Sunday, December 19, 2021

CRIMINAL CAPIITALI$M; PRICE GOUGING

Report: Shipbuilding Cost for Canada’s Icebreakers Skyrockets to C$7B

cost estimates to Canada's new icebreakers — (Canadian Coast Guard)

Costs for Canada’s long-delayed plan to build new, large icebreakers have reportedly skyrocketed according to a new report from Canada’s Parliamentary Budget Officer. The report suggested that costs have risen by seven times as the government went from one to two large icebreakers and that the price remains sensitive to further delays and cost overruns. The new icebreakers appear headed into a political sea more difficult than any ice they might encounter.

Canada’s federal government first announced plans in 2008 to build a new icebreaker costing C$700 million to replace the largest vessel in the Canadian Coast Guard’s fleet, the CCGS Louis S. St-Laurent, which entered service in 1969. The 11,345 gross ton vessel would have been replaced by the modern vessel, but the project encountered delays. By 2013, costs had risen to C$1.3 billion. The government withdrew the contract for the construction in 2019 as the selected shipyard encountered problems delivering on other government contracts.

“We estimate the total cost of the icebreaker project at C$7.25 billion, inclusive of project management costs of C$346 million, design costs of C$820 million, and acquisition costs of C$6.1 billion,” said Yves Giroux of the PBO in a report released on December 16. The federal government is yet to release its estimate for the cost of the vessels.

The cost increase includes the doubling of the project to two large vessels, which the federal government first announced in May 2021. The new plan also called for one of the vessels to be built on the Pacific coast and the other on the Atlantic. The PBO report estimates that splitting the contact to two or three shipyards would result in a loss of economies of scale and experience learned in the project. They estimate the added cost at between C$600 and C$800 million by splitting the construction and also highlighted a “significant premium,” because of the government mandate to build the ships domestically.

Based on the recent experience of the Government of Canada’s shipbuilding procurement initiatives to date, as well as competing priorities at the partner shipyards, the PBO reports that it assumes that construction activities for the first of the two ships will begin within the 2023-2024 fiscal year, with the second beginning in the following fiscal year. Deliveries of these vessels are anticipated for 2029-2030 and 2030-2031, respectively.

Timing for the first of the two vessels is considered critical as the older vessel is currently slated to retire in 2030. Delays in the effort to build the new icebreaker and renew other parts of the existing fleet have already strained the Canadian Coast Guard. Reports indicate that warming ocean temperatures have created a greater need for icebreakers. The Canadian Coast Guard recently purchased existing vessels in the secondhand market, including recently a commercial light icebreaker to help address the need for capabilities.

The PBO in its report warns, “A sensitivity analysis suggests that delays of either one or two years in the start of the construction for both vessels at each partner shipyard would increase total project costs by C$235 million or C$472 million, respectively.”

The announcement in the spring that the federal government planned to double the order was met with calls that it was politically driven, especially with the splitting of the order. Political critics are expected to highlight the dramatic cost increase and cost to taxpayers over the government’s inability to complete the project as another example of excessive spending.

Report: AUKUS Nuclear Sub Program's Cost Could Balloon to $120B

A U.S. Navy Virginia-class nuclear-powered attack sub. The Virginia design is among the options under consideration for Australia's program (USN)

Australia's plans to build nuclear-powered submarines using technology provided by the U.S. could cost a staggering $122 billion to implement, according to an analysis by a top think tank.

In a new report, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) determined that the most economic approach for implementing the Australia–UK–US submarine partnership (AUKUS) that was signed in September would cost about $83-92 billion. This "economic-build" option assumes that the subs would be built in Adelaide and that they would be constructed in parallel on a rapid delivery timeline.

If the subs are built sequentially using a "continuous-build" approach, with one delivery every three to four years, construction would take longer and the total delivered cost would be higher - between $109-122 billion, including the effects of inflation.

“This new enterprise will be a massive undertaking and probably the largest and most complex endeavor Australia has embarked upon. The challenges, costs and risks will be enormous. It’s likely to be at least two decades and tens of billions of dollars in sunk costs before Australia has a useful nuclear-powered military capability,” states the report.

The cost drivers include both the U.S. and UK moving to bigger submarine designs; choice of build strategy; and the broader support system and infrastructure needed to operate nuclear submarines. The authors added that once those cost drivers are fully understood, it is entirely possible that the estimates could grow significantly, putting a heavy burden on taxpayers.

In September, the Australian government announced that it would acquire a nuclear-powered submarine (SSN) capability with support from the UK and the U.S. With little notice, it abandoned a previous diesel-electric sub deal with France; this preexisting arrangement was already facing the possibility of cancellation because of concerns over schedule and capability. Its acquisition cost would have been in the range of $40 billion in constant dollars, though cost growth was a growing concern.

Under AUKUS, the Australian government has indicated plans to acquire at least eight nuclear-powered submarines with a size range of between 7,000 tonnes and 10,000 tonnes.

According to ASPI, the decision by Australia to invest in the lethal, high capability subs was largely informed by the shifting military balance in the Indo-Pacific region, where China is using “military power and intimidation to achieve its ends."

“The Australian government has assessed that the risks and uncertainties associated with China’s continued aggression towards and coercion of its neighbors warrant taking the significant political and economic risks associated with this decision,” stated the report.

