Some farmers in Europe are winding down production this winter due to high energy prices, further threatening the global food supply that is already in a crisis. Europe faces a potential energy shortage this winter as countries in the region are highly dependent on Russia for natural gas. However, Russia has shut down a significant pipeline to Europe, citing technical issues due to sanctions over the invasion of Ukraine, and the EU is planning a full Russian oil ban this winter. This has caused a massive surge in natural-gas prices that were already on the rise even before the war due to rebounding demand as pandemic restrictions eased.
As energy is required throughout the food production process, farmers and food producers are feeling the pinch from red-hot prices with some halting or slowing output in the colder months ahead. Nordic Greens Trelleborg, a top Swedish tomato producer, said it will not be planting a winter crop this year because it would be running at a loss given current electricity prices, Swedish newspaper Afton Bladet reported on Sunday. That's because Nordic Greens had already locked in tomato prices earlier in the year when electricity prices were lower, explained the company's site manager Mindaugas Krasauskas. It's the first time the company is suspending production. EU farmer union Copa-Cogeca told the Financial Times that the dairy and bakery sectors are the most impacted by the surge in fuel prices because processes for pasteurization and milk powder production consume a lot of energy. This, in turn, has pushed up butter and milk powder prices, which were up 80% and 55% respectively at the end of August from a year ago, according to the European Commission. Meanwhile, some greenhouses — which regulate temperatures for off-season growing — in the Netherlands are switching off or reducing production areas this winter due to expensive fuel prices, Reuters reported on Wednesday. The Netherlands is the world's second-largest agricultural exporter after the US, so a reduction in farm output would hit shipments of fruits, vegetables, and flowers. With man-made farming solutions slowing due to the energy crisis, the industry could be going back in time this year. "It's like we will go back in history again with Spain producing in wintertime and the northern European countries producing their own vegetables in summertime," Rabobank analyst Cindy van Rijswick told Reuters. "Some people say maybe that's the way it should be."
0 Comments
Rimac, the Croatian electric hypercar manufacturer, has delivered its first production Nevera to a customer – none other than German-Finnish former Formula 1 driver Nico Rosberg. In a video uploaded to Mr Rosberg’s YouTube channel, we can see this Nevera is blacked-out apart from the shiny aluminium wheels, and is referred to as ‘#001’. Technically there is an earlier Nevera production model referred to a ‘#000’ that’s finished in a Callisto Green exterior paint and will remain in the possession of Bugatti Rimac as demonstrator and marketing car. As previously detailed, Rimac only intends to produce 150 examples of the Nevera in total and they’re already sold out. Each example will be tested and signed off by company founder Mate Rimac before final delivery. When there were still examples of the Rimac Nevera available to purchase, prices started from €2 million ($A2.94 million). At this stage, Rimac has indicated it will ramp up production of the hand-built Nevera to up to 50 units per year. Powered by a quad-electric motor setup, the Rimac Nevera produces an other-worldly 1427kW of power and 2360Nm of torque. This is mated to a 120kWh lithium-manganese-nickel battery, designed in-house by Rimac, that’s positioned along the car’s centre tunnel. The Croatian hypercar manufacturer claims the Nevera can do the 0-100km/h sprint in an insane 1.85 seconds and has a top speed of 412km/h. It also claims the Nevera has a range of 547km according to WLTP testing. During the YouTube video, Mr Rimac said that there are 14 cameras around the Nevera so it can record footage itself without the need for mounting GoPros. The footage can apparently be viewed and downloaded from a companion phone app. In addition, Mr Rimac said the company is still working on an autonomous track driving feature that will come in a future software update. Mr Rimac said the feature is currently still in development, but is now just as fast around as the company’s test drivers. The Bugatti Rimac CEO also repeated some previously-reported statements about the next Bugatti hypercar, saying it will have a “very interesting internal-combustion engine” and be “heavily electrified”. Mr Rimac also said the Chiron successor is going to be the “opposite of what you expect”, and Mr Rosberg alluded to it being similar to the Mercedes-AMG One in a short, off-the-cuff remark. In addition to developing and now producing the Nevera, Rimac Group, which encompasses the Bugatti Rimac joint venture and the Rimac Technology electric vehicle (EV) division, is currently in the process of constructing its new €200 million ($A293.95 million) headquarters in Zagreb, Croatia.
