It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Wednesday, July 27, 2022
Stellantis laying off employees at two Ontario plants
BNN Bloomberg
A Stellantis sign is seen outside the Chrysler Technology Center, in Auburn Hills, Mich., on Jan. 19, 2021. Stellantis says it will be laying off an undislosed number of employees at its Windsor and Brampton auto assembly plants in Ontario as part of a push for operational efficiencies in its transition to become a "mobility tech company." , THE CANADIAN PRESS/AP-Carlos Osorio
Stellantis NV says it will be laying off an undisclosed number of employees at its Windsor and Brampton auto assembly plants in Ontario as part of a push for operational efficiencies in its transition to become a "mobility tech company."
Spokeswoman LouAnn Gosselin says the company, who's brands include Chrysler, Jeep, Dodge and Ram, will offer a retirement incentive program to eligible employees to minimize the impact on the workforce, and will try to place laid-off hourly employees into open full-time positions as they become available.
She says eligible employees will have until mid-August to make a decision on the buyout, while the workforce reductions will take place over the next several months.
The unspecified cuts come as the company prepares to make major investments in electric vehicle production, including a $3.6 billion commitment to upgrade the Brampton and Windsor plants.
Stellantis and LG Energy Solution are also building a $5 billion battery plant in Windsor as part of the company's plans to invest $45 billion globally by 2025 on electrification and software.
Gosselin says the funding commitments show the company is "firmly committed to the future of its Canadian operations."
Tom Mulcair: The stakes couldn't be higher as Canada's top court decides whether to hear climate class action lawsuit
People mark Earth Day with a march, Friday, April 22, 2022 in Montreal.
Canadians will learn on Thursday whether the Supreme Court is willing to step up to the plate and hear a case concerning the rights of future generations in the fight against climate change and global warming.
The stakes couldn’t be higher and the case deserves to be heard.
That case against the federal government is a class action brought by a Quebec-based environmental group called ENJEU (short for Environnement Jeunesse, meaning environment and youth). They have thus far been heard in the Quebec Superior Court and Court of Appeal, and they have fallen short in both instances. The sums involved ($100 for every person under 35 in the province) are not earth-shattering and the money would go to projects to fight climate change and adapt to its effects.
Far more importantly, what is at stake in the Supreme Court decision is the role of the courts in our society. Since the Quebec courts have sidestepped the issue, the Supreme Court is the only remaining institution in our democracy that can help force the Canadian government to meet its international obligations.
There have been precedents, particularly in the Netherlands, where the courts have indeed forced the government to meet specific greenhouse gases (GHG) reduction goals. This is an existential question for future generations and when one of the branches of government completely fails in its role, the courts can be quite creative in moving into the breach.
Over the weekend, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault once again illustrated why Canada has become an international laggard in the fight against climate change and why, as a result, this Supreme Court decision has suddenly become much more important.
In a radio interview, Guilbeault had this to say: "[We] recognize that some of the measures that will be needed to achieve those deep emission reductions might require more time than what we have between now and 2030…I'm not saying today it's necessarily going to be 2032, but the companies have said it could be 10 years, which would bring us to 2032."
Those 2030 targets were the same ones Guilbeault used to justify the approval of a major new offshore fossil fuel project just a few months ago. The announcement of the Bay du Nord project came the same week that the Secretary General of the United Nations released a startling new IPCC report and pleaded with world leaders not to approve any new fossil fuel projects. Guilbeault and Trudeau rationalized that after 30 years as an international outlier, Canada was just about to get it right so…we could approve the project.
By Monday, Guilbeault was in full damage control and produced this pearl: "Basically, these companies would be able to use carbon credits to meet some of the regulatory emissions reductions requirements. But again, it would be for a short amount of time, for a short period, two years, and it would be in limited quantity."
When the Trudeau Liberals approved the Bay du Nord project, they turned a deaf ear to the international consensus and took a decision that would be politically popular in a province where the Liberals hold almost all of the seats. Short-term gain for long-term pain.
That’s where the ENJEU legal challenge hopes to make a difference.
When the Liberals signed the Kyoto Protocol, they had no plan. Jean Chrétien’s former chief of staff Eddie Goldenberg famously admitted that it was about “galvanizing public opinion”. In other words, it was a political communications exercise, not an environmental decision. That might help explain why Canada went on to have one of the worst records in the world for greenhouse gases emission increases after signing Kyoto.
