtful decarbonization of the economy occurs with post-COVID-19 recovery.
At this point, if the world does not begin to reduce the amount of carbon being released into our atmosphere, we will likely be unable to meet our Paris Agreement commitments. This means in five years we must be close to achieving net-zero carbon emissions.
It is clear urgent action is required — a combination of new technology (clean and renewable), energy efficiency and societal change. Stated policies only get us part way there, and more measures are required, including valuing nature’s contribution to people, rainwater harvesting, ensuring conservation easements, afforestation and reforestation, and protecting soils and wetlands.
New technologies will be necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and keep global temperature rise to 1.5C. (Beuttler C, Charles L and Wurzbacher J , 2019. The Role of Direct Air Capture in Mitigation of Anthropogenic Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Front. Clim. 1:10.), CC BYMore
The majority of climate change scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement rely on technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or prevent it from being emitted.
Planting trees, using biochar (a charcoal-like substance) to store carbon in agricultural soils, capturing carbon directly from the atmosphere, burning organic materials such as switchgrass or loblolly pine to produce energy and capturing the carbon emissions, and other negative emission technologies can help keep the carbon budget in check. Carbon dioxide removal also occurs with agricultural best management practices that increase soil organic carbon content, reduce soil erosion, salinization and compaction.
All hands on deck — policy mixes are important
There is no one single policy solution to climate change. Instead we need a system or suite of policy portfolios. Economists prefer a carbon tax for its economic efficiency and because it is technology neutral and allows producers and consumers to make choices.
Read more: Climate change puts health at risk and economists have the right prescription
But markets are not always efficient and oftentimes new technology and innovation requires a different impetus. Carbon dioxide pipelines, infrastructure for electric or hydrogen vehicles and geothermal heating require government leadership.
Green financing, targeted tax credits (such as 45Q, a U.S. tax credit that encourages carbon dioxide capture), greater efficiencies in infrastructure, buildings and homes, and nature-based solutions, such as constructed wetlands, rainwater harvesting and protecting grass and grazing lands are all important measures to be advanced through incentives or regulation.
A key remaining question is how governments can make the best climate decisions in the face of increasingly legally binding commitments. Rigid provincial, territorial and sectoral targets give rise to burden-sharing decisions as certain sectors are exempted from regulating carbon emissions or businesses move to less rigid jurisdictions resulting in carbon “leaking” from one jurisdiction to another.
Climate accountability frameworks, such as those legislated in Manitoba, British Columbia, New Zealand and the U.K., break long-term targets into interim milestones and hold governments to account. President-elect Joe Biden’s planned changes to U.S. climate policy, including rejoining the Paris Agreement, will address some of these issues and bodes well for Canada’s advancing climate policy.
Change is happening
The World Economic Forum has created an Energy Transition Index to help policy-makers and businesses plot a course for a successful energy transition. Several countries such as Sweden, the U.K. and France have done well at reducing energy subsidies, achieving gains in energy intensity of GDP, and increasing the level of political commitment to pursuing aggressive energy transition and climate change targets. But Canada’s score has worsened between 2015 to 2020.
Governments are increasingly recognizing the need to embrace laws and policies with targets of net zero emissions by 2030 or 2050. Many countries, including Sweden, the U.K. and Hungary, have declared ambitious net-zero emissions goals — Suriname and Bhutan have already achieved these goals. Others are considering them. In all, 77 countries, 10 regions and more than 100 cities announced their commitment to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and the momentum continues to build.
Business is changing. Planning for the financial quarter or year end has become obsolete. As airlines realized during COVID-19, governments and funders are reticent to bail out an industry whose massive profits over the years have been paid to shareholders and used to buy back stocks, thereby making the companies less resilient. Business is now considering the long term.
A large number of global organizations have also declared carbon neutral targets, especially those with end-consumer-facing business models (including Amazon, Google, Apple, Cenovus Energy, TELUS and Maple Leaf Foods). Our youth recognize the intergenerational injustice of worsening future climate change impacts include storms, fires, droughts and floods. Seventy per cent of young people consider the speed of energy transition to be either stagnant or too slow, and they are willing to pay for it and accept the lifestyle changes required.
