Tech Billionaires Are Betting Big On Nuclear Power

By Felicity Bradstock - Dec 09, 2022

• Nuclear power is back, in a big way.
• 
  
• Silicon Valley billionaires are betting big on the clean energy tech.
• 
  
• Between 2015 and 2021, investment in nuclear energy grew around 325 percent by volume and 3,642 percent by dollar value.

Once a taboo topic, nuclear power seems to be the words on everyone’s lips, as governments worldwide put power stations back on their agenda in a bid to accelerate the green transition and ensure greater energy security for the coming years. Following several notorious nuclear disasters in previous decades, governments, environmentalists, and a fearful public decided nuclear power was too dangerous an energy source to continue producing. But after a moment of pause, the re-evaluation of the high safety standards of nuclear power, and as we face global energy shortages, nuclear energy is getting a resurge in attention, particularly from tech billionaires who appear to want a piece of the nuclear pie 

Despite the negative public impression of nuclear power, due to famous disasters, including Chornobyl and Fukushima, nuclear energy has actually been shown to be one of the safest power sources. According to the measure of deaths per unit of electricity produced by the various types of energy worldwide, nuclear power is way down the list. Studies show that coal is by far the most dangerous energy source, partially due to its production through mining in difficult conditions, but mainly owing to the pollution caused by burning coal, which has led to a vast array of diseases and deaths. 

In addition, nuclear power offers abundant low-carbon energy, something that governments worldwide have been racing to develop to meet their climate pledges. As we face global energy shortages, in the wake of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions on Russian energy, political powers are realising the importance of becoming more self-sufficient in their energy production and not simply coming to rely on fossil fuels from other foreign powers. 

Now, nuclear power is getting the backing of Silicon Valley and other major tech regions, with tech giants beginning to invest in the development of nuclear energy facilities. As tech majors bring their expertise and funds to the nuclear industry, there is a significant potential for greater innovation to be seen in the development of nuclear hubs for the first time in decades. 

The economist and lecturer at MIT, John Parsons, stated of the increase in interest, “I think having fresh perspectives is really good.” He explained nuclear energy is “a very complex science, and it’s been supported by the federal government and at these national labs. And so that’s a very small circle of people. And when you broaden that circle, you get a lot of new minds, different thinking, a variety of experiments.”

Between 2015 and 2021, investment in nuclear energy grew around 325 percent by volume and 3,642 percent by dollar value, according to Pitchbook. This year alone, venture investors devoted a record $3.4 billion to nuclear startups. While this is significantly lower than the investment in other renewable energy sources in recent years, due to the nuclear power industry having to start almost from scratch, it shows a significant rise in interest that is expected to continue. Greater investment in the sector will be supported by President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which offers companies tax breaks and other financial incentives for investing in green energy, including nuclear power. And in March, the U.S. Congress approved record funding for a public-private partnership programme to build new fusion devices, encouraging private companies to invest more in the sector. 

This year, several tech billionaires have publicly shown their backing for the energy source. Elon Musk tweeted that nuclear is “critical” to national security. Meanwhile, venture capitalist Marc Andreessen called for “1,000 new state-of-the-art nuclear power plants in the U.S. and Europe, right now.” Similarly, Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, and Peter Thiel have all financed nuclear projects in recent years. In fact, Josh Freed, from Washington-based think tank Third Way, believes: “We wouldn’t be having a conversation about innovation in nuclear power today without the investment and thinking of the leaders of Silicon Valley.”

As well as existing nuclear plants, several startups are catching the eyes of tech giants. It is still early days and these startups have yet to produce nuclear power. But some think they’re getting much closer. Christofer Mowry, CEO at Vancouver-based General Fusion, explained “Silicon Valley has been the foundation of the entire private fusion industry.” And the technological advances coupled with greater urgency to shift to green could be a catalyst for the industry. 

Following decades of stagnation, nuclear energy companies are finally getting the boost they need to develop projects and deliver meaningful amounts of low-emissions nuclear power to the U.S. Previously, the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, that was the last nuclear project to be approved, in 1973, faced major delays and cost increases meaning that production only began in 2016. But now, existing nuclear plants are gaining state and private support, while startups are receiving the funding needed to develop innovative technologies to support the advancement of nuclear power. 