Canada also went on to become the first country in the world to withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol, the only others being Australia and Russia.
You don’t have to be a climate scientist to understand what you’re seeing around the world this summer. The extreme heat and record temperatures in Europe and the uncontrolled wildfires in California have been modelled and predicted for years now. We knew this was coming, yet successive Canadian governments dithered, denied and delayed.
What’s left other than the courts to force them to act? Even a once respected environmentalist like Guilbeault tries to justify the unjustifiable. Let’s put his arguments to the test in court with real rules of proof and evidence, not political and bureaucratic rationalization.
The Wagner Court is graced with some of the best legal minds to have ever sat on the Supreme Court. That perhaps explains why it has been unable to have any consistent philosophy or approach: too many first class people digging in to show how they can parse, distinguish and, far too often, dissent.
The Lamer Court gave life to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and, in particular, to minority language rights. The McLachlin Court will be remembered for its groundbreaking decisions on indigenous rights.
This case, about the environment, sustainable development and the rights of future generations, could become one that also begins to define this court…for the future.
A 13-year-old girl has been accepted to a medical school program only a year after graduating high school.
Alena Analeigh Wicker shared the news on Instagram with her more than 20,000 followers recently.
"I've worked so hard to reach my goals and live my dreams. Mama I made it," the teenager posted below a picture of her program acceptance letter.
She was accepted into the Burroughs Wellcome Scholars Early Assurance Program at the University of Alabama at Birmingham's Heersink School of Medicine, the school confirmed in a statement to CNN.
The program is a partnership between the medical school and HBCU's across Alabama, and it provides early acceptance to the students who meet the requirements for acceptance and matriculation, according to their website.
Alena posted to Instagram that she graduated high school last year at the age of 12, and she has already accumulated a list of impressive accomplishments.
In an interview with the Washington Post, she said, "I'm still a normal 13-year-old."
But not quite. She's currently a student at both Arizona State University and Oakwood University earning two separate undergraduate degrees in biological sciences, according to the Washington Post.
And yet, how does she do it all at such a young age?
"I just have extremely good time management skills and I'm very disciplined," she told the Washington Post.
She also created "The Brown STEM Girl," to engage, empower and educate girls of color in STEM -- science, technology, engineering and mathematics, according to its website.
The Brown STEM Girl Foundation honors the legacy of Katherine Johnson, a trailblazer for African-American mathematicians at NASA.
Alena keeps the public updated on her journey, posting on her Instagram and Facebook page, where she expresses her love and passion for STEM, NASA and Legos.
Alena's mother told the Washington Post that she noticed her daughter's intellect since the science buff was a toddler.
"Alena was gifted," her mother, Daphne McQuarter, said. "It was just how she did things and how advanced she was. She was reading chapter books."
Western media shows ‘sour grapes’ mentality to keep hyping Chinese rocket re-entry, despite flawless safety record
By GT staff reporters
Published: Jul 26, 2022
China launches Wentian lab module for space station on July 24, 2022.
Photo: Fan Wei/GT
Right after China's successful launch of the Wentian lab module for the construction of the China Space Station, the Western media rapidly followed with a new round of smear campaign, hyping the "uncontrolled fall" of the Long March-5B Y3 carrier rocket's first stage.
Mission insiders at the rocket's developer and space analysts reached by the Global Times on Tuesday said that they were not surprised by such ignorant manipulation of facts, which projected once again the "sour grapes" mentality of some in the West toward the robust development of China's aerospace sector.
Media such as space.com claimed in its coverage of the Wentian mission that it was the third time that China "has opted not to control the disposal of the first stage of the Long March 5B rocket, once again putting China under scrutiny from space debris trackers after similar uncontrolled falls in 2020 and 2021."
Jonathan McDowell, an experienced tracker of these events at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, was quoted in these reports as saying that US Space Command orbital data is showing the 21-ton stage floating on its own.
"The inert ... core stage remains in orbit and was not actively deorbited," McDowell wrote on Twitter. McDowell added that Americans "do a rather better job of upper stage disposal, and China on average a worse one.
