The secret world of underwater archaeology

The Cosquer Cave's impressively well-preserved Stone Age paintings were only discovered in 1991. Researchers are always finding new treasures under water.

TREASURES OF UNDERWATER ARCHAEOLOGY
No GPS under water
The research divers in Germany systematically study coastal regions and inland lakes. They also work around the world, such as in Mexico and Indonesia. Historical sources, like old land and sea maps, or actual eyewitnesses, sometimes lead them to a discovery underwater. Coincidence, however, is the biggest factor in discoveries. GPS cannot help researchers, as it doesn't work underwater. PHOTOS 12345678

When the French diving instructor Henri Cosquer discovered in 1985 the access to a flooded cave at a depth of 37 meters (121 feet), during a diving tour in the Mediterranean off the coast of Marseille, he didn't know that it concealed an archaeological sensation.

He and his companions dived down to the entrance of the cave several times over the next few months. But it wasn't until 1991 that he managed to reach the main cave through a tunnel. It would later bear his name.

The narrow, stone-carved space was completely dry, its walls covered with mysterious prehistoric paintings. 

The world's only underwater Stone Age cave

The archaeologists and scientists who later examined the cave found that the drawings were approximately 19,000 to 27,000 years old. The paintings mainly showed animals — seals, fish, horses, bison, mountain goats, sea birds — that were surprisingly lifelike.

"It's the only underwater Stone Age cave that is known to us to date," explains marine archaeologist Fritz Jürgens from the University of Kiel, who also dives to explore such caves. "There are particularly good conservation conditions there."

Towards the end of an ice age, this cave, which is about 11 kilometers (7 miles) off the coast in southern France, was used and painted by Stone Age people. But as the polar ice caps thawed, the sea level gradually rose, and the cave entrance was at some point deep under water. Yet the higher cave itself remained dry.

"That's how these 20,000-year-old and very unique Stone Age cave paintings survived," researcher Jürgens told DW. "They include a stencil painting of a human hand and the only known Stone Age depiction of a penguin."

The stenciled Stone Age hand in the Cosquer Cave

A replica to secure the prehistoric art

The prehistoric Cosquer Cave is now a protected area open only to researchers.

"The Lascaux caves, for example, were opened to visitors after they were discovered," points out Fritz Jürgens. "But within 50 years, the visitors' torches and breathing had damaged the works of art so badly that they had to be closed."

Scientists and specialists are currently building an exact replica of the Cosquer Cave for a maritime museum in Marseille. It is scheduled to be made public in June 2022. The original cave is threatened by rising sea levels, due to climate change.
Shipwrecks are more common

Underwater archaeologist Florian Huber

Underwater archaeology is a special method taught at the Institute for Pre- and Protohistoric Archaeology at the University of Kiel, where Fritz Jürgens also completed his training. Each year, only 10 to 12 students are trained there, and the job opportunities for graduates are limited.

Jürgens' colleague Florian Huber has been working as a professional research diver for many years and dives in the North and Baltic Seas, as well as in large inland lakes in Germany. "As underwater archaeologists, we actually find all kinds of items that were thrown or got into the water at some point, from the Stone Age to World War II," he told DW. "Of course, there are shipwrecks that we find everywhere — in rivers, lakes and seas. And we find submerged settlements that are now under water due to the rise in sea levels."

Excavation of a boat from the 24th-23th century BC, found in Lake Constance

This is an advantage over conventional archaeology, says Jürgens. "Things are preserved under water that would have long since disappeared on land: all organic materials, for example textiles, leather and wood. On land they only survive in the rarest of cases."
Most finds are accidental

Archaeological research under water also has a clear disadvantage: the GPS system, which has already contributed to spotting many sensational terrestrial finds from the air, does not work at greater water depths. "It only goes a few centimeters below the surface of the water. Then it breaks off," says archaeologist Huber.

"What we use in underwater archaeology to track down finds are side scans or multibeams. We scan the seafloor with acoustic signals. These are reflected, come back to the research vessel and are visualized on the computer as converted signals. And then we can see if there is a wreck on the ocean floor."

Historical nautical charts or logbooks are also used by underwater archaeologists, but most finds are discovered by chance, says Huber. "New discoveries are always being made underwater, for instance, when new port facilities are built, but also by recreational divers who go down and discover shipwrecks, remains of boats or stakes underwater somewhere."

As German law specifies that all finds must be notified to authorities, researchers can usually quickly secure new archaeological sites.

In 2020, Huber found an Enigma machine from World War II

A WWII find while doing environmental work

Underwater archaeologists don't only dive for research purposes. Huber and his company in Kiel often work for the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). "Mainly to salvage ghost nets in the Baltic Sea. These are abandoned fishing nets that have been lost but continue to drift in the sea. And fish, birds, whales, seals or turtles can get tangled up in them and die."

It was on one of those missions that Huber's team made a sensational find in 2020, not from the Stone Age, but from the Second World War. "We found an Enigma machine in one of the nets." The special typewriter was developed and used by the Nazis to encode and decipher their encrypted messages during WWII. The find attracted international media attention. For the team of scientists, it was definitely a more valuable discovery than finding ancient gold coins.


Watch video 04:35 Dive in history – underwater tourism as a future trend

This article was translated from German.

Beer from Ancient Egypt to modern Germany

Remains of a 5,000-year-old brewery have been uncovered in Egypt. So, how did beer make its way from the land of the Pharaohs to Germany?

Remains of vats used for beer fermentation were uncovered


Archaeologists from the USA and Egypt have unearthed an ancient brewery on the banks of the Nile. Cairo's tourism ministry says the site, which dates back 5,000 years, would once have been capable of producing 22,400 liters of beer per batch.

In antiquity, the fermented barley juice served as a drink for almost the entire population and was regarded as a staple food. The beer was made from a mixture of water and barley that was heated and then fermented. That mixture was partly seasoned with fruit juice concentrates, filtered and served as a thick, sweet drink.

This find and others in the last 12 months have created hope for new breath of life into Egypt's mummified tourism sector. In 2010, some 14.7 million tourists came to Egypt. Those figures collapsed in 2011 during and after the Arab Spring; and took another blow from Egypt's military coup in 2016. The industry slowly regrew for the next few years, only to be flattened again by the coronavirus pandemic. In 2019, the country had 13.1 million tourists; that had shriveled to just 3.5 million in 2020.