Dubbed the Rimac Campus, it’ll serve as the company’s international research and development (R&D) and production base for all future Rimac products, including the current Nevera and its key components. The company has broken ground and the headquarters should be completed in 2023. The decision to remove Tesla from the S&P 500 ESG Index earlier this year seems out of tune with the thinking of many. The world’s largest maker of electric cars is a crucial enabler of a shift away from fossil fuels, yet S&P Dow Jones Indices excluded Tesla from the benchmark index over, among other factors, the company’s labour rights record and lack of a low carbon strategy.
Tesla board member Hiromichi Mizuno, a Japanese champion of sustainable investment, said that current ESG ratings give too much weight to negative impacts and not enough to positive. There may be some truth here, but it is also clear that a single, data-driven ESG index cannot be everything at once. At a minimum, there should be two distinct ratings: one to reflect a company’s positive impacts and another its negative externalities. Attempting to capture both in one score dilutes the informational value of the final rating: the positives and negatives inevitably cancel each other out, resulting in a rating that fails to represent either and can’t be relied upon to guide capital allocation decisions. One option is to focus the ESG (environmental, social and governance) rating on the negative externalities while using the United Nations sustainable development goals (SDG) framework to assess which business activities are critical to addressing challenges like climate change. Tesla, for example, would have a high SDG score because its revenue comes from selling electric vehicles and other green tech products, which are important in the push to reach net zero carbon emissions. If an investor’s goal is to allocate capital for climate solutions, then the SDG rating should be the driver. If the goal is to invest in companies that behave in an environmentally and socially responsible manner, then the ESG rating should dominate. In practice, the two could be used together. There are technical reasons current ESG ratings don’t fully capture a company’s level of sustainability. One reason is that ratings providers often combine varying environmental, social and governance scores into a headline rating. This approach works better the closer it gets to either end of ESG spectrum. For example, a very high ESG rating usually indicates that a company is performing well across all three pillars. For most companies that fall in the middle, however, the headline ESG rating could be misleading. A company with poor environmental practices could still be included if its environmental score is sufficiently smoothed out by an above-average performance in social and governance terms. This explains why fossil fuel companies with little interest in the energy transition may have an unexpectedly high ESG score, even as a company like Tesla falls down the rankings – and why investors need to pay close attention to ESG fund holdings. It also matters whether companies are scored on a relative or absolute basis. In this scenario, a company that performs poorly on ESG on an absolute basis could get a top rating because its peers are doing even worse. At a portfolio level, such an approach can be meaningless. A portfolio of best-in-class coal mining companies, for example, could appear to be doing better on ESG than one of average finance companies. Renewables are projected to increase from its current 12% of the global energy supply to 90% in 2050. Yet the widespread use of renewables is challenged by the intermittency of solar and wind, and we’re not yet at a place where we can store enough energy to avoid these problems. As renewable energy supply increases around the world, so to is the demand for grid-scale energy storage. It has been projected that the combined global stationary and transportation annual energy storage market will increase from today’s baseline of around 600 GWh by a factor of four by 2030 to more than 2,500 GWh. Today, global energy storage capacity is dominated by gravity-based pumped hydro (90%), followed by lithium, lead and zinc batteries (5%), with the remaining capacity alloted to thermal and flow batteries, compressed air, flywheels, and other gravity-based mechanical systems.
