(SLN) BIFFA GETS GREEN LIGHT TO SUE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT

A lord ordinary has ruled that a waste management company is entitled to sue the Scottish government over its decision to delay the coming into effect of the Deposit Return Scheme for Scotland.

Biffa Waste Services Ltd, which committed around £51.4 million towards implementation of the DRS, sought costs and lost profits from the Scottish ministers based on a duty of care owed to them. An alternative case was made that they had relied upon a letter sent to them in May 2022 by the responsible minister, Lorna Slater MSP, which turned out to be a negligent misrepresentation. The defenders sought dismissal of the action on the grounds of no duty of care being owed, or alternatively irrelevance.

The case was heard by Lord Clark in the Outer House of the Court of Session, with the Dean of Faculty, Roddy Dunlop KC, and McWhirter, advocate, appearing for the pursuer. Moynihan KC, Reid KC, and Arnott, advocate, appeared for the defenders.

It was not disputed that the implantation of a DRS was a Scottish government policy, the framework for which was set out in the Deposit and Return Scheme for Scotland Regulations 2020. Under this framework, on 18 July 2022 Biffa entered into a contract with Circularity Scotland Ltd, the scheme administrator, to become the logistics provider for the DRS.

Before entering into the contract, Biffa sought assurances as to the deliverability of the DRS. On 17 May 2022, Lorna Slater MSP, minister for green skills, circular economy and biodiversity, wrote on behalf of the defenders to Biffa’s CEO. In the letter, the minister referred to the defenders’ “unwavering” commitment to delivering the DRS and said that Biffa entering into the contract with CSL was “a major vote of confidence” that would increase momentum towards successful delivery.

On 7 June 2023, a delay to the DRS was announced until at least October 2025 due to difficulties obtaining an exclusion for the DRS from UK-wide market access rules. Biffa averred that the decisions to delay created significant uncertainty and that producers refused to fund CSL given the position taken by the Scottish government. The delay led to CSL entering administration, and the termination of Biffa’s contract.

The pursuer averred that the defenders owed a duty of care due to their unique knowledge of the need for Internal Market Act approval, a fundamental step towards the deliverability and viability of the DRS. Their failure to alert the pursuer to this requirement before assuring them that the DRS would be implemented was a breach of that duty. Alternatively, the letter of May 2022 created a false and misleading impression and amounted to misrepresentation.

For the defenders it was submitted that their decision to proceed as they did was non-justiciable because it was part of a delicate political process of conducting inter-governmental relations. There can be no liability if the decisions that were taken fell within the ambit of a reasonable exercise of discretion. Regarding the May 2022 letter, on no reasonable reading did it assure the pursuer that the DRS was entirely deliverable. More of this article (Scottish Legal News) - link - more like this (Biffa) - link - more like this (Scotland) - link - more like this (DRS) - link

(CHA) SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS - THE REVIVAL

Research Paper - How the circular economy can revive the Sustainable Development Goals

With progress on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) badly off track, international policymakers are scrambling for solutions that can both revitalize the current SDG agenda and drive more effective action on humanity’s big challenges in the future. The ‘circular economy’ offers clear potential in this area. 

This wide-ranging concept, which involves making economies less wasteful and less resource-intensive while contributing to human development and well-being, could hold the key to accelerating SDG delivery. A more formal role within the SDGs and any emerging post-2030 successor regime would also provide a catalyst for expansion of the circular economy itself.

This paper explores how the circular economy could support each of the 17 SDGs, and argues for the concept to be put at the heart of emerging plans to drive sustainable development towards 2050. Doing so could help to foster resilient economies, reduce environmental impacts and ensure equitable resource distribution. Research paper (Chatham House) - link - more like this (circularity) - link - more like this (closed loop) - link

(GRE) FOOD WASTE U.S.A.

Ozempic, inflation and the Trump presidency will likely dictate how the US deals with food waste in 2025, according to ReFED, a leading non-profit.

Last year was a big year for food waste policy in the US. The Biden White House introduced the first-ever strategy to fight food waste, published in collaboration with the USDA, the Food and Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, three agencies that renewed a recurring collaborative agreement to keep food from ending up in the bin and landfills.

