It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Thursday, September 16, 2021
Nurses say 3% pay award is ‘unacceptable’
Alan Jones, PA Industrial Correspondent
Wed, 15 September 2021,
The Government is being urged to reconsider its 3% pay award to NHS staff after nurses overwhelmingly described it as “unacceptable”.
More than nine out of 10 members of the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) in England and Wales voted in a consultative ballot saying the controversial award was not acceptable.
RCN general secretary Pat Cullen said: “Just a week after Boris Johnson talked about ‘good wages’ for nursing staff, they are delivering a clear verdict on his NHS pay award.
“We are placing the matter back in the hands of politicians and asking what they are going to do next.
“Ministers must avoid a further escalation of this situation. Faced with this result, they can signal they intend to listen and do the right thing.
“Our members expect to see action from governments across the UK to pay nursing staff fairly.
“It is against the best interests of the health service, staff and patients for this issue to remain unaddressed – ministers are pushing people out of nursing when there are tens of thousands of unfilled jobs and patient care is being impacted.”
Graham Revie, who chairs the RCN Trade Union Committee, said: “RCN members have made their voice heard and ministers in Westminster and Cardiff must think again about how they are treating nursing staff.
“Members deserve to be paid fairly – nursing has earned it and our patients deserve it.
“Unsafe staffing levels hamper patient care. Fair pay is one major way of keeping people in work and attracting the next generation into our profession.
“The future of this campaign will always be determined by RCN members – this campaign is led by members like me in the interests of the whole profession.”
The RCN said nursing staff in Northern Ireland will have to wait until next month to see if additional funding requested from the Northern Ireland Executive will be made available.
In Scotland, RCN members are in a dispute with the Scottish government and NHS Scotland employers after they rejected an offer which gave them an average 4% pay increase.
Didier Reynders
Daniel Boffey in Strasbourg
Wed, 15 September 2021
Photograph: Yves Herman/EPA
The EU must swiftly legislate to further protect the rights of activists, journalists and politicians following the Pegasus spyware scandal, and the perpetrators of illegal tapping must be prosecuted, the bloc’s justice commissioner has told the European parliament.
Didier Reynders told MEPs that the European Commission “totally condemned” alleged attempts by national security services to illegally access information on political opponents through their phones.
He said: “Any indication that such intrusion of privacy actually occurred needs to be thoroughly investigated and all responsible for a possible breach have to be brought to justice. This is, of course, the responsibility of each and every member state of the EU, and I expect that in the case of Pegasus, the competent authorities will thoroughly examine the allegations and restore trust.”
Related: What is Pegasus spyware and how does it hack phones?
He added that the EU’s executive branch was closely following an investigation by Hungary’s data protection authority into claims that Viktor Orbán’s far-right government had been among those targeting journalists, media owners and opposition political figures with invasive Pegasus spyware.
Reynders said that it was already the case, as confirmed by the European court of justice, that governments could not “restrict the confidentiality and integrity of communications”, except in “very strictly limited” scenarios.
But he added that a pending EU privacy regulation would further tighten the rules, and called for MEPs and the member states to urgently agree on the details of that new law in light of the spyware scandal.
Reynders said: “Various reports have shown that certain national security services used Pegasus spyware, to have direct access to citizens, equipment, including political opponents and journalists.
“Let me say right at the start that the commission totally condemns any illegal access to systems or any kind of illegal trapping or interception of community users communications. It’s a crime in the whole of the European Union.”
A consortium of 17 media outlets, including the Guardian, revealed in July that global clients of the Israeli surveillance firm NSO Group had used hacking software to target human rights activists, journalists and lawyers.
The investigation was based on forensic analysis of phones and analysis of a leaked database of 50,000 numbers, including that of the French president, Emmanuel Macron, and European Council president Charles Michel, along with other heads of state and senior government, diplomatic and military officials, in 34 countries.
Reynders, a former Belgian justice minister, was speaking at the start of a debate in the European parliament on the scandal.
Sophie In ‘t Veld, a Dutch MEP in the liberal D66 party, said the parliament’s civil liberties, justice and home committee, of which she is a leading member, would launch an investigation into the use of Pegasus within the EU.
“We want total clarity and honesty now,” she said. “The European commission denies having had any contacts with the company, but I find that hard to believe. At our initiative, [the committee] will start a quick investigation into the allegations.
“I would also like to reiterate our call for a proper European intel service, subject to full democratic scrutiny of the European parliament. Europe is not the wild west. We have to protect our citizens and our democracy.”
