UK

Bucks university joins new project exploring Moon’s resources and nuclear power


Noora Mykkanen
Tue, 7 March 2023 


The UK Space Agency has announced new funding to support space exploration using the Moon’s resources and nuclear power.

The projects could revolutionise the ability to journey deeper into space – and even travel to Mars – safely and efficiently.

They aim to use remote technologies, and supplies found in space, to sustain astronauts and spacecraft.

One project is creating remote equipment scientists can use to run experiments on biological models in deep space from Earth.

This will allow them to better understand the impact of space on human health and begin designing medical treatments for astronauts.

Other ventures include testing improved systems for recycling breathing gases while in space, and enhanced methods for extracting valuable resources, such as oxygen and metals, from Moon rock.

While another one of the projects will look at new nuclear power processes for propulsion.

The agency announced £1.6 million funding for the eight projects through its Enabling Space Exploration fund on Mars Day.

CEO of the UK Space Agency Dr Paul Bate said: “The concept of exploring deeper into space – whether that means returning to the lunar surface through the Artemis programme, or working out how we could travel to, and survive on, Mars and beyond – is a global ambition that has been growing since humanity’s first forays into space in the 1950s.

“Supporting technologies that make that ambition a reality will help raise the international profile of UK space skills and expertise.

“Not only does this naturally unlock business opportunities all along the supply chain, but it helps inspire young people to consider the possibility of a career in space without having to leave the UK.

“This is an incredibly exciting time for the space exploration sector, and I look forward to seeing how far the results of these projects will reach.”

Minister of State with responsibility for Space at the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology, George Freeman, said: “Space is the ultimate frontier, laboratory and technology testbed.

“The UK’s long history of leadership in deep space science and exploration is key to both understanding our solar system and origins of life, and creating opportunities for our high growth SpaceTech sector.

“Today’s funding is part of the government’s strategy to use our £5 billion investment in space science and technology to grow our £16.5 billion commercial space sector to create the businesses, jobs and opportunities of tomorrow, and the space clusters from Cornwall to Scotland.”

At the European Space Agency Council of Ministers meeting in November, the Government pledged £1.84 billion for important space programmes, which includes a commitment to the UK-built Rosalind Franklin Mars Rover, set to launch to Mars in 2028.

The projects will be led by the University of Exeter, University of Southampton, Hampshire, Open University in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, MAC SciTech, South Shields, Bangor University, Wales, and Thales Alenia Space, Oxfordshire.

AUSTRALIA

Coalition and Greens team up to force Labor to release emissions model

Paul Karp

 Guardian Australia
Tue, 7 March 2023 

Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images

Jim Chalmers has accused opponents of Labor’s renewable energy policies of spinning wheels in “ideological cul-de-sacs”, as the Coalition and Greens team up to force the government to release emissions modelling.

On Tuesday the Senate rejected the Albanese government’s public interest immunity claim, meaning it will be forced to release forecasts of how big industrial emitters would use carbon credits to meet obligations created by the proposed safeguard mechanism.

The motion, by Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young, passed without a vote after the Greens said they had secured opposition support for the ambush.

The government now has until 4pm on Thursday to produce the modelling, a key input into negotiations between the Greens and Labor over the safeguards mechanism bill, which requires big emitters to reduce emissions intensity by 4.9% a year.

Related: Labor’s reform of safeguard mechanism will fail unless changed, say Greens

The two progressive parties remain deadlocked, with the Greens calling for a ban on new coal and gas projects while Labor insists it has a mandate for the safeguards mechanism without a condition that would reduce supply of gas as a transition fuel.

Chalmers, the treasurer, told the Australian Financial Review business summit on Tuesday that Australia had “immense potential when it comes to the climate and energy transition”.

“Cheap, clean renewable energy, new industries up and along the supply chains of the net zero economy, and new ways to maximise traditional strengths,” he said.

But in order to attract billions of dollars of clean energy capital by 2050, Australia must give “investors and companies clearer guardrails, and the clarity and confidence they need to invest”.

“It means moving up the value chain – a key focus of the national reconstruction fund.

“Thanks to the work you’ve done with us – on the safeguard mechanism, on climate risk disclosure, on sustainable finance – we’re well placed to make important strides here.”

The treasurer’s reference to two bills that the Greens are yet to commit to pass – the reconstruction fund and the safeguard mechanism – adds pressure to negotiations currently stuck on the question of limits on new coal and gas.

Chalmers warned that “we won’t build the modern economy we need by wasting time spinning our wheels in the cul-de-sacs at either end of the ideological spectrum”.

“We’re here to make a difference – not for a dose of comfortable complacency or for the performance and fakery and puffery of politics.”

Related: Safeguard mechanism: what is it, will it cut emissions and what role do carbon offsets play?

In a dissenting report in the Senate inquiry into the safeguards bill, the Greens warned that the safeguard mechanism will fail unless the Albanese government agrees to changes, despite having described the fossil fuel ban as an “offer, not an ultimatum”.

Hanson-Young told ABC TV that evidence to the inquiry suggested “if new coal and gas entrants are allowed into the system that will see pollution overall go up not down”.

“Our door is still open. The government’s door is still open. We are still talking … but [we’re] being very clear that this package needs to reduce pollution not make climate change worse.”

“This is why we are saying the legislation as it is and the draft regulations, if they remain in their current form we cannot support them.”

The climate change minister, Chris Bowen, told Radio National that the safeguards bill allowed parliament “either to seize the opportunity to reduce emissions by 205 million tonnes or to squander it”.

“Of course, when you’re doing a big complicated reform … the Liberals will say this is a disaster, the Greens will say it doesn’t go far enough.”

Bowen argued carbon credits were needed to provide firms “flexibility” with whether they reduce their own emissions or achieve a reduction in “net” terms.

He said no new coal and gas “is, frankly, a slogan, not a policy”, and gas would be required until it was replaced by green hydrogen.

Meat, dairy and rice: Which foods contribute the most to global warming?
Euronews
Tue, 7 March 2023 


Greenhouse gas emissions from the way humans produce and consume food could add nearly 1 degree of warming to the Earth’s climate by 2100, according to a new study.