"So, I congratulate China on the successful launch of Wentian but deplore their failure to redesign the Long March 5B that sets us up for another major uncontrolled re-entry," the US astronomer told spacenews.com, further emphasizing his theory.
Commenting on these almost routine accusations, a mission insider at the rocket developer China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT) told the Global Times on Tuesday that "There is no specific adjustment made to the rocket used in the Wentian launch in terms of the re-entry issues. And the mission was executed strictly in line with international practice, as the country always did in previous space launches."
The so-called Western experts should come back to reality, where the truth has proven to be the opposite of their accusations again and again, and they'd better do so, as we still have the Mengtian launch coming next, the insider said on condition of anonymity.
It was not the first time that the West has picked on the Long March-5B, a shorter variant of the country's strongest Long March-5 rocket type that has been deployed for China Space Station module launches.
The US made quite a fuss over the Long March-5B Y2 debris' re-entry in May 2021, when the rocket was commissioned to deliver the Tianhe core module.
CALT rocket designer Zhang Borong told the Global Times in May 2021 that the rocket adopted passivation technology that would not cause any explosion in orbit or create debris in space, and that rocket debris would be burned up by friction with the atmosphere, rather than smashing into Earth as in sci-fi movies.
Turning a deaf ear to repeated statements by China's space industry insiders and the Foreign Ministry that the probability of the rocket remnants causing harm was extremely low, a number of Western media outlets, including CNN and The New York Times, as well as the Pentagon and NASA, claimed during the Tianhe mission that the debris was heading back to Earth in an "uncontrolled" manner and criticized China for being "irresponsible" for the ocean landing.
The last round of the US-led smear campaign against Long March-5B was met with "slaps in the face," as the facts proved that the re-entry of the rocket remnants was harmless.
In fact, the China Manned Space Agency (CMSA) has regularly updated orbit data for debris re-entry of any rockets or spacecraft used for the China Space Station's construction, such as that for the Long March-2F rocket as well as the Tianzhou cargo spacecraft, which fully conforms to international norms in a rather responsible fashion, analysts said.
The CALT source told the Global Times that it saddened them that the Western world has adopted such obscurantism that it uses twisted facts to fool its people, citing another hyped report that said Tiangong Classroom sessions were filmed on Earth rather than in space.
"China ruled out the possibility of causing ground damage at the design stage, and its capability to ensure the re-entry safety has proven itself reliable again and again. What is behind such smears is total jealousy of us," Song Zhongping, a TV commentator who closely follows China's space program, told the Global Times on Tuesday.
The US is running out of ways to stop China's development in the aerospace sector, so smears and defamation became the only things left for it, Song noted. "But those efforts would be useless to affect the development of the China space program."
Scientists calculate the risk of someone being killed by space junk
The chance of someone being killed by space junk falling from the sky may seem ridiculously tiny. After all, nobody has yet died from such an accident, though there have been instances of injury and damage to property. But given that we are launching an increasing number of satellites, rockets and probes into space, do we need to start taking the risk more seriously?
A new study, published in Nature Astronomy, has estimated the chance of causalities from falling rocket parts over the next ten years.
Every minute of every day, debris rains down on us from space—a hazard we are almost completely unaware of. The microscopic particles from asteroids and comets patter down through the atmosphere to settle unnoticed on the Earth's surface—adding up to around 40,000 metric tons of dust each year.
While this is not a problem for us, such debris can do damage to spacecraft—as was recently reported for the James Webb space telescope. Occasionally, a larger sample arrives as a meteorite, and maybe once every 100 years or so, a body tens of meters across manages to drive through the atmosphere to excavate a crater.
And—fortunately very rarely—kilometer-sized objects can make it to the surface, causing death and destruction—as shown by the lack of dinosaurs roaming the Earth today. These are examples of natural space debris, the uncontrolled arrival of which is unpredictable and spread more or less evenly across the globe.
The new study, however, investigated the uncontrolled arrival of artificial space debris, such as spent rocket stages, associated with rocket launches and satellites. Using mathematical modeling of the inclinations and orbits of rocket parts in space and population density below them, as well as 30 years' worth of past satellite data, the authors estimated where rocket debris and other pieces of space junk land when they fall back to Earth.
