Tuesday, November 19, 2019

ANS -- In a major win for the environment, world’s largest bank says goodbye to fossil fuel financing

Here's a fairly short article on a big step in saving our planet.  
--Kim


In a major win for the environment, world's largest bank says goodbye to fossil fuel financing

The bank's decision to end all financing of oil, gas, and coal projects after 2021 will make it the first multilateral lender to rule out financing for projects that contribute to the climate crisis.

1777
SOURCENationofChange

Become a powerful force for change

Environmentalists have a reason to celebrate this week. The European Investment Bank (EIB) announced on Thursday that it will phase out its financing completely for fossil fuels within the next two years.

The bank's decision to end all financing of oil, gas, and coal projects after 2021 will make it the first multilateral lender to rule out financing for projects that contribute to the climate crisis.

EIB's board voted on the decision on Thursday. They hope that this step will make EIB, which is the world's largest multilateral financial institution, the world's first "climate bank."

"Climate is the top issue on the political agenda of our time," said the bank's president, Werner Hoyer. "We will stop financing fossil fuels and launch the most ambitious climate investment strategy of any public financial institution anywhere."

EIB's vice president, Andrew McDowell, went even further, calling this step "an important first step – not the last step, but probably one of the most difficult."

Environmentalists are praising the bank's decision. Bill McKibben of 250.org called it a "truly amazing win" and Friends of the Earth Europe said the decision is a "significant victory for the climate movement."

The decision is part of the bank's new energy lending policy, passed with overwhelming support, and doesn't outright ban fossil fuel projects but makes most of them impossible by instilling the following guidelines:

Energy projects applying for EIB funding will need to show they can produce one-kilowatt hour of energy while emitting less than 250 grams of carbon dioxide, a move which bans traditional gas-burning power plants.

According to Reuters, "Gas projects are still possible, but would have to be based on what the bank called "new technologies," such as carbon capture and storage, combining heat and power generation or mixing in renewable gases with the fossil natural gas."

Although the announcement is a year later than climate activists were hoping for, it calls for limited approval for projects already under appraisal by the bank. This could cause massive problems for the oil and gas industry, which according to The Guardian has more than $200 billion in liquified natural gas projects planned over the next five years.

Regardless of the timing, the blow to fossil fuel industries is sure to be massive. Environmental groups have estimated that between 2013 and 2018 EIB handed out €6.2m every day to fossil fuel companies.

In the words of 350 Action Germany campaigned Kate Cahoon, this is "the beginning of the end of climate-wrecking fossil fuel finance."

Monday, November 18, 2019

ANS -- Bill Gates Unveils Toilet That Transforms Waste Into Fertilizer, Doesn't Require Water or Sewers

this is a short article on a new kind of toilet that uses chemicals to disinfect human waste.  this potential contamination is more and more of a problem as we become more over-populated.  He doesn't say how available or expensive the chemicals will be.  but it's something positive!
--Kim


Bill Gates Unveils Toilet That Transforms Waste Into Fertilizer, Doesn't Require Water or Sewers

HEALTH + WELLNESS
Microsoft founder Bill Gates speaking during the Hongqiao International Economic and Trade Forum in the China International Import Expo at the National Exhibition and Convention Centre on November 5, 2018 in Shanghai, China. Lintao Zhang / Getty Images

For Bill Gates, toilets are serious business. The billionaire philanthropist kicked off the Reinvented Toilet Expo in China and unveiled a new toilet that does not require water or sewers, and uses chemicals to turn human waste into fertilizer, Reuters reported.

"We are all here for one reason: because more than half the world's population doesn't have the safe sanitation they need to lead healthy and productive lives," Gates said in a speech on Tuesday in Beijing.

Gates tweeted a video Monday that described his and his foundation's mission to improve sanitation for countries that do not have or cannot afford to build the sewer infrastructure to remove waste.

To drive home the importance of safe sanitation, Gates brought a jar of feces with him during his keynote in Beijing.

"You might guess what's in this beaker—and you'd be right. Human feces. This small amount of feces could contain as many as 200 trillion rotavirus cells, 20 billion Shigella bacteria, and 100,000 parasitic worm eggs," the Microsoft co-founder said.