Continuing the dietary patterns of today will push the planet past the 1.5 degrees Celsius limit of warming sought under the Paris climate agreement to avoid the worst effects of climate change.

According to the study published Monday in Nature Climate Change, it could cause us to approach the agreement's limit of 2 degrees Celsius.

Which food items cause the most greenhouse gas emissions?

The modelling study found that the majority of greenhouse gas emissions come from three major sources: meat from animals like cows, sheep and goats; dairy; and rice.

Those three sources account for at least 19 per cent each of food's contribution to a warming planet, according to the study, with meat contributing the most, at 33 per cent.

All emit large amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas with more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide, in the way they are currently farmed. The researchers calculated that methane will account for 75 per cent of food's share of warming by 2030, with carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide accounting for most of the rest.

Greenhouse gas emissions from the way humans consume food could add nearly one degree of warming to the Earth’s climate by 2100. - AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee, File

“I think the biggest takeaway that I would want (policymakers) to have is the fact that methane emissions are really dominating the future warming associated with the food sector,” said Catherine C Ivanovich, a climate scientist at Columbia University and the study's lead author.

Ivanovich and colleagues from the University of Florida and Environmental Defense Fund calculated the three major gases produced by each type of food over its lifetime based on current consumption patterns. Then they scaled the annual emissions over time by gas based on five different population projections.

And then they used a climate model frequently used by the United Nations panel on climate change to model the effects of those emissions on surface air temperature change.

Food is critical to meeting climate goals

Stanford University climate scientist Chris Field, who wasn't involved in the study, said it used well-established methods and datasets “to produce a novel, sobering conclusion.”

“The study highlights that food is absolutely critical to hitting our Paris Agreement climate targets — failure to consider food is failure to meet our climate targets globally,” said Meredith Niles, a food systems scientist at the University of Vermont who was not involved in the study.

The study offered some ways to change global food production and consumption that could limit warming.

Many of these changes are already being called for or adopted. US President Joe Biden touted the climate benefits of planting cover crops that can draw down carbon from the atmosphere in an April 2021 address to Congress.

Multiple recent studies and reports have recommended eating less meat in order to reduce greenhouse gas creation by animals raised for consumption. And California started a mandatory food waste recycling program in 2021 to reduce the emissions created by decaying food.

But reducing methane may be the most important goal of all. Although methane is far more potent than carbon, it also is much shorter-lived — meaning cuts in methane emissions can have a quick benefit, Ivanovich said.

People sit, drinking and eating, outside cafes and pubs Soho, central London. - AP Photo/Alberto Pezzali, File

“So that’s going to help us stay under the dangerous warming target,” she said, “as well as give us some time to build up resilience and adaptation to climate change in the meantime.”

A major question that remains is whether food producers and consumers can change their behaviour in order to achieve the reductions in greenhouse gases laid out in the study. There's a roadmap, but will it be followed?

“Changing behaviour, especially when we are bombarded with constant media extolling the benefits of everything from Coke to french fries, from pizza to burgers, is pretty damned difficult,” Columbia University plant physiologist Lew Ziska in an email to the AP.

“So, overall, while we need to change, whether we can change is .... problematic.”

Mass rallies and strikes in France over Macron's pension reform

Tue, March 7, 2023 

More than a million people marched in France and strikes disrupted transport and schools on Tuesday during mass protests against President Emmanuel Macron's plans to push back the retirement age to 64.

Police used teargas in Paris and minor clashes also took place in the western city of Nantes, but the more than 260 union-organised rallies across the country were mostly peaceful.

Labour leaders had pledged to bring France "to a standstill" on the biggest day of action in a series of stoppages this year -- a goal that proved beyond their reach judged by the busy roads of major cities.

Only one in five regional and high-speed trains ran, however, and the Paris metro system operated with a skeletal schedule. Rubbish began piling up in the capital after garbage collectors walked off the job.

"The government has to take (resistance) into account when there are so many people in the street, when they're having so much trouble explaining and passing their reform," CFDT union chief Laurent Berger said as she stood at the head of the Paris rally.

- Unions plan more action -

The interior ministry said 1.28 million people marched across the country, making it one of the biggest protests in decades and slightly bigger than a previous round of demonstrations on January 31.

The CGT union put the figure at 3.5 million.

It appears unlikely that Tuesday's protests will influence Macron, 45, who has championed pension reform since coming to power in 2017 in order to tackle deficits forecast for the coming decades.

Analysts see the centrist as determined to press ahead, with parliament set to vote on the draft legislation as early as next week.

On Tuesday evening the unions called for an urgent meeting with Macron.

But they also announced to more days of action, including protests on Saturday.

- U-turn? -

Speeches on Tuesday by political opponents and union leaders sought to convince voters that only massive popular resistance and protests could force the government into a U-turn, a regular feature of French democracy.

"On the one hand there's (Macron's) will, on the other the will of the people," hard-left presidential candidate Jean-Luc Melenchon told a demonstration in the Mediterranean port city of Marseille.

"Who should have the last word? Of course it should be the people," he added, calling for fresh elections or a referendum on the changes.

Although around two in three people are against the reform, around the same number believe it will be enacted, according to a poll by the Elabe survey group published on Monday.

Most people support the strikers, polls also show.

Ali Toure, a 28-year-old construction worker, was waiting for a delayed train north of Paris on Tuesday morning, but said it was "no big deal" if he arrived late to work for a month.

"They're right to be striking. Manual labour is hard," he said.

A blockade of oil refineries, underway since Tuesday morning, has the potential to cause severe disruption if it continues in the weeks ahead.

Around a third of teachers were absent on Tuesday, a quarter of civil servants, and half of workers at the state-owned EDF energy utility, according to ministry and company figures.

- 'Work longer' -

The government argues that raising the retirement age from 62 to 64, abolishing privileges enjoyed by employees in some sectors, and stiffening the requirements for a full pension are required to balance the pension system.

France lags most of its European neighbours, which have hiked the retirement age to 65 or above.

Its spending on pensions is the third highest among industrialised countries, at the equivalent of 14.5 percent of GDP, according to data from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

"If we want to keep this system going, we need to work longer," Macron said last month.

But unions contest that conclusion and say small increases in contributions could keep it solvent.