The Paris Agreement unified the world in setting a target of limiting global warming. The door is closing on achieving this target. The next five years are the years for ensuring through meaningful policy and action that this target is achieved!
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Margot Hurlbert, University of Regina.
Read more:
Canada’s next budget update should include carbon
How Canada could benefit from a carbon budget
Margot Hurlbert receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), the Canada Research Chairs Programme, the Sylvia Fedoruk Canadian Centre for Nuclear innovation at the University of Saskatchewan, and the Candu Owners Group Inc.
The majority of climate change scenarios consistent with the Paris Agreement rely on technologies that remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or prevent it from being emitted.
Planting trees, using biochar (a charcoal-like substance) to store carbon in agricultural soils, capturing carbon directly from the atmosphere, burning organic materials such as switchgrass or loblolly pine to produce energy and capturing the carbon emissions, and other negative emission technologies can help keep the carbon budget in check. Carbon dioxide removal also occurs with agricultural best management practices that increase soil organic carbon content, reduce soil erosion, salinization and compaction.
All hands on deck — policy mixes are important
There is no one single policy solution to climate change. Instead we need a system or suite of policy portfolios. Economists prefer a carbon tax for its economic efficiency and because it is technology neutral and allows producers and consumers to make choices.
Read more: Climate change puts health at risk and economists have the right prescription
But markets are not always efficient and oftentimes new technology and innovation requires a different impetus. Carbon dioxide pipelines, infrastructure for electric or hydrogen vehicles and geothermal heating require government leadership.
Green financing, targeted tax credits (such as 45Q, a U.S. tax credit that encourages carbon dioxide capture), greater efficiencies in infrastructure, buildings and homes, and nature-based solutions, such as constructed wetlands, rainwater harvesting and protecting grass and grazing lands are all important measures to be advanced through incentives or regulation.
A key remaining question is how governments can make the best climate decisions in the face of increasingly legally binding commitments. Rigid provincial, territorial and sectoral targets give rise to burden-sharing decisions as certain sectors are exempted from regulating carbon emissions or businesses move to less rigid jurisdictions resulting in carbon “leaking” from one jurisdiction to another.
Climate accountability frameworks, such as those legislated in Manitoba, British Columbia, New Zealand and the U.K., break long-term targets into interim milestones and hold governments to account. President-elect Joe Biden’s planned changes to U.S. climate policy, including rejoining the Paris Agreement, will address some of these issues and bodes well for Canada’s advancing climate policy.
Change is happening
The World Economic Forum has created an Energy Transition Index to help policy-makers and businesses plot a course for a successful energy transition. Several countries such as Sweden, the U.K. and France have done well at reducing energy subsidies, achieving gains in energy intensity of GDP, and increasing the level of political commitment to pursuing aggressive energy transition and climate change targets. But Canada’s score has worsened between 2015 to 2020.
Governments are increasingly recognizing the need to embrace laws and policies with targets of net zero emissions by 2030 or 2050. Many countries, including Sweden, the U.K. and Hungary, have declared ambitious net-zero emissions goals — Suriname and Bhutan have already achieved these goals. Others are considering them. In all, 77 countries, 10 regions and more than 100 cities announced their commitment to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 and the momentum continues to build.
Business is changing. Planning for the financial quarter or year end has become obsolete. As airlines realized during COVID-19, governments and funders are reticent to bail out an industry whose massive profits over the years have been paid to shareholders and used to buy back stocks, thereby making the companies less resilient. Business is now considering the long term.
A large number of global organizations have also declared carbon neutral targets, especially those with end-consumer-facing business models (including Amazon, Google, Apple, Cenovus Energy, TELUS and Maple Leaf Foods). Our youth recognize the intergenerational injustice of worsening future climate change impacts include storms, fires, droughts and floods. Seventy per cent of young people consider the speed of energy transition to be either stagnant or too slow, and they are willing to pay for it and accept the lifestyle changes required.
