50-year-old UAE to pour billions into UK
Thu, 16 September 2021

Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan met Britain's Prime Minister Boris Johnson at Downing Street (AFP/JUSTIN TALLIS)More

HM BUTTMAN

The United Arab Emirates will invest billions into the UK under a strategic partnership marking 50 years since its founding after British rule, both governments announced Thursday.

The five-year investment worth £10 billion ($13.8 billion, 11.7 billion euros) will focus on technology, infrastructure and climate-focused energy transition, according to a joint statement.

It was announced following talks in London between Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, the UAE's de facto ruler.

The pair inspected a British Army honour guard as the energy-rich UAE builds up to the December celebration of its founding in 1971, after Britain had relinquished control over its constituent emirates.

Mubadala, Abu Dhabi's sovereign wealth fund, said its investment plans would "drive a significant increase" across the three target sectors, building on an existing deal.

In March, Mubadala committed an initial £800 million to UK life sciences including healthcare research over five years.

The new investment is a boost to the Johnson government's vows to boost trade with the rest of the world, including the Middle East, after Britain left the European Union fully in January.

"This partnership has gone from strength to strength and its expansion is evidence of its effectiveness and what we can achieve with important trade and investment partners like the UAE through investment," Minister for Investment Gerry Grimstone said.

UK-UAE trade was worth £18.6 billion in 2019 and two-way investment came to £13.4 billion, according to British government data.

"Today's expansion of our Sovereign Investment Partnership will help accelerate funding and innovation in key sectors that are foundational to economic growth of both nations," said Mubadala chief executive Khaldoon Al Mubarak.

In the run-up to Britain hosting the COP26 summit in November, the new partnership envisages energy giant BP collaborating with the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company and renewables firm Masdar on climate-focused investments.

Those potentially include "low-carbon hydrogen hubs" and the creation of a carbon-neutral air corridor between the two countries, the statement said.

The partnership also encompasses reinforcing strong military ties between Britain and the UAE, whose relations with Gulf neighbour Iran are tense.

Britain said it planned to increase land exercises in the UAE.

Abu Dhabi and foundation linked to Ikea invest in full fibre broadband

August Graham
Thu, 16 September 2021

Vodafone and TalkTalk are among the companies that use CityFibre’s network. 

(Dominic Lipinski/PA) (PA Wire)

The Government of Abu Dhabi and a foundation linked to furniture giant Ikea have thrown £825 million at an effort to roll out full-fibre broadband in the UK.

CityFibre said that it had secured more than £1.1 billion to invest, including £300 million worth of new loans.

It is money that will help the company reach into a third of UK homes by the middle of the decade, it said on Thursday.

Investors include Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, the Mubadala Investment Company, and Interogo Holding – which is owned by a foundation set up to “safeguard the IKEA Concept”.

The UK is open for business and attracting investments like this as a high-value, high-growth science superpower, specialising in industries of the future

Boris Johnson

“This new capital will not only underpin our rollout to up to eight million homes across 285 cities, towns and villages, but will also enable our participation in the Government’s Project Gigabit programme to extend our future-proof infrastructure to rural areas and ensure no one is left behind,” said the CityFibre chief executive, Greg Mesch.

“If nurtured and protected, infrastructure competition at scale will continue to unleash huge investment from the private sector as well as catalyse investment from incumbent operators.”

CityFibre’s network is used by Vodafone and TalkTalk among other internet providers. It is live in 46 places around the UK.

Prime Minister, Boris Johnson said: “The Government is committed to making high-speed broadband available for every part of the UK, and this exciting investment will turbocharge the UK’s full-fibre rollout. It will revolutionise people’s lives and generate huge economic benefits, jobs and growth.

“The UK is open for business and attracting investments like this as a high-value, high-growth science superpower, specialising in industries of the future.”

UPDATED

World Bank kills business climate report after ethics probe cites 'undue pressure' on rankings


By Andrea Shalal and David Lawder

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The World Bank Group on Thursday said it ended publication of its "Doing Business" report on country investment climates after a probe of data irregularities cited "undue pressure" by top bank officials, including then-Chief Executive Kristalina Georgieva, to boost China's ranking in 2017.

The World Bank said in a statement https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2021/09/16/world-bank-group-to-discontinue-doing-business-report 

that the decision came after internal audit reports had raised "ethical matters, including the conduct of former Board officials as well as current and/or former Bank staff" and a board investigation conducted by the law firm WilmerHale.

The Wilmer Hale report https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/84a922cc9273b7b120d49ad3b9e9d3f9-0090012021/original/DB-Investigation-Findings-and-Report-to-the-Board-of-Executive-Directors-September-15-2021.pdf 

cited "direct and indirect pressure" from senior staff in the office of then-World Bank President Jim Yong Kim to change the report's methodology to boost China's score, and said it likely occurred at his direction.

It also said that Georgieva, now the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, and a key adviser pressured staff to "make specific changes to China's data points" and boost its ranking at a time when the bank was seeking China's support for a big capital increase.

China's ranking in the "Doing Business 2018" report published in October 2017, rose seven places to 78th after the data methodology changes were made, compared with the initial draft report.

The Doing Business report assesses regulatory environments, ease of business startups, infrastructure and other business climate measures.

"I disagree fundamentally with the findings and interpretations of the investigation of data irregularities as it relates to my role in the World Bank’s Doing Business report of 2018," Georgieva said in a statement issued by the IMF. She added that she had met with the IMF's executive board to discuss the matter.

The WilmerHale report also cited irregularities in the data used to determine rankings for Saudi Arabia and Azerbaijan in the "Doing Business 2020" report published in 2019, but found no evidence that any members of the bank's Office of the President or executive board were involved in these changes.

"Going forward, we will be working on a new approach to assessing the business and investment climate," the World Bank said in a statement.

(Reporting by David Lawder and Andrea Shalal; Editing by Marguerita Choy)

IMF chief called out over pressure to favor China while at World Bank

Andrea Shalal and David Lawder
Thu, 16 September 2021, 


IMF chief called out over pressure to favor China while at World BankFILE PHOTO: International Monetary Fund (IMF) Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva speaks during a news conference in Washington

By Andrea Shalal and David Lawder

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - World Bank leaders, including then-Chief Executive Kristalina Georgieva, applied "undue pressure" on staff to boost China's ranking in the bank's "Doing Business 2018" report, according to an independent investigation released Thursday.

The report, prepared by law firm WilmerHale at the request of the bank's ethics committee, raises concerns about China's influence at the World Bank, and the judgment of Georgieva - now managing director of the International Monetary Fund - and then-World Bank President Jim Yong Kim.

Georgieva said she disagreed "fundamentally with the findings and interpretations" of the report and had briefed the IMF's executive board.

