How China Is Transforming Africa’s Economies

Editor OilPrice.com

Thu, January 26, 2023 

In 2000, China was the leading source of imports for only a few African countries: Sudan, Gambia, Benin and Djibouti.

But as Statista's Martin Armstrong shows in the infographic below, 20 years later, the Asian superpower is now the top supplier of goods for over 30 nations on the continent.

You will find more infographics at Statista

The China-Africa connection has been fostered intensely over the last two decades. As reported by Statista's research expert for Angola, Kenya and Tanzania, Julia Faria:

"The value of Chinese exports to African countries jumped from five billion U.S. dollars to 110 billion".

It's not just a one-way street, however:

"African exports to China also increased, though at a slower pace. In 2020, total export value to China reached nearly 62 billion U.S. dollars, a slowdown caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. The growing Chinese demand for raw materials has found a strong supplier in Africa, with exports valued at around 14 billion U.S. dollars in 2020."

Far beyond being a simple trade relationship, China has been the largest foreign investor in Africa for a number of years now. Additionally, the country was the source of 25 percent of infrastructure funding in the continent in 2018 - the second highest share that year and only second to the financial commitments from national African governments.

By Zerohedge.com

GLOBALIZATION IS FORDISM

Yellen lauds Ford's 100-year history in South Africa, flags more investments





U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen visits South Africa

Thu, January 26, 2023
By Andrea Shalal

SILVERTON, South Africa (Reuters) - U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on Thursday lauded the Ford Motor Co's 100-year history of assembling vehicles in South Africa and underscored Washington's resolve to expand trade ties with countries that it "can count on," including South Africa.

Yellen spoke after touring Ford's plant in Silverton, a suburb of Pretoria, where she got behind the wheel of bright yellow new Ranger pickup truck and spoke with workers and company officials. This is the third leg of her three-country trip across the African continent that is aimed at expanding U.S. economic ties and countering China's influence on the continent.

The plant, which employs 4,000 people, is an example of how deeper ties between the United States and Africa could produce good jobs and boost economic growth for both sides, Yellen told workers and company officials.

"Africa will shape the future of the global economy," she said. "We know that a thriving Africa is in the interest of the United States. A thriving Africa means a larger market for our goods and services. It means more investment opportunities for our businesses."

About 600 U.S. companies operate in South Africa, employing about 220,000 people and generating revenue equivalent to about 10% of South Africa's entire gross domestic product, U.S. Ambassador to South Africa Reuben Brigety said at the event.

Ford, a major U.S. investor in South Africa, is investing $1 billion to expand output at the plant there by 20%, adding 1,200 new jobs, and aims to develop a freight rail link with a seaport 700 miles (1,126.54 km) away.

Yellen said other U.S. companies, including Cisco, General Electric, and Visa also planned big investments, attracted by expanding markets fueled by a demographic boom that will see Africa account for a quarter of the world’s population by 2050.

The U.S. Treasury chief said South Africa had been the biggest beneficiary of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, which grants eligible Sub-Saharan countries duty-free access to the U.S. market, but did not spell out what would happen when the legislation expires in 2025.

Yellen said South Africa also had a role to play in U.S. efforts to shift supply chains away from over-reliance on China and other non-market economies to more like-minded countries, an approach she has dubbed "friendshoring."

As in her comments to South Africa's finance minister earlier on Thursday, Yellen did not address South Africa's refusal to take sides over Russia's war in Ukraine or Washington's concern over military exercises it plans with China and Russia.

The massive economic disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia's war against Ukraine underscored the need for resilient supply chains, she said.

"We are addressing the over-concentration of the production of critical goods in certain markets — particularly those that may not share our economic values," Yellen said. "To do so, we are deepening economic integration with the many countries that we can count on. That includes our many trusted trading partners on this continent — like South Africa."

(Reporting by Andrea Shalal; Editing by Tomasz Janowski)

Yellen says Africa to shape world economy as US reengages

MOGOMOTSI MAGOME and GERALD IMRAY
Thu, January 26, 2023 

PRETORIA, South Africa (AP) — U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen watched Ford cars and pickup trucks being assembled at a plant in South Africa on Thursday, citing it as an example of cooperation between Washington and Africa as she begins the Biden administration's big push to reengage with a continent that has 1.3 billion people and an abundance of economic potential.

“The United States’ strategy towards Africa is centered around a simple recognition that Africa will shape the future of the global economy,” Yellen said at the Ford plant in the suburb of Silverton in the South African capital, Pretoria.

“We know that a thriving Africa is in the interest of the United States. A thriving Africa means a large market for our goods and services. It means more investment opportunities for our businesses like this Ford plant, which can create jobs in Africa and customers for American businesses.”

The 76-year-old Yellen, smiling widely, got behind the wheel of one of the shining new vehicles at one point, and gripped the steering wheel firmly with both hands.


Yellen is nearing the end of a three-country tour of Africa that began in Senegal on the continent's west coast and also took in Zambia. Her visit is the start of the Biden administration's efforts to rebuild ties with Africa in the light of China's rapidly increasing economic presence on the world's second-largest continent, and Russia's military and diplomatic foothold in parts of it.

South Africa, Africa's most developed economy and pivotal to the U.S. plan, has deep ties with both Russia and China, and raised concern at the White House when it announced last week it would host Russian and Chinese warships next month and take part in joint naval drills with them off its east coast. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov made an official visit to South Africa on Monday, a day before Yellen touched down.

Yellen has avoided mentioning the naval drills during her trip, or South Africa's neutral stance over the war in Ukraine and decision not to side with the West in condemning Russia. She did say Russia's invasion is to blame for increasing some of Africa’s problems.

“Russia’s brutal war against Ukraine has raised energy prices and exacerbated food insecurity,” she said.

Africa is the world's largest single trade area by number of countries. It has a young population, a burgeoning middle class and is expected to be home to one quarter of the world's population by 2050.

It also has a myriad of problems, and Yellen focused on one of them earlier Thursday when she held morning talks with South African Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana. The talks partly dealt, Yellen said, with transitioning South Africa from its heavy reliance on coal to greener energy sources.