Australia sees nuclear-powered submarines as a significant deterrent given their clear superiority over conventional submarines, particularly their speed, endurance and ability to generate time on station.

As an example, the report noted that it takes a diesel submarine 20 days to reach the South China Sea from a base at HMAS Stirling in Western Australia, then another 20 days to return - leaving just 11 days on patrol. During that time, the submarine would need to break the surface multiple times to recharge its batteries, exposing it to detection from ships, submarines, aircraft and satellites due to its increased radar, noise and heat signatures.

In comparison, a faster nuclear submarine would take around seven days to reach the area of operations and require another seven days to return, allowing 75 days on patrol with its greater endurance. That would represent 600 percent more time on station for a single mission, and at no time would the submarine need to break the surface.

Abandoned for Christmas: Fishing Crew Left in Limbo for Nine Months

Nine months after the Kenyan-flagged fishing vessel Ra'Horakthy was abandoned by her owners at the port of Mombasa,10 crewmembers are still stuck on board, awaiting the resolution of a court case that will determine whether they can recover their wages.

The vessel's owners stopped paying wages in March 2021, then ceased providing food and fuel. Maritime charity Stella Maris has stepped in to supply the crew with cooking oil, rice and meat, and it is advocating with local authorities on their behalf.

The crew's Kenyan and Tanzanian members have already been paid and repatriated, and six Indonesian crewmembers flew home with the help of the Indonesian Embassy on December 15. 10 Korean and Vietnamese crewmembers remain on board, including the captain, Seo Hyundo.

“It is very distressing that the remaining ten seafarers will spend Christmas away from their families. The delicate humanitarian situation that the seafarers are in should rightfully prompt the fast tracking of the case to a just and quick conclusion,” said Stella Maris' Mombasa director, Margaret Masibo. "We are concerned with how long the court case will take, and the financial struggle and psychological strain on the crew and their families."

The case illustrates a wider problem of seafarer abandonment, Stella Maris said. According to the ILO Abandonment of Seafarers database, 66 ships have been reported abandoned since the start of 2021. Seafarers' unions and welfare organizations are often the first responders in these cases, advocating for the victims and providing them with supplies when low-end shipowners walk away.

Maersk Tankers and bp Test Marine Biofuel Blend in Product Tankers

bp and Maersk tankers test biofuel — (bp tanker file photo)

In one of the highest-profile tests of biofuels, bp and Maersk Tankers, with support from the Danish Maritime Authority, successfully completed trials using biofuel-blended marine fuel in product tankers. They reported that it demonstrates that sustainable biofuels can be used as a marine ‘drop-in fuel’ to help reduce carbon emissions in shipping.

The trials were completed using two product tankers on time-charter to bp from Maersk Tankers. The ships were the four-year-old Maersk Cirrus, a 39,999 dwt tanker, and the five-year-old Maersk Navigator, a 45,999 dwt tanker. Each vessel was supplied with bp Marine B30 biofuel, consisting of 30 percent fatty acid methyl esters (FAME) blended with very low sulfur fuel oil (VLSFO). According to bp, FAME is a renewable alternative biofuel largely produced from recycled cooking oils and renewable oil sources. It has physical properties similar to conventional diesel and is also non-toxic and biodegradable. The origination and production of the feedstocks used to produce FAME is certified for its sustainability to internationally recognized standards.

The trials saw the vessels sail from Rotterdam to West Africa. Throughout the trials, tests were carried out to assess the reliability and performance of the B30 biofuel blend in each ship’s main engine, auxiliary engine, and boiler, and any impact on fuel tanks to determine the level of interchangeability with other fuel types.

They reported observing no adverse effects on equipment or machinery during or after the trials. No modifications to the engine or infrastructure were required, they said demonstrating the suitability of sustainable biofuels for use as a ‘drop-in fuel’.

bp is working with companies in key industrial sectors that have significant carbon emissions to manage, supporting their work to decarbonize. Based on the outcome of the recent trials, bp aims to regularly supply biofuel blends for their operated and time-charter vessels when they refuel in the Netherlands, subject to owners and flag-state approval. This is part of its ongoing efforts to help decarbonize the shipping industry.

Maersk Tankers says for its part it is developing and deploying solutions that help shipowners boost the economic and environmental performance of their vessels. Through its pools and industry-wide collaboration, the company is working in partnerships to contribute to a more sustainable future for the industry.

The Undiscovered World of Subsea Volcanoes

The ROV Jason investigates a subsea hydrothermal vent (NOAA)

Volcanic activity is the posterchild of nature’s destructive power. When they happen on land, volcanic eruptions leave a trail of destruction to real estate and loss of human life. As of 2015, approximately eight percent of the world population lived within 60 miles of a volcano with at least one significant eruption. They are a source of both risk and prosperity: fertile soils created by volcanic ash can fuel agriculture, and the heat from volcanic activity can be tapped for electricity production (geothermal energy).

Current scientific knowledge of volcanoes is largely built on eruptions that are observed on land, but scientists contend that volcanology can help provide nuance in ocean research as well. Specifically, undersea volcanoes are increasingly helping marine scientists to understand marine biogeochemical cycles - the manner in which nutrients circulate in oceans. The foundation of ocean productivity, and hence the fisheries it can support, is based on this cycle.

“It’s strange, that despite their importance and the flair for the dramatic, submarine volcanoes haven’t found their way into the zeitgeist,” writes Dr. Robin George in his new book, "Super Volcanoes."