He kept the jar on the podium for nearly 10 minutes before removing it, the Associated Press reported.

Poor sanitation kills nearly 500,000 children under the age of five annually and costs an estimated $223 billion a year in the form of higher health costs and lost productivity and wages, Reuters reported, citing the information from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

The untreated sewage can also negatively impact the surrounding environment.

"Some of the untreated human waste is in unlined pit latrines that contaminates groundwater around people's homes," Gates said in his speech. "Some is collected manually, or by trucks, and is dumped into nearby fields or bodies of water. And some is collected in sewers but never gets treated. The point is that we are far from the goal the world set in 2015 of everyone using a safely-managed toilet."

The aim of the expo is to "launch a new category of innovative, decentralized sanitation solutions that will benefit millions of people worldwide," Gates said.

Several of these "reinvented toilets" are currently being tested in Durban, South Africa.

"Durban is a good place to run these tests because the city is growing fast and many people there don't have a modern sanitation, which means that, even if they have access to a toilet, the waste can get into the environment and make people sick," Gates said in the video.

"A typical toilet needs water, but many of the new approaches don't require any water at all, some of them don't need electricity either, others run on solar power," he added. "All of them remove the pathogens from the waste and, most importantly, they don't have to be connected to the sewer system."

The next step for the project is to pitch the concept to manufacturers, Gates told Reuters. He estimated that the market for the toilets will be more than $6 billion by 2030.

@BillGates / Twitter

ANS -- Jury Finds Abortion Foes Harmed Planned Parenthood, Awards Over $2 Million

Here's a bit of good news for a change.  A Federal court is still supporting Planned Parenthood's  right to exist.  Fairly short article.  
--Kim


Jury Finds Abortion Foes Harmed Planned Parenthood, Awards Over $2 Million

SAN FRANCISCO (CN) – A federal jury found an anti-abortion cohort led by David Daleiden caused substantial harm to Planned Parenthood by infiltrating abortion industry conferences to secretly tape abortion doctors and staff – and awarded punitive damages of $870,000.

David Daleiden, an anti-abortion activist charged with invasion of privacy for filming attendees at National Abortion Federation conferences in California.

Daleiden, who heads the Center for Medical Progress, and his co-defendant Sandra Merritt, posed as human tissue procurers for a fake company called BioMax as part of a hidden-camera investigation into the organization.

The pair attended abortion industry conferences from 2013 to 2015 – posing as exhibitors named Robert Sarkis and Susan Tennenbaum – where they secretly recorded conversations they later posted online. Daleiden also made recordings at Planned Parenthood-affiliated clinics in Texas and Colorado.

Daleiden's attorneys contended he and Merritt were investigating "violent felonies" based on a belief that infants were being born alive at Planned Parenthood clinics and that Planned Parenthood was illegally profiting from the sale of fetal tissue for medical research. They have also framed Daleiden's tactics as citizen journalism.

The jury of nine men and one woman deliberated for a little less than three days. They found Daleiden and his group, which also includes abortion opponents Albin Rhomberg and Troy Newman, conspired to commit fraud, breach of contract and trespass and to violate federal and state recording laws in Maryland, California and Florida.

U.S. District Judge William Orrick III ruled prior to the six-week trial that started in October that the jury may only consider information Daleiden had prior to launching his video project in 2012, and not anything he learned from the recordings.

At least three congressional committees and law enforcement officials in thirteen states launched investigations into Planned Parenthood after Daleiden and his group released the first video on July 14, 2015. Planned Parenthood was cleared of wrongdoing by the states and so far nothing has come of the federal investigation.

Planned Parenthood lawyers denounced Daleiden's and Merritt's beliefs about crimes being committed by abortion doctors as a preposterous pretext to disguise their true mission to destroy Planned Parenthood, thus establishing the requisite malice, oppression, and fraud for the jury to award punitive damages.

The organization's lawyers claim the release of the videos, roughly one per week, were part of a sophisticated scheme to smear the organization and strip it of federal funding.