Gravity energy storage Two ASN articles in 2019 about some exciting new developments in storing renewable energy as gravitational potential energy by lifting and lowering heavy objects (Gigawatt Electricity Storage Using Water and Rocks and Climate Change Will Require Heavy Lifting). At the time, a Swiss private company founded in 2017 that caught my attention was Energy Vault. In a demonstration project built and showcased in Switzerland, they showed the first use of cranes to lift and lower heavy composite blocks into massive architectures to respectively store and release significant amounts of renewable electricity. Importantly, the composite blocks enable the use of alternative materials to replace environmentally-unfriendly substances like concrete, which accounts for 7-8% of greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the technology can accommodate the recycling of various pre-existing waste materials, which in return helps large utility and industrial companies transform financial and environmental liabilities into infrastructure assets to support their transition to a fully circular economic approach.
During lifting, electricity is stored as gravitational potential energy in the blocks, and on lowering, the stored potential energy drives a motor generator to regenerate electricity with as little loss as possible to maximize the efficiency of the process. The technological performance and commercial potential of this gravity-based system relative to other new entrants into the energy storage space was not apparent at the time, especially the levelized cost of electricity in $/MWh compared to lithium-ion batteries. Somehow, extremely tall cranes that lift and lower massive blocks in huge construction sites did not seem to be a practical global solution to grid-scale renewable energy storage. Fast forward to today and I have changed my mind. As of April 2022, Energy Vault became listed on the New York Stock Exchange, and with the breathtaking news of its latest gravitational energy storage system, it is one of the most exciting companies to watch. In just three years it has established an impressive global reach with its advanced gravity storage system on five continents, with more than US$32B earmarked projects over the next five years.
What has changed to elevate Energy Vault to such great heights? It’s simple: They have simplified their gravity storage system by integrating the lifting-and-lowering of heavy weights into a familiar “elevator” style building design that is compatible with all international building codes. Plus, they have perfected the manufacturing process of their eco-friendly and fully recyclable composite materials. The Energy Vault system literally can be built anywhere a building can be built. It is scalable on demand with no topological and geographical constraints, having flexible modular construction with the capacity to deliver GWs of power over short and long enough durations to handle solar and wind intermittency shortfalls. The energy storage system can also withstand harsh and changeable weather conditions, it is resilient to storage capacity degradation over time, not reliant on carbon intensive mining and refining of rare and toxic metals, and is devoid of chemical and fire safety risks. The round-trip efficiency or the proportion of stored to retrieved electricity is currently 83-85%, rather close to that of comparable power rating lithium-ion batteries, which hold 87-89%. Most importantly, it is purported to offer a lower levelized cost of electricity than any competing technology, particularly 60% of of today’s lithium-ion batteries — by 2025 this is projected to drop to 51%. This is one of the most promising sustainable solutions to global grid-scale renewable energy storage. It almost certainly will prove to be an indispensable piece of the circular economy puzzle, having a positive ripple effect on creating new clean technology industries and jobs, avoiding environmental liability, ameliorating climate change, and mitigating global warming. Now that’s what I call heavy lifting! US gasoline prices averaged more than $5 per gallon on Saturday, setting a new all-time high, data from the American Automobile Association (AAA) shows. According to the non-profit AAA, which tracks prices at more than 60,000 gas stations across the country, the national average price for regular unleaded gas rose to $5.004 per gallon on June 11 from $4.986 the day before. The highest prices have traditionally been recorded in the state of California, at up to $6.43 per gallon, and the lowest in Georgia, at $4.46 per gallon. Data shows that US fuel prices have now more than doubled since US President Joe Biden was inaugurated in January 2021, when a gallon of gasoline cost only $2.39 on average.
The Biden administration has been determined to curb the soaring prices, which have propelled inflation to four-decade highs. The government has ordered a record-large release of barrels from US strategic reserves, suspended a rule prohibiting the sale of higher-ethanol blend gasoline during the summer, and pressured the major producers of OPEC to boost production. However, these efforts have so far proven futile in the face of rebounding post-pandemic demand and Ukraine-related sanctions on Russia, including a US embargo on Russian oil. The pandemic-induced decline in US refining capacity has also contributed to the price surge, as at least five refineries in the country have reportedly been shut down during the past two years. Scientists in the United Arab Emirates have looked at how off-grid rooftop PV could be combined with batteries, fuel cells or reversible solid oxide cells for energy storage. The modeling assumed a typical commercial building in Los Angeles. Researchers from Khalifa University in the United Arab Emirates have conducted a techno-economic analysis of a building energy system based on standalone rooftop PV linked to either lithium-ion batteries, proton-exchange membranes reversible fuel cells (PEM RFC), or reversible solid oxide cells (RSOC). They have found that each of the proposed configurations could result in low capital costs and high efficiency.