The World Bank Group on Thursday canceled the entire "Doing Business" https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2021/09/16/statement-on-release-of-investigation-into-data-irregularities-in-doing-business-2018-and-2020 

report on business climates, saying internal audits and the WilmerHale investigation had raised "ethical matters, including the conduct of former Board officials, as well as current and/or former Bank staff."

The U.S. Treasury Department, which manages the dominant U.S. shareholdings in the IMF and the World Bank, said it was analyzing what it called the "serious findings."

The WilmerHale report https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/84a922cc9273b7b120d49ad3b9e9d3f9-0090012021/original/DB-Investigation-Findings-and-Report-to-the-Board-of-Executive-Directors-September-15-2021.pdf

 cited "direct and indirect pressure" from senior staff in Kim's office to change the report's methodology to boost China's score, and said it likely occurred at his direction.

It said Georgieva, and a key adviser, Simeon Djankov, had pressured staff to "make specific changes to China's data points" and boost its ranking at a time when the bank was seeking China's support for a big capital increase.

Kim did not respond to a request for comment. Djankov could not be immediately reached.

China's ranking in the "Doing Business 2018" report, published in October 2017, rose seven places to 78th after the data methodology changes were made, compared with the initial draft report.

The "Doing Business" report ranks countries based on their regulatory and legal environments, ease of business startups, financing, infrastructure and other business climate measures.

'SERIOUS FINDINGS'

The report comes nearly two years after Georgieva took over as IMF chief, shortly before the biggest global economic crisis in the Fund's 76-year history, prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The U.S. Treasury is analyzing "serious findings" in the WilmerHale report, Treasury spokeswoman Alexandra LaManna told Reuters. "Our primary responsibility is to uphold the integrity of international financial institutions.”

The WilmerHale report also cited pressures related to data used to determine rankings for Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Azerbaijan in the "Doing Business 2020" report published in 2019, but found no evidence that any members of the World Bank's Office of the President or executive board were involved in these changes.

Saudi Arabia climbed 30 places to 62nd in the "Doing Business 2020" report https://www.reuters.com/article/us-worldbank-regulation-rankings-idUKKBN1X304R.

"Going forward, we will be working on a new approach to assessing the business and investment climate," the World Bank said.

WilmerHale said it was hired by the lender's International Bank for Reconstruction and Development in January to review the internal circumstances that led to the data irregularities. It said the bank supported the probe, but it was wholly independent.

CAPITAL INCREASE

The report said the push to boost China's ranking came at a time when the bank's management was "consumed with sensitive negotiations" over a major capital increase, and China's disappointment over a lower-than-expected score.

Georgieva told WilmerHale investigators that "multilateralism was at stake, and the Bank was in 'very deep trouble' if the campaign missed its goals," the report said.

The World Bank in 2018 announced 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-imf-g20-wbank/world-bank-shareholders-back-13-billion-capital-increase-idUSKBN1HS0QS 

a $13 billion-paid in capital increase that boosted China's shareholding stake to 6.01% from 4.68%.

WilmerHale said Georgieva visited the home of a "Doing Business" manager to retrieve a hard copy of the final report that reflected changes that boosted China's ranking, and thanked the employee for helping "resolve the problem."

The report said a "toxic culture" and "fear of retaliation" surrounded the Doing Business report, and said members of that team "felt that they could not challenge an order from the Bank's president or CEO without risking their jobs."

Nonprofit group Oxfam welcomed the bank's decision to discontinue the Doing Business report, saying it had long encouraged governments to slash labor regulations and corporate taxes in order to improve their spot in the rankings.

Former World Bank chief economist Paul Romer first voiced concerns about the integrity of the "Doing Business" report in 2018, saying Chile's ranking may have been biased against socialist then-President Michelle Bachelet. Romer left the bank shortly after his comments.

(Reporting by David Lawder and Andrea Shalal; Editing by Marguerita Choy, Heather Timmons, and Jon Boyle)

Facebook boosts fight against conspiracies and violent groups

Thu, 16 September 2021,

Facebook unveiled a new effort to fight malicious information on its platform (AFP/Kirill KUDRYAVTSEV)

Facebook has launched an effort targeting users working together on the platform to promote real-world violence or conspiracy theories, beginning by taking down a German network spreading Covid misinformation.

The new tool announced Thursday is meant to detect organized, malicious efforts that are a threat but fall short of the social media giant's existing rules against hate groups, said Facebook's head of security policy Nathaniel Gleicher.

Facebook has been under relentless pressure to guard against being a platform where misinformation and hate can spread, while at the same time remain a forum for people to speak freely. It has struggled to respond.

Under the new effort, users who work together to "amplify their group's harmful behavior" and repeatedly violate the platform rules can have their accounts shut down.

Facebook is looking for groups of users that do things like "brigading," or ganging up on other accounts, to flood them with comments or complaints.

"We recognize this challenge is complex," Facebook threat disruption director David Agranovich told a press briefing.

"We need to be careful and deliberate... to distinguish between people who organically come together to organize for social change, and the types of adversarial networks that can cause social harm," he added.

A series of recent Wall Street Journal articles has cast a harsh light on the company for failing to protect teenage users of its photo app Instagram, but also for shielding VIPs from some of the network's own restrictions.

Under the new effort, Facebook has removed fewer than 150 accounts, pages, or groups operated by people associated with the Querdenken movement, which opposes anti-Covid measures like mask-wearing and lockdowns.

People behind the accounts, some of which were on Instagram, boosted content that portrayed violence as the way to overturn German government efforts against the virus, according to Facebook.

The social network cited public reports that the group took part in violence against journalists, police and medical practitioners in Germany.

The new enforcement tool will take aim at groups with histories of violating Facebook's rules and trying to dodge accountability.

Gleicher said the network has been developing this new tool since before the start of this year, as harmful social media campaigns increasingly enlisted real users to spread posts.

He noted bad actors "deliberately blur the lines" between real people expressing their ideas and deliberate manipulation, in order to be harder to catch.

gc/jm

Facebook deletes accounts of German anti-lockdown group

The tech giant says the Querdenken (Lateral Thinking) movement was causing "social harm" by promoting conspiracy theories against coronavirus restrictions.



The Querdenken protests have attracted a group of coronavirus skeptics and anti-vaxxers

Social media giant Facebook deleted nearly 150 accounts, pages and groups linked with Germany's Querdenken (Lateral Thinking) movement, the platform's representatives said on Thursday. The movement made its reputation by accusing the media and politicians of lying about the coronavirus pandemic.

"The people behind this activity used authentic and duplicate accounts to post and amplify violating content, primarily focused on promoting the conspiracy that the German government's COVID-19 restrictions are part of a larger plan to strip citizens of their freedoms and basic rights," Facebook head of security policy, Nathaniel Gleicher, told reporters.