The discovery of what the Egyptian tourism ministry is calling "the oldest high-production brewery in the world," at Abydos, near Luxor, could help build a thirst for Egyptian tourism again.

As the discovery of the "snack bar" in Pompeii in 2020 proved, culinary finds are very popular with the public. Archaeologist and director of the Burg Linn Museum, Dr. Jennifer Morscheiser agrees: "As an archaeologist you know what the press loves: All finds that have to do with sex, alcohol or seasonal holidays."

ANCIENT TREASURES FOUND IN 2020
Saqqara
Saqqara, the necropolis of the city of Memphis, about 30 kilometers south of Cairo, is considered one of most important archaeological sites in Egypt together with the Valley of the Kings and the pyramids of Giza. The settlement struck the headlines this year with yet another spectacular discovery: In September and October, researchers found beautifully decorated wooden coffins.    PHOTOS 123456789

Cooler climate, falling wine production — a beer storm was brewing

In 2011, Morschheiser herself stumbled over the remains of an ancient brewery — in Bonn on the banks of the Rhine — built by the Romans 2,000 years ago.

"It is a credible idea that there was a move to make drinks more preservable and relatively germ-free, especially 2,000 or 5,000 years ago, when wells, sewage systems and rivers were only partially separated from one another," explains Morscheiser.

That might explain why beer brewing became popular thousands of years ago. But how did beer brewing come to be in the area where Germany is today, in Northern and Central Europe?

There are several possible pathways. The Greeks are thought to have learned to brew beer from the Egyptians during the third century BCE, but it's unclear whether the Romans learned from Greeks or from the Egyptians after the Roman conquest in North Africa, in 32 BCE.

The Abydos archaeological site is seen as the oldest high-production beer brewery uncovered to date

In Central Europe, there is evidence that the Celts were fermenting grain to make alcohol around the same time; and it's entirely possible that other European peoples discovered the fermentation process independently.

"Beer and mead were already known to the Celts, but the hype and mass production didn't begin until the middle of the second century AD," explains Morscheiser.
'The aqueducts were left to decay, but not the brewing'

Although the Romans may have regarded it as a second class drink, the Teutonic love for beer has remained ever since.

"As far as I can see, brewing has continued since then," says Morscheiser.

"It even survived the fall of the Roman Empire — the aqueducts were left to decay, but they didn't want to give up brewing beer."

But beer in Europe was still being fermented on a small scale; and that's the way it would stay until the Middle Ages, when Christian monasteries started to brew larger quantities. It was only with the industrial revolution that Europe began brewing on an industrial scale.

Nowadays, beer is a big tourist drawcard for Germany. That point is abundantly clear every September when around six million tourists usually visit Oktoberfest in Munich.

But the brewery which was recently uncovered by archaeologists in Egypt may have been about making beer for a less cheerful occasion. The head of the excavation, Matthew Adams of New York University, believes it's possible that the brewery's purpose was to provide drinks for the funeral rites of the pharaohs.

Fact check: How effective is the Sputnik V coronavirus vaccine?

Russia's COVID-19 vaccine, Sputnik V, has been approved for use in dozens of countries, and it's also under review by the European Medicines Agency. But the vaccine remains controversial.


Sputnik V is already being used in Venezuela to immunize the first group of people

President Vladimir Putin has touted Sputnik V as "the best vaccine in the world," and the Russian media have regularly touted the vaccine's record exports abroad.

However, is it actually a safe and effective inoculation against COVID-19? DW tries to separate the facts from the propaganda.

What is Sputnik V?

Developed by the state-run Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology in Moscow and financed by the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), Gam-COVID-Vac is a viral vector vaccine, similar to those developed by AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson (J&J). Vector vaccines are easier to manage than mRNA vaccines, which need to be stored at very low temperatures.

In a vector vaccine, harmless viruses, such as inactive cold viruses, deliver the genetic code for spike proteins — which the SARS-CoV-2 pathogen uses to attach itself to human cells — into the body. The body of a vaccinated person will recognize them as alien substances and react by creating antibodies and specific T-cells, which are both important for immunity.

Watch video 03:41 Sputnik V vaccine raises hopes in Moscow

What's unusual about Sputnik V, however, is that two different types of cold virus, or adenovirus, are used for the first and second shots — rAd26 (which J&J also uses) and rAd5, respectively. This combination is supposed to prevent the second shot from neutralizing the immunization effect from the first and preventing the desired booster effect.

How effective is Sputnik V?

In principle, it's possible to use two different vectors because this promises a higher vaccine efficacy. The efficacy of other vector vaccines such as AstraZeneca (76%) and J&J (85.4%), which only use one vector, is much lower than that of the mRNA vaccines by BioNTech-Pfizer (95%) and Moderna (94.1%).

However, it's hard to precisely determine the efficacy of Sputnik V. It was approved for use in Russia last August before the state safety review had been completed. Eight months after the government's fast-track approval, there is still no reliable data on the vaccine. Russia has not yet made crucial primary data available to an independent drug testing authority.

Sputnik V was first approved for use in Russia last August

In September, British medical journal The Lancet published partial results from Sputnik V's phase 1 and 2 trials. However, the two studies on safety, tolerability and immunogenicity only included 38 participants each. The findings stated a strong immune response, and said no serious adverse side effects had been detected.

International experts had strong reservations about the results — and not only because of the size of the trial groups. Several researchers pointed out a number of oddities: For example, even though the participants had been given very different forms of the vaccine, the study found that they all had the exact same level of antibodies in their blood on different days. They said that it could not be a coincidence that the participants all had identical levels of T-cells, which fight the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Some 40 scientists from Europe, the United States, Canada and even Russia signed an open letter raising concerns that data might have been manipulated.

On February 2, Russian scientists published interim results from phase 3 trials in The Lancet. They said that over 18,000 participants had received two doses of the vaccine at an interval of three weeks and claimed that efficacy was at 91.6% with no serious side effects. Once again, their international colleagues responded with skepticism, pointing out that there could not be an independent evaluation if the primary data had not been published.

According to a new study released on April 3, Sputnik V is also effective against the B.1.1.7 variant first detected in the UK and the B.1.351 variant first identified in South Africa. However, this has not been confirmed by a standard peer review process.
What are the risks?

In early April, the EU Observer claimed that four people had died and six others had experienced serious health complications after being vaccinated with Sputnik V. In response, Russia's Federal Service for Surveillance in Healthcare, Roszdravnadzor, denied there was a direct link with the vaccine.