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

New Brunswick

Nuclear opponents taking 'best shot' to slow approval of N.B.'s small reactors

Social Sharing

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Email
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Minister says momentum growing for non-emitting technology

Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Dec 08, 2022 

A group opposed to small modular nuclear reactors wants the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to reverse an exemption for ARC Clean Technology's proposal from the federal impact assessment process. (Shane Fowler/CBC)

Opponents of small modular nuclear reactors in New Brunswick are hoping to slow down the federal regulatory process for one of the projects, even as political momentum for the technology grows.

They're asking the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency to reverse an exemption for ARC Clean Technology's proposal from the federal impact assessment process.

That would send the review to public hearings that would slow the process and give opponents a platform to argue against the reactors. 

"It's to make people aware of the risks. We want the impact assessment to bring the risks out into the sunlight," said Ann McAllister, a member of the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick.

Ann McAllister belongs to the Coalition for Responsible Energy Development in New Brunswick. (Submitted by Ann McAllister)

"Done right, the assessment process should include independent experts. … In that sense, it's the best shot we have to bring the risks out into the open."

Under federal legislation, federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault can reverse the exemption "if the project may cause adverse direct or incidental effects within areas of federal jurisdiction" or if public concerns about that warrant no exemption, the agency said.

Federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault is a former activist who once opposed nuclear power but said recently the technology may be required to hold global temperature increases to targets set in 2015. (CBC)

Guilbeault must decide by Jan. 2 whether to reverse ARC's exemption.

Political momentum growing

ARC is one of two Saint John-based companies proposing to pilot a small reactor next to NB Power's existing Point Lepreau nuclear generating station.

Company CEO Bill Labbe said an additional assessment wouldn't compromise ARC's ability to get a first reactor operating at Lepreau by 2030.

The political momentum for nuclear power has grown in the last year. The war in Ukraine and the resulting squeeze on world oil markets are forcing governments to accelerate their search for alternatives to fossil fuels.

In October, the Canada Infrastructure Bank, a federal Crown corporation, announced it would provide Ontario Power Generation with a $970-million loan to build the first SMR at Darlington, Ont. 

New Brunswick Energy Development Minister Mike Holland says an assessment of ARC would be redundant because the same technology has already operated in larger-scale reactors. (Jacques Poitras/CBC)

New Brunswick Energy Development Minister Mike Holland called the federal announcement "a very positive affirmation of the sector in general."

Ottawa sees nuclear power — which does not emit greenhouse gases — as key to its reduction targets. Holland said that view is getting more acceptance.

"The landscape of energy today and the conversation around it, versus the conversation two years ago, is absolutely different," he said.

"We've had to look at different global realities and perhaps even have more folks look at a more creative way of moving away from fossil fuels."

Germany has delayed the shutdown of its last three nuclear reactors while it searches for new sources of energy abroad.

Port of Belledune interested in SMRs

The Port of Belledune in northern New Brunswick recently announced plans to use one of ARC's small reactors to power the potential future expansion of hydrogen energy generated there for export.

That would see an SMR operating at Belledune between 2030 and 2035, the port said in a news release.

The port hopes to export hydrogen power to Germany and other European countries looking to end their dependence on Russian oil and gas.

Chief Terry Richardson of Pabineau First Nation, near Bathurst said he sees SMRs as a good option. (Alexandre Silberman/CBC)

Ottawa removed small modular nuclear reactors from the list of projects requiring impact assessments in 2019.

Even so, the proposal from the other Saint John-based SMR company, Moltex Clean Energy, will require one because of its plans to recycle nuclear waste.

But ARC is exempt unless the activists can persuade Guilbeault.

"The goal is to make more people aware of the risks of SMRs," McAllister said.

"The impact assessment is the only process that has that kind of comprehensive examination."

• National law group supports impact assessment request for N.B. nuclear reactors

• N.B.'s nuclear power could complicate Belledune's hydrogen sales

Guilbeault is a former environment activist who once opposed nuclear power but said recently that the technology may be required to hold global temperature increases to targets set out in Paris in 2015.

"There is a wide consensus out there that we need to use all the non-emitting, from a pollution perspective, technologies that are at our disposal to achieve 1.5 degrees Celsius," he told CBC's The House.

"Obviously, my role is different now from when I was working for non-governmental organizations. My fundamental beliefs haven't changed but my role has changed." 

An impact assessment of ARC's technology would look at species at risk, fish habitats, migratory birds, as well as Indigenous rights.