The clampdown included both Facebook's own platform and Instagram, which is owned by Facebook. The company blocked domains linked with the movement from being shared. Accounts of Querdenken founder Michael Ballweg have also been affected.
Facebook to monitor, 'take action' if needed

The group gained popularity during anti-lockdown protests in Germany, and attracted various fringe groups including people from the far-right. At several anti-lockdown protests, police officers and journalists were attacked by the members of the movement.

According to Facebook, individuals linked with the Querdenken movement repeatedly violated the platform's standards against spreading health misinformation, incitement of violence, bullying, harassment and hate speech. Gleicher said the group was causing "coordinated social harm."

However, Facebook said it was not banning all Querdenken content. The company was "continuing to monitor the situation and will take action" if necessary, according to Facebook representative Gleicher.
Deleted from YouTube

The clampdown is the first time Facebook is taking action against the so-called "social harm" campaigns. Such campaigns "typically involve networks of primarily authentic users who organize to systematically violate our policies to cause harm on or off our platform," Gleicher said.

In May this year, YouTube removed the Querdenken 711 channel with its parent company Google accusing it of violating YouTube's misinformation guidelines.

Pandemic-hit Qantas weighs new pay structure to keep key executives


Thu, 16 September 2021, 

FILE PHOTO: A crew member walks from a Qantas plane at a 

domestic terminal at Sydney Airport in Sydney


SYDNEY (Reuters) - Qantas Airways Ltd said on Friday it was considering new ways to structure pay to ensure it could retain key executives as it enters the third financial year affected by the pandemic-driven slowdown in travel.

Qantas Chairman Richard Goyder said executives had faced a high workload with no annual bonuses for the last two years, and a continued wage freeze at a time when attrition was rising across the airline.

"Our executive cohorts are talented and in increasing demand across a range of industries, many of which, unlike aviation and tourism, are experiencing high rates of growth and activity, with financial rewards to match," he said in the airline's annual report.

In the case of CEO Alan Joyce and executive management, any incentive plan would take the place of the traditional annual bonus plan, Goyder said, adding that a decision was expected in the second half of the financial year.

Joyce's total annual pay rose to A$1.97 million ($1.44 million) in the 12 months ended June 30, up 13% from a year earlier, when he had taken a period of zero base pay, but his pay remained 80% below pre-COVID levels.

Joyce has said he expected to stay in his role until at least July 2023 to complete a three-year recovery plan designed to cut ongoing annual costs by A$1 billion.

In a separate note to staff seen by Reuters, Goyder said the company would look to reward all employees if the recovery plan is completed successfully by that date.

"Nothing is finalised but we look forward to sharing more detail in the first quarter of next year," he said.

Other companies in the travel sector, including Flight Centre Travel Group Ltd and Air New Zealand Ltd, have offered shares to all employees as part of retention efforts.

($1 = 1.3689 Australian dollars)

(Reporting by Jamie Freed. Editing by Gerry Doyle)

PERMANENT WAR ECONOMY

#AUKUS

'Great power rivalry' fuels Pacific arms race frenzy

AFP - 1h ago

A quick barrage of missile tests and bumper defence deals in the Pacific have highlighted a regional arms race that is intensifying as the China-US rivalry grows.

"There's a little frenzy in the Indo-Pacific of arming up," said Yonsei University professor John Delury. "There's a sense of everyone's doing it."

Within 24 hours this week, North Korea fired off two railway-borne weapons, South Korea successfully tested its first submarine-launched ballistic missile, and Australia announced the unprecedented purchase of state-of-the-art US nuclear-powered submarines and cruise missiles.


© STRExperts say defence spending increases across the Pacific are a reaction to China's military expenditure

A remarkable flurry, but indicative of a region spending apace on the latest wonders of modern weaponry, experts say.

Last year alone, the Asia and Oceania region lavished more than half a trillion US dollars on its militaries, according to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.


© John SAEKIGraphic on nuclear submarines around the world

"You've really seen an upward trend for the last 20 years," the institute's Lucie Beraud-Sudreau told AFP. "Asia is really the region where the uptick trend is the most noticeable."

She points to a perfect storm of rapid economic growth -- which puts more money in the government kitties -- and changing "threat perceptions" in the region.

- Big brothers -

China accounts for about half of Asia's total and has increased defence spending every year for the last 26 years, turning the People's Liberation Army into a modern fighting force.


Beijing now spends an estimated $252 billion a year -- up 76 percent since 2011 -- allowing it to project power across the region and directly challenge US primacy.

But defence spending in Australia, India, Japan, South Korea and elsewhere is also gathering pace.

Michael Shoebridge, a former Australian defence intelligence official, now with the Australia Strategic Policy Institute, believes that spending is a direct reaction to China.

"The actual military competition is between China and other partners that are wanting to deter China from using force," he said.

"That reaction has just grown, particularly since Xi (Jinping) has become leader. He's clearly interested in using all the power that China gains fairly coercively and aggressively."

Today around 20 percent of the region's defence spending is on procurement, notably on maritime assets and long-range deterrence designed to convince Beijing -- or any other adversary -- that the cost of attack is too high.

Shoebridge points to Australia's landmark decision Thursday to acquire at least eight US nuclear-powered submarines and an unspecified number of Tomahawk cruise missiles.

"They're all focused on raising the cost to China of engaging in military conflict. They're a pretty effective counter to the kinds of capabilities the PLA has been building."

But even South Korean spending "is as much driven by China as North Korea," he said. "There's no explanation for (Seoul's decision to build) an aircraft carrier that involves North Korea."

Similarly, "India's military modernisation is clearly driven by China's growing military power," Shoebridge added.

For its part China -- fond of describing its relationship with the United States as "great power rivalry" -- accuses the United States of fuelling the arms race.

In the words of state-backed tabloid the Global Times, Washington is "hysterically polarising its alliance system."

If fear of China is the driving force behind regional defence spending, then the United States has appeared happy to speed the process along, actively helping regional allies to beef up.

As China and Japan were "blazing forward" with defence programmes, Delury says Washington has been "aiding and abetting" allies "in the name of deterring China."

"We're not seeing arms control here, we're seeing the opposite," he said.

seb-arb/jfx/mtp

Australia shrugs off China anger on nuclear subs

Issued on: 17/09/2021 - 

The deal extends US nuclear submarine technology to Australia as well as cyber defence, applied artificial intelligence and undersea capabilities

 Jamica Johnson US NAVY/AFP/File

Sydney (AFP)

Australia on Friday shrugged off Chinese anger over its decision to acquire US nuclear-powered submarines, while vowing to defend the rule of law in airspace and waters where Beijing has staked hotly contested claims.

US President Joe Biden announced the new Australia-US-Britain defence alliance on Wednesday, extending US nuclear submarine technology to Australia as well as cyber defence, applied artificial intelligence and undersea capabilities.

Beijing described the new alliance as an "extremely irresponsible" threat to regional stability, questioning Australia's commitment to nuclear non-proliferation and warning the Western allies that they risked "shooting themselves in the foot".