South Africa relies on coal-fired plants to generate about 80% of its electricity. As well as being a huge polluter, the coal plants have proved unable to meet the country's needs. South Africa is currently embroiled in an electricity crisis, with scheduled rolling blackouts hitting businesses and households and its 60 million people for up to 10 hours a day because of diesel shortages and breakdowns at the state-owned electricity provider’s aging coal plants.

South Africa plans to reduce its reliance on coal to 59% of its electricity production by 2030 and is targeting zero carbon emissions by 2050. The U.S. and other Western nations have committed to help, pledging $8.5 billion in loans to fund South Africa's energy transition.

"South Africa is the first country with a just energy transition partnership to which the United States was proud to commit as a partner,” Yellen said. “This partnership represents South Africa’s bold first step towards expanding electricity access and reliability and creating a low-carbon and climate-resistant economy.”

Yellen's mission to promote American investment and ties comes in the face of China overtaking the U.S. in foreign direct investment in Africa. Trade between Africa and China surged to $254 billion in 2021, up about 35%.

Yellen's trip kicked off U.S. efforts to recover lost ground, while the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, is also on a tour to Africa, and President Joe Biden has said he intends to visit this year, as does Vice President Kamala Harris.

The Biden administration's plans were largely laid out at the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington in December, when U.S. Deputy Commerce Secretary Don Graves said, “We took our eye off the ball so to speak (in Africa), and U.S. investors and companies are having to play catch-up.”

Before his meeting with Yellen on Thursday, Godongwana said that the U.S. still ranks among South Africa’s top trading partners.

“My hope is that this may continue,” he said.

___

Gerald Imray reported from Cape Town.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen looks into the interior of newly build vehicle during her tour at the Ford Assembling Plant in Pretoria, South Africa, Thursday, Jan. 26, 2023.

 (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)

Anti-abortion protesters break into Walgreens AGM meeting room


Signage is seen outside of a Walgreens, owned by the Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc., in Manhattan, New York City

Thu, January 26, 2023 at 4:51 PM MST·2 min read

(Reuters) - Anti-abortion protesters broke into the room where Walgreens Boots Alliance Inc held its annual shareholders meeting in Newport Coast, California on Thursday for its decision to start selling abortion pills, the pharmacy chain said.

Walgreens and CVS Health Corp said on Jan. 4 that they plan to offer abortion pills following the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) decision to allow retail pharmacies to offer the drug in the country for the first time.

"Today, directly after the close of official business of our annual shareholders meeting, a small group of protesters entered the meeting room without authorization," Walgreens Senior Director for External Relations Fraser Engerman told Reuters.

"We are grateful that none of our shareholders, team members and event staff were harmed during this incident," Engerman said in a written statement.

The FDA on Jan. 3 finalized a rule allowing retail pharmacies to sell mifepristone. However, pharmacies must still weigh whether and where to offer the pill given political controversy surrounding abortion in the United States.

"It was a wild annual shareholders meeting," said Walgreens shareholder and AGM attendee John Chevedden. "The protesters knew what they were doing because they found a way to enter the room from behind the podium. It was a complete surprise."

"Upon leaving the meeting there were about 50 noisy protesters with signs just outside of the resort grounds," he said via email.

U.S. abortion rights were curtailed in 2022 when the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the constitutional right to terminating pregnancies when it scrapped a landmark ruling in the 1973 Roe vs. Wade case.

"We believe strongly in the right to peaceful protest, and an area was set aside for this purpose, but unfortunately some protesters took further disruptive actions," said Engerman.

(Reporting by Ahmed Aboulenein and Ross Kerber; Editing by Christopher Cushing)

Faculty calls on embattled Minnesota college head to resign


Hamline University Fayneese Miller during an interview Monday, Jan. 23. 2023 in St Paul Minn. The faculty at the Minnesota college is calling for its president to resign for her handling of a Muslim student's objection to a depiction of the Prophet Muhammad being shown in an ancient art course. Faculty leaders at Hamline University say members voted Tuesday, Jan. 24. 

Jerry Holt/Star Tribune 


Wed, January 25, 2023

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — Faculty leaders at a Minnesota college that dismissed an art history instructor who showed depictions of the Prophet Muhammad in a course have overwhelmingly called for the university president to resign.

Faculty leaders at Hamline University said 71 of 92 members who attended a meeting Tuesday voted to call on President Fayneese Miller to resign immediately. They say they lost faith in Miller because of her handling of an objection lodged by a Muslim student who said seeing the artwork violated her religious beliefs.

The adjunct instructor who showed the artwork, Erika López Prater, sued the private liberal arts school last week after it declined to renew her contract.

“It became clear that the harm that’s been done and the repair that has to be done, that new leadership is needed to move that forward,” Jim Scheibel, president of the Hamline University Faculty Council, told the Star Tribune of Minneapolis.

The faculty objected to what they considered a violation of academic freedom.

“We are distressed that members of the administration have mishandled this issue and great harm has been done to the reputation of Minnesota’s oldest university,” the faculty council statement read. It later went on to say, “As we no longer have faith in President Miller’s ability to lead the university forward, we call upon her to immediately tender her resignation to the Hamline University Board of Trustees.”

After criticism from across the country, Miller conceded last week that she mishandled the episode, which sparked a debate over balancing academic freedom with respect for religion.

“Like all organizations, sometimes we misstep,” she said in a joint statement with the chair of the school’s trustees. “In the interest of hearing from and supporting our Muslim students, language was used that does not reflect our sentiments on academic freedom. Based on all that we have learned, we have determined that our usage of the term ‘Islamophobic’ was therefore flawed.”

A Hamline spokesman told the St. Paul Pioneer Press that Miller and her team were discussing how to respond to the faculty vote.

López Prater showed centuries-old artwork depicting the Prophet Muhammad in an October lesson on Islamic art. She said she knew that visual depictions of him violate many Muslims' faith, so she warned the class ahead of time.