Chief Terry Richardson of Pabineau First Nation, near Bathurst, which signed a consultation agreement with the Port of Belledune in 2018, said he sees SMRs as a good option.

"We're not looking at something that's new, right?" he said.

Coal to be phased out by end of decade

Holland says an assessment of ARC would be redundant because the same technology has already operated in larger-scale reactors.

"I do think the fact that it's a known technology should count for something," he said.

But Labbe said ARC is ready to comply with whatever regulatory process it faces.

The case for nuclear may be even more urgent with the proposed Atlantic Loop project now apparently in jeopardy. That project would see power grids from Quebec and the four Atlantic provinces linked with more transmission cables, making more emissions-free hydroelectricity from Quebec and Labrador available to the region. 

That would help New Brunswick and Nova Scotia replace electricity generated by coal, which must be phased out by 2030. 

• SMRs could be key weapon in climate-change battle, engineer says

Emera, the parent company of Nova Scotia Power, said in October it would pause its key role in the Atlantic Loop after the provincial government there capped electricity rates.

"There isn't enough money in order to continue to pursue that," CEO Scott Balfour said.

Federal Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc said last month Ottawa still intends to be "a significant partner" in the project and hopes for an agreement in the first quarter of 2023.

Holland says questions about the Atlantic Loop show why SMRs are important.

"When you have jurisdictions that are key to the process saying they don't know if they can invest in it, it would be naive to say it doesn't put the project at risk," he said.

"Let's continue to have that conversation, but let's not make that the only conversation."

Turkey in talks with US to buy small nuclear reactors, weaning itself off coal


A view of the construction site of Turkey's first nuclear power plant 'Akkuyu', pictured during the opening ceremony on April 3, 2018. (AFP)

Bloomberg
Published: 21 December ,2022: 

Turkey’s government and private companies are in talks with the US for purchases of small nuclear reactors, as the country looks to wean itself off coal.

“There is a serious interest in nuclear as a way to replace coal-fired power plants,” Justin Friedman, senior advisor for commercial competitiveness in nuclear energy at the US State Department, said in an interview with Bloomberg on Tuesday in Ankara.
There is room to purchase as many as 35 small modular reactors, known as SMRs, Friedman said, citing Turkish aspirations for 20 gigawatts of electricity generation capacity from nuclear by 2050.

“Now the question is how do we work together government-to-government to open the door to the business-to-business cooperation,” he said.

US manufacturers of SMRs include NuScale Power Corp. and the Bill Gates-backed TerraPower LLC. SMRs typically generate a hundred megawatts or slightly more — making them roughly a tenth the size of conventional reactors — and can be built in series, like components in a factory, rather than as the usual bespoke projects.

Investment on this scale would cost billions of dollars. It’s unclear how the financing would work should the talks result in a commercial deal.

Turkey’s energy ministry declined to comment.

The talks with the US come as Russian state company Rosatom nears completion of the Akkuyu nuclear power plant in southern Turkey. The government is also negotiating a second power plant with Rosatom that may be built in Sinop on the Black Sea coast.

Turkey has 68 coal-fired power stations, which met about a third of its electricity needs last year, according to the energy ministry. The country aims to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2053.

Read more: Turkey launches construction of first nuclear power plant

Christmas Grid Chaos Paves The Way For Transportable Nuclear Plants

By ZeroHedge - Dec 27, 2022

• The cold blast during the holiday weekend was a stress test for the U.S. grid.
• 
  
• Fossil fuels and nuclear power generation mix across the eastern U.S. saved grids from collapse.
• 
  
• Advanced nuclear reactors will play a critical role in decarbonizing electricity.

The cold blast this holiday weekend across the eastern half of the US exposed the fragility of power grids as soaring heating demand spiked peak total loads to record high in many areas while supplies were tight. Grid operators and utilities told tens of millions of Americans to conserve power -- some conservation efforts are still ongoing Christmas morning. Christmas Eve was a mess for many customers in the Southeast states, including North Carolina and Tennessee, as utilities implemented rolling blackouts. 

Fossil fuels and nuclear power generation mix across the eastern US saved grids from collapse. Unreliable renewables, such as solar and wind, were just a tiny fraction of the power mix. 