Roszdravnadzor said that no adverse side effects had been reported apart from typical post-vaccination reactions such as flu-like infections, skin irritations, headaches and fatigue.

Watch video 12:06 How do we make sure vaccines are safe? (11.11.20)

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) launched a rolling review in early March, looking at data as they become available from ongoing studies, to assess the efficacy and safety of Sputnik V. But if it is to grant approval for its use across the EU, it needs access to a complete dataset. The EMA aims to obtain the information in Russia in an accelerated review process, but Russia's reaction so far has been hesitant.
Where has Sputnik V been approved for use?

According to DW's research, Sputnik V has been approved in 60 states, including India, Mexico, Iran, Ghana, Sri Lanka and Serbia, as well as in the Palestinian territories and Republika Srpska, in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Though Sputnik V has yet to receive EMA approval, the EU member states Hungary and Slovakia have granted emergency national approvals. It is already being used in Hungary to vaccinate citizens, but in Slovakia the authorities have not yet approved use of the 200,000 doses delivered by Russia.

It's difficult to find out for certain which countries have already approved and started using Sputnik V. Argentina, Serbia, Venezuela and San Marino are among them, and of course Russia itself. According to Our World in Data, as of April 12 around 8.8 million people, 6% of the population, had received at least one shot in Russia — a rather low figure by international comparison.

Some countries have already preordered the vaccine and are conducting trials, but they have not yet approved the vaccine. Brazil has already ordered about 76 million doses of Sputnik V in anticipation.

Will the EU start using Sputnik V?

There has been growing interest in the Russian vaccine in Europe, even though the European Commission is not currently negotiating future supply contracts as it did with BioNTech-Pfizer and AstraZeneca late last year. The Czech Republic, Germany and Austria are trying to secure doses of Sputnik V, but have insisted the vaccine will only be used after the EMA gives the go-ahead.

Though the EMA has already launched its rolling review of Sputnik V, it will only be able to begin the approval process after the first results of scientific and clinical trials have been evaluated. This could take weeks, if not months.

Russia is hoping to supply the European Union with 50 million doses from June onwards, and is also planning to build manufacturing sites in Europe. But Thierry Breton, who heads the EU Commission's vaccine task force, remains unconvinced.

"It normally takes many months to build up and ramp up the corresponding production. It is simply too late to use Sputnik V for our goal of having all Europeans vaccinated by the summer," he told the German weekly Der Spiegel last week.

Additional reporting: Uta Steinwehr

• Date 15.04.2021
• Author 
• Ines Eisele, Alexander Freund

This article has been translated from German

How social media is manipulated — and how Russia is involved

Social media posts by Russian lawmaker Leonid Slutsky are being boosted with likes paid for on promotional sites. This also appears to be the case with other Russian political accounts, as DW has discovered.



On social media, it can be hard to tell real from fake interactions

It costs between 1 1/2 and 2 rubles, or around 2 cents, to buy a like or a repost on Facebook. That's also the going rate for retweets when Leonid Slutsky's posts need a little nudging on Twitter.

Slutsky is the head of the foreign affairs committee in the lower house of the Russian parliament, the State Duma. He often writes about such topics as "provocation from Brussels" or the "hellish absurdity" of the Biden administration on his social media accounts.

And as DW has discovered, he uses the Russian promotional site, bosslike.ru, to buy likes. The site also charges for reposts, views and to inflate subscriber numbers on all the main social media outlets, including Telegram, YouTube and TikTok, and the popular Russian networks, Odnoklassniki or VKontakte.
Bargain-basement prices for social media boost

The platform gives approximate rates for the purchase of various types of activities on specific social networks. But in the end, everyone decides what they're willing to pay to have their posts promoted. The more they pay, the faster it all works. Theoretically, anyone using the site can buy likes or retweets for Slutsky, or any other post or account — all that's needed is a current email address.

All of Slutsky's posts were listed on bosslike.ru when DW began observing the site in mid-March. Within a half hour of appearing online, one of Slutsky's Facebook posts about the situation on the Russian-Ukrainian border also appeared on the site to be promoted. DW asked Slutsky in writing if he or any of his staff were paying for likes or reposts, but so far there hasn't been a reply.


The popularity of many of Leonid Slutsky's social media posts appears to have been given a boost

Slutsky came to the attention of the wider Russian public in 2018 for allegedly sexually harassing several female journalists. But despite the public furor, he was cleared by the State Duma's ethics committee.

The Dossier Center, a nonprofit organization run by the self-exiled Russian businessman Mikhail Khodorkovsky, is an organization which, in its own words, "tracks the criminal activity of various people associated with the Kremlin."

In an analysis published in early April, it said that the so-called Russian Peace Federation, a group headed by Slutsky, was asking US senators in Washington for grant money. At the same time, Slutsky's social media accounts were ruthlessly criticizing the United States and the European Union.

In a recent Twitter post, Slutsky said "it is not Russia that is pulling away from the EU but rather Brussels that is provoking confrontations." To date, he has received at least 170 likes for this tweet. DW looked into the 78 public accounts that liked the tweet and found that all but one came for the same Russian promotion site. The profiles were also filled with retweets of other posts listed on the promotion site, and at least nine accounts have since been flagged and suspended by Twitter due to suspicious activity.
Politicians compete with influencers, startups for recognition

NATO's Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (NATO StratCom COE) has been looking into the issue of buying social media popularity since 2018. Rolf Fredheim, a researcher with the center, said that several accounts belonging to lesser-known local Russian politicians can be found on such promotional sites. He told DW that other prominent lawmakers in the State Duma are also on the list, but he was reluctant to single out any particular politician.

Watch video 03:38 Kremlin targets TikTok over critical content

However, Fredheim pointed out that politicians remain relatively rare on such platforms. Most often, it's "some new wannabe celebrity on Instagram or Facebook who wants to boost their presence," he said, estimating that politicians make up only around 10% of the clients. "Most common perhaps would be companies," he continued, because they are just starting out, "and they use these services to make it look like they are bigger and more authentic than they actually are."

On one of the promotional sites, DW uncovered a VKontakte profile belonging to Konstantin Malofeev, the Russian media czar and a confidant of President Vladimir Putin. In his posts, Malofeev —a supporter of Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine — lashes out against "the Kyiv junta" or the "godless EU" on a regular basis.