They also argue that the proposed measures are unfair and would disproportionately affect low-skilled workers who start their careers early, as well as women.

The bill is now being debated in the upper house senate, with a vote by both houses of parliament expected by the middle of the month or by March 26 at the latest.

Union leaders are set to meet Tuesday evening to decide on their next moves.

burs-adp/pvh

Major train strikes in France aimed at "blocking country"

Rory Armstrong
Tue, 7 March 2023 


This Tuesday, transport services join an undetermined strike that will see services severely reduced at local, regional and international levels. These will affect France's rail, bus and aviation services, with reduced services, except at peak working hours, and blockades to major cities expected.

March 7 will mark the sixth day of industrial action since January over government plans to reform pension rights in France and increase the retirement age from 62 to 64, which saw more than a million people take to the streets and this time, unions are hoping, will bring the country to a standstill.

Unlike previous strikes, major confederations of French trade unions – including the CFDT and CGT – have announced ‘’grèves reconductibles’’, meaning workers will vote at the end of each strike day on whether to continue industrial action. With no fixed end date, unions hope rolling walkouts have the potential to disrupt daily life and threaten the economy so severely that it forces the government into submission.

Which countries have the most strikes in Europe and what impact does it have on the economy?

In the transport sector, national rail company SNCF and Parisian public transport RATP are both expecting major ongoing strikes, with transport authorities warning of “major disruption” in Paris.

International journeys on trains and flights will also be impacted, with the French civil aviation authority recommending that airports in major cities across France reduce flight traffic by up to 30%. Delays and cancellations are expected.

Schools and power plants to close

Apart from transport, the education and industrial sector are also expected to join the strike.

On Friday energy production in France was reduced in multiple nuclear power stations bringing down the overall electricity supply. In the midst of a cost of living and energy crisis, union representatives said production would fall even lower as strikes continue, in order to negatively impact the French economy.

In education, the seven major teaching unions have called for the “total closure” of schools on March 7. High school and university students are expected to join protests alongside staff from Tuesday, with a peak of activity on March 9 with a dedicated “Youth Mobilisation” day.

Pension reform in France: Which countries have the lowest and highest retirement ages in Europe?

For gas and electricity workers, walkouts will continue “at the minimum until the 7th, and at the maximum until we win”, said the secretary-general of union confederation CGT Energie, Sébastien Ménesplier.

Impact on women

Protest actions focused on women and the retirement reform’s impact on working mothers are expected Wednesday to coincide with International Women’s Day.

Asked about the strikes on Saturday as he completed a tour of African countries, Macron said he had "nothing new to say" on the topic.

French Strikes Over Pension Reform Hit Power Utility, Trucking


Tara Patel
Sun, March 5, 2023 

Strikes in France to protest against government pension reforms hit power giant Electricite de France SA for a third consecutive day after workers cut output at a number of nuclear reactors.

The walkouts reduced production on Sunday by about 4 gigawatts across generators at four plants including Tricastin, Flamanville, Cattenom and Paluel, according to filings published on EDF’s website.

The labor strife is also spreading to the trucking industry, with freight haulers planning to block some logistics and industrial centers early Monday, Le Parisien reported.

The disruptions come ahead of nationwide protests planned to start Tuesday. Some unions including CGT have pledged to bring the country to a standstill by snarling planes, trains, metros and road haulage as well as affecting schools, ports, refineries and other industrial sectors. President Emmanuel Macron has promised to push through the changes to retirement in spite of opposition from workers and rival politicians.

“We’re moving to a whole new level,” CGT leader Philippe Martinez told the Journal du Dimanche.

Public support for the reforms stands at 32%, according to an Ifop poll published Sunday in the newspaper, while 34% of respondents believe the government will withdraw the plan in response to protests and strikes.

“It’ll be really chaotic for some people,” Transport Minister Clement Beaune said in an interview on France 3 television. While the walkouts mean there will be little public transport available, he said the government remains determined to overhaul the pension rules.

Pension Regimes

The walkouts at EDF come after the French Senate voted overnight on a plan to phase out specific pension regimes which allow some workers including those in the utility to retire years earlier than people in other jobs.

The power reductions at EDF affect available supply, but mild weather is expected to reduce the strain on the country’s energy systems.

France’s civil aviation authority, the DGAC, has asked airlines to cancel 20% to 30% of their flights at French airports on March 7 and 8 due to planned walkouts by air traffic controllers.

Air France said it plans to operate eight out of 10 flights on those days including all long-haul services. “Delays and last minute cancellations cannot be ruled out,” it said.

National railway SNCF has warned traffic will be disrupted on March 7 while the Eurostar rail service has canceled some links between Paris, London, Brussels and Amsterdam on March 7 and 8.

FAUCI OF THE UK
How Matt Hancock plotted to have ‘useless loudmouth’ Covid scientist sacked

The Lockdown Files Team
Sat, 4 March 2023 

THE PLAYERS

Matt Hancock
British Conservative politician 

Jeremy Farrar
Epidemiologist and director of the Wellcome Trust

Dido Harding
British businesswoman 




Ministers criticised by one of the world’s most eminent scientists tried to have him sacked from the Government’s Covid advisory committee, leaked messages reveal.

Sir Jeremy Farrar, a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage), was described as “worse than useless” by Matt Hancock, who demanded of his permanent secretary: “Can we fire him?”

He also described Sir Jeremy, now the most eminent scientist with the World Health Organisation (WHO), as “totally offside” and a “complete loudmouth” who “has little respect amongst the serious scientists”.

Sir Jeremy, who was also the director of Wellcome Trust, Britain’s biggest medical research charity, at the time, had publicly questioned the Government’s decision to shut down Public Health England (PHE) in August 2020, about six months into the pandemic.

Sir Jeremy, who took up his new post as the WHO’s chief scientist only last week, had condemned the proposal to scrap PHE in favour of a new organisation run by Mr Hancock’s friend, Baroness Harding, who had run the NHS Test and Trace programme.

The former professor of tropical diseases at Oxford University and one of the world’s leading experts on infectious diseases had also been highly critical of Test and Trace.