The instructor alleges in her lawsuit that Hamline subjected her to religious discrimination and defamation, and damaged her professional and personal reputation.

The American Association of University Professors, which is devoted to academic freedom, has launched an inquiry and is planning a campus visit next month.

While leaders of some local Muslim groups have criticized López Prater, the national office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations disputed claims that her actions were Islamophobic. The group said professors who analyze images of the Prophet Muhammad for academic purposes are not the same as “Islamophobes who show such images to cause offense.”

LEFT WING MEME

 

CUT NOSE TO SPITE FACE
HIV at center of latest culture war after Tennessee rejects federal funds


Kayla Collins, director of health and wellness at OutMemphis, gets ready to give HIV tests when people drop in for a weekly dinner. The funding for those tests may no longer exist once Tennessee stops accepting federal HIV prevention grants after May 31. (Andrea Morales for The Washington Post)
Ariana Eunjung Cha and Fenit Nirappil, (c) 2023, The Washington Post
Thu, January 26, 2023 at 10:26 AM MST·8 min read

Tennessee has rejected millions of dollars from the federal government for HIV/AIDS prevention - a move that public health experts worry will politicize the response to the disease and has the potential to destabilize decades of progress in getting the epidemic under control.

The controversy, which critics say was triggered by questions about the inclusion of transgender and abortion rights groups, is the latest example of Republican pushback against federal leadership and oversight that has resulted in clashes in areas that once had bipartisan support.

"This is something that is dangerous," said Greg Millett, director of public policy for Amfar, a leading AIDS nonprofit, and a former senior policy adviser in the White House Office of National AIDS Policy until 2014. "This is part of a larger backlash against public health we've been seeing in our country the past few years."

The tensions in Tennessee began in the fall, when Republican Gov. Bill Lee voiced disapproval of two HIV grant recipients spotlighted in conservative media - a task force on transgender health issues and Planned Parenthood. The conflict escalated late last week when the state announced that after May 31, it would no longer accept any money from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for testing, prevention and surveillance of HIV.

State officials said they would continue to support HIV testing and prevention but would focus on first responders, victims of human trafficking and mothers and children. In contrast, the federal program prioritizes men who have sex with men and transgender people, particularly in communities of color, who are at greatest risk of HIV, according to federal surveillance data.

"It's pretty hard not to think that part of the motivation is to restrict funding to groups we don't like and don't want to support," said Wayne Smith, who runs a faith-based HIV prevention program in Knoxville that will lose about $10,000 for testing each year.

Joseph Cherabie, an infectious-disease physician at Washington University in St. Louis who oversees an HIV prevention program, called the decision "a coordinated effort in order to try to dehumanize and stigmatize the LGBT community."

Those who have long battled HIV say they are fearful about the human cost. Indiana drew national scrutiny in 2015 when one rural county saw 200 new HIV cases in a short period driven by intravenous drug use, at a time when then-Gov. Mike Pence delayed allowing a clean needle exchange program. And in 2017, after then-Florida Gov. Rick Scott returned $54 million in unspent federal funds for HIV, the state saw the highest number of new HIV diagnoses in the United States.

For advocates of the gay and transgender communities in Tennessee, concerns about new disease outbreaks are magnified by the fact that Shelby County, home to Memphis, already has one of the highest rates of new HIV infections in the United States. Nationwide, about 35,000 new cases are reported each year.

Lee told reporters Friday that he still believes HIV prevention is "very important," but that "we think we can do that better than the strings attached with the federal dollars that came our way."

But neither he nor state health officials would explain why they decided to target new groups, how they planned to distribute state funding, or what shape their programs would take.

Health-care groups said the decision to forgo federal funding would allow state officials to elevate conservative organizations whose goals may be more about imposing their values on others because the state would no longer have to follow CDC guidelines on scientific, evidence-based medicine. They drew parallels to how "crisis pregnancy centers" backed by social conservatives advertise themselves as health-care entities but are primarily concerned with preventing women from getting abortions.

Tennessee has received about $8.3 million annually from the CDC for HIV prevention efforts. The governor's office said it is committed to maintaining the same funding levels.

CDC spokesman Scott Pauley said the agency had not received official notification from the Tennessee Department of Health withdrawing from the CDC's funding.

"We would certainly be concerned if the services people in Tennessee need to stay healthy were interrupted, or if public health capacity to respond to HIV outbreaks and bring an end to this epidemic were hindered," he said.

- - -

For several decades, HIV/AIDS had seemed to be insulated from the partisan politics that has created conflict and confusion for other health-care goals - over the coronavirus response, abortion rights, surgery that helps people transition to their self-identified genders, and even the expansion of Medicaid.

It was President George W. Bush who signed legislation in 2003 authorizing Pepfar, or the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, which some have described as the most effective government effort ever to address a global disease outbreak.

President Barack Obama helped reorient domestic strategy to focus on PrEP drugs to stop the spread of new infections and provided the means to make those medications available through federal funding and mandating insurance coverage. President Donald Trump continued that tradition in his 2019 State of the Union address, announcing an initiative to stop new HIV infections in the United States by 2030.

Some of the funds coming to Tennessee had in fact been authorized under Trump's plan, which concentrated resources on 50 "hot spots," including Shelby County, that are leading the country in new infections.

Even before Tennessee's decision, there had been other signs of a splintering of the bipartisan coalition supporting federal HIV surveillance and prevention policies.

In Texas, religious employers brought a suit arguing they shouldn't have to pay for HIV-prevention drugs that are mandated by the Affordable Care Act, and in September, a federal judge sided with them, citing the right to religious freedom. And in West Virginia, state and local officials imposed new barriers on sterile-syringe programs targeted at reducing the spread of HIV even as the Biden administration has pushed to expand them.

Jeremiah Johnson, acting executive director of PrEP4All, an HIV advocacy group, pointed out that the lifetime cost of a single new HIV infection is estimated at $500,000.

"It's always disconcerting when we end up being considered less important to invest in, and less important to invest our health-care concerns. It's a slippery slope. . . . Whom does public health serve?" he asked.

But community groups say the battle isn't over.