Retailers, meanwhile, made the most significant progress ever reported by cutting food waste by a quarter between 2019 and 2022. The number of businesses signed up to the US Food Loss and Waste 2030 Champions pledge grew to 50, with giants like Danone, Hilton, Starbucks, Kroger, Walmart, Unilever and Tyson Foods replicating the government’s commitment to half food waste by 2030.

These efforts have sparked what research non-profit ReFED calls a “food waste moment” in the US, where a range of external factors come together to produce opportunities for real progress in food waste reduction.

This is crucial when you consider that 38% of all food goes to waste, which is worth $473B, according to research organisation ReFED. It is the single largest volume of material sent to landfills and incinerators, and accounts for 58% of methane emissions from solid municipal waste landfills.

Will this food waste moment – and momentum – continue in 2025? ReFED is confident about further progress, laying out the key trends we could see in the coming months.

GLP-1: a boon or bane for food waste?

Ozempic was picked as the Name of the Year by the American Name Society in 2024, a reflection of the weight-loss drug’s explosive popularity in the US. With companions like Wegovy, Mounjaro and Zepbound, GLP-1 medications have now been used by one in eight Americans.

It has shaken the food system to its core. Large producers – from Nestlè to Coca-Cola – are responding with products that meet the needs of GLP-1 users (or seekers), retailers and restaurants are losing sales, and fibre-forward startups are seizing the moment.

But Ozempic and the like are also affecting how much food is wasted. A 2024 Ohio State University study found that one in four GLP-1 users wasted more food since taking the drugs, thanks in large part to nausea from the injectables. Interestingly, the effects of these weight-loss drugs on food waste withered with time – people who had been taking the medications for over a year were less likely to throw away food than those who had been on them for less than 90 days. As they shift to eating more vegetables on their shrunken appetites, the likelihood of them wasting food diminishes.

With the number of users forecast to rise to anywhere between 10 to 70 million by 2028, GLP-1 drugs are here to stay. They are set to boost America’s GDP by 1% by that year and command a $105B market by the end of the decade. “Their influence will only continue to grow,” said ReFED, which says it will publish further analysis on the links between GLP-1 drugs and food waste this year.

Inflation and the Trump administration could prove highly influential

According to ReFED, the average family of four spends more than $3,000 a year on food that ends up in the bin. At the same time, GLP-1 users are spending up to 9% less on groceries than they were before taking the medications.

But 13.5% of households are food insecure in the US, with the amount of food lost or wasted potentially able to feed around 46 million Americans – or more than the states of New York and Florida, combined.

Inflation has kept prices sky-high – 75% of Americans are very concerned about the cost of food – and informed how people voted in this election. “There’s a real opportunity for the new administration and other policymakers to help consumers make the connection between cost and food waste, and implement solutions that maximise the value of the food they’re already purchasing,” suggests ReFED. More of this article (Green Queen) - link - more like this (food waste) - link - more like this (US) - link

(CEN) TURNING JAPANESE - A FIRM HAND ON WASTE

Garbage sorting is a well established ritual in Japan that few question, despite the time and effort involved. 

A typical resident of a major city has Mondays and Thursdays as options to take combustible garbage to a designated collection site. Tuesdays are for metal cans and polyester bottles, Wednesdays for newsprint and other recyclable paper, and Saturdays for other plastic containers. On Sundays, all trash stays home.

Japanese citizens are generally accepting of these rigid trash-sorting guidelines. Their willing participation has inspired planners to think about innovative ways to mine this waste. As early as 2003, Japan was converting used plastics into ammonia. Now, despite setbacks in the US and elsewhere, more and more Japanese companies are aiming to use household waste to produce basic chemicals like hydrogen, ethanol, and ethylene.

Sekisui Chemical is leaving no stone unturned in its effort to develop the most efficient way to turn household waste into ethanol. “Our process uses microorganisms that exist in the stomachs of rabbits,” says Satoshi Koma, head of corporate new business development in Sekisui’s biorefinery group.