We now know more about outer space than we do about the submerged seamounts that host some of the most unique habitats for life on Earth.

“One of Earth’s most underappreciated biodiverse habitats is, for now, mostly a mystery. That’s left a chasm in the collective understanding of the full extent of our largely detrimental effects on the world’s watery domains. And the threats these habitats face, from warming oceans to commercial fishing to a controversial, nascent deep-sea mining industry, are mounting,” added Dr. Robin in an article he wrote for Vox.com.

The Pacific islands of Nauru and Kiribati, themselves a result of volcanism, have petitioned the International Seabed Authority (ISA) to expedite an approval to begin deep-sea mining operations. Many scientists see this as reckless, especially due to limited knowledge of deep ocean ecosystems.

In a recent global conservation summit held by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), thousands of conservationists, scientists and diplomats voted overwhelmingly in favor of a moratorium on deep sea mining and new exploration contracts until there is proof that marine ecosystems can be protected effectively.

Humans have only explored a tiny fraction of the deep sea, home to most of the Earth’s volcanoes. If all these underwater volcanoes were merged, their total area would be roughly equivalent to Europe and Russia combined. Thus, deep-sea mining becomes scary in the sense that it targets these deep-sea habitats - abyssal plains, seamounts and hydrothermal vents - to extract minerals. No one can characterize the level of potential impacts it would have on these fragile ecosystems, teeming with marine life. The vast majority of species down there remain undiscovered, precisely due to the cost, expertise and technology required to do so.

Remarkably, seamounts have been shown to be waystations for marine life making voyages across oceans. That is, they are oceanic outposts where life can seek refuge, refuel and raise offspring before proceeding with their journey.

For example, sea turtles coming from the Great Barrier Reef use Kavachi (an active submarine volcano in the Solomon Islands) as a transit point for feeding before moving on.

“Undersea volcanoes can even protect life against climate change. Shallow depths are warming quicker and acidifying faster as we continue pumping greenhouse gases into the sky. Seamounts deeper down will likely act as castles for biodiversity,” explains Dr. Robin.

If you sail about 300 miles west from the Oregon Coast, you will be floating above Axial Seamount, where scientists have established a global model of an undersea volcanic observatory. Scientists have wired up the active volcano with hundreds of sensors and cameras, sending gigantic amounts of data back to shore. The goal is to have a continuous glimpse into pyrotechnics of volcanic activity hidden in the dark recesses of the ocean – and begin to answer some of the longstanding questions about how this activity affects our planet.

Failure to Disconnect Car Batteries Caused Inferno Aboard Höegh Xiamen

An electrical fault from an improperly disconnected battery in a used vehicle led to the fire aboard vehicle carrier Höegh Xiamen, resulting in $40 million worth of damages, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) concluded in a newly-released investigative report.

NTSB determined that failure to properly disconnect and secure vehicle batteries ignited the fire on the 600-foot-long Norwegian-flagged roll-on/roll-off vehicle carrier. The vessel caught fire as she was preparing to depart the Blount Island Horizon Terminal in Jacksonville, Florida, en route to Baltimore, Maryland on June 4, 2020.

A bystander on the pier noticed smoke coming from the vessel's ventilation exhaust vents while the ship was preparing to depart. The crewmembers discovered a fire on deck 8, which had been loaded with used vehicles. The fire eventually spread to other decks and continued to burn for eight days, leading to total destruction of the ship.

The Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department responded to help fight the fire, and a few hours later, nine firefighters sustained injuries in an explosion on board. None of the vessel’s 21 crewmembers were injured.

The fire took over a week to extinguish, and the Höegh Xiamen and her cargo of 2,420 used vehicles were declared a total loss at a cost of $40 million. In August 2020, after salvage operations were completed, the vessel was towed to Turkey to be recycled.

“Many of the vehicles loaded onto the vessel had batteries that were not disconnected and secured in accordance with procedures, which increased the risk of electrical arcing and component faults. During loading operations, both the loading personnel and crew missed opportunities to address these hazards,” said NTSB in its report.

NTSB added that detection of the fire was delayed because the vessels’ fire detection systems had not yet been reactivated after loading was completed. Also contributing to the extent of the fire was the master’s decision to delay the release of the vessel's fixed firefighting system.

The response to the accident was further delayed because the ship’s master did not immediately have available contact information for search and rescue authorities, and he did not know how to report a fire to local authorities, NTSB found.

NTSB determined that the crew failed to adhere to the Hazardous Materials Regulations developed following a similar incident involving the Grimaldi’s Grande Europa in 2019.

Following Grimaldi’s experience with previous roll-on/roll-off vessel fires, the company developed a battery disconnect procedure to reduce the risk of vehicle fires during transportation. At the time of the fire, Höegh Xiamen was on charter to Grimaldi for the transport of "non-commercial used personal vehicles in poor condition," including some that were so damaged that they had to be carried aboard with a forklift.

Although Höegh Xiamen and the longshore crew were supposed to use Grimaldi's battery-disconnect procedure, a postaccident examination of a sample of 59 vehicles did not find a single battery that was secured.