Another figure on the promotional site is Oleksandr Feldman, a current member of the Ukrainian parliament and a former ally of ex-president Viktor Yanukovych, who fled to Russia in 2014. Feldman is now on the campaign trail and hopes to become the mayor of Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city in. Social media likes on his posts are going for more than a cent apiece.
Russia leads when it comes to social media manipulation

According to the NATO StratCom COE, Russian companies dominate the market when it comes to manipulating social media networks. In a report published in late 2020, the organization said that nearly all of the big software and infrastructure providers they had identified were of Russian origin.

It said that between 10% and 30% of all likes, reposts and views on these platforms could be attributed to fake social media activities. The center's director, Janis Sarts, told DW the center only has "snapshots of that data, so [...] the full scale of the manipulation is not possible."

Is a ban on buying sex work effective? Sex workers say 'no'

Five years ago, France banned the purchase of sex — but not the sale of it. The prostitition measures aimed to decrease the number of sex workers. The result, however, has seen services pushed into clandestine routes.


Sex workers marked five years since the ban on buying sex with protests in Paris


Sex work. The issue of whether a country should criminalize the industry is a polarizing one — and no less in France. In 2016, lawmakers banned the purchase of sex, but not the sale of it.

Today, clients face up to €1,500 ($1,700) in fines for a first-time offense, as well as a €3,750 fine for a repeated offense. Lawmakers at the time hailed the measure as a means to end prostitution and human trafficking while protecting sex workers.

Five years on, however, sex workers say they are in more danger than before.

Sex workers and allies protested in Paris for the 2016 bill to be overturned

Cybele Lesperance, a sex worker and activist based in Chambery, in southeastern France, was one of dozens of protesters across three cities on Tuesday who demonstrated against the bill. The 39-year-old, a Canadian native, said that demand for sex work is lower — but notes that sex workers find themselves in more precarious situations than ever before. Part of this, activists say, is because when the purchase of sex services is banned, those who tend to obey the law avoid seeking these services — and that those who dare to circumvent the law are often delinquents with a criminal history.

While the bill aims to empower sex workers, those in the industry say the buyer and provider are not on equal footing. They say the power has shifted to the client, who often demands riskier practices or unusually low rates.

"We have people that say, 'Hey, I'm criminalized now and I'm taking the risk — you should make the effort.' Or they say they know that I don't have many clients. And now with COVID the law is worse. There are more threats and verbal violence and more threats to publish your personal data onto the internet," said Lesperance.

Watch video 02:51 COVID poses new dangers for sex workers

This is backed by a December 2020 evaluation by researchers at the Sciences Po institute of political studies in Paris, which examined the prostitution act’s "failure" when it comes to power relations between sex workers and clients.

More than 10 sex workers were killed in the six months leading up to February 2020, according to a sex workers' rights group.

'Lack of political commitment' to help sex workers

French Senator Annick Billon, a centrist lawmaker and president of the delegation for women's rights, told DW that around 5,000 fines have been levied against buyers in France since 2016, "which is very little compared to the number of prostitutes estimated at 40,000."

Moreover, 564 people have taken part in support programs that help sex workers exit the industry, but only 161 sex workers completed the process.

Billon argues that more financial resources need to be dedicated to implementing the current law. "There is a lack of human [police, social workers] and financial resources to support prostitutes for administrative formalities, protect them, enable them to undergo professional training and have the resources to live," she said in a statement to DW. "There’s also a lack of political commitment."

"Paradoxically, this law was able to weaken prostitutes. The decline in the number of clients, considered to be delinquents, has forced prostitutes to accept dangerous practices and agree to lower prices," said Billon. "If we had the means to fight against procuring in France as we have the means to fight against drug trafficking, we would make undoubted progress."

Vanesa Campos, a 36-year-old migrant sex worker, was fatally shot in a forest near Paris in 2018

'No credible evidence' on link to human trafficking

Many activists seeking to end prostitution say the sex services industry should be criminalized in a bid to thwart human trafficking. But studies and anti-human trafficking organizations, like La Strada International, have rejected this stance, saying there is "no credible evidence" to support the theory.

La Strada International, however, has said the available evidence suggests such laws place consenting sex workers at higher risk, and that there appears to be a double standard in how industries are regulated.

"When it comes to labor exploitation, for example, exploitation of agricultural workers and domestic workers — regardless whether they work here legally or not — people seem to say, ‘Yes, we should give them rights to reduce exploitation, we should regulate their work and empower them.' But the moment you start to talk about sex workers, it suddenly seems to be a different issue," Suzanne Hoff, international coordinator for La Strada International, told DW.

Sex workers in Ireland, which has banned buying sex services since 2017, have called for safer conditions

Is the Swedish model effective?

France's 2016 reform on prostitution was inspired by Sweden, which in 1999 was the first country in the world to criminalize the purchase of sex but not the sale.

Some sex workers in Ireland, which adopted the so-called Nordic model in 2017, and in Sweden told DW that they, too, have been forced into more precarious conditions to make a living.

There are limited independent studies available on the impact of the law. The Swedish government reviewed its policy in 2010 and found that street prostitution had been reduced by half. "This reduction may be considered to be a direct result of the criminalization of sex purchases," it said. Sex workers, however, say their services simply moved indoors or were made available through clandestine and precarious situations.

Watch video04:00 Julia tells of the sex worker's plight

A 2015 report by the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education found that evidence of the desired effects of the legislation was "weak" and that the law had contributed to "unintended consequences."

That same year, University of Cambridge researcher Jay Levy published a 255-page book after years of research, arguing that "while Sweden has been unsuccessful in achieving its aim to eliminate (or even demonstrably diminish) prostitution, it is, in fact, clear that there have been adverse material effects of Swedish abolitionism."

"Other nations will no doubt continue to look to Sweden when drafting or proposing prostitutional law and policy. They would do well, though, to learn the real lessons of the Swedish model."

Cybele Lesperance and more than 200 others have filed a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights

Human rights violation?

Human rights group Amnesty International in 2016 issued a policy on sex work, declaring that to protect sex workers’ rights "it is necessary not only to repeal laws which criminalize the sale of sex, but also to repeal those which make the buying of sex from consenting adults or the organization of sex work (such as prohibitions on renting premises for sex work) a criminal offense."

A bid to have the ban on buying sex overturned was rejected by France's top constitutional court in 2019. But the matter could be decided by the European Court of Human Rights, which is currently reviewing the case.

