Booting Rep. Omar off House Foreign Affairs Committee is 'cancel culture,' says GOP Rep. Mace

Brianna Herlihy, Tyler Olson

FOX NEWS

Sat, January 28, 2023 

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., said Friday it would be hypocritical for Republicans to boot Rep. Ilhan Omar D-Minn., from the House Foreign Affairs Committee over anti-Semitic comments, and said doing so amounts to a form of "cancel culture."

HER PRO PALESTINE /PRO BDS/ ANTI-ISLAMAPHOBIA COMMENTS ARE NOT ANTI-SEMITIC

"There's a First Amendment in this country. We don't have to agree with everything that members say," Mace said Friday when Fox News asked if she supported Speaker Kevin McCarthy's vow to block Omar from the committee.

"I think we have to be very careful about what we are as a constitutional republic," she said. "I am not a fan of Ilhan Omar. She's an anti-Semite. She's a bigot. She's a racist. She's a socialist. But that doesn't mean that we cancel people in this country. Republicans don't stand for cancel culture. And that's essentially what this is."

Mace indicate that there were a "handful" of Republicans who are aligned in her thinking.

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C.

"I think it sets a very dangerous precedent. And you know, there's so much anti-Semitism in this country. We should be condemning it right and left as we always have, but there's also the First Amendment right to do that," she said.

ILHAN OMAR SAYS MCCARTHY LEAVING HER OFF AFRICA SUBCOMMITTEE IS 'RACIST, XENOPHOBIC'

"We're all talking about the Twitter files and conservatives being censored, you know, it's, it's, it seems pretty hypocritical if you ask me," Mace added.

Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C.

Mace said that a resolution to remove Omar was yet to be circulated, and she would wait to read it before making her final decision.

"So I'm going to read the resolution. We haven't seen it. I'm going to read it before I make that final decision next week. But we've been asking for it, and it hasn't been released to public yet," she said.

Ilhan Omar says McCarthy leaving her off Africa subcommittee is 'racist, xenophobic'

Lawrence Richard

FOX NEWS
Thu, January 26, 2023

In a new statement, Rep. Ilhan Omar is now accusing House Speaker Kevin McCarthy of being "racist" and "xenophobic" for removing her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Omar, a member of the Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, and Global Human Rights, defended her position in a tweet saying she is "the only African-born" member.

"As the only African born, not being on the Africa subcommittee is not just an elimination of a unique voice but an elimination of all the voices that have never been heard on a committee on the continent," Omar wrote.

She added: "It’s racist, xenophobic and discriminatory."

SCHIFF, SWALWELL, OMAR RESPOND AFTER SPEAKER MCCARTHY KEEPS THEM OFF COMMITTEES: 'POLITICAL VENGEANCE'

A split photo of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn.

Omar echoed these remarks during an appearance Sunday on MSNBC's "Yasmin Vossoughian Reports."

"I think it would be hypocritic [sic] for him to remove, you know, the first African born on subcommittee on Africa on the Foreign Affairs Committee, where I’ve had the opportunity to not only represent my constituents but the voice of so many people who have never had a voice on the Foreign Affairs Committee," Omar said.

Omar has previously described McCarthy's decision as a political stunt, a blow to the integrity of the democratic institution and a threat to national security.

HOUSE DEM LEADER PREDICTS 'BIPARTISAN' SUPPORT TO KEEP ILHAN OMAR ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

McCarthy has said he is removing Omar from the position as she has upset many of her colleagues in the past with controversial anti-Israel statements that highlighted antisemitic tropes.

She once said, "It's all about the Benjamins, baby" to explain why McCarthy criticized her for opposing the Jewish country. She also sparked backlash for a remark comparing the U.S. and Israel to Hamas and the Taliban.

McCarthy, as Speaker, has the authority to approve committee appointments offered by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-MN, outside the U.S. Capitol on January 26, 2023, in Washington, DC.

Republican members could offer a vote to keep Omar on the committee, and at least two Republicans have expressed support to keep her position.

Rep. Victoria Spartz, R-Ind., and Nancy Mace, R-SC., said they oppose removing her from the committee.

ILHAN OMAR'S LONG HISTORY OF CONTROVERSIAL STATEMENTS

In addition to Omar, McCarthy has rejected the appointments of Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell, both Democrats from California, to the House Intelligence Committee.

"Kevin McCarthy just kicked me and @RepSwalwell off the Intelligence Committee," Schiff tweeted Tuesday. "This is petty, political payback for investigating Donald Trump."

From left, Reps. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., conduct a news conference on being removed from committees assignments, in the Capitol Visitor Center on Wednesday, January 25, 2023.

Reps. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., center, Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., conduct a news conference on being removed from committees assignments, in the Capitol Visitor Center on Wednesday, January 25, 2023.

"If he thinks this will stop me, he will soon find out just how wrong he is. I will always defend our democracy," the Democrat added.

The Africa, Global Health, and Global Human Rights Subcommittee previously included Reps. Karen Bass, D-Calif., who was the Chairwoman in the 117th Congress, Christopher Smith, R-NJ., Darrell Issa, R-Calif., Greg Steube, R-Fla., Dean Phillips, D-Minn., Ami Bera, D-Calif., Young Kim, R-Calif., Ronny Jackson, R-TX., Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., and others.

McCarthy might have a math problem in blocking Omar from panel




Mychael Schnell
Thu, January 26, 2023

Speaker Kevin McCarthy’s (R-Calif.) vow to block Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) from sitting on the House Foreign Affairs Committee has hit an early snag: He may not have the votes to do it.

Omar, one of three Muslims in Congress, has been a controversial figure on Capitol Hill for her sharp criticisms of the Israeli government and its human rights record. Republicans have said she’s crossed a line into antisemitism, and McCarthy’s case for booting her from Foreign Affairs rests on that accusation.

But McCarthy has a math problem to solve, one that could prove an early test of his ability to keep his narrow majority united and fulfill a long-running vow.

Democrats are rallying behind Omar, which could force GOP leaders to rely entirely on their own members if they’re to succeed.

“Thee’s already two Republicans that have indicated that they won’t vote to put her off, and I think others will come aboard also,” said Rep. Gregory Meeks (N.Y.), the senior Democrat on the Foreign Affairs Committee, who is lobbying Republicans on Omar’s behalf.

“So I don’t think it’s going to be a simple vote. I think that she has a good chance of staying.”

Rep. Victoria Spartz (R-Ind.) said this week she’ll oppose the measure, calling McCarthy’s move “unprecedented” while citing her opposition to Democrats’ successful removal of GOP Reps. Marjorie Taylor Greene (Ga.) and Paul Gosar (Ariz.) from committees in 2021.

“Two wrongs do not make a right,” she said in a statement. “As I spoke against it on the House floor two years ago, I will not support this charade again.”