The company has formed a technical alliance with the US firm LanzaTech, which supplies the microbe, and is in the final stages of building a demonstration project. In their process, combustible garbage such as food leftovers and plastic film is gasified into carbon monoxide and hydrogen and purified using Sekisui technology. LanzaTech’s microorganisms consume the gases and excrete ethanol as waste.

Koma says the ethanol is recovered as a roughly 5% solution, then distilled to a purity of 99% or higher and supplied as a chemical raw material. “Currently, the biggest challenge in the demonstration test is to stably produce 1,000 to 2,000 L of ethanol from 20 metric tons of combustible waste per day,” he says.

The disciplined sorting habits of the Japanese public don’t change the facts that the composition of household waste changes daily and water content varies. “Meanwhile, the specifications of the microbial feed are fixed,” Koma says. “We are accumulating research to create a more constant gas composition to match these specifications.”

Although challenges remain to turning garbage into ethanol, Sekisui is already thinking big. Annually, combustible waste generated in Japan has an energy content of about 800 trillion kJ, Koma points out, while the naphtha that Japanese petrochemical companies use as a raw material for plastics every year harbors 630 trillion kJ. “It is mathematically possible to produce domestically all the plastic materials from combustible waste,” he says.

The Japanese government is supporting Sekisui’s demonstration of the technology with a grant from its Green Innovation Fund worth more than $100 million over 8 years.

Sekisui hopes to complete its demonstration by the end of fiscal 2025, select a site for the project, and start building the plant in fiscal 2026 or later. The company has agreed to supply its ethanol to Sumitomo Chemical for ethylene and propylene production via a new Sumitomo process that uses ethanol as a feedstock. More of this article (Chemical & Engineering News) - link - more like this (Japan) - link - more like this (ethanol) - link

(GUF) PLASTIC RECYCLING

While recycling is often promoted as a solution to plastic waste, the reality is far more complex and less sustainable than many assume. 

Limited Types of Recyclable Plastics:

Although most durable plastic can be recycled, only two types of plastic; PET (Polyethylene Terephthalate) and HDPE (High-Density Polyethylene) are widely accepted (actually wanted) for mainstream recycling . These materials are commonly found in products such as beverage/water bottles, milk jugs, and detergent containers.

Quality Degradation During Recycling:

Unlike materials such as glass or metals that can be recycled indefinitely without losing quality, plastics degrade during the recycling process. Each recycling cycle reduces the polymer chains' strength and quality, often requiring the addition of virgin plastic to create a usable product.

Downcycling:

Most recycled plastics are not turned back into the same type of product. Instead, they are "downcycled" into lower-quality products like textiles (e.g., polyester), composite lumber, or packaging. This means the plastic's lifecycle is extended slightly but does not prevent its eventual disposal.

End-of-Life Issues:

Ultimately, even downcycled plastics face disposal, often ending up in landfills or incinerators. If improperly managed, they may contribute to environmental pollution, including microplastics in ecosystems.

The Bigger Picture

While recycling is a critical component of waste management, it is not a silver bullet for the plastic waste crisis. Addressing the issue requires:

1. Reducing Plastic Production and Use: Moving towards reusable and alternative materials. We seriously need to reduce our reliance on plastic.

2. Innovating Recycling Technologies: Developing methods like chemical recycling, which can break plastics down into their original monomers for higher-quality reuse.

3. Implementing Circular Economy Practices: Designing products with end-of-life reuse and minimal waste in mind.

This highlights the urgent need for systemic changes in how we produce, consume, and manage plastics. More like this (recycling plastic) - link - more like this (circularity) - link

(ENS) SAUDI ARABIA ADDS 2GW BESS

A 2GWh battery energy storage system (BESS) project has gone into operation in Saudi Arabia, according to the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) firm which delivered it.

PowerChina Hubei Engineering, a subsidiary of the Power Construction Corporation of China (PowerChina) said last week (17 January) that the 500MW/2,000MWh (4-hour duration) Saudi Bisha BESS project is supplying power to the grid.