Molly Rose Quinn, executive director of OutMemphis, Tennessee's largest LGBTQ health organization, said groups across the state are trying to figure out alternative funding and exploring whether the grants could bypass the state and be administered by a county or other municipality that would partner with community groups.

"A state choosing to back away from federal money for health care - if they do get away with it - could introduce a very dangerous pattern," she said. Her group has received $180,000 from the CDC program for HIV testing.

"We're just really freaked out honestly," Quinn added. "We are concerned not only for the people we serve directly, but statewide, the HIV transmission rates are alarming in this part of the country."

- - -

The issue that blew up the Tennessee program was unrelated to HIV prevention.

Groups that relied on the grants said they had operated mostly without controversy until October, when they were pulled into a conservative firestorm over surgeries at Vanderbilt Children's Hospital's transgender care clinic in Nashville that help people transition to the gender that matches how they identify. An article on a conservative news site falsely accused Planned Parenthood's Memphis clinic of conducting such surgeries on youths, as well, and a transgender task force getting CDC funding was accused, again falsely, of starting as an HIV prevention group but then expanding "to promote transgender surgeries and abortion."

Lee, who was running for reelection as governor, promised a "thorough investigation."

He disavowed and defunded the task force, citing its "extreme ideologies." The group had been created in 2018, before he took office, to develop HIV prevention programs for transgender people and sought to provide a guidebook of trans-affirming health-care providers and webinars. It had received $10,000 annually from the CDC grant. Around the same time, Planned Parenthood officials said that they were told they would no longer receive HIV tests from the state to distribute to their patients and that a free-condom program they had managed for decades would lose its $225,000 annual funding.

"The attacks are getting worse and worse, day by day in our community," said Ray Holloman, who chairs the nine-member Task Force for Transgender Health.

Ashley Coffield, president and CEO of Planned Parenthood of Tennessee and North Mississippi, said that ending the AIDS epidemic requires a coordinated federal strategy, rather than one-off efforts by a single state - especially one that borders so many other states. She worries about new disease outbreaks "not just in the highest risk, but in the general population."

"Walking away from these programs could take HIV back a generation," Coffield said.

In Unexpected Swing, Germany’s Public Now Favors Nuclear Power

Editor OilPrice.com
Wed, January 25, 2023 

For decades, Germany has maintained a love-hate relationship with nuclear power. Currently, Germany has three existing nuclear reactors that produce ~6% of the country's power supply, a far cry from the 1990s when 19 nuclear power plants produced about a third of the country’s electricity supply.

The genesis of the current state of affairs can be traced back to 1998 when a new center-left government consisting of the Greens party and Social Democrats started demanding that the country moves away from nuclear power, a long-held objective of the Greens. The Greens became prominent in the 1980s after they started rallying against the dangers of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons against the backdrop of the Cold War. Indeed, the last new nuclear plants to be built in Germany date back to 2002 after which plans were put in place to phase out all existing plants over the next few decades.

However, the tide turned again in 2010 after a coalition of the liberal Free Democratic Party and the conservative Christian Democrats rose to power and extended the use of nuclear energy in Germany by up to 14 years. But alas, the newfound love for nuclear power was not to last: a year later, explosions and meltdowns at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan soured the public’s mood on nuclear power and forced Germany to do another about-face on this policy. Berlin then returned to the original plan for a nuclear phaseout by the end of 2022.

But Russia’s war in Ukraine is forcing a rethink of energy security not only in Germany but also by the entire continent. Up until last year, Germany and Russia were major energy partners, with the latter providing the country with the majority of its oil and natural gas. But Russia’s war has led to Europe and Germany scrambling for alternative supplies as winter looms. Germany is now rethinking its nuclear phaseout strategy, and the public is falling in line.

"We will need more electric power in the future. That's a fact. And 6% can be a lot to miss when there is nothing new [to replace it]. We'd be losing 6% when we really will need more,"German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has told Deutsche Welle. Previously, the majority of the public was in favor of the nuclear phaseout in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster; now over 80% are in favor of extending the lifespan of Germany's existing nuclear reactors.

Nuclear energy is seen as a preferable energy source to a fall back to burning coal. According to Dutch-based anti-nuclear group WISE, nuclear plants produce 117 grams of CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour, much lower compared to burning lignite which emits over 1,000 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour.

Back To Coal

But limiting greenhouse gas emissions is hardly a top priority for energy-starved Europe. According to a report by the Observer Research Foundation, energy supply disruptions triggered by Russia’s war on Ukraine took LNG prices even higher leaving coal as the only option for dispatchable and affordable power in much of Europe, including the tough markets of Western Europe and North America that have explicit policies to phase out coal.

According to the Washington Post, coal mines and power plants that closed 10 years ago have begun to be repaired in Germany. In what industry observers have dubbed a “spring” for Germany’s coal-fired power plants, the country is expected to burn at least 100,000 tons of coal per month by winter. That’s a big U-turn considering that Germany's goal had been to phase out all coal-generated electricity by 2038.

Other European countries such as Austria, Poland, the Netherlands and Greece have also started restarting coal plants.

Meanwhile, China’s coal imports have been surging as power generators increased purchases to provide for peak summer electricity demand. China has the largest number of operational coal power plants with 3,037 while Germany, the largest economy in the EU has 63.

The situation has led to soaring global coal consumption that could reach levels we haven’t seen in a decade, though there will be a limit to growth considering that investment in any new coal-powered plants has stalled. But that only makes the coal market tighter, pushing the energy source into an outperforming category.

Thermal coal, which is the variety used to generate power, has seen a 170% rise in price since the end of 2021–most of those gains made following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

By Alex Kimani for Oilprice.com

How Environmental Fear-mongering Derailed The Nuclear Energy Boom

Editor OilPrice.com
Wed, January 25, 2023 at 4:00 PM MST·5 min read

Despite high hopes for nuclear power several decades ago, when the development of many large-scale nuclear plants was underway and numerous projects were already up and running, we are living far from the dream once envisioned by nuclear scientists, who were hoping to deliver vast amounts of clean energy to the world and offer a replacement for fossil fuels. Nuclear energy once presented the idea of a fossil fuel-free future, with power plants providing abundant clean energy to populations around the world. However, following a few prolific nuclear disasters, the world quickly turned its back on nuclear, and environmentalists worldwide made sure we never forgot about the high risks involved with nuclear power. Now, as several countries are putting nuclear power back on the agenda, many are questioning whether this fearmongering was really justified, given the major risks involved with continuing fossil fuel operations.