They found that there is a small, but significant, risk of parts re-entering in the coming decade. But this is more likely to happen over southern latitudes than northern ones. In fact, the study estimated that rocket bodies are approximately three times more likely to land at the latitudes of Jakarta in Indonesia, Dhaka in Bangladesh or Lagos in Nigeria than those of New York in t
The authors also calculated a "casualty expectation"—the risk to human life—over the next decade as a result of uncontrolled rocket re-entries. Assuming that each re-entry spreads lethal debris over an area of ten square meters, they found that there is a 10% chance of one or more casualties over the next decade, on average.
To date, the potential for debris from satellites and rockets to cause harm at the Earth's surface (or in the atmosphere to air traffic) has been regarded as negligible. Most studies of such space debris have focused on the risk generated in orbit by defunct satellites which might obstruct the safe operation of functioning satellites. Unused fuel and batteries also lead to explosions in orbit which generate additional waste.
But as the number of entries into the rocket launch business increases—and moves from government to private enterprise—it is highly likely that the number of accidents, both in space and on Earth, such as that which followed the launch of the Chinese Long March 5b, will also increase. The new study warns that the 10% figure is therefore a conservative estimate.
Saudi officials inspect a crashed module in January 2001. Credit: Wikipedia
What can be done
There are a range of technologies that make it entirely possible to control the re-entry of debris, but they are expensive to implement. For example, spacecraft can be "passivated," whereby unused energy (such as fuel or batteries) is expended rather than stored once the lifetime of the spacecraft has ended.
The choice of orbit for a satellite can also reduce the chance of producing debris. A defunct satellite can be programmed to move into low Earth orbit, where it will burn up.
There are also attempts to launch re-usable rockets which, for example, SpaceX has demonstrated and Blue Origin is developing. These create a lot less debris, though there will be some from paint and metal shavings, as they return to Earth in a controlled way.
Many agencies do take the risks seriously. The European Space Agency is planning a mission to attempt the capture and removal of space debris with a four-armed robot. The UN, through its Office of Outer Space Affairs, issued a set of Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines in 2010, which was reinforced in 2018. However, as the authors behind the new study point out, these are guidelines, not international law, and do not give specifics as to how mitigation activities should be implemented or controlled.
The study argues that advancing technologies and more thoughtful mission design would reduce the rate of uncontrolled re-entry of spacecraft debris, decreasing the hazard risk across the globe. It states that "uncontrolled rocket body reentries constitute a collective action problem; solutions exist, but every launching state must adopt them."
A requirement for governments to act together is not unprecedented, as shown by the agreement to ban ozone layer-destroying chlorofluorcarbon chemicals. But, rather sadly, this kind of action usually requires a major event with significant consequences for the northern hemisphere before action is taken. And changes to international protocols and conventions take time.
More information:Michael Byers et al, Unnecessary risks created by uncontrolled rocket reentries,Nature Astronomy(2022).DOI: 10.1038/s41550-022-01718-8
Russia is set to pull out of the International Space Station (ISS) after 2024 and build its own orbiting outpost.
Yuri Borisov, the country’s new space chief announced the move on Tuesday during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, reported the Associated Press.
“Of course, we will fulfill all our obligations to our partners, but the decision about withdrawing from the station after 2024 has been made,” said Borisov. “I think by that time we will start forming a Russian orbiting station.”
However, AP also reports that NASA hasn’t received anything official from its Russian counterparts.
“Nothing official yet,” said Robyn Gatens, NASA’s ISS director in an interview at a conference in Washington. “We literally just saw that as well. We haven’t gotten anything official.”
While the tension between the US and Russia persists over the war on Ukraine, the announcement came as a surprise.
About two weeks ago, NASA and Russia’s space agency, Roscosmos, signed an agreement allowing US astronauts and Russian cosmonauts to hitch rides on each other’s spacecrafts to and from the ISS.
Since its launch in 1998, the station has been led by an American-Russian partnership, and has been home to 14 Canadian astronauts including Chris Hadfield, who famously recorded his own version of David Bowie’s “Space Oddity” from space in 2013.
NASA announced a retirement plan for the ISS in February, which involves crashing it into the Pacific Ocean.
Big Oil set for record profit as world reels from high fuel cost
Kevin Crowley, Laura Hurst and Francois de Beaupuy, Bloomberg News
Jul 26, 2022
Big Oil is poised for a record-breaking US$50 billion profit in the second quarter, but the industry’s stellar performance could contain the seeds of its own decline.