China has its own "very substantive programme of nuclear submarine building", Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison argued Friday in an interview with radio station 2GB.

"They have every right to take decisions in their national interests for their defence arrangements and of course so does Australia and all other countries," he said.

In a series of media interviews, the Australian leader said his government was reacting to changing dynamics in the Asia-Pacific region where territory is increasingly contested and competition is rising.

Australia is "very aware" of China's nuclear submarine capabilities and growing military investment, he told Channel Seven television.

"We are interested in ensuring that international waters are always international waters and international skies are international skies, and that the rule of law applies equally in all of these places," he said.

The first contingent of US Marines to be deployed in Australia arrived in Darwin in 2012

 Christopher Dickson AUSTRALIAN DEPARTMENT OF DEFENCE/AFP/File

Australia wanted to ensure that there were no "no-go zones" in areas governed by international law, the prime minister said.

"That's very important whether it is for trade, whether it is for things like undersea cables, for planes and where they can fly. I mean that is the order that we need to preserve. That is what peace and stability provides for and that is what we are seeking to achieve."

- 'Stab in the back' -

The Australian move also infuriated France, aghast at losing a contract to supply conventional submarines to Australia that was worth Aus$50 billion (31 billion euros, $36.5 billion) when signed in 2016.

Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said it was a "stab in the back" from Australia.

But the main backdrop to the alliance is China's rise.

China claims almost all of the resource-rich South China Sea, through which trillions of dollars in shipping trade passes annually, rejecting competing claims from Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam.

Beijing has been accused of deploying a range of military hardware including anti-ship missiles and surface-to-air missiles there, and ignored a 2016 international tribunal decision that declared its historical claim over most of the waters to be without basis.

An aerial shot of Chinese development on the disputed Subi reef in the Spratlys 

TED ALJIBE AFP/File

China has also imposed tough trade sanctions on a range of Australian products, widely seen in Australia as a reaction to Canberra's opposition to Chinese investment in sensitive areas and to its questioning of the origins of the coronavirus pandemic.

- 'The forever partnership' -

Morrison said the new defence alliance, prepared in 18 months of discussions with the United States and Britain, will be permanent.

"It involves a very significant commitment not just today but forever. That is why I refer to it as the forever partnership. It is one that will see Australia kept secure and safe into the future," he said.

Australia's defence spending will rise, Morrison said, as the new alliance also requires greater investment in cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, quantum technologies and undersea capabilities.

Morrison told Australian media that the defence alliance had been "well received" in his discussions so far with leaders in Japan, India, Singapore, New Zealand, Fiji, and Papua New Guinea.

Indonesia's government said it took note "cautiously" of the agreement. "Indonesia is deeply concerned over the continuing arms race and power projection in the region," the foreign ministry added in a statement.

Dutton said Australia was willing to host more US Marines on rotation through the northern city of Darwin and wanted to see air capability enhanced.

© 2021 AFP

Australian submarine deal boosts Ultra Electronics takeover prospects


James Titcomb
Thu, 16 September 2021

Submarine - PA/PA Wire

A new security pact between Britain, America and Australia has weakened the rationale for blocking the US private equity takeover of Ultra Electronics, which supplies kit for Britain's nuclear submarines, experts have said.

Advent International's pursuit of Ultra is thought to be more likely to succeed after the three countries agreed to share sensitive data under the so-called Aukus agreement.

Ministers last month ordered a national security review into the £2.6bn takeover of Ultra amid concerns over top-secret technology developed by Ultra for the Royal Navy falling into another country's hands.

Ultra makes electronic equipment which is so vital for Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent that it was feared security could be endangered even if the company was owned by a business in a close ally such as the US.

However, the new pact means that the UK and US are now committed to sharing even more information than before. The three countries will be collaborating on nuclear propulsion technology to help the Royal Australian Navy build attack submarines.

Peter Sandeman, an analyst at Navy Lookout, said: “The Aukus agreement shows we are getting closer militarily and that probably means that the ownership of Ultra by a business in an Allied nation is more acceptable.

“We are getting closer to Americans all the time selling industrial businesses to the US and it is obviously not as catastrophic as these businesses being taken over by the Chinese or even European owners.”

Henry Carver, an analyst at Peel Hunt, said: “It should allay some concerns around security in that it highlights how closely the US Department of Defence and UK Ministry of Defence work together.”

He said the Government may require intellectual property to be safeguarded in the takeover, but that will not necessarily mean the deal has to ne blocked.

Advent has agreed a £35.16-a-share offer with Ultra’s directors to buy the company through Cobham, the British defence contractor it took over last year for £4bn. It has committed to legally binding undertakings to assuage national security concerns, but has not yet revealed what these are.

The takeover is controversial since Advent has sold off much of Cobham’s operations since buying the company, raising fears that the same could happen to Ultra.

Kwasi Kwarteng, the Business Secretary, last month ordered the Competition and Markets Authority to conduct a national security review of the deal by January 18. He has the power to block it if significant concerns are raised.

Ultra’s shares were up 0.5pc on Thursday. Ultra and Advent declined to comment.

Separately, Babcock has landed the first export contract for its Arrowhead 140 lightweight frigate design from Indonesia, which will build the two of the ships in local yards.

The FTSE 250 defence company is selling five of the ships to the Royal Navy for £250m each. It has only provided the design to Indonesia and the new contract is understood to be worth less than £20m

Rolls-Royce and BAE set to benefit after Australia spurns French submarines

Alan Tovey
Thu, 16 September 2021, 

Astute

“These are the most complicated machines humans to have ever built,” said a senior officer of one of the Royal Navy's latest nuclear-powered submarines. “The space shuttle doesn’t even come close," he added, showing off the Western world’s most advanced attack vessel.

Not only are they the most complex, but also the most secret assets in a country’s arsenal, containing technology critical to national security.

Thursday's announcement of a pact between the UK, US and Australia to build nuclear-powered submarines, is, therefore, a landmark moment. The partnership will include sharing ultra-classified information to help Australia create at least eight such vessels, which are able to stay submerged and operational until food or the crew’s endurance runs out.

It marks an attempt to counter China's increasingly aggressive military prowess, highlighting the level of threat Western nations think they are up against and the need for co-operation to counter it. A mention of Beijing was, however, avoided in the formal announcement of the tie-up.

The "Aukus" agreement resulted in Australia abandoning a A$90bn (£48bn) contract agreed in 2016 with France for 12 diesel-electric submarines, to replace its ageing Collins class vessels. Deliveries were due to start in the 2030s.

That such an isolated nation, completely dependent on sea trade, was willing to tear up its contract with France's Naval Group and turn to far more expensive vessels shows just how dangerous it thinks China is.