What's idiotic is the decarbonization campaign to decommission nuclear and fossil fuel generators for renewables. This weekend's grid chaos is a wake-up call. America has a severe grid problem sparked by the 'green' movement. Thank the climate alarmist, woke corporations, and progressive politicians for ushering in so-called green reforms that have transformed once-stable grids into a third-world country prone to rolling blackouts anytime temperatures fall below freezing. 

Readers have been well informed of our view that advanced nuclear reactors will play a critical role in decarbonizing electricity in the US by providing carbon-free energy, and it is a much better form than solar and wind assets. 

Perhaps forward-thinking utilities will wise up and even warm up to next-generation nuclear reactors for power generation. 

One such design is for a sea-based nuclear reactor that is transportable and can be connected to grids at a moment's notice. 

Canada's Prodigy Clean Energy and America's NuScale recently released a conceptual design for the transportable and sea-based small modular reactor (SMR), which "can generate safe, affordable, and reliable electricity at grid-scale at any coastal location worldwide," with the design to be used "for engagement with utilities, regulators, and shipyard manufacturers."

This means a portable and sea-based nuclear power plant that is considered "safe" will connect to shore-based power grids to increase power capacity. 

"Utilisation of a transportable marine facility will enable us to deploy the NuScale Power Module at more locations around the world," John Hopkins, NuScale Power President and CEO, wrote in a statement.

Instead of grids waiting 5-7 years or more to construct a new nuclear power plant -- the SMR is a 'plug and play' access to electricity and heat supply for grids. 

Similar technology is already in use in Russia. The world's first floating nuclear power plant was commissioned in Pevek, Chukotka region in the Russian Far East in 2020. 

Floating nuclear power plants could be the answer to plugging the energy gap on grids after progressives have been hellbent on decarbonizing fossil fuel generators. Capacity needs to increase as electric vehicles on highways are steadily increasing. If not, Americans should get used to rolling blackouts.  

By Zerohedge.com

Shale Giant Pioneer Explains Why U.S. Drillers Won’t Drill More

By Irina Slav - Dec 21, 2022

• Pioneer Natural Resources’ CEO Scott Sheffield indirectly told the White House why U.S. shale drillers aren’t eager to drill more.
• 
  
• Energy stocks have become the best performers on the stock market this year.
• Energy Secretary Granholm has taken a softer stance on the oil industry in recent months.
• 
  

Earlier this month, the White House’s top energy advisor Amos Hochstein called shale drillers “un-American” for their refusal to boost oil production despite the administrations’ multiple calls to that effect. Now, the industry is striking back. Pioneer Natural Resources’ CEO Scott Sheffield, one of the most outspoken industry executives, has indirectly explained to the White House that shale drillers will not be drilling more and that is it. And he had an excellent reason for it.

Speaking to the Financial Times in an interview, Sheffield said that returning to production growth now would cause an outflow of investors and energy stocks will plummet to the bottom of the stock market. And this is why no public oil driller would do it.

“You’ve got to realise: when you produce a 2 per cent return on capital employed, you end up being at the bottom of the S&P 500,” Sheffield told the FT. “And so if we end up doing what he’s asking us to do, we’ll end up back at the bottom of the S&P 500.”

Investor pressure for higher returns has been one of the reasons given by both industry and analysts for the current unwillingness of the U.S. shale oil industry to start ramping up output the way it always did in the past when prices rose.

These investors have been watching for years how shale drillers burn their cash in order to turn the United States in the biggest oil producer in the world. Then they had to watch all this breakdown in 2020 with oil prices dropping below zero for the first time in history, even though the drop was a short one.

Now, two years later, things are very different both with oil prices and with shale drillers. No company seems to have the ambition to see just how much oil it can produce if it puts its mind and resources to it. Instead, shale drillers are relearning capital discipline and prioritizing their shareholders after, one might say, years of neglect.

As a result, the FT points out in its story on the interview with Sheffield, energy stocks have become the best performers on the stock market this year. It is unlikely that any energy company would risk this performance just to respond to the calls of an administration that has from the start been against the whole oil industry.

Yet, there are also purely practical constraints as well, as Sheffield noted in his talk with the FT. Oilfield services cost a lot more than they did a couple of years ago and there are equipment shortages.

“He was criticising the majors and independents for not growing more. He doesn’t realise if we wanted to grow more than 5 per cent, I’d have to call up all the service contractors; they’re going to charge me 30 to 40 per cent more; it’s going to take a year to build new equipment; it’s going to take two years to start showing results. By that time, you may go through an oil price collapse,” Sheffield explained.