The soaring earnings are direct result of the high energy prices that have stoked inflation, piled pressure on consumers, raised the risk of recession and prompted calls for windfall taxes. Amid this political and economic turbulence, shareholders may have to temper their expectations for rising returns.
“There’s a strong chance that earnings will peak in the second or third quarter, with a small decline thereafter,” said Ahmed Ben Salem, an analyst at Oddo BHF. “This looming recession is calming things down.”
Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., Shell Plc, TotalEnergies SE and BP Plc -- collectively known as the supermajors -- are set to make even more money than they did in 2008, when international oil prices jumped as high as US$147 a barrel. That’s because it’s not just crude that has soared during the crisis created by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, natural gas prices and refining margins have also broken records. Exxon leads the pack with a 46 per cent rise this year, while TotalEnergies is the worst performer, though still up 11 per cent while the S&P 500 Index has dropped 17 per cent .
Many major markets have found themselves critically short of refining capacity due to a combination of shutdowns, investments that were stalled by the pandemic, sanctions on Russia and a decision by China to limit petroleum exports.
The US Gulf Coast’s 3-2-1 crack spread, a rough measure of profit margins from refining a barrel of crude, exploded to average US$48.84 in the second quarter, more than double the level a year-earlier. A similar measure for Europe -- TotalEnergies’ variable cost margin -- rose threefold to US$145.70.
Refining now makes up 26 per cent of the cost of a gallon of gasoline in the US, up from an average of 14 per cent in the previous decade, according to the Energy Information Administration.
Shell is expecting to post a US$1 billion gain in refining results. Exxon, which has the largest downstream footprint of the supermajors, is expected to make more in the second quarter than the previous nine combined, according to estimates collected by Bloomberg.
These “eye-watering” refining margins probably won’t last, said Matt Murphy, a Calgary-based analyst at Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. High fuel prices, combined with a broader surge in the cost of living, are hurting consumers. “Gasoline demand is underperforming forecasts, we’re seeing a degree of demand destruction.”
As a result, companies are seen being conservative despite soaring earnings. Exxon will probably use its excess cash to lower debt, according to Citigroup Inc. analysts led by Alastair Syme. Chevron may increase the bottom end of its buyback range to US$10 billion for the year, they said.
Sky-high profits aren’t solely the result of the broad-based upswing in commodity prices. The supermajors are also spending much less than they did the last time oil was above US$100 a barrel. Capital expenditures is creeping to a forecast of US$80 billion this year, but that’s half the level of 2013.
“Costs have been on a long, downward trend since 2014,” said Paul Cheng, a New York-based analyst at Scotiabank. “With commodity prices this good, it’s the perfect combination.”
That’s not necessarily the view of political leaders, such as US President Joe Biden, who are battling to contain rampant inflation and crippling consumer energy costs. Their pleas for the oil and gas industry to boost domestic production have gained little traction. Executives are cautious about how long high prices will persist and wary of committing to large fossil fuel projects that may become redundant as the world transitions to cleaner energy.
The supermajors may not be able to keep capital expenditure this low for long, due to their need to ramp up spending in an inflationary cost environment. Schlumberger NV, the world’s biggest oilfield service company, last week said sales increased nearly 20 per cent from a year earlier, and sees a “multiyear upcycle” in demand for its services.
This situation risks a political backlash. The UK imposed a windfall tax on oil and gas profits earlier this month. Italy has passed a levy on the energy industry, while in France some lawmakers are backing the idea of a special tax of as much as 3 billion euros (US$3.1 billion) a year. President Emmanuel Macron has so far resisted such calls, instead urging companies including TotalEnergies to extend rebates on fuel purchases.
In the US, Biden has criticized Exxon for making “more money than God” and accused other oil firms of exploiting high gasoline prices, but so far there has been no serious political pressure for a windfall tax.
Against this turbulent backdrop, the most profitable quarter in the supermajors’ history may not be cause for overt celebration.
“Most of the companies in this quarter are going to report record earnings no question” said Scotiabank’s Cheng. “But with the potential for a severe recession and memories of 2020, I expect management teams to be conservati
Key Algoma Steel union meets tomorrow, as strike pressure builds
Powerful Local 2251 demands wage hikes totalling 16 per cent wage over three years
Salaried workers at Algoma Steel Inc. have averted a strike, but 2,000 members of the powerful United Steelworkers Local 2251 will gather Wednesday at GFL Memorial Gardens, prepared to take a strike vote if no agreement is reached by 9:30 a.m.