The scientists quantified the impact of the PEM RFC and RSOC on overall system degradation. Their modeling considered a typical medium-sized commercial building in Los Angeles, California. Its minimum value of electricity demand was 18.79 kW during the night, with a maximum demand of 178.30 kW in August. The rooftop solar array was assumed to have a capacity of 400 kW, with 310.15 W SPR-E19-310-COM solar modules with 19% efficiency from US manufacturer SunPower. The 250 kW RSOC system – equipped with an air preheater, water boiler, and high-performance heat exchangers – was assumed to have a power density of 0.312 W and an overall system efficiency of 43.99. The fuel cell has a capacity of 251.4 kW, a power density of 0.284 W, with a total system efficiency of 31.18%. The cost of the RFC was estimated at around $667/kW and that of the RSOC at $500/kW. The costs were based on a modeled 250 kW PEM stack cost and 250 kW RSOC stack cost, at 10,000 units per year. The battery is based on a nickel-manganese-cobalt cathode and graphite anode, and has a storage capacity of 400 kWh. It has a round-trip efficiency of 92.5% and a cost of $339/kW. Its lifetime is more than 5,000 cycles. The academics found that the PV system can achieve a levelized cost of energy (LCOE) of $0.0237/kWh. The levelized cost of storage (LCOS) of the RFC, RSOC and the battery was $0.04173/kWh, $0.02818/kWh, and 0.02585/kWh, respectively. “The breakdown of the LCOS shows that capital cost accounts for more than 65% of the total LCOS, making it the most important component that needs more R&D to bring the capital cost down for these energy storage technologies,” they explained. They found that the LCOS increases and the discharge decrease depended on the lifetime of each of the three storage technologies they used. “The LCOS is sensitive to changes in capital costs, round-trip efficiency, lifetime, and discount rate; therefore, changes in these parameters should be carefully considered,” they warned, noting that lithium-ion batteries offer the most economical solution along with maximum efficiency, while also noting that RFCs and RSOCs can improve a standalone building's reliability and resiliency. The scientists presented their findings in “Techno-economic analysis of energy storage systems using reversible fuel cells and rechargeable batteries in green buildings,” which was recently published in Energy. Germany’s Uniper is continuing talks with Russian Gazprom and the German government on paying in rubles for deliveries of Russian gas, according to a Q1 financial report, out today. The news comes as the European Commission urges member-state governments to shun Russian gas amid preparations for an embargo on Russian crude oil imports. Uniper, which is one of Germany’s top gas buyers from Russia, said last week it was going to accept Gazprom’s new terms for gas payments.
“The plan is to make our payments in euros to an account in Russia,” a company spokesperson told German media, as cited by Reuters last Thursday. Since then, however, the EC has stepped up pressure on European gas importers. Yesterday, the Commission reiterated its warning that paying for Russian gas in rubles would constitute a breach of EU sanctions on Moscow for its invasion of Ukraine. Per the new Russian terms for payments, any buyer of Russian gas from any unfriendly country needs to open two accounts in Gazprombank: one in the foreign currency it wants to pay in and one in rubles. When a gas payment is due, the buyer deposits the necessary sum in dollars or euros in its first Gazprombank account. The bank then converts the sum into rubles under Russian central bank exchange rates and deposits it in the second account, from which the actual payment is made. “Paying roubles through the conversion mechanism managed by the Russian public authorities and a second dedicated account in Gazprombank is a violation of the sanctions and cannot be accepted,” said Energy Commissioner Kadri Simson on Monday. The European Union received some 40% of its imported natural gas from Russia along with 26% of its imported crude oil. The bloc has substantially stepped up its efforts to find replacement supplies in the last few weeks. Global energy prices are projected to rise dramatically, culminating in the biggest price jump in commodities in nearly half a century, the World Bank has warned. According to the bank’s April Commodity Markets Outlook report, global energy prices, which have already seen a dramatic surge due to ongoing Covid-19 lockdowns in China and the Russia-Ukraine conflict, are expected to surge by 50.5% in 2022.