Indeed, messaging from the White House to the oil industry has had a remarkably short horizon, the focus being on the present and involving the apparent assumption that with a bit of good will, the industry could add another million barrels daily to output in a matter of days.

For now, however, this is physically impossible, and threats of windfall profits have not helped put drillers in a more generous mood. Neither has the much softer message that came last week from Energy Secretary Granholm.

“We are eager to work with you,” she told an industry association, acknowledging that oil and gas were going to be used for a long time yet and admitting the energy transition, if it happens too fast, “could have unintended consequences that hurt people, cause backlash.”

This olive branch, as Bloomberg called it, might be a positive sign in itself but it is unlikely to change shale drillers’ minds. There is simply no good reason for them to drill more and the administration cannot give them one.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

TRANSHUMANISM

Imagine the Possibilities of Speaking Fluent Machine

AI can already turn natural language instructions into code, but in 2023, these productivity copilots will find myriad other uses.


ILLUSTRATION: SCOTT BALMER

IT’S DIFFICULT TO reflect on the past year—or forecast the next—without a sense of wonder regarding the sheer magnitude of innovation taking place across the AI landscape. On a weekly basis, researchers across industry and academia have published work advancing the state-of-the-art in nearly every domain of AI, toppling benchmarking leaderboards and accomplishing feats beyond what we could have imagined even a few years ago.

In large part, this progress is due to the rapid advancements we’ve seen in large AI models. Recent progress in supercomputing techniques and new applications of neural network architectures have allowed us to train massive, centralized models that can accomplish a wide variety of tasks using natural language inputs—from summarizing and generating text with unprecedented levels of sophistication, to even generating complex code for developers.

The combination of large language models and coding resulted in two of the most powerful AI developments we witnessed in 2022: the introduction of the OpenAI Codex Model—a large AI model that can translate natural language inputs into more than a dozen programming languages—and the launch of GitHub Copilot, a programming assistant based on Codex.

Historically, computer programming has been all about translation: Humans must learn the language of machines to communicate with them. But now, Codex lets us use natural language to express our intentions, and the machine takes on the responsibility of translating those intentions into code. It’s basically a translator between the human imagination and any piece of software with an API.

Codex has enabled the creation of GitHub Copilot, a virtual programming partner that, on average, generates more than 40 percent of the code for developers who use it. Over the coming months and years, as large AI models reliably scale up in size and become more powerful, GitHub Copilot will become increasingly useful for the developers relying on it, freeing up their time for more engaging and creative work and enhancing their efficiency.

In and of itself, that’s a truly remarkable step forward in productivity for developers alone, a community of knowledge workers who are wrestling with extraordinary complexity and unprecedented demand for their talents. But it’s just the first step of many that will be taken in 2023 as we see this pattern repeated across other sorts of knowledge work.

In 2023, we will see Codex and other large AI models used to create new “copilots” for other types of intellectual labor. The applications are potentially endless, limited only by one’s ability to imagine scenarios in which such productivity-assisting software could be applied to other types of complex, cognitive work—whether that be editing videos, writing scripts, designing new molecules for medicines, or creating manufacturing recipes from 3D models.

By applying the same underlying technology used to create GitHub Copilot, it will be possible to build Copilots for virtually any complex, repetitive aspect of knowledge work, allowing knowledge workers to spend their time on higher-order cognitive tasks, and effectively transforming how a great many of us interact with technology to get things done.

Our increasingly complicated and information-dense world requires more knowledge work every year, imposing ever-greater demands on those workers in every field and industry. Copilots for Everything could offer a genuine revolution for types of work where productivity gains have been few and far between since the invention of the personal computer and the internet.

FEATURED VIDEO
Why Billionaires Are Actually Ruining the Economy

Kevin Scott is the CTO and executive vice president of AI and Research at Microsoft. He's the author of the book Reprogramming the American Dream: From Rural America to Silicon Valley—Making AI Serve Us All.

Concerns for Ontario wetlands as changes to assessments complete

Eden Thomson

December 24, 2022



The majority of the greater Toronto area’s sensitive wetlands could be de-conserved under the provincial government’s drastic overhaul of wetland ratings, leaving the lands open to development, critics say.

