adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

News

Financial institutions, businesses see a role in preserving biodiversity at COP15

Published

 on

A number of business groups and financial institutions say they want to play a role in promoting biodiversity and hope a new UN biodiversity treaty will require some companies to disclose their impacts.

A proposal that at least some businesses be required to monitor their impact on biodiversity is one of the items being discussed at the biodiversity conference, known as COP15, currently taking place in Montreal.

But it’s one of many elements of a possible deal where multiple proposals are on the table — with the different options marked by square brackets.

Basile van Havre, co-chair of one of the conference’s working groups, said the private sector is looking for rules and certainty on the environmental effectiveness of its investments.

300x250x1

“They want measures of risk so that they can target their investment the right way,” van Havre said in a recent interview. “Guess what? That helps us.”

He said it’s part of a larger push for performance standards that companies and investors can use to measure their activities against.

The conference, which is bringing more than 190 nations together, is entering its second day of hard talks on hard targets for saving the world’s biodiversity.

Van Havre said business groups have learned from climate change discussions that they need a way to assess risks.

He pointed to a possible example of a company funding beef production that creates deforestation, which might not be a sustainable long-term investment.

A Finance for Biodiversity Pledge has been signed by 110 financial services companies from 20 countries, calling on governments to reach an “ambitious” deal to protect biodiversity at the conference.

They want to see public and private financial flows — things like foreign direct investment and foreign aid — aligned with the goals and targets of the agreement and want large businesses to be required to disclose their impacts and dependencies on nature.

Suresh Weerasinghe, the head of levelling up and investments at British insurance company Aviva, which has signed the pledge and is a representative of the Finance for Biodiversity Foundation at the conference, said companies like his “take the view that, basically, our businesses will be imperilled if the biodiversity crisis isn’t addressed.”

Regulatory regimes that require disclosures level the playing field, he said, and ensure that companies like his can see what the businesses they invest in are actually doing.

Florian Titze, an international biodiversity policy adviser at the World Wildlife Fund, said businesses are asking governments to regulate them so they can plan ahead.

Regulation will also create more fairness in the market and ensure that those who are ambitious are not disadvantaged, he said in a recent interview.

Economic players understand that supporting biodiversity is in their interest, he added.

“They know that in a world without biodiversity, there’s no way of making a profit anymore,” Titze said.

Another pledge, signed by more than 300 companies, including H&M, L’Oréal, McCain Foods and SNC-Lavalin, also calls for the agreement that would be signed in Montreal to require companies to assess and disclose their effect on nature.

Irina Likhachova, the global lead for biodiversity finance at the World Bank’s International Finance Corporation, which invests in private-sector projects in developing countries, said her organization is looking to increase its investments in projects that will benefit biodiversity.

The IFC already screens investments for biodiversity risk, she said in an interview, but is increasingly looking to invest in projects that have benefits for biodiversity or address the key drivers of biodiversity loss.

She used the example of an investment in a shipping company that saw it add to its ballast water tanks, to prevent the spread of invasive species.

But she said there’s now increased interest in investments that directly support the restoration of nature.

Private investors are funding nature restoration through the purchase of carbon credits, she said, and the IFC sees opportunities to integrate natural infrastructure into larger infrastructure projects.

“Let’s say if you’re a water utility, you can filter water through building a plant, or you can filter water through wetlands, we are advocating for the adoption of these natural type of infrastructure solutions within larger projects,” she said.

But some environmental groups are skeptical of private-sector involvement in efforts to reduce business’s ecological footprint. In a recent report, Friends of the Earth said many such groups talk more about sharing knowledge, disclosure and setting targets than actually reducing their impacts.

That continues to be the case at COP15, the group said.

“Instead of defining policy lines that would prevent business from harming biodiversity, the (Convention on Biological Diversity) has instead invited business to the table and asked them what voluntary measures they would be willing to take. Needless to say, this is not only hugely insufficient but also severely undermines the power of the (convention) to actually regulate business.”

Although there is broad support for the conference’s overall goals, consensus remains elusive.

Negotiators say about 900 so-called brackets, points that haven’t yet been agreed on, remain in the draft text.