Rep. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) has been similarly cool to the concept, also pointing to her criticism of the Greene and Gosar evictions under Democratic rule.

“I’m not going to be a hypocrite just because Republicans are in the majority now,” she told reporters Wednesday morning. “It’s not been a precedent in Congress to kick people off of their committees because of things that they say, even if you vehemently disagree with those things.”

Still, Mace said she’s withholding final judgment until the final resolution is released.

Adding to the mathematical headache, Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) said he will be “sidelined in Sarasota for several weeks” after falling 25 feet from a ladder on his property — denying Republicans an easy “yes” vote if the resolution hits the floor soon.

A wild card in the debate remains whether Democrats would vote unanimously to support Omar. The overwhelming majority are expected to do so, putting pressure on McCarthy to rally his own troops. But several Democrats aren’t showing their hands, including Reps. Josh Gottheimer (N.J.) and Jared Moskowitz (Fla.), two Jewish lawmakers who represent large Jewish constituencies.

Asked Wednesday if every Democrat would support Omar, Democratic Caucus Chairman Pete Aguilar (Calif.) was coy, saying only that “it’s going to be a bipartisan vote to keep her on the committee.”

Omar hasn’t officially been recommended for the committee yet and a House vote has not been set.

For months, McCarthy has signaled he would block three Democrats from serving on certain committees should he win the gavel: Omar on Foreign Affairs, and Reps. Adam Schiff (Calif.) and Eric Swalwell (Calif.) on the House Intelligence Committee.

That push began in 2021 after Democrats — and some Republicans — voted to remove Greene and Gosar from their committees as punishment for promoting violence against Democrats on social media.

McCarthy began his house-cleaning effort on Tuesday night when he blocked Schiff and Swalwell from the Intelligence panel, accusing the pair of abusing their positions at risk of national security. Because of the special rules governing the Intel panel, he was able to do so unilaterally.

The effort to block Omar from Foreign Affairs won’t be quite as easy, since it requires a vote of the full House.

Republicans are focusing on past comments from Omar that have been accused of being antisemitic and anti-Israel. In 2019, for instance, she tweeted that lawmaker support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins, baby” — a remark that sparked immediate condemnation from Democratic leaders and forced Omar to issue an apology.

More recently, she received widespread criticism for equating the U.S. and Israel with the Taliban and Hamas when it comes to human rights abuses.

“It would be odd to me that members would not support [the removal resolution] based upon her comments against Israel,” McCarthy said Tuesday night.

But Omar is defending her right to sit on the panel, arguing that she has already paid the price for her comments.

“I have addressed it, I’ve apologized,” the congresswoman told reporters on Wednesday.

As the debate evolves, Democrats are seeking to distinguish between their decision to remove Greene and Gosar in 2021, and the Republicans’ targeting of Omar and other Democrats, arguing that the violence promoted by the GOP lawmakers put them in a different league.

“Suggesting violence against other members, your colleagues, is a much more serious offense,” said Rep. Ami Bera (D-Calif.). “I think we start to go down a dangerous path when you start to remove members because you disagree with their policies.”

Democrats are also pointing to a separate episode in the last Congress involving Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), who told a crowd in her district that sharing an elevator with Omar was alarming — until she saw that Omar “doesn’t have a backpack.”

The implication was that Omar must be a suicide bomber because of her faith, and Democrats demanded that McCarthy condemn the remarks — something he refused to do.

“Nothing. Not a word. Not a peep,” Meeks said.

Then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also resisted efforts to have Boebert removed from her committees, infuriating liberals at the time.

“That’s assuming that all Muslims are terrorists, right?” Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), another Muslim lawmaker, said Wednesday. “All of this is so incredibly frustrating.”

McCarthy and Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), the Foreign Affairs chairman, made their case for blocking Omar during a closed-door meeting with the House GOP conference Wednesday morning, when McCaul highlighted a number of Omar’s statements that have been cited as antisemitic.

“They went through ‘em,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who was initially undecided but opted to support the effort following the presentation, said afterward. “Because we need to remind people, this is what she said in the past.”

Other Republicans have remained mum on how they will vote, including Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), one of 11 Republicans who voted to boot Greene from her committees.

“We’ve got to have consistent rules that apply to everybody,” Fitzpatrick said Wednesday, adding that “we haven’t even seen anything yet.”

Meanwhile, Omar’s allies say they’re eager for the battle to reach the floor to get everyone on the record.

“I’m fully supportive of taking a vote — I think it’s important,” said Tlaib. “Because if we’re going to continue doing this over and over again, I want to see where everybody stands.”
 The Hill.

Asteroid's sudden flyby shows blind spot in planetary threat detection

"So by golly, we gotta find these asteroids."

Sun, January 29, 2023 
By Joey Roulette

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The discovery of an asteroid the size of a small shipping truck mere days before it passed Earth on Thursday, albeit one that posed no threat to humans, highlights a blind spot in our ability to predict those that could actually cause damage, astronomers say.

NASA for years has prioritized detecting asteroids much bigger and more existentially threatening than 2023 BU, the small space rock that streaked by 2,200 miles from the Earth's surface, closer than some satellites. If bound for Earth, it would have been pulverized in the atmosphere, with only small fragments possibly reaching land.

But 2023 BU sits on the smaller end of a size group, asteroids 5-to-50 meters in diameter, that also includes those as big as an Olympic swimming pool. Objects that size are difficult to detect until they wander much closer to Earth, complicating any efforts to brace for one that could impact a populated area.

The probability of an Earth impact by a space rock, called a meteor when it enters the atmosphere, of that size range is fairly low, scaling according to the asteroid's size: a 5-meter rock is estimated to target Earth once a year, and a 50-meter rock once every thousand years, according to NASA.

But with current capabilities, astronomers can't see when such a rock targets Earth until days prior.

"We don't know where most of the asteroids are that can cause local to regional devastation," said Terik Daly, a planetary scientist at the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory.

The roughly 20-meter meteor that exploded in 2013 over Chelyabinsk, Russia is a once-every-100-years event, according to NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory. It created a shockwave that shattered tens of thousands of windows and caused $33 million in damage, and no one saw it coming before it entered Earth's atmosphere.

Some astronomers consider relying only on statistical probabilities and estimates of asteroid populations an unnecessary risk, when improvements could be made to NASA's ability to detect them.

"How many natural hazards are there that we could actually do something about and prevent for a billion dollars? There's not many," said Daly, whose work focuses on defending Earth from hazardous asteroids.

AVOIDING A REALLY BAD DAY

One major upgrade to NASA's detection arsenal will be NEO Surveyor, a $1.2 billion telescope under development that will launch nearly a million miles from Earth and surveil a wide field of asteroids. It promises a significant advantage over today's ground-based telescopes that are hindered by daytime light and Earth's atmosphere.