He posted on Twitter early on Aug 19, 2020: “Arbitrary sackings. Passing of blame. Ill thought through, short term, reactive reforms… Preempting inevitable public inquiry” and a link to a newspaper article reporting the axing of PHE.

The social media post so infuriated ministers that they orchestrated a ring-round of Sir Jeremy’s colleagues including Baroness Manningham-Buller, the then chairman of the Wellcome Trust and the former head of MI5.

Lord Bethell, the health minister and one of Mr Hancock’s closest friends, told the then health secretary: “He’ll now know I’ve done a comprehensive ring round. This will irritate him but also warn him. I wonder if there is some sort of official route to talking to him?”

The conversations are revealed among more than 100,000 messages exchanged between ministers, officials and others during the pandemic that have been obtained by The Telegraph.

Sir Patrick Vallance, the Government’s Chief Scientific Adviser and the chairman of the Sage committee, also became embroiled in the row after Mr Hancock asked: “Does [Sir Jeremy] bring any value at all to SAGE? I've never once heard him say anything useful at all.”

Mr Hancock’s comments will raise serious concerns over the apparent attempts behind the scenes to undermine a senior scientist and member of Sage, the body that provided independent scientific advice on Covid to the Government.

It will also raise questions about ministers’ response to public criticism from eminent scientists who were concerned by the handling of the pandemic.

In his own book, published in July 2021, Sir Jeremy said of the then health secretary: “Matt Hancock shoulders a responsibility for the PPE shortages and testing fiasco, among other failings, that contributed to the dreadful epidemics in care homes and hospitals.”
‘Grave error’

In the book, Sir Jeremy also said Baroness Harding’s appointment as chairman of Test and Trace was a “grave error” and that the decision to put her in charge of the new body was “even worse” than PHE “being thrown under the bus”.

Mr Hancock appears to have been infuriated by Sir Jeremy from early on in the pandemic, even before his posts on the scrapping of PHE.

Four months earlier, in April 2020, Mr Hancock was already angry that Sir Jeremy had done an interview with Sophy Ridge on Sky News in which he had said: “I hope we would have a vaccine towards the end of this year,” but warned of the difficulty of making sure it was safe and then able to be manufactured in billions of doses around the world that “is truly effective”.

It is unclear what part of the Sky News interview so irritated Mr Hancock, but he sent a WhatsApp message to a special adviser at 9.18am on April 20, a day after the interview aired, questioning whether Sir Jeremy had been given permission to speak to the broadcaster. It is unclear whether there was any requirement of Sage members to do so.

Mr Hancock said: “We need a Jeremy Farrar handling strategy. He is totally offside, a complete loudmouth, has little respect amongst the serious scientists. Did he approach us before doing Ridge? He needs to be either inside the tent and onside, or outside and commentating. He adds no value internally.”
‘Frankly dangerous’

On the day that he gave the Sky News interview, Lord Bethell told Mr Hancock he had, “after massive toing-and-froing”, with Sir Jeremy and Prof John Newton, the Government’s testing tsar, agreed on proposals to conduct a survey to test the public on past and present Covid infections.

But Sir Jeremy had raised his concern that the antibody tests in April 2020 were unlikely to be accurate.

In a message circulated to Mr Hancock and Lord Bethell, Sir Jeremy wrote of the tests: “They should not be believed. I have seen no data that shows any currently available rapid test would be useful or informative. Some are frankly dangerous.

“I appreciate this is not a message that is popular. I wish this was not true. But the RDTs [rapid detection tests] are currently a distraction. In months to come there maybe good RDTs – there are none today in my view and reading of the data.”

Lord Bethell appeared to have been concerned at Sir Jeremy’s stance. “Farar is being a total spanner in the works,” he said in a message to Mr Hancock on April 19, adding: “But I think somehow he needs management. Either a Big Hug. Or a sharp talking to. But at the moment is q tricky.”

A month later, on May 29, Sir Jeremy posted on Twitter his concerns that Covid was “spreading too fast to lift lockdown in England” and that Test and Trace needed to “be in place, fully working” to deal with any surge in the virus.

He would tweet three weeks later, on June 19, 2020, that the “situation now changed” and the decision to lift lockdown restrictions was “entirely reasonable”.

But on May 29, Allan Nixon, another of Mr Hancock’s advisers, messaged his boss on WhatsApp: “Jeremy Farrar going off the rails again.” The then health secretary replied: “He is definitely no10’s problem not ours,” adding: “If asked about Farrar by No10, explain that we thought best to relieve him from his duties but were overruled...”

Mr Hancock’s anger and frustration increased, however, after Sir Jeremy posted criticism of the Government on Twitter following the axing of PHE.

That day, Aug 19, 2020, Mr Hancock sent a message to Sir Chris Wormald, the permanent secretary in the Department of Health and Social Care.

“We have to do something about Farrar. Can we fire him? This is completely unacceptable,” he wrote in a WhatsApp message. Prof Sir Chris Whitty, England’s Chief Medical Officer (CMO), replied: “Would have to be Patrick V to fire him as it’s SAGE."

The next day, Mr Hancock raised his concern with Emma Dean, a special adviser, asking her to speak to Sir Chris.

“Can you talk to CMO and see what we can do,” asked Mr Hancock. Ms Dean replied: “Yes. What is your ask? Get rid or neutralise?” to which Mr Hancock responded: “Neutralise. Stop the defamation.”

Later, Mr Hancock, clearly still irritated, said: “Why don’t we kick him off SAGE? he brings nothing.” Ms Dean said removing Sir Jeremy “would make him a martyr and would dine out on it very noisily” and advised against it.

On Aug 21, the issue over Sir Jeremy is still rankling and Lord Bethell told Mr Hancock that he had spoken to an eminent scientist “about handling Farrar”.

Lord Bethell reported back to Mr Hancock he had been advised “dont talk to Manning Buller - she’s ferocious and self-important, and would contrive to interpret a call as somehow interfering with Wellcome independence. He suggests I speak to Farrar directly, nicely explaining the challenge of outspoken external criticism when operating as a trusted advisor. I’ve put a call in, he didnt pick up. will update”.

“Manning Buller” refers to Baroness Manningham-Buller.