Lesperance is one of the more than 260 people of various nationalities who have filed a complaint with the court. For her, the goal is simple. "We could ask for compensation, but what we see is that this bill is a crime against sex workers," she said.

"This kind of policy is so bad that I want to make sure that other European countries are sent the message that human rights are being denied with such a law."

• Date 14.04.2021
• Author Stephanie Burnett

ENVIRONMENT
United Airlines: 'No choice' but to go green

If aviation were a country, it would be among the world's top CO2 emitters. 

The sector has committed to reducing its carbon footprint, but the technology it's banking on for low-carbon travel is far from being developed.


In 2019 there were 4.5 billion airline passengers worldwide, up from 2.1 billion in 2005

Flying is one of the most carbon-intensive ways to get around. About 2-3% of global carbon emissions come from aviation, which means that, if the sector were a country, it would be the sixth-largest source of CO2 in the world.

Besides these emissions from burning jet fuel, planes streaking across the sky also release gases and water vapor into the atmosphere that contribute further to global warming.

The aviation industry has committed to halving its net CO2 emissions from 2005 levels by 2050. But the technology that could allow people to keep boarding planes without further damaging the planet doesn't exist yet. So making this green future a reality is going to require a huge transformation.

On top of that, demand for air travel has been steadily increasing since the early 2000s, and is expected to rebound after the pandemic.

The US carrier United Airlines, which received a multibillion dollar bailout earlier in the pandemic, wants to go carbon neutral by 2050. DW's environment podcast "On the Green Fence" spoke to Lauren Riley, the company's managing director of global environmental affairs and sustainability, about how it plans to get there given that air traffic is only expected to keep growing.

DW: United Airlines wants to be 100% climate neutral by 2050, without using voluntary offsets. How are you going to achieve this?

Lauren Riley: Primarily we've got three pathways forward within aviation today. One is around replacing the fuel — the kerosene that we burn on our planes — and instead putting sustainable aviation fuel on our jets. Sustainable aviation fuel is a solution that's available today that emits up to 80% less carbon on a lifecycle basis.

The second pathway United is focused on is around carbon capture and sequestration. This is a technology that literally captures the CO2 from the atmosphere and permanently stores it underground.

Lauren Riley says driving down the cost of sustainable fuels is key

And then the third pathway is around investing in this next generation of solutions. We don't know what is going to scale, we don't know what is going to be the preeminent solution. So we have an obligation to really look at what are those promising technologies, whether it's hydrogen-powered or electric-powered aircraft or the next. So because there's no silver bullet, we're really looking at all of these areas to address climate change.

According to estimates, the current production levels of sustainable aviation fuels are at around 50 million liters per year. And some experts believe that around 7 billion liters would be necessary to make it competitive with conventional jet fuel, which is still very cheap in comparison. Given this market pressure, how will that scaling up be achieved if jet fuel is just so cheap?

Sustainable aviation fuel has its challenges. First and foremost, there simply is not enough. United has been using sustainable aviation fuel for about a decade now. We've been flying with it on a daily basis since 2016. And yet, in any given year, sustainable aviation fuel is far less than 1% of the total fuel we burn — and we're one of the market leaders in the world. So that's just simply not good enough. But secondly, it's expensive. It's two to four times the cost of conventional jet fuel. And so in particular right now, given our financial circumstances, that's not very viable.

We've been looking at partnerships as an enabler to help scale. Our business community has been a very strong partner, but the long-term solution really lies, in my opinion, with government. We need policy incentives that really help scale and commercialize sustainable aviation fuel. We need to close that price gap and we need to drive supply up. And until that happens, we're going to continue to struggle with replacing conventional kerosene with sustainable alternatives.

Biofuels make up less than 1% of the fuel in United Airline's planes

Aviation has long enjoyed certain tax privileges, for instance, for jet fuel. Given the urgency of the climate crisis and, how can we explain to this Fridays for Future generation that there's a tax exemption for kerosene? How can we justify that?

Well, that's a good one, I don't know. What I do know is that today the technology in aviation relies on kerosene. It is the only scaled option to enable air travel. I would love to see us, quite frankly, in a place where alternative low carbon kerosene is scaled and replaces the kerosene that we use today. That is what we need to strive for, and that's really what we need to focus on incentivizing. So until we drive down that cost, it is unlikely that that's going to happen.

So you wouldn't be in favor of a carbon tax across the board because, I mean, that would obviously hit the aviation industry rather hard, right?

I would be in favor of pricing carbon, absolutely. How that manifests in policy, I don't have an opinion on that, but I do think that it should be valued and things that are valued have a price. And I do think that we have an obligation across aviation to acknowledge that there is a price to emitting that CO2.

Aviation in countries like China and India is growing at a tremendous pace, with hundreds of new airports are being built. As wealth increases in these countries, more and more people are going to want to get on a plane. What happens if we haven't achieved green aviation by that point? Is that something that you think about or do you focus on just the American contribution?

Oh, no, you can't just focus on a single country contribution. That's not how the world operates. We want those folks on airplanes, but we want the flight to be net zero. And I think the opportunity that faces all of us that are looking at decarbonisation of any industry is how do we build towards that now and how do we accelerate the pace of that change such that we can achieve it in a manner in which any passengers shouldn't hesitate to think about the impact of their travel because by default, it is sustainable. I believe we're going to get there. I don't think it's going to be tomorrow or perhaps in the next five years.

There are critics out there who will say: "Hmm ... this sounds good, but this probably is just tantamount to greenwashing." What can you say to convince the skeptics out there that you really are going to turn things around with United?

Well, I would say two things. One, we don't have a choice. I have young children. I care desperately about the planet that we leave behind. So does my CEO and the whole community across United. So this is what we are going to do. We're going to take action regardless.

My second comment would be: I challenge those folks to get involved. So let their voices be heard, lean in and help us signal that we want these low carbon alternative fuels. We want advanced aircraft and airframe technology and engine technology. We need that because people should be able to take pride getting on an airplane to go explore this beautiful planet we have. And they shouldn't have to think twice about the emissions coming out of the tailpipe.

Lauren Riley is the managing director of global environmental affairs and sustainability at United Airlines.

This interview was conducted by Neil King and has been edited for clarity and length. It features in this aviation episode of "On the Green Fence" alongside interviews with Ryanair, Stay Grounded and Atmosfair.

