Monday, November 27, 2023

Dublin Riots: the Social Engineering of Xenophobia in Ireland


 Facebook
 NOVEMBER 27, 2023

Photograph Source: David Rovics

In these days of a genocidal bombing campaign in Gaza and a widespread blackout in both the mainstream media in the west, and on social media, the choice between a news blackout on Facebook and a polarized, all-or-nothing “discourse” on X, trying to make sense of anything happening in the world that you’re not directly witnessing yourself can in many ways be more challenging than ever, oddly enough, in this epoch of supposed “connection.”

Following events taking place in Dublin, Ireland, since November 23rd, all the same sorts of factors are at play in trying to make real sense of anything, it seems to me.  I’m not sure if it’s any different for people who live there, at least judging from the sorts of things we’re hearing from the Irish politicians or Irish media outlets.

So although I know many Irish people in Ireland who share my take on recent history there and ongoing developments in Irish society that have been taking place on the island in our shared lifetimes, perhaps my vantage point as an outsider who is also a frequent visitor with an interest in sociology might be of use.

For the many people out there in the world with Irish ancestry or just anyone with a deep sense of connection with various themes from Irish history or with Irish music, dance, poetry, etc., it’s easy to paint the Irish past and present with broad brushes and unhelpful generalizations.  I’ll just admit right here that I’m one of those people apt to make such generalizations, being a history buff with a bit of an obsession with Irish traditional music.  But I’ll endeavor to avoid any inaccurate pronouncements, even if I may make a few broad historical statements along the way.

For those who missed it, an Irish citizen with an immigrant background seems to have lost the plot and began attacking small children with a knife, on one of Dublin’s busiest streets.  One of the children’s teachers and a quick-thinking Brazilian immigrant on a motorcycle were able to put a stop to the man’s stabbing spree.  What then followed were large groups of young men engaging in the torching of city buses and police cars and apparently the chanting of xenophobic slogans (“get them out”), the targeting of a refugee asylum center, it seems, with one of the burning vehicles on fire directly in front of it, and then larger groups of people taking the opportunity created by the chaos to loot some downtown shops.

Politicians and pundits are saying these riots are unprecedented, in a number of ways.  They’re very understandably expressing revulsion.  But just as often, they seem perplexed.

If they are actually perplexed, and not just faking it for the cameras, it could still be understandable.  The politicians are usually around my age or older, unlike these young rioters.  The politicians grew up in something more along the lines of the Ireland I first visited in the 1980’s, and then again much more in the 1990’s.

The Irish Republic they grew up in — and the Irish Republic I first visited — was overwhelmingly white, Irish, Catholic, and poor.  It was the first country to be colonized by the British Empire, and one of many to throw off the yoke of imperial domination only to replace it with a partial independence that had a lot to be desired, and still does.

But the Ireland they grew up in also had, at least by my recollection, certain consistencies about it that many people found comforting.  Most people were poor, but then that was true of most people you knew, and there were very few ostentatiously wealthy people of any description, even in the center of the biggest cities, flaunting their riches and wearing mink coats and staying in fancy hotels back then.  Many people were on the dole — probably half the young people I met back when I first visited — but rent was cheap in most of the country, and most everyone could at least squeak by under the circumstances.

Although many people had complaints about the two-party duopoly that had been (and still is) running the Republic of Ireland for most of its existence since independence, there was also a widespread feeling that a lot of people in the world had it worse than Ireland did at the time.  There was, and still is, a widespread sense of solidarity with other formerly colonized lands and peoples around the world, whether they were other former victims of the British Empire or victims of other empires.  There was a widespread and frequently-expressed revulsion for the racist attitudes many Irish people associated with Irish-Americans, and as an American visiting Ireland I was often told by people that “we’re not like that here.”

To say what is overwhelmingly obvious to anyone my age or older who grew up in Ireland, the whole foundation of Irish nationalism was that it was a nationalism of a colonized nation against an imperial one.  And to the extent that most of the island became independent in 1921, Irish nationalism maintained this internationalist, anti-colonial, anti-imperialist, and also fundamentally anti-racist and anti-xenophobic character, as it was rooted in all the colonized people uniting against their common oppressors, and very rooted in socialist notions generally.  As any Irish person passingly familiar with Irish history knows, the leaders of the Irish independence struggle were also socialists.

Ireland was thus also not only an island with a disproportionate number of great musicians, but its population on average was one of the most generous in the world, in terms of donating to and volunteering for humanitarian organizations, which is just one quantitative measure of the attitude of the average Irish person.