Five days later, Lord Bethell messaged Mr Hancock telling him he had spoken to eminent scientists about Sir Jeremy.

He also spoke to Baroness Manningham-Buller: “Manning Buller said she agreed with him 100% and defended his right to say whatever he liked.

“I’ve called and texted JF but he hasn’t replied. He’ll now know I’ve done a comprehensive ring round. This will irritate him but also warn him. I wonder if there is some sort of official route to talking to him?”

Sir Jeremy remained a member of Sage throughout the pandemic.

The EU's new debate: Are e-fuels a viable and green alternative to the combustion engine?

Jorge Liboreiro
Tue, 7 March 2023 


Brussels is abuzz with talks and takes on e-fuels, a nascent technology that combines hydrogen and CO2 to produce alternative sources to power road vehicles.

The esoteric topic suddenly finds itself at top of the European Union's political agenda after a small group of member states, including Germany and Italy, pushed last week to delay the final vote on the phase-out of combustion engine cars.

The phase-out had already been agreed upon by the co-legislators, the EU Council and the European Parliament, with a cut-off date of 2035, the deadline by which all new cars and vans sold across the bloc should present a 100% reduction in CO2 emissions.

Brussels chose 2035 as the time limit because the average lifespan of vehicles is 15 years and the European Green Deal aims to make the entire economy climate neutral by 2050.

In practice, the measure means the end of the combustion engine as we know it, a major shift with vast implications for Europe's automotive industry and the 13 million jobs that directly and indirectly depend on the sector.

The German Ministry of Transport, led by the business-friendly FDP party, has mounted a campaign to spare e-fuels in a bid to keep the combustion engine alive after 2035. The ministry says the European Commission, which drafted the original legislation, had offered a verbal commitment during negotiations to table a separate proposal that would enshrine the e-fuel exemption in law.

"How the Commission intends to fulfill its promise is of secondary importance. We are not imposing any conditions on the Commission in this regard," a spokesperson from the ministry told Euronews.

"What is important is that the Commission quickly submits legally binding and legally effective proposals to enable vehicles that can demonstrably be fuelled only with e-fuels to still be registered after 2035. This was the explicit pre-condition for Germany to agree to the revision of the CO2 Regulation."

The European Commission declined to comment on any verbal commitment or the possibility of designing a brand-new piece of legislation to satisfy Berlin's demands but said it was working "constructively" with member states to push the law over the finish line.

"The proposed legislation is technologically neutral," a Commission spokesperson said.
What exactly are e-fuels?

The production of e-fuels, also known as synthetic fuels or electro-fuels, starts with the process of electrolysis, which splits water (H2O) into hydrogen (H) and oxygen (O). The hydrogen is then mixed with carbon dioxide (CO2) to create the e-fuel in liquid form.

This e-fuel is later refined into e-petrol, e-diesel, e-kerosene and e-methanol, among other derivatives, that have commercial purposes similar to those of the fossil fuels they seek to replace.

In the case of vehicles, e-fuels can be blended in with oil-based fuels and combusted in the same engine, which means a smaller but still considerable amount of pollutants are released into the air.

Germany argues these damaging emissions can be offset by decarbonising the entire manufacturing process. This would entail mixing fully green hydrogen with carbon dioxide directly captured from the air, as well as using 100% renewable electricity across the value chain.

"Provided they are produced with renewable energy, e-fuels are climate neutral," the German spokesperson said.

The current state of the market, however, suggests the goal faces an uphill struggle: over 96% of the hydrogen currently produced in Europe comes from natural gas, while carbon capture technology continues to fall short of expectations, despite decades of development.

These tight conditions put pressure on prices and supplies, relegating e-fuels to a niche, well-off audience and overshadowing one of their key assets: e-fuels can be stored and shipped at room temperature worldwide, contrary to electricity, which is generated for immediate, near-at-hand consumption.

The eFuel Alliance, a Berlin-based interest group, blames the adverse situation on the lack of political endorsement for e-fuels, which hampers the development of a genuine economy of scale.

"European production capacities are very limited," the Alliance told Euronews in a statement. "But scaling up is waiting in the wings. However, this is not due to a lack of demand, but to uncertainties of the political framework conditions at the EU level."

The Alliance complains the EU's combustion engine ban is based on CO2 emissions detected at the exhaust pipeline, a condition that rules e-fuels out, rather than on the carbon footprint of the manufacturing process.

"This means that only vehicles that do not emit any emissions in real-life operation are classified as climate-neutral," the Alliance said. "This is one of the biggest problems and counteracts the actual efforts to advance any technology that is useful for the climate."

Expressing similar views, Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA), the association that represents the German automotive industry, says the EU should offer tax advantages to incentivise the uptake of "climate-neutral fuels" – even if e-fuels hardly classify as such at the moment.

"The market ramp-up of e-fuels technology must no longer be slowed down politically," a VDA spokesperson told Euronews.

Low-carbon vs Low-cost

E-fuels are further beset by criticism for their poor energy inefficiency compared to their greatest rival in green transport: electric vehicles.

The International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), an independent research organisation based in Washington, has estimated that, on average, 48% of renewable electricity used to convert e-fuels into liquid is lost along the process, while up to 70% of the fuel's energy is lost upon combustion.

This leads to a 16% efficiency.

By contrast, in electric vehicles, the ICCT says, only 10% of electricity is lost in charging and 20% is lost by the motor, resulting in a 72% efficiency.

Transport & Environment (T&E), a Brussels-based NGO that advocates for cleaner transport, projected very similar efficiency numbers in a critical report published last October.

The study showed that, due to the disparate efficiency rates, an electric car could travel five to six times farther than its e-petrol counterpart using the same amount of renewable electricity.

"It is incredibly energy inefficient to create any synthetic fuel," said Alex Keynes, clean vehicles manager at Transport & Environment. "E-fuels should not have a place in decarbonising cars. It is simply a waste of investment, a waste of energy and is not a credible technology."

German Transport Minister Volker Wissing, left, and German Finance Minister Christian Lindner are leading the charge against the EU's proposed ban on the combustion engine. - Markus Schreiber/Copyright 2023 The AP. All rights reserved

Keynes believes e-fuels should be promoted in economic sectors that currently lack low-carbon solutions, like maritime transport and aviation, rather than in the automotive industry where a "cheaper and viable alternative" exists in the form of electric vehicles.

