demo fortune gems
Elon Musk Backs Claims Of Foul Play In Suchir Balaji's Death, Says ‘This Doesn't Seem Like Suicide’
On the heels of , which wrapped last week in Baku, Azerbaijan, the future of the planet is anything but certain. The talks ended with a deal to provide US per year to developing nations to decarbonize their economies and cope with the effects of climate change. That’s a marked increase from the $100 billion currently distributed; however, critics raised concerns that the sum is insufficient for the task at hand, calling it “ .” Action on climate goals is still very much a work in progress. Next spring, countries are being asked to publish updated over the next 10 years. Meanwhile, methane, which in the atmosphere, is flooding the atmosphere, and climate change is wreaking havoc . Although global investment in — twice that of fossil fuels, according to the International Energy Agency — there are questions about the repercussions of the recent U.S. election on the future of climate technology. Cleantech initiatives, such as the , 2022 legislation that accounts for $500 billion US to boost clean energy and curb greenhouse gases, are likely to be diluted or struck down, and sweeping changes to climate policy could adversely affect , . So how worried should we be about humanity’s prospects? We asked three experts for their perspectives on the important gains we’re making in the race against a warming climate, the hazards undermining cleantech’s progress and the reasons to hold on to hope for the future. “There are two primary greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide and methane. Methane has a much greater impact on the environment in the short term. If we look at a 20-year scale, every tonne of methane mitigated is like of carbon dioxide. If we look at a five-year scale, it’s actually over 100 times greater impact than carbon dioxide. If we want to have a shot at keeping global temperatures within 1.5 degrees [above pre-industrial average] to avert the worst effects of climate change, we need to address methane emissions now, and I think more and more people understand that. “On Nov. 12, there was a U.S.-China and they announced that 159 countries are now in the . That’s amazing. The vast majority of the emissions coming from oil and gas and also from waste and coal are covered by the Global Methane Pledge. We need to translate the pledge into action, and that’s a lot of what we saw at COP28 and at COP29, although we still have a lot of work to do. “The climate negotiation process put in place by the UN is absolutely critical. It’s the only mechanism we have globally for all the countries to get together. The part I see is the international community — from NGOs to corporations — that is also involved in addressing those climate goals. The energy and the enthusiasm around that group, and all the ideas and solutions they’re bringing to bear, is an important part of the COP process, even if we’re not directly involved in negotiations. “There continue to be new and exciting ways to deal with emissions, from pure hardware solutions to digital solutions and AI. I fundamentally believe that innovation has a huge role to play in tackling the climate crisis, and we need to keep it going. “I’m optimistic that with the increased attention on methane and the understanding that it really is a quick win, levels will plateau soon. Fixing methane now buys us time to fix CO2 later. It’s a complicated picture, but I think pressure is leading toward greater world action.” “What keeps me up at night is: We’re a decade behind on the energy transition and that means we need to supercharge both innovation and deployment. The (IEA) says we need to , and . Those are all big marks to hit. “In Canada, we’re really good at the innovation side. We are less good at commercialization, so that’s something that we’re very much focused on at CICE. We support the early-stage innovators. There are 13 Canadian companies on the , and seven of them are based in B.C. We need to see more of those companies grow and stay in Canada. “I would say that global fragmentation and uncertainty are the biggest threats to meeting climate targets. Whether it’s trade issues or supply chain challenges or government zigging and zagging on policy at the global level — all those things create inefficiencies that slow progress. “If you’re running a business today, you likely have supply chain risks — it doesn’t matter whether you’re in the concert business or building products. Companies need to be building out those net-zero adaptation plans while not forgetting that clean growth is a $4-trillion opportunity by 2030. For corporate leaders, there’s a big opportunity and a risk management piece that go hand-in-hand. “We saw under Trump’s last presidency that global investment in clean energy and climate tech continued to go up. Is it a headwind? Yes. I think the biggest risk is uncertainty. If you’re growing a Canadian business and you’ve got customers in the States, is that department of energy grant or loan still there to expand your business? “Right now only two per cent of capital flows to women-led ventures. It’s about six per cent in climate and cleantech. That means 50 per cent of the population is not fully deployed to come up with those innovative solutions. This is about economic opportunity, and we’re leaving half the team in the dressing room. “There’s a lot of risk aversion in Canada’s corporate sector in terms of trying new things. We need to stop thinking of climate as a crisis and think of it as the biggest economic opportunity. Think about what China has done with batteries and critical mineral supply chains. We’re putting in tariffs because while we debated whether climate change was real, they got on with building a giant business that is now very competitive. We need to recognize that the countries building the economy of the future are the ones delivering the solutions the world needs.” “There’s a tremendous amount of momentum driving solutions that provide a clean transition for industries that have historically been really challenging to decarbonize. Genuine ways of doing clean cement or other commodities are super exciting because we need these things to be produced in ways that are fully electrified. “There are also a lot of interesting innovations happening at the intersection of biology and climate that could change things relating to food security and nutrition. Those are real challenges, especially as we think about the needs of the global population. “Typically, it takes eight years to get something new to market because of field trials and seasonality. That can be a roadblock. Some companies are doing amazing genetic modification work and figuring out ways to hack biology — plant innovations, plant augmentation, plant modifications — to create more resilient crops with larger harvests. “I’m optimistic about the number of people diving into this space. Given Engine Ventures’s close ties with academia and industry, we have the opportunity to work with amazing researchers who become entrepreneurs. And if we have enough talented and smart people giving their all, the diversity of solutions is going to be so strong and robust that we will be able to push forward some amazing things.”