"The defendants' plan here was not to find crimes, and it was not about journalism. It was about using any means, including illegal means, to destroy Planned Parenthood," Planned Parenthood attorney Rhonda Trotter told the jury.

In a statement following the verdict Trotter said, "The jury has spoken loud and clear. Those who violate the law in an effort to limit access to reproductive rights and health care will be held accountable. It has been our firm's great honor to represent Planned Parenthood in this important matter, and to help protect the rights, safety and security of Planned Parenthood and its dedicated doctors and staff in the face of an egregious and unlawful attack."

Planned Parenthood was also represented by Jeremy Kamras and Sharon Mayo of Arnold & Porter, and Amy Bomse of Rogers Joseph O'Donnell.

The jury also awarded Planned Parenthood and several affiliates roughly $478,000 in compensation for security costs and changes to their vetting procedures. They found the defendants had also conspired to violate the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, which triples the compensatory damages.

Taking this into consideration, Planned Parenthood is looking at a $2.275 million verdict, which Daleiden's lawyer Peter Breen said he will challenge on First Amendment grounds, noting that the compensatory damages stem from the publication of the videos.

"We believe the compensatory damages should go to zero on appeal," he said, adding that he found it ludicrous the jury found the defendants had participated in a racketeering conspiracy.

Daleiden's lawyers characterized the trial as unfair from the outset, taking issue with everything from the verdict form and jury instructions, to Orrick's pretrial rulings precluding certain defense experts from testifying about Daleiden's motives. Orrick has noted throughout the case that it is not about whether abortion is good or bad, or about whether Planned Parenthood profited from fetal tissue, but about whether Planned Parenthood was damaged by the fraud, trespass and breached agreements.

Orrick also instructed the jury not to consider the First Amendment as a defense.

"The First Amendment is not a defense to the claims in this case for the jury to consider," Orrick wrote ahead of trial. "Defendants' argument that they were citizen journalists was admissible as context for the defendants' case, not as a legal defense."

"When you have a case that was not able to be presented to the jury, you can't have a verdict that will reflect the truth," Breen said. "Our expectations for this jury were not high."

Daleiden and Merritt also face criminal charges of eavesdropping and invasion of privacy, and are scheduled to appear in state criminal court on Dec. 6 when San Francisco Superior Court Judge Christopher Hite will determine if the case should go to trial.

Breen said the civil verdict has no bearing on the criminal case, as defense witnesses who were not allowed in the civil case have already offered preliminary testimony on Daleiden's behalf. "We expect a different result in criminal court," Breen said.

Merritt's attorney Horatio Mihet also vowed to appeal the civil verdict. "We will continue to fight," he said. "We are disappointed with the outcome today but are confident this is not the last word."

In another blow for Daleiden and his organization Friday, a Ninth Circuit panel refused to disturb a federal judge's order blocking any further publication of recordings by the group.

The panel found that given the criminal proceedings Daleiden faces in California, congressional investigations that uncovered no wrongdoing and plaintiff National Abortion Federation's report of violence and disruptions stemming from the videos, the injunction is justified.

 

Sunday, November 10, 2019

ANS -- Centrists, Progressives and Europhobia

this is a fairly short piece by Paul Krugman about centrists being out of touch with current reality.  
--Kim


Centrists, Progressives and Europhobia

Who's out of touch with reality, again?

Paul Krugman

By 

Opinion Columnist

  • Nov. 7, 2019
Joe Biden at a campaign event in Iowa in October.
Joe Biden at a campaign event in Iowa in October.Credit...Jordan Gale for The New York Times

Will the Democratic presidential nomination go to a centrist or a progressive? Which choice would give the party the best chance in next year's election? Honestly, I have no idea.

One thing I can say, however, is that neither centrism nor progressivism is what it used to be.

There was a time when arguments between centrists and progressives were framed as debates between realism and idealism. These days, however, it often seems as if the centrists, not the progressives, are out of touch with reality. Indeed, sometimes it feels as if centrists are Rip Van Winkles who spent the last 20 years in a cave and missed everything that has happened to America and the world since the 1990s.