The province completed its proposed changes to the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES) — an assessment method that determines whether a wetland deserves provincial protection — on the eve of the winter holiday. This is despite nearly 15,000 comments from “public, environmental and conservation organizations, academic/scientific community, indigenous communities and local authorities” expressing “concern about changes affecting wetland conservation.”

Critics, including Ontario’s Auditor General, said the changes would “completely undermine protection of Ontario’s wetlands” while doing little to solve the housing crisis.

Changes the province is pushing include: reducing government oversight of wetland assessments; Assess smaller wetlands independently and not as part of a larger wetland complex, which would likely render them unprotectable; and to change the rating so that the presence of an endangered species or an endangered species does not automatically qualify the wetland for protection.

Conservation agencies in Toronto, Halton and the Niagara Peninsula, which are responsible for wetland management, said up to 95 percent of provincially significant wetlands (PSW) in their jurisdictions could be “adversely affected.”

Read also: The First Nations group warns GO trains may be delayed due to environmental assessments

“The full overhaul of the OWES…will ensure that very few wetlands will be classified as provincially significant in the future and that many, if not most, existing PSWs could lose this designation,” said a letter sent to the province, issued by 70 environmental groups have signed in Ontario, including Ontario Nature, Birds Canada and the National Farmers Union. “As a result, very few of Ontario’s wetlands would benefit in the future from the protection that PSW designation currently offers.”

Critics said this means many currently protected wetlands could be re-evaluated or those queued for an evaluation could ultimately see development.

In southern Ontario, wetlands play a key role in the province’s flood control strategy. They are areas that have been soaked in water long enough for the ground to become soggy – and they include swamps, bogs, and marshes. Not only do they prevent flood damage, but they also provide habitat for wildlife and filter water.

Conservation Halton said 95 percent of its wetlands of provincial importance could be reassessed under the provincial changes. Biodiversity areas of Niagara could see 80 percent of identified wetlands “negatively impacted.” The Toronto and region conservation agency said the numbers were “staggering” and that 9,000 of its 10,000 wetlands could be at risk from the proposed changes.

“We are concerned that subsequent impacts/removals would affect essential natural functions of the wetlands such as: These include flood mitigation, erosion control, water conservation and purification, and biodiversity support,” Toronto’s Conservation Authority said in its submissions to the province on the wetland changes last month.

The province created a wetland rating system in 1983 to curb their destruction and establish scientific criteria to determine how to protect them. Wetlands that are considered provincially important are generally protected from development and must be buffered from development on adjacent properties.

TRCA, under its jurisdiction, said wetlands make up less than five percent of the land, which accounts for about 11,000 hectares. And a number of wetlands — such as the Lower Duffins Creek wetland — have been under development pressure, particularly under the application of the Ford government’s ministerial zoning regulations, which permit development on wetlands under certain conditions.

In releasing the changes to the Ontario Environmental Registry rating system in November — the same day the omnibus housing law was unveiled — the province said it introduced the changes to “provide greater certainty and clarity as to how significant wetlands are assessed and identified” and “to allow further rationalization of development decisions by removing the requirement for the Department to review and confirm wetland assessment results.”

In an email to the Star, a spokesman for Graydon Smith, Secretary of State for Natural Resources and Forestry, said: “Our Government recognizes the importance of wetlands in communities across the province. The proposed update…would eliminate duplicate requirements and streamline the assessment process,” said Melissa Candelaria.

However, critics said one of the most worrying changes was the removal of provincial oversight from the assessment process altogether.

Currently, the Department of Natural Resources and Forestry and the Department of Communities and Housing share responsibility for assessing wetlands and ensuring they are protected in light of development. But under the new changes, the assessments would not be conducted by the MNRF, but by a privately trained wetland assessor who would inform the local community whether a wetland should be protected.

“The elimination of provincial oversight in the wetland assessment process introduces a further risk of inconsistency in the assessment and hence protection of wetlands across the province,” writes Bonnie Lysyk, Auditor General, in her November Flood Risk Reduction Report.

In particular, critics fear that the province’s changes would no longer rate groups of wetlands as a complex, but instead would rate each individual part of a complex. Currently, wetlands under two hectares are not assessed, but may be protected if assessed and valued as part of a larger complex.

In its letter, TRCA said that 90 percent of the wetlands in its jurisdiction are less than five acres — roughly the size of four football fields — and this change “puts a large majority of wetlands within TRCA jurisdiction… at risk.”