That new telescope will help NASA meet a goal assigned by Congress in 2005: detect 90% of the total expected amount of asteroids bigger than 140 meters, or those big enough to destroy anything from a region to an entire continent.

"With Surveyor, we're really focusing on finding the one asteroid that could cause a really bad day for a lot of people," said Amy Mainzer, NEO Surveyor principal investigator. "But we're also tasked with getting good statistics on the smaller objects, down to about the size of the Chelyabinsk object."

NASA has fallen years behind on its congressional goal, which was ordered for completion by 2020. The agency proposed last year to cut the telescope's 2023 budget by three quarters and a two-year launch delay to 2028 "to support higher-priority missions" elsewhere in NASA's science portfolio.

Asteroid detection gained greater importance last year after NASA slammed a refrigerator-sized spacecraft into an asteroid to test its ability to knock a potentially hazardous space rock off a collision course with Earth.

The successful demonstration, called the Double Asteroid Redirection Test (DART), affirmed for the first time a method of planetary defense.

"NEO Surveyor is of the utmost importance, especially now that we know from DART that we really can do something about it," Daly said.

"So by golly, we gotta find these asteroids."

(Reporting by Joey Roulette; Editing by Andrea Ricci)

A small asteroid gave Earth a close but safe shave Thursday night

Scott Sutherland

Fri, January 27, 2023

A small asteroid swung past Earth Thursday night, in one of the closest flybys we've ever seen.

On January 21, 2023, Gennadiy Borisov, the same amateur astronomer who found the first interstellar comet, spotted a new asteroid flying towards our planet. Now named 2023 BU, this roughly 5-metre-wide space rock is one of 115 asteroids discovered so far this year that come reasonably close to our world. This particular near-Earth asteroid has earned a special distinction, though.

Based on the observations made by Borisov and other astronomers around the world, NASA's system for analyzing the impact threat of asteroids — Scout — found that it would be a safe pass, but an extremely close one!

"Scout quickly ruled out 2023 BU as an impactor, but despite the very few observations, it was nonetheless able to predict that the asteroid would make an extraordinarily close approach with Earth," Davide Farnocchia, the NASA JPL engineer who developed Scout, said in a press release. "In fact, this is one of the closest approaches by a known near-Earth object ever recorded."

Asteroid 2023 BU - orbit comparison

These diagrams show the orbit of asteroid 2023 BU in relation to the Earth, the ring of geostationary satellites (green), and the orbit of the Moon (gray) — the top view from beyond the Moon's orbit, and the bottom from beyond geostationary orbit. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Scott Sutherland

At 7:27 p.m. EST on Thursday, January 26, 2023 BU passed over the southern tip of South America at an altitude of around 3,600 kilometres above the surface.

For a sense of scale, that's around 9 times farther away than the orbit of the International Space Station. However, it's also about one-tenth the distance to the ring of geostationary weather and communication satellites that circle the planet, and over 100 times closer than the Moon.

According to NASA, Earth's gravity affects every asteroid that comes close to the planet. 2023 BU is coming so close, though, that it will experience a significant change in its orbit around the Sun.

"Before encountering Earth, the asteroid's orbit around the Sun was roughly circular, approximating Earth's orbit, taking 359 days to complete its orbit about the Sun," the space agency said. "After its encounter, the asteroid's orbit will be more elongated, moving it out to about halfway between Earth's and Mars' orbits at its farthest point from the Sun. The asteroid will then complete one orbit every 425 days."

No risk from 2023 BU

Both NASA and the European Space Agency have gone on record saying that there was no threat of an impact from asteroid 2023 BU.

In fact, the discovery of this asteroid shows how far we've come in the field of planetary defence.

"2023 BU was discovered about a week ago. Although it doesn't seem like much warning, the advance detection of this very small — and safe — asteroid, shows just how much detection technologies are improving," the ESA said.

Spotted!!

As predicted, 2023 BU skimmed by Earth, right on schedule!

The predictions of its trajectory were so accurate that a robotic camera run by the Virtual Telescope Project picked up the tiny visitor during its closest pass.

This stands as another fantastic example of how far we've come with our ability to detect and track asteroids.

In November, astronomers spotted an even smaller object, a meteoroid less than a metre wide named 2022 WJ1, just three hours before it plunged into the atmosphere to burn up over Southwestern Ontario. The hunt for meteorites from this event is still ongoing.

Watch below: An asteroid burned up over Southwestern Ontario

Click here to view the video

Millennials and Gen Z won’t have enough kids to sustain America’s population—and it’s up to immigrants to make up the baby shortfall


Prarthana Prakash
Wed, January 25, 2023 

Millennials and Gen Z are less enthusiastic about having children than their parents. The reasons are many: financial, social, and biological, along with the preference among younger generations for “freedom.”

America’s falling fertility rates have been a cause for concern for several decades. During the Great Recession in 2008, millennials delayed marriage and having children, causing fertility rates to drop.

Then, early in the COVID-19 pandemic, there was a short-lived “baby bust,” when conceptions fell slightly. Months later, the rates rebounded but were inconsequential compared to the huge number of daily deaths.

Over the next few decades, demographers expect the population growth to decline further. But there’s one hope for increasing the U.S. population: immigrants.

A report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released Tuesday predicts that the nation’s population will near 373 million by 2053, up by almost 3 million from CBO estimates a year ago. The difference? An increase in immigrants over the next three decades.

Chart shows U.S. population growth over the next 30 years

The U.S. population is currently 334.3 million.

Over the next 30 years, the CBO projected a decline in births compared to deaths. In isolation, it would mean that the population will fall rather than grow.

But long-term population growth will be “driven by immigration as fertility rates remain below the rate that would be required for a generation to exactly replace itself in the absence of immigration,” the report said.

Still, the pace of population growth through 2053 will still only be a third of what it was between 1983 and 2022, the CBO said.

U.S. immigration rates are swayed by many factors.

William H. Frey, a demographer and senior fellow at Brookings Metro, a think tank, wrote in an analysis of census data earlier this month that government policies and economic trends impact immigration. “In the mid-2010s, the nation saw gains of over 1 million net immigrants from abroad per year. Yet largely because of government restrictions, that dropped to 477,000 in 2019–20,” he wrote.

In addition to immigration patterns, the CBO report also predicted the population will grow older in the coming decades, with more Americans falling within the “65 and above” bracket. This could be why the estimates show deaths overtaking births by 2042.

The CBOs estimates offer some optimism as it still predicts a growth in population numbers, much of which is attributed to those in their prime age, between 25 and 54 years. That segment will grow by 1.1 million annually, which means more individuals in the economy are employable.

HINDUTVA IS FASCISM

India's Gen Z grapples with Modi's dark past in new documentary

Yashraj Sharma

Sat, January 28, 2023 

SRINAGAR, India — When the lights were suddenly cut off, the crowd of young people switched on the flashlights on their smartphones. They turned them toward the seat of a motorbike, where student activist Aishe Ghosh stood in defiance.