The Paris Agreement unified the world in setting a target of limiting global warming. The door is closing on achieving this target. The next five years are the years for ensuring through meaningful policy and action that this target is achieved!
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: Margot Hurlbert, University of Regina.
Read more:
Canada’s next budget update should include carbon
How Canada could benefit from a carbon budget
Margot Hurlbert receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC), the Canada Research Chairs Programme, the Sylvia Fedoruk Canadian Centre for Nuclear innovation at the University of Saskatchewan, and the Candu Owners Group Inc.
Margot is a Professor at the University of Regina, Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy and a Canada Research Chair in Climate Change, Energy and Sustainability Policy
Tipping point? Experts say the Paris agreement changed the climate on climate
Five years after it was passed, the Paris agreement may finally be changing the climate on climate change.
© Provided by The Canadian Press
"I've always known we're not going to act as soon as we could have," said Mark Jaccard, a widely consulted energy economist at Simon Fraser University.
"I also know that when we do start to act, it'll be very fast. It'll be one of those tipping points and it could be that we're at one right now."
On Dec. 12, 2015, 196 countries met in Paris and put their signatures on a legally binding treaty to do what it took to limit global warming to below two degrees Celsius and to create carbon-neutral economies by 2050.
Progress on those promises has been spotty.
The United Nations annual emissions gap report released this week points out that greenhouse gas emissions have continued to grow and reached record levels in 2019. Even with a seven per cent decline in emissions expected this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic, atmospheric concentrations are expected to rise.
The Liberal government has committed Canada to being carbon neutral by 2050. But it has released no plan for the three to four per cent annual cuts that it would take to get there. Canada has never met any of its previous climate goals and is one of five G20 countries behind on its Paris commitments.
And yet ...
"We have a much stronger climate movement that we did," said Keith Stewart of Greenpeace. "A lot of the big forces in the world are starting to line up behind the transition."
More and more financial institutions — including, just this week, the $225-billion New York state pension fund — are divesting from fossil fuels or decarbonizing. The UN says 126 countries, including China, have either adopted binding net-zero goals or are considering them.
The cost of renewable energy is plummeting — 90 per cent for solar power, says an Oxford University publication. Some countries — again, including China — are putting end dates on the sale of gas-powered vehicles.
"The effort is picking up speed," Jaccard said.
Without Paris, Canada wouldn't have achieved what it has, federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson told an online webinar Thursday.
"Canadians were really tired of inaction," he said. "The pan-Canadian framework was something that came out of the Paris agreement."
The federal Liberals have implemented a carbon tax, signed agreements to reduce methane releases, promised a clean-fuel standard to cut vehicle emissions, announced $1.5 billion in funding for electric buses and charging stations, and helped phase out coal-generated power.
"The Trudeau government is the only federal government Canada's had that is implementing the pricing and regulations that actually reduce emissions," Jaccard said.
Wilkinson promises even more.
"We know that more ambition will be required."
More is needed than just a new set of targets, Stewart said. Canadians who depend on the fossil fuel industry need help with the transition.
"There's a whole bunch of people who are going to be hurt badly if we don't do this properly," he said. "The rest of the country is going to be supporting Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland."
Jaccard said some way may be needed to prevent countries that aren't limiting emissions from having a trade advantage. Tariffs that penalize products from high-carbon jurisdictions are being discussed both at home and abroad, he said.
"How do you get any kind of collective action when there are easy rewards for cheating? You have to have penalty mechanisms."
Paris made a real difference and progress is out there, said Jaccard.
"I react strongly to people who say it's too late. The evidence doesn't support it.
"It's harder, which means we've taken longer to act on it, but I always knew we would act."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 11, 2020.
Bob Weber, The Canadian Press
"I've always known we're not going to act as soon as we could have," said Mark Jaccard, a widely consulted energy economist at Simon Fraser University.
"I also know that when we do start to act, it'll be very fast. It'll be one of those tipping points and it could be that we're at one right now."
On Dec. 12, 2015, 196 countries met in Paris and put their signatures on a legally binding treaty to do what it took to limit global warming to below two degrees Celsius and to create carbon-neutral economies by 2050.