Among the bracketed items is a target to protect 30 per cent of the world’s land and water by 2030, a goal supported by Canada, among several other countries.

Speaking to reporters on Thursday, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said he remains “very optimistic” that a deal will be reached.

The conference runs until Dec. 19.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Dec. 8, 2022.

News

Canadian team discovers power-draining flaw in most laptop and phone batteries – CBC.ca

Published

 on


The phone, tablet or laptop you’re reading this on is likely having its battery slowly drained because of a surprising and widespread manufacturing flaw, according to researchers in Halifax.

“This is something that is totally unexpected and something that probably no one thought of,” said Michael Metzger, an assistant professor at Dalhousie University. 

The problem? Tiny pieces of tape that hold the battery components together are made from the wrong type of plastic.

300x250x1

Batteries release power because of a chemical reaction. Inside each battery cell, there are two types of metal. One acts as a positive electrode and one as a negative electrode. 

These electrodes are held in an electrolyte fluid or paste that is often a form of lithium. 

When you connect cables to each end of the battery, electrons flow through the cables — providing power to light bulbs, laptops, or whatever else is on the circuit — and return to the battery. 

Trouble starts if those electrons don’t follow the cables.

When electrons move from one charged side of the battery to the other through the electrolyte fluid, it’s called self-discharge. The battery is being depleted internally without sending out electrical current.

This is the reason why devices that are fully charged can slowly lose their charge while they’re turned off.

“These days, batteries are very good,” Metzger said. “But, like with any product, you want it perfected. And you want to eliminate even small rates of self-discharge.”

Stress-testing batteries

In the search for the perfect battery, researchers have to watch how each one performs over its full lifespan.

“We do a lot of our tests at elevated temperatures these days. We want to be able to do testing in reasonable time frames,” Metzger said. Heat makes a battery degrade more quickly, he explained.

Different number readings are seen on a battery testing device that's a black box with six dials.
Some of the testing equipment used to regulate the temperature of each experiment. The coloured numbers indicate the temperature of each heated compartment in which battery cells are being tested. (Brett Ruskin/CBC)

At Dalhousie University’s battery lab, dozens of experimental battery cells are being charged and discharged again and again, in environments as hot as 85 C. 

For comparison, eggs fry at around 70 C. 

If researchers can learn why a battery eventually fails, they can tweak the positive electrode, negative electrode, or electrolyte fluid.

Seeing red

During one of these tests, the clear electrolyte fluid turned bright red. The team was puzzled.

It isn’t supposed to do that, according to Metzger. “A battery’s a closed system,” he said.

Something new had been created inside the battery.

They did a chemical analysis of the red substance and found it was dimethyl terephthalate (DMT). It’s a substance that shuttles electrons within the battery, rather than having them flow outside through cables and generate electricity. 

Shuttling electrons internally depletes the battery’s charge, even if it isn’t connected to a circuit or electrical device.

But if a battery is sealed by the manufacturer, where did the DMT come from?

Through the chemical analysis, the team realized that DMT has a similar structure to another molecule: polyethylene terephthalate (PET). 

PET is a type of plastic used in household items like water bottles, food containers and synthetic carpets. But what was plastic doing inside the battery? 

Tale of the tape 

Piece by piece, the team analyzed the battery components. They realized that the thin strips of metal and insulation coiled tightly inside the casing were held together with tape.

Those small segments of tape were made of PET — the type of plastic that had been causing the electrolyte fluid to turn red, and self-discharge the battery. 

A piece of metallic tape sits on a wooden table.
One of the metallic sheets removed from a coil inside a cylindrical battery. Each layer of the coil is held in place by plastic tape, shown here as the greenish strips. (Brett Ruskin/CBC)

“A lot of companies use PET tape,” said Metzger. “That’s why it was a quite important discovery, this realization that this tape is actually not inert.”

Tech industry takes notice

Metzger and the team began sharing their discovery publicly in November 2022, in publications and at seminars.

Some of the world’s largest computer-hardware companies and electric-vehicle manufacturers were very interested.

“A lot of the companies made clear that this is very relevant to them,” Metzger said. “They want to make changes to these components in their battery cells because, of course, they want to avoid self-discharge.”