“They will shut one screen, we will open hundreds,” she shouted.

The students had gathered at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi, the Indian capital, for an outdoor screening of a new BBC documentary that is critical of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his role in the deadly 2002 riots in Gujarat when he was the western state’s chief minister.

After the power outage — Ghosh blames the university administration, which hasn’t commented on it publicly — students streamed the film on their phones and laptops instead, either through VPNs or by sharing proxy links to archived footage via encrypted apps.

Authorities in India, the world’s largest democracy, have gone to extraordinary lengths to stop people inside the country from seeing the film since the first part aired in Britain last week, invoking emergency powers to order the removal of any clips or links that are posted on social media platforms including YouTube and Twitter. For Indians dismayed by what they see as rising authoritarianism under Modi and his Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, watching the documentary has become a symbol of protest.

Tensions escalated in the university after a student group said it planned to screen a banned documentary that examines Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's role during 2002 anti-Muslim riots, prompting dozens of police equipped with tear gas and riot gear to gather outside campus gates. (Manish Swarup / AP)More

Many of India’s young people have no memory of the riots, in which more than 1,000 people, most of them Muslims, were killed. Modi denies being complicit in the attacks, and India’s Supreme Court upheld a ruling last year that he should be cleared of all charges.

Over half of India’s 1.4 billion people are under the age of 30, and they are shaping up to be a pivotal political force in the 2024 general election and beyond, Ghosh told NBC News.

“It is very important for the BJP to control these minds,” she said.

Arindam Bagchi, spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, called the BBC film, “India: The Modi Question,” a “propaganda piece designed to push a particular discredited narrative” and said it reflected a “colonial mind-set.”

In a statement, the British broadcaster said that the film had been “rigorously researched” and that the Indian government had declined to comment on the allegations.

The first part of the documentary is about Modi’s political career before he became prime minister. Gujarat was convulsed by riots in early 2002 when Hindu mobs, blaming Muslims for the deaths of 59 Hindu pilgrims in a train fire, retaliated against Muslim communities.

Narendra Modi n New Delhi on Wednesday. (T. Narayan / Bloomberg via Getty Images)

According to the film, British officials said the violence bore “the hallmarks of ethnic cleansing” and that Modi, as chief minister, was “directly responsible” for letting it happen.

Harsh Mander, who quit his job as a civil servant to become a rights activist after the riots in Gujarat, said they “showed us a very different India than what we had promised ourselves at independence” in 1947.

“Today’s generation needs to see what happened in 2002 and make an informed choice,” he added. “Is this the India you want?”

For years, Modi was barred from traveling to the United States over his role in the riots, being invited back only after he became prime minister in 2014. The second half of the BBC documentary, which aired in Britain this week, focuses on his leadership since then.

Critics say Modi has promoted discrimination against India’s Muslim minority and quashed dissent, especially since his re-election in 2019. Some journalists have been stopped from traveling overseas, and government demands for the removal of content on Twitter have soared. Last year, India fell to 150th out of 180 countries on the World Press Freedom Index.

State Department spokesperson Ned Price said Wednesday that the U.S. supported press freedom and other rights that strengthen democracies.

“This is a point we make in our relationships around the world,” he said at a regular briefing. “It’s certainly a point we’ve made in India as well.”

Opposition lawmakers in India have also pushed back, sharing links to the documentary that have since stopped working.

“Sorry, Haven’t been elected to represent world’s largest democracy to accept censorship,” Mahua Moitra, a member of Parliament from the center-left All India Trinamool Congress, said on Twitter. “Here’s the link. Watch it while you can.”

But Kanchan Gupta, a senior adviser to India’s Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, called the film “anti-India garbage” and said YouTube and Twitter had complied with government orders to block it from being shared.

Tensions escalated in the university after a student group said it planned to screen a banned documentary that examines Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's role during 2002 anti-Muslim riots, prompting dozens of police equipped with tear gas and riot gear to gather outside campus gates. (Manish Swarup / AP)

Both platforms have struggled with free speech issues in India. Twitter sued the Indian government last year over sweeping regulatory changes that give officials greater power to demand the removal of online content they deem threatening to the state, the same changes now being used to censor the BBC documentary. The future of the lawsuit is uncertain under the company’s new owner, Elon Musk.

“First I’ve heard,” Musk, who calls himself a free speech absolutist, said on Twitter this week when asked about the BBC film’s censorship in India. “It is not possible for me to fix every aspect of Twitter worldwide overnight, while still running Tesla and SpaceX, among other things.”

Kunal Majumder, the Indian representative of the Committee to Protect Journalists, said officials had weaponized an emergency provision of the laws, which are known as the Information Technology Rules, against legitimate journalism.

“The government has reacted to the documentary calling it propaganda and [part of a] colonial mind-set,” he said. “How does that qualify as an emergency?”
‘We created a plan’

Nivedya P.T., a student in New Delhi, was 2 years old at the time of the riots in Gujarat. She and others defied warnings from her university, Jamia Millia Islamia, not to screen the BBC film because “it is very important for us to know about our history,” she said.

“You cannot just block a documentary arbitrarily saying it is propaganda. That’s not right,” Nivedya said. “We have freedom of expression in this country, and we can watch any documentary and movie we want. So we created a plan.”

The screening was set for Wednesday night. That morning, Nivedya said, university staff chased her around campus and confiscated her phone. In the afternoon, she and three other students were taken away by police.

Students staged a protest near campus that night demanding Nivedya’s release, clashing with police officers equipped with tear gas and riot gear. Five students from the protest were detained as well, she said.

The campus remained closed the next day, students told NBC News, and police have maintained a strong presence in the area.

Nivedya’s detention came on the eve of Republic Day, a national holiday marking the anniversary of India officially adopting its Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression.

“We are being deprived of our fundamental rights,” Nivedya lamented after she was released. “I’m not sure how democratic India is anymore.”

This article was originally published on NBCNews.com

Why Indian students are protesting the banning of a BBC documentary

Students in India have clashed with police over the ban of a documentary about Prime Minister Narendra Modi's involvement in the 2002 anti-Muslim riots in the state of Gujarat.


Niamh Cavanagh
·Reporter
Fri, January 27, 2023 


Student activists in Kochi, India, on Wednesday with an effigy of Prime Minister Narendra Modi after they watched the BBC documentary "India: The Modi Question."

 (Arun Chandrabose/AFP via Getty Images)

LONDON — Students in India have clashed with police over the government banning of a BBC documentary about Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his involvement in the 2002 anti-Muslim riots in the state of Gujarat. The documentary, “India: The Modi Question,” found the leader to be “directly responsible” for enabling the violence that led to the death of 2,000 Muslims. India’s Foreign Ministry dismissed the documentary as “propaganda” and reportedly invoked emergency powers to have it taken down online.