“This amounts to the largest commodity shock we’ve experienced since the 1970s. As was the case then, the shock is being aggravated by a surge in restrictions in trade of food, fuel, and fertilizers,” the World Bank’s Vice President for Equitable Growth, Finance, and Institutions, Indermit Gill, said in a statement accompanying the report released last Tuesday. The report points out that sanctions imposed on Russia have undermined global trade in commodities, having triggered huge energy-price increases. Food prices are projected to increase by 22.9% this year as well, the most since 2008, as wheat prices jump 40% to record highs. That will put pressure on developing economies that rely on wheat imports, especially from Russia and Ukraine,” the World Bank said. Ukraine was expected to produce 10% of the world’s wheat in 2022, but the institution says anywhere from 25% to 50% of that production has been affected by the conflict. Meanwhile, metal prices are expected to grow by 16% before easing next year but will reportedly remain at elevated levels. According to the report, surging commodity prices have contributed to inflation levels not seen in more than 40 years in the US, and a record 7.5% jump in consumer prices in Europe. “These developments have started to raise the specter of stagflation. Policymakers should take every opportunity to increase economic growth at home and avoid actions that will bring harm to the global economy,” Gill said. Over the last two years, Victorians have spent more time at home with a keen eye on their energy usage. With mounting power bills, there's never been a better time to consider solar power as a low-cost energy alternative. The renewable energy source is a popular way to power your home from a cleaner energy source and keep bills low.
Myth 1: The bigger the system, the bigger the savings When it comes to rooftop solar energy, bigger isn’t necessarily better. Bigger solar systems don’t automatically mean you’ll save more on power bills, as you still have to pay a fixed daily connection fee for energy produced as well as power used at night. Additionally, there’s no point spending up big on a higher-output system if you don’t need it or can’t afford it. However, Any advises it’s important to consider not just your current power consumption, but also your future needs. A large solar system might help “future proof” your home with clean energy, say for the day you want to sell, get an electric vehicle or a solar battery. Andy therefore advises that every household is different, and the most important consideration is to “discuss your needs, including future power usage, with your experienced solar installer before deciding what system size is right for you.” Myth 2: Solar panels don’t work when it’s cloudy or cold High-quality solar panels do produce energy in low-light conditions, such as cloudy days, although you will experience a reduction in power output on rainy days. In partly cloudy conditions, you may commonly see panels still performing at anywhere between 40 per cent to 70 per cent of their normal output, On severely overcast days, you can see a performance drop to the point where almost no electricity is produced at all. Myth 3: A cheaper system will pay for itself faster When crunching the numbers of your solar investment, installing a cheaper system may seem like sound economic sense. But low cost often means fewer panels and lower efficiency compared to a higher-priced, higher-quality system that will generate more power and ultimately save you more on your electricity bills. “Over the past decade, we’ve seen so many consumers dazzled by offers that appeared ‘too good to be true’. Time after time, those consumers find themselves with a myriad of problems, and a provider that won’t support them after they have paid for their system. We get SOS calls asking us to rectify problems on a system that we didn’t install, and often the repair bill is more than the cost of the entire system.” The smartest solar investment is to pay a reasonable price for installing solar panels and, most importantly, have it installed by a reputable company with a long history in the solar industry. Myth 4: You can’t use solar power at night Solar panels don’t work at night, but solar batteries do. Excess energy produced by homes with rooftop solar panels during the day can be stored in a home battery and used when the sun goes down. Even if you don’t have a battery, excess solar power can be fed into the electricity grid in return for a credit from your power retailer. This so-called ‘feed-in tariff’ may help to offset night-time power costs, but check with your retailer for the most up-to-date information. Myth 5: I don’t use power during the day, so solar won’t save me money While