The team even proposed a solution to the problem: use a slightly more expensive, but also more stable, plastic compound.

A man in a plaid shirt walks through a room full of battery technology.
Metzger walks through one of the battery-testing laboratories at Dalhousie University. (Brett Ruskin/CBC)

One option is polypropylene, which is typically used to make more durable plastic items like outdoor furniture or reusable water bottles. 

“We realized that it [polypropylene] doesn’t easily decompose like PET, and doesn’t form these unwanted molecules,” Metzger said. “So currently, we have very encouraging results that the self-discharges are truly eliminated by moving away from this PET tape.”

MORE TOP STORIES 

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

News

U.S. escalates trade concerns over Canada's online news and streaming bills – The Globe and Mail

Published

 on


U.S. President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau arrive for a joint news conference at the conclusion of the North American Leaders’ Summit in Mexico City, Mexico on Jan. 10.KEVIN LAMARQUE/Reuters

Washington has escalated its concerns about the trade implications of Ottawa’s online streaming and online news bills, prompting a legal expert to predict the issue will be raised during President Joe Biden’s planned visit to Canada in March.

Deputy United States trade representative Jayme White stressed “ongoing concerns” about the two Canadian bills at a meeting last week with Rob Stewart, Canada’s deputy minister for international trade.

Senior Democrat and Republican senators on the influential U.S. Senate finance committee also weighed in last week, writing a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Katherine Tai about Canada’s “troubling policies,” which they said target U.S technology companies.

300x250x1

Both bills are making their way through Canada’s Parliament. Bill C-11 reached a third-reading debate in the Senate on Tuesday.

The U.S. is concerned that the two bills unfairly single out American firms, including Google, Facebook and Netflix.

Bill C-11 would update Canada’s broadcast laws, giving the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) the power to regulate streaming platforms such as Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Prime and Spotify.

The streaming platforms would have to promote Canadian content – including films, TV shows, music and music videos – and fund its creation.

Bill C-18 would force Google and Facebook to strike deals with news organizations, including broadcasters, to compensate them for using their work. The CRTC would have a role in overseeing the process.

Two sources told The Globe and Mail that the CRTC’s lack of experience regulating print media and digital platforms was raised by Ms. Tai and her team in previous talks with Canada’s Trade Minister, Mary Ng. The Globe is not naming the sources because they were not authorized to speak publicly on the issue.

A U.S. readout of Mr. White’s meeting with Mr. Stewart said the American official had “expressed the United States’ ongoing concerns with … pending legislation in the Canadian Parliament that could impact digital streaming services and online news sharing and discriminate against U.S. businesses.”

Shanti Cosentino, a spokeswoman for Ms. Ng, said the Minister “has reiterated to Ambassador Tai that both Bill C-11 and C-18 are in line with our trade obligations and do not discriminate against U.S. businesses.”

Last week, Democrat Ron Wyden, chairman of the U.S. Senate committee on finance, and Republican Michael Crapo, a senior member of the committee, raised concerns in a letter to Ms. Tai that the bills could breach the terms of the United-States-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USMCA).

Michael Geist, the University of Ottawa’s Canada Research Chair in internet law, said the intervention from both parties means it is now likely the issue will be on the agenda when Mr. Biden visits Canada.

“To see this raised in a bipartisan manner by two U.S. Senators from the powerful finance committee suggests that the issue is gaining traction in Congress,” he said.

The senators urged Ms. Tai to take enforcement action if Canada fails to meet its trade obligations.

Their letter said the online streaming bill would “mandate preferential treatment for Canadian content and deprive U.S. creatives of the North American market, access they were promised under USMCA.”

It added that Bill C-18 “targets U.S. companies for the benefit of Canadian news producers and raises national treatment concerns under USMCA.”

But Toronto-based trade lawyer and former diplomat Lawrence Herman, founder of Herman and Associates, said the U.S. politicians’ intervention is “a reflection of a well-orchestrated lobbying effort by the major digital platforms.”

He said there is no evidence that either bill discriminates against American companies.

“Canada is well armed to defend any trade complaint,” he said.