So many aspects of this Ireland I’m describing began to change in the 1990’s, with the “Celtic Tiger” phenomenon.  Overnight, it seemed, Ireland became a country of immigration rather than emigration.  Suddenly, jobs were plentiful, but they were being taken not only by Irish people but my immigrants from other EU countries and beyond.

IT companies were moving in in droves and setting up their European headquarters in Ireland.  This was good for Irish IT experts, but for everyone else, as in places like San Francisco, it meant skyrocketing rents and other skyrocketing expenses for so many other people.

Ireland was obviously at a crossroads, in the 1990’s, and in a situation where really big decisions desperately needed to be made about regulating the housing market under the circumstances, lest the cost of living become completely disconnected from what the average person earned.  Despite efforts to increase social spending to keep up with rising inequality, inequality has continued to rise in Ireland, by my observation and also according to something I just read from the International Monetary Fund.  Where this is most apparent is within the ranks of the top 10%, and particularly the top 1%, of Irish society.

As with the US and so many other countries, although perhaps it would be a stretch to call the Irish Republic a failed state, it is a state that, like the US, has been completely unable to rise to the occasion that is demanded by the situation, and effectively control the housing market, which is of course one of the biggest reasons the wealthy keep getting wealthier, and so many other people can’t pay the ever-increasing costs.  The average apartment rental in Dublin is now well over $2,000, and getting worse all the time.

And who are the beneficiaries of this growing divide?  Some of the biggest are those who own the land — the land, and the buildings, that once were only moderately profitable to own as a landlord, which have become tremendously profitable.  Which has led, in Ireland as with the US, to a further concentration in ownership of the housing stock, by investors with ever less connection to the society whose basic needs it is their business to profit from.

This kind of untenable situation might give rise to lots of people identifying their problem as being all caught up with capitalism and things like the housing market being woefully insufficiently regulated.  People might demand that all the landlords in the Dáil resign!  People might recognize Ireland for the terribly divided class society that it is, now more than ever, and they might try to address this problem head-on.

While there are people trying to organize renters in Ireland, of course, what has characterized the Irish left by my observation over the past two decades or so has been the same sorts of division and atomization that has been easy to witness here in the United States.  Identity politics has largely taken over political discourse in the Republic of Ireland, unlike reality on the ground in Northern Ireland, where the same phenomenon has not taken hold to anything like the same degree, though it’s evident there, too.

I don’t know what the various motivations are for the different actors involved here, but what is very evident to observe on social media in the wake of the riots, and generally on social media consumed by Irish people for many years, are people constantly promoting the same kinds of nominally anti-racist arguments that are steeped in a sort of white guilt and anti-working class sentiment very familiar to Americans, but which seems especially alien in the Irish context.  Or at least it used to.  Now, it seems to have taken root.

After years and years of people in Ireland expressing nationalist sentiments being told by anonymous actors on the internet — some of whom may actually be fellow Irish people, who knows — that their patriotic pride or nationalistic sentiments were nothing more than expressions of racism and xenophobia, that they were uneducated people, that they were scum, eventually this kind of message being driven home continually on corporate, American-owned social media platforms managed to take root.  Eventually, some combination perhaps of their ever-more-stressed circumstances, of the unfamiliar displays of ostentatious wealth that are now so easy to find in the center of every Irish city, of the direly precarious and ever-worsening housing market, and of the competition for jobs and housing with an ever-growing population of immigrants and refugees, created the xenophobic outburst that was being socially engineered for so many years, in so many ways.

When I look at the kinds of messaging I’m seeing on social media platforms using hash tags like #DublinRiots I see organized, professional trolls who have an agenda in mind to foment division within Irish society and to foment racism and xenophobia in it.  Of course it doesn’t need to be professional to appear to be organized or to have terrible consequences.  The right algorithms can create that appearance and have the same effect.

But whether professional actors are involved or not, who might they be and what interests might they be promoting?  The possibilities are endless.  The ones that first come to mind to me would be anyone who might have an interest in de-socializing Irish nationalism, and turning it into a racist, rightwing phenomenon.  Up to this point, Ireland has had no far right party.  It is definitely in the interests of various actors, such as MI5, just to take a less-than-random possibility, to divide the Irish nationalist community as much as possible.