Last month Hungary’s data protection authority, the NAIH, said it had launched an official investigation into allegations about the Hungarian government’s use of the Pegasus software.
At least five Hungarian journalists appeared on a leaked list reviewed by the Pegasus papers consortium. Also on the list was the number of the opposition politician György Gémesi, the mayor of the town of Gödöllő and head of a nationwide association of mayors.
Hungarian law provides that in cases where national security is at stake, the intelligence services can order surveillance with no judicial oversight, only the signature of the minister of justice.
Hungary’s justice minister, Judit Varga, has declined to comment, but said “every country needs such tools”.
In ‘t Veld said: “The reports that the Hungarian government used Pegasus spyware are very troubling. They merit a full and independent investigation. Journalists, politicians and activists must be able to do their work without being spied on by an increasingly authoritarian government. If proven otherwise, this constitutes a massive infringement of civil liberties.”
Gwendoline Delbos-Corfield, an MEP in the French Europe Ecologie Les Verts party, said: “So far, the Hungarian government still hasn’t reacted to the Pegasus project revelations. Neither transparency nor accountability has been brought to the public debate.”
NSO have denied that the inclusion of a number on the leaked list was indicative of whether it was selected for surveillance. “The list is not a list of Pegasus targets or potential targets,” the company said. “The numbers in the list are not related to NSO Group in any way.”
NSO is an Israeli surveillance company regulated by the country’s ministry of defence, which approves sale of its spyware technology to government clients around the world.
The company says it sells only to military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies in 40 unnamed countries for the purpose of terrorism and crime investigations.
It further claims to rigorously vet its customers’ human rights records before allowing them to use its spy tools. NSO says it “does not operate the systems that it sells to vetted government customers, and does not have access to the data of its customers’ targets”.
Lizzie Edmonds
Wed, 15 September 2021
Emma at the Met Ball (Getty Images)
Emma Raducanu is rumoured to be in talks with jewellery brand Tiffany & Co to become the high-end brand’s new ambassador.
Rumours of a potential deal began over the weekend after the 18-year-old from Bromley was seen wearing various pieces of the brand’s jewellery during her victorious US Open final.
The tennis champion stunned the world by winning the US Open on Saturday, beating Canadian Leylah Fernandez, 19, in straight sets.
She wore a set of £4,500 pearl and diamond earrings during the match, a white gold £3,275 ring and a £2,750 cross pendant. Ms Raducanu also wore a £17,100 diamond hinged bangle.
The star also wore jewellery by the brand when attending Monday night’s Met Gala alongside Jennifer Lopez, Billie Eilish and Kristen Stewart at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
Ms Raducanu is also being linked with Chanel after she wore the French fashion house to the exclusive party.
Already the tennis player has a sponsorship deal with Nike and it is likely she will have received a bonus following her US Open win
The details of her deals are likely to remain private. She is being managed by Max Eisenbud, vice-president at IMG sports management group, who was behind Maria Sharapova’s reported £200 million career.
Experts have predicted Ms Raducanu - who only sat her A-Levels this summer - could be Britain’s first billion-dollar sports star.
The PR guru Mark Borkowski, who has worked with Michael Jackson, Joan Rivers and Led Zeppelin said: “This is the start of something epic. She is a billion-dollar girl, no doubt about it.
“She is the real deal. It’s not just that she plays extraordinary tennis, it’s also her background, her ethnicity, her freedom of spirit. People also love the fact that she is vulnerable, but laughs the pressures away.”
The money-savvy teen - who achieved an A in A-Level economics this year - comes from a financial background. Both her Chinese mother and Romanian father work in finance.
And, according to The Times, she registered Harbour 6 Limited - which is said to be the vehicle to manage her finances - when she was just 17.
On Tuesday, Raducanu ticked off another of her bucket list visits during her stay in New York.
Raducanu - who made history by becoming the first qualifier to win the US Open on Saturday - was pictured talking to trading floor staff during her tour of the New York Stock Exchange.
Lily Hamourtziadou, Senior Lecturer in Security Studies, Birmingham City University
Wed, 15 September 2021
Burlingham/Shutterstock
Drones have become the signature tool of 21st-century warfare, particularly by US forces in the “war on terror”. The fundamental rationale for drone use relies on their “surgical precision”, supposedly saving civilian lives.