Asked about Germany's position, Keynes said a tailor-made exemption for e-fuels would open up loopholes and be "simply unenforceable."

"There is no way to control whether the driver of the vehicle is putting fossil petrol or e-petrol into the car," Keynes told Euronews in an interview. "This creates a significant risk of greenwashing."

The industry insists Europe's road to climate neutrality should be "technology open" and embrace nascent technology, even if their commercial potential and environmental prowess are yet to be proven.

"At the beginning of every transformation, there are many question marks and uncertainties," said the eFuel Alliance. "Radical changes require trust and courage."

The Alliance admits the efficiency of e-fuels is "still being debated" but has a notable recommendation to close the gap with electric vehicles: to set up production centres in countries with "ideal conditions for solar and wind power," such as those in Africa, the Middle East and South America.

Civil society adamantly opposes this strategy, arguing that in the context of the climate crisis and Russia's war in Ukraine, the last thing Europe needs is yet another dependency on imported fuel.

"The 2035 phase-out of internal combustion engines is the best way forward," Keynes said. "If this target is watered down, then Europe simply cannot even comply with its own Paris Agreement commitments."

Two strong earthquakes rock southern Philippines

Cecil Morella and Ron Lopez
Tue, 7 March 2023 


Two strong earthquakes jolted the southern Philippines on Tuesday, authorities said, with the second damaging buildings and forcing the evacuation of hundreds of villagers from their homes.

A 6.0-magnitude quake struck at about 2:00 pm (0600 GMT), a few kilometres from Maragusan municipality in the mountainous gold-mining province of Davao de Oro on Mindanao island, the US Geological Survey said.

Local authorities said there were no reports of casualties or significant damage.

But a shallower second quake, measuring 5.6 magnitude, hit nearly three hours later in the neighbouring municipality of New Bataan, triggering the collapse of some houses.

New Bataan disaster officer Lynne Dollolasa said nearly 300 people were forced to leave their homes in Andap village, where "a number of houses collapsed".

About 100 people inside a shopping mall in Tagum city, in the adjacent province of Davao del Norte, were hit by falling glasses and plates as they fled the building, said Jay Suaybaguio, the provincial information officer.

"I was in the third floor buying office supplies when the quake suddenly struck," Suaybaguio told AFP.

"When we reached the first floor we saw broken bottles of wine and condiments. The lights went out but emergency lights turned on, helping us to find our way."

Photos posted on the Facebook page of the Davao del Norte disaster agency showed collapsed ceiling sections inside another Tagum shopping mall, which it attributed to "the series of earthquake incidents".

The Davao del Norte government suspended work and classes on Tuesday and Wednesday to allow for inspections of public buildings and infrastructure to ensure public safety.

The first quake lasted about 30 seconds and was followed by aftershocks, said Corporal Stephanie Clemen, a police officer in Tagum, about 40 kilometres (25 miles) from Maragusan.

"We immediately went under our desks and when the ground stopped shaking we went straight outside," Clemen told AFP.

"We are still outside because a moderate aftershock just hit."

While the quake did not appear to have destroyed anything, Clemen said, it was strong enough to "cause fear".

Quakes are a daily occurrence in the Philippines, which sits along the Pacific "Ring of Fire", an arc of intense seismic and volcanic activity that stretches from Japan through Southeast Asia and across the Pacific basin.

Most of the earthquakes are too weak to be felt by humans, but strong and destructive ones come at random with no technology available to predict when and where they will happen.

The nation's civil defence office regularly holds drills simulating earthquakes along active fault lines.

The last major quake was in the northern Philippines in October.

The 6.4-magnitude earthquake hit the mountain town of Dolores in Abra province, injuring several people, damaging buildings and cutting power to most of the region.

A 7.0-magnitude quake in mountainous Abra last July triggered landslides and ground fissures, killing 11 people and injuring several hundred.

rbl-cgm/amj/pbt

UK government urged to consider changing law to allow gene editing of embryos

Robin McKie
Sat, 4 March 2023 


Ministers must consider changing the law to allow scientists to carry out genome editing of human embryos for serious genetic conditions – as a matter of urgency. That is the key message of a newly published report by a UK citizens’ jury made up of individuals affected by genetic conditions.

The report is the first in-depth study of the views of individuals who live with genetic conditions about the editing of human embryos to treat hereditary disorders and will be presented at the Third International Summit on Human Genome Editing, which opens at the Crick Institute in London this week.

Scientists say that in a few years, they will be ready to use genome editing techniques to alter genes and induce changes in physical traits, such as disease risk, in future generations. In the UK, around 2.4 million people live with a genetic condition. These include cystic fibrosis, sickle cell disease, muscular dystrophy, various cancers, and some forms of hereditary blindness.

“Genome editing offers the prospect of preventing such conditions affecting future generations but there needs to be a full national debate on the issues,” said Prof Anna Middleton of Cambridge University, the project’s leader. “These discussions need to start now because genome editing is advancing so quickly. Many affected individuals want to debate the ethical issues and explore what implementation might look like.”

Genome editing acts like a pair of molecular scissors that can cut a strand of DNA at a specific site, allowing scientists to alter the structure of a gene, a form of manipulation that does not involve the introduction of DNA from other organisms. In the UK, as in most countries worldwide, it is illegal to perform genome editing on embryos that lead to pregnancy.

However, clinical trials of genome editing treatments are progressing in many countries, and a citizens’ jury recently gathered at the Wellcome Genome Campus, near Cambridge, to discuss under what circumstances the British government should consider changing that law. The 21 jurors all had personal experience of a genetic condition. Some were parents of children who died from a genetic condition and others had an inherited condition, such as cystic fibrosis .

After four days of presentations by scientists, lawyers and other experts, the group overwhelmingly voted to urge the government to consider changing the law to allow genome editing of embryos.

“The ethical discussions have been derailed by an abstract focus on designer babies when we have patients dealing with life-threatening diseases who want their voices heard,” Middleton said. “People affected by genetic disorders recognise it’s time to embrace a genuine discussion on whether embryo research should be enabled and what a pathway to implementation looks like. They have made it clear we should proceed down that road with urgency.”