The facility is claimed to be the largest electrochemical battery storage project to be brought online in a single phase of construction and installation in the world to date.

Located in the southern border town of Bisha around 160km from the Red Sea coast, the facility aims to support the local electricity grid with services including peak shaving – reducing power demand during peak periods – and enabling the greater integration of variable renewable energy (VRE) sources to the network.

EPC firm PowerChina Hubei Engineering noted that the Bisha project team overcame challenges in constructing the project including sand, dust and high temperature conditions.

For China, it meets the aims of the Belt and Road Initiative to increase the Asian powerhouse’s connections and influence across land and sea, the firm said in an announcement.

Meanwhile, for Saudi Arabia, the project is a step toward the Kingdom’s Vision2030 goals of increasing the share of renewable energy to 50% of its energy mix by the end of this decade. According to various reports, Saudi energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman has said the country will pursue the deployment of 48GWh of energy storage to enable its integration. More of this article (Energy Storage News) - link - more like this (BESS) - link - more like this (China) - link - more like this (Saudi Arabia) - link

(GBN) STOP TRASHING BRITAIN

STOP TRASHING BRITAIN

Restore pride in our country by demanding proper punishment for those who blight our beautiful nation with litter and rubbish. Sign the petition - here - more like this (litter) - link - more like this (litter) - link

(EUN) ANTHONY VIAUX - A LESSON IN ETHICS

“When I was in my plane watching the forest fires from above, I couldn't help but feel responsible.”

Anthony Viaux, a captain at Air France, was in the midst of an internal struggle between his passion and his ethics. Since he was a young boy, he’d dreamed of being a pilot and had worked hard to get his wings and rise through the ranks to become a captain.

But he couldn’t ignore the impact his career was having on the planet.

Soaring over the French Alps, he would notice, year by year, the snow retreating from the peaks. On many occasions, his night flights across Europe would give him a bird’s eye view of raging wildfires below.

“I’d say to myself, I contributed to that,” he says. “People don't make the links between things like aviation and forest fires. But I did.”

Ultimately, Anthony’s eco-anxieties became too much, and he walked away from a career that spanned two decades and one that he loved very dearly.
Anthony Viaux: A long struggle to become a pilot

Anthony had long dreamed of flying aeroplanes, but having not particularly excelled at maths and physics in school, he put his dream on the back burner and went to business school instead.

To satiate his appetite for flying, he joined a local gliding club and met some like-minded people. It was through them that he realised there was another route to getting his wings.

Independently, Anthony studied and sat exams for the theoretical side of commercial piloting, and eventually enrolled himself in pilot school. In 2000, he was offered a job flying for Regional Airlines, a subsidiary of Air France that is today known as Hop!

Beginning on small turboprop planes like the Saab 2000, he built up his hours and experience and eventually graduated to being type-rated on his first jet - the Airbus A320 - flying for the mainline airline, Air France. More of this article (Euro News Green) - link - more like this (flying) - link - more like this (France) - link

(PUL) WORLD'S LARGEST HYDROPOWER DAM

China is making its neighbour, India, and India’s neighbour, Bangladesh, very angry. The Chinese are setting up to build the biggest hydropower dam in the world and it appears that the government failed to consider the repercussions further down the line—or the river, in this case. 

Protests and public outcry are gathering momentum as India and Bangladesh draw attention to the potential impact on ecologically sensitive areas and millions of people outside China’s border.

In December 2024, China approved the construction of the super dam to be called the Medog Hydropower Station on a lower section of the Yarlung Zangbo River in Tibet, which in India is known as the Brahmaputra River. This has become a flashpoint of conflict between India and Beijing. Bangladesh also has a dog in this fight because the same river eventually crosses India’s border into Bangladesh, and the effects on environments and settlements downriver could quite plausibly reach that far.

According to China’s Xinhua news agency, the development is “a safe project that prioritizes ecological protection,” promising that it has a major role to play in meeting China’s carbon neutrality goals. The reason why the site is so attractive for hydropower production is that when the Yarlung Zangbo River reaches a section called the Great Bend, it plunges 6,560 feet down and generates massive volumes of energy as it does so.