What is happening in India?

Hundreds of students at Jawaharlal Nehru University in New Delhi had gathered to watch a screening of the documentary organized by student president and activist Aishe Ghosh. The university had threatened disciplinary action if the screening went ahead, claiming that it would disturb the peace on campus. Before it could air, the power was cut, forcing the students to watch the documentary on their phones and laptops.

“It was obviously the administration that cut off the power,” Ghosh told Reuters. “We are encouraging campuses across the country to hold screenings as an act of resistance against this censorship.” The Students’ Federation of India (SFI) said it plans to show the documentary in every state in India.

People watch the documentary in Kochi, India, on Tuesday.

 (Arun Chandrabose/AFP via Getty Images)

On Wednesday, multiple students at Jamia Millia Islamia University in New Delhi were arrested after a group planned a screening. According to the SFI, the 13 students who were detained have yet to be released from police custody. The All India Student Association called for further protests and condemned the police’s “brutality.”

India currently ranks 150 out of 180 countries in the Press Freedom Index compiled by Reporters Without Borders.

Why was the documentary banned?

Last week, the BBC released the first part of the two-part series, which highlighted a British government document that said Modi was “responsible” for the riots in Gujarat when he was the state’s chief minister.

The diplomatic report featured in the documentary stated that there had been “widespread and systematic rape of Muslim women” and violence that was “politically motivated,” all of which had the “hallmarks of ... ethnic cleansing.”

The documentary was not set to air in India, and the government made it difficult for residents to access it online. After describing the documentary as a “propaganda piece designed to push a particularly discredited narrative,” the government blocked segments of it from YouTube and Twitter, implementing state censorship under the Information Technology Rules. Unnamed sources told the digital liberties nonprofit Internet Freedom Foundation that both Twitter and Google’s YouTube had complied and enforced the ban.

A policeman looks over a burned train car and belongings of Hindu activists in Godhra, India, on Feb. 28, 2002. (Sebastian D'Souza/AFP via Getty Images)

Arindam Bagchi, a spokesperson for the Indian government, on Thursday criticized the documentary, saying, “The bias, the lack of objectivity, and frankly a continuing colonial mindset, are blatantly visible.”

The BBC defended the documentary, saying the organization had adhered to the “highest editorial standards.”
What happened during the Gujarat riots?

How the riots in February 2002 began remains disputed. However, what is agreed on is that four cars of a train caught fire, burning 59 people, including 10 children, to death. Most of the travelers on board were Hindu pilgrims. Authorities have convicted 31 Muslims of murder over the fire. Within hours, anti-Muslim riots broke out across the state and 2,000 people lost their lives.

Modi has been accused of enabling the riots and was accused of having said that Hindus should be allowed to vent their anger. In a sworn statement in 2011, a senior police officer who worked during the riots alleged that Modi told officials that the Muslim community needed to be taught a lesson, the BBC reported.

An activist armed with an iron rod shouts slogans against Muslims in Ahmedabad, India, on Feb, 28, 2002. (Sebastian D'Souza/AFP via Getty Images)

Under the leadership of Modi, the National Democratic Alliance, led by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, came into power in 2014.

In June 2021, Modi was cleared by India’s Supreme Court of any wrongdoing in the riots after a plea was filed when a special investigation team exonerated him along with 62 fellow senior government officials.
How is Elon Musk involved?

Elon Musk, as the owner of Twitter, has been blamed for Twitter’s decision to censor clips from the documentary on the app. However, Musk denied that he knew anything about the alleged censorship. Replying to a post on Twitter, he said it was the first he had heard of the matter. “It is not possible for me to fix every aspect of Twitter worldwide overnight, while still running Tesla and SpaceX, among other things,” he tweeted.

Twitter and YouTube haven't immediately replied to requests for comment.

There's almost unlimited clean, geothermal energy under our feet. New tech could help unleash that potential in New Mexico.

Kevin Robinson-Avila, Albuquerque Journal, N.M.
Sat, January 28, 2023 

Jan. 28—Canadian company Eavor Inc. drilled an 18,000-foot well bore this past fall in southwest New Mexico to prove it could hammer its way through deep-underground, hard-granite rock to reach previously untapped geothermal energy.

Eavor's well now stands as the deepest hole ever drilled in New Mexico, successfully demonstrating that the company's new technology can potentially crack open access to vast subsurface hot-rock formations that offer massive amounts of clean, renewable energy.

Eavor's success is just the latest achievement in what could soon become a global renaissance in geothermal development that's got both industry experts and public officials hyped about the potential for unleashing a virtually unlimited source of clean energy for electric generation, and for heating and cooling of homes and buildings.

"We have massive geothermal resources sitting below our feet, but it's been elusive to tap into the deep subsurface areas we need to reach to extract that energy economically and use it," Eavor Vice President of Business Development Neil Ethier told the Journal. "... Our drilling project in southwest New Mexico showed that our technology can unlock that geothermal potential, and it's now ready for commercial development."

In fact, the company is preparing to break ground in Nevada on its first 20-megawatt geothermal power plant in the U.S. using its new technology to exploit deep hot-rock formations. The project will supply power to local utility NV Energy, pending approval by state regulators in Nevada.

That project could be the first of many new power plants Eavor expects to build in western states, where geothermal energy is more readily accessible at levels closer to the surface than in other places. Eventually, that could include New Mexico as well, which has the sixth-highest geothermal potential in the nation, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado.

"New Mexico's geothermal resource is very good," Ethier said. "It's a wonderful opportunity for New Mexico to develop clean, firm, baseload electricity that employs New Mexicans."

Eavor is one of many companies now aggressively pursuing geothermal development with modern drilling technologies that allow them to tap into the deep underground rock formations that eluded the industry in years past.

Texas-based Fervo Technologies, for example, has also signed new power purchase agreements in western states to build modern geothermal power plants, including three separate projects with utilities in California for a combined total of nearly 100 MW of generation. And, as that company perfects its drilling techniques — and as economies of scale kick in to lower costs — Fervo expects to target a lot more places for geothermal development, including New Mexico, said Fervo Senior Associate for Policy and Regulatory Affairs Laura Singer.

"We definitely see New Mexico as an opportunity for the future once we get our drilling costs lower and our techniques fully hammered out," Singer told the Journal.

State legislation

Both Eavor and Fervo met with a geothermal working group last year that state Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, D-Albuquerque, formed to explore local development potential, paving the way for newly proposed legislation in this year's session to promote the industry.

Ortiz y Pino has filed the Geothermal Resources Development Act, Senate Bill 8, to provide $25 million in state money for grants and loans for research and development of geothermal energy projects around New Mexico. And he filed a second bill, SB-173, to offer up to $10 million annually in tax breaks for new geothermal projects.

