Monday, September 26, 2022

INTO THE INFINITE

Maarten Schmidt, the father of quasars, dies at age 92

Famed astronomer Maarten Schmidt's 1963 breakthrough discovery rocked the astronomy world, helping change the universe's origin story.

Maarten Schmidt, seen here investigating a spectra in 1965, played a pivotal role in unraveling the early mysteries of quasars.
Caltech Archives

The world of astronomy mourned the recent passing of Dutch-American astronomer Maarten Schmidt, the first person to measure the distance to a quasar. His groundbreaking work in the 1960’s greatly expanded the size of the known universe, providing one of the first clues that the Big Bang theory was correct. Schmidt died on Sept. 17 at his home in Fresno, California. He was 92 years old.

The story of quasars began several years before Schmidt focused his attention on them. Starting in the 1950s, astronomers identified several sources of radio emissions in the sky. Many of those radio sources could be assigned to known objects, like bright stars or nearby galaxies. But some remained frustratingly elusive, having no visible counterpart. Whatever these strange radio sources were, they appeared as point-like objects, indicating that they were either huge in size but incredibly far away or small and nearby.

Astronomers, never slow to assign a name to a new category of celestial phenomenon, quickly designated these radio sources “quasi-stellar objects,” which was shortened to quasars.

Unraveling the mysteries of quasars

Schmidt, who received his Doctor of Philosophy from Leiden University in 1956 under the tutelage of Dutch astronomer Jan Oort (of Oort Cloud fame), eventually moved to the California Institute of Technology to continue his studies into the properties and evolution of galaxies. Among Schmidt’s many accomplishments during his tenure there, he was the first to discover that the density of interstellar gas within galaxies was proportional to their rate of star formation, a relationship now known as the Schmidt law (or, more recently, the Kennicutt-Schmidt law).

Schmidt then turned his attention to finding the light spectra of radio sources, especially these mysterious quasars. By the early 1960s, astronomers had been able to identify optical light counterparts to one other quasar, but its spectrum remained poorly understood — its light output did not match any other known type of astronomical object.

In 1963, Schmidt used the 200-inch Hale telescope at Palomar Observatory to discover the optical counterpart of the quasar known as 3C 273, one of the first to be discovered. He also gathered the spectrum of this poorly understood object, and that spectrum featured strange emission lines that, once again, defied explanation.

After several weeks of deep contemplation and much nervous pacing around his home, Schmidt realized what he was looking at: a perfectly normal galaxy. All the emission lines from all the usual elements were there, like hydrogen and helium, but they were simply shifted far down toward the red end of the spectrum.

The light spectrum of an astronomical object can shift from two things. One is the Doppler effect: If an object is moving away from us, the wavelength of its emitted light will lengthen, and its emission lines will be redshifted. But the position of the emission lines from 3C 273 implied a recession velocity of around 100 million mph, some 15 percent the speed of light!

This redshift result was orders of magnitude larger than that found for any other known object.

Quasars: The luminous cores of distant galaxies

Schmidt argued for another interpretation in his Nature paper describing his discovery: the Big Bang. Distant objects are pulled away from us due to the expansion of space itself, which also causes a redshift. It was this realization that allowed Edwin Hubble to lay the observational groundwork for the Big Bang theory in the 1920s. But besides Hubble’s insight, there was little more to anchor the Bang Bang in observations. And so astronomers continued to debate its validity.

Schmidt’s work showed that 3C 273 was billions of light-years away, making it the most distant astronomical object known at the time. This discovery of the first distance to a quasar dramatically rewrote our understanding of the true scale of the cosmos.

For quasars to be detectable at such vast distances, they must be insanely luminous. In fact, they must be the most luminous objects in the universe. Schmidt believed that when we observe a quasar, we are seeing the light emitted as gas violently swirls and grinds together around a gigantic black hole in a newly forming galaxy, which turned out to be the correct interpretation.

The existence of quasars provided proponents of the Big Bang theory a major observational win. Quasars only appear in the distant universe; there are no nearby objects like them.

In the Big Bang model, the universe changes and evolves as it continues to cool and expand. And because quasars are only found far, far away, they must have only existed in the early universe, not our modern-day one.











In 1966, Time magazine put Schmidt on their cover, likening his discovery of the true nature of quasars to those of Galileo’s in its power to reshape our understanding of the universe. And an accomplishment like that is sure to live on. 


Caltech Mourns the Passing of Maarten

Schmidt, 1929-2022



September 19, 2022

Maarten Schmidt, Francis L. Moseley Professor of Astronomy, Emeritus, at Caltech, passed away on Saturday, September 17, 2022. He was 92 years old. Schmidt is well known for his 1963 discovery of quasars—extremely bright and distant cosmic objects powered by active supermassive black holes.

Schmidt was born in December of 1929, in Groningen, the Netherlands. He earned his bachelor's and master's degrees from the University of Groningen, a PhD from Leiden University in 1956, and a Doctor of Science degree from Yale in 1966.

After earning his PhD, Schmidt did postdoctoral work at the Mount Wilson and Mount Palomar observatories for two years as a Carnegie Fellow. He then returned to the University of Leiden for one year before moving to the United States.

Schmidt joined Caltech in 1959 as an associate professor of astronomy. He became full professor in 1964, Institute Professor in 1981, and Moseley Professor in 1987. He retired and became Moseley Professor, Emeritus, in 1996. He had also served as the executive officer for astronomy from 1972 to 1975, chair of the Division of Physics, Mathematics and Astronomy from 1976 to 1978, and director of the Hale Observatories from 1978 to 1980.

After first coming to Caltech, Schmidt focused on mass distribution and dynamics of galaxies. During this period, he published a paper titled "The Rate of Star Formation," in which he outlined a relationship between gas density and star formation rate in a given region. This relationship came to be known as the Schmidt law.