But headlines show us this isn’t true. A recent US drone strike in Kabul, Afghanistan mistakenly killed 43-year-old aid worker Zemari Ahmadi, along with nine members of his family, including seven children. This idea of precision is just one of many pervasive myths about drones that I’ve set out to dispel in my research.
Military technology aims to inflict maximum damage to the enemy while minimising our own losses of manpower and material. Drones have advantages compared to piloted aircraft, primarily that they protect the lives of those conducting strikes. This has lulled us into a false sense of security about the nature of war, suggesting that conflicts can be won from a distance, with minimum harm to civilians, in wars that are ethical and respect international law.
Addressing these myths can hopefully reduce harm to the unarmed population and bring the civilian body count from drone strikes down to zero.
Myth 1: it’s ‘precision bombing’
Drone pilots – humans operating the weapons remotely – wait for a target to appear then launch a missile. The process of identifying a target and carrying out an attack is minimised, with pilots potentially making grave decisions “on the fly”.
In Iraq, more than 13,000 civilians have been killed in coalition drone strikes since they resumed in 2014, when Islamic State (IS) captured areas of Iraq (they had ceased three years earlier with the withdrawal of US and UK troops).
By August 1 2019, in 1,773 days of 14,570 coalition drone strikes in Iraq and 19,785 in Syria, up to 13,000 civilians had been killed, of which 2,300 were children.
Figures from the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan show the number of civilian casualties from US drone strikes rose from 158 in the first half of 2018 to 430 in the same period in 2019. The total number of civilian casualties in the country rose by 39% to 519 by the end of 2019.
Myth 2: drone warfare is ethical
In drone strikes, the aim is to kill not capture. Human beings are denied the right to surrender and are instead executed for being members of a group defined by the killers as evil. Drones are thought to appear in a sticky situation to swiftly reward the just and punish the unjust. Those executed are presumed “guilty”, without arrest, questioning or subsequent conviction. Targeted killing becomes normalised, leading to increasing human rights abuses.
New York Times journalist David Rohde, who was kidnapped by the Taliban for months in 2008 and 2009, described the buzz of drones overhead during his captivity as “hell on earth”.
Myth 3: if the war is legal, so is the weapon
According to international law and the Geneva conventions, all parties to a conflict must distinguish between combatants and civilians – the latter being “protected persons”.
US President Barack Obama signed an executive order in 2016 to minimise civilian casualties in all uses of force. That year he published presidential policy guidance on “direct action against terrorists”, which laid out a process for authorising drone targets in line with the principles of just war theory, a tradition of military ethics that determines which actions are acceptable when waging war.
The use of drones was supposed to both respect the law and protect the vulnerable. Yet in Iraq the methods that killed the most civilians per event were drone strikes.
To protect civilians from indiscriminate harm, as required by international humanitarian law, military and civilian policies should prohibit aerial bombing in civilian areas, unless it can be demonstrated —- by monitoring civilian casualties —- that civilians are being protected.
Unmanned aerial vehicles are the weapon of choice for the world’s most powerful militaries. aapsky/Shutterstock
Myth 4: drones are a triumph of technology
If only drones were used, goes the logic, wars would still be fought in far-off places, but without tens of thousands of boots on the ground. Yet despite their increasing use, drones have not fully enabled militaries to avoid the usual (dirty and costly) methods of fighting wars.
Iraq and Afghanistan started as high-tech wars, but rapidly evolved into widespread insurgencies. In response, the US and its allies committed hundreds of thousands of boots on the ground, resulting in casualties in the occupied countries and in the west.
In the last 15 years we have turned to the new technologies of eyes in the sky – armed drones and long-range strikes, but also special forces and privatised military corporations. With this has come the policy of training and arming local forces, while drones and special forces handle the counterinsurgency.
Myth 5: drones are effective
While no large-scale attack has taken place on US soil since 9/11, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians have been killed since the 2003 invasion as a result of drone strikes and other military action.
Aerial bombardment has not created peaceful states, nor defeated IS, nor stopped the violent deaths of innocents, nor abated sectarian conflicts, nor alleviated suffering. These wars have led to endemic anarchy, mass exodus of civilians, death, poverty and generations living with the trauma of war. They have contributed to the rise of theocracy and jihadism. Wars rage, as millions are radicalised, disillusioned and despairing.
The physically remote and concealed nature of drone tactics prevents state transparency regarding those killed and injured, denying individuals the dignity of recognition and obscuring the full human costs of warfare.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
The Conversation
Lily Hamourtziadou is affiliated with Iraq Body Count, principal researcher since 2006.