Lebanon's Lokman Slim's widow: 'His work lives on in all of us'

German filmmaker Monika Borgmann, widow of slain Lebanese activist Lokman Slim, is continuing the work they began together in Lebanon.




Lokman Slim und Monika Borgmann met in 2001

Dozens of files and 8mm films are piled up on a big wooden table at an archive in Beirut, the only one documenting Lebanon's recent past that is accessible to the public. The walls are covered with photos of the city devastated in the civil war. The atmosphere is busy.

Monika Borgmann is seated on a leather sofa. She drinks coffee and smokes as she discusses the ongoing economic crisis and the protests against Lebanon's corrupt and incompetent politicians: "We're angry and the work here is our driving force," she explains.

Those in power, meanwhile, seem incapable of creating new opportunities in a country that is getting poorer and poorer at an alarming rate and yet was known as the "Switzerland of the Middle East" not all that long ago.

Many people have lost hope in the future. Borgmann is a German filmmaker who found first her vocation and then her husband in Lebanon. She was widowed in February when Lokman Slim, a famous Lebanese intellectual and courageous critic of the powerful Shia militant group Hezbollah, was killed.

Though she is composed, tears well up when she talks about her late husband. "He was executed," she says. "It was a political murder. They shot my husband with six bullets."

Borgmann first came to Lebanon in the mid-1980s. She was spending a year in Syria as a student of Islamic Studies and had flown from Damascus to Beirut for New Year's Eve. Lebanon was 10 years into the civil war and the land route was too dangerous. "Something about the country had always fascinated me," she recalls.

Exploring the past

She started working as a freelance journalist from Beirut and later from Cairo, Egypt. Her first radio feature was about daily life in wartime Beirut. She was intrigued by questions such as: "How does one become a perpetrator, a killer?" - questions that had obsessed her during her youth in Germany, when she and her generation started wondering about the responsibility and complicity of their parents during the Nazi era.

After the Lebanese civil war ended in 1990, Borgmann started interviewing snipers and later mass murderers. In 2001 she was conducting research for a documentary about the 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre in Beirut when a friend introduced her to Lokman Slim because they were both interested in "morbid" themes, he had joked.

They started living and working together. Their first joint project was the documentary about the massacre. It featured six of the Christian Phalange militia who were involved in the killing of thousands of civilians over a period of three days. In it, they talked openly about how they had tortured and murdered people.

The 2005 documentary 'Massaker' was about the perpetrators of the massacres at Sabra and Shatila

"Lokman and I complemented each other," explains Borgmann. They had a common mission to explore and process the past, even if neither of them was able to find a satisfactory answer to the question of why somebody becomes a murderer.

They often faced obstacles in their research. There was no national archive containing detailed eyewitness accounts and historical documents pertaining to the civil war which lasted 15 years. Education was also limited. Even though people knew what had happened during the war, accounts of what had happened varied widely among the population. And in schools, history lessons tended to stop in 1943 with Lebanon's independence.

'We never feared for our lives'

So Borgmann and Slim decided to set up their own archive and education center, in the middle of Dahiye, a southern suburb of Beirut, which is now a stronghold of Hezbollah. They wanted their Umam research center to link the past to the present.

Since 2005, the center has worked to close the gaps in collective memory. It is supported by Germany's ifa organization for international cultural relations, as well as the German Foreign Ministry and the Swiss Embassy. Workshops, exhibitions and debates with activists, civilians, diplomats and people of different religions and confessions as well as others interested in history and cultural memory are organized here, allowing for unique opportunities for exchange.

But the couple's work also made them enemies. Borgmann says that the threats against her and her husband increased when the Syrian army retreated from Lebanon in 2005. "Each time something important happened in the country, the pressure on us grew," she said. "But we never feared for our lives."

Despite their activism, Borgmann says she and her late husband had never feared for their lives

When Lokman Slim was found dead in his car on February 4, 2021, many wondered: "Why now?"

Borgmann can only guess: "Maybe it was his research into the explosion in the port of Beirut in August 2020." He had told journalists just after the blast that he thought only a small fraction of the ammonium nitrate stash had exploded and speculated that the rest had gone to Iraq or Syria. This theory might well have been seen as an accusation by certain members of Lebanon's divided society.

Crossing a red line

Borgmann says that his murder overstepped a red line. Though nobody ever took responsibility, an eloquent critic of Hezbollah and its allies had been silenced.

The son of a Shiite lawyer and Christian mother, Lokman had grown up in southern Beirut and continued to live there with Borgmann despite the influence of the Hezbollah, whom he never shied away from criticizing. Describing himself as a Shiite atheist, he thought that Hezbollah, which emerged in opposition to Israeli occupation in the 1980s, is manipulated from afar by Iran.

Watch video 11:15 Hezbollah: The world's most powerful militant group?

Borgmann says that today, Hezbollah — a combination of militia, political party, social organization and military entity — needs conflict with Israel to justify its existence. But this justification could vanish in a country that is facing its worst economic crisis since the outbreak of the civil war in 1975. Hyperinflation is causing the Lebanese lira to fall by the hour. Most of the population has lost faith in politicians, whether they belong to pro-Western factions or Hezbollah.

There have been protests across Lebanon as inflation soars

In October 2019, mass protests erupted on the streets. Activists and intellectuals, including Borgmann and Slim, met to discuss the situation and possible solutions. In December, a discussion flared up when the couple talked about the idea of neutrality in foreign policy and about finding regional solutions by involving neighbors, including Israel, with which Lebanon is still officially at war. Many Hezbollah supporters felt provoked and accused them of Zionism. They left the premises under police protection.

Borgmann takes another cigarette from her pack, lights it, continues to talk. She talks passionately about her politics, art and husband. "We worked and lived together for 20 years. They may have murdered Lokman, but his work lives on in all of us here."

• Date 11.04.2021
• Author Lea Bartels

This article was translated from German.

COVID: Which countries still have no vaccines?

The coronavirus vaccine campaign in Gibraltar is already over and yet it hasn't even started in many other countries. What’s the reason for that — and could the situation be about to change?



Kenya has received some delivieries of vaccine, but Africa is largely undersupplied


More than 600 million vaccinations have taken place worldwide, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). But while close to 100% of Gibraltar's population, for instance, have already been vaccinated, countries like Nicaragua are still waiting to receive their first doses of vaccine. WHO Secretary-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus referred to the situation on Tuesday as a "farce." He called for global production to be cranked up and vaccines to be fairly distributed to tackle the acute phase of the pandemic.