Schmidt is best known for his discovery of quasars and his measurement of their great distances from Earth. While studying the light spectra of radio sources, he noticed that a cosmic object called 3C 273 produced spectral lines that had been shifted to the red end of the spectrum, or "red shifted," indicating that the object was roughly 3 billion light-years away, well outside our galaxy. Because the faraway object shone too brightly to be a star, Schmidt came to the realization that the "quasi-stellar object" was the core of a forming galaxy, in which swirling disks of matter surround a supermassive black hole.

Since this pivotal observation in 1963, thousands of quasars have been identified. These objects were more common in the early universe and are visible from Earth today because of the time it takes for light to travel over such enormous distances. Schmidt's work gave astronomers a deep insight into the history of our universe.

Schmidt is the recipient of numerous awards and honors, including the Kavli Prize for Astrophysics (2008); the Bruce Medal (1992); the James Craig Watson Medal (1991); the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society (1980); the Henry Norris Russel Lectureship (1978); and the Helen B. Warner Prize (1964). He was also on the cover of Time magazine on March 11, 1966.

He is survived by his three daughters: Anne, Marijke, and Elizabeth.


GEOLOGY
Volcanoes in Canada could one day be used to generate renewable energy












“World-class conditions” for generating geothermal energy have been found at Mount Meager in British Columbia.

Published on Sep. 22, 2022, 
Isabella O'Malley, M.Env.ScReporter

Will Canada use volcanoes to generate energy?

Scientists and policymakers are exploring all possible renewable energies that will help Canada lower its greenhouse gas emissions and eventually reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

It might come as a surprise, but Canadian volcanoes could one day play a role in lowering national emissions, according to Steve Grasby, a research scientist from Natural Resources Canada (NRCan).

Although many are unaware there are volcanoes in Canada, the country is home to five potentially active volcanic areas: one overlaps the Yukon-Alaska border and four are located across British Columbia.

The most recent Canadian eruption occurred 150 years ago at Lava Fork in northwestern B.C.

Grasby and fellow researchers are focused on analyzing Mounts Cayley and Meager, which are located along the South Coast near Pemberton.


View of Mount Cayley from research helicopter. 
(Steve Grasby/ Research Scientist/ Natural Resources Canada)

Their analysis indicates there is a “high potential” for extracting geothermal energy from volcanoes in Canada, particularly from Mount Meager. The team has detected volcanic gases being released, which indicates that it is “more of an active volcano than an inactive one.”
Content continues below

“A well has been drilled at Mount Meager and temperatures up to 250°C have been discovered at about 1.5-kilometre depth. These are really world-class conditions with these very high-temperature waters at a pretty reasonable depth,” Grabsy told The Weather Network.
Harnessing energy from volcanoes

Extracting geothermal energy begins with drilling a well, pumping water into the ground, and then drawing it back to the surface. Rocks within the volcano are extremely hot and heat the water as it flows past them.

A drone flies over one of Mount Meager's three fumaroles. The footage shows how much ice is melting, allowing gas and steam to escape from the volcano. (Aeria Solutions)

As the hot water returns to the surface it transitions into steam due to the drop in pressure, which then spins a turbine to generate electricity. Energy can also be created by using the hot water to heat other fluids that transition into steam. Afterwards, the used water is safely pumped back into the ground, and the cycle continues.

If the water extracted from the well is less than 100°C it is not hot enough to generate electricity through the process mentioned above, but it can flow through pipes and be used for direct heating in homes, buildings, and industrial systems.

“The volcanic belts of western Canada and areas with hot sedimentary basins in Yukon, North West Territories, western Alberta, and southern Saskatchewan are all prime for electricity. Other regions across Canada have the potential for direct heating,” said Grasby.

Although using volcanoes to generate electricity might seem futuristic, many countries have developed large-scale operations around this renewable energy and have been utilizing it on a national scale.

UNICORN TECH

Helicopter at a magnetotelluric measurement site.
 (Steve Grasby/ Research Scientist/ Natural Resources Canada)

“Iceland, is a prime example, it produces most of its energy from its volcanic systems,” said Grasby.

“The Pacific Ring of Fire is a whole range of volcanoes that go all around the Pacific Ocean, from the West Coast in North America, South America, and around the east coast of Asia. Canada is really the only country in the Ring of Fire that has yet to produce geothermal energy. We kind of stand out in the world for not yet making use of that resource.”

Some of the most attractive aspects of geothermal energy include reliability, robust potential to generate high levels of electricity and heat, and zero requirements for storing excess energy generated, which is the case for other renewables like solar and wind.
Content continues below

Grasby noted that Canada is home to many other geologic environments that also have the potential to be utilized for geothermal energy, such as certain Prairie regions.

NRCan research scientist at the Turbid Creek thermal spring on the south flank of the Mount Cayley volcano. The bright colours are from minerals precipitating from the spring waters and algal and bacteria mats growing in the warm water. 
(Steve Grasby/ Research Scientist/ Natural Resources Canada)

For example, DEEP Earth Energy Production Corp, located in southern Saskatchewan, states that they have the potential to generate approximately 140 MW of geothermal power, which could offset the amount of emissions released by 85,000 cars annually.

Canada’s 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan notes that investments in geothermal technology, as well as other renewable energies that are not yet commercially deployable, such as tidal energy and carbon capture and storage systems, will “allow Canada to be a world leader in these new technologies.”

An example of federal support in expanding geothermal energy is the $5 million investment in Novus Earth.

This company is exploring the geothermal potential in Hinton, Alberta in hopes of one day combining geothermal energy, hydroponics, and aquaculture to grow produce and seafood in the province and in Canada’s Arctic.

NRCan research scientist Wanju Yuan on the south flank of Mount Cayley looking south over the Squamish Valley. (Steve Grasby/ Research Scientist/ Natural Resources Canada)

When asked about potential opposition to building infrastructure on a volcano that could be active, Grasby explained that eruptions are notoriously difficult to predict and there is currently no clear understanding yet about the degree of hazards Canadian volcanoes currently pose.
Content continues below

“I think there'll be a lot larger problems if we had a volcanic eruption than just one geothermal plant being damaged. There'll be a much larger impact on the entire region. So I think that's a relatively minor concern,” stated Grasby.