Major banks and business groups sued the Federal Reserve on Tuesday, alleging the central bank’s annual “stress tests” of Wall Street firms violate the law. The lawsuit filed in US District Court in Columbus, Ohio, claims the Fed’s practice of determining how big banks perform against hypothetical economic turmoil, and assigning capital requirements accordingly, do not follow proper administrative procedure. Plaintiffs included the Bank Policy Institute, the US Chamber of Commerce and the American Bank Association. The lawsuit marks the latest example of the banking industry growing bolder and challenging in court their regulators’ powers, particularly in the wake of recent Supreme Court rulings placing fresh restrictions on administrative authority. In June, the Supreme Court dealt a major blow to such power by overturning a 1984 precedent that granted deference to government agencies in interpreting laws they administer. The so-called “Chevron doctrine” had called for judges to defer to reasonable federal agency interpretations of US laws deemed to be ambiguous. While the 2010 Dodd-Frank law passed following the global financial crisis broadly requires the Fed to test banks’ balance sheets, the capital adequacy analysis the Fed performs as part of tests, or the resulting capital it directs lenders to set aside, are not mandated by law. Specifically, the groups are calling for the Fed to make public and subject to feedback the now-confidential models they regulators use to gauge bank performance, as well as details of the annual scenarios they create to test for weaknesses. The groups said they did not want to kill the stress testing program, which provides an annual bill of health to the nation’s biggest firms, but argue the process needs to be more transparent and responsive to public feedback. On Monday, the Fed announced plans to pursue similar changes ahead of the 2025 exams, citing recent legal developments, but the industry opted to proceed with its lawsuit. A Fed spokesperson declined to comment on the lawsuit on Tuesday. “The opaque nature of these tests undermines their value for providing meaningful insights into bank resilience,” Rob Nichols, president and CEO of the American Bankers Association, said in a statement. “We remain hopeful the Fed will address long-standing issues with the stress tests, but this litigation preserves our ability to seek legal remedies if the Fed falls short.” These tests, which banks have complained for years are opaque and subjective, are a central piece of the US regulatory bank-capital structure. The Fed has long resisted calls to completely open up the testing process, due to concerns that it could make it easier for banks to clear the exams. How banks perform on the test informs how much capital they must set aside to meet their obligations and also dictate the scope of dividend payouts and stock buybacks.
Romania's far-right candidate Calin Georgescu on Saturday urged voters to go to polling stations despite the country's top court having scrapped the presidential elections over alleged irregularities amid claims of Russian interference. The court's shock ruling, coming just before the presidential run-off which had been due Sunday, opens the way for a new electoral process starting from scratch in the EU and NATO member state bordering war-torn Ukraine. The annulment follows a spate of intelligence documents declassified by the presidency this week detailing allegations against Georgescu and Russia, including claims of "massive" social media promotion and cyberattacks. Georgescu -- who unexpectedly topped last month's first round of voting -- called for voters on Sunday "to wait to be welcomed, to wait for democracy to win through their power", said a statement from his team. "Mr. Calin Georgescu believes that voting is an earned right," said the statement. "That is why he believes that Romanians have the right to be in front of the polling stations tomorrow." Georgescu himself would go to a polling station near Bucharest at 0600 GMT, said his team. Earlier Saturday, police raided three houses in Brasov city in central Romania as part of the investigation "in connection with crimes of voter corruption, money laundering, computer forgery". Among the houses searched was that of businessman Bogdan Peschir, a TikTok user who according to the declassified documents allegedly paid $381,000 to those involved in the promotion of Georgescu, Romanian media reported. Peschir has compared his support for Georgescu to the world's richest man Elon Musk's backing of US president-elect Donald Trump. Little-known outsider Georgescu, a 62-year-old former senior civil servant, was favourite to win the second round on Sunday against centrist pro-EU mayor Elena Lasconi, 52, according to several polls. But the constitutional court on Friday unanimously decided to annul the entire electoral process as it was "marred... by multiple irregularities and violations of electoral legislation". President Klaus Iohannis said on Saturday that he had discussed with European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, and they agreed on the "need to strengthen the security of social media". The European Commission announced earlier this week that it had stepped up monitoring TikTok after Romania's authorities alleged "preferential treatment" of Georgescu on the platform -- a claim the company has denied. Following the court's decision, the United States said it had faith in Romania's institutions and called for a "peaceful democratic process". Trump's eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., on X branded the vote's cancellation an "attempt at rigging the outcome" and "denying the will of the people". Georgescu called it "a formalised coup d'etat" and said democracy was "under attack". His team on Saturday declined to comment on the raids, saying they "will not comment or provide answers until we have exact data". Georgescu and another far-right party, the AUR, have said they plan to appeal the decision to stop the voting to the High Court of Cassation and Justice. A past admirer of Russian President Vladimir Putin, Georgescu, an EU and NATO sceptic, in recent days had reframed himself as "ultra pro-Trump," vowing to put Romania "on the world map" and cut aid for neighbouring Ukraine. In an interview with US broadcaster Sky News on Saturday, Georgescu said there were no links between him and Russia. Political scientist Costin Ciobanu told AFP that the annulment has "further polarised Romanian society". With trust in institutions and the ruling class already low, the vote's cancellation poses a "major danger that Romanians will think that it doesn't matter how they vote", Ciobanu added. Elsewhere in the EU, Austria annulled presidential elections in 2016 because of procedural irregularities. In Romania, a new government is expected to set another date for the presidential vote. In last weekend's legislative elections, the ruling Social Democrats came top. But far-right parties made big gains, securing an unprecedented third of the ballots on mounting anger over soaring inflation and fears over Russia's war in Ukraine. In a joint appeal on Wednesday, the Social Democrats and three other pro-EU parties -- together making up an absolute majority in parliament -- signed an agreement to form a coalition, promising "stability". bur-jza/jj
In the region: W&L advances in NCAA volleyball tournamentSchieve: ‘Really big projects’ coming to downtown Reno