On the global vaccination map, there is still a whole swath of African countries awaiting supplies — from Libya to Madagascar. Those countries do not even feature in the WHO's vaccination statistics. The picture is similar in Central Asia, as well as in individual countries such as North Korea, Cuba, and Bosnia and Herzegovina. That does not, however, necessarily mean that the respective countries have received absolutely no shots up to now. Bosnia is due to receive its first big, direct delivery at the end of May, but it has already received some vaccines donated by neighboring Serbia.
Zero vaccine doses for 10 African countries

"With regard to Africa, we have the good news that 44 countries have already received vaccine supplies. But, conversely, this also means, of course, that 10 countries have received no vaccines up to now," says Clemens Schwanhold, political officer at the nongovernmental organization ONE.

Madagascar, Burundi and Eritrea are among those countries whose governments believed that the virus could be fought by other means. Tanzania, in the meantime, has undergone a change of heart after the sudden death of coronavirus skeptic President John Magufuli following unconfirmed rumors of a COVID infection. Schwanhold believes the government led by Magufuli's successor, President Samia Suluhu Hassan, is likely to order vaccine supplies in the next few weeks. "Then it would still take a few months, ideally a few weeks, until anything arrives. In the second half of the year, something could be possible."

COVAX — A good idea that packs little punch?

In the interests of global health, we need to create herd immunity against the new coronavirus, including among people living in the remotest corners of the Earth. As long as the virus keeps on encountering lots of new hosts it can continue mutating and, at some point, it is possible that variants will develop that can evade all existing vaccines. "None of us is safe until we all are safe" is a common refrain about COVID-19 — and it is the idea behind the COVAX program to provide global access to vaccination. The member states of the WHO have been divided into two groups. One is made up of 98 more affluent countries, which are funding subsidized or free vaccine supplies for the 92 poorer ones. Germany is one of the COVAX program's biggest benefactors, providing almost €1 billion ($1.19 billion) in funding.

"The problem is that there are not many more vaccine doses available because the EU and the United States have already secured the large majority of them," says Sonja Weinreich, who is in charge of health issues at Brot für die Welt (Bread for the World), a relief agency run by the Protestant churches in Germany. "So this mechanism hasnt been able to properly take hold because this solidarity just doesn't exist."
Would waiving vaccine patents help?

A large coalition of aid organizations and other groups have called for the waiving of COVID vaccine patents to help tackle this problem. "It would allow the poorer countries — or all the companies across the world — that are able to produce vaccines to do just that. That would simply have to go hand in hand with the relevant technology transfer," Weinreich tells DW.

Brot für die Welt is one of the organizations behind this demand. One argument is, she says, that the vaccines were partially developed and produced with public funds: "It is not acceptable for something to be publicly funded and then the profits from it privatized."

Ghana did not receive any vaccines until late February

The pharmaceutical industry, on the other hand, argues that the patents are not the sticking point. Nathalie Moll, director general of the industry lobby group the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA), told DW at the end of March: "If one company contacts another to expand vaccine production, a lot of technical know-how has to be transferred, so that the vaccines can be produced safely and efficiently in the required amounts. This is about much more than intellectual property." She said that 250 licenses had already been distributed worldwide to expand production capacity.

In the opinion of Clemens Schwanhold from ONE, such licenses are a positive step forward. Batches of AstraZeneca destined for African states are, for example, largely being produced by the Serum Institute of India, the world's biggest vaccine factory. It is questionable, he says, whether major production capacities remain that could be swiftly integrated into the global vaccine rollout: "If they first had to be built and then approved, it would take months, maybe even years," Schwanhold tells DW.

COVAX has been delivering to the Palestinian territories

Is COVAX‘s pledge realistic?

Yet it is India of all places — which is so vital for world vaccine supplies — that has recently restricted the export of vaccines. The government wants to keep the supplies in India, which is currently seeing record levels of infection. The United States also has exported practically no vaccines at all, while the European Union has allowed supplies to be sent to poorer countries up to now.

Nevertheless, both Sonja Weinreich and Clemens Schwanhold are optimistic that the COVAX program's main goal can be achieved. Its aim is to vaccinate at least 20% of the population of all 92 beneficiary countries by the end of 2021, including high-risk groups and medical personnel. "I think that is feasible," says Weinreich. "In Europe, the vaccination rollout is beginning to pick up speed and a lot more vaccines should be available," she adds.

The EU has ordered more than four vaccine shots per capita from a number of manufacturers, even though only two at the most are required. Canada has ordered more than eight. Clemens Schwanhold explains that liability issues still need to be resolved before such excess vaccine supplies can be passed on to countries in need. Manufacturers have passed their liability on to most of the states purchasing their products because of the extremely short development turnaround time. "And it is understandable that the EU does not want to be liable for any potential claims if it passes on vaccine doses."

He says that the success of the COVAX pledge depends on "all participants pulling together when it comes to funding and to the provision of raw materials." The good thing, says Schwanhold, is that: "COVAX does not have to do all this alone." The African Union has also ordered significantly more than 500 million vaccine doses, he says: "I am relatively confident that we will have vaccinated far more than 20% by the end of this year."

• Date 11.04.2021
• Author David Ehl

This article has been translated from German.

Bill Gates buys big on a farmland shopping spree

The third-richest man on the planet, Bill Gates, is also one of the largest private owners of farmland in the US. 

He is known for supporting environmental innovation, but his farming plans have been secretive until now.


Melinda Gates and Bill Gates speak during 'One World: Together At Home' in April 2020

In January, US magazine The Land Report — which tracks land transactions and produces an annual list of the 100 biggest US landowners — revealed that Bill and Melinda Gates have one of the largest portfolios of private farmland in the US, with assets totaling more than $690 million (€590 million).

The Land Report gives top spot to Liberty Media Chair John Malone, who owns 2.2 million acres (8,094 square kilometers) of ranches and forests. CNN founder Ted Turner ranked third with 2 million acres of ranch land, while Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is in 25th spot with ownership of 420,000 acres, mainly in west Texas. Gates is in 49th spot but rising.

The magazine editor, Eric O’Keefe, was researching a purchase of 14,500 acres of prime Washington State farmland and found that the buyer was a small company in Louisiana, acting on behalf of Cascade Investments, the investment firm that manages most of the huge fortune belonging to Gates.