China is also home to the world’s current largest hydropower facility, the Three Gorges Dam. The Medog dam will dwarf this by a significant margin and generate an estimated 300 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity per year. China is investing a prolific amount of funds into researching different energy solutions, and according to a groundbreaking new study, installing solar panels over deserts is the next target for development.

However, environmentalists in India have identified ecological risks in the country’s sensitive mountainous region below the site of the mega-dam, saying that harnessing the river and changing the rate of flow will have detrimental effects on the country’s northeastern states and, ultimately, ecosystems in Bangladesh as well. India is now urging China to consider the interests of downstream regions. Indian foreign ministry spokesman Randhir Jaiswal offered a warning:

“We will continue to monitor and take necessary measures to protect our interests.”

China defended the project by promising that rigorous evaluation and impact assessment were conducted before the plans for the Medog Hydropower Station were approved. Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun responded to India’s concerns: “The project will not have a negative impact on the ecological environment, geological conditions, and the rights and interests related to water resources of downstream countries.”

It appears that experts in India and Bangladesh have not been pacified, though. Y. Nithiyanandam, the head of the Geospatial Research Programme at the Bengaluru-based Takshashila Institution raised questions about the project:

“The region proposed for dam construction is highly susceptible to landslides and is located on a geological fault line that intersects the Yarlung Zangbo. Planning a dam of this magnitude in such complex terrain poses significant risks to downstream regions of India and Bangladesh, especially in the event of a mishap or if there is alteration in the water flow.”

Nithiyanandam pointed to the recent Tibetan earthquake that killed at least 126 people, highlighting the risk to settlements downriver if a catastrophic event had to compromise the integrity of the dam:

“This is a critical reminder to reassess the proposal for building a mega-dam in such an environment.”

It’s expected that it will take four years to complete the construction of the Medog Hydropower Station, which is planned to begin in 2029. This means that India and Bangladesh have some time to make their case heard if they intend to influence the project in any way. More of this article (The Pulse) - link - more like this (hydropower) - link - more like this (China) - link

(GRE) UK RECYCLES LESS THAN 10% OF EVERYDAY PLASTICS

The sad truth is that less than 10% of everyday plastic – the plastic packaging that the things we buy is wrapped in – actually gets recycled in the UK.

And despite what the adverts tell you, the problem isn’t that people aren’t recycling enough. The problem is that there is still far too much throwaway plastic being produced – so much in fact that we’re having to burn it or dump it on other countries to deal with.

So, should you stop recycling? No – a recycling system that works well is an important part of the puzzle. But the UK government needs to take urgent action to solve the wider problem.

The government claims to be a global leader in tackling plastic pollution, but it is failing to address this crisis responsibly. Its small gestures towards stemming the plastic tide, like banning plastic cotton bud sticks, stirrers and straws have had a minimal impact. Meanwhile, more significant reforms like introducing a plastic bottle ‘deposit return scheme’ have been repeatedly delayed.

If the UK produced half as much single-use plastic, we could end waste exports, and send less plastic into incineration and landfill. The government should commit to a 50% reduction in single-use plastic by 2025 – and supermarkets and major brands must deliver it if we’re going to properly protect people and the planet from plastic pollution. More of this article (Greenpeace) - link - tips to reduce your plastic waste (WWF) - link - more like this (recycling) - link - more like this (Greenpeace) - link

(NAT) WORLD'S LARGEST SOLAR ENERGY PLANT

Abu Dhabi will soon be home to a 5.2-GW solar farm – snagging the top spot on the global solar energy plant leaderboard.

That's part of a gigascale project set to be built in the capital of the United Arab Emirates by Abu Dhabi Future Energy Company aka Masdar, and Emirates Water and Electricity Company. The firms note it'll be the world's first '24/7' solar photovolatic plant coupled with a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) to match.

What that means is the solar plant will be able to supply energy even when the sun's not out – 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.Between the 5.2-GW solar plant and the 19-GWh BESS, the project will deliver up to 1 GW of baseload power every day gathered using solar panels. That should be enough to power 750,000 homes.