It would also be in the interest of the Irish ruling class — the 1% of Irish society that owns a third of the wealth there — which is profiting at a heretofore unprecedented rate from the basic need of the island’s population to have a place to live.  Much better to have the nationalists and the refugees competing with each other for a place in Irish society, rather than having them unite against their common class enemy.

David Rovics is a frequently-touring singer/songwriter and political pundit based out of Portland, Oregon.  His website is davidrovics.com.


The War against Wind Farms


 
 NOVEMBER 27, 2023
Facebook

Photograph Source: National Rural – CC BY 2.0

The fossil fuel lobby has had a busy year on the eco-camouflage front.  Earlier this year, interest started to rumble and rage against the stranding of humpback whales on the east coast of the United States.  Suddenly, opponents of wind turbine technology – and renewable technology more broadly – had identified an invaluable, if tenuous nexus: a link between whale mortality and offshore wind farms.

One true enthusiast for the proposition proved to be Donald Trump.  Speaking at a rally in South Carolina in September, for example, the Republican presidential contender suggested that these “windmills” were driving whales “crazy”, inflicting death in such numbers that they were washing up on shore “on a weekly basis”.

Such technology is the subject of frenzied study, and it would be remiss not to mention that various environmental concerns have been raised.  These are often specific to their intended locales.  One need only consult recent work commissioned by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, an adjunct of the US Department of the Interior, to appreciate the complexity of the field.  The report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concerned the Nantucket Shoals region, an area of complex hydrodynamics and ecology.  The authors acknowledged that large turbines of the size planned for the region had not, as yet, been built in US waters, and would therefore require extensive modelling on oceanographic effects, notably on zooplankton populations upon which whales feed.

Rob Deaville of the Zoological Society of London’s Cetacean Strandings Investigation Programme also admits that disruptions to marine wildlife can take place in the construction phase of wind farms given the presence of percussive noise.  Animals such as porpoises or dolphins “may move out of that area while you’re installing the wind farms, but then the longer-term picture: in some areas they may never come back, in some they may come back in larger numbers than before.”

Such concerned albeit cautious observation sits differently with claims of mass whale mortality that has become a hobby horse for opponents of renewable energy sources.  But look behind these newly converted whale-loving types, and you are likely to find an avid fossil-fuel lobbyist, the cash-filled account of the commodities sector, or those advocating the merits of nuclear energy.

The issue has also made its way across the Pacific to Australia, that great bastion of fossil feud mania.  In the state of New South Wales, residents of the Hunter and Illawarra regions woke up to posters making the claim about the harmful effects of wind turbine technology.   A roadside billboard in Port Stephens, north of Newcastle, featured a beached whale with a background of wind turbines, sporting the words, “Stop Port Stephens Offshore Wind Farms”.

Fictional articles have also made similar claims.  One, in particular, purports to have been published in the academic journal Marine Policy, asserting that offshore wind farms in the Illawarra and Hunter would result in an annual whale death toll of 400.  The journal’s disconcerted editor-in-chief, Quentin Hanich, could find no evidence of the phantom study with its alleged origins in the University of Tasmania, which had been shared on a Facebook group No Offshore Wind Farm for the Illawarra.  “We never received this imaginary paper … I am seeing no evidence that the study ever took place.”

None of this seems to trouble members of the Liberal National Coalition.  The federal opposition leader, Peter Dutton, has claimed, somewhat erroneously, that there had been “no environmental consideration of what these huge wind turbines, 260 to 280 metres out of the water, will mean.”

Another example of a fossil fuel parliamentarian turned green populist is Queensland Nationals Senator, Matt Canavan, who recently admitted that he had a soft spot for these cetacean casualties.  But then again, he also claims to have a fondness for all of Mother Nature’s glories, now facing the scourge of wind farm technology.  As he told Sky News, that favourite network for scratching populists and reactionaries, “massive amounts of wind farms, and solar panels which take up enormous amounts of land […] destroy koala habitat [and have] a massive impact on our environment … we destroy the environment to try and save it.”

The same senator has been a spoiler of any net zero emissions policy regarding greenhouse gases, much to the consternation of many members of his own party, and could barely conceal his delight at the wording of the 2021 Glasgow Climate Change communique that countries “phase down” rather than “phase out” coal burning.  For Canavan, this meant that COP26 had given the “green light” for Australia to keep digging and “supply the world with more coal because that’s what brings people out of poverty.”

This burst of anti-wind farm criticism ignored the inconvenient fact that almost all the humpback whale strandings the subject of concern showed signs of vessel strike.  In February 2023, the Marine Mammal Commission released a statement confirming the view that “there is no evidence to link these strandings to offshore wind energy development”.

This month, Greenpeace published a piece stating that “offshore wind farms aren’t killing whales.”  While admitting the answer is a nuanced one, it concluded that “building offshore wind is way, way better for ocean wildlife than fossil fuels, especially offshore gas and oil.”  No single peer-reviewed study, Greenpeace went on to note, has found that offshore wind farms are responsible for whale mortality.

The greatest threat to various whale populations lies in fishing, ship strikes, and oceanic disruptions arising from climate change.  As, it would seem, those figures in eco-camouflage such as Dutton and Canavan, who continue to coddle fossil fuel companies intent on seismic blasting and offshore drilling.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com


The Present State of Our Art World


 
 NOVEMBER 27, 2023
Facebook

For a very long time, at least since the 1980s, there has been a dramatic contrast between the politics of most art writers and artists and those of the collector class. The art writers and artists who had any political concerns have been liberal-leftists, while their collectors often have had decidedly conservative views. (Here of course I generalize.) People who are very good at making money are, in general, unlikely to be leftists. (But of course there are exceptions.) When I say that the artists and writers were leftists, I should qualify that claim. They held leftist views but were unlikely to act politically in any practical way, apart from signing petitions. Indeed, if you are far enough to the left you may well think that nothing you say or do is likely to have any practical effect.

The basis of this contrast goes back to the 1950s, when Clement Greenberg, the greatest and most influential American art writer, developed a Marxist theory of modernist even while his own activities migrated rightwards from depression era leftist politics to outright right wing positions. His career showed that theorizing could be disconnected from practical politics. When in the 1980s I came into art criticism from a very different, essentially apolitical field, philosophy, I was for a long time puzzled by the politics of my colleagues. What seemingly was at stake, I surmised, was a professional guilt, the sense that one ultimate role of art writing was to support the market system in art. Maybe that was an unfair, dismissive judgment. But so far as I could see, although a few conservatives complained, no one was seriously bothered by this odd situation.

That the most famous (and best) authority on Impressionism published ferocious leftist manifestoes did not prevent him from achieving the highest academic honors. Nor was anyone disturbed when the man generally said to be the greatest living American sculptor had his work accompanied, at least early on, with leftist claims. It was as if the establishment simply didn’t take these outspoken political statements seriously. Or didn’t even care about them. Very well known critics argued in the 1980s that there were two kinds of artworks: those good ones that were politically critical; and those others that lacked that criticality. Their theorizing was very different from Greenberg’s, but here you see the critical inheritance of his Marxism. All of these works entered into the same art markets, and were supported by the same collectors and public museums. And so it was natural to ask whether this contrast between politically critical art and conformist works made any difference or, indeed, was real.

At any rate, what’s happened right now is that this long standing alliance between leftist artists and the political powers in the art world has come apart. It’s useful to identify three stages of that development. A couple of years ago, Black artists started, finally!, to be taken seriously. Then there were widespread critical discussions about the finances of art museums, and the uneasiness about some sources of their funding. And right now it has been amplified with the spill over of the latest Middle Eastern conflicts into domestic politics. Concern with race; with museum financing; and with Middle Eastern wars: all of these are long lasting conflicts, and so it’s surprising, in retrospect, that their effects did not surface earlier in the art world. Until recently, very many artists were free to make political art without having their works judged critically by the people who buy the art and pay the bills for museums. Now, however, it seems, that is no longer happening.

These three novel developments involve rather distinct demands. Adding Black artists (and Black curators) to the art world, while a major change, seems compatible with the basic operation of the present art world system. The canon is always changing, and so adding Jacob Lawrence to the major artists from the era of the Abstract Expressionists and Adrian Piper to the conceptual artists is merely to enlarge the pool of much admired artists. Response to critical debates about museum funding is a more dramatic demand, for if it requires providing less support for extremely expensive artworks, then the present art world economy will indeed be changed. Once the political interests of the upscale museum trustees are examined critically, it will surely be harder to raise vast sums. And so it’s hard to know exactly what a lower key economic art world would be like. As for the third concern, the spill-over of Middle Eastern politics into the art world, its effect is harder still to predict. Zionism is not an especially prominent theme in contemporary art, and so the avoidance or promotion of displays of works with that subject would not, in itself, be a major change. But what’s at issue may be larger themes, concern with colonialism and its legacy, and, as noted earlier, the link to debates about art world financing.

Suppose that the collector-class seriously policed the political claims of contemporary art. In the earlier case of Black art, there was a new desire to display, promote and collect work by Black artists. What would happen if the collectors were to make demands about what work they will (and won’t) support? The reason that American museums depend so heavily upon private funding is that if put to a public test, it would be impossible to get support for even remotely controversial exhibitions of contemporary work. And so our museums need their upscale collectors. Already we find a similar-seeming situation in the education world, where some donors are saying that they want to control what is taught and who teaches. Given that some universities are dependent upon donors, this may be a serious demand, one that carries real financial consequences. Perhaps, then, the same thing will happen in the art world.

This art world has changed. When in 1972 I did my thesis defense at Columbia University, the chair of my committee was Arthur Danto, the philosopher soon to become a renowned critic, and a distinguished art historian, Howard Hibbard. And the third member was a literary scholar, known at that time only for his writings about deconstruction and modernist literature. But soon enough Edward Said because famous. I remember a few years later looking in the faculty directory and finding that he had no home address listed. In our culture, political fame can be tricky. Of course the present art world is just a very small part of the world economy. And so it’s dangerous to draw larger conclusions from our particular situation. But it does seem obvious that massive change is on the horizon. Under the old regime, patronage functioned in a top-down basis. Perhaps we will return to that situation.

David Carrier is a philosopher who writes art criticism. His Aesthetic Theory, Abstract Art and Lawrence Carroll (Bloomsbury) and with Joachim Pissarro, Aesthetics of the Margins/ The Margins of Aesthetics: Wild Art Explained (Penn State University Press) were published in 2018. He is writing a book about the historic center of Naples, and with Pissarro he conducted a sequence of interviews with museum directors for Brooklyn Rail. He is a regular contributor to Hyperallergic.

Oil and gas industry faces moment of truths

Photo by Zbynek Burival on Unsplash

Oil and gas producers face pivotal choices about their role in the global energy system amid a worsening climate crisis fuelled in large part by their core products, according to a major new special report from the International Energy Agency (IEA). It shows how the industry can take a more responsible approach and contribute positively to the new energy economy.

The Oil and Gas Industry in Net Zero Transitions analyses the implications and opportunities for the industry that would arise from stronger international efforts to reach energy and climate targets. Released ahead of the COP28 Climate Summit in Dubai, the special report sets out what the global oil and gas sector would need to do to align its operations with the goals of the Paris Agreement in 2015.

Even under today’s policy settings, global demand for both oil and gas is set to peak by 2030, according to the latest IEA projections. Stronger action to tackle climate change would mean clear declines in demand for both fuels. If governments deliver in full on their national energy and climate pledges, demand would fall 45% below today's level by 2050. In a pathway to reaching ‘net zero’ emissions by 2050, which is necessary to keep the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5degC within reach, oil and gas use would decline by more than 75% by 2050.

Yet the oil and gas sector – which provides more than half of global energy supply and employs nearly 12 million workers worldwide – has been a marginal force at best in transitioning to a clean energy system, according to the report. Oil and gas companies currently account for just 1% of clean energy investment globally – and 60% of that comes from just four companies.

IEA executive director Fatih Birol said: “The oil and gas industry is facing a moment of truth at COP28 in Dubai. With the world suffering the impacts of a worsening climate crisis, continuing with business as usual is neither socially nor environmentally responsible. Oil and gas producers around the world need to make profound decisions about their future place in the global energy sector.

“The industry needs to commit to genuinely helping the world meet its energy needs and climate goals – which means letting go of the illusion that implausibly large amounts of carbon capture are the solution. This special report shows a fair and feasible way forward in which oil and gas companies take a real stake in the clean energy economy while helping the world avoid the most severe impacts of climate change.”

Transition strategy
The global oil and gas industry encompasses a large and diverse range of players – from small, specialised operators to huge national oil companies. Attention often focuses on the role of the private sector majors, but they own less than 13% of global oil and gas production and reserves. Every company’s transition strategy can and should include a plan to reduce emissions from its own operations, according to the report. The production, transport and processing of oil and gas results in nearly 15% of global energy-related greenhouse emissions – equal to all energy-related greenhouse emissions from the USA. As things stand, companies with targets to reduce their own emissions account for less than half of global oil and gas output.

To align with a 1.5°C scenario, the industry’s own emissions need to decline by 60% by 2030. The emissions intensity of oil and gas producers with the highest emissions is currently five- to 10-times above those with the lowest, showing the vast potential for improvements. Furthermore, strategies to reduce emissions from methane – which accounts for half of the total emissions from oil and gas operations – are well-known and can typically be pursued at low cost.

While oil and gas production is vastly lower in transitions to net zero emissions, it will not disappear – even in a 1.5°C scenario. Some investment in oil and gas supply is needed to ensure the security of energy supply and provide fuel for sectors in which emissions are harder to abate, according to the report. Yet not every oil and gas company will be able to maintain output – requiring consumers to send clear signals on their direction and speed of travel so that producers can make informed decisions on future spending.

Declines in demand
The $800 billion currently invested in the oil and gas sector each year is double what is required in 2030 on a pathway that limits warming to 1.5°C. In that scenario, declines in demand are sufficiently steep that no new long-lead-time conventional oil and gas projects are needed. Some existing oil and gas production would even need to be shut in.

In transitions to ‘net zero’, oil and gas is set to become a less profitable and riskier business over time. The report’s analysis finds that the current valuation of private oil and gas companies could fall by 25% from $6 trillion today if all national energy and climate goals are reached, and by up to 60% if the world gets on track to limit global warming to 1.5°C.

Opportunities lie ahead despite these challenges. The report finds that the oil and gas sector is well placed to scale up some crucial technologies for clean energy transitions. In fact, some 30% of the energy consumed in 2050 in a decarbonised energy system comes from technologies that could benefit from the industry’s skills and resources – including hydrogen, carbon capture, offshore wind and liquid biofuels.

However, this would require a step-change in how the sector allocates its financial resources. The oil and gas industry invested around $20 billion in clean energy in 2022, or roughly 2.5% of its total capital spending. The report finds that producers looking to align with the aims of the Paris Agreement would need to put 50% of their capital expenditures towards clean energy projects by 2030, on top of the investment required to reduce emissions from their own operations.

The report also notes that carbon capture, currently the linchpin of many firms’ transition strategies, cannot be used to maintain the status quo. If oil and natural gas consumption were to evolve as projected under today’s policy settings, limiting the temperature rise to 1.5°C would require an entirely inconceivable 32 billion tonnes of carbon captured for utilisation or storage by 2050, including 23 billion tonnes via direct air capture. The amount of electricity needed to power these technologies would be greater than the entire world’s electricity demand today.

Dr Birol concluded: “The fossil fuel sector must make tough decisions now, and their choices will have consequences for decades to come. Clean energy progress will continue with or without oil and gas producers. However, the journey to ‘net zero’ emissions will be more costly, and harder to navigate, if the sector is not on board.”


Ukraine takes delivery of 3D printed Titan Falcon drones

Three drones were provided by an American-Ukrainian NGO, Germany's Donaustahl GmbH, and Titan Dynamics Inc.

Stay up to date with everything that is happening in the wonderful world of AM via our LinkedIn community.

In addition to all the other noteworthy implications 3D printing technology is having on different industries, it is also revolutionizing the defense sector – offering innovative solutions for military applications. This transformative impact is evident in various projects, including the development of advanced drones like the Titan Falcon, which has been provided to Ukrainian troops through the collaboration of an American-Ukrainian NGO, Germany’s Donaustahl GmbH, and Titan Dynamics Inc.

So far, three Titan Falcon drones, produced through 3D printing techniques, have been delivered to the Armed Forces of Ukraine. These drones are undergoing intensive testing in the country – demonstrating their versatility and durability in various environments. The Titan Falcon stands out for its impressive flight endurance of up to 6 hours and a range of 400 kilometers. It features a first-person view (FPV) camera for real-time surveillance and can be equipped with a 2.5-inch lens camera – boosting its reconnaissance capabilities.

Ukraine takes delivery of 3D printed Titan Falcon drones thanks to Germany's Donaustahl GmbH and Titan Dynamics Inc.
Source: German Aid to Ukraine on X.

Titan Dynamics Inc. is leading this initiative. The company specializes in creating fixed-wing and Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) aircraft. They focus on enhancing efficiency, maximizing utility, and increasing the range of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) – all while reducing manufacturing costs.

Beyond the Titan Falcon project, 3D printing technology is being utilized in other defense areas including the production of lightweight yet durable components for military vehicles, the creation of custom parts for weaponry, and the manufacturing of protective gear and equipment. The technology’s ability to produce complex designs quickly and cost-effectively is proving to be a game-changer in this field – offering new possibilities for rapid innovation and deployment.

Recently, London Defense R&D, a leading British defense enterprise, created a 3D printed Anti-Drone System – the LD-80 – to counteract the increasing number of drones. Built using MJF, this development signified a substantial transition in the international arms market – introducing a new paradigm in the defense industry where individuals and institutions can manufacture their own tactical products, rather than buy the completed product.

 

Mind the gap: Caution needed when assessing land emissions in the COP28 Global Stocktake


Peer-Reviewed Publication

INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR APPLIED SYSTEMS ANALYSIS

Figure 1 

IMAGE: 

FIG 1: ALIGNING CONVENTIONAL SCIENTIFIC MODELS WITH NATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY DEFINITIONS OF LAND USE, LAND USE CHANGE, AND FORESTRY FLUXES. THE VARIATIONS ARE A RESULT FROM DIFFERENCES IN WHAT LAND IS CONSIDERED MANAGED AND WHETHER FLUXES RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLIMATIC CHANGES ARE INCLUDED.  

view more 

CREDIT: GIDDEN, ET AL.





Effective management of land, whether for agriculture, forests, or settlements, plays a crucial role in addressing climate change and achieving future climate targets. Land use strategies to mitigate climate change include stopping deforestation, along with enhancing forest management efforts. Countries have recognized the importance of the land use, land-use change, and forestry (LULUCF) sector, with 118 of 143 countries including land-based emissions reductions and removals in their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which are at the heart of the Paris Agreement and the achievement of its long-term goals.

A new study, published in Nature, demonstrates that estimates of current land-based emissions vary between scientific models and national greenhouse gas inventories due to differing definitions of what qualifies as "managed" land and human-induced, or anthropogenic, removals on that land, and shows how global mitigation benchmarks change when accounting for LULUCF fluxes in scientific models from the national inventory perspective. The research team underscores the necessity to compare like for like when assessing progress towards the Paris Agreement with countries needing to achieve more ambitious climate action when comparing their national starting points with global models.

“Countries estimate their LULUCF fluxes (emissions and removals) differently. Direct fluxes are a result of direct human intervention, such as agriculture and forest harvest. The models in the Assessment Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) use this accounting approach to determine the remaining carbon budget and the timing for achieving net-zero emissions. Indirect fluxes are the response of land to indirect human-induced environmental changes, such as increase in atmospheric CO2 or nitrogen deposition that both enhance carbon removal,” explains Giacomo Grassi, a study coauthor and researcher with the Joint Research Centre at the European Commission.

Grassi points out that it is practically not possible to separate direct and indirect fluxes through observations such as national forest inventories or remote sensing. Therefore, national greenhouse gas inventory methods follow reporting conventions that define anthropogenic fluxes using an area-based approach, whereby all fluxes occurring on managed land are considered anthropogenic. In contrast, greenhouse gas fluxes on unmanaged land are not included in the reporting.

Globally, this results in a difference between bookkeeping models and country inventories of around 4-7 gigatons of CO2, or around 10% of today’s greenhouse gas emissions, but this difference varies from country to country.

The research team assessed key mitigation benchmarks using the inventory-based LULUCF accounting approach. They found that, in pathways achieving the 1.5 °C long-term temperature goal of the Paris Agreement, net-zero CO2 emissions is achieved one to five years earlier, emission reductions by 2030 need to be 3.5-6% stronger, and cumulative CO2 emissions are between 55-95 Gt CO2 less. The research team emphasizes that results do not conflict with the benchmarks assessed by the IPCC, but rather assesses the same kinds of benchmarks using an inventory-based approach.

“The IPCC Assessment Reports use direct, land-based emissions as input and include the indirect emissions due to climate and environmental responses in their physical climate emulation to calculate the global temperature response to anthropogenic emissions. In our analysis, we make it clear that we’re looking at these two kinds of emissions separately. The climate outcome of each scenario we assess remains the same, but the benchmark – when viewed through the lens of national greenhouse gas inventory accounting conventions – shifts. Without making adjustments, countries could appear in a better position than they actually are,” explains Thomas Gasser, a study coauthor and senior researcher associated with both the IIASA Advancing Systems Analysis and Energy, Climate, and Environment programs.

“Our findings show the danger of comparing apples to oranges: To achieve the Paris Agreement, it’s critical that countries aim for the correct target. If countries achieve model-based benchmarks using inventory-based accounting, they will miss the mark,” says Matthew Gidden, study author and senior researcher in the IIASA Energy, Climate, and Environment Program.

Ahead of the COP28 summit and its first Global Stocktake – a process that will enable countries and other stakeholders to see where they’re collectively making progress toward meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement and where they’re not – the researchers are urging for more detailed national climate goals. They recommend distinct targets for land-based mitigation separate from actions in other sectors.

“Countries can bring clarity to their climate ambition by communicating their planned use of the LULUCF sector separately from emissions reductions elsewhere. While modelers and practitioner communities can come together to improve comparability between global pathways and national inventories, it is vital that the message that significant mitigation effort is needed this decade, is not lost in the details of reporting technicalities,” concludes Gidden.

Reference:

Gidden, M., Gasser, T., Grassi, G., Forsell, N., Janssens, I., Lamb, W., Minx, J., Nicholls Z., Steinhauser, J., Riahi, K. (2023). Aligning climate scenarios to emissions inventories shifts global benchmarks. Nature DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06724-y


About IIASA:

The International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) is an international scientific institute that conducts research into the critical issues of global environmental, economic, technological, and social change that we face in the twenty-first century. Our findings provide valuable options to policymakers to shape the future of our changing world. IIASA is independent and funded by prestigious research funding agencies in Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Europe. www.iiasa.ac.at

 

Revolutionary breakthrough in the manufacture of photovoltaic cells at the University of Ottawa


Another step towards miniaturization of electronic devices


Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA

Revolutionary breakthrough in the manufacture of photovoltaic cells at the University of Ottawa 

IMAGE: 

“THESE MICROMETRIC PHOTOVOLTAIC CELLS HAVE REMARKABLE CHARACTERISTICS, INCLUDING AN EXTREMELY SMALL SIZE AND SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCED SHADOWING”. KARIN HINZER — VICE-DEAN, RESEARCH, AND UNIVERSITY RESEARCH CHAIR IN PHOTONIC DEVICES FOR ENERGY

view more 

CREDIT: THE UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA





The University of Ottawa, together with national and international partners, has achieved a world first by manufacturing the first back-contact micrometric photovoltaic cells.

The cells, with a size twice the thickness of a strand of hair, have significant advantages over conventional solar technologies, reducing electrode-induced shadowing by 95% and potentially lowering energy production costs by up to three times.

The technological breakthrough—led by Mathieu de Lafontaine, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Ottawa and a part-time physics professor; and Karin Hinzer, vice-dean, research, and University Research Chair in Photonic Devices for Energy at the Faculty of Engineering—paves the way for a new era of miniaturization in the field of electronic devices.

The micrometric photovoltaic cell manufacturing process involved a partnership between the University of Ottawa, the Université de Sherbrooke in Quebec and the Laboratoire des Technologies de la Microélectronique in Grenoble, France.

“These micrometric photovoltaic cells have remarkable characteristics, including an extremely small size and significantly reduced shadowing. Those properties lend themselves to various applications, from densification of electronic devices to areas such as solar cells, lightweight nuclear batteries for space exploration and miniaturization of devices for telecommunications and the internet of things,” Hinzer says.

A breakthrough with huge potential

“This technological breakthrough promises significant benefits for society. Less expensive, more powerful solar cells will help accelerate the energy shift. Lightweight nuclear batteries will facilitate space exploration, and miniaturization of devices will contribute to the growth of the internet of things and lead to more powerful computers and smartphones,” de Lafontaine says.

“The development of these first back-contact micrometric photovoltaic cells is a crucial step in the miniaturization of electronic devices,” he adds.

“Semiconductors are vital in the shift to a carbon-neutral economy. This project is one of many research initiatives that we’re undertaking at the Faculty of Engineering to achieve our societal goals,” says Hinzer. Semiconductors are included in three of the five research areas at the Faculty of Engineering, namely, information technologies, photonics and emerging materials, and two of the four strategic areas of research at the University of Ottawa, namely, creating a sustainable environment and shaping the digital world.  

This international partnership between Canada and France illustrates the importance of innovation and research in micromanufacturing, leading the way to a future in which technology will become more powerful and accessible than ever. It also marks an historic step in the evolution of the global scientific and technology scene.

This initiative was funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Fonds de recherche du Québec Nature et technologies, the Horizon Europe Framework program, Prompt Québec and STACE Inc.

This innovative achievement is described in more detail in the article titled “3D Interconnects for III-V Semiconductor Heterostructures for Miniaturized Power Devices” in Cell Reports Physical Science.