“We determined that the probable cause of the fire aboard the vehicle carrier Höegh Xiamen was ineffective oversight of longshoremen, which did not identify that Grimaldi’s vehicle battery securement procedures were not being followed, resulting in an electrical fault from an improperly disconnected battery in a used vehicle on cargo deck 8,” said NTSB. “The circumstances of this accident make clear that it is critical to ensure that the batteries of used vehicles are disconnected and properly secured during cargo loading operations,” said NTSB.

Britain’s New Polar Research Vessel Docks in Antarctica for First Time

British research vessel arrives in Antarctica on maiven voyage — RRS Sir David Attenborough docked for the first time in Antarctica (William Clark photo courtesy of BAS)

Britain’s new polar research vessel, the RRS Sir David Attenborough, docked in Antarctica on December 17 a week after reaching the region on its maiden voyage. The much-maligned vessel, which received numerous reports in the British media due to cost overruns and construction delays, departed the U.K. in mid-November and will be conducting its research and resupply mission not returned home till June 2022.

The vessel, which gained international attention when the British voted to name it Boaty McBoatface, was handed over to the Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) late in 2020. She spent the last year undergoing additional outfitting and training for its crew as well as correcting some technical issues that appeared during the tests. After departing Harwick, England on November 16 and a brief stop in Portsmouth, she completed a three-and-a-half week transit to the Falkland Islands before officially entering Antarctica on December 13.

“The ship is a state-of-the-art research and logistics vessel, enabled by world-class infrastructure, that has been delivered by an amazing team of professional and technical experts from BAS and our industry partners,” says Jon Ager, Programme Director (AIMP), for the British Antarctic Survey which is operating the vessel.

Her first call in Antarctica is at Rothera Research Station, the UK’s largest Antarctic research station on the continent. She is transporting station personnel, food, fuel, and cargo for the resupply of Britain’s research programs.

Docked at the Rothera Research Station (William Clark photo courtesy of BAS)

The RRS Sir David Attenborough’s arrival at Rothera Research Station also marks the first time the new purpose-built wharf has been used to berth the ship. The wharf which measures more than 240 feet was completed in 2020 by the Antarctic Infrastructure Modernization (AIMP). It enables Britain’s new polar research ship to berth safely and helps the station run more efficiently with a new crane to launch small science boats, a personnel gangway, and a floating pontoon to deploy scientific instruments.

The RRS Sir David Attenborough’s arrival also marks the start of the new construction season with activity on the Discovery Building for the third year in a row, a new state of the art, science, and operations facility for Rothera Research Station. Due to the harsh, cold Antarctic environment, construction can only take place during the Antarctic summer months. Over 50 members of a specialist construction team arrived last month and will work until April on erecting the main steel structure, installation of ground floor pre-cast concrete slabs, ground drainage, and site-wide services.

“Everyone on board is thrilled to arrive at Rothera for the first time,” said Will Whatley, Captain of the RRS Sir David Attenborough. “This is a really exciting and proud moment for us, and another huge milestone to have achieved. As we’ve traveled further South, we’ve had the chance to put the ship through its paces in Antarctic conditions and I’m pleased to report the ship has performed really well.”

After calling at Rothera, the RRS Sir David Attenborough will continue its mission South, making calls at Signy, King Edward Point, and Bird Island research stations, and heading to the Stange Ice Front for its ice trials.

Fun moment during the three-and-a-half week trip from the UK to the Antarctic (Jenna Plank photo courtesy of BAS)

Norwegian Researchers Build a Floating "Ocean Lab"

Just off the small island of Munkholmen, outside the city Trondheim, the first of two observation buoys is now installed to collect data from the fjord. With a diameter of five meters and a yellow colour, the buoy is easy to spot from land. The buoys will be powered primarily by wind and solar, and don’t need to be permanently manned.

“It is probably an understatement to call this a buoy. A floating laboratory would probably be a better description,” says SINTEF researcher Emlyn Davies.

He is a marine scientist and has helped to develop some of the equipment that will be undertaking continuous measurements of marine environmental data. The research buoy will be important for testing ocean sensor technology, the education of future marine scientists, and establishing long-term data on the status of the environment in the fjord.

The information from the buoys will be used for increasing environmental understanding and for developing and updating models. Ocean models can forecast things like current conditions and algae blooms, but more knowledge is needed in order to further develop them.

The floating laboratory will also contribute to making local environmental policy more knowledge-based.

Important part of “OceanLab”

The second buoy, which has a diameter of about two metres, will be located outside Ingdalen in the municipality of Orkland. Both buoys are part of OceanLab, which will host one of the world’s most advanced array of data collection platforms for marine research.

According to Davies, OceanLab is a new and state-of-the-art national research infrastructure that is being established in Trondheim. It is a collaborative venture between SINTEF and NTNU, funded by the Research Council of Norway. OceanLab will contribute to research on underwater robotics, aquaculture, autonomous shipping and environmental research. The observation buoys are particularly important for increasing understanding of the environment in the fjord.

The data collected will be made available in real time on a digital platform for anyone who is interested.

“As we gradually develop new ways of utilising resources in the ocean, we also have an increasing need to collect data. This is important in order to develop good ocean models that can predict the impact of developments – something which is also one of the goals of the UN Ocean Decade. This will provide us with more knowledge about the consequences of what we do. One example of this is the increasing interest in harvesting more of the smallest organisms found in the sea, such as Calanus finmarchius and krill. The data we collect will provide a better understanding of how these affect the environment,” says Davies.