Progress on those promises has been spotty.
The United Nations annual emissions gap report released this week points out that greenhouse gas emissions have continued to grow and reached record levels in 2019. Even with a seven per cent decline in emissions expected this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic, atmospheric concentrations are expected to rise.
The Liberal government has committed Canada to being carbon neutral by 2050. But it has released no plan for the three to four per cent annual cuts that it would take to get there. Canada has never met any of its previous climate goals and is one of five G20 countries behind on its Paris commitments.
And yet ...
"We have a much stronger climate movement that we did," said Keith Stewart of Greenpeace. "A lot of the big forces in the world are starting to line up behind the transition."
More and more financial institutions — including, just this week, the $225-billion New York state pension fund — are divesting from fossil fuels or decarbonizing. The UN says 126 countries, including China, have either adopted binding net-zero goals or are considering them.
The cost of renewable energy is plummeting — 90 per cent for solar power, says an Oxford University publication. Some countries — again, including China — are putting end dates on the sale of gas-powered vehicles.
"The effort is picking up speed," Jaccard said.
Without Paris, Canada wouldn't have achieved what it has, federal Environment Minister Jonathan Wilkinson told an online webinar Thursday.
"Canadians were really tired of inaction," he said. "The pan-Canadian framework was something that came out of the Paris agreement."
The federal Liberals have implemented a carbon tax, signed agreements to reduce methane releases, promised a clean-fuel standard to cut vehicle emissions, announced $1.5 billion in funding for electric buses and charging stations, and helped phase out coal-generated power.
"The Trudeau government is the only federal government Canada's had that is implementing the pricing and regulations that actually reduce emissions," Jaccard said.
Wilkinson promises even more.
"We know that more ambition will be required."
More is needed than just a new set of targets, Stewart said. Canadians who depend on the fossil fuel industry need help with the transition.
"There's a whole bunch of people who are going to be hurt badly if we don't do this properly," he said. "The rest of the country is going to be supporting Alberta, Saskatchewan and Newfoundland."
Jaccard said some way may be needed to prevent countries that aren't limiting emissions from having a trade advantage. Tariffs that penalize products from high-carbon jurisdictions are being discussed both at home and abroad, he said.
"How do you get any kind of collective action when there are easy rewards for cheating? You have to have penalty mechanisms."
Paris made a real difference and progress is out there, said Jaccard.
"I react strongly to people who say it's too late. The evidence doesn't support it.
"It's harder, which means we've taken longer to act on it, but I always knew we would act."
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 11, 2020.
Bob Weber, The Canadian Press
Fight climate change like we battle COVID-19, says Paris Accord's chief negotiator
By Elizabeth Pineau
Reuters Thu., December 10, 2020
By Elizabeth Pineau
Reuters Thu., December 10, 2020
Interview with Laurent Fabius, the Frenchman who made the Paris Climate Accord happen
PARIS (Reuters) - Laurent Fabius, the Frenchman who brought down the gavel to seal the Paris Accord on climate change five years ago, said he wished world powers had fought global warming as resolutely as they have confronted the coronavirus pandemic.
The agreement between almost 200 states on Dec. 12, 2015 was hailed as a potential turning point in efforts to contain global warming. It called for holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
While the long-term trend in global temperatures is now downwards, progress is insufficient, Fabius said, blaming a lack of political will among many governments, not least the United States under President Donald Trump.
However, in an interview with Reuters, he highlighted some positive developments, including President-elect Joe Biden's pledge to bring the United States back into the accord.
Governments have taken courageous financial and social decisions to halt the virus, but climate change poses an even graver threat, Fabius said.
"Unfortunately, we are not doing as much to fight climate change as we are to tackle the fallout from COVID," said Fabius, who was chief negotiator at the Paris talks and is now president of France's Constitutional Council.
He said it was critical that in the global recovery from the pandemic, the rebound is "green" and money is not ploughed into old, polluting industries.
The accord has brought some success, Fabius said. Scientific models had projected temperatures would increase 5 or 6 degrees and now estimated rises of 3 to 4 degrees by 2100. But this was still too high, he said.