it’s true that households with higher daytime consumption make the most of solar energy, all homes have a ‘baseload energy consumption' used to run the fridge, hot-water system, appliances on standby, etc. Solar will offset the cost of this baseload use during the day. Even if you’re out of the house all day, you can make the most of your solar system and decrease your energy bill by setting a timer to run energy-greedy appliances such as dishwashers, washing machines, or dryers during daylight hours. Andy also recommends running heating or cooling systems during the day so that your house is at a comfortable temperature when you get home. This way, you’ll use less energy to change the temperature to a comfortable level at night. Myth 6: Solar panels will power my home during a blackout Solar systems automatically stop working when there’s a power blackout on the grid, essentially to stop power flowing back into the grid and risking the safety of electrical workers fixing the problem. Some solar battery storage systems can provide backup power, but not all of them do. It’s important to check before you buy, Myth 7: Installing solar panels will damage my roof Solar panels shouldn’t damage your roof if they’re installed correctly. However, Andy says while a quality installer will take great care to avoid causing any damage during installation, accidents can sometimes happen, especially on tiled roofs. It’s a good idea to have some spare tiles on hand so they can replace a broken tile for you straight away. Myth 8: Solar panels don’t work if they’re dirty They may not look pretty, but research shows that dirty solar panels rarely make more than one per cent difference to the power produced. Andy argues that rain naturally cleans solar panels, but if they are on a flat roof, dirt will build up and become a problem. If your home has a flat roof, it’s worth having panels installed on a slight tilt to avoid dirt and debris building up. If they do need a clean, he recommends spraying with a hose in the early morning or evening when the panels are cool. Note that applying cold water to hot panels may cause cracking. Myth 9: I’m a renter so I can’t have solar If you’re a renter, it’s worth talking to your landlord about the benefits of installing rooftop solar on your home, especially as a new state government interest-free loan program has made it more affordable. The new loans allow landlords to take out an interest-free loan to install solar on rental properties, in addition to the existing solar rebate. Not only will rooftop solar improve the resale value of a property, but lower electricity bills will also help ensure good tenants stick around.
Illarionov was also openly critical of the Russian government, saying that President Putin's "territorial ambitions, his imperial ambitions, are much more important than anything else, including the livelihood of the Russian population and of the financial situation in the country... even the financial state of the his government." The European Union has been discussing an oil embargo on Russia but has stopped short of imposing one because of its heavy dependence on the commodity, not to mention natural gas where the dependence is a lot heavier. Even so, officials in Brussels continue to discuss an oil embargo and, according to a Reuters report from Monday, it could become part of the next sanctions package, even though for some member states, such an embargo would constitute an "asymmetric shock".
While the discussions are ongoing, OPEC poured cold water on EU hopes for a quick replacement of Russian oil. Per another report by Reuters, the oil-producing cartel has told the EU it would not be able to fill the gap left by Russian barrels lost to an EU embargo. "We could potentially see the loss of more than 7 million barrels per day (bpd) of Russian oil and other liquids exports, resulting from current and future sanctions or other voluntary actions," the group's chief, Mohammad Barkindo, said in a speech seen by Reuters. "Considering the current demand outlook, it would be nearly impossible to replace a loss in volumes of this magnitude," Barkindo added. Since the conflict in Ukraine began, there has been a concerted effort to try and establish greater ‘transatlantic’ control over Western Europe's foreign policy, or to speak more explicitly, to put it in line with that of the United States. America’s foreign influence operations on the continent are huge, ranging from an army of funded think tanks, to allied journalists, to of course politicians. It is little surprise that the situation with Russia has weaved into the longstanding effort to get Europe to also conform to America’s preferences on China, also, and dismantle the ‘Merkel legacy’ of engagement with Beijing .