A new documentary, “Nuclear Now,” by Oliver Stone, explores the detrimental effect that environmentalists worldwide had on nuclear power development over the past decades. Stone suggests that actions taken by the environmental movement to derail nuclear power were wrong and contributed to the acceleration of the climate crisis. Stone stated, “We had the solution [nuclear power] … and the environmental movement, to be honest, just derailed it. I think the environmental movement did a lot of good, a lot of good ... [I’m] not knocking it, but in this one major matter, it was wrong. It was wrong.” He added, “And what they did was so destructive, because by now we would have 10,000 nuclear reactors built around the world and we would have set an example like France set for us, but no one … followed France, or Sweden for that matter.”

Oliver Stone is just the latest public figure to slam environmentalists for halting the development of nuclear power, which he believes could have provided clean, safe energy to replace the fossil fuels that continue to pollute the world. The International Energy Agency (IEA) and other major global groups have repeatedly called on governments and energy firms to reduce fossil fuel production in a bid to halt the effects of climate change. But without the renewable energy available to fill the gap, the world still very much relies on oil, gas, and coal. However, many suggest that nuclear power could have provided the energy source needed to wean ourselves off these fossil fuels decades ago.

A range of studies over several decades demonstrates that nuclear power is one of the safest forms of electricity generation. One analysis shows that nuclear power is responsible for 0.03 deaths by accidents and air pollution per terawatt-hour of electricity produced. By contrast, hydropower is responsible for 1.3 deaths, oil for 18.43, and brown coal for a staggering 82.72 deaths.

Yet, the three notable nuclear incidents – Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Three Mile Island – were publicised around the world and led to the widespread fear of other nuclear disasters. The lack of public knowledge of the implications of nuclear power and the failure of governments around the globe to respond appropriately to these incidents created a sense of fear about the continued development of nuclear energy. Conversely, the rate of accidents seen in coal, oil, and gas operations, while high, goes relatively undiscussed in the public forum. While people may be aware of the perilous conditions of coal mining and oil rigs, few see these as a threat to the greater population.

The irony is the very same environmental groups that were once encouraging populations around the globe to support a move away from nuclear are now pushing for the development of new nuclear power plants in a bid to move away from fossil fuels and curb the effects of climate change. In California, in 2016, the environmentalist Michael Shellenberger, the climate scientist James Hansen, and the founder of the crunchy Whole Earth Catalogue Stewart Brand started campaigning to save California’s last nuclear power plant – Diablo Canyon. Surprisingly, this action drove other environmentalists in the area to join the cause, including Kristin Zaitz and Heather Hoff, the founding members of the group Mothers for Nuclear. Zaitz explained, “It's the largest source of carbon-free electricity in the United States… Most people don't know that it produces a lot of electricity on a relatively tiny land footprint.”

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has spurred greater support for nuclear power, as we face severe energy shortages and rising costs worldwide. Governments are finally making meaningful investments in renewable energy, as well as putting nuclear power back on the agenda. And environmentalists are seeing this as an opportunity to encourage a green transition, even if this means supporting nuclear power. President Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act – offering a zero-emission nuclear power production credit of up to $15 per megawatt-hour for the electricity produced by the plants – is widely supported by climate activists. And similar policies from governments around the world are gaining equal support from environmental groups, hoping that the rise of renewables and nuclear energy will lead to a cleaner future. So, despite the strong opposition to nuclear power once seen from environmental groups – leading to decades of delays and the acceleration of climate change – many climate activists are now backing nuclear plants as an important provider of clean energy.

By Felicity Bradstock for Oilprice.com

A global rush is on to reduce cow burps — and help save the world from climate change


Melissa Rossi
·Contributor
Wed, January 25, 2023 

A herd of cows in an alpine pasture above La Clusaz, France. (Jeff Pachoud/AFP via Getty Images)


When a cow belches, it releases methane, around 220 pounds of it every year, into the atmosphere. When more than 1.7 billion cows and buffalo currently on the planet burp, the resulting methane, a potent greenhouse gas contributing to climate change, is a big problem.

Overall, livestock production accounts for roughly 15% of greenhouse gas emissions, with the bulk of that coming from cows and their burps. But in response to that fact, a surprising fix — mixing powdered red algae daily into traditional cow feed — has been discovered, and companies across the globe are rushing to cash in on it. Adding just a single cup of red algae into the feed each day resulted in cows that belched up to 90% less methane.


“The potential of this solution is extremely high,” Fredrik Åkerman, CEO of the Swedish biotech firm Volta Greentech, told Yahoo News. When he was 22, he co-founded Volta Greentech, raising over $5 million of investment for the startup to research red algae and its effects on the digestion of cattle. Now his company is growing the seaweed in ponds and tanks at a land-based facility in Sweden, with plans to become one of the world’s biggest algae farms.

Cow burps have also caught the attention of Microsoft founder Bill Gates. On Monday, Rumin8, an environmental tech company making feed supplements from red algae in Perth, Australia, announced that Gates’s company, Breakthrough Energy, had heavily invested in their $12 million program to run commercial trials of the algae-based supplement in Australia, New Zealand, Brazil and the U.S. Last week, dairy manufacturer Danone, which is headquartered in France and works with 58,000 farmers in 20 countries, announced it aimed to slash methane emissions from its dairy cows by 30% by 2030. Danone, too, is underwriting a red algae startup, this one based in Hawaii.