“As a three-ocean nation, it is necessary to have access to the most capable submarine technology available,” the Canberra government said. “We are ready to take the step ... to defend Australia and its national interests.”

Geopolitics aside, the deal is a huge opportunity for British and US defence firms. But building submarines is an incredibly complicated business, even before nuclear power is thrown into the equation.

Under the agreement, Australia will lean on the UK and US navies and their suppliers for expertise needed to construct the submarines’ power systems, and likely also the other technology the vessels contain. The southern nation has no domestic infrastructure to support the nuclear technology, but will need to be able support the new submarines in ports on home soil.

Among British suppliers, BAE Systems is set to be a winner. The defence contractor is currently building the final three of seven nuclear-powered attack submarines, called the Astute class, for the Royal Navy, as well as the first of four Dreadnought submarines to replace the existing Trident nuclear missile models. Both are powered by reactors from engine maker Rolls-Royce.

The two London-listed companies are also involved in the planning of a successor to the Astute, expected to come in mid-to-late 2040s. Shares rose 4pc and 2pc, respectively, after they were namechecked by the Ministry of Defence as it announced the tie-up.

BAE has said it “stands ready to support AUKUS discussions as they progress”, with Rolls adding it that “looks forward to supporting the UK Government in the initial scoping phase for this new endeavour”.

Thales UK - whose French parent owns 35pc of Naval Group - could also be a beneficiary. It supplies the Astute’s highly rated sonar which is able to hear and identify ships hundreds of miles away.

Technology already deployed in the Astute or even its successors could be tapped to go into Australia’s fleet.

Over in America, General Dynamics Electric Boat and Huntington Ingalls Industries - which both build submarines for the US Navy - are likely to do well from the deal. Both firms produce a class of nuclear-powered fast-attack vessels, named the Virgina, which compete with the UK's Astute for the title of the most capable Western submarine.

What sort of design Australia will actually choose, however, is unknown.

Industry sources say defence companies were caught off guard by the announcement, leaving them to conclude it was driven at the highest political level with little industrial involvement. As such, nothing beyond a broad concept has been decided on.

Virginia class submarine

Working out the requirements for the design is likely to last 18 months, according to the Ministry of Defence. Although details are unclear, insiders say that would not enough time to come up with an entirely new design.

“Building a submarine is mind-bogglingly complex. When you’ve got no nuclear infrastructure, it just adds another order of magnitude of difficulty,” says Pete Sandeman of a military expert at website Navy Lookout.

“What I’d expect to see is an ‘Australianised’ version of the Astute, or possibly a derivation of the US Virginia class. If they go for a blank sheet of paper, that’s going to add another five or ten years before they start to arrive.”

One thing that is certain is the new submarines will be built in Australia, despite expertise coming from abroad.

As the country makes its biggest-ever military purchase, it would not want to see such a vast sum spent entirely abroad. Australia's former contract with France stipulated that at least 60pc of the spend would be at home, with Adelaide chosen as the construction site.

Meanwhile, submarine facilities in the UK and US are full with existing orders. In this area Australia, however, is set for a challenging period ahead in setting up a new yard, which needs vital skills and experience.

The UK 's bitter experience building the first Astute boats is a prime example, resulting in it arriving four years late and £2bn over budget as British industry relearned how to build submarines.

Sandeman says the problem will be even more difficult if Australia tries to do something it has never done before.

“It’s hardly as if there are a load of submarine experts sitting around with nothing to do in the UK and US,” he says. “Abandoning Naval Group may mean that Australia is jumping out of the frying pan into the fire - and it’s worrying because it could be a British fire.”


Still, problems with the French deal may have contributed to Australia’s decision. Costs were spiralling - the project was meant to be about half the price - and delays were creeping in. Reports of disagreements about specifications, how much work would be carried out domestically and that Australia was ready to walk away may have influenced Canberra’s decision to turn to its close allies.

Sandeman says Naval Group’s design - a nuclear-powered vessel converted to diesel-electric - and a mixture of systems from around the world were other factors, possibly along with cultural differences.

“It sounds like it was an uphill struggle,” he says. “A converted French design, with a US command and control system, combined with differences between the Australians and French do things.

“It’s often missed but in something as complex as a submarine, talking the same language and doing things the same way are incredibly important.”

This cultural alignment extends to the deep links between the British and Australian navies, who work closely with their US counterparts.

With Australia having already bought the design for Britain's latest frigate combat ship, the Type 26. Nine are being built by BAE's local arm Down Under.

Sharing technology that makes their submarines more similar, and better able to work together, is perhaps only logical.

The French government, however, labelled the decision a stab in the back with the French ministers saying it was "regrettable, lacked coherence". They added that it "reinforces the need to raise the issue of European strategic autonomy loud and clear".

To view this content, you'll need to update your privacy settings.Please click here to do so.

Twisting the knife a bit deeper, France's ambassador to the US noted in a tweet the decision came “exactly 240 years [after] the French Navy defeated the British Navy in Chesapeake Bay, paving the way for the victory at Yorktown and the independence of the US”.

But with allies like that, and faced with a threat as great as China, perhaps Aukus was inevitable. The only surprise was that it took as long as it did.

UK

Co-op faces union heat over Amazon tie-up that will see customers ordering their shopping from the tech giant's website

By MATT OLIVER FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 16 September 2021

Co-op customers will soon be able to order their shopping from Amazon’s website.

The supermarket chain said the service would be trialled in Glasgow before being rolled out to other parts of the UK later this year.

It will allow Amazon Prime customers to do their full Co-op shop on Amazon.co.uk. Same-day delivery and two-hour scheduled time slots will be free on orders worth £40 or more, or cost £3.99 for orders under that amount, with a minimum shop of £15.

Co-op said the service allowing customers to order groceries from the Amazon website would be trialled in Glasgow before being rolled out to other parts of the UK later this year

However, Co-op, which also provides funerals and other services, reported a loss of £15m for the six months to July 3, compared with profits of £56m a year ago, as it was hit by supply chain problems and the pandemic.

Welcoming the deal with Amazon, Co-op boss Steve Murrells said: ‘We’re driving forward with exciting plans to provide rapid kerb-to-kitchen grocery delivery.’

However, union chiefs are enraged, claiming customers would be ‘shocked’ by Co-op’s partnership with the US tech giant.

Defending the tie-up, Murrells insisted Amazon ‘wants to be a force for social good’.

But Andy Prendergast, national officer of the GMB union, which represents Amazon workers, said: ‘It’s really disappointing to see a company with a proud ethical heritage like the Co-op teaming up with Amazon: a tax evading multinational with a horrifying health and safety record.’

An Amazon spokesman said it offered staff ‘excellent pay, benefits and opportunities for career growth, all while working in a safe, modern work environment’.