Wed, 15 September 2021
Bitcoin has already used more power so far this year than it did in all of 2020, a new study has suggested, as the debate on the impact of cryptocurrency mining on the environment heats up.
Bitcoin is set to use 91TWh of energy by the end of this year, according to a Bloomberg report, which noted this is as much energy as Pakistan. Last year, Bitcoin was estimated to have consumed about 67TWh of electricity.
While tracking how much energy Bitcoin mining uses is difficult, the trend is clear. The Cambridge Bitcoin Electricity Consumption Index estimates that Bitcoin will consume 95.68 TW/h by the end of the year, which is about the same as the power consumption of the Philippines.
Could Cardano’s 'green' cryptocurrency ADA take over Bitcoin and Ethereum?
Why does Bitcoin use so much energy?
Bitcoin uses a system called "proof of work", the mechanism is used to confirm transactions and add new blocks to the chain. Its decentralised system requires a global network of computers to run at the same time when a transaction takes place. This is why it uses so much energy, as it is designed to encourage increased computing effort.
Bitcoin could switch to the less energy-consuming "Proof of Stake" mechanism, which randomly allocates coins to users who put up their own tokens as collateral.
The Bloomberg report said as the price of Bitcoin increases, more miners with less energy-efficient machines are joining the network, which then drives up energy use.
The report said it was "essential to improve the efficiency of crypto-mining and move to low-carbon energy sources for electricity".
In a crumbling economy, Venezuela’s cheap electricity is a blessing for its Bitcoin miners
Ukraine becomes the latest country to legalise Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies
Electronic waste
But it's not just the running of Bitcoin mining that is costing the environment. The computer equipment used for mining typically only lasts for one and a half years. It can not then thrown out afterwards because the equipment can only be used for mining.
Science Direct found that as a result, one transaction on the Bitcoin network produces 272 grams of electronic waste.
When governments and Elon Musk get involved
One of the most prominent figures to add to the crypto environmental debate is the Tesla chief executive officer Elon Musk.
Earlier this year he said the electric car company would accept Bitcoin as payment, but environmentalists later convinced Musk to backtrack on his decision.
Musk subsequently announced the company would not accept crypto payments for Tesla vehicles again until at least 50 per cent of mining operations using green energy. But this has not yet happened.
Bitcoin jumps as Elon Musk signals Tesla to start accepting the crypto when it becomes eco-friendly
Elon Musk wants Bitcoin to become environmentally friendly. Can he convince the crypto's devotees?
Cryptocurrency experts have previously told Euronews Next that crypto miners have no incentive to make greener choices.
Governments are also weighing in on the debate. China and Iran temporarily halted Bitcoin mining due to the massive energy use that was causing power cuts in some areas.
In the United States, Senator Elizabeth Warren butted heads with two cryptocurrency CEOs.
Earlier this month she tweeted a New York Times article on the environmental impact of cryptos and wrote: “Bitcoin mining consumes roughly the same amount of electricity as Washington state—putting pressure on our power grids and worsening the #ClimateCrisis. We need to protect our planet and crackdown on environmentally wasteful crypto mining practices.”
In response, CEO of MicroStrategy, Michael Saylor, tweeted: "#Bitcoin mining converts wasted & stranded energy into digital energy, the natural successor to chemical & electrical energy. It can be managed by any computer, transferred anywhere at the speed of light, and lasts forever, thereby improving our climate, economy & power grid".
Meanwhile, FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, responded to Warren in saying Bitcoin mining could be improved but that it is "in line with its economic impact".
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
News that the perilous plight of endangered grasslands is not fully recognised in a EU draft anti-deforestation law (Leaked EU anti-deforestation law omits fragile grasslands and wetlands, 14 September) brings into sharp focus the dangerous underappreciation of a global habitat that has a crucial role in the fight against climate change. Grasslands aren’t just crucibles of biodiversity, playing home to a wealth of wild plants, fungi, butterflies and bees, they also possess an as-yet underreported ability to lock down carbon. Given that up to 30% of the Earth’s land carbon is stored in grassland, these sites are every bit as important as other ecosystems in the fight against greenhouse gases.
The Grasslands+ campaign, supported by some of Britain’s leading conservation charities including Plantlife, Butterfly Conservation and the Bumblebee Conservation Trust, is calling for international protections for our planet’s grasslands, savannas, plains, heaths, steppes and meadows to help mitigate the impact of climate change and increase biodiversity. The UK government, the EU and other world leaders must commit to restoring, enhancing and protecting these habitats at Cop26 in Glasgow.