The next steps for NRCan researchers involve compiling data and analysis about the volcanoes to determine optimal drilling locations with high temperatures at relatively shallow depths.

“What we hope to do is to help reduce the economic risk of drilling wells so that we can share the techniques that we developed and information that we gather in the data. And then [industries] can use that information to make decisions along with regulators and First Nations to decide if this is something worth developing and drilling in the future,” said Grasby.

Thumbnail image: Sharp peaks cover the top of Mount Cayley, marking the old central core of the volcano. (Steve Grasby/ Research Scientist/ Natural Resources Canada)
Two ways to think about Patagonia’s $3 billion climate donation

Is it a groundbreaking philanthropic move, or a way to avoid taxes?

Budrul Chukrut / SOPA Images / LightRocket via Getty Images


John McCracken
GRIST
Published Sep 20, 2022

When Patagonia founder Yvon Chouinard announced last week that he and family members were giving away the company to use its profits to fight climate change, the move was hailed as historic and remarkable by philanthropic experts.

The outdoor retailer, with a history of sustainability and environmental efforts, once told people to “think twice” before buying one of its iconic jackets. Now, in the wake of their decision to give away the company, some observers are in fact thinking twice — about whether the giveaway is actually that groundbreaking.

According to some legal experts, it’s a typical tax move.

Chouinard, his wife, and their two adult children transferred all of the company’s voting stock, or 2 percent of all shares, to the newly created Patagonia Purpose Trust, as first reported by the New York Times. The rest of the company’s stock has been transferred to a newly created social welfare organization, the Holdfast Collective, which will inject a projected $100 million a year into environmental nonprofits and political organizations. Patagonia Purpose Trust will oversee this mission and company operations. The giveaway was valued at roughly $3 billion and did not merit a charitable deduction, with the family paying $17.5 million in taxes on the donation to the trust.

While this move is groundbreaking in the philanthropic world, New York University law professor Daniel Hemel told Quartz that the giveaway allowed the family to reap the benefits of a commonly used tax law maneuver used by philanthropists. The Chouinard family paid more than $17 million in taxes when all was said and done, however, Hemel noted that the payment is a small percentage of the donation made, and the way the trusts and ruling organizations played out still allowed the family to call the shots on both the business and its future charitable contributions.

The Chouinard family’s gift has been compared to a recent move by conservative billionaire Barre Seid, who sold his entire company to the tune of $1.6 billion to fund right-wing political actions. When the New York Times reported on Seid, his transaction was noted to be shaded in dark money, while Patagonia’s was historic, despite both billionaires funneling money into 501c4 organizations. Hemel called out this juxtaposition both on Twitter and in his recent interview, where he said the gifts were “substantively similar.”

Billionaires use charitable giving to address a variety of issues, from right-wing politics to preserving wildlife. Communication and public policy professor Matthew Nisbet of Northeastern University has been outspoken against the role philanthropy and billionaires play in climate change before and told Grist that the newly announced Patagonia decision may be applauded by many in environmental industries, but Yvon Chouinard has essentially gone from a reluctant billionaire to political fat cat.

“Now that they’ve invented this (model) and introduced it to the marketplace for politically motivated billionaires, regardless of their background, everyone’s going to do it,“ Nisbet said. “This is an escalating zero-sum political arms race.” With the creation of the new 501c4 Holdfast Collective, Nisbet likened this new organization to other notable political spending groups, such as the National Rifle Association and the conservative Club for Growth.
Yvon Chouinard, the founder of Patagonia. Campbell Brewer

A 501c4 organization, considered a tax-exempt, social welfare organization by the Internal Revenue Service, is not required to disclose its donors but must disclose money granted to other organizations equal to $5,000 or more. 501c4 organizations can engage in political lobbying and endorse candidates related to their organizational mission.*

Nisbet feared that the influx of cash controlled by an interest group would set the agenda of climate issues in the political realm moving forward. “Do you believe that our politics should be decided by billionaires who can spend hundreds of millions of dollars in elections with no accountability, no transparency, and pick and choose winners or pick and choose issues?” he asked.

Lack of transparency in political spending and philanthropy has mired public perception of charitable giving, causing long-standing scrutiny that dates back to 20th-century oil baron John D. Rockefeller’s creation of his namesake foundation. 501c4 organizations have funded anti-climate Facebook ads and directly influence climate legislation at the state level, with little knowledge of who funds these actions. While the source of the Holdfast Collective’s funding will come directly from Patagonia’s profits, Nisbet said he worries the new organization could become a way for other billionaires to donate and influence climate issues. Modern-day billionaires have taken climate change, the environment, and agriculture under their charitable wings more often in recent years, despite 10 percent of the world’s richest people producing half of the globe’s carbon emissions.

Soon-to-be trillionaire Jeff Bezos created a $10 billion Bezos Earth Fund in 2020, but Amazon has come under fire from watchdogs for undercounting its carbon footprint, punishing climate-focused workers, and polluting neighboring communities. Bill Gates has focused his philanthropy on agriculture and global hunger, while critics accuse him of gobbling up American farmland and cornering the market on seeds. Both Bezos and Gates have poured billions into tech-focused climate solutions, as well as Tesla founder Elon Musk also offering up $100 million for carbon capture innovations.

Patagonia has increased its political presence in recent years when it went to the courtroom to fight for the conservation of the Bears Ears National Monument in Utah and joined legal battles against logging, as well as commented on voting rights. The outdoor retail giant does have a long history of charitable giving, as they’ve donated 1 percent of all profits to environmental causes for decades and donated back $10 million of tax cuts to climate advocates.

Patagonia spokesperson Corley Kenna told Grist that, at this time, there are no publicly announced organizations that the company’s future funds will go to, but “all options are on the table.” She said Chouinard and the Holdfast Collective are interested in tackling the root causes of the climate crisis, including land and water protection, grantmaking to on-the-ground groups, and funding policy focused on solutions.