And just how large a plant are we talking about? The US Department of Energy estimates that it takes 1.887 million solar panels to generate just 1 GW of power. Going by that, Abu Dhabi's 5.2-GW plant could require nearly 10 million panels to get the job done.

Let's try to estimate the sort of space needed for this kind of thing. The Al Dhafra solar plant, inaugurated in Abu Dhabi in November 2023, has 4 million panels installed across 8.1 square miles (21 sq km). So Masdar's new project will likely need 20.25 square miles of space (52.44 sq km) – not counting the BESS. That's nearly 10,000 football fields.

The project will cost US$6 billion, and is set to be commissioned in 2027. Mohamed Jameel Al Ramahi, CEO of Masdar, told CNBC that it'll be "managed through a smart integrated solution to allow dispatchability at any point of time during the day or night."

With that 5.2 GW figure, it beats out the Power Construction Corp of China's 3.5-GW solar farm in the counry's Xinjiang province. This facility was said to be the world's biggest solar farm last June.

The new project in Abu Dhabi not only earns the UAE major bragging rights, but also gets it closer to its Net Zero by 2050 target. More of this article (New Atlas) - link - picture (ME Construction News) - link - more like this (pv) - link - more like this (Abu Dhabi) - link

(GUF) ADVICE FOR 2050 - GET A TORCH

This is an article about a fact. In an electrical grid, the power must be produced in real time, as it is being used; if supply to the grid is less than demand at any time, there will be a blackout. For the grid to function, supply and demand must be balanced at all times - link

By 2050 the National Grid ESO, the electricity system operator for Great Britain, is forecasting that the UK will need at least 50 GW of energy storage power capacity and just under 200GWh of capacity - link

Of the 4.7 GW of installed energy storage capacity in the UK, battery energy storage systems (BESS) account for only about 2.1 GW

Most of the current capacity, 2.8 GW, comes from pumped hydro storage – a form of turbine-powered hydroelectric storage where water moves between two reservoirs at different heights - link

With just over 5GW of capacity currently under construction, we could reasonably expect battery storage capacity in the UK to reach over 10 GW in the next few years - link

A best-case scenario (i.e. Leading the Way), deployment rates of battery power storage capacity would be at 20 GW by 2030, and 35 GW by 2050. 

Back to where this started - by 2050 the National Grid ESO, the electricity system operator for Great Britain, is forecasting that the UK will need at least 50 GW of energy storage power capacity - link - more like this (power outage) - link - largest battery in Britain - link

(NAT) NATRIUM HITS KEY MILESTONE

Since founding TerraPower in 2008, Bill Gates has had his eye on developing a safe, efficient, and clean next-gen nuclear plant. That project, called Natrium, has already broken ground in Wyoming and has just leaped over a critical hurdle.

In Kemmerer, Wyoming, the Naughton Power Plant has been burning coal to provide electricity since the 1960s. But in September 2019, it was announced that the plant would be shut down by 2025 due to issues with operating efficiency and compliance with environmental regulations. Yet unlike other towns where coal plants get shuttered, Kemmerer won't simply fade from the map. Instead, it is the site where Natrium, America's first coal-to-nuclear project, is taking place.

The project is being spearheaded by TerraPower, a next-gen nuclear development company founded in 2008 by Bill Gates and several other high-wealth backers. TerraPower is now also supported by the US Department of Energy, which gave the company an $80 million grant in October 2020 as part of its Advanced Reactor Demonstration Project program.

TerraPower broke ground on Natrium in June of last year and, this week, the company announced that it received approval from the Wyoming Industrial Siting Council (ISC) for the first of the Natrium plants, known as Kemmerer Power Station Unit 1. According to the company, this makes them the first developer to receive a state permit for an advanced nuclear project in US history.