Ian Dunn CEO, Plantlife; Gill Perkins CEO, Bumblebee Conservation Trust;
Via AP news wire
Wed, 15 September 2021,
Logging Old Trees (Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.)
Looking down a hillside dotted with large stumps and nearly devoid of trees, a pair of retired U.S. Forest Service employees lamented logging policies they helped craft to deal with two harbingers of climate change -- pine beetles and wildfires.
Timber production dramatically ramped up two decades ago in the Black Hills National Forest along the South Dakota-Wyoming border, as beetles ravaged huge expanses of forest and worries grew over wildfires.
The beetles left, but the loggers haven’t — and they're now felling trees at twice the rate government scientists say is sustainable. That means the Black Hills forests are shrinking, with fewer and smaller trees.
Timber sales from federal forests nationwide more than doubled over the past 20 years, according to government data. In Washington, D.C., Republicans and Democrats alike have pushed more aggressive thinning of stands to reduce vegetation that fuels wildfires.
But critics of federal forest management say that in their fervor to do something about climate change, officials are allowing the removal of too many older trees that can actually better withstand fire.
In the Black Hills, stands of century-old ponderosa pines were thinned over the past two decades, then thinned again. In some areas, most of the remaining older and larger trees are being cut, leaving hillsides almost bare.
“Eventually you’re not going to have any big trees on the whole forest,” said Dave Mertz, who worked as a government natural resources officer overseeing Black Hills logging until retiring in 2017. “The timber industry is pulling the strings now. The Forest Service has lost its way.”
DIRE PREDICTIONS
Across the western U.S., more trees have been dying as climate change dramatically alters the landscape and leaves forests more susceptible. Wildfires, insects and disease are the top killers, researchers say.
A sweeping government review of forest health surveys since 1993 found that the rate of trees dying increased this century and outpaced new growth in all eight states examined — Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. Timber harvested from Forest Service lands over the past two decades also increased.
In the Black Hills, those two trends have collided. With more trees being logged and even more killed by beetles and fires in recent years, government scientists say the forest can’t grow fast enough to keep up.
The timber industry and allies in Congress are pushing back against that conclusion. Timber company representatives predict dire economic consequences if forest managers sharply reduce harvest levels. And they say wildfires and beetle outbreaks would get worse.
One of the region's seven mills closed in March, eliminating 120 jobs in Hill City, South Dakota. Owner Neiman Enterprises said a recent slowdown in timber sales meant it wouldn't have enough logs.
"These companies aren’t tech startups. They are multi-generational family companies that want to be there for the long term.” said Ben Wudtke, director of the Black Hills Forest Resource Association of saw mills and logging companies.
FIGHTING FIRE
To counter growing havoc from western wildfires, Biden's administration wants to double the forest acreage thinned or treated with prescribed burns to 6 million acres (2.4 million hectares) annually — bigger than New Hampshire.
One method to reduce fire risk is to remove dense stands of small trees and thick underbrush that accumulated for decades as wildfires — a natural part of the landscape — were suppressed.
It’s expensive, labor-intensive work, and there’s little market value in small trees. When sworn in this summer, Forest Service Chief Randy Moore said combating climate change will require making it worthwhile to harvest smaller trees, such as using the vegetation as biomass to generate electricity.
“It doesn’t pay for itself and we don’t have markets that seem to be increasing quickly enough," he said.
The service's former deputy chief, Jim Furnish, criticized the agency as too focused on timber production and too slow to react to climate change, to the detriment of the forest.
There are signs of change under President Joe Biden including the administration’s move last month to end large-scale commercial logging of old-growth trees in Alaska’s Tongass National Forest.
But other projects that include old-growth removal are pending, including in Montana's Kootenai National Forest along the Canada border, the Kaibab National Forest just north of the Grand Canyon in Arizona and Idaho's Nez Perce-Clearwater National Forest.
“The Forest Service’s approach to date has been to attack this as a management problem: ‘We need to cut more trees,'” Furnish told The Associated Press. “You can’t cut your way out of this problem.”
Moore, the agency's chief, acknowledged the warming planet was forcing changes, but said he hoped to find a “sweet spot” between the environment and industry — while removing enough vegetation to reduce wildfire risk. In the Black Hills, officials said they would consider the latest science alongside economic impacts as they seek to make logging sustainable.