The thresholds set by the Paris Accord reflect scientists' beliefs that a rise in temperatures of more than 2 degrees would doom the planet to a future of rising sea levels, catastrophic floods, droughts and storms, and food and water shortages.
BIDEN: A GAME-CHANGER?
Fabius, a former prime minister who was France's foreign minister at the time of the accord, recalled sleepless nights during two weeks of intense negotiations. The accord almost fell apart at the last moment.
He has a cherished replica of the green wooden hammer: cheers erupted and diplomats hugged as his gavel came down.
"Since then, it's not been the same. In particular there was the backtracking by U.S. President Donald Trump, which was bad for America but more so the rest of the world," he said.
The United States, the world’s second-largest greenhouse gas emitter after China, formally exited the accord on Nov. 4, a day after Election Day, fulfilling a Trump promise to withdraw.
"A certain number of countries said to themselves: if the world's biggest power doesn't respect its commitments, why should we?" Fabius continued.
But he said there had been a geopolitical shift in recent months. Biden has promised to rejoin the accord, China has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2060 and Japan by 2050.
Fabius predicted that Biden's task will not be easy, with control of the U.S. Senate still up for grabs and energy lobby groups wielding huge influence in Washington.
"(But) to move things we need every country in the world to act, not just one county."
(Reporting by Elizabeth Pineau; Writing by Richard Lough; Editing by Frances Kerry)
PARIS (Reuters) - Laurent Fabius, the Frenchman who brought down the gavel to seal the Paris Accord on climate change five years ago, said he wished world powers had fought global warming as resolutely as they have confronted the coronavirus pandemic.
The agreement between almost 200 states on Dec. 12, 2015 was hailed as a potential turning point in efforts to contain global warming. It called for holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels.
While the long-term trend in global temperatures is now downwards, progress is insufficient, Fabius said, blaming a lack of political will among many governments, not least the United States under President Donald Trump.
However, in an interview with Reuters, he highlighted some positive developments, including President-elect Joe Biden's pledge to bring the United States back into the accord.
Governments have taken courageous financial and social decisions to halt the virus, but climate change poses an even graver threat, Fabius said.
"Unfortunately, we are not doing as much to fight climate change as we are to tackle the fallout from COVID," said Fabius, who was chief negotiator at the Paris talks and is now president of France's Constitutional Council.
He said it was critical that in the global recovery from the pandemic, the rebound is "green" and money is not ploughed into old, polluting industries.
The accord has brought some success, Fabius said. Scientific models had projected temperatures would increase 5 or 6 degrees and now estimated rises of 3 to 4 degrees by 2100. But this was still too high, he said.
The thresholds set by the Paris Accord reflect scientists' beliefs that a rise in temperatures of more than 2 degrees would doom the planet to a future of rising sea levels, catastrophic floods, droughts and storms, and food and water shortages.
BIDEN: A GAME-CHANGER?
Fabius, a former prime minister who was France's foreign minister at the time of the accord, recalled sleepless nights during two weeks of intense negotiations. The accord almost fell apart at the last moment.
He has a cherished replica of the green wooden hammer: cheers erupted and diplomats hugged as his gavel came down.
"Since then, it's not been the same. In particular there was the backtracking by U.S. President Donald Trump, which was bad for America but more so the rest of the world," he said.
The United States, the world’s second-largest greenhouse gas emitter after China, formally exited the accord on Nov. 4, a day after Election Day, fulfilling a Trump promise to withdraw.
"A certain number of countries said to themselves: if the world's biggest power doesn't respect its commitments, why should we?" Fabius continued.
But he said there had been a geopolitical shift in recent months. Biden has promised to rejoin the accord, China has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2060 and Japan by 2050.
Fabius predicted that Biden's task will not be easy, with control of the U.S. Senate still up for grabs and energy lobby groups wielding huge influence in Washington.
"(But) to move things we need every country in the world to act, not just one county."
(Reporting by Elizabeth Pineau; Writing by Richard Lough; Editing by Frances Kerry)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)