Collecting large amounts of marine research data

The buoy off Munkholmen will collect data on everything that happens close to it, such as the weather, waves, current and temperature, and it is specially equipped to monitor underwater life.

It will have a range of features, including particle imaging, acoustic communication and a plug-and-play interface for customised sensors. In practice, this means that researchers can add and remove sensors as required. The floating lab will also have equipment that can take photos of organisms that are invisible to the human eye, such as phytoplankton.

“By looking at the kind of plankton here, what it looks like and how it changes during the course of the season, we will be able to see, for example, how the River Nid affects the ecosystem in the fjord. With climate change we are seeing more extreme weather with heavy rain that carries water from the land and out to the ocean. When sediment enters the fjord it blocks the light. One of the effects is that it prevents algae from growing, which in turn results in a reduction in the food available for organisms and lowers oxygen production. To understand these kinds of changes and their consequences, we need to collect environmental data over the longer-term,” says Davies.

One of the most advanced instruments on the buoy is called CytoSub. This equipment creates on-site images by lowering an instrument called a flow cytometer, which produces microscope images and fluorescence signatures of particles and plankton right down to nano-level.

The reason is that phytoplankton are critical organisms for ocean ecosystems. Phytoplankton produce about 50 per cent of the world’s oxygen. They also harness energy from sunlight which scientists can measure by using light sensors. The plankton is also a primary source of food that in turn is eaten by larger organisms.

No random placement

The position of the buoy at Munkholmen has been calculated by using a 3D model developed by SINTEF called SINMOD. This model system connects and simulates physical and biological processes in the ocean. According to SINMOD the selected point is representative of much of the fjord.

“Even if the data is only collected in one place, what is happening in Trondheim Fjord may be representative of ocean conditions elsewhere in the world. For example, if the sediment darkens the water and has an impact on nature, then that knowledge is transferable to other coastal areas,” says Davies. “They will serve as a platform that can support faster technology development and prototyping of new sensors, as well as comparisons of different sensors that measure the same thing in different ways. Here we can test new technology while it is being developed."

Testing this type of technology is often both costly and time-consuming, but here the researchers and tech companies will only be a few hundred meters away.

“We can get here in minutes, plug in what we want to test and obtain the data very quickly,” says Davies.

Creating power for own consumption

SINTEF Ocean has acquired the buoy from the British company Hydrosphere, which has supplied the buoy in accordance with a design developed by Mobilis in France. They have developed the buoy specifically for OceanLab.

“This is the largest buoy we have developed so far. It has four chambers for sensors and measuring equipment and it has also been adapted for power generation using solar cells, wind cells and spare fuel cells so that it is self-sufficient in electricity – even in winter, says John Caskey of Hydrosphere.

This article appears courtesy of Gemini News and may be found in its original form here.

The opinions expressed herein are the author's and not necessarily those of The Maritime Ex

CRIMINAL CAPITALI$M; HUBRIS
Electric car making company Tesla hit by lawsuit over tweets by CEO Elon Musk

WION Web Team
California, United States Published: Dec 18, 2021

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Famous for making eye-popping statements on social media, Musk had asked in a poll on Twitter if people thought he should sell 10 percent of his stake in Tesla

Electric car producer Tesla has been hit by a lawsuit because of tweets by CEO Elon Musk.

In the poll, almost 58 percent of the 3.5 million votes cast were in favor of him proceeding with the sale.

Now, Tesla investor David Wagner has accused Musk of violating an agreement with the US securities regulator.

He believes the company's board members failed to adhere to their fiduciary duties and has filed for access to internal documents to investigate the matter at the Delaware Court of Chancery.

Also read | Tesla CEO Elon Musk is thinking of quitting his jobs and becoming an influencer

Under a September 2018 settlement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, Musk was required to step down as chairman and pay $20 million to settle charges he defrauded investors with false claims on Twitter about the possible go-private transaction that was quickly aborted.

Musk, who is the world's richest person, has sold just over 934,000 shares in Tesla, according to documents filed with US stock regulators. They were worth about $14 billion.

Also read | Tesla CEO Elon Musk wealthier than Pakistan’s GDP

Wagner alleges that Tesla shares, which had hovered near record-highs, lost their value by about a quarter after the irresponsible tweets made by Musk.

Analysts said the 50-year-old South African billionaire's stock sale will be liable for capital gains tax of at least $1.4 billion.

His tweets followed a proposal by US Congressional Democrats to tax the super-wealthy more heavily by targeting stocks, which are usually only taxed when sold.

(With inputs from agencies)

Watch: Telsa Owner Told Repairs Will Cost 20,000 Euros. He Chose Dynamite

Jaala, an idyllic and ice-covered village in south Finland's Kymenlaakso region with just a few thousand people, witnessed a bizarre incident as the owner of a 2013 Tesla Model S set his car up for an explosion.

Edited by Sumana Nandy

Updated: December 19, 2021

The owner of a 2013 Tesla Model S set his car up for an explosion

Automobile giant Tesla leads the EV sector with innovations and new technology. But that was not enough to stop a disgruntled customer from blowing up his Tesla car using 30 kg of dynamite.

Jaala, an idyllic and ice-covered village in south Finland's Kymenlaakso region with just a few thousand people, witnessed a bizarre incident as the owner of a 2013 Tesla Model S set his car up for an explosion.