"The union is always ready to negotiate," Local 2251 president Mike Da Prat told SooToday early Tuesday evening.
"Discussions are ongoing between the company and the hourly employees represented by USW Local 2251, and the company continues to work toward reaching an agreement before the contract expires," the company said in a news release.
Da Prat's Local 2251 represents hourly workers at Algoma Steel, Sault Ste. Marie's largest employer.
"USW Local 2251 is presently in negotiations with Algoma Steel," the local's leadership said in a news release.
"The collective agreement terminates on July 31, 2022," the release states.
"Algoma Steel has announced unprecedented revenue. The local union proposed wage increases of six per cent, six per cent and four per cent."
The release says the steelmaker responded "with an offer of COLA (cost of living announcement) roll-in plus 0.5 per cent increase the first year and $1.35 increase in Years 2 and 3 reduced by any COLA amount generated."
Local 2251 members will receive updates on negotiations at information meetings scheduled for 9:30 a.m., 3:30 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. Wednesday at GFL Memorial Gardens.
"Strike voting will take place after the first meeting until the end of the 7:30 p.m. meeting," the union release states.
"Voting will continue on Thursday, July 28 and Friday, July 29 at 68 Dennis St. from 8:30 to 4:30 p.m.; and all-day Saturday from 5:30 a.m. to 9:30 p.m."
As SooToday reported on Monday, Algoma's Steel's 500 salaried workers, represented by United Steelworkers Local 2724, have voted 59.9 per cent to approve a new collective agreement.
Local 2724 represents salaried office and technical professionals, front-line supervisors, shift coordinators and planners.
Although its membership is smaller than Local 2251, its settlements often set the tone for the larger bargaining group.
"It's back to work with no concerns about labour disruptions for Local 2724 membership....We have a renewed contract," Local 2724 president Rebecca McCracken announced Tuesday.
In recent communications to her membership, McCracken has said her local's agreement with the company contained no concessions.
McCracken said salaried staff will get a 2022 cost-of-living increase of approximately 3.2 per cent as of July 31, 2022.
She referred to a salary increase of 0.5 per cent on Aug. 1, 2022, a three per cent increase in base salary effective Aug. 1, 2023, followed by another three per cent hike on Aug. 4, 2024.
McCracken has recently expressed concern about "incorrect information" circulating about the Local 2724 agreement and has asked members to contact her office with any questions.
Labour is being too cautious on public ownership - it’s pragmatic policy
Instead of siphoning off profits to private shareholders, state utility companies could tackle the cost of living and climate crisis
‘If Labour brings the whole railway into public ownership and funds it properly, that will be a huge cause for celebration.’
Yesterday morning, Rachel Reeves was drawn into stating on the Today programme that a Labour government would not bring rail, energy and water into public ownership. Then followed a number of tweets from Labour’s shadow transport ministers, reaffirming the party’s commitment to nationalising the railway. By the afternoon, Keir Starmer had confirmed that rail would indeed be brought into public ownership because this was “pragmatic”, but water and energy would not.
While Starmer claims the pragmatism of the policy rests on the fact that some of the rail network is already in public hands, the more relevant issue is that Labour is terrified of buying back assets. Bringing contracts (like rail franchises) into public ownership when they come to an end is generally cost-free whereas buying back water and energy companies involves compensating shareholders – and Jeremy Corbyn was hammered for this in the 2019 election.
Of course, if Labour brings the whole railway into public ownership and funds it properly, that will be a huge cause for celebration. Privatisation has utterly failed and wastes £1bn a year. The best railway in Europe is publicly owned, in Switzerland.
It could go further. If Labour’s rule is that public ownership is fine if it’s cost-free, why not set up a publicly owned energy supply company to compete in the market and offer people a better deal on their energy bills (as French EDF is doing right now)? The government has propped up Bulb at great cost when it could instead have created a new public supplier and transferred its 1.7 million customers. When smaller suppliers failed, they could be absorbed into this company.