The spokesperson strongly rebuked the criticism that the recently announced company transition is not rooted in transparency and will fuel untraceable funds, citing Patagonia’s long history of transparency about its manufacturing, giving, and leadership.

“Yvon Chouinard, the Chouinard family, and the Holdfast Collective is not an extension of a political party,” Kenna said. “What we’re talking about here is a family that is committed to addressing the existential crises facing our planet.”

With big-name companies and wealthy families entering the fray, climate-focused philanthropy has grown in recent years, but still accounts for less than 2 percent of global giving, according to a report last year by ClimateWorks Foundation. Shawn Reifsteck, vice president of strategy and communications for the foundation, said Patagonia is “trailblazing a new way for companies to give back for generations to come” and he hopes others will follow suit. Philanthropic strategist Bruce DeBoskey said more and more philanthropists are recognizing that the traditional model of writing checks and giving grants has not been successful in solving overarching societal problems and billionaires are adopting new models of giving, such as the Chouinard family’s giveaway.

“It’s not about changes in the tax laws that I’m aware of,” DeBoskey said. “It’s about the changes in thinking.”

Editor’s note: Patagonia is an advertiser with Grist. Advertisers have no role in Grist’s editorial decisions.

*Correction: This story originally misidentified a 501c4 organization’s political capabilities.

New contract gives Manitoba health-care workers retroactive raises, signing bonus


The Canadian Press
Published Sept. 23, 2022 

WINNIPEG -

Some 18,000 health-care support workers in Manitoba have ratified a new collective agreement that includes pay raises.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees says its members have voted in favour of the deal reached earlier his month.

It covers workers in many areas, including the southern, northern and Winnipeg regional health authorities

The seven-year deal is retroactive to 2017 and contains annual wage hikes that total 9.6 per cent.

The union says there is also a signing bonus, an increase in pay for people who work nights and weekends, and improvements to family sick leave.

The union says the negotiations were difficult, dating back to when the provincial government tried to impose a wage freeze on public-sector workers.


This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 23
PATHETIQUE RIGHT WING JINGOISM
Not a hint of a heckle for the least Labour thing you’ll see at a Labour conference

If some had their reservations about opening with the national anthem, they kept them to themselves in a show of unity

SIR Keir Starmer leads a formal tribute to the late Queen Elizabeth II at the Labour party conference in Liverpool. Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian

JOHN CRACE
THE GUARDIAN
Sun 25 Sep 2022 


Stick to what you’re good at. It’s in the nature of things – especially during a party conference – that opposition leaders find themselves put under the microscope for character flaws. For reasons why they may never make it to prime minister. Keir Starmer is no exception. No matter that he has been consistently ahead in the polls for months now, or that Liz Truss has spectacularly failed to secure the traditional new prime minister bounce – she seems to be taking her desire to be unpopular extremely seriously – as she tries to crash the economy. Starmer gets it in the neck from left and right. He’s too timid. He’s too vague. He never says anything.

Except that over the last few weeks we’ve now found something at which Keir genuinely excels. In fact, he’s probably one of the best, if not the best, in the business. He’s just an exceptional mourner. Were I to pop my clogs in the not too distant future, I would hope that my family fell to their knees and begged him to organise the 10 days of national psychosis. There would be tears. There would be pomp. There would be circumstance. Chopin’s funeral march on repeat. And more and more tears.

When the Queen died, our lantern-jawed superhero with the sensitive, middle-distance stare suddenly came in to his own. Come the tributes in parliament, he was note-perfect. While Librium Liz couldn’t even connect with herself in a drab, monotone speech that said everything about her and nothing about the Queen, Starmer was emotionally literate enough to convey the nation’s feelings.

He touched us. He held us. Acknowledged our loss. And then, for the rest of the ceremonies over the next nine days, he was strong and silent. Present but unobtrusive. Not trying to game the situation for his own political advantage. If one of the pallbearers had fainted, Keir would have been first to step up.

All of which goes some way to explaining why this year’s Labour party conference began with the singing of the national anthem. Now, anyone in the Commons last Friday for Kwasi Kwarteng’s asset-stripping suicide note would have realised politics was well and truly tribal again. You’d have needed a heart of stone not to enjoy the sight of free marketeers not quite grasping what a free market actually meant as the pound sank without trace. Not so much Britannia Unchained as Britannia Unhinged.

No matter. Starmer wanted to get the conference off to a good start – he’d navigated the traditional leader’s interview on the morning’s Sunday politics shows without taking much collateral damage, though sometimes you wish he’d learn to lie a little better. It wouldn’t hurt him to say he’d freeze energy prices for longer than six months given that he’s never going to be in a position to do so – so he was determined to play to his strengths. Doubling down on mourning it was.
Just before 11am, Starmer took to the conference stage in a packed hall. Above him was a giant video screen with a black and white image of the Queen. Behind him was a new Labour logo of a swirly union jack. There’s sometimes a fine line between patriotism and nationalism. But if some people had their reservations, they kept them to themselves.

This was to be a theme of this year’s party conference. There might be a few angry members on the periphery, but everyone else was determined to put on a display of unity. Labour has now decided it’s in with a genuine chance of winning the next election and will do whatever it takes. These days it’s the Tories who are the real political psychopaths. Imagine trashing the economy just because it’s something you’ve always wanted to do, and finally all the grownups have left the room and there’s no one left to stop you.

Starmer kept it short and sweet, sensing that not everyone might share his enthusiasm for mourning and that they might have come to Liverpool to talk politics. She wasn’t just Our Queen, he said, ripping off Emmanuel Macron’s high-class tribute. She was The Queen. The Queen of the World. The very best Queen we had ever had. The very best Queen there ever could be. We had been blessed. Keir’s eyes half closed in a moment of zen-like calm. He gulped. Perhaps he was laying it on a bit thick.