The crew of a YouTube channel - Pommijatkat - shot the entire episode that premiered today with the help of a few volunteers.

The Tesla was blown up at an abandoned quarry

The video opens with shots of the picturesque countryside of Finland with vast snow-covered expanses, very few houses, and trees. A voiceover speaks about life and its hardships in this country. "From time to time, things just go wrong, sh*t hits the fan. Then it's time for Finnish intransigence to step on the lead," it says, setting the tone for what's about to happen next - a massive explosion.

Sticks of dynamite were mounted onto one side of the car to direct the blast in one direction

"This time Pommijatkat's mission is to explode the 2013 Tesla Model S," the voiceover announces before the car's owner - Tuomas Katainen - reveals why.

"When I bought that Tesla, the first 1,500 km were nice. It was an excellent car. Then the error codes hit. So I ordered the tow truck to take my car to the service station. For almost a month the car was at the dealer's workshop and I finally got a call that they cannot do anything for my car. The only option is to change the whole battery cell," the owner says with his white Tesla in the background.

"It would cost me at least 20,000 Euros."

The explosion was no easy task

"So, I told them I am coming to pick up my car. And now I am going to explode the whole car away because apparently there was no guarantee or anything," he reasons.

The explosion was no easy task. Sticks of dynamite were mounted onto one side of the car to direct the blast in one direction and ensure that the fragments hit a rock wall behind the car. A circuit of fuses was built.

"Feels so good right now," the car's owner said

The video shows a montage of the kind of effort that went into readying the Tesla for this massive blast.

Suddenly, a helicopter is seen flying in and dropping an effigy of Tesla's CEO Elon Musk - complete with a helmet. "Well, Elon Musk called us yesterday and said he really wants to take the ride with that Tesla," the stuntman of the YouTube channel jokes.

A helicopter dropped an effigy of Tesla's CEO Elon Musk - complete with a helmet

The effigy is then strapped into the driver's seat of the Tesla and it is now time to blast off.

The crew, along with the car's owner, then goes inside a bunker, ready to push a button. "Any thoughts now?" they ask Mr Katainen. "Feels so good right now. Can't wait for the blast," he says. At the count of three, the car is blown.

The video, which amassed over 2.23 lakh views in just a few hours, shows the explosion from various angles, in slow motion, and also the charred parts of the high-end car. The crew and the owner then collect the debris, accumulate them in a pile.

"There's nothing left. Absolutely nothing," Mr Katainen says into the camera, adding, "I never enjoyed this much with the Tesla! And also, maybe I am the first person in the world who has exploded a Tesla. So maybe, made some history."

Labour urged to vote down ‘draconian’ changes to crime bill

Call for opposition to counter ministers’ ‘cynical attempt to bypass parliamentary scrutiny’

Insulate Britain protesters outside Downing Street in November.

Human rights activists describe amendments to the bill as ‘a dangerous power grab’.

Photograph: Vuk Valcic/Sopa Images/Rex/Shutterstock

Damien Gayle
THE OBSERVER
Sun 19 Dec 2021

The Labour party has been urged to take advantage of a unique opportunity to vote down a raft of last-minute amendments to an already controversial crime bill, which human rights activists have described as “a dangerous power grab”.

The 18 pages of amendments to the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill were introduced by government peers in November, on the day nine members of the protest group Insulate Britain appeared in court charged with contempt.

Unlike the rest of the bill, however, where the lords can merely send amendments back to the Commons to be reconsidered, because the latest amendments were introduced in the House of Lords they will fall if peers vote against them.

But that can only happen if Labour agrees to oppose them, according to the Green party peer Jenny Jones. “If a rebellion by the Lords in defence of civil liberties has any chance of defeating these police state laws, then we need the Labour party to join those of us who plan to oppose the government,” Jones said.

“These draconian laws, that will make effective protests illegal, should be seen as part of the attack on our democracy designed to keep a corrupt government in power and minimise opposition. Ironically, it could be the government’s attempt to bypass parliamentary scrutiny by MPs, that enables the lords to defeat these 18 pages of new amendments.”

Among other powers, the new amendments will impose potential 51-week sentences for protesters who attach themselves to another person, to an object, or to land, or for protests that obstruct in any way major transport works from being carried out.

They also include an expansion of powers for stop and search without suspicion around protests, as well as “serious disruption prevention orders” that will allow authorities to ban named individuals from participating in demonstrations or even using the internet to encourage others to do so.

The Liberal Democrats, who have 84 members in the lords, have already vowed to oppose the bill. Brian Paddick, a former senior officer in the Metropolitan police, who has led the party’s opposition to the bill, said further stop and search powers would have a “chilling effect” on the right to protest.

“This is particularly true for minority communities, where the use of ‘suspicion-less’ stop and search sees black people 18 times more likely to be stopped than white people,” Paddick said. “If Labour and Conservative peers take a stand and join us then we can stop these reckless Conservative plans. I hope they will join us and stand up for effective policing and people’s rights.”

Human rights organisations joined the calls to oppose the changes. Mark Johnson, legal and policy officer at Big Brother Watch, said: “The government’s move to add Orwellian anti-protest amendments to the policing bill at this late stage is nothing short of a cynical attempt to bypass parliamentary scrutiny.

“Labour peers have an opportunity to stop these draconian proposals dead in their tracks. It is absolutely vital that all opposition parties vote against the government’s new amendments in order to protect our protest rights and those of future generations.”