The permit allows TerraPower to begin building the non-nuclear portions of its plant, including its "energy island," which will hold the plant's turbines and molten-salt energy storage tanks. These tanks are critical to Natrium's energy efficiency as they can be used to store energy in the form of heat that can be released on an as-needed basis to supply additional power to the local grid when required. More of this article (New Atlas) - link - more like this (nuclear) - link - more like this (Wyoming) - link

(CRI) UK NEEDS TO PREPARE FOR BLACKOUTS

In the still, frosty nights at the start of the second week of January, Britain came closer than at any time in recent years to running out of electricity. 

On Wednesday evening, (8th January) peak demand came within 580 MW (around 1 per cent of total demand) of overwhelming the available generation capacity. This would have forced the grid to impose emergency constraints on demand, which would have been experienced by at least some people as a blackout.

The National Energy System Operator (NESO), the body which runs the national electricity grid, managed to squeeze through on this occasion. But it will not be the last time this winter that its nerves will be tested, let alone in the years ahead.

This situation has come about as a result of older fossil fuel assets being taken offline, while the new capacity being added to the grid has mainly been intermittent, weather-based renewable generation. Under Ed Miliband’s plans, this process will be accelerated dramatically in the run up to 2030, by which time the Government hopes that 95 per cent of the country’s power generation will come from low-carbon sources. The government is not planning a massive expansion of nuclear power in the next five years, so this means that Britain’s power generation will be made up primarily from sources that can simply stop at any time, at the whim of nature.

I wrote back in October about the sobering thought that many members of Britain’s non-technical elite don’t understand the principle of balancing an electricity grid — the fact that the power which the nation consumes must be balanced by what is being produced, in real time. Given the enormity of the changes being planned, this is a concept about which the whole nation will be getting an unwelcome education in the near future. Yet despite last Wednesday’s near miss, much of the public still seems to be insulated from the fundamental change that is planned in the way that electricity is going to be created.

In this, Ed Miliband has been aided immeasurably by the fact that many of these plans had already been laid down by the Conservatives, and especially by Boris Johnson’s government. Not only the Net Zero plans themselves, but also bans on petrol and diesel cars, and rules encouraging heat pumps. Johnson announced a lot of these ideas for the purpose of political signalling; like a can he was dropping on the floor, to be kicked down the road by the uninterrupted Tory governments he saw stretching out in front of him for years to come, back in 2019. But what Boris had intended merely as an ephemeral political counterweight to Brexit, Miliband now plans in deadly earnest. 

All he needs to do is tinker around the edges; a deadline brought forward here, a regulation amended there. More of this article (The Critic) - link - picture (The Independent) - link - (more like this (the grid) - link - more like this (Labour) - link

(EEA) 79% OF ALL PLASTIC EVER MADE IS STILL AROUND US

Approximately 79% of all the plastics ever produced is either still in use or has either been disposed of in landfills or released into the environment, including the oceans. 

More of this article (European Environment Agency) - link - more like this (waste plastics) - link - more like this (recycling) - link

(CUS) WASTE PLASTIC - THE SOLUTION

THE ONLY SOLUTION: MAKE LESS PLASTIC 

Recycling has long been pushed as the natural solution to plastic pollution. But the truth is, plastic recycling only escalates the problems it sets out to solve, creating new dangers for the environment and threatening human health.

As more information about plastic recycling comes to light, it has become clear that it will not solve plastic pollution, with recycled plastics actually more toxic than virgin plastic.

What has been framed as the answer to the plastic problem is unravelling as another example of industry greenwashing, serving only to delay the necessary transition to alternative materials.

Plastic can be quite difficult to recycle, and the process varies depending on the material, but generally plastic waste is collected and sent to recycling centres where it is separated, shredded and then melted down to a liquid state ready for casting into a mould.

The process is time-consuming and emissions-intensive, with it being far easier to produce new, virgin plastic than recycle plastic waste. This goes a long way to explaining why adoption rates for plastic recycling have been slow to say the least.

Recycled plastic accounts for just 6% of global plastic production and only 9% of plastic is actually recycled. Around half of it ends up in landfill, a fifth is incinerated and the remainder is mismanaged, being left to leach into the environment.

Of this mismanaged waste, much of it ends up in the ocean, with estimates indicating that between 8 million and 11 million tons of plastic enter the ocean every year.