Brad Stephens, senior manager of planning ecology at TRCA, said almost all of the wetlands in the GTA are complexes, including the Toronto Islands, Lower Duffins Creek wetland and Carruthers Creek. “It’s very rare that we have one huge wetland in our jurisdiction,” he said.

Conservation Halton’s Shelly Datseris said treating wetlands as complexes is a “science-based approach that recognizes that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” and that the “removal of complexes means many PSWs can be reassessed as a whole.” unit after unit and will probably no longer be PSWs.”

Datseris said 95 percent of Conservation Halton’s wetlands of provincial importance are part of complexes, and with the proposed changes they could be “reassessed in a piecemeal approach that could render each individual entity insignificant one at a time”.

Environmental groups said they are also concerned that the province will no longer consider the presence of an endangered or threatened species in a wetland when determining whether it is of provincial importance. And that the province will implement a compensation policy where they would compensate for the loss of wetlands in one place by creating another.

“Implementing an offset policy could set precedents for the removal of wetlands, forests and wildlife habitats, regardless of their importance,” a group of ecologists and environmental advisers said in a letter to the province, adding that the province’s proposal “does not recognize that Complexities, challenges and costs of managing and implementing ecosystem recovery.”

However, the province said it has invested $30 million in a wetland restoration program that “will result in a net positive impact on wetlands.”

In her report, the Auditor General said that while such programs “can help preserve individual wetlands on private land, the lack of an overarching strategy and goals increases the risk that wetlands, which can reduce urban flood risk, will continue to be lost or degraded.” will”.

Noor Javed is a Toronto-based reporter for The Star, covering city news with an interest in 905 local politics. Follow her on Twitter: @njavedSHARE:

Rock glaciers on Earth may help us prepare for water-seeking missions on Mars

By Stefanie Waldek 

published 2 days ago  

SPACE.COM

Rock glaciers are a potential water source on Mars.

Rock glaciers like the Sourdough Rock Glacier in Alaska can help scientists prepare to study similar features on Mars to seek out water. (Image credit: Michael Christoffersen)

We know you've heard of rocks before, and you've likely heard of glaciers. But did you know that rock glaciers exist? And not only here on Earth — they're also on Mars.

We know very little about Mars rock glaciers, but scientists do suspect that they may hold significant amounts of water, which could aid future human exploration and settlement on the Red Planet. Thus, a team of researchers from the University of Arizona has set out to study their Earth-based brethren in order better understand this intriguing geological formation.

A rock glacier is similar to a traditional ice glacier, but it's filled with far larger quantities of rocks and sand. That debris is commonly picked up when ice glaciers melt and refreeze at the base of mountains, where that rocky debris often gathers. Because of their composition, rock glaciers are typically much smaller than ice glaciers, though they both move very slowly over time.

Now if Martian rock glaciers are very similar to those on Earth, they might hold water ice that could be harvested by future Mars explorers. "They're … more accessible than polar ice because spacecraft wouldn't have to change their orbits as much as they would if they were to land on a pole, which requires a lot more fuel to reach," Tyler Meng, a doctoral student studying planetary science and geoscience at the University of Arizona who is participating in the research, said in a statement(opens in new tab).

To study rock glaciers here on Earth, the researchers traveled to four rock glaciers in Colorado, Wyoming, and Alaska, mapping them in three dimensions with radar equipment. "In the process, we made the most precise estimates of rock glacier geometry and composition to date," Meng said. That data can be used to study the water budget in those mountain regions, because the glaciers serve as reservoirs — which they hopefully do on Mars, too.


University of Arizona doctoral student Tyler Meng surveys the Sourdough Rock Glacier in Alaska in 2021.
(Image credit: Stefano Nerozzi)

"Our goal is to use these rock glaciers on Earth as an analog for processes on Mars," said Meng. "By mapping the patterns of debris thickness on Earth, we're trying to understand how that debris thickness may also vary on Mars. Also, by learning about the differences in flow parameters between clean ice and debris-rich ice, that will help simulations for the Martian case as well."

Next up for the team: more measuring. But this time they'll not only be using radar equipment, but also drones — a technique that could perhaps one day be used on Mars with a vehicle like NASA's Ingenuity helicopter, which has been flying sorties as part of the Perseverance rover mission for over a year.

A study based on the team's research was published in the Journal of Glaciology on Oct. 21.