Cut to the national anthem. Starmer, Angela Rayner, Anneliese Dodds and John Ashworth all dressed in black. Ashworth looking as if he had a magnificent soprano as the broadcast footage focused on him rather than the woman leading the singing. The audience all standing and singing along. They didn’t even need the printed sheets of the words that the ushers had thoughtfully left out. It was about the least Labour thing you’ll ever see at a Labour conference. But everyone was on message. Not even a hint of a heckle. This was an unashamed land grab for the now vacant middle ground. A siren call to the red wall.



SIR Keir Starmer pays tribute to Queen at start of Labour conference – video

Stranger things still were about to happen. In her speech as deputy leader, Rayner twice made reference to “rising to the occasion” of this 1997 moment. Normally any mention of Tony Blair is the kiss of death in the conference hall. Then in the afternoon, at a session on winning the next election, the same video screen that had hosted the Queen now showed images of Blair and Gordon Brown. Weirdly, members of the audience started clapping and cheering. Unheard of. Most disturbing of all, there was even a fleeting sighting of Peter Mandelson on the screen. Birnam Wood has come to Dunsinane.



Toronto charity questions why feds chose only one aid agency to match Fiona donations

Feds to match Red Cross donations after Fiona


One death confirmed in P.E.I. after Fiona

Austin Delaney
CTV News Toronto Videojournalist
Published Sept. 25, 2022 

A Toronto charity with expertise in disaster relief is questioning why the federal government is offering to match donations to just one registered charity providing relief in the aftermath of tropical storm Fiona.

During a press conference on Saturday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the federal government would match any donations made to the Canadian Red Cross to provide relief in the wake of destruction left by Fiona.

Guy LePage of the Canadian Red Cross told CTV News Toronto the agency is on the ground on the east coast, closely working with other agencies in the area.


“It’s going to take a long time to clean up and [is] going to cost a lot of money,” LePage said, asking Canadians to consider making a donation.

RELATED STORIES

Several public schools across N.S. closing Monday due to power outages, unsafe road conditions from Fiona

RELATED LINKSThe Canadian Red Cross - Hurricane Fiona Relief

“We appreciate all the money that Canadians traditionally cough up,” Lepage said, in asking for donations. “As Canadians, we’re very generous and we can empathize with our fellow Canadians who go through a rough time.”

However, Rahul Singh, with GlobalMedic, a humanitarian relief organization that provides aid in areas affected by natural disasters or complex emergencies, argues this is a bad decision.

“When you create a matching fund that only benefits one agency, it actually comes at the expense of other agencies,” he said.

Singh says less private funding will now flow to his organization, instead going the other way to the Canadian Red Cross and hampering GlobalMedic’s ability to help in the Maritimes.

“In our sector, there are many agencies like us trying to help Canadians in need and the resources coming to us will dwindle because of this decision.”



Fallen trees lean against a house in Sydney, N.S. as post tropical storm Fiona continues to batter the Maritimes on Saturday, September 24, 2022.
FOREVER CHEMICALS
How birds of prey are exposing a toxic time bomb

Ida Emilie Steinmark - 17h ago - THE GUARDIAN

Rui Lourenço first started collecting feathers because they were beautiful. Below the birds’ cliff-side nests in rural Portugal, he would find their shed feathers and bring them back to his ecology lab at the University of Évora. “It was just the typical curiosity of a naturalist,” he says. “Especially the flight feathers, they’re large, they’re soft, they have really interesting patterns.”

One day, a colleague asked if she could check them for toxic chemicals. As top predators, raptors’ concentration of chemicals is particularly high due to a phenomenon called biomagnification in which concentrations increase as you go up the food chain. This means that monitoring them can help reveal what substances are polluting the natural world. Lourenço now regularly sends feathers for analysis. “They work as an alert system not only for predators, but for the environment and humans,” he says.

And we need to be alerted. This year, a team of scientists warned that we had probably breached the planetary boundary for how much chemical pollution the Earth can handle and still remain a suitable home for human beings. Since the release of new chemicals now far outstrips our ability to test and regulate them, they argue, the situation is out of control.

Then, last month a paper showed that just one class of chemicals – per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), also known as “forever chemicals” because they do not break down in the environment – is now ubiquitous in Earth’s rainwater at concentrations above the safe drinking limit. “At the UN environment programme, they talk now consistently about the triple crisis: climate, biodiversity and pollution,” says Linn Persson from the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, who co-authored the planetary boundary warning.

Chemical pollution is a vast problem, the depth of which is still unclear because many chemicals are not extensively tested for their environmental impact and not routinely monitored. This means that analysing raptors and other top predators is one of the only ways to tell how bad the situation really is – and how to save it.

***


Most under-studied chemicals face no regulation and are not routinely monitored

‘There are around 350,000 substances marketed worldwide and around 100,000 of these are marketed in the EU,” says ecotoxicologist Paola Movalli. “Of these, only about 500 are well-characterised for their [hazards and] exposure.” That leaves a huge knowledge gap for scientists and for regulators deciding where to step in. “You can’t regulate something unless you know whether it’s a problem and why it’s a problem,” says Daniel Lapworth, who researches groundwater pollution at the British Geological Survey.

Since 2007, the EU has had Reach, a regulatory framework for industrial chemicals not covered by food, medicine or agricultural legislation, and post-Brexit, the UK has UK Reach. While similar, UK Reach is starting to diverge on what substances to regulate and how. “[We] are trying to create a UK version of it rather than just what we acquired on the day we left the EU,” says Andrew Smith, a regulatory scientist at the UK’s Health and Safety Executive. Under either system, however, companies must provide substance dossiers with information on hazards to human health and potential environmental effects.

But the lower the amount produced or imported, the fewer tests are required. The European Environment Agency estimates that more than 70,000 mostly low-volume chemicals have little to no toxicity information available. On top of that, reports from the German Environment Agency show that at least a quarter of dossier datasets for medium and high-volume chemicals do not actually comply with Reach’s requirements. “We are producing tens of thousands of different compounds,” says Lapworth, “but for many of them, we don’t have the toxicity data.”