This makes the China-EU summit such a critical juncture. It is inevitable that newspapers such as the Financial Times have sought to frame this event in solely negative narratives for Beijing, running a story titled: ‘Russia’s invasion of Ukraine forges new unity of EU purpose on China’ and forecasting that a tougher stance on China which will attempt to ‘pressure’ it to disavow Moscow. But this posturing is far from reality. What the EU says and what the EU does are often two separate things, seeking to project the appearance of unity no matter what. In practice, the Brussels does not in fact have the political will, unity, or means anymore to comprehensively force Beijing to do anything, especially after it has reaffirmed that its strategic partnership with Russia continues to be of “no limits.” Not only, for that matter, is the EU’s apparent unity on Russia, which the Financial Times piece attempts to frame as “surprising” for Beijing, significantly exaggerated, but it seems even less plausible that the bloc has the political resolve to endure the pain of a head-on collision against a much stronger economic partner such as China, which is now larger than the entire EU in terms of nominal GDP. Either way, it seems clear that the pathway of aligning with American foreign policy interests is going to make Western Europe weaker, poorer, and less relevant than ever before – typical of the self-sabotage it has often imposed on itself at the behest of Washington.The approach of Western nations towards China over Ukraine is increasingly that of having their cake and eating it too – Beijing is presented as an adversary, a competitor, and a rival; it is depicted constantly with suspicion, disdain, and scepticism in the mainstream media. There is a move to try and militarize its entire surroundings, with the United States urging European countries to adopt ‘Indo-Pacific’ strategies, send warships into the South China Sea, and support Taiwan, whilst relations with it are portrayed as a binary struggle for dominance between authoritarianism and liberal democracy. Over the past two years, the goodwill the West has collectively shown towards China has been minimal. Whilst most of Europe has not been on the same level as the English-speaking nations, the efforts by the US to turn the screws have been noticeable through its channels of influence. Yet despite this, China is still expected to cooperate and do the bidding of the West on various things which serve their own interests, often on the back of various threats. It is inevitable on such a stance that China will continue to see its strategic partnership with Russia as multifaceted and crucial. Why would Beijing throw Moscow under the bus in favour of the West, when the West quite explicitly shows no goodwill or intent to China whatsoever? Beijing is right to hedge its options and interests accordingly. While that may not involve completely endorsing the situation in Ukraine, nor does it involve condemning it at the demand of certain countries either. China’s hedging is both prudent and strategic – it would be naïve to trust the US and its allies. If there is any cooperation or favours to be had regarding this situation, Beijing is within its right to demand a high price in return.Do the EU members want peace talks? Then, for example, furthering the China-EU comprehensive investment agreement (CAI) must be part of it, or ending Lithuania’s ludicrous adventurism regarding Taiwan. Beyond the tough rhetoric, it should also be noted that the EU is not in a position of strength right now to seriously push back, even if it wants to. Germany’s annual economic growth forecast has been cut to just 1.8% as its disastrous energy policies begin to take their toll, whilst inflation has reached a record of nearly 10% in Spain. Can the EU afford to threaten and punish China? And will every EU state stand for it? Not a chance. Thus, beyond the usual political posturing, China will approach the EU summit shrewdly and pragmatically, keeping its hand carefully and subtly ensuring it does not want to rock the boat. Europe, of course, may not be amicable or friendly to China as it once was, given the influences exerted on it, but that’s a different ballgame altogether than being unified or having the space to push back against Beijing as a bloc, given it can scarcely do so with Moscow. But ultimately, if European countries want real results here, they’re going to have to be willing to give at least as much a they take in their approach to China and stop believing in the transatlantic fantasies. They should finally ask themselves: Does their self-proclaimed strategic autonomy truly exist? Or are they going to throw away win-win diplomacy with their largest trading partners to suit the qualms of Washington? It’s very much crunch time. Perovskite sun cells would possibly revolutionize how people generate power from daylight. First 200 other folks get 20% off annual top class subscription. In this video we’ll discover the arena’s quickest making improvements to new sun generation, and supply an unique peek throughout the lab of a crew running in this step forward subject matter.