It could go further still. Why not set up a publicly owned renewable generation company to drive forward water and wind energy, while creating jobs and boosting the economy? The Norwegian state owns Statkraft, the largest renewables generator in Europe and is considering setting up a state-owned hydrogen company. Denmark owns 50% of Ørsted (previously Dong Energy), the world’s largest developer of offshore wind power.
Creating an energy supplier and a renewable generation company could be done at very little cost, and would be a pragmatic way to use public ownership to tackle the cost of living crisis and the climate crisis.
But by awkwardly dodging discussion of buying back water and energy grids, when recent polling shows a majority of “red wall” voters believe they belong in public hands, Labour is missing an opportunity. The privatised English water monopolies have spewed sewage into our rivers and seas, killing fish and making children ill wand allow 900 Olympic swimming pools worth of water a day to leak away, racking up a debt mountain, paying CEOs millions and allowing 900 Olympic swimming pools worth of water a day to leak away because they’d rather not spend money on investing in infrastructure. Meanwhile, they return around £2bn a year to shareholders, pay their CEOs millions and rack up a debt mountain at our expense. Scottish Water has spent £72 a year extra per household on infrastructure because it’s in public ownership.
The energy grid monopolies have extremely high profits, and have similarly been slow to invest in infrastructure. Bringing energy transmission and distribution into public hands would save about £3.7bn a year.
It’s understandable that Labour is scared to talk about this. But bringing these assets into public hands would be a brilliant deal for the public purse. Every household in the country could benefit, and so would local economies.
Parliament can judge what is in the public interest and decide how much compensation would be appropriate. It seems reasonable to compensate shareholders for the money they originally invested, rather than the current market value of shares. The policy would pay for itself in around seven years on that basis.
Would this hurt our pensions? Absolutely not. Our water companies and energy networks are primarily owned by shareholders abroad. Wessex Water, for example, is owned by a Malaysian company, and Northumbrian Water is 80% owned by Li Ka Shing, a Hong Kong businessman. Only 8.5% of the water sector is owned by UK pensions. Northern Powergrid which provides electricity to the North East, is owned by Warren Buffett. UK Power Networks, covering London, is also owned by Li Ka Shing. Only 8.5% of the water sector is owned by UK pensions. US billionaire Warren Buffett owns Northern Powergrid, which provides electricity to north-east England. Li Ka-shing, a Hong Kong businessman owns UK Power Networks, covering London. Only 2% of our energy is owned by UK pensions.
How about really taking back control, having water and energy companies that work for the British public and protecting pensions as needed while we do it? England’s model of selling off water assets wholesale is unique and the UK is almost the only country in Europe to have a privatised energy grid.
Reeves has already committed to £28bn of green investment a year. Bringing water and energy into public ownership would also be an investment, giving the government tools to cut bills, connect up community renewables to the grid, upgrade infrastructure to stop leaks and clean up rivers and seas.
People want decent public transport. They also want affordable energy bills and rivers that aren’t filled with sewage. Taking back our national assets is not only pragmatic, it’s a vote winner. Cat Hobbs is the founder of We Own It, an organisation that campaigns for public ownership of public services
Plesiosaur fossils found in the Sahara suggest they weren't just marine animals
Fossils of small plesiosaurs, long-necked marine reptiles from the age of dinosaurs, have been found in a 100-million year old river system that is now Morocco's Sahara Desert. This discovery suggests some species of plesiosaur, traditionally thought to be sea creatures, may have lived in freshwater.
Plesiosaurs, first found in 1823 by fossil hunter Mary Anning, were prehistoric reptiles with small heads, long necks, and four long flippers. They inspired reconstructions of the Loch Ness Monster, but unlike the monster of Lake Loch Ness, plesiosaurs were marine animals—or were widely thought to be.
Now, scientists from the University of Bath and University of Portsmouth in the U.K., and Université Hassan II in Morocco, have reported small plesiosaurs from a Cretaceous-aged river in Africa.
The fossils include bones and teeth from three-meter long adults and an arm bone from a 1.5 meter long baby. They hint that these creatures routinely lived and fed in freshwater, alongside frogs, crocodiles, turtles, fish, and the huge aquatic dinosaur Spinosaurus.
These fossils suggest the plesiosaurs were adapted to tolerate freshwater, possibly even spending their lives there, like today's river dolphins.