“We need the industry to help us,” Moore said, referring to climate change. “It’s not really about timber sales or cutting large trees.”
“BEAT TO HELL”
The Black Hills played an outsized role in the early formation of the nation's timber policies. In the 1890s, excessive logging to feed demand for timbers for a nearby gold mine helped spur creation of the national forest system. The first regulated logging sales in forest service history took place there in 1899.
When artist and environmentalist Mary Zimmerman bought property within the Black Hills in 1988, neighboring public lands where that first timber sale took place had regrown so successfully that huge branches overhead “were like a cathedral.”
The site was thinned in 1990, removing some big trees but leaving many. It was thinned more in 2016. Then logging crews returned last year and took out the remaining big trees. Cattle now graze the area.
“It’s just beat to hell,” said Zimmerman.
Her account was confirmed by Blaine Cook, forest management scientist for the Black Hills for more than two decades until his 2019 retirement.
EARLY WARNINGS
Cook said his monitoring began to show last decade that the forest’s growth rate wasn’t keeping up with aggressive logging that was a response to the pine beetle outbreak that began in 1998. The high harvest rate continued after the outbreak peaked in 2012 and even after it ended in 2017.
Cook said his warnings that the forest was being damaged were rejected by superiors who faced political pressure to provide a steady supply of logs to sawmills in South Dakota and Wyoming.
Disagreement within the agency over whether there was too much logging culminated in a report this April by scientists from the forest service’s research branch that was unequivocal: Black Hills logging needs to be cut back by at least half, possibly more, to be sustainable.
The problem is that the forest changed but logging rates have not, said Mike Battaglia, one of the lead authors.
“In the late 90's, you had twice as much volume” of trees in the forest, he said. “To take out the same amount now, you're taking too much."
Forest industry representatives criticized the government’s multi-year study for including only parts of the forest, saying that created an incomplete picture of how many trees are available to harvest.
They estimated up to 80% of the region’s timber industry jobs would be lost if the forest service reduced logging to recommended levels. If that happens, they said the agency would have difficulty finding companies willing to do less profitable thinning work for wildfire protection.
“You have to have somebody around to do it," said the forest industry's Wudtke. “It's really critical that we keep these companies going."
___
Follow Matthew Brown on Twitter: @MatthewBrownAP
___
Read more of AP’s climate coverage at http://www.apnews.com/Climate
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
Wed, 15 September 2021,
The enormous and devastating Australian bushfires of 2019-2020 released more than twice the amount of carbon dioxide than previously thought, a new study has revealed.
During that Australian summer season, fires ripped through an especially large area in the coastal regions of Victoria and New South Wales.
Around 74,000 km2 - an area almost the size of Scotland - of eucalyptus forest went up in flames, triggering mass evacuations and killing or displacing three billion animals.
The fires were already known to have released large amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, but the latest analysis found in fact 715 teragrams of CO2 were emitted between November 2019 and January 2020.
This is more than twice the amount previously estimated and surpasses Australia's normal annual fire and fossil fuel emissions by 80%.
The report, published in the peer-reviewed journal Nature, said the fact that fires were "driven partly by climate change" makes "better-constrained emission estimates particularly important".
The link with climate change, and the expectation that fires will become more frequent in future, suggests that "part of the CO2 emitted by these fires will not be sequestered by vegetation regrowth".
It warned of a vicious cycle of carbon dioxide from the fires building up in the atmosphere, contributing to climate change, which in turn drives more fires.
Globally, wildfire emissions are roughly equivalent to 22% of all fossil fuel emissions, the report said.
The wildfires also released vast amounts of aerosols, containing nitrogen and iron.
These are likely to have fuelled vast plankton blooms thousands of kilometres away in the Southern Ocean, a separate study in Nature found, highlighting the complex links among wildfires, ecosystems and the climate.
"It has been suggested that the oceanic deposition of wildfire aerosols can relieve nutrient limitations and, consequently, enhance marine productivity but direct observations are lacking," the study into the blooms said.
Watch the Daily Climate Show at 6.30pm Monday to Friday on Sky News, the Sky News website and app, on YouTube and Twitter.
The show investigates how global warming is changing our landscape and highlights solutions to the crisis.
‘Time is running out’:
Researchers warn climate
progress has stalled as only
one country doing enough
to meet 1.5C target
Only one country is currently doing enough to meet the world’s aspiration of limiting global heating to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, researchers have warned.