Imagine an affordable answer of perovskite crystals that may make a photovoltaic cellular so skinny, that simply part a cup of liquid can be sufficient to energy a area. A sun panel so light-weight, that it may be balanced atop a cleaning soap bubble. That is referred to as the holy grail of solar power. So when can we see perovskite sun panels used for a solar energy device for your house? Maybe quicker than you are expecting. Currently, most effective 2% of worldwide electrical energy comes from solar energy. And 90% of that, comes from crystalline silicon-based sun panels, the dominant subject matter generation. While plentiful, silicon has downsides associated with potency, production complexity, and air pollution that save you it from being an absolute no brainer. Emerging skinny movies like perovskites provide a shiny long run. Imagine sun automobiles like a sun tesla, sun yachts, or a sun airplane. Solar cellular applied sciences may also be categorised into two classes, wafer-based or thin-film cells. Perovskites are the main contender in rising skinny movies. Topics coated on this video come with packages, perovskite crystal construction, running concept of perovskite sun cells, potency limits, multi-junction sun cells, shockley-queisser restrict, how sun works, sun simulator, band hole, production, vapor deposition, how sun panels are made, and the way forward for solar energy. President Putin: ‘unfriendly countries’ must switch to Ruble Russian President Vladimir Putin has authorized the government, the central bank, and Gazprombank to take the necessary steps to switch all payments for Russian natural gas from “unfriendly states” to rubles starting March 31. The measure targets “member states of the EU and other countries that have introduced restrictions against citizens of the Russian Federation and Russian legal entities,” the mandate published on the Kremlin website reads. Russia will stop shipping natural gas to countries refusing to settle payments in rubles, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Monday. The decision, first announced last week, came as Russia’s oil trade has been left in disarray as importers put orders on hold due to the latest sanctions introduced against Moscow over its military operation in Ukraine.
The conflict in Ukraine and the anti-Russia sanctions that followed have raised concerns of a global economic crisis. Skyrocketing commodity prices are sending the costs of consumer goods, energy, and food ever higher, giving rise to fears of a possible recession in many countries and even hunger in some parts of the world. Russia’s decision to switch payments to its domestic currency has been made in response to the unprecedented penalties imposed by the US and its allies on the country’s financial system. The ruble plummeted to record lows after Western nations and Japan blocked Russia’s access to some of its international reserves. Since last week’s currency-switch announcement, the ruble has reached its strongest level against the US dollar and the euro in nearly a month. Germany has announced a long-term contract with Qatar for the supplies of liquefied natural gas (LNG), as Europe’s biggest economy looks to reduce its energy dependence on Russia. The move comes amid broader Western sanctions aimed at isolating Russia from global trade and energy markets in response to the country’s military operation in Ukraine. According to Germany’s economy minister Robert Habeck, his country will have to rely on gas supplies from Russia at least for 2022. “We might still need Russian gas this year, but not in the future,” Habeck was quoted as saying by DPA in Doha." The minister described the deal as a “door-opener” for his country’s economy since it would reduce Germany’s reliance on Russian gas deliveries, which reportedly account for more than half of its annual supply. Habeck declined to provide details on the quantities and other terms of the contract, adding that it would be up to individual German energy firms, the heads of which accompanied him on the trip to Qatar. Qatari authorities welcomed Germany’s decision to “fast-track” the development of LNG terminals, and said in a statement that the countries’ “respective commercial entities would re-engage and progress discussions on long-term LNG supplies from Qatar to Germany”.
|
Thank you for choosing to make a difference through your donation. We appreciate your support.
This website uses marketing and tracking technologies. Opting out of this will opt you out of all cookies, except for those needed to run the website. Note that some products may not work as well without tracking cookies. Opt Out of CookiesCategories
All
Archives
April 2024
|