Gates’ holdings, it turns out, include large tracts in Illinois, Iowa, Louisiana, California and a dozen other states. With the Washington State acreage and other recent additions to his portfolio, O’Keefe calculated that Gates owns at least 242,000 acres of American farmland, the largest holdings in Louisiana (69,071 acres), Arkansas (47,927 acres), and Arizona (25,750 acres).

Life on US farms has often been hard

Follow the money

Most things Gates gets involved with have been appropriated by one conspiracy theory or another, and this is no different. Some argue that Gates is buying up land to indulge in futuristic experiments in urban dwelling or the creation of new food.

But the reason for the move may in fact be more prosaic: It’s a good investment, with low volatility, not closely tied to the stock market and can be deployed as an inflationary hedge.

Gates has spent years diversifying his $129 billion fortune through Cascade Investments. Michael Larson runs the Washington-based asset manager, as well as supervising the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s $50 billion endowment. "The arrangement is simple," The Wall Street Journal wrote in a 2014 profile. "Mr. Larson makes money, and Mr. Gates gives it away."

"Land has been an attractive investment for many years, producing dependable returns for investors and owners over a long cycle, with a primary focus on delivering food, fiber and fuel to a resource-hungry world," Emily Norton, director of Rural Research at real estate firm Savills, told DW.

"Investors are now showing appetite for the next paradigm of economic thinking, where land is managed in a way to give back as much (if not more) than we take from it," she adds.

Climate mitigation is another key motivation, with investors plowing money into an asset class where long-term gains from productivity increases are expected as population growth pushes up demand for more and higher quality food.

The farmland sector has been heating up in the wake of the news. The farmland real estate investment trust (REIT) Farmland Partners, which owns 156,500 acres in 16 US states, has seen its traded value more than double since November and is trading near an all-time high since its 2014 IPO. Gladstone Land, another farmland REIT that owns 127 farms comprised of 94,000 acres, trades at an all-time high.

Farmland in the area of Washington State where Gates made his latest purchase is valuable, with prices between $10,000 and $15,000 per acre, above the state average of about $2,000. Globally, the Savills Global Farmland Index indicates an 11% compound annual growth rate from 2002 to 2019. Farmland funds raised $5.7 billion in 2019 before inflows fell to $2 billion in 2020, according to Preqin data.

"Bill Gates, co-founder of Microsoft, has an alter ego," O’Keefe wrote: "Farmer Bill, the guy who owns more farmland than anyone else in America." Gates — who stepped down from day-to-day involvement Microsoft in 2008 — has long been looking for ways to help the world’s poorest and to address the planet’s environmental challenges.
Not related to climate change

When asked during a discussion on Reddit why he’s buying up so much farmland, Gates said it wasn't connected to climate change, adding that seed science and biofuel development were the major drivers of the acquisitions.

"The agriculture sector is important. With more productive seeds we can avoid deforestation and help Africa deal with the climate difficulty they already face. It is unclear how cheap biofuels can be, but if they are cheap it can solve the aviation and truck emissions," he wrote.

But the decision, he said, came from his investment group. Cascade Investment is also is a shareholder in the plant-based protein companies Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods as well as farming equipment manufacturer John Deere.

Good for the goose, good for the gander?

In January, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation announced it was creating a nonprofit entity called Gates Ag One that it said would "speed up efforts to provide smallholder farmers in developing countries, many of whom are women, with access to the affordable tools and innovations they need to sustainably improve crop productivity and adapt to the effects of climate change."

But the process of consolidation of land ownership in the US appears to be moving in the opposite direction. Many farmers lease at least some of the land they cultivate. Very large farms, which number almost 200,000, produce 63% of agricultural products in the US, but there are 1.9 million small family farms.

According to Bruce Sherrick, a professor of agricultural economics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, about 60% of row-crop farmland in the Midwest is leased. The landowners include investors like Gates. Although the global farmland market is still highly fragmented, investment by financial institutions and wealthy individuals has risen since the financial crisis.

Others suggest Gates’ move is also motivated by the need to buy carbon neutrality across his portfolio.

Investment firms argue the farmlands will meet carbon-neutral targets for sustainable investment portfolios while also increasing agricultural productivity and revenue.

Analysts expect measures of carbon emissions and biodiversity to become more formalized, with the possible introduction of new carbon taxes.

"Farmland offers an excellent means to diversify a tech-heavy portfolio," O’Keefe told Crosscut. "It’s a sound counterbalance with proven rates of return. In addition, given the scale of Bill Gates’ investments, he has ample opportunity to build a team of superior agricultural managers, which is precisely what one sees at Gates’ farmland firm, Cottonwood Ag Management."

On the right is a plant-based burger containing wheat protein, coconut oil and potato protein

On the brighter side

American agriculture is being transformed as farmers employ new technologies and Big Data to help them manage their crops.

That can mean better yields with decreased use of fertilizers and pesticides. With proper techniques, the carbon from decaying plant matter can be kept safely in the soil rather than entering the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide.

 UK

MP says Earth is ‘overpopulated’ and calls for rich people to be ‘abolished’

 Jordan King Wednesday 14 Apr 2021 METRO UK

\Claudia Webbe said the ‘rich should be abolished’ despite being in the top 1% herself (Pictures: Getty, Twitter/ClaudiaWebbe, PA SHE IS NOT, SHE EARNS $100,000

A Labour MP has said the world should ‘abolish the rich’ to tackle overpopulation and climate change.

  The Cambridge Sustainability Commission on Scaling Behaviour Change recently published a new report revealing that the UK’s richest 1% produce double the combined carbon emissions of the world’s poorest 50%.  

The study concluded that people, particularly society’s richest, need to change their lifestyles. 

 Claudia Webbe, who currently represents Leicester East and previously served as a cabinet member for energy, environment and transport, responded to the report on Twitter. 

She tweeted: ‘Earth is overpopulated; there are too many rich people. To solve the climate crisis; the rich must be abolished.’ 

 In a series of tweets she referenced some statistics from the 73-page document, including that the richest 10% of the world produces 52% of all consumption-based greenhouse gas emissions.  Meanwhile, the poorest 50% are responsible for just 7% of all consumption-based greenhouse gas emissions. 

Read more https://metro.co.uk/2021/04/14/mp-says-earth-is-overpopulated-and-rich-should-be-abolished-14411440/?ito=newsnow-feed?ito=cbshare