Co-op under fire for delivery deal with 

“tax-evading” Amazon

Simon English
Thu, 16 September 2021

(Getty Images)

Co-op Group today unveiled a delivery deal with Amazon, raising eyebrows in the sector and earning the immediate ire of unions.

The member owned grocer, insurer and funeral provider is trialling a deal that will see its food sold via Amazon to Prime subscribers. Orders over £40 will be delivered free, starting in Glasgow initially with plans for a quick roll out elsewhere.

Andy Prendergast, national officer of the GMB, said: “It’s really disappointing to see a company with a proud ethical heritage like Co-op teaming up with Amazon: a tax evading multinational with a horrifying health and safety record.

“Amazon has made billions throughout the pandemic and pays virtually no tax. Bosses won’t even recognise a union to improve the health and safety of their beleaguered workforce.”

Co-op chief executive Steve Murrells said he wasn’t “here to defend Amazon” but added: “We have been working with Amazon for many years. From our point of view it allows us to get more ethically sourced products to more homes. It is a good joining of bedfellows.”

It declined to give financial details of the deal with Amazon, saying they are “commercially sensitive”.

In the half-year to July 3 the group made a loss of £15 million. Debts jumped from £550 million to £712 million. Food sales are up 6.5% compared to pre pandemic levels.

Murrells says the group is investing heavily in staff and stores.

He says a shortage of lorry drivers is hitting supplies.

“If you got into any retailer today you will see gaps on the shelves, it is not a Co-op problem, it is not a UK problem it is a global problem.”

He says the situation will be mostly resolved come Christmas.

The Co-op has a “ten-point climate plan” including a commitment to match the pricing of own brand plant-based foods with meat-based equivalents.

Read More

Co-op link up with Amazon doesn’t look of mutual benefit

Co-op warns supply chain crisis will push up prices and put pressure on profits

Co-op announces acceleration of online strategy

Co-op criticised after announcing new partnership with Amazon in bid to double online sales


Daniel Keane
Thu, 16 September 2021


( Co-op/PA)

Co-op has faced criticism after announcing a new partnership with Amazon and extending robot deliveries as part of plans to double its online sales by the end of the year.

The alliance allows Amazon Prime customers to do their full Co-op grocery shop on the Amazon website with same-day delivery and two-hour scheduled slots.

The partnership launched in Glasgow and surrounding areas on Thursday, but will be rolled out to other parts of the UK before the end of the year, with the aim of it becoming a nationwide service at an unconfirmed date. All orders over £40 will be delivered for free by Amazon’s Flex service.

Co-op, which prides itself on its ethical image and sustainability, has faced criticism from the GMB trade union over the move. Amazon has been accused of not paying its fair share of tax in the UK and poorly treating the drivers who deliver its goods.

Andy Prendergast, national officer of the GMB, said: “It’s really disappointing to see a company with a proud ethical heritage like Co-op teaming up with Amazon.

“Amazon has made billions throughout the pandemic. Bosses won’t even recognise a union to improve the health and safety of their beleaguered workforce.”

Steve Murrells, the Co-op’s chief executive, said he wasn’t “here to defend Amazon” but added: “We have been working with Amazon for many years. From our point of view, it allows us to get more ethically sourced products to more homes. It is a good joining of bedfellows.”

Meanwhile, Co-op is also extending its partnership with Starship Technologies, the robot company launched by the co-founders of Skype, which allows the delivery of groceries in as little as 20 minutes.

The convenience retailer will increase the number of autonomous vehicles operating and delivering Co-op groceries from 200 to 500 by the end of this year, extending them from Milton Keynes and Northampton to Cambridgeshire and then into the north of England.

A Co-op spokesperson said: “We aren’t compromising our ethics and principles and the extension of the partnership is about getting our ethically sourced products into the hands of more people.

“It reflects the support Co-op members have shown for Amazon’s products by using its lockers and click and collect services through hundreds of our stores for a number of years.”

The news comes as Mr Murrells warned of food price increases and pressure on its annual profits from the growing supply chain crisis. He said the company will look to offset the cost pressures “as best we can”, but that “some of that will filter down” to customers.

Co-op reported underlying pre-tax operating losses of £15m for the six months to 3 July, compared with profits of £56m a year ago, as it was hit by product availability issues and the continuing impact of the pandemic.

John Boumphrey, Amazon UK country manager, said: “Our partnership with Co-op is another way for us to provide our Amazon Prime customers with more choice, value and convenience to shop for their everyday groceries.”

A spokesperson for the firm said they offered “excellent pay, benefits and opportunities for career growth” in a “safe, modern work environment”.

Heads of Exxon and BP called on to testify before Congress to address climate crisis

Chris McGreal
Thu, 16 September 2021

Photograph: Kathleen Flynn/Reuters

US congressional investigators say they have uncovered “very concerning” new documents about ExxonMobil’s disinformation campaign to discredit climate science.

Representative Ro Khanna, a leading critic of the petroleum industry on the House oversight committee, said the documents came to light ahead of a hearing next month to question the heads of major oil companies about their industry’s long history of undermining the evidence that burning fossil fuels drove global heating.

Khanna declined to discuss the information beyond describing it as “very troubling facts and some very concerning documents”.

On Thursday, the House oversight committee sent out letters summoning the heads of four firms – Exxon, Chevron, Shell and BP – to testify on 28 October.

The letter to Darren Woods, Exxon’s chief executive, said the “fossil fuel industry has reaped massive profits” while devastating communities, ravaging the natural world and costing taxpayers billions of dollars.

“We are also concerned that to protect those profits, the industry has reportedly led a coordinated effort to spread disinformation to mislead the public and prevent crucial action to address climate change,” the letter said.

The hearings follow a secret recording of an Exxon lobbyist earlier this year describing the oil giant’s backing for a carbon tax as a public relations ploy intended to stall more serious measures to combat the climate crisis.

“The big oil companies owe the American people an explanation,” said Khanna, a California Democrat who chairs the environmental sub-committee. “They need to admit what they’ve done on climate misinformation in the past, they need to acknowledge what they’re currently doing in terms of spending dark money, and they need to commit 100% that they’re going to stop any climate disinformation campaign.”

The congressman said it was “unbelievable” that oil industry leaders have yet to face questioning by Congress about the climate crisis. He likened the hearings to the groundbreaking appearance of seven tobacco company chiefs before Congress in 1994 to expose what the cigarette companies knew about the hazards of smoking. He said the oversight committee is currently being advised by some of those involved in those hearings.

Khanna said he wants to hear from the leaders of the oil giants not only about past actions but their continued funding of front groups and thinktanks pushing disinformation about climate science, the covert funding of denialist advertising and the use of lobby groups to oppose green legislation.

“The magnifying glass is particularly important now so that they don’t interfere with the Congress’s agenda to get all kinds of legislation. We will not tackle the climate crisis successfully if we don’t first put an end to climate disinformation,” he said.