On Thursday, as Canada’s Senate debated Bill C-11 at third reading, Senator Dennis Dawson, sponsor of the bill in the Senate, said the legislation has been thoroughly scrutinized and should now be passed.

The Senate was due to begin debating C-18 this week. But that could now be delayed because of an error in the printed text of the bill sent over from the Commons, the Speaker of the Senate said.

The incorrect text included a sub-amendment that had not actually passed in a Commons committee. It will now have to be pulped and reprinted.

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Continue Reading

News

Racism: Examining Injustices of Canadian Society

Published

 on

Racism Can be Prevented in Canada

As the Canadian government works to create a more inclusive and just society, racism remains an issue that needs to be addressed. Racial discrimination, both conscious and unconscious, continues to be a problem throughout the country, resulting in the exclusion and marginalization of certain groups. Let’s look at why racism is still prevalent in Canada and what can be done to combat it.

 

The Root Causes of Racism in Canada

Racism is a systemic and deeply rooted problem in Canada that has been perpetuated through laws, policies, and practices for centuries. Every day, Canadians are confronted with the effects of racism in their lives, whether it’s seen in the workplace, at school, or even within our own homes. In order to understand how racism has become so pervasive in our society and what we can do to combat it, we must first examine its root causes.

Racism is embedded into Canadian society largely due to the historical legacy of colonialism. Through colonization, Europeans sought power and control over other nations while systematically stripping them of their culture and identity.

300x250x1

This resulted in a system of dominance and privilege that was heavily skewed toward white people while creating oppressive conditions for Indigenous peoples and people of colour.

As a result, many societal systems have been built on this foundation of inequality—from education to employment to housing—which has only served to further entrench racism into our society.

Discrimination is another major factor that contributes to racism in Canada. Systemic discrimination occurs when certain groups are disproportionately denied access to resources or opportunities because of their identity or perceived differences.

For example, people who are racialized often face systemic discrimination when it comes to employment; according to Statistics Canada, unemployment rates for racialized individuals were more than double those for non-racialized individuals as recently as 2018.

Similarly, Indigenous women experience higher levels of poverty than any other group in Canada due to systemic discrimination that prevents them from accessing education and employment opportunities.

Finally, institutional prejudice plays a significant role in perpetuating racism in Canada. Institutional prejudice refers to the biases that exist within institutions such as schools or workplaces which favour certain groups over others based on race or ethnicity.

These biases may be subtle or overt, but they have powerful consequences; research shows that students who identified as visible minorities are more likely to get suspended from their school than their white peers due to implicit biases held by teachers and administrators against these students’ racial backgrounds.

Similarly, workers who are racialized may be passed over for promotions despite being better qualified than their white counterparts due to underlying prejudices against them.

 

How Racism Impacts People

Racism can have significant impacts on individuals’ mental health, education outcomes, employment opportunities, access to resources such as healthcare services, and overall quality of life.

For example, studies have found that racial bias affects hiring decisions even when employers are unaware of their own biases. Additionally, people from minority backgrounds often experience discrimination when trying to access housing or healthcare services due to implicit biases held by service providers or institutions.

These experiences of exclusion can lead to feelings of frustration and helplessness among those impacted by racism.

 

What Can Be Done?

In order for us as a society to address the impacts of racism on individuals and communities across Canada, there must be an acknowledgement that racism exists and an openness towards taking actionable steps towards addressing it.

To do so effectively requires collaboration between different levels of government as well as with organizations advocating for social justice initiatives such as anti-racism campaigns.

Efforts should also include educational initiatives aimed at increasing awareness about systemic forms of racism as well as providing tools for individuals looking to challenge discriminatory behaviour within their own circles or workplaces.

 

Summary

Racism is still pervasive in Canada despite the efforts taken by many individuals and organizations towards creating a more equitable society free from discrimination based on race or ethnicity.

In order to address this issue effectively, we need widespread collaboration between different levels of government along with education initiatives aimed at increasing awareness around systemic forms of racism while also providing individuals with tools necessary for challenging discrimination where they see it occurring.

With everyone working together, we can create a brighter future free from bigotry and prejudice for all Canadians, regardless of their background or identity.

 

Continue Reading

Trending