UK
Anger grows over Afghan journalists still stranded by Home Office inaction

Mark Townsend Home Affairs Editor
Sat, 4 March 2023

Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

Hundreds of Afghan journalists remain stranded in increasingly “dire” circumstances as frustration mounts over the UK government’s refusal to share the latest entry criteria for its flagship resettlement programme.

This weekend, a coalition of press freedom and free expression organisations, including Index on Censorship, the National Union of Journalists, PEN International and English PEN, have written to home secretary Suella Braverman asking why details of the next phase of the Afghan citizens’ resettlement scheme (ACRS) have yet to be revealed.

Germany, France and Kosovo are among the countries that have offered safe refuge to a number of journalists, with critics accusing the UK of failing to meet its obligations to the journalists who supported the west’s mission in Afghanistan.

Martin Bright, editor-at-large of Index on Censorship, said the organisation had received a “deluge” of relocation demands from Afghan journalists in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran who had been offered no reassurance, despite apparently being prime candidates for resettlement, because of the UK government’s unwillingness to offer clarity.

“Without clarification on progress for ACRS, there is little if any support that can be provided, and this leaves the journalists vulnerable to threats of disappearance, violence, arrest, imprisonment and assassination,” said Bright.

Estimates indicate that 200 Afghan journalists have fled to Iran and Pakistan, many of them women, where they report being targeted as their visas expire, with little sign of getting their paperwork renewed. Index is talking directly to 35 at-risk journalists in Afghanistan and Pakistan via an encrypted platform.

One case involves a female Afghan journalist who fled to Pakistan, itself a perilous place due to the presence of Taliban sympathisers – and was routinely harassed there due to her nationality and ethnicity, culminating in a street attack during which she was sexually assaulted.

Last month, reports emerged that a number of Afghan journalists had been arrested in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, and their phones, laptops and cameras seized.

A Taliban fighter stands guard as a woman walks past in Kabul, Afghanistan, in December 2022. Photograph: Ebrahim Noroozi/AP

Eight Afghan journalists who worked for the BBC have recently had their UK visa applications reopened after legal action against the Home Office.

In August 2021, then prime minister Boris Johnson announced the creation of ACRS with priority for those who stood up for democracy, women’s rights and freedom of speech – including a specific reference to journalists.

It officially launched in January 2022 for those already evacuated, with a second “pathway” later opened for refugees in neighbouring countries such as Pakistan and Iran.

After giving priority to contractors who worked for institutions like the British Council, the third pathway is planned to fully open this year, with journalists expected to be among its priority groups, though no details are yet available.

A government source said more information “will be set out in due course”. Index, PEN and the NUJ are urging Braverman to explain how the scheme will help at-risk journalists.

Meanwhile, accounts are increasingly emerging of journalists, particularly women, who have escaped to Pakistan only to continue to face threats. One reporter and women’s rights activist, whose work led to her publicly denouncing the Taliban, is now living in poverty in Pakistan with a five-month-old baby boy.

Another, a prominent young Afghan broadcast journalist, also made it across the border, where she now survives in a slum and goes days without food.

“During this period, I have gone through hell. There is much discrimination, racism and prejudice in Pakistan society, and hostility towards Afghan women in particular,” she said.

Her Pakistani visa expired in August 2022, with the authorities yet to offer her an extension. Any Afghan in Pakistan without a valid visa could be jailed for three years or deported back home.

A spokesperson for the British government said that 24,500 people had so far been brought to safety from Afghanistan, including “campaigners for women’s rights, human rights defenders, scholars, journalists, judges and members of the LGBT+ community”.

They added that, since the evacuation of Kabul, the UK had helped “7,000 vulnerable people leave the country. Our work continues to help other eligible Afghans.”

‘You saw all your bones in your hands’: British veteran recalls atom bomb test horror

While successive British governments have denied troops were exposed to unsafe levels of radiation in the Pacific, the US has a dedicated compensation programme for its nuclear veterans.

Darren Calpin
Tue, 7 March 2023 

Mayor Alan Dowson - Suppplied by Darren Calpin

Councillor Alan Dowson was just 19 when he witnessed most people’s worst nightmare – a nuclear explosion.

After entering the RAF Catering Corps to carry out his National Service, the teenager from Sunderland was ordered to do his bit for Queen and Country on the other side of the world in the spring of 1958.

On a balmy hot day beneath clear blue skies, Dowson found himself on an idyllic beach on Christmas Island (now Kiritimati), one of more than 30 low-lying Pacific islands that make up the tropical nation of Kiribati.

Sitting within the grand, present day surroundings of the Mayor’s Parlour at Peterborough Town Hall, the now 84-year-old closes his eyes and takes us back to that day: April 22, 1958.

“When the blast went off, you saw all your bones in your hands,” he recalls. “The X-rays ran through your body.”

This was Operation Grapple – an H-bomb detonation which was part of the UK’s atomic weapons testing programme. The awestruck 19-year-old had just seen for himself an H-bomb airdrop with an explosive yield of around three megatonnes. It remains the largest British nuclear weapon ever tested.

Operation Grapple – an H-bomb detonation – was the largest British nuclear weapon ever tested

“There was a heat…” Dowson says painfully, tears appearing with the memory. “There was a heat coming through, and there was a whiplash of sound.”

Regaining his composure, he continues: “The blast went over you and after 20 seconds you were allowed to get up and watch. There was one person who was allowed to watch it [all]. He went blind, [but] he got his sight back a few months later.”

Dowson, who was an Acting Corporal at the time, remembers looking around and seeing “thousands and thousands of dead birds.”

In total, the British government dropped nine thermonuclear weapons on Kiritimati between 1957 and 1958. Around 22,000 British servicemen, along with soldiers from New Zealand and Fiji, took part in the tests.

Utilising all three branches of the armed forces, the controversial weapons testing programme was the largest British military undertaking since D-Day. Upon its completion, Great Britain declared itself the world’s third nuclear power, alongside the United States and the Soviet Union.