The legislation could inspire more investment in both geothermal electric generation, and use of geothermal energy to heat and cool homes and buildings.

Heating-and-cooling technology is well developed. But it requires more education and promotional incentives to encourage broad market adoption and deployment.

In contrast, geothermal electric generation based on today's emerging technologies that target deep hot-rock formations is still evolving. But it's nearing the commercial break-out point.

"We're on the cusp of it," Ortiz y Pino told the Journal. "Eavor just drilled a hole nearly 19,000 feet deep to show it can do this. That opens the door to a lot more potential development as other energy companies jump in."

Both of Ortiz y Pino's bills have bipartisan support, with two Republican senators co-sponsoring them. And more bipartisan backing is likely, Ortiz y Pino said.

That's because, apart from offering clean "baseload" energy that can operate 24/7 all year long, today's emerging technology could also create direct employment opportunities for workers in the oil and gas industry as the state diversifies away from fossil fuels.

Drilling for heat, not hydrocarbons

Indeed, it's the modern drilling technologies developed by the oil and gas industry that are opening the gateway to deep underground geothermal energy, making the drilling rigs and skilled workforce that manage today's oil and gas operations essential for companies like Eavor and Fervo to bust through hard, subsurface granite to reach hot-rock formations.

"We're piggybacking off technology advancements in oil and gas drilling," Ethier said. "But instead of drilling for hydrocarbons, we're drilling for heat. Fifteen years ago we couldn't do this."

Modern hydraulic fracturing methods that include hardened drill bits to crack open tough shale beds — plus advanced seismic sensor technology and data analysis to pinpoint and accurately target underground hydrocarbon deposits — all contributed to the shale gas revolution, allowing the industry to exploit previously untapped oil-and-gas reservoirs.

More recently, horizontal drilling technology has pushed oil and gas operations into unprecedented levels of development, permitting operators to penetrate laterally into shale beds stretching in all directions to reach more pockets of hydrocarbons.

Now, those same drilling techniques — combined with further technology development by the geothermal companies themselves — is creating a paradigm shift that, for the first time, lets developers dig far below the shallow hot water aquifers that the geothermal industry has traditionally targeted to instead bore deeper down into hot-rock formations.

That capability opens up access to far more geothermal energy in many more places, because developers are no longer limited to exploring and developing around volcanos and fault lines where natural subsurface fracturing has created pools of relatively shallow, underground reservoirs. Such conditions are relatively rare and are concentrated in certain places, such as the western U.S.

"The industry has been historically limited to conventional wet, steamy reservoirs where developers look for the steam and natural fault lines," Singer said. "We don't need steam now. We look instead for hot rock at reasonable depths. Subsurface heat exists everywhere — it's just a matter of how deep it is."

Nearly 20 years ago, extensive research showed that intense subsurface heat is ubiquitous and basically inexhaustible nearly everywhere below the Earth's crust, with heat level depending on depth, said Shari Kelly, a senior geophysicist and field geologist with the state Bureau of Geology and Mineral Resources.

"We came to realize that no matter where you are in the U.S. — even if it's Connecticut — if you drill deep enough you can reach temperatures that are usable for heat and electricity," Kelly told the Journal. "... That really shifted the perspective on geothermal development."

The challenge, however, has been lack of adequate drilling technology that could slice through hard rock to reach the necessary depths while also withstanding extreme subsurface temperatures that can shut down drilling equipment.

"Today's drilling technology allows developers to reach those deep depths," Kelly said. "It's a game changer."

Advancing the technology

Companies like Fervo and Eavor are now building on oil and gas drilling technology to develop techniques and methods specifically geared toward deep geothermal development.

Fervo, for example, has developed advanced data analytics using down-hole fiber optics to gather and analyze real-time data on flow, temperature and performance of geothermal resources, Singer said. That provides much greater insight into subsurface behavior, allowing the company to precisely identify where the best resources exist and optimize well performance.

Once the hole is drilled and fracked, the company pumps cold water down into the well bore, where it's heated to between 350 and 400 degrees Fahrenheit and then brought back to the surface to create steam to run a turbine generator.

Conventional wells that tap into existing hot water aquifers usually don't penetrate below 3,000 feet down, and those wells generally only produce between 200- and 300-degree heat. In contrast, Fervo is targeting rock formations at 8,000-10,000 feet down, providing much greater heat for more efficient and abundant generating capacity.

"Some companies are looking to drill extremely deep into extremely hot rock," Singer said. "We're not. We're targeting more moderate depths that allow us to use existing oil and gas drill bits and equipment."

Eavor, meanwhile, has created new technology to drill far deeper wells of up to 23,000 feet or more, Ethier said. That requires extreme temperature-resistant equipment with reinforced drill bits to break through hard granite rock.

To do that, it's created proprietary insulated drill pipes and partnered with industry vendors to design new drill bits. It's also developed advanced down-well control technology to precisely place liquid-filled pipes through two well bores that pump water down for heating at the geothermal resource and then bring it back up again.

And the entire process is contained in a novel, closed-loop system where the water being heated never leaves the underground or surface pipes. Rather, it absorbs heat from the hot-rock bed like a radiator, using horizontal drilling to place piping offshoots directly next to the geothermal resource, which then heats up the water inside the tubes before it's brought back to the surface.

"We have over 30 patents covering a lot of technology components, including proprietary software, hardware and system design," Ethier said.

Eavor directly tested most of its technology in the New Mexico Bootheel at a drill site located next to the Lightning Dock geothermal power plant near Lordsburg. That's the only conventional geothermal facility currently operating in the state.

"We met all our technology milestones," Ethier said.

Future employment opportunities

That test operation also demonstrated lucrative future employment potential for oil and gas industry workers. Two conventional drilling rigs were used on the project, which lasted from August to December last year.

"We had more than 50 people employed at the rig site throughout construction," Ethier said. "And that doesn't include local services we used for fuel and water delivery, or for sewage and garbage disposal. It was also a boon for local hotels and restaurants in the area."

As industry development gains momentum and companies begin drilling deeper wells for power plants, and for heating and cooling applications, a lot more employment opportunities could emerge for skilled oil and gas drilling crews, engineers and seasoned industry professionals.

In fact, most companies now pursuing modern geothermal development are largely run by former oil and gas executives and staffed by industry workers. Helmerich & Payne Inc., for example — an oil and gas drilling rig operator — is an investor in Eavor.

Global drilling company Baker Hughes also formed a partnership with two industry giants, Continental Resources and Chesapeake Energy, to test whether they can profitably turn spent natural gas wells into geothermal facilities, according to Politico. And Chevron New Energies, a subsidiary of Chevron Corp., is partnering with Sweden's Baseload Capital to develop new geothermal technologies, starting with a new project in Weepah Hills mountains in Nevada.