The committee is also requesting that the heads of two major trade groups closely aligned with the oil industry, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the US Chamber of Commerce, answer questions about their role in the cover up.

Minnessota’s attorney general, Keith Ellison, is suing API, alleging that it “engaged in a public-relations campaign that was not only false, but also highly effective” to undermine climate science.

Democratic senator Sheldon Whitehouse told the Guardian earlier this year that API was acting as a front for the industry by allowing oil firms to claim they were committed to addressing climate change while API lobbied against green policies in Congress. Whitehouse accused API of “lying on a massive industrial scale”.

In 1998, after countries signed the Kyoto Protocol to help curb carbon emissions, API drew up a multimillion-dollar disinformation campaign to ensure that “climate change becomes a non-issue”. The plan said “victory will be achieved” when “recognition of uncertainties become part of the ‘conventional wisdom’”.

Similarly, the US Chamber of Commerce has helped downplay the climate crisis and oppose legislation to curb greenhouse emissions.

In 2015, Columbia Journalism School and the Los Angeles Times uncovered a raft of Exxon documents held at the University of Texas that showed the company worked to undermine climate science by promoting denialism.

Exxon’s chairman and chief executive, Lee Raymond, told industry executives in 1996 that “scientific evidence remains inconclusive as to whether human activities affect global climate”.

This story is published as part of Covering Climate Now, a global collaboration of news outlets strengthening coverage of the climate story

Democrats call oil giants to testify on climate campaign

Congressional Democrats are calling top executives at ExxonMobil and other oil giants to testify about what lawmakers say is a long-running, industry-wide campaign to spread disinformation about the role of fossil fuels in causing global warming

Via AP news wire

Congressional Democrats are calling top executives at ExxonMobil and other oil giants to testify at a House hearing as lawmakers investigate what they say is a long-running, industry-wide campaign to spread disinformation about the role of fossil fuels in causing global warming.

The House Oversight Committee on Thursday requested that executives at ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron and Shell testify at a hearing next month, along with leaders of the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry's top lobbying group, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

“We are deeply concerned that the fossil fuel industry has reaped massive profits for decades while contributing to climate change that is devastating American communities, costing taxpayers billions of dollars and ravaging the natural world,” Oversight Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., and Rep. Ro Khanna D-Calif., wrote in a letter to oil executives.

“We are also concerned that to protect those profits, the industry has reportedly led a coordinated effort to spread disinformation to mislead the public and prevent crucial action to address climate change,” they wrote. Khanna, chairman of Oversight's environment subcommittee, has been pressing the oil industry for months for documents and other information on its role in stopping climate action.

Khanna has been focusing on Exxon after a senior lobbyist for the company was caught in a secret video bragging that Exxon had fought climate science through “shadow groups” and had targeted influential senators in an effort to weaken President Joe Biden’s climate agenda.

The comments by Washington-based lobbyist Keith McCoy were made public in June by the environmental group Greenpeace UK, which secretly recorded McCoy and another lobbyist in Zoom interviews.

Darren Woods, Exxon’s chairman and chief executive, condemned McCoy's statements and said the company stands by its commitment to work on finding solutions to climate change.

Woods is among the executives the House panel hopes to question at an Oct. 28 hearing, along with BP America CEO David Lawler, Chevron CEO Michael Wirth and Shell president Gretchen Watkins.

Maloney and Khanna said in a statement that ExxonMobil and other oil companies “have worked to prevent serious action on global warming by generating doubt about the documented dangers of fossil fuels and misrepresenting the scale of their efforts to develop alternative energy technologies.'' They compared the tactics to those deployed by the tobacco industry to resist regulation "while selling products that kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.''

The oil industry's “strategies of obfuscation and distraction span decades and still continue today,'' Khanna and Maloney said. The five largest publicly traded oil and gas companies reportedly spent at least $1 billion from 2015 to 2018 "to promote climate disinformation through ‘branding and lobbying,' ” the lawmakers wrote.

Union for striking Nabisco workers reaches tentative agreement after month of protests and boycotts


Alex Woodward
Thu, September 16, 2021

(REUTERS)

The union representing hundreds of striking Nabisco workers has reached a tentative agreement with the snack giant’s parent company as work stoppages in several states, nationwide boycotts and protests entered a second month.

Workers behind Oreo and Chips Ahoy! cookies and Ritz crackers initiated a strike in August after failing to reach a deal on a new contract with Mondelez International, the brand’s parent company.

The strike spread to Nabisco facilities in five states, as workers reached a breaking point amid factory closures, concerns over outsourcing to Mexico, and changes to pay, schedules and healthcare coverage that workers and unions say have undermined their labour, all during the coronavirus pandemic that has seen a “snack boom” with record profits.

Workers called for a product boycott, drawing widespread public attention, including from actor Danny DeVito, who called his Twitter followers to support workers “striking for humane working hours, fair pay, outsourcing jobs”.

“NO CONTRACTS NO SNACKS,” he wrote.

US Senator Bernie Sanders also announced his support for striking workers.

“If Nabisco can rake in billions of dollars in corporate profits, they can afford to treat their workers with dignity and respect,” he said on 18 August.

Mondelez briefly threatened legal action against the union, which was hit with a cease-and-desist notice for interrupting the company’s operations.

The union reached a “tentative agreement” on a new contract on 14 September, according to Anthony Shelton, president of the Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union.

Local union chapters will vote on the contract after it is presented to members “in the coming days”, he said.

“I want to thank and commend all of the members of the bargaining committee for their many, many hours of extremely hard work to reach this tentative agreement,” Mr Shelton said in a statement. “As always in our Union, the members will have the final say on the contract.”

This year, Mondelez closed Nabisco facilities in Georgia and New Jersey, where the company’s decades-old bakeries employed roughly 1,000 workers combined.

Those shutdowns triggered concerns among workers that the company could eliminate their union jobs and move production to Mexico, after closures at a Chicago plant and a shift to production in Mexico in 2016 made headlines during that year’s presidential race.

The 2021 strike kicked off in Portland, Oregon, where more than 200 workers at a Nabisco bakery ignited a strike that spread to Illinois, Virginia, and distribution centres in Colorado and Georgia.

Workers have objected to company proposals to roll back healthcare coverage and work shifts that include 12-hour days without overtime pay.

In an offer released publicly on 31 August, Mondelez modified a work schedule proposal and offered a bonus of $5,000 per employee, annual wage increases, and a boost to the company’s matching contributions to workers’ 401k plans.

It also offered “alternative work schedules of 12-hour shifts” which would alternative three to four days a week “only on select, high-demand lines in bakeries”.

That offer expired on 7 September, and the company and union resumed in-person bargaining this week.

Mondelez said the latest agreement for new contracts has been “fully recommended by both parties”.