‘Things were not right with the airmen’

Dowson and his comrades were driven to the beach in a lorry on that fateful day. Despite being just 40 miles from the blast, the men were issued no personal protective equipment of any kind, Dowson claims.

Safety guidance on the day was, he recalls, scarce: personnel were advised to wear a hat and make sure their sleeves were rolled down. The men were then ordered to “sit down with your back towards the blast area and cover your eyes.”

Despite assurances given at the time that the tests posed little risk to health (via radiation exposure), a significant number of veterans went on to experience significant repercussions.

Former servicemen and veterans associations, such as the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association (BNTVA), believe these nuclear tests ruined their lives, causing cancers and fertility problems, as well as birth defects that have been passed down through the generations.

Dowson, who was an Acting Corporal at the time, remembers seeing ‘thousands and thousands of dead birds’

The Ministry of Defence has declared that no link has been found between the tests and ill health. Dowson, who was last year elected as Peterborough’s mayor, disagrees fervently with the MoD’s findings.

“When we came back,” he says, “there started to be rumours that things were not right with the airmen.” Dowson believes his inability to conceive a child with his wife was caused directly by his presence on Kiritimati. “Most of us were infertile,” he says, visibly upset.

Of those veterans who were able to conceive, Dowson reiterates the issue of birth defects: “A number of them have had children and grandchildren who have been directly affected by the radiation.”

Nuclear test veterans have campaigned for decades to have their contributions to Britain’s ‘ultimate deterrent’ officially acknowledged. In November 2022, the Prime Minister finally decided to award medals to all those who participated in the UK’s atomic weapons testing programme.

Rishi Sunak described the medals as “an enduring symbol of our country's gratitude” for those involved in the test programme. “It is,” he said, “only right their contribution to our safety, freedom and way of life is appropriately recognised with this honour.”

Alan Dowson with a fellow serviceman

Dowson during Operation Grapple

Dowson welcomed the decision with mute enthusiasm: “It’s some acknowledgment, but I don’t think it goes far enough.”

Gazing out of the window over the busy street below, he muses: “Knocking out a medal for 1,500 people is little expense for the cost they’ve created in the past.

“The cost has been borne by the servicemen and their families.”

The mayor, who is a committed supporter of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), is clear about what he and his former comrades really want from the government: “I think they’ve got to apologise,” he said.

The US Government has already paid compensation to British personnel who were present at Operation Dominic, a separate nuclear test program which the US and UK worked on together in the Pacific during the early 1960s

Yet the mayor acknowledges the chances of receiving a public formal apology are slim. It will, he admits, open the floodgates for compensation claims.

“If the British Government can ignore facts then they will, if they can get away with it,” he adds. “And they have got away with it – so far.”

The cost of nuclear fallout

Analysis, by Paul Nuki

Here’s a not-so-funny thing about the atomic tests that took place in the Pacific: if you were a US serviceman stationed there who has since developed cancer, you are compensated. If, on the other hand, you are a Brit like Mayor Dowson, you get a medal but nothing more.

“The MOD does not accept that participants at the UK atmospheric nuclear test and weapons experiments were, as a result, exposed to ionising radiation that adversely affected their health,” the Foreign Office told the Telegraph last week.

Quite the reverse in fact: “The findings … show that over the entire follow-up period of 1952-2017, overall mortality, and cancer mortality of the test veterans and military controls remain lower than the general population,” it added.

Can it really be that 20,000 British servicemen stood unprotected and at close quarters to a series of nuclear explosions and suffered no ill effects whatsoever?

And if that really is the case, why are the Americans compensating their people? Indeed, why worry about nuclear fallout at all?

While successive British governments have denied troops were exposed to unsafe levels of radiation in the Pacific, the US has a dedicated compensation programme for its nuclear veterans.

A mushroom cloud rises over the Pacific moments after the detonation of Britain's second Hydrogen bomb - Gilbert Carter/Mirrorpix via Getty Images

The scheme provides $75,000 for those who served in the Pacific and went on to develop one or more of 20 cancers known to be linked to radiation exposure.

In one case, the US government paid out to a critically ill British ex-serviceman who had been seconded to the US military on Christmas Island.

Roy Prescott died aged 66 of lung cancer, which he believed was caused by nuclear tests he witnessed. “I am a casualty of the cold war,” he said before his death in September 2006.

There is, of course, no doubt that exposure to radiation can cause a range of cancers.

After the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, more leukaemias and solid cancers were observed among the survivors than expected, for example. Historically, nuclear workers have also been found to be at higher risk of leukaemia and many other cancers.

Then there are studies of soldiers who served in the Pacific. One US study of 3,020 nuclear veterans revealed increases in leukaemia; a study of 10,983 Australian veterans also showed an increase in leukaemia, as did a study of 528 men from New Zealand.

So how does the UK government justify its view?

The truth is the studies it relies on – ones it commissioned itself – are not as clear cut as it pretends.

Members of the press and naval ratings aboard HMS Alert 35 miles offshore of Malden Island, Kiribati. Seen here dressed in protective suits known as Goon Suits. The ships crew and passengers where there to witness the second test of Britain's Hydrogen bomb - Gilbert Carter/Daily Herald

Yes, it is true that Pacific veterans have better health than the general population but that is to be expected. It is true of all soldiers who are selected for their fitness and is known as the “healthy soldier” effect.

The long-term UK study tracking Pacific veteran's health actually finds they have a 2 per cent higher mortality rate than a control group of similar soldiers. They are also more likely to have contracted leukaemia as well as other cancers.

“The overall mortality rate in the [nuclear] test participants was slightly higher relative risk than that in the control group”, say the study authors. “This difference was driven by similar increased risks for both all cancers combined and all non-cancer diseases. Leukaemia … showed evidence of being raised relative to controls”.

Of course this link between watching nuclear bombs explode in the Pacific and a raised mortality and cancer risk is only an association. Proving one caused the other is a different question and would rely on the MOD having taken detailed and accurate radiation exposure reading at the time.

For Mayor Dowson and his colleagues who took part in Operation Grapple on Christmas Island this information hardly exists, with just 2 per cent of the men involved monitored for their exposure to radiation.

“Consequently… the power to detect any increasing risks with measured [radiation] dose was limited,” note the study authors.