Red algae. (Damsea/Shutterstock)

While news outlets like Fox News have often poked fun at climate change activists and governments like New Zealand’s for their focus on cutting cow emissions, methane is a serious atmospheric problem. It accounts for around 16% of greenhouse gas emissions, but its heat-attracting effects are more intense than carbon dioxide in the short term, trapping 80 times more heat than CO2 in its first 20 years in the atmosphere.

“Over a shorter period, methane is much stronger” when looked at using the global warming potential, said Theun Vellinga, senior researcher at Wageningen Livestock Research, “and it goes up to 80 or 90 times as strong as carbon dioxide. If you average it over the whole period of 100 years, it is still 27 or 28 times stronger. So that’s quite strong.”

Methane levels have been accelerating rapidly in recent years — partly due to increased shale extraction as well as increased thawing of the Arctic permafrost and partly due to the rising number of cows and bulls, according to Vellinga.

Red algae, particularly the seaweed known as Asparagopsis, has been of scientific interest since around 2010, when a Canadian farmer on Prince Edward Island noticed that his cattle near the sea were eating seaweed and seemed healthier than his cattle that grazed elsewhere. He conveyed his observation to a scientist, Rob Kinley, who was working on his PhD at the Dalhousie Faculty of Agriculture in Halifax, Nova Scotia. Studying the cows, Kinley realized that the seaweed-eating cattle emitted far less methane. He later joined the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), an Australian government scientific research agency, which began publishing groundbreaking papers about red algae — which Åkerman read when he was in high school, after hearing about them on Reddit.

Straus Dairy Farm and Blue Ocean Barns demonstrated a climate change solution in the first commercial trial in the U.S. using a specific red seaweed on a dairy farm in 2021. (Business Wire via AP)

Initially studying electrical engineering in college, Åkerman changed course after contacting CSIRO, instead deciding to harvest red algae in Sweden and start a company focused on reducing methane emissions from cows. Now, Volta Greentech, which collaborates with CSIRO and spinoff Australian company Futurefeed, is figuring out how to mass-produce red algae within cost constraints.

Production is “still small scale,” he said, adding, “There’s no way of implementing this if it costs too much.”

The algae works, he explained, by reducing the number of a certain microorganism that breaks down food in the largest compartment of a cow’s complex stomach, the rumen. Sometimes likened to a food processor, the rumen’s microorganisms break down and ferment food, forming methane, which is released when a cow belches.

But not everyone is wowed by the potential of red algae in fighting methane. “Some people are quite enthusiastic, but honestly, I don’t understand it, because it’s a really hazardous material,” said Vellinga, pointing to bromoform, the active ingredient that lowers methane production in cows.

“In high concentrations, the bromoform is toxic,” said Åkerman. “But we and all the different research groups have made sure that the dose that we are actually feeding to the animals are far, far below the regulated limits. And a lot of studies have been done on the toxicity of bromoform to make sure that it is completely safe.”

On Dutch dairy farms, where red algae supplements have not yet been approved for use, another synthetic methane inhibitor, Bovaer, is more widely in use, said Vellinga. On average, Bovaer “reduces enteric methane emissions [cow burping] by 30% from dairy cows and 45% from beef cattle.”

Agribusiness megalith Cargill recently teamed up with U.K. company Zelp to trial “burp-catching masks” — an innovation that oxidizes the methane, reducing it by over 50% — that received $59,000 from Britain's Prince Charles for the Terra Carter Design Lab award last year. In Spain, agricultural research is showing that certain cows release less methane than others, and projects are underway to interbreed cows that are by nature less prone to spew the gas.

A cow with a Zelp burp-catching mask. (Zelp)

But each method faces its own challenges. In order to maintain its effectiveness, Bovaer must be fed to cows several times a day, making it less optimal for cattle that graze in fields. Some people, including Vellinga, consider the burp-catching masks to be inhumane to cattle, and farmers aren’t permitted to use them in the Netherlands. Selectively breeding cows that emit less methane, meanwhile, will take many years to make a significant difference, given the size of existing herds.

Another way to reduce methane emissions from cows is to reduce their overall numbers. The Dutch government has already embarked on a plan to thin the number of cattle by 30% over the next seven years. Part of its controversial $27 billion program consists of buying thousands of cattle farms near protected nature reserves in the hopes of reducing nitrogen compounds and ammonia emitted by cows and their urine.

“The government doesn’t believe in the innovations [in reducing ammonia and nitrogen compounds] anymore,” said Vellinga. “So it means that then the only way to reduce emissions is by reducing the volumes of cows.” And while the decision to reduce the Netherlands' cow stock was made in an effort to curb ammonia and nitrogen compound emissions, it will slash methane emissions as well, he noted.

Eating less meat and dairy products is another means to reduce emissions, simply by reducing demand. While vegans and vegetarians are still a small minority in Europe, more people are becoming so-called flexitarians — eating meat, but less of it.

“A couple of years ago, the big issue was, should we eat beef or become vegetarian,” Ola Thomsson, the purchasing manager at Protos, a Swedish food manufacturer, told Yahoo News. “Now the vegan and vegetarian trend has sort of descended a bit. And now we’re talking more about, perhaps we should eat more vegetables and vegetarian meals, but whatever meat we’re eating should be the right type of meat.”

Black Angus cows in Tankerton, Australia. (EyeEm/Getty Images)

Protos, which brings meat to market, and Volta Greentech teamed up last summer in a pilot project to introduce the world’s first low-methane meat to Swedish stores. It quickly sold out, and more commercial pilot projects are planned.

According to Innova Market Insights, the flexitarian trend is growing, with “30% [of the population] in Germany and 23% in France” espousing flexitarianism. Even in the U.S., the trend might be growing. A 2021 survey by One Poll commissioned by Sprouts Farmers Market indicated that 47% of Americans who were surveyed self-identified as flexitarians.

Whether through food supplements, masks or changing behavior, climate change watchers are urging change and methane slashing quickly. “Reducing human-caused methane emissions is one of the fastest, most cost-effective strategies to reduce the rate of warming and contribute to global efforts to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C,” stated a 2021 report released by the Climate and Clean Air Coalition and the U.N. Environment Program.