Most under-studied chemicals face no regulation and are not routinely monitored. Scientists, however, have started to find some of them in the environment: in water supplies, the Arctic and now in top predators such as birds of prey. Dubbed “emerging contaminants” (ECs), their presence is worrying because it suggests that they build up in living organisms and do not easily break down. Such pollution is very difficult to reverse and can cause problems for decades: for example, polychlorinated biphenyls were banned in the 1980s, but still seem to cause infertility in Britain’s last orcas.



Point of no return? Orcas around the British Isles produce calves only rarely, with fertility thought to be affected by high levels of PCBs. 
Photograph: SeaTops/Alamy© Provided by The Guardian

ECs are not necessarily new in the environment, but advanced mass spectrometry techniques mean that scientists can now spot more and more of them. They give an almost complete picture of “the ‘universe’ of chemicals in the environment”, says Movalli, who is based at the Naturalis Biodiversity Centre in the Netherlands. That is critical because wildlife is exposed to chemicals in combination, not one by one.

For example, a study this year found an overwhelming 85 contaminants in 30 white-tailed eagles from northern Germany, including pharmaceuticals, musk fragrances, pesticides and PFASs. While some were long-banned chemicals such as DDT, still frequently found in wild animals after over 40 years of restrictions, many were ECs. Other recent raptor studies also report detecting new types of flame retardants, UV filters from sunscreens and plastic additives such as bisphenols

PFASs are a particular concern, says ecotoxicologist Veerle Jaspers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. They are used for all kinds of things, such as lining takeaway bags and waterproofing raincoats, and some have been linked to hormone and immune disruptions as well as cancer in humans. Jaspers has found PFASs in eagle-owls in Norway and has seen “very clear effects” of them in the lab.

Related: ‘Forever chemicals’: what are PFAS and what risk do they pose?

In one study, she and her team tested the effect of a now restricted PFAS against an unregulated alternative in chicken eggs, at comparable concentrations to those observed for PFASs in wild eggs. They found that both chemicals altered the chicks’ heart rate, potentially imperilling their hatching. At a higher dose, which was still significantly less than the reported PFAS exposure in eggs close to European chemical plants, the unrestricted alternative also resulted in abnormally large livers.

And because there are so many of them, they also make up a complex cocktail on their own. Movalli and her colleagues recently detected 56 different PFAS compounds across nine species, including buzzards. Only two are currently banned by Reach and the Stockholm Convention, an international treaty that tackles persistent pollutants worldwide.

***

Research like Jaspers’s and Movalli’s suggest that exposure is significant and widespread in the environment, so it is no surprise that people are also exposed to many ECs. After all, we are surrounded by them: we put them straight on our skin and cook our food with utensils covered with them. According to estimates, almost everyone on Earth has PFASs in their blood.

That exposure is full of unknowns, even for chemicals we are beginning to understand better. Take the plastic additive and endocrine disruptor bisphenol A (BPA). In 2015, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) concluded that normal exposure was way under the safety limit and posed no health risk to the public. But in late 2021, it suggested lowering that limit by many orders of magnitude due to new evidence. This would mean that it now considers most people to be ingesting too much.

As with raptors, biomonitoring can bring clarity here. Environmental epidemiologist Carl-Gustaf Bornehag from Karlstad University runs a large human biomonitoring project called Selma on endocrine disruptors. In a paper published in Science earlier this year, he and his colleagues showed how considering the broader endocrine-disrupting mix of chemicals we are exposed to can help us judge our risk from them better.



Scientists recently analysed the livers of 30 white-tailed eagles in northern Germany and found over 85 contaminants. 
Photograph: Our Wild Life Photography/Alamy© Provided by The Guardian

“We have a risk assessment system [of chemicals today] where we take one compound at a time,” he says, “but we are always exposed to very complicated mixtures.” In the study, he identified a mix of chemicals from the blood and urine of nearly 2,000 pregnant Swedes that was associated with having children with a language delay. It consisted of BPA, phthalates and various PFASs.

His colleagues then extensively tested the mix in tadpoles, zebrafish and lab-grown human “mini-brains”. They found significant hormone disruption that increased with dosage. Based on these experiments, the team defined a level of concern before checking the pregnant Swedes: a whopping 54% were above the threshold. Considering the effect of mixtures revealed by biomonitoring, Bornehag says, the safety limit of many everyday chemicals might need to be lowered.

According to Jaspers, however, sufficient action on problematic chemicals can take decades, whether it is to protect humans or wildlife. Movalli shares her frustration: “When a chemical is restricted or banned after years of studies, industry simply replaces it with a similar one,” she says. “It then takes more years of studies to restrict the new substance – repeat ad infinitum.”

Bornehag says he saw the exchange of one phthalate for the next throughout the 2000s. In certain cases, BPA has also been swapped for other endocrine-disrupting bisphenols in products where BPA has been restricted and some replacement flame retardants show similar toxicity to their banned predecessors. But to Smith, it is not as black and white as that. Just take asbestos, he says. Industry is “always going to be very wary of anything that looks like asbestos. The last thing they want to do is to be accused of creating the next big problem.”

One way to circumvent this is to group and regulate substances together. That does look set to become more common: member states are preparing a proposal for the EU to ban most PFASs and the European Commission recently published its vision for restricting a huge number of harmful chemicals by group as part of its new chemicals strategy. At the same time, the EFSA is looking to consider chemical mixtures in its risk assessments.



Rannoch Moor on the edge of the Scottish Highlands. A recent study has shown that rainwater is no longer safe to drink due to levels of “forever chemicals”. 
Photograph: Adam Burton/Alamy© Provided by The Guardian

“[Grouping chemicals] is increasingly what we want to do because it is much more efficient,” says Smith, though with regard to PFASs, he says they are more varied than most people realise. The UK recommendation on how to deal with PFASs, including potential restrictions, was expected this summer but has yet to be published. Similarly, the UK’s delayed chemicals strategy, which was proposed in 2018 with the 25-year environment plan, is expected some time this year.

With the EU’s new strategy signalling a step change, there are fears that UK Reach will fall behind. “Any divergence or any kind of delays in making decisions about particular groups of contaminants [could cause] a problem,” says Lapworth. “It’s potentially a dilution of the gold standard that we were working in line with.”