The rest of the planet is making “sobering” progress towards meeting the target agreed by countries under the Paris Agreement, according to new analysis released just weeks before the Cop26 climate summit is due to take place in Glasgow.
The assessment of 37 countries, from the independent research group Climate Action Tracker, says that progress towards keeping hopes of the 1.5C target alive have stalled since May, with Gambia being the only country currently taking sufficient action.
It adds that the UK is the only developed country to have climate plans that are in line with efforts to limit warming to 1.5C. However, it does not yet have the policies in place to make its ambitious targets a reality, the scientists said.
“It’s sobering that in the last few months we’ve seen little movement,” Professor Niklas Hohne, analysis author and founding partner of the NewClimate Institute in Germany, told The Independent.
“The gap between where we want to be and where we are is huge. When considering all of the pledges and targets that are currently on the table, we will barely stabilise greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 – while we would have to halve global emissions by 2030 to be in line with the Paris Agreement.”
Gambia is rated highly because it currently accounts for a very small share of global greenhouse gas emissions and yet has still pledged to slash its climate pollution, said Prof Hohne.
“Gambia is not responsible a lot for climate change, but it has still pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions if there is international finance available,” he said.
A flurry of new commitments to slash these emissions were put forward during key climate summits held in the first half of 2021, the researchers said. However, progress has now slowed.
“We’ve moved very little in the last four months,” said Prof Höhne.
The findings come shortly after a landmark report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which said that the climate crisis is already affecting weather and extremes in every region of the globe – and that urgent action is required to keep hopes of limiting global heating to 1.5C alive.
The new analysis says that three-quarters of all countries are currently making insufficient progress towards meeting the 1.5C target.
All countries were expected to come forward with new domestic climate plans, known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs), this year ahead of Cop26.
However, the analysis finds that a group of countries, which together account for around half of global emissions, have not yet submitted any new plans for how they will cut their emissions. This group includes the world’s top emitter China, as well as India, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
In addition, many of the countries that did come forward with new climate plans failed to meaningfully increase their ambition, the analysis said. Such countries include Australia, Mexico, Brazil, Singapore, Russia, Indonesia, New Zealand, Switzerland and Vietnam.
“Those countries have to go back and think about whether that was the right decision,” said Prof Höhne. “We are just months away from Cop26 and time is running out.”
Some countries are “almost” doing enough to be in line with keep global temperatures to 1.5C, he added. These countries include Costa Rica, Ethiopia, Kenya, Nigeria, Morocco and Nepal.
Dr Bill Hare, analysis author and CEO of the global research centre Climate Analytics, added that it would be “impossible” to meet climate goals without more urgent action.
“The IPCC has given the world a ‘code red’ warning on the dangers of climate change reinforcing the urgent need for the world to halve emissions by 2030,” he said.
“An increasing number of people around the world are suffering from ever more severe and frequent impacts of climate change, yet government action continues to lag behind what is needed. While many governments have committed to net zero, without near-term action achieving net zero is virtually impossible.”
Read More
IPCC report – live: UN report warns time running out to save planet
10 key takeaways from the IPCC’s landmark climate report
1.5C goal slipping beyond reach, warns IPCC climate report
Governments falling woefully short of Paris climate pledges, study finds
Oliver Milman in New York
Wed, 15 September 2021
Every one of the world’s leading economies, including all the countries that make up the G20, is failing to meet commitments made in the landmark Paris agreement in order to stave off climate catastrophe, a damning new analysis has found.
Less than two months before crucial United Nations climate talks take place in Scotland, none of the largest greenhouse gas emitting countries have made sufficient plans to lower pollution to meet what they agreed to in the 2015 Paris climate accord.
This means the world is barreling towards calamitous climate impacts.
Under the Paris deal, nations vowed to prevent the world’s average temperature rising 1.5C above pre-industrial times in order to avoid disastrous heatwaves, flooding, storms, drought and other consequences that are already starting to unfold. But the new analysis, by Climate Action Tracker, finds almost every country is falling woefully short of that commitment.
Climate pledges made by Russia, Iran and Saudi Arabia are “critically insufficient”, the analysis found, while Australia, Brazil, Canada, China and India are among those deemed “highly insufficient”.
The US, the European Union bloc, Germany and Japan are ranked as “insufficient”, while the UK, the host of the upcoming climate summit, is “almost sufficient”.
Of the 36 countries, plus the EU, ranked by the Climate Action Tracker only the Gambia has made commitments in line with the 1.5C Paris goal. Combined, these countries make up 80% of global emissions.