Union employees at the Portland, Richmond and Chicago bakeries and at distribution facilities in Aurora, Colorado, Addison, Illinois and Norcross, Georgia “will have the opportunity to vote on ratifying the new contracts in the coming days”, the company said in a statement.

Waste from one bitcoin transaction ‘like binning two iPhones’

Alex Hern UK technology editor

THE GUARDIAN 
Fri, 17 September 2021,



A single bitcoin transaction generates the same amount of electronic waste as throwing two iPhones in the bin, according to a new analysis by economists from the Dutch central bank and MIT.

While the carbon footprint of bitcoin is well studied, less attention has been paid to the vast churn in computer hardware that the cryptocurrency incentivises. Specialised computer chips called ASICs are sold with no other purpose than to run the algorithms that secure the bitcoin network, a process called mining that rewards those who partake with bitcoin payouts. But because only the newest chips are power-efficient enough to mine profitably, effective miners need to constantly replace their ASICs with newer, more powerful ones.

“The lifespan of bitcoin mining devices remains limited to just 1.29 years,” write the researchers Alex de Vries and Christian Still in the paper, Bitcoin’s growing e-waste problem, published in the journal Resources, Conservation and Recycling.

“As a result, we estimate that the whole bitcoin network currently cycles through 30.7 metric kilotons of equipment per year. This number is comparable to the amount of small IT and telecommunication equipment waste produced by a country like the Netherlands.”

In 2020 the bitcoin network processed 112.5m transactions (compared with 539bn processed by traditional payment service providers in 2019), according to the economists, meaning that each individual transaction “equates to at least 272g of e-waste”. That’s the weight of two iPhone 12 minis.

The reason why e-waste is such a problem for the cryptocurrency is that, unlike most computing hardware, ASICs have no alternative use beyond bitcoin mining, and if they cannot be used to mine bitcoin profitably, they have no future purpose at all. It is theoretically possible for these devices to regain the ability to operate profitably at a later point in time should bitcoin prices suddenly increase and drive up mining income, the authors note.

“Nonetheless, there are several factors that generally prevent substantial extension of the lifetime of mining devices,” they add. Storing mining hardware costs money, and the longer it is stored for, the less likely it is that it will ever be profitable.

The authors also warn that the e-waste problem will probably grow further if the price of bitcoin continues to rise, since it will incentivise further investment in and replacement of ASIC hardware.

If the community were to try to reduce its e-waste problem, the paper concludes, it would need to replace the bitcoin mining process in “its entirety with a more sustainable alternative”, and the paper suggests “proof of stake”, an experimental replacement. Ethereum, a bitcoin successor, announced in May plans to move to proof of stake within months, although the switchover has yet to occur.

Other bitcoin alternatives have been less successful at limiting their environmental footprint. Chia, a cryptocurrency that is built on a “proof of time and space” algorithm, has been accused of leading to shortages in hard drives and SSDs, a type of storage medium popular in fast computers. “Instead of just wasting electricity, Chia chews through SSDs at a fantastic rate and also has thoroughly wrecked the market for big HDs,” said David Gerard, a cryptocurrency expert.

Statue to bitcoin inventor unveiled in Budapest


Thu, 16 September 2021, 



Statue to bitcoin inventor unveiled in Budapest

To reflect the mystery surrounding the true identity of bitcoin's founder, sculptors Tamas Gilly and Reka Gergely turned the face into a sort of mirror (AFP/ATTILA KISBENEDEK)More


Hungarian bitcoin enthusiasts unveiled a statue in Budapest on Thursday which they say is the first in the world to honour Satoshi Nakamoto, the enigmatic inventor of the virtual currency.

The bronze bust is of a hooded figure, in an allusion to the fact that the true identity of Nakamoto -- a pseudonym -- is unknown.

The sculpture, erected in a business park alongside a statue of Apple founder Steve Jobs and an installation by Hungarian inventor Erno Rubik, was the brainchild of entrepreneur and bitcoin journalist, Andras Gyorfi.

It was financed by four Hungarian cryptocurrency organisations.

"Back in March, I was researching the connection between digital art and blockchain," the technology behind bitcoin, Gyorfi told AFP before the unveiling.

"And I thought: 'why shouldn't Satoshi have a statue in Budapest?'", he said.

To reflect the mystery surrounding the true identity of bitcoin's founder, sculptors Tamas Gilly and Reka Gergely turned the face into a sort of mirror.

"The basic concept of bitcoin is that it belongs to everyone, the people of the internet, that we are all Satoshi," Gilly told AFP in his workshop just outside Budapest earlier this month.

"So anyone can recognise themselves when looking at the face," he said.

Created following the 2008 global financial crisis, bitcoin aspired to overthrow traditional monetary and financial institutions such as central banks.

The founding white paper, published on October 31, 2008, and penned by Nakamoto, included the key goal of processing online payments between two parties without passing via a financial institution.

Since a first block of 50 bitcoins was created in January 2009, around 18.8 million units are currently in circulation.

The cryptocurrency has been on a rollercoaster ride recently, witnessing wild swings in price.

But over the past year, bitcoin has increasingly won support from small and large investors alike, including on Wall Street and from Tesla boss Elon Musk.

It struck a world first this month by becoming legal tender in El Salvador.

pmu/spm

SHOULD NATIONALIZE THEM

Berlin to buy 15,000 flats for 2.46 billion euros from rental firms

Fri, 17 September 2021


 An office building of the German property group

 Deutsche Wohnen & Vonovia are pictured in Berlin


BERLIN (Reuters) -German residential rental companies Vonovia and Deutsche Wohnen are selling almost 15,000 apartments to Berlin for 2.46 billion euros ($2.90 billion), the companies said on Friday.

The acquisition comes nine days before elections in the German capital, where housing shortages and rapidly rising prices have become a hot issue. An advisory referendum on expropriating the two housing companies is due to be held in parallel with the city election.

Deutsche Wohnen would be selling 10,700 apartments and 4,250 would come from Vonovia's portfolio.

Vonovia, the largest German residential rental company is in the process of acquiring its smaller competitor, creating a housing behemoth with some 550,000 apartments worth more than 80 billion euros.

In an effort to win political support for the deal announced in May, the two companies have pledged to limit regular rent increases in Berlin and offered to sell about 20,000 apartments to the city for at least 2 billion euros. [L2N2NB1I4]

However, a group behind the referendum initiative, has criticised the proposals and reiterated its opposition to such a transaction on Friday.

"We are in principle in favour of taking over the apartments by the public, but not through backdoor deals at speculative prices," Moheb Shafaquar said in a statement.

But Vonovia's Rolf Buch said the price was fair.

"With this sale of housing stock in Berlin to the municipal housing companies, we are fulfilling a central promise to the Berlin Senate," he said. "We are selling the apartments at a fair price."

($1 = 0.8488 euros)

(Reporting by Mattias InverardiEditing by Tomasz Janowski)