Persson and her co-authors worry that trying to assess all the chemicals out there is too big a job, a view they share with the European Environment Agency. “The constant inflow of new substances that we synthesise is so much quicker than our capacity to assess,” she says, especially on a global scale. Instead, she and co-authors floated the idea of a fixed cap on chemical production, inspired by emissions caps in the fight against global heating

This idea might find sympathy among the ecotoxicologists who study raptors. When you ask Movalli what chemical worries her most in relation to the peregrine falcons she monitors, you get a list that goes on for some time. PFASs, old toxic metals, the long-banned dioxins, endocrine disruptors, even stimulants such as nicotine. “Sincerely, I am worried about everything,” she says.
Compared to oil and gas, offshore wind is 125 times better for taxpayers

A new report finds per-acre revenue from offshore wind blows oil and gas out of the water

Thomas Jackson / Getty Images

Jessie Blaeser
Sep 23, 2022
GRIST

Not only is offshore wind power better for the planet compared to oil and gas, it’s also better for taxpayers. That’s according to a new analysis from the Center for American Progress, a nonpartisan policy research institute.

“Americans are getting significantly more return on investment from offshore wind energy lease sales than they are from oil and gas lease sales” per acre, said Michael Freeman, a conservation policy analyst for the Center and author of the report.

Offshore leases are essentially patches of publicly-owned waters rented out by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management for energy production — a process governed by the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. The money made from these leases goes to the U.S. Treasury Department, and, through public program funding, back into the pockets of taxpayers.

From 2019 to 2021, the average winning bid from offshore oil and gas lease sales was $47 per acre. By contrast, the average winning bid for a wind lease sale was 125 times higher — just over $5,900 per acre. And that number is likely to get even higher given the American wind industry is still in its relative infancy, said Jenny Rowland-Shea, the Director of Public Lands for the Center for American Progress.

With such a high return on investment, the new analysis suggests offshore wind leases could be a promising source of public revenue in comparison to oil and gas leases, while also reducing energy and fuel costs. Freeman said this money could be redistributed to taxpayers in the form of funding federal agencies or paying for health and education programs: “Expanding offshore wind energy is good for [taxpayers’] driving, for their wallet, for the air that they breathe.”
 
Grist / Jessie Blaeser

And of course, there are environmental benefits too. Energy produced by offshore wind does not result in the same climate consequences as offshore oil and gas energy production, which releases up to 87 metric tons of carbon dioxide per active acre in the Gulf of Mexico. That’s roughly the equivalent carbon pollution of 19 cars driven for one year. And according to the report, the social cost of carbon emissions per acre for oil leases is over $16,000 and roughly $2,800 for natural gas leases. Meanwhile, the social cost of carbon emissions from offshore wind power is “essentially nil” per acre, Freeman said. “Clean energy really is clean.”

Offshore wind power has a long way to go before it can come close to the scale of its oil and gas equivalent, but the U.S. has announced big plans for the industry. Early in 2021, the Biden administration set the goal of producing 30 gigawatts of offshore wind power by 2030, or enough to power 10 million homes. This August, Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act into law, which tied the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s ability to issue offshore wind leases to oil and gas leasing, effectively connecting the expansion of offshore wind to expansion of offshore oil and gas energy production.

Prior to the Inflation Reduction Act, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management had only sold two offshore wind leases to U.S. operators, which contribute less than 1 percent of the energy required to reach the 30-gigawatt goal.

While energy analysts say offshore wind lease sales create greater return on investment for the government and produce more energy per acre compared to offshore oil and gas, the latter is, at least for the present time, more cost effective. That’s because of the high start-up costs associated with the relatively new offshore wind industry. Nevertheless, Freedman said he expects offshore leases to shift away from oil and gas in the future.

The report shows that offshore wind leasing is a valid way to harness ocean energy resources, Rowland-Shea said, and at a crucial time. “What’s at stake is acting on the climate emergency and our transition to a clean energy economy.”

Switching to renewables could save trillions by 2050, says Oxford study


Wind and solar energy are already the cheapest options for new power projects. 
Picture: Armand Hough/ANA

Published 22h ago

Making the switch from dirty fossil fuels to cleaner renewable energy could save the world as much as $12 trillion (R220 trillion), a recent Oxford University study says.

The report said it was wrong and pessimistic to claim that moving quickly towards cleaner energy sources was expensive.
Story continues below Advertisement

This comes as gas prices in Europe have soared on increased concerns over energy supplies, much of which come from Russia – now widely seen as a pariah state.

“Rapidly decarbonising the global energy system is critical for addressing climate change, but concerns about costs have been a barrier to implementation. Most energy-economy models have historically underestimated deployment rates for renewable energy technologies and overestimated their costs,” the researchers said.

The constantly decreasing cost of renewables is something that cannot be ignored any longer because it makes choosing green energy simply a good economic decision, the researchers said.

"Even if you're a climate denier, you should be on board with what we're advocating," Professor Doyne Farmer from the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School said.

"Our central conclusion is that we should go full-speed ahead with the green-energy transition because it's going to save us money," he said.

Researchers used historic price data for both renewables and fossil fuels to construct a model on how these are likely to change in the future.



Fossil fuel data goes back more than a century from 2020 and shows that, after accounting for inflation and market volatility, the prices of fossil fuels haven't changed much.

Researchers admitted that, owing to the widespread use of renewables being relatively recent, there isn’t as much data available as there is for fossil fuels, but over time the continual improvements in technology have meant the cost of solar and wind power have fallen rapidly, at a rate approaching 10% a year.

Researchers used a "probabilistic" modelling method to determine that the price of renewables will continue to fall. This made use of data on how massive investment and economies of scale have made other similar technologies cheaper.
Story continues below Advertisement

"Our latest research shows scaling up key green technologies will continue to drive their costs down, and the faster we go, the more we will save," said Dr Rupert Way from the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, the report's lead author.