"We're not taking away from the oil and gas industry, but adding stability to it," Ethier said. "This can provide a just transition for energy diversification that offers other options for employment."

Forging ahead

Full-scale deployment of emerging geothermal technology — now called enhanced geothermal systems, or ESG — is still a few years off, but it's a lot closer that many think, Singer said.

"We're ready to deploy," she said. "This is not technology that needs to be reinvented, because the technology and skills are there. It's a matter of just starting to drill wells, and we're ready to go."

As momentum accelerates, it will allow drilling and development costs to decline through economies of scale and continuous technology and system efficiency improvement, making ESG more economical compared with fossil fuels like natural gas, Singer added.

"One reason for the shale gas revolution success was continuous drilling and constantly evolving technology and techniques to bring down costs," Singer said. "Geothermal has not yet experienced that, and it's what's needed."

Challenges remain. More temperature-resistant drilling technology, for example, is critical as wells go deeper, and a lot more subsurface research is needed to identify the best places for geothermal development.

Permitting issues could also cause problems, slowing development down the same way transmission projects are routinely held up through local, state and federal regulatory requirements that delay planning and construction for years.

But federal- and state-level investment and incentives can help with all those challenges. The U.S. Department of Energy announced in September a new "Energy Earthshot" to lower the costs for ESG by 90% to $45 per megawatt hour by 2035, which would make it significantly more affordable than today's prices for natural gas.

That includes $44 million in new investment's in ESG through the DOE's Frontier Observatory for Geothermal Energy Research laboratory in Utah, plus $84 million in funding under the federal Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment law to support four ESG demonstration projects in different locations.

State-level initiatives like Ortiz y Pino's bills can also help. And apart from potential bipartisan legislative support, environmental organizations are getting on board, given geothermal's potential to provide clean backup power for intermittent solar and wind facilities as the state transitions from fossil fuels to renewables.

Some environmental activists took leading roles in Ortiz y Pino's working group, and environmental organizations are expected to firmly back the senator's bills in this year's session.

"It's such a great opportunity for us to supplement wind and solar in a sustainable fashion," Ortiz y Pino said. "Geothermal runs 24/7, 365 days a year. It doesn't go away, and it makes freeing ourselves from fossil fuels much more realistic."

Sandia National Laboratories' drilling research, long used by oil and gas firms, is being put to use for clean geothermal energy development

Sandia wants to make those efforts more efficient and less expensive.

TIME'S TRUE CRIME STORY
The University of Idaho Murders Show the Hidden Cost of America's True Crime Addiction

Solcyre Burga
Wed, January 25, 2023

Suspect Arrested For The Murders Of Four University Of Idaho Students

Bryan Kohberger, right, appears at a hearing in Latah County District Court in Moscow, Idaho, on January 5, 2023. Credit - Ted S. Warren—Getty Images

The public’s fascination with true crime has led to endless docu-series, podcasts and social media theories dedicated to infamous crimes and killers. But when an investigation is unfolding in real time, this obsession—especially when internet sleuths get involved—can have grim consequences for real people.

Most recently, the murders of four University of Idaho students who were found stabbed to death in an off-campus townhouse in the college town of Moscow, Idaho, became a breeding ground for misinformation with conspiracy theorists and amateur “detectives” dissecting the case on social media. On TikTok, the hashtag “Idaho murders”—and its many iterations—have collected more than one billion views with thousands of users posting updates and asking for answers.


TikTok lives and videos discussing different theories on who could be responsible for the gruesome slayings have spanned hours on the platform, especially in the weeks before suspect Bryan Kohberger, 28, was arrested.

While high-profile cases can garner the attention necessary to bring new tips forward, they can also endanger innocent people and be the cause of much misinformation.
Fake theories, real people

Rebecca Scofield, a University of Idaho professor was accused by TikToker Ashley Guillard (@ashleyisinthebookoflife) of involvement in the Idaho murders in a series of videos posted online. Scofield says the lies spread about her have caused safety issues for her and family.

Guillard, a self-proclaimed clairvoyant who uses her abilities “to help solve mysteries,” told her more than 115,000 followers on the app that Scofield was romantically involved with one of the victims and worked with another individual to commit the murders in more than 50 videos starting around Nov. 17.

Scofield served Guillard with two cease-and-desist letters that were ignored, even after police had charged and arrested Kohberger on Dec. 30. Scofield has since filed a lawsuit, citing emotional distress from the public attention caused by Guillard.

Although users on Guillard’s most recent videos began telling her to stop posting videos about Scofield—saying things like “You’re still doing this?!” and “none of this happened”—previous posts where Guillard defamed Scofield have amassed at least 2.5 million likes, according to the lawsuit.

Guillard declined an interview and did not respond to requests for comment.

In a statement to TIME, Scofield’s lawyer Wendy Olson said: “These untrue statements create safety issues for the Professor and her family. They also further compound the trauma that the families of the victims are experiencing and undermine law enforcement efforts to find the people responsible in order to provide answers to the families and the public.”

While Scofield has been the only one to take legal action, several others associated with the case have been accused online. Guillard also accused an ex-boyfriend of victim Kaylee Goncalves, of involvement in the crime. “He’s not only lost the love of his life,” his aunt told the New York Post, but “half of America” also believes he could be responsible for the murders.

A neighbor of the four University of Idaho students has also been wrongfully accused by social media users. He told NewsNation that people have been “ruthless” about getting information about his personal life. He added that he now carries a gun with him to get “that extra sense of security.”

“They’ve already contacted my friends asking questions about me,” he said. “And so who knows if someone’s gonna go so far as to try and confront me in person.”
A double-edged sword

David Schmid, an associate professor of English at the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences, says that public interest in high-profile cases can certainly bring forward attention and new information that can help investigators solve a case, but also comes with high costs.

In the Idaho murders case, Guillard is just one of many online personalities who has chosen to make accusations with little or no evidence.

On Dec. 9, weeks before Kohberger was arrested in connection with the murders, Moscow Police released a statement about the influx of information circulating online, saying they were “monitoring online activity” related to the case and were “aware of the large amount of rumors and misinformation being shared, as well as harassing and threatening behavior toward potentially involved parties.”

“Anyone engaging in threats or harassment whether in person, online or otherwise needs to understand that they could be subjecting themselves to criminal charges,” the department said in a Facebook post.

That is not to say all involvement in true crime is detrimental. Bystanders who were at nearby locations to Gabby Petito in the moments before her disappearance in September 2022 uploaded TikToks, photos and videos of their interactions with her and helped police narrow down their search efforts and ultimately find her body.

And in the Idaho case, the Moscow Police Department reports that they received more than 19,000 tips from the community as of Dec. 30 that were integral to arresting Bryan Kohberger, according to CBS News. They continue to ask for more tips related to the arrest of the primary suspect.