You can see this in politics, where Joe Biden has repeatedly declared that Republicans will have an "epiphany" once Donald Trump is gone, and once again become reasonable people Democrats can deal with. Given the G.O.P.'s scorched-earth politics during the Obama years, that's a bizarre claim.

You can also see it in economics. There are many reasonable criticisms you could offer of Elizabeth Warren's economic proposals. But the one I keep seeing is that Warren would turn America into (cue scary music) Europe, maybe even (cue even scarier music) France. And you have to wonder whether people who say such things have paid any attention to either Europe or America over the past few decades.

Sign Up for Debatable

Agree to disagree, or disagree better? We'll help you understand the sharpest arguments on the most pressing issues of the week, from new and familiar voices.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

Just to be clear, Europe does have big economic problems. But they're not the ones such people seem to imagine.

When people say such things, they seem to have in mind a picture of the U.S.-Europe comparison that did seem to have some validity in the 1990s. In that picture, nations with large social spending and extensive government regulation of markets suffered from "Eurosclerosis," persistent lack of jobs.

  • You have 5 free articles remaining.
Subscribe to The Times

Employers, the story went, were reluctant to expand both because of high taxes and because they feared not being able to fire workers once hired. At the same time, workers had little incentive to accept jobs because they could live off generous social programs.

Europe also seemed to be lagging in the adoption of new technology: For a while, the U.S. surged ahead in making use of the internet and information technology in general, leading to arguments that Europe's high taxes and regulation were discouraging innovation.

But all of that was a long time ago. The jobs gap has largely vanished; adults in their prime working years are actually more likely to be employed in Europe, France included, than they are in America.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

Any gap in the adoption of information technology has also long since vanished; households in much of Europe are as or more likely to have broadband than their U.S. counterparts, partly because the U.S. failure to limit providers' monopoly power has led to much higher prices for internet access.

It's true that European nations have lower G.D.P. per capita than we do, but that's largely because, unlike most Americans, most Europeans actually have significant vacation time and hence work fewer hours per year. This sounds like a choice about work-life balance, not an economic problem.

And on that most fundamental of indicators, life expectancy, the U.S. has fallen far behind: French residents can expect, on average, to live more than four years longer than Americans. Why? Universal health care and policies that mitigate extreme inequality are the most likely explanations.

Now, I don't want this to sound like praise of all things European. The nations on the euro remain terribly vulnerable to financial crises, because they've adopted a shared currency without a shared banking safety net; only the heroic leadership of Mario Draghi, the former president of the European Central Bank, avoided a catastrophic collapse of the euro in 2012.

Europe also suffers from persistent weakness in demand because key players, Germany in particular, have an obsessive fear of deficits, even when the European economy desperately needs stimulus.

These are big problems, severe enough that I wouldn't be surprised if Europe is the epicenter of the next global crisis. But the problem with Europe is not that its social programs are too generous and its governments too intrusive. If anything, it's almost the opposite: Europe's economy is vulnerable because a combination of political fragmentation and ideological rigidity has left its politicians unwilling to be Keynesian enough.

The point is that centrists who point to Europe as an illustration of the bad things that happen when you're too enthusiastic about pursuing social justice are stuck decades in the past. Modern European experience actually vindicates progressive claims that we can do a lot to make America fairer without destroying incentives. And even Europe's problems make the case for more government intervention, not less.

ADVERTISEMENT

Continue reading the main story

By all means, let's talk about whether "Medicare for all," wealth taxes and other progressive proposals are actually good ideas. But trying to shoot them down by going on about how terrible things are in France is a sure sign that you have no idea what you're talking about.

PAUL KRUGMAN'S NEWSLETTER
 Get a better understanding of the economy — and an even deeper look at what's on Paul's mind. Sign up here.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@nytimes.com.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on FacebookTwitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

Paul Krugman has been an Opinion columnist since 2000 and is also a Distinguished Professor at the City University of New York Graduate Center. He won the 2008 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his work on international trade and economic geography. @PaulKrugman

A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 8, 2019, Section A, Page 29 of the New York edition with the headline: Progressives, Centrists and EurophobiaOrder Reprints | Today's Paper | Subscribe