Although wind and solar energy are already the cheapest options for new power projects, questions remain over how to best store power and balance the grid when changes in the weather lead to a fall in renewable output.

In 2019, Philip Hammond, then the Chancellor of the Exchequer, wrote to the then British prime minister stating that the cost of reaching net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 in the UK would be over £1 trillion. This report says the likely costs have been overestimated and have deterred investment.

The research has been published in the journal Joule and is a collaboration between the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, the Oxford Martin Programme on the Post-Carbon Transition, the Smith School of Enterprise & Environment at the University of Oxford, and SoDa Labs at Monash University.

SEE Offshore Wind Can Lower Energy Prices and Beat Out Oil and Gas - Center for American Progress

Catalytic Process With Lignin Could Enable 100% Sustainable Aviation Fuel


NREL, MIT, Washington State University Collaboration Provides Pathway to Sustainable Jet Fuel

Sept. 22, 2022 | 

Three containers with a powdery substance in one and liquid in the others.
Containers are of poplar biomass (left), the extracted lignin oil, and the resulting sustainable aviation fuel.

An underutilized natural resource could be just what the airline industry needs to curb carbon emissions.

Researchers at three institutions—the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and Washington State University—report success in using lignin as a path toward a drop-in 100% sustainable aviation fuel. Lignin makes up the rigid parts of the cell walls of plants. Other parts of plants are used for biofuels, but lignin has been largely overlooked because of the difficulties in breaking it down chemically and converting it into useful products.

The newly published research demonstrated a process the researchers developed to remove the oxygen from lignin, such that the resulting hydrocarbons could be used as a jet fuel blendstock. The research, “Continuous Hydrodeoxygenation of Lignin to Jet-Range Aromatic Hydrocarbons,” appears in the journal Joule.

Gregg Beckham and Earl Christensen are the researchers involved from NREL.

The paper points to the need to use sustainable sources for jet fuel as the airline industry has pledged to dramatically reduce carbon emissions. Airlines consumed 106 billion gallons of jet fuel globally during 2019, and that number is expected to more than double by 2050. Accomplishing the industry’s goal of achieving net carbon neutrality during that same period will require a massive deployment of sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) with high blend limits with conventional fuel.

Jet fuel is a blended mixture of different hydrocarbon molecules, including aromatics and cycloalkanes. Current commercialized technologies do not produce those components to qualify for a 100% SAF. Instead, SAF blendstocks are combined with conventional hydrocarbon fuels. As the largest source of renewable aromatics in nature, lignin could hold the answer to achieving a complete bio-based jet fuel. This newly published work illustrates the ability of a lignin pathway to complement existing and other developing pathways. Specifically, the lignin pathway described in this new work allows the SAF to have fuel system compatibility at higher blend ratios.

Because of its recalcitrance, lignin is typically burned for heat and power or used only in low-value applications. Previous research has yielded lignin oils with high oxygen contents ranging from 27% to 34%, but to be used as a jet fuel that amount must be reduced to less than a half-percent.

Other processes have been tried to reduce the oxygen content, but the catalysts involved require expensive noble metals and proved to be low yielding. Researchers at the trio of institutions demonstrated an efficient method that used earth-abundant molybdenum carbide as the catalyst in a continuous process, achieving an oxygen content of about 1%.

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Bioenergy Technologies Office and Center for Bioenergy Innovation funded the research.

NREL is the U.S. Department of Energy's primary national laboratory for renewable energy and energy efficiency research and development. NREL is operated for the Energy Department by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC.

SUDBURY

More than 300 new mines needed to meet electric vehicle demand, says analyst

Canada can play a big role in meeting demand for electric vehicles, analyst says

More than 300 mines around the world will be needed to meeting growing demand for electric vehicles, according to a new forecast. (Steve Lawrence/CBC)

More than 300 new mines will be needed globally to meet growing demand for electric vehicle (EV) batteries, according to a new forecast from a mining analyst.

Benchmark Mineral Intelligence estimates at least 384 new mines for graphite, lithium, nickel and cobalt will be required to meet electric vehicle demand by 2035. If battery materials can be recycled in large enough quantities, the firm says about 336 new mines would be needed.

Andrew Miller, Benchmark's chief operating officer, said he wasn't surprised when they arrived at the numbers.

"You know this has been something that has been building," he told CBC News.

"The targets, if you talk about EV demand, are increasing. We publish our forecast every quarter and that number has only ticked up."

Miller said the rest of the world is catching up to China with regard to demand for electric vehicles.

Traditional automakers like General Motors, Volkswagen and Hyundai have also started to offer more electric vehicles. 

Except for cobalt, Miller said there are enough minerals in the ground to meet growing demand for batteries, but mines can take years to develop. There are types of batteries called lithium iron phosphate batteries that no longer need cobalt, however.

"Canada has some massive potential," Miller said.

"It already has some of these mines that are under development today. A huge number of lithium prospects are being developed across Canada."

U.S tax credits a benefit for Canada

He said new tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act in the U.S. will benefit Canada, because they apply to vehicles built in North America, that use minerals mined from the U.S. or its free trade partners. 

Miller said recycling batteries to recover their metals will become more important as demand grows and the mining industry struggles to keep up.

It will also be important for mining companies to expand their operations in a responsible fashion, he added.

"I think a huge opportunity for the new generation of miners and suppliers into the EV market is to make sure things are done sustainably," Miller said.

"To deploy new methods, new practices, to build out the clean energy credentials on site as well for the energy that's being used to really make sure that the the materials going into feeding this EV revolution are sustainable and are being extracted responsibly."

Steve LeVine, the editor of The Electric, a publication that focuses on electric vehicles and the lithium ion batteries that power them, previously told CBC News it's unlikely automakers will be able to meet their projections for electric vehicles as demand continues to rise.

He said current mines can't meet future demand.

"At the end of the decade, the desire is to make between 25 million and 40 million EVs, if you count the Chinese [industry] and Tesla," LeVine said.

"There's enough nickel to make 13 million."