Martha Spurrier, the director of Liberty, said: “It is the role of the House of Lords to act as a check on this type of power grab, to temper the most dangerous and authoritarian tendencies of the government of the day.

“All peers who value democracy must oppose these dangerous amendments – and while there is vocal opposition from across the house and from cross-party peers it’s vital that the opposition are clear and ensure this opportunity is taken to protect our fundamental rights.”

The Guardian has contacted the Labour party for comment.

Climate change is driving supply chain shortages — and your supermarkets are not prepared

The problem with our supply chains can be explained by climate change — and America is in no way ready for it

By MATTHEW ROZSA

SALON
DECEMBER 19, 2021

Out of control fire on Narrow Neck Plateau, Katoomba, Blue Mountains, Australia. Climate change is causing extreme weather, prolonged droughts and increasing bushfires | Empty store shelves are seen in a supermarket as people has been stocking up for food and other essential items fearing the supply shortages

(Photo illustration by Salon/Getty Images)

Before the days of antiseptic supermarkets, with their fluorescent lights and linoleum floors, food was sold in very different types of markets, most of which would not pass muster to a modern health inspector. Take Medieval Europe: Even the sturdiest contemporary carnivore might have felt a bit queasy at the sight of animals being slaughtered, which would happen not far from where the cuts of meat were ultimately sold (if they were cut up at all). Farmers would wheel in their produce from plots of land within walking distance of their homes, or at most a short horse ride away. By contrast, citizens of the early 21st century are used to their food coming to them in the same way as their cars, their clothes and their household appliances — through sprawling international supply chains.

Unfortunately, just like a chain is only as strong as its weakest leak, a supply chain can become inefficient or fall apart if there is even a slight hiccup. This is especially so when the supply chains overlap in so many ways that it's more of a "supply labyrinth" or "supply knot" than a supply chain.

Consumers may already be starting to feel that the more disparaging terms are more appropriate. Retailers are reporting rising costs for holiday-returns, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has launched an inquiry into a number of supermarket chains, retailers and food corporations to get to the bottom of the seemingly endless product shortages.

Based on this reporter's own journey to a pair of local retail outlets, including Walmart and Target, it was noted that customer complaints seemed to fall into three major categories: Electronics (like video game consoles or VR headsets), frozen food items (like chicken wings and pizzas) and sanitary products like (you guessed it) toilet paper. Each of those items has a series of interconnected supply chains, from the foods themselves to the added ingredients and the packaging, not to mention (in the case of frozen items) extra care taken for transportation and storage.

It is literally impossible to map the origin of every single item used in every single one, much less plug all of that data into one central database for reference. This means that, when a major disruptive event occurs across the planet, this delicate and interconnected web of chains can be easily disrupted in countless untraceable ways.

The COVID-19 pandemic was just such a worldwide disruptive event.

"The global economy is a complex system of national and local economies," Christa Court, an assistant professor of regional economics at the University of Florida, told Salon by email. The pandemic brought about an abrupt halt to major economic sectors across the planet, which in and of itself had ripple effects on countless smaller business transactions. Not all of these could simply wind back up once the lockdowns were reversed. Even then, those reversals often did not immediately allow a full restoration of economic activity, and many times were applied so erratically that they wound up being integrated into the business environment.

"By now, we are all familiar with the term 'pandemic-induced supply chain disruptions,' whereby the evolution of the pandemic itself (trends in cases and deaths) as well as the policy responses to the pandemic ('shutdowns,' stay-at-home orders, vaccine or mask mandates, etc.) have resulted in massive shifts in supply and/or demand for many products and sectors," Court pointed out.

When it comes to food-based supply chains, climate change is another major culprit, albeit one that is very difficult to quantify. Unlike other economic sectors, where there can disruptions from the demand end as well as the supply end, people never decide they have had enough of food. (They may, of course, alter their dietary preferences.) When there are supply chain issues, it is usually because some unwanted outside variable has made it more difficult for those who produce food to do their job. Climate change causes many of those unwanted outside variables: Warming temperatures harmed American corn yields in 2010 and 2012, as well as $220 million in losses for Michigan cherries in 2012. As weather continues to warm, crops that depend on precise temperatures at specific times will be thrown off kilter or possibly wiped out. While moderate warming and carbon dioxide increases will help some plants grow faster, even they will ultimately be harmed by the droughts and floods that will harm so many other crops.

"A major drought in California or freezing temperatures in Florida can throw a wrench into this market," Dr. Ariel Ortiz-Bobea, an associate professor of applied economics at Cornell University, told Salon in August. "Those events can drastically reduce the supply of oranges from those regions. While oranges can be produced in other areas (e.g. Brazil), acquiring them is much more expensive especially if the supply chains are not already established and prepared to larger volumes."

In addition to climate change, there is also the built-in structural problem of capitalism itself: Concentration of power, and the fact that supply chain disruptions also exist because the global economic system is built around what individual powerful corporations have decided will maximize their profits. A system that prioritizes profitability over everything else will make choices about who gets what first based on how they can make the most money, not on who needs it most or what will be most efficient. That means that supply chain disruptions, though not ideal, are also not viewed as a company's absolute worst case scenario.