Governments are supposed to periodically improve their emissions reduction targets in order to fulfil the promises made in Paris but progress has “stalled” this year, the researchers said.
There was “good momentum” in May after a climate summit held at the White House by the US president, Joe Biden, according to Niklas Höhne, a researcher at NewClimate Institute, a partner organization in the Climate Action Tracker analysis.
“But since then, there has been little to no improvement – nothing is moving,” he said. “Governments have now closed the gap by up to 15%, a minimal improvement since May.
“Anyone would think they have all the time in the world, when in fact the opposite is the case,” he added.
This intransigence comes despite the looming climate talks and increasing signs of the climate crisis manifesting itself in catastrophic weather events, including massive floods in Germany and China, severe wildfires in the US and dangerous heatwaves sweeping several countries.
A survey of 16,000 people across North America, Europe and Asia on Tuesday by Pew found that 72% were worried that climate change will harm them personally at some point.
In August, a landmark report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the world’s leading authority on climate science, found that the burning of fossil fuels is changing the Earth’s climate in “unprecedented” ways and that rapid cuts in greenhouse gases are needed to avert climate breakdown.
António Guterres, the UN secretary general, said the report should act as “a code red for humanity”.
Related: Rain fell on Greenland's ice sheet for the first time ever known. Alarms should ring | Kim Heacox
But the Climate Action Tracker found a lack of urgency by all of the major emitters, such as China, India and the US, in responding to this threat.
Even countries with strong climate targets are not on track to meet them, while international finance for poorer countries to help cope with the climate crisis is falling short. If current practices continue, the world is on track for nearly 3C in warming.
The analysis said of “particular concern” are the governments of Australia, Brazil, Indonesia and Russia, all of which have failed to raise the ambition of their emissions cuts at all since 2015.
Coal, the most polluting fossil fuel, is still being developed on a large scale by India and China, the report found, while gas infrastructure is being expanded by Australia and the EU.
“An increasing number of people around the world are suffering from ever more severe and frequent impacts of climate change, yet government action continues to lag behind what is needed,” said Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics, another partner in the new study.
“While many governments have committed to net zero, without near-term action achieving net zero is virtually impossible.”
The analysis provides a sobering reality check ahead of the UN climate talks, which were pushed back from last year due to the Covid-19 pandemic. A coalition of 1,000 environment groups have called for the talks to be postponed again because delegates from the poorest countries still lack access to coronavirus vaccines.
This call has been rejected by the British government as well as John Kerry, the US climate envoy, who said on Monday that a further delay would be a “huge, huge mistake”.
But Kerry risks entering the talks with no major climate victory to brandish, with emissions reduction provisions as part of a huge $3.5tn piece of Biden’s legislative agenda still a matter of disagreement even among Democrats in the US Congress.
Environmentalists have also attacked the Biden administration for recently leasing out vast areas of the US west and the Gulf of Mexico for oil and gas drilling.
The leases “will make it even harder for America to meet its climate goals”, said Jennifer Rokala, executive director for the Center for Western Priorities conservation group.
“Vision is nothing without action. Unfortunately, the Biden administration’s actions to increase drilling on public lands are at odds with the president’s vision,” she added.
Wed, 15 September 2021,
San Marino -- a landlocked republic in central Italy -- is counting down to a referendum on legalising abortion.
The small state of 33,000 inhabitants will decide on September 26 whether to allow terminations up to twelve weeks of pregnancy.
It is one of the only places left in Europe where terminating pregnancies is illegal.
Attempts to legalise abortion over the past 20 years have been vetoed by successive governments, most of them conservative.
"It is not true that abortion does not exist in San Marino," said Rosa Zafferani, a member of the UDS (San Marino Women's Union). "Women go to have abortions outside our country. They do it illegally because abortion is a criminal offence here. All this is disgraceful."
But Rocco Gugliotta, 41, a warehouse worker, believes it shouldn't just be the mother who is the decision-maker.
"A couple is composed of a mother and a father. Why does it always have to be only the mother who decides? Does the father not have any decision-making power?
"The pregnancy must be carried out without abortion. If you really don't want the child there is the possibility of putting it up for adoption."
If the "yes" campaign win abortion would be legal within the first three months. After that, it would only be allowed if the mother's life was in danger or in the case of fetal abnormalities which could harm the woman physically or psychologically.
San Marino women were only given the vote in 1964. Divorce was only introduced in 1986.