The new paper was headed by University of Bath Student Georgina Bunker, along with Nick Longrich from the University of Bath's Milner Center for Evolution, David Martill and Roy Smith from the University of Portsmouth, and Samir Zouhri from the Universite Hassan II.
Kem Kem plesiosaur silhouettes. Credit: University of Bath
The fossils include vertebrae from the neck, back, and tail, shed teeth, and an arm bone from a young juvenile.
"It's scrappy stuff, but isolated bones actually tell us a lot about ancient ecosystems and animals in them. They're so much more common than skeletons, they give you more information to work with" said Dr. Nick Longrich, corresponding author on the paper.
"The bones and teeth were found scattered and in different localities, not as a skeleton. So each bone and each tooth is a different animal. We have over a dozen animals in this collection."
While bones provide information on where animals died, the teeth are interesting because they were lost while the animal was alive—so they show where the animals lived.
Plesiosaur humerus. Credit: University of Bath
What's more, the teeth show heavy wear, like those fish-eating dinosaur Spinosaurus found in the same beds.
The scientists say that implies the plesiosaurs were eating the same food—chipping their teeth on the armored fish that lived in the river. This hints they spent a lot of time in the river, rather than being occasional visitors.
While marine animals like whales and dolphins wander up rivers, either to feed or because they're lost, the number of plesiosaur fossils in the river suggest that's unlikely.
A more likely possibility is that the plesiosaurs were able to tolerate fresh and salt water, like some whales, such as the beluga whale.
Credit: University of Bath
It's even possible that the plesiosaurs were permanent residents of the river, like modern river dolphins. The plesiosaurs' small size would have let them hunt in shallow rivers, and the fossils show an incredibly rich fish fauna.
Dr. Longrich said: "We don't really know why the plesiosaurs are in freshwater.
"It's a bit controversial, but who's to say that because we paleontologists have always called them 'marine reptiles,' they had to live in the sea? Lots of marine lineages invaded freshwater."
Freshwater dolphins evolved at least four times—in the Ganges River, the Yangtze River, and twice in the Amazon. A species of freshwater seal inhabits Lake Baikal, in Siberia, so it's possible plesiosaurs adapted to freshwater as well.
The plesiosaurs belong to the family Leptocleididae—a family of small plesiosaurs often found in brackish or freshwater elsewhere in England, Africa, and Australia. And other plesiosaurs, including the long-necked elasmosaurs, turn up in brackish or fresh waters in North America and China.
Plesiosaurs were a diverse and adaptable group, and were around for more than 100 million years. Based on what they've found in Africa—and what other scientists have found elsewhere—the authors suggest they might have repeatedly invaded freshwater to different degrees.
"We don't really know, honestly. That's how paleontology works. People ask, how can paleontologists know anything for certain about the lives of animals that went extinct millions of years ago? The reality is, we can't always. All we can do is make educated guesses based on the information we have. We'll find more fossils. Maybe they'll confirm those guesses. Maybe not."
"It's been really interesting to see the direction this project has gone in," said lead author Georgina Bunker. The study initially began as an undergraduate project involving a single bone, but over time, more plesiosaur fossils started turning up, slowly providing a clearer picture of the animal.
The new discovery also expands the diversity of Morocco's Cretaceous. Said Dr. Samir Zouhri, "This is another sensational discovery that adds to the many discoveries we have made in the Kem Kem over the past fifteen years of work in this region of Morocco. Kem Kem was truly an incredible biodiversity hotspot in the Cretaceous."
"What amazes me" said coauthor Dave Martill, "is that the ancient Moroccan river contained so many carnivores all living alongside each other. This was no place to go for a swim."
But what does this all mean for the Loch Ness Monster? On one level, it's plausible. Plesiosaurs weren't confined to the seas, they did inhabit freshwater. But the fossil record also suggests that after almost a hundred and fifty million years, the last plesiosaurs finally died out at the same time as the dinosaurs, 66 million years ago.Medical scan reveals the secrets of New Zealand's extinct marine reptiles
More information:Georgina Bunker et al, Plesiosaurs from the fluvial Kem Kem Group (mid-Cretaceous) of eastern Morocco and a review of non-marine plesiosaurs,Cretaceous Research(2022).DOI: 10.1016/j.cretres.2022.105310
.jpg;w=960)