"To analyze supply chain disruptions as if they were exceptional is a mistake," Dr. Richard Wolff, emeritus professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, told Salon by email. "They are regularly recurring products of capitalist decision-making. It is only because of capitalists' buck-passing that their media focus us on the conditions (forever changing) and away from the profit-maximizing strategies of capitalists' responses to those changing conditions."

If there is one silver lining to the supply chain crises, it is that an increasing number of those companies are deciding that it makes more sense to "re-shore" jobs than it does to have sprawling, worldwide supply chains. The term "re-shore" is a play on "offshore," which refers to moving jobs overseas. "Reshoring" means those jobs would be brought back to the United States.

But until reshoring happens, the supply chain in the United States will remain as fickle as the pandemic has proven it to be. Recently, an image of a plastic container of pears went viral for its packaging: "Grown in Argentina, packaged in Thailand," read the package, which was sold in the United States. Of course, there are plenty of pears grown in the United States; these pears' three-continent trip was not only wasteful, but fragile in the face of disruption — and the mere existence of three-continent pears speaks to the greater problem.

MATTHEW ROZSA
Matthew Rozsa is a staff writer for Salon. He holds an MA in History from Rutgers University-Newark and is ABD in his PhD program in History at Lehigh University. His work has appeared in Mic, Quartz and MSNBC.MORE FROM MA

Study: Climate Change Puts Farmed Seafood Production At Risk

file image — File image courtesy Thomas Bjørkan / CC BY-SA 3.0

The supply of farmed seafood such as salmon and mussels are projected to drop 16 per cent globally by 2090 if no action is taken to mitigate climate change, according to a new UBC study.

Ocean-farmed seafood or mariculture is often seen as a panacea to the problems of depleted stocks of wild fish and growing human demand, and is expected to grow substantially in the coming years, says lead author Dr. Muhammed Oyinlola (he/him), a postdoctoral research fellow at the Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries (IOF). But the new modelling study highlights the industry is as vulnerable to the effects of climate change as any other. “If we continue to burn fossil fuels at our current rate, the amount of seafood such as fish or mussels able to be farmed sustainably will increase by only eight per cent by 2050, and decline by 16 per cent by 2090.”

By comparison, in a low emissions scenario where the action is taken to mitigate climate change, mariculture is projected to grow by about 17 per cent by the mid-21st century and by about 33 per cent by the end of the century, relative to the 2000s.

The model takes into account many factors, including changing ocean temperatures, suitable mariculture areas in the future, and the supply of fishmeal and fish oil. It examined approximately 70 per cent of the world’s mariculture production as of 2015, focusing on Exclusive Economic Zones, where most of the world’s seafood farming occurs.

Climate change will affect mariculture production differently depending on where farms are in the world, and what they produce, says Dr. Oyinlola. The hardest-hit regions in the high-emissions scenario— Norway, Myanmar, Bangladesh, the Netherlands, and China—could see their mariculture production decline by as much as 40 to 90 per cent.

Climate effects on mariculture include changes in the area of viable ocean in which to farm fish as well as the stock of food used to feed them. Fish farms tend to use fishmeal and fish oil, which are largely composed of smaller fish such as herring and anchovy – stocks which are also threatened by climate change.

“Some regions produce more bivalves, such as mussels, oysters and clams, and in these regions, the impact is smaller,” Dr. Oyinlola said. “In regions that produce more finfish, such as salmon, the impact will be high due to reduction in the supply of fishmeal and fish oil.”

Under current carbon emission rates, finfish farming, such as salmon, is projected to decrease globally by three per cent by 2050, and 14 per cent by 2090. Bivalve farming is projected to increase by 2050 and decrease by 2090 under both climate scenarios.

Countries where mariculture is prominent especially for finfish production, such as Norway, Iceland, Finland, Chile, and Bangladesh, will be hit hardest, according to Dr. Oyinlola, whereas regions that produce more bivalves will be more stable or in Canada’s case, will grow.

Vegetarian fish: feeding fish soybeans

The study also found that substituting fishmeal and fish oil for plant-based foods such as soybeans could help alleviate the effects of climate change for fish farms.

When a quarter of the fish food was substituted with alternatives, under a low emissions scenario, mariculture production was projected to increase by 25 per cent by 2050 and 31 per cent by 2090.

With no change to current emissions, when a quarter of the fish food was substituted with alternatives, mariculture production was projected to increase by 15 per cent by 2050 and four per cent by 2090. When half the food was substituted in both climate scenarios, these percentages increased.

“This study highlights the need to diversify mariculture development from the current focus on fish,” said senior author Dr. William Cheung (he/him), IOF professor and director. Climate-adapted mariculture would include species that are not dependent on fishmeal and fish oil, such as shellfish or algae, or those that can utilize non-fish-based feed. “Farming these species generally helps to reduce exposure of seafood farming to climate hazards.”

While there is enthusiasm about ocean mariculture helping to increase the production of seafood, the study shows if humans don’t relieve climate change, such enthusiasm will be tempered, says Dr. Cheung. “Climate change affects everything, including aspects of seafood farming we’ve not previously considered. We need to act, and quickly, to mitigate climate change rather than rely on one solution to solve all our seafood production problems.”

This article appears courtesy of UBC and may be found in its original form here.

Top image: Fish cages at a Norwegian fish farm (File image courtesy Thomas Bjørkan / CC BY-SA 3.0)

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment