Evaluating Ammonia's Role in Sustainable Shipping

By Brian Westenhaus - Feb 08, 2024

• Ammonia as a marine fuel can lead to eutrophication, acidification, and emissions of potent greenhouse gases like laughing gas.
• 
  
• The production of green ammonia is energy-intensive, and its use may not be as environmentally friendly as anticipated due to the risk of creating new problems.
• 
  
• The study suggests that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for decarbonizing shipping and emphasizes the need for more research and life cycle analyses to evaluate different fuel options.

Chalmers University of Technology researchers show in a study where the researchers carried out life cycle analyses for batteries and for three electrofuels including ammonia.

The report has been published in Applied Energy.

Switching to ammonia as a marine fuel, with the goal of decarbonization, can instead create entirely new problems. Eutrophication and acidification are some of the environmental problems that can be traced to the use of ammonia – as well as emissions of laughing gas, which is a very potent greenhouse gas.

In the search for viable fossil-free marine fuels, ammonia has been on the agenda for several years as one of the strongest alternatives.

Ammonia (NH3) is a carbon-free fuel and has the advantage of a higher energy density than, for example, hydrogen.

It can also be liquefied fairly easily although it is a gas at standard conditions.

However, a significant disadvantage is that the production of electro-ammonia – which requires electricity – is very energy intensive.

Moreover, the new study shows that an eagerness to rid the shipping sector of carbon emissions, by using ammonia, might create entirely new problems instead.

Selma Brynolf, Chalmers researcher and co-author of the paper noted, “Although ammonia is carbon-free, its combustion in engines is not free from greenhouse gas emissions. Engine tests have shown varying degrees of emissions of laughing gas, which is a very potent greenhouse gas with more than 200 times the global warming impact than carbon dioxide.”

Fayas Malik Kanchiralla, PhD student at the Department of Mechanics and Maritime Sciences at Chalmers and lead author of the paper added, “There is simply a lack of deeper risk analyses of what a switch to ammonia could mean.”

The alternative with the lowest cost is environmentally problematic

The researchers used life cycle assessment and life cycle cost to evaluate technical viability, environmental impacts, and economic feasibility for four types of renewable energy carriers, for three different types of ships.

The energy carriers examined included electricity via batteries, and three electrofuels: hydrogen, methanol, and ammonia.

The energy carriers were in turn used in combination with both engines and fuel cells.

The study shows that ammonia and methanol have the lowest cost of the alternatives studied.

Fayas Malik Kanchiralla commented, “The market is usually drawn by costs, and since electro-ammonia has the lowest cost, the market is aiming towards it. There is a hype around this fuel in shipping today. But if, and when, we make a shift to ammonia, it is to solve the problem of using fossil fuels, and at the moment it seems like we might end up creating more problems instead.”

This is because ammonia comes with a set of environmental disadvantages.

Its use as a fuel can affect air and water quality due to ammonia leakage and emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), such as laughing gas (N2O). Fayas Malik Kanchiralla and his colleagues stress the importance of controlling this for ships operating in areas with emission controls, for example a sensitive marine area such as the Baltic Sea.

Electrofuels are synthetic fuels that are produced with electricity, in a process where energy-rich molecules are made from other molecules. These fuels are defined as ‘green’ when they are produced with renewable electricity.

But the study shows that all three green electrofuels have a higher environmental impact than traditional fuels in terms of human toxicity, use of resources such as minerals and metals, and water use.

Eutrophication and acidification are some of the risks

 The use of ammonia is associated with substantial toxicity challenges and risks, which are manageable, but would increase the complexity of the safety systems required.

This would potentially limit the use of the fuel to only deep-sea cargo ships.

“Among the environmental problems that can be traced to use of ammonia are eutrophication and acidification,” noted Fayas Malik Kanchiralla.

“To sum up; even though green ammonia is a fossil-free and relatively clean fuel, it is probably not green enough for the environment as a whole. More risk assessments on the emissions of ammonia, and the related nitrogen compounds, need to be done before adopting this fuel for shipping.”

The study also shows that it is very difficult to find a simple non-fossil fuel solution that both works for all types of ships and is able to meet the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in shipping

Assessing the environmental and economic aspects of different fuel options for the shipping sector is complex, and several factors need to be considered when developing climate strategies for various types of ships and modes of operation.

“From a life cycle perspective, one needs to find different types of solutions for decarbonisation for different kinds of ships,” said Fayas Malik Kanchiralla. “There is no silver bullet. More research and more life cycle analyses need to be done.”

**

Kanchiralla said it very factually. “There is no silver bullet.” And the assessment “More research and more life cycle analyses need to be done,” may be a bit understated.

There are going to be tradeoffs when the pressure comes to politicize the fuel and energy issues of a modern economy to satisfy the whole of the interested parties. The risk exists to make immense mistakes that are far worse than the starting problem.

Beware the squeaking wheel of special interests. Better to look for hard facts duly researched and replicated such to be as close to 100% certainty as possible. Even then mistakes can be made. Just because a party is interested doesn’t mean it has a credible interest vs other parties.

The challenge will be to correct the mistakes before they are heavily invested or market dominate.

By Brian Westenhaus via New Energy and Fuel

Karim Beguir Wants to Empower the World With AI

Courtesy Karim Beguir

BY TARA LAW
FEBRUARY 8, 2024 


For an industry that trades on newness, tech can be remarkably staid. Many of the big players are headquartered in a Northern California valley, and world-changing innovations are often produced by goliaths like Apple and Google. In just a decade, however, decision-making AI company InstaDeep has challenged that status quo. Led by co-founder and CEO Karim Beguir, the company set up shop in Tunis, far from the Bay Area’s tech bubble. InstaDeep also operates in a complex domain: deep tech, meaning it is creating novel technology through its own scientific and engineering innovations. The company builds AI systems that can make decisions for businesses, which could have applications from identifying the most promising drug candidates to test, to optimizing an electric grid for energy efficiency.

InstaDeep’s work not only demonstrates how far AI has come, but also signals the kind of world such technology might create. In founding the company 10 years ago, Beguir—a mathematician who had previously worked in finance—says he set out to “prove that deep tech innovation is possible” in the developing world by publishing AI research, creating new algorithms, and deploying it practically—all with a team largely based in Africa.

Today, InstaDeep’s efforts hint at the fields AI could most reshape, ranging from a paper on protein binding—which is relevant for drug discovery—to research on robotics with Google’s DeepMind. The company has moved its headquarters to London, but maintains a substantial presence in Africa, including offices in Cape Town, Lagos and Tunis. In 2022, it unveiled an AI-based program with BioNTech which can identify COVID-19 virus variants of concern two months earlier, on average. Subsequently, in July 2023, BioNTech acquired InstaDeep for $680 million.

It's little surprise, then, that Beguir is so attuned to the breadth of AI’s potential. While ChatGPT’s conversational capabilities awed people around the world, he is focused on developing technologies that can serve a wider range of purposes and industries. One promising area is transportation. InstaDeep is working on a project in Germany that aims to use AI to plan train routes, and reschedule them when service is disrupted. The goal, according to German national railway Deutsche Bahn AG, is to ultimately create a nationwide system that can efficiently address delays and operate more trains.

“This Is a very exciting time where a business that focuses on AI and invests in the technology can have [disproportionate] outcomes,” says Beguir. “A critical part of making sure AI is going to be beneficial for economies, and not just for the few which are at the forefront of its development, is to have many businesses adopt AI.” In particular, he says, AI could unlock major economic opportunities for the developing world. But if a diverse group of businesses don't take advantage of AI’s growth, they might then become dependent on technology created in other countries. As some experts have warned, AI that is built by a predominantly white, male and Western workforce runs the risk of embedding biases, such as by failing to create AI that doesn’t operate well in languages millions of people speak.

For this reason, Beguir believes it is essential for people all across the world to help shape the developing technology, to ensure it will better serve their communities and minimize the potential for bias. For InstaDeep, that includes fostering efforts to build the first natural language processing models for languages from Nigeria and Tunisia. Beguir also argues that getting local communities involved in building AI is especially important. He’s worked as a Google For Startups Accelerator mentor, and is a steering committee member for Deep Learning Indaba, an organization which builds community around machine learning in Africa. InstaDeep has opened an outpost in Kigali, Rwanda, to tap into more young talent in the region.

“If we want to avoid dependencies, and if we want to avoid a rise of inequalities—because this is one of the major risks with artificial intelligence—what is important is that multiple communities all across the world, actually appropriate the technology and learn how to use it for their own needs,” says Beguir. He hopes InstaDeep’s success and the growing global recognition has shown it is possible for a large, innovative company with a sizable presence in Africa to “build a bridge” to tech hubs in other parts of the world—thus encouraging more investment in similar startups. The company was able to grow so rapidly since its 2014 founding in part because of the interest and engagement from local talent, says Beguir.

“I do believe things change when you see positive examples of success, positive examples of what creativity, innovation can bring to the table, that inspires you to go and build,” says Beguir. “That’s the future I’m fighting for.”

Tapping into Earth's Natural Hydrogen Reserves

By Haley Zaremba - Feb 08, 2024

• Gold hydrogen, or naturally occurring hydrogen, has been discovered in numerous locations worldwide and could be extracted in large quantities, offering a clean energy source for industries reliant on high-heat fuels.
• 
  
• Producing green hydrogen requires significant amounts of renewable energy, potentially making it counterproductive for achieving decarbonization goals, while gold hydrogen bypasses the need for energy-intensive production processes.
• 
  
• Despite the excitement surrounding gold hydrogen, it remains largely untested, and concerns exist regarding its environmental impact, potential for fossil fuel discovery, and misuse for greenwashing.

Many climate experts and energy industry insiders believe that hydrogen will be an essential part of achieving global climate goals because of its utility in hard-to-decarbonize heavy industry. Hydrogen can be burned at high heat like fossil fuels, but unlike coal, oil, or natural gas, it leaves behind nothing but water vapor when combusted. This makes it a very attractive alternative for industries that rely on hot-burning fuels like thermal and coking coal, and could potentially transform the steelmaking and shipping industries, just to name a couple of heavy hitters. 

The potential benefits of a wide-scale replacement in high-heat industrial applications are difficult to overstate. “Replacing the fossil fuels now used in furnaces that reach 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,732 degrees Fahrenheit) with hydrogen gas could make a big dent in the 20% of global carbon dioxide emissions that now come from industry,” Bloomberg Green wrote in a report titled “Why Hydrogen Is the Hottest Thing in Green Energy.”

There’s just one problem. Creating hydrogen for these kinds of industrial applications is energy intensive, and the resulting hydrogen is only as green as the energy source used to make it. Hydrogen is already widely used in heavy industry today, but the vast majority of it is produced using fossil fuels (known as ‘gray hydrogen’), which defeats the purpose of using it for decarbonization. ‘Blue hydrogen’, which refers to hydrogen produced using natural gas, yields lower emissions than other fossil fuels and is seen by some as a stepping stone to full decarbonization. But the real buzz is around green hydrogen, which is produced using renewable energy and is therefore seen as a clean energy source that could be integral to the global clean energy transition.

There is a serious downside to green hydrogen, however. A 2022 report from the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) warned against the “indiscriminate use of hydrogen,” arguing that extensive use of hydrogen “may not be in line with the requirements of a decarbonised world.” In particular, the report argues that producing green hydrogen requires vast amounts of clean energy that may be better used in other applications, making the mass production of green hydrogen counterproductive for reaching climate goals. 

But now a new color has been added to the hydrogen rainbow, and it could completely sidestep the issues faced by existing forms of hydrogen production. Gold hydrogen (also sometimes referred to as white hydrogen) is the name being used to refer to hydrogen which is naturally occurring in certain geological areas of the world (subsurface geologic accumulations, to be exact), sometimes in vast quantities. It’s produced underground when water chemically reacts with iron-rich rocks or radioactive minerals. And it’s the new holy grail of hydrogen exploration. 

This kind of hydrogen was previously dismissed as fictional at worst or untappable at best, but in the last few years “reservoirs have been discovered in the United States, Canada, Finland, the Philippines, Australia, Brazil, Oman, Turkey and Mali, leading would-be gold diggers to believe that there are numerous sources waiting to be discovered,” Reuters recently reported. According to one estimate published in Earth-Science Reviews back in 2020, we could be extracting 23 million tons of hydrogen from the ground each and every year. And there’s already a new wave of startups looking to do just that.

One such startup, Natural Hydrogen Energy (NH2E), was founded by Viacheslav Zgonnik, the chemist who wrote the 2020 Earth-Science Reviews paper. Zgonnik thinks that the potential for gold hydrogen extraction is even greater than his paper, which is based on a conservative estimate of existing tappable reserves, suggests. “That is the currently available estimate of generation of geologic hydrogen from the ground but, in my opinion, the real number should be two to three orders of magnitude higher because we still don't know a lot about the hydrogen system and have very scarce measurements of hydrogen on the planet,” he told Reuters.

Not everyone is as optimistic as Zgonnik, however. Reporting on gold hydrogen is couched in caveats, and while there is a lot of excitement about the fuel’s potential, it’s just far too early to declare that gold hydrogen will be a silver bullet for the climate. It’s almost completely untested – at present, the village of Bourakébougou in Mali has the only place in the world with a functioning hydrogen well already being used as a fuel source. 

Furthermore, there needs to be a whole slew of studies conducted to determine exactly how clean this underground hydrogen is. Many scientists are concerned that when we extract this stored hydrogen, we will release greenhouse gasses along with it. Others worry that hydrogen exploration will lead to the discovery – and use – of new fossil fuel reserves. Still others think that gold hydrogen will be misused for greenwashing purposes á la carbon capture. 

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com

Pharma CEOs Signal Doubt on Lowering Prices in Sanders Showdown

Sanders says Americans pay too much for brand medicines

Drugmakers defend high prices due to research, innovation



Chief executive officers of Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, during a Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee hearing on drug prices.
Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Feb. 8, 2024, 
Nyah Phengsitthy
Reporter

Chief executives of Bristol Myers Squibb Co., Johnson & Johnson, and Merck & Co. all declined to commit to lowering the list price of their drugs before facing market competition, despite pressure from high profile senators Thursday.

“Will you commit today at Bristol Myers Squibb to reduce the list price of Eliquis in the United States to the price that you charge in Canada, where you make a profit?” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) asked CEO of Bristol Myers Squibb, Chris Boerner, in a Thursday hearing before the Senate, Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

“We can’t make that commitment primarily because the prices in these two countries have very different systems,” Boerner said.

Boerner was joined by Merck’s CEO Robert Davis who similarly reasoned the main driver for their high costs reflects their investment in drug innovation and access for patients, which is approached differently in other countries. The three CEOs all agreed to welcome cheaper, copycat versions of their drugs when the main patents for their top products expire.

Johnson & Johnson‘s CEO Joaquin Duato said he will commit to lower the price of medication Stelara in 2025 when competing drugs enter the market.

The push from Sanders, chair of the HELP Committee, in the hearing is the latest swing at reducing prescription drugs costs and reshaping price distribution in the US health care system.

The three CEOs acknowledged their high drug prices, but put the blame on pharmacy benefit managers and the pressure to keep up with innovation and treatment for drugs in the US.
Pointing to PBM Reform

In response to drugmakers signaling for more PBM control, Mitt Romney (R-Utah) asked the executives what Congress should be looking at in order to help.

“We may not have the right bad guys here,” Romney said.

“We have something here they don’t have in the rest of the world—these PBMs that want higher and higher list prices because they get paid based on how high the list price is,” he said.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) questioned their thoughts on passing a PBM reform bill.

All three CEOs said the list prices would reduce and significantly reduce the out of pocket costs for the patient if the bill was passed.

“I know that in conversations with the chair, the intent is to move on that bill pretty soon, potentially with some other health items as well, and I think that the opportunity is right before us,” Kaine said.

 Bloomberg Law

Progressive Democrats break fundraising records in election fight against pro-Israel PACs



By —Farnoush Amiri, Associated Press

Politics Feb 8, 2024 

WASHINGTON (AP) — They were warned that criticism of Israel’s conduct during its war on Hamas in Gaza could cost them politically. But in the four months since Israel’s blistering offensive was ignited by Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack, progressives in Congress who have called for a cease-fire are seeing record fundraising dollars as they fight to remain in office.

Members of the “squad” — a group of liberals in the House — are being singled out by pro-Israel PACs like the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, better known as AIPAC. The groups have pledged or plan to spend tens of millions of dollars to try to defeat them in Democratic primaries and the general election this year, turning the otherwise safely Democratic districts into election battlegrounds.

The cohort of Black and brown lawmakers is facing what they see as an “existential threat” to their political careers. It’s a struggle that raises significant questions about who can be a Democrat in Congress, what positions are permissible about Israel and the Palestinians, and what role outside groups should have in determining both.

AP-NORC POLL: Half of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders want more U.S. support of Palestinians

Unlike in previous cycles, progressives are being bolstered more and more by Arab American and Muslim groups who are organizing in record numbers to ensure their voices are heard on Capitol Hill.

“The fact that amidst these AIPAC attacks, amidst us having a viable challenger, we have record-breaking fundraising quarter is because the Muslim community has felt erased and dehumanized throughout this process,” Rep. Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y., told The Associated Press in an interview last month.

AIPAC has defended its track record, telling the AP in a statement that “it is entirely consistent with progressive values to stand with the Jewish state,” and that the group has a history of supporting members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Congressional Democrats have long been sensitive about the divisions around Israel, with even lawmakers aligned with AIPAC declining to discuss the situation on the record.

Bowman, who is among a group of 19 Democrats who have called for a cease-fire in Gaza, is facing a Democratic challenger backed by AIPAC. The group, which has historically yielded immense clout in Washington, has shifted strategy in the last several years, transitioning from strictly a lobbying organization to helping elect centrist, pro-Israel Democrats. In 2022, it began challenging Democratic incumbents in primaries.

Ahead of November, the group and PACs connected to its ethos have once again begun contributing to candidates running against members of the squad. In addition to Bowman, the Democrats facing challengers include Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, Summer Lee of Pennsylvania and Cori Bush of Missouri, all of whom have not only called for a cease-fire but have demanded an end to U.S. aid to Israel.

Israel’s air and ground offensive has killed more than 27,000 Palestinians, driven most people from their homes and pushed one-quarter of the population toward starvation. In the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas in southern Israel, militants killed some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and took about 250 people hostage.

Progressive groups are closely watching the campaign as they track the unprecedented flow of money into congressional district races at a level usually seen for battleground Senate seats.
Never going to be a ‘fair fight’

In 2022, AIPAC spent around $27 million targeting progressive candidates. Its war chest this cycle is expected to be more than twice that amount.

In the last quarter alone, the group was the largest donor to George Latimer, Bowman’s opponent in the Democratic primary. AIPAC gave the Westchester County executive more than $600,000, representing more than 40 percent of his $1.4 million in contributions so far, according to campaign finance reports filed Wednesday.

Bowman, meanwhile, managed to raise more than $730,000 in total last quarter — the majority of which his campaign says came from grassroots Arab and Muslim groups and individual donors.

WATCH: Arab and Muslim Americans on how U.S. support for Israel could affect their votes in 2024

“(Muslim and Arab groups) are building an infrastructure that is financial and political and social, to fight back against AIPAC and to fight back against entities that continue to demonize them as Muslims as Arabs and as brown people,” Bowman said.

It marks a record-breaking quarter for the educator-turned-congressman who in December 2021 had barely managed to raise $200,000 in contributions. But outside groups like Justice Democrats say the challenge ahead is considerable, with AIPAC having the ability to drop more than half a million on a candidate in one quarter.

“This is versus candidates, black and brown candidates, who come from working-class backgrounds, who represent working-class districts, who do not take corporate PAC money, who rely on grassroots fundraising. So this is not a fair fight,” said Usamah Andrabi, the communications director for Justice Democrats. “It has never been a fair fight.”
Looking for candidates

Beyond the four members of the squad — Bowman, Lee, Omar and Bush — who are already facing both primary and general election challenges, pro-Israel groups are still searching for candidates to take on some other vocal Palestinian advocates in Congress.

One progressive who is no stranger to AIPAC-backed challenges since coming to Washington is Rep. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, the only Palestinian serving in Congress.

While there has been an active effort to recruit an opponent against her this cycle, no candidate has accepted the appeals from various groups to take her on. Nonetheless, Tlaib has raised nearly $3.7 million since the start of the war in Gaza, record fundraising for the third-term congresswoman who has faced constant attacks from both sides for her criticism of Israel. She was censured by the House in November for her remarks about the war.

Tlaib’s massive fundraising haul can largely be attributed to a grassroots effort, with the campaign saying that donations in the three months came from 32,600 people. More than 20,000 of those people were first-time donors and the average donation was less than $75, according to the campaign.

“We are proud of our grassroots campaign that is bringing people together to fight for justice for all, no matter where you live or who you are,” said Carolina Toro-Román, Tlaib’s co-campaign manager.

Tlaib has easily defeated primary opponents in the past, in part because her district includes parts of Dearborn and one of the largest Arab American communities in the nation.

Hussein Dabajeh, a Dearborn resident and Democratic consultant, said there’s been an active effort in the community to financially support not only Tlaib, but any lawmakers who have called for a cease-fire in Gaza.

“Whether it be chats on WhatsApp, Facebook groups, coordinated emails from different organizations, text message campaigns, calls, or town halls: There are efforts that are coming in from the community,” Dabajeh said. “Not only in Dearborn or in Detroit, but from across the country.”
Message to voters and Democratic establishment

Before November, progressive members and the outside groups supporting them are looking beyond fundraising tactics to challenge AIPAC’s standing with the Democratic Party.

Candidates being targeted by the group are trying to raise awareness for what they say is AIPAC’s toxic role in Democratic primaries. In recent years, several major Republican donors have helped fund the group’s effort to target candidates critical of Israel. In 2022, the majority of the money spent in the Democratic primary between then-Rep. Andy Levin and Rep. Haley Stevens in Michigan came from GOP donors.

After the last Israel-Hamas war in 2021, Levin, a self-proclaimed Zionist and former synagogue president, renewed his calls for a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine. That, in addition to redistricting in Michigan, resulted in a perfect storm against Levin, who faced an organized campaign by AIPAC that would funnel an unprecedented amount of money — over $4 million — to Stevens, a centrist, pro-Israel member. Stevens won the primary, helping push Levin and his vocal criticism of Israel out of Congress.

“I think this is really a structural issue for democracy in general and an existential issue for the Democratic Party,” Levin told the AP last month. “What kind of a party are we, if we allow Republicans to come in and determine who we pick in a Democratic primary to run against the other side?”

Rep. Pramila Jayapal, chair of the Progressive Caucus who is also a target of AIPAC this year, said she has been talking with Democrats who still receive money from the group about the damage it could do to the party and their efforts to regain the House.

“This is hurting the Democratic Party to challenge our incumbents,” Japayal said. “Our goal as a unified Democratic Party is to make sure that Joe Biden stays in the White House, and that we take back the House and make Hakeem Jeffries our speaker and that we expand our ranks in the Senate.”

And AIPAC, she says, has become a major obstacle to that goal.

Associated Press writer Joey Cappelletti in Lansing, Michigan, contributed to this report.

PHOTO: Rep. Rashida Tlaib (MI-12) addresses attendees as she takes part in a protest calling for a ceasefire in Gaza outside the U.S. Capitol, in Washington, U.S., October 18, 2023. Photo by Leah Millis/Reuters

Related Biden aides meet with Arab American leaders in Michigan, aiming to mend political ties

Unanimous US Supreme Court Victory for Corporate Whistleblower on Rules to Win


February 8, 2024


WASHINGTON—Today, in a win for corporate and financial whistleblowers, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected a corporate challenge to the burdens of proof that determine who wins in 18 whistleblower statutes enacted since 1992. The immediate context was the anti-retaliation shield in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for 60 million workers in publicly traded companies. Murray v. UBS SECURITIES, LLC.,

Trevor Murray filed a whistleblower action alleging that UBS terminated his employment in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1514A which states that employers may not “discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or in any other manner discriminate against an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because of” protected whistleblowing activity.

Murray had worked for UBS as a research strategist when he informed his supervisor that two leaders of the UBS trading desk were engaging in what he believed to be unethical and illegal efforts to skew his independent reporting. UBS terminated Murray shortly after. Lawyers for UBS argued that Murray failed to show “retaliatory animus” in the decision to terminate his employment. The Supreme Court rejected this analysis, clearing the way for UBS to be held accountable for their discriminatory firing of Murray in violation of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

Legal Director Tom Devine, co-counsel on amicus (friend of the court) briefs supporting Murray, commented,

“Today’s unanimous Supreme Court decision was the Waterloo for marathon big business attacks on fair standards to enforce corporate whistleblower rights. The game is over.

Burdens of proof are the rules of the game for which side must produce how much evidence to win. In numerous lawsuits climaxed by Murray, big business has tried to rewrite the law so that victimized employees would have to prove retaliatory motives, instead of employers having to prove innocent ones. It is not realistic for an employee to read the organization’s mind. If big business had won, the whistleblower protection laws would be traps with rules rigged to rubber stamp retaliation.”

Government Accountability Project was co-counsel for Senators Charles Grassley (R. Iowa) and Ron Wyden (D.-Oregon) for friend of the court briefs defending the burdens of proof. Attorneys Ned Miltenberg, Alan Morrison and Jason Zuckerman were our partners.

Lead counsel, Alan Morrison, urges employees and employers to heed the words of Justice Sotomayer in her unanimous opinion, “the health, safety, or well-being of the public may well depend on whistleblowers feeling empowered to come forward. This Court cannot override that policy choice by giving employers more protection than the statute itself provides.”

Government Accountability Project 
whistleblower.org

 ‘Mentors sexually harassed staff’: MoD faces more allegations

by Adam McCulloch   8 Feb 2024

A survey by trade union Prospect has revealed that more than 120 female civil servants have experienced sexual harassment at the Ministry of Defence or public sector defence agencies.

The survey found that 60% of the 200 female public sector workers in the defence industry who responded had personally experienced problems, while a similar number had witnessed sexual harassment.

About 100 private sector defence workers also responded, with just under half (47%) saying they had experienced sexual harassment.

Last month it was revealed that bullying allegations had soared at the MoD since 2019.

Armed forces

Broken bones causing Army recruitment targets to be missed

EHRC urged to examine MoD handling of sexual harassment claims

MoD employee reveals sexual harassment episodes

Rape and sexual assault in the workplace itself along with unsolicited photographs of genitalia were among the allegations recorded.

Mentors were the subject of some of the allegations of unwanted sexual advances. The poll also recorded insults over women’s appearance and the lack of repercussions for offenders after complaints.

Over the past year, 75% of those who responded had witnessed or experienced sexual harassment at least once a month with around 8% weekly, and almost 4% on a daily basis.

In the MoD about a third (32%) witnessed or experienced such behaviours several times a month (24% in agencies), 5% once or twice weekly (7% in agencies), and 4% on a daily basis (2% in agencies).

Prospect said attitudes were worst in the MoD, with 73% of respondents working there agreeing that behaviour that would be considered toxic and inappropriate in public life was tolerated in the defence sector

The survey included descriptions of some of the behaviour. One MoD civil servant reported: “I have had to physically pull a colleague who was much larger and stronger than me off a female colleague. Because he was so strong I had to scratch and hit him to try and get him off. Throughout this, my female colleague was crying and grasping for my hand. It was quite traumatising for the both of us – we were 19-20 years old at the time.

“When I told my manager about this she discouraged me from reporting it formally, and being so new to the organisation I trusted her so took it no further.”

Another said: “I have had my leg touched in the office by someone who was meant to be a mentor. He also shared inappropriate images and had a nickname about being creepy across numerous departments.”

‘You must be gay then’

An MoD agency worker she had been “personally belittled”, had negative comments about her physical appearance and manner of dress, and was the subject of a “you must be gay then” comment when sexual advances were rejected. “Negative comments and assumptions made about my professional capabilities and competence both to my face and to other colleagues behind my back.”

The union commissioned the survey after 60 senior women at the department wrote to the permanent secretary to the MoD, David Williams, in October with details of sexual assault, harassment and abuse by male colleagues.

After that, Prospect wrote to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) asking for an investigation into whether the MoD was failing in its public sector equalities duty in relation to discrimination, harassment and victimisation.

The trade union’s survey was sent to about 3,000 of its members working in the defence industry or public sector, with a 10% response rate.

Sue Ferns, the senior deputy general secretary of Prospect, said bad behaviour “thrives in an environment where it is tolerated. Nothing short of a wholesale culture change is required. It’s time the MoD and other employers worked properly with trade unions to stamp this out.

“It is absolutely clear that this type of toxic behaviour is seen to be tolerated by employers and often left unpunished,” she added.

Coast Guard Sexual Assault Victims Can Now Report the Crime Without Being Punished for Minor Misconduct

U.S. Coast Guard Vice Commandant, Adm. Charles Ray, speaks to Coast Guardsmen and women at Base LA/LB about the Coast Guard leadership's commitment to the Sexual Assault Prevention, Response and Recovery program in San Pedro, California, May 2, 2019. (U.S. Coast Guard photo by Seaman Ian Gray)

Military.com | By Patricia Kime

Published February 08, 2024 

The Coast Guard has announced a new policy requiring commanders to disregard "minor" misconduct -- including underage drinking or fraternizing -- by victims or witnesses in sexual assault cases to encourage reporting of such crimes.

The regulation is known as "Safe-to-Report" and the other military service branches under the Defense Department adopted it more than two years ago. The Coast Guard announced the policy Feb. 1 in a servicewide message.

Advertisement

The Coast Guard’s adoption follows a scandal in which the service investigated 102 cases of rape or sexual assault at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy from 1988 through 2006 but concealed the results of the review, dubbed "Operation Fouled Anchor." The investigation and cover-up were exposed last June in reporting by CNN.

Read Next: All 5 Marines Aboard Downed Helicopter in California Were Killed in Crash, Service Says

Now, victims and witnesses in the service -- including active-duty and reserve members, as well as Coast Guard Academy cadets and recruits -- who report a sexual assault will not be subject to discipline for what the policy calls "minor collateral misconduct."

Advertisement

Under the requirement, commanders are to consult with a staff judge advocate to decide whether the misconduct is "minor" or "non-minor," taking into account a number of considerations to determine if that person should be subject to discipline.

Commanders have "considerable discretion" to decide whether an offense is minor, utilizing guidance in the Uniform Code of Military Justice for some infractions that may have been punishable by up to a year in jail if the case went to court-martial, according to the service’s announcement in ALCOAST 050/24.

Such behaviors may include underage drinking; the victim being in a prohibited or unacceptable relationship at the time of the assault; or a violation of a lawful order or regulation such as a curfew, being at an off-limits location, or breaching school standards or barracks or berthing policies.

Commanders also are to take into consideration circumstances such as the victim's age and military experience; whether the suspect was in a position of authority or of higher rank than the victim; whether there was stalking or harassment involved; or whether the misconduct was related to the trauma, such as drinking underage to deal with an assault.

"If the alleged collateral misconduct is deemed minor, then the Safe-to-Report policy applies, and the victim must not be disciplined," the policy states.

If the misconduct is considered "non-minor," the commander retains discretion on whether and when to discipline unless a special trial counsel assumes authority over the alleged collateral misconduct.

Depending on the situation, a commander may take administrative actions to provide services to the victim or witness, such as referring them to substance abuse screening or medical treatment, including mental health care. Commanders also will have the discretion to suspend a victim or witness' access to their duties should they hold a high-level security clearance, while an investigation into the alleged crime is ongoing.

"It may be appropriate to temporarily decertify the victim from critical positions until 
appropriate evaluations can be conducted," the policy states.

The policy also allows the Coast Guard Investigative Service to investigate and document alleged misconduct, but it "may impact the commander's actions or response to such misconduct."

The new requirement closely mirrors the Department of Defense's Safe-to-Report policy, which was instituted in November 2021 -- 11 months after it was required by the fiscal 2021 National Defense Authorization Act.

The Coast Guard, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, was specifically excluded from the language of that legislation.

Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Linda Fagan ordered a top-down review of the service's policies, practices and culture in regard to sexual assault and harassment following CNN's bombshell investigation.

That review found that the service failed to live up to its core values when it mishandled reports of sexual assault and hid the results of the investigation into the cases.

But it stopped short of holding anyone responsible for the investigative failures and cover-up -- topics that were raised in a Senate hearing in December.

In a Feb. 6 press release, Coast Guard officials announced several other initiatives to address the service's handling of sexual assault, harassment "and other harmful behaviors.”

According to the release, Force Readiness Command will establish new training at various points in members' careers. Future leadership conferences will focus on culture within the service and the way ahead for addressing the issues.

"At times, we have failed to connect the workplace experience to our core values. We are committed to rebuilding trust and ensuring every member of our workforce (active-duty, reserve, civilian, auxiliary, and our families) feels empowered to own our culture," Master Chief Petty Officer of the Coast Guard Heath Jones said in a statement.

Among the steps taken in the past few months was the appointment of retired Coast Guard Capt. Laura Collins to serve as the service's first enterprise victim advocate, a position designed to support and represent victims.

Related: Coast Guard Apologizes for Mishandling of Sexual Assaults at Academy

Related Topics: Military Headlines Coast Guard Topics Sexual Assault Women in the Military Military Legal Crime

Patricia Kime

Patricia Kime focuses on military personnel and veterans issues for Military.com, reporting on health care, military families, justice and benefits. She has covered military issues for decades, reporting on combat-related illnesses and injuries, the Defense Department and the Department of Veterans Affairs. Read Full Bio

Hawaii’s high court cites ‘The Wire’ in rebuke of US Supreme Court decision that expanded gun rights



Two men walk past a gun club on June, 23, 2022, in Honolulu. A ruling by Hawaii’s high court saying that a man can be prosecuted for carrying a gun in public without a permit uses pop culture references in an apparent rebuke of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded gun rights nationwide. (AP Photo/Marco Garcia, File)

Handguns are displayed at a gun shop on June 23, 2022, in Honolulu. A ruling by Hawaii’s high court saying that a man can be prosecuted for carrying a gun in public without a permit uses pop culture references in an apparent rebuke of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded gun rights nationwide. (AP Photo/Marco Garcia, File)

BY JENNIFER SINCO KELLEHER
 February 8, 2024

HONOLULU (AP) — A ruling by Hawaii’s high court saying that a man can be prosecuted for carrying a gun in public without a permit cites crime-drama TV series “The Wire” and invokes the “spirit of Aloha” in an apparent rebuke of a U.S. Supreme Court decision that expanded gun rights nationwide.

“The thing about the old days, they the old days,” the unanimous Hawaii Supreme Court ruling issued Wednesday said, borrowing a quote from season four, episode three of the HBO series to express that the culture from the founding of the country shouldn’t dictate contemporary life.

Authored by Justice Todd Eddins, the opinion goes on to say, “The spirit of Aloha clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities. ”

The ruling stems from a 2017 case against Christopher Wilson, who had a loaded pistol in his front waistband when police were called after a Maui landowner reported seeing a group of men on his property at night.

The handgun was unregistered in Hawaii, and Wilson had not obtained or applied for a permit to own the gun, the ruling said. Wilson told police he legally bought the gun in Florida in 2013.

Wilson’s first motion to dismiss the charges argued that prosecuting him for possession of a firearm for self-defense violated his right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. It was denied.

Then in 2022, a U.S. Supreme Court decision known as New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen upended gun laws nationwide, including in Hawaii, which has long had some of the strictest gun laws in the country — and some of the lowest rates of gun violence.

Just as the Bruen decision came out, Wilson filed a second motion to dismiss the case. A judge granted the dismissal, and the state appealed.

Ben Lowenthal of the Hawaii public defender’s office, Wilson’s attorney, said Thursday his office is “taking stock of our options,” including seeking review from the U.S. Supreme Court.

Wilson denied trespassing and said he and his friends “were hiking that night to look at the moon and Native Hawaiian plants,” according to the recent ruling.

Hawaii Attorney General Anne Lopez hailed the ruling as a “landmark decision that affirms the constitutionality of crucial gun-safety legislation.”

The ruling reflects a “culture in Hawaii that’s very resistant to change” and a judiciary and government that has been “recalcitrant” in accepting Bruen, said Alan Beck, an attorney not involved in the Wilson case.

“The use of pop culture references to attempt to rebuke the Supreme Court’s detailed historical analysis is evidence this is not a well-reasoned opinion,” said Beck, who has challenged Hawaii’s gun restrictions.

Beck represents three Maui residents who are challenging a Hawaii law enacted last year that prohibits carrying a firearm on the beach and in other places, including banks, bars and restaurants that serve alcohol.

A federal judge in Honolulu granted a preliminary injunction, which prevents the state from enforcing the law. The state appealed, and oral arguments are scheduled for April before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Bruen set a new standard for interpreting gun laws, such that modern firearm laws must be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

“We believe it is a misplaced view to think that today’s public safety laws must look like laws passed long ago,” Eddins, of the Hawaii high court, wrote. “Smoothbore, muzzle-loaded, and powder-and-ramrod muskets were not exactly useful to colonial era mass murderers. And life is a bit different now, in a nation with a lot more people, stretching to islands in the Pacific Ocean.”

The Bruen ruling “snubs federalism principles,” Eddins wrote, asserting that under Hawaii’s constitution, there is no individual right to carry a firearm in public.

Dating back to the 1800s, when Hawaii was a kingdom, weapons were heavily regulated, Eddins wrote. He noted that in 1833 King Kamehameha III “promulgated a law prohibiting ‘any person or persons’ on shore from possessing a weapon, including any ‘knife, sword-cane, or any other dangerous weapon.’”

RESEARCH/STUDY

Among TV news networks, CNN was alone in consistently connecting California deluge to climate change

CNN’s Nick Watt and Bill Weir drove the network’s climate reporting

Media Matters / Molly Butler

WRITTEN BY ALLISON FISHER
PUBLISHED 02/08/24 

Corporate broadcast news networks and cable news networks, with the exception of CNN, largely failed to connect the storms wreaking havoc earlier this week in California and other parts of the western U.S. to climate change.

Heavy precipitation from an atmospheric river — the second one to hit Southern California in recent weeks — has caused destructive flooding that unleashed mudslides and gale-force winds, which knocked out power for hundreds of thousands in California and throughout the West, leaving at least three people dead. Los Angeles was hit with six months worth of rain in just a few days, and these storms carry the fingerprint of our warming climate: As reported by NPR, climate scientists say “the intensity of recent atmospheric rivers is almost certainly affected by human-caused climate change.”

In fact, the link between heavy precipitation and our warming climate is well understood by scientists. However, similar to coverage of the relentless rain that inundated California last January and the record rainfall in Texas last month, TV news largely failed to communicate the relationship between climate change and the flooding events unfolding this month.Key findings


From February 5, when a second atmospheric river hit California, through February 6:Cable news networks CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC aired 81 combined segments on the California rain. Just 10 segments, or 12% of the total, mentioned climate change. All 10 climate mentions appeared on CNN. The vast majority (7) came from correspondent Nick Watt. Chief climate correspondent Bill Weir appeared in two segments to discuss the connection between climate and the flooding. One link was made by CNN News Central co-anchor Sara Sidner. Corporate broadcast news networks ABC, CBS, and NBC aired a combined 30 segments on California storms during the same time period. Only one of these segments, by ABC’s Ginger Zee, mentioned climate change.

Extreme weather is happening year-round, and CNN showed how to situate these events within the climate crisis

Reporting from Los Angeles on February 5, CNN correspondent Nick Watt appeared in coverage throughout the day and consistently reported on the relationship between our warming climate and the heavy precipitation in California. On CNN News Central, for example, Watt explained, “Why is this happening? Well, the ocean of the Pacific is warmed by climate change.”

In a report which appeared on several CNN programs, Watt dove into even more detail, describing the atmospheric river as “a conveyor belt of moisture fueled by El Niño and the unusually warm Pacific” that “can carry 20 times more water than the Mississippi [River].” He added that this year’s “El Niño is now classed as very strong, only the fourth time it has reached that level in 50 years. Combined with oceans already warm from climate change, it is supercharging these types of storms.”

“LA and beyond, 14 million people now officially at high risk level for excessive rainfall,” Watt continued. “Remember this state was recently in a mega drought. Then record rainfall last winter. And now this. Scientists call that ‘weather whiplash,’ and say such violent swings will become increasingly common as the planet warms in years to come.”

CNN chief climate correspondent Bill Weir appeared in two segments during the period reviewed to discuss the relationship between the heavy precipitation and climate change. Appearing on The Lead with Jake Tapper, he built off of Watt’s reporting, explicitly identifying fossil fuel pollution as the driver of climate change through “the unnatural warming from man-made activities” and connecting it to “the double whammy effect that we are having” from this year’s strong El Niño. Going further, Weir also suggested that adaptation is needed for places that are repeatedly experiencing climate-fueled events:


BILL WEIR (CNN CHIEF CLIMATE CORRESPONDENT): El Niño could ease in the next year or two but we still have the climate change on top of that, so a lot of hope for folks is that these are lessons — it is not a storm to grit your teeth and get through, but these lessons for how to adapt and how to think about living in places like California in the future.

Earlier in the day, Weir appeared on CNN News Central. In addition to making the link between the flooding and climate, he emphasized the relationship between climate change and the burning of fossil fuels, explaining the need to see what’s unfolding in California not as a single event but part of the broader climate crisis.

Extreme weather is becoming a regular part of TV news coverage, but it has too often been reported without giving the context of the climate crisis. Watt and Weir demonstrate how extreme weather coverage can be better.

The U.S. experienced a record number of billion-dollar disasters in 2023, and the planet experienced its hottest year on record. A relentless heat wave claimed over 600 lives in Phoenix, Arizona, and some places in the U.S. are becoming virtually uninhabitable as insurance companies pull out of states that now regularly experience extreme weather.

So far, 2024 is already bringing back-to-back extreme weather in the U.S., while Chile is experiencing what will likely be its deadliest wildfires on record. With more climate-driven disasters surely on the horizon, it’s past time for consistent and clear-eyed coverage that places extreme weather events within the broader climate crisis.

Methodology


Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for all original episodes of ABC’s Good Morning America and World News Tonight, CBS’ Mornings and Evening News, and NBC’s Today and Nightly News as well as all original programming on CNN, Fox News Channel, and MSNBC for any of the terms “atmospheric river,” “boulder,” or “storm” or any variation of any of the terms “flood,” “rain,” “mud,” or “rock” within close proximity of any of the terms “California,” “Nevada,” “Los Angeles,” “San Diego,” or “west coast” from February 5, 2024, when a second atmospheric river hit California and other parts of the West Coast, through February 6, 2024.

We included segments, which we defined as instances when the extreme rain and flooding events due to the second atmospheric river were the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of the extreme rain and flooding. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed the extreme rain and flooding with one another.

We did not include passing mentions, which we defined as instances when a single speaker in a segment on another topic mentioned the extreme rain and flooding without another speaker in the segment engaging with the comment, or teasers, which we defined as instances when the anchor or host promoted a segment about the extreme rain and flooding scheduled to air later in the broadcast.

We then reviewed the identified segments for mentions of the terms “climate” or “global warming.”