Schmid suggests that the best of internet sleuthing—deep diving into criminal cases online— is seen in projects like Serial, an investigative journalism podcast whose first season focused on the case of Adnan Syed, who was convicted of killing 18-year-old Hae Min Lee in 1999. With an average of more than 2 million listeners at the time of its release, Serial’s popularity undoubtedly played a role in Syed’s eventual release last October.

Citizen sleuthing into true crime can have dangerous impacts though. Serial, for instance, was made by experienced journalists who took measures to fact-check and share information in a manner that minimizes harm. TikTokers and others on social media, however, often have little basis for their claims. Yet with TikTok’s more than 1 billion users, they are able to reach vast numbers of people.

“[The internet] has a tremendous impact in terms of allowing people who ordinarily wouldn’t have access to media influence in any way, shape or form to provide input,” Schmid tells TIME. “In some cases, that’s been a very good thing, but like everything else, it’s a mixed bag.”

Schmid warns that the mass amount of information people have access to on a day-to-day basis often generates misinformation on a scale that is difficult to contain once it’s out. And because there is a lack of trust in traditional arbiters of information like the press and authorities, citizens feel that they have an equal right to comment and investigate.

Schmid believes social media companies should be responsible for taking down false accusations and misinformation in cases like the University of Idaho murders. “Obviously, the scale of the problem is so big you’re never going to be able to eliminate it entirely. But I think in cases like the one you’re discussing, where the damage being done is so egregious, I think deplatforming is a very good response to that,” Schmid tells TIME.

China, U.S. spar at WTO meeting over disputes

Fri, January 27, 2023
By Emma Farge

GENEVA (Reuters) -China and the United States exchanged sharp criticism at a World Trade Organization meeting on Friday, with Beijing calling Washington a "unilateral bully" and the U.S. accusing its rival of illegal retaliatory measures.

China's ambassador to the WTO Li Chenggang spoke at a meeting on trade disputes shortly after the United States lodged an appeal against a series of WTO rulings involving China, Turkey, Norway and Switzerland which found that U.S. metal tariffs breached global rules.

"These troubling behaviors of the U.S. have clearly depicted an image of the U.S. as a unilateral bully, a rule breaker, and a supply chain disruptor," he said, according to a copy of his speech obtained by Reuters.

The WTO has made important rulings against the United States in recent weeks, including the metals ruling involving China and a separate dispute with Hong Kong over labeling which Washington also appealed. Washington, which has long criticized the WTO dispute system for overreach and is leading discussions on reforming it, has criticized both rulings.

The United States said it regretted the metal tariffs dispute with China was even on the agenda at the meeting and accused Beijing of imposing "illegal unilateral retaliatory measures" on U.S. exports.

"A WTO that serves to shield China's non-market policies and practices is not in anyone's interest," said Deputy United States Trade Representative Maria Pagan, according to a copy of her speech.

The WTO will not be able to review Washington's appeal of the metals case because its top appeals bench is paralyzed after the United States blocked new judges.

"China would have hoped that the U.S. would show due self-restraint not to appeal every unfavorable panel report into the void, which the U.S. itself has created," Li said.

In an interview with Reuters on Thursday, Pagan played down the significance of more vocal criticism of Washington by China at WTO meetings. "You can call us whatever names you want," she said. "We are continuing to talk to China."

(Reporting by Emma Farge; Additional reporting by Gabrielle Tetrault-Farber; editing by Toby Chopra and Grant McCool)

Can India Take Advantage Of Its Enormous Green Energy Potential?

Editor OilPrice.com
Sat, January 28, 2023 at 3:00 PM MST·4 min read

“The world needs India to avert climate catastrophe,” a CNN headline blared late last year, before asking the crucial follow-up question: “Can Modi deliver?” India aims to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2070, but so far progress on climate goals has been uneven, to say the least. The South Asian nation’s decarbonization progress over the coming months and years can make or break the global fight to keep average temperatures at or below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial averages. India currently produces the third-most carbon dioxide emissions in the world, after China and the United States.

As India has industrialized and its population has continued to grow, the subcontinent’s energy needs have skyrocketed. According to figures from the International Energy Agency, Indian energy consumption has more than doubled since the year 2000, and over 900 million Indians have gained access to electricity over the last two decades. And the country is just starting its development journey. India’s federal power ministry projects that national electricity demand will expand by up to 6% every year for the next ten years. India is on track to overtake China as the most populous country in the world, and it has already established itself as a major economic and cultural force on the global stage.

India also has some of the greatest potential for green energy production in the world, creating a massive opportunity for Modi’s India to place itself at the forefront of the green energy revolution and give the economy – currently bogged down by high energy prices on the global market – a major boost. According to a brand new report from the Global Energy Monitor, India is in the top seven countries for prospective renewable power. The country already has plans for gargantuan solar and wind farms in the works, and if the country’s planned buildout of 76 gigawatts of solar and wind power by 2025 comes to fruition, it will successfully avoid the use of almost 78 million tons of coal per year, leading to savings of up to 1.6 trillion rupees ($19.5 billion) annually.

While these projects are a major step forward for India, and the savings could serve as a major incentive to keep going, getting to carbon neutrality by 2070 is going to take a lot more investment – and a lot more grit. While green energy is gaining a foothold in India, it’s going to be very, very difficult to wean the subcontinent off of coal. India depends on fossil fuels for 70% of its energy mix, with coal taking the lion’s share. According to figures from ember-data, India installed 168 gigawatts of coal-fired generation from 2001 to 2021, almost double the addition of solar and wind energy combined over the same period.

At present, just 10% of India’s energy mix comes from renewable energies, and the country missed its 2022 target to install 175 gigawatts of renewable energy to the total level of domestic power production. Only four out of India’s 28 states met their renewable energy targets last year. What’s more, most of them failed by a discouragingly wide margin. “Most states have installed less than 50% of their targets and some states such as West Bengal have installed only 10% of their target,” the Associated Press reported this week. The country’s next target is to install a total of 450 gigawatts of clean energy by 2030, and meeting this is going to require a massive acceleration of India’s current rate of renewable capacity buildout.

For all of India’s investing and pledging related to building out green energy, the reality is that India just isn’t ready to give up on coal. At COP26 in Glasgow, India led a last-minute charge to change language related to phasing out coal in the conference's final joint agreement. This move highlighted the tightrope that Modi currently has to walk: India has to phase out coal for the benefit of the climate and its international diplomacy, but it also can’t sacrifice its own development and growth. For many developing countries, the current pressure to rapidly decarbonize their economies feels a lot like having to pay for the first world’s sins. Developed countries have burned fossil fuels with little to no recompense for over a century, and have robust economies to show for it. India wants its chance to do the same – an understandable enough sentiment, but a sentiment that could have devastating consequences for the entire world, now and in future generations.

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com