Giving red algae to cows appears at first glance to offer one possible mechanism to curb methane emissions. Whether it can be produced fast enough to be fed to the world’s many millions of cows, however, remains to be seen.

“When considering new ways to reduce methane, it’s always complex: Does it reduce methane for a long time or just temporarily, what are the consequences for animal health, milk quality, food safety, is it affordable, is it easily applied?” Vellinga said. When it comes to red algae and the other methane remedies coming onto the market, he remains cautious and not yet fully convinced.

U$A

‘Plan C’ Documentarian Kept Her Cameras Rolling As Abortion Access Dried Up

Rich Juzwiak

Jezebel
Wed, January 25, 2023 

Image: Dinky Pictures/Sundance

June 24, 2022, started unremarkably for documentary filmmaker Tracy Droz Tragos (Abortion: Stories Women Tell, Rich Hill). She was dropping her child off at summer camp in the Berkshires and had to swing by CVS to grab a disposable camera, as the camp didn’t allow cell phones. And then she heard it on the radio: The Supreme Court had overturned Roe v. Wade. She got to work, capturing footage of response on the ground, and most revealingly, shooting a doctor fielding calls from women whose scheduled abortions the ruling had canceled. In Tragos’ documentary Plan C, which premiered at Sundance this week, we see said doctor advise a patient about using abortion pills just days after Dobbs: “Since you are in a state where abortion is banned, you don’t want to put them in vaginally, because if something happened and you went into the hospital, we don’t want to have anything where they can tell you actually took medication.”

At that point, Tragos had already been filming for years, though she didn’t set out to make quite the historical chronicle that Plan C turned out to be. She started in 2018 when she met principal subject Francine Coeytaux, one of the co-founders of Plan C, the “public health meets creative campaign” that since 2015 has provided information for those seeking at-home, medical abortions. Initially, her doc was more of a portrait of those behind Plan C, but the repeated blows to abortion access in the United States over the past few years transformed her film as well as her process. “It [took] being scrappy and a more investigative reporter than I typically am in my work,” Tragos told Jezebel by Zoom on Tuesday, just hours after her doc premiered.

“It’s a tricky balance, because we wanted to get some of the hard facts out there,” she explained. “But we didn’t want this to be, you know, eating your broccoli. At the end of the day, we can strike the perfect balance of providing just enough information, being historically accurate—because we’re filming over four years when there’s all of these laws coming down—and the portraiture of the regular, ordinary people who step up.” Covid’s impact on the necessity of at-home abortion, Brett Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court appointment, and the Supreme Court’s January 2021 ruling that abortion medication mifepristone must be retrieved in person (reversing the covid-era suspension of that rule) are all chronicled in Plan C, alongside profiles of Plan C, commentary from the likes of activist Loretta J. Ross and senior counsel of If/When/How Farah Diaz-Tello, and accounts from people who have had abortions or access denied.

Coeytaux notes early in the film—way before the doc gets to the impact of the overturning of Roe—that, “What’s legal and what’s not half the time has to just be proven by doing it and finding that in fact nobody can come after you, or does come after you because probably it wouldn’t stand.” Tragos related to the dubiousness of the work she captured her subjects performing: “I think it’s similar to the spirit of a documentary filmmaker, frankly, where it’s like, do you ask for permission all of the time, or do you beg for forgiveness?”

It’s a tricky balance, because we wanted to get some of the hard facts out there. But we didn’t want this to be, you know, eating your broccoli.

Tragos said she left out certain details regarding the supply chain of the abortion pills—she was less interested in presenting how the sausage gets made and more in showing viewers where to get the sausage. That said, those who have helped get abortion pills into the hands and mailboxes of people seeking abortion face more than legal ramifications—they could be harassed and targeted by anti-abortion activists. Some of the movie’s subjects openly worry about their children being affected. This created more trickiness for a filmmaker attempting to tell her subjects’ stories while not putting them in further danger. In Plan C, there’s a range of identity obscuring happening, from the withholding of last names, to strategically obscuring shots, to blurring of faces and distorting of voices.

“We filmed often with the intention that we weren’t going to show faces,” explained Tragos. “We did that as artfully as possible, but also not shying away from the fact that, yeah, we have to conceal these people. We are in the United States of America and yet we have to do this.” Some subjects were double blurred; some like Coeytaux appear completely unobscured. “We navigated that individually with the people in the film,” said Tragos. “And it’s on everyone’s own inner compass to decide how far they can go.” After screening a cut and hearing concerns regarding a particularly vulnerable subject, she removed shots of the subject’s blurred face, replacing them with shots of the subject’s hands. “It’s kind of costly to swap all that out after [editing], but at the end of the day, I don’t want to jeopardize this work,” said Tragos.

Speaking of cost, Plan C came at a considerable one for Tragos, who says the movie put her into debt. Her production company was able to secure a loan, as well as some funding from the Utah Film Center, but the project was largely self-funded. She worked with a “skeleton crew”—sometimes she shot without a designated sound person, just her and one of her two directors of photography (Emily Topper and Derek Howard). “There were definitely low points,” she said of the shoot. “But, you know, you get up again and there’s a bigger why. And frankly, I was inspired by the women in this film. I was inspired by how they came together.”

Crusading judge tests boundaries of free speech in Brazil


Judge Alexandre de Moraes stands as he is sworn in as the new head of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, the government body that oversees elections, ahead of the Oct. 2 elections in Brasilia, Brazil, Aug. 16, 2022. De Moraes has been aggressively pursuing those suspected of undermining Brazil’s democracy, whether it's investigating former President Jair Bolsonaro, arresting protesters on slim evidence or banishing some people from social media after they were accused of spreading conspiracy theories.

 (AP Photo/Eraldo Peres, File) 


MAURICIO SAVARESE and JOSHUA GOODMAN
Wed, January 25, 2023 

SAO PAULO (AP) — With his Batman-like gown, athletic build and bald head, Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes cuts an imposing figure.

To some, his actions from the bench are more intimidating. Whether it is investigating former President Jair Bolsonaro, arresting protesters on slim evidence or banishing his far-right supporters from social media, de Moraes has been aggressively pursuing those suspected of undermining Brazil’s fragile democracy.

In the wake of this month's attack on Brazil’s Congress, presidential palace and Supreme Court by a mob of Bolsonaro supporters seeking to overturn the recent election, de Moraes' role as chief judicial power broker has expanded further. Some accuse de Moraes of overstepping in the name of protecting Brazilian democracy from the twin threats of political violence and disinformation. Others view his brash tactics as justified by extraordinary circumstances.

“Our democracy is in a situation of extreme risk, so it is understandable that some exceptional restrictions be put in place,” said Juliana Cesario Alvim, a human-rights professor at the Federal University of Minas Gerais who has researched the Supreme Court’s decisions. “But that doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be criticism of how these cases are handled.”

Defining the boundaries of free speech isn’t just a conundrum in Brazil. In the U.S., some conservatives see content moderation of social media as censorship. Some liberals say that not enough is being done to root out hatred, violence and misinformation.

In Brazil, Bolsonaro loyalists who say de Moraes is muzzling expression have recently gained support — and the social media megaphone — of Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, who resides in Brazil.

Unlike the U.S., where the First Amendment is an almost sacred text taught in every middle school, Brazil’s constitution is more unwieldy. Drafted in the aftermath of the 1964-1985 military dictatorship, it contains of a long list of aspirational goals and prohibitions against specific crimes such as racism and, more recently, homophobia. But freedom of speech is not absolute, according to Jane Reis, a federal judge and law professor in Rio de Janeiro.

Still, some of de Moraes' decisions have raised eyebrows — even among his defenders. In August, he authorized search warrants targeting business leaders after a local media outlet reported that they had a private group chat that included loose talk favoring a possible coup, but did not seem to show a coordinated effort to topple democracy.

The Supreme Court decided in 2019 to investigate fake news and threats against the top court’s justices, dramatically bolstering de Moraes’ authority to raid, censor and even jail antidemocratic voices.

The move immediately generated controversy and was unprecedented because it wasn't the result of a request from lawmakers or a government institution. The probe has been carried out with the court’s magistrates — and de Moraes as lead investigator — serving as accuser, victim and arbiter all at once, according to critics. The court denies that characterization, saying it would rule only on charges prosecutors present or against someone who has special legal protection, such as a sitting lawmaker.

Soon enough, de Moraes turned attention to Bolsonaro. In 2020, police raided the homes and froze the social media accounts of far-right supporters and YouTubers, Pro-Bolsonaro lawmakers argued for de Moraes' impeachment, claiming that he was biased against the far-right leader. Bolsonaro for months used his sizable social media presence to raise unfounded doubts about Brazil’s electronic voting system, pitting him against de Moraes as he assumed the presidency of the electoral authority.

Since Bolsonaro’s loss to leftist former President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in an October runoff, de Moraes' crusade has intensified. Three days after the mob stormed Brazil's capital, de Moraes ordered Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram to block the accounts of individuals accused of inciting or supporting attacks on Brazil’s democratic order. Failure to comply within two hours would result in a fine of 100,000 reais ($20,000) per day, according to the secret edict first revealed by Greenwald.

Among those targeted are Nikolas Ferreira, a 26-year-old YouTuber who received the most votes of 513 federal lawmaker candidates in the last election. Days after the assault, Ferreira falsely blamed the incoming administration for the violence.

“In the name of democracy, an unelected judge is silencing the elected representatives of the people on the internet,” Greenwald, who fashions himself a free-speech absolutist, said in an interview.

Telegram has declined to block Ferreira's account. Local media reported Wednesday, without specifying its sourcing, that the company sent a letter to de Moraes saying that the content-removal orders impede legitimate discussions, imply censorship and curb freedom of expression.

Ferreira thanked Telegram on his channel, the only public platform he can still use.

“They literally want to disappear me from the internet. Surreal,” he wrote.

Moraes on Wednesday fined Telegram 1.2 million reais ($237,000) for failure to comply, and gave the company five days to pay, according to the text of his decision.

Legal scholars point out that de Moraes isn’t acting on his own. His decisions, while sometimes taken swiftly in response to news reports, must eventually be ratified by the court's full bench. In the absence of any action from the prosecutor-general — a Bolsonaro appointee — de Moraes has been thrust by his colleagues to the front of their fight against far-right radicalism.

The legal experts say that the free speech debate distracts from the bigger concerns about overreach, pointing to a few de Moraes decisions not analyzed by the full bench, including arrests, and the origin of the fake news probe.

“The responses of the judiciary must be proportional to the attacks and should not be excessive," said Marcus Vinicius Furtado Coelho, a former president of Brazil’s bar association, who made clear he agrees with almost all of de Moraes’ decisions. Coelho added that the judiciary should arrest people only as “the last resort, and only necessary and after a fair trial.”

Brazil’s Supreme Court said in a statement that “every investigation is absolutely constitutional.” It added that de Moraes' rulings in the fake news probe were confirmed by the full court on 40 occasions, as many other investigations under his watch move forward with the court’s authorization.

Moraes, 54, appears to relish his image as an enforcer. Uniquely among the Supreme Court's justices, who hail mostly from other courts or prosecutors' offices, he initiated his legal career as a criminal defense attorney. Later, he took the reins as the security chief of Sao Paulo, the most populous state.

So far, many leftists and some moderates have seemed willing to turn a blind eye to any potential overreach so long as Bolsonaro’s movement is contained.

But they were blasting him as a “coup monger” when he was nominated to the Supreme Court six years ago, accusing him of plotting to impeach then-President Dilma Rousseff, a close Lula ally.

During the Jan. 8 invasion of government buildings, a door from de Moraes' office was ripped off and proudly displayed to an excited mob. Hours later, the justice was issuing arrest warrants for hundreds who partook in the mayhem.

“These people are not civilized. Just look what they did,” de Moraes said in a speech days later. “The Supreme Court, I am absolutely sure, with legal support, with our constitution, and the Federal Police, will punish everyone responsible.”

___

Goodman reported from Miami.