Recycling is the only method that could theoretically make plastics sustainable, so naturally has become key to the long-term future of the plastic industry.

At present, however, there is little evidence to suggest plastic recycling is having a positive impact, with efforts to develop a recycling process that is legitimately safe and sustainable so far proving unsuccessful.

There are two main types of plastic recycling: mechanical and chemical. Most plastic is recycled mechanically through a process of sorting, washing, grinding and re-granulating waste plastics. Chemical recycling is a more recently developed method that involves breaking down the chemical structure of plastic using heat or chemical processes.

Mechanical recycling

Mechanical recycling refers to a multi-stage process of sorting, cleaning and shredding waste plastic into tiny particles, ready for melting down into new plastic. It’s commonly used to recycle PE and HDPE, with typical end-products being plastic bottles, carrier bags and cosmetics bottles.

The main drawback with mechanical recycling is that it changes the molecular structure of the plastic, in turn reducing its material integrity. As a result, recycled plastic is routinely mixed with virgin plastic to make new products, and even then, it can still only be recycled two or three times.

Chemical recycling

Chemical recycling (sometimes referred to as advanced recycling) has been pushed by the plastic industry as a solution to the shortcomings of mechanical recycling, supposedly increasing both the quality of recycled plastic and the number of plastic materials that can be recycled.

This method draws on a range of complex chemical processes, including pyrolysis, gasification and depolymerisation, to break down plastics to the molecular level for use as building blocks for new plastic products.

In reality, chemical recycling is yet to be implemented at scale, currently accounting for a tiny fraction of overall plastic recycling. Only certain plastics can be recycled using chemical processes and where this is the case the process is not always successful.

A report from Beyond Plastics and the International Pollutants Elimination Network found that this purportedly advanced method of plastic recycling hasn’t worked for decades, and only produces small amounts of material that can actually be recycled, while also generating considerable amounts of hazardous waste.

And even if these issues could be resolved, chemical recycling would still be plagued by many of the same flaws faced by mechanical recycling. Neither method removes the toxins used to make the plastics in the first place. On top of that, the process still alters the plastic in a way that will always reduce its quality and limit its number of uses.

The plastic industry has long been aware of these facts, as a recent report from the Centre for Climate Integrity documents, but this has not stopped it from funnelling huge amounts of resources into a campaign of fraud and deception to promote recycling as a viable solution to the plastic problem. More of this article (CUSP) - link - the source of SUP (Candid) - link - (more like this (plastic recycling) - link - more like this (plastic pollution) - link - why the Global Plastics Treaty failed - link

(ITY) THE KARDASHEV SCALE

Tech mogul Elon Musk has recently brought attention to the Kardashev scale, a theoretical framework for measuring a civilisation's technological advancement based on its energy consumption and utilisation capabilities.

The Kardashev Scale gives us a way to imagine advanced civilisations and our potential future as a species in terms of energy use and control over our environment.

As Musk explains, "You're Kardashev level 1 if you harness the power of a planet, 2 if you harness the power of a solar system, or 3 if you harness the power of a galaxy."

The Kardashev scale, proposed by Soviet astronomer Nikolai Kardashev in 1964, categorises civilisations into three main types.

Type I Civilisation – Planetary Civilisation

A Type I civilisation, also called a planetary civilisation, can use and store all of the energy available on its home planet. This includes harnessing resources like wind, water, and solar energy to its fullest extent. Earth is estimated to be at about 0.73 on this scale, meaning humanity hasn't yet reached Type I status. Achieving Type I would mean solving significant challenges in sustainable energy and resource utilisation.

Type II civilisation – Stellar civilisation

A Type II civilisation, or stellar civilisation, can harness and control the total energy output of its star. One theoretical way to do this is by constructing a "Dyson Sphere," a hypothetical structure that would surround a star to capture and utilize most or all of its energy. This would give a civilisation virtually unlimited power for technologies, space exploration, and sustenance.

Type III civilisation – Galactic civilisation

A Type III civilisation can control energy on the scale of its entire galaxy. This would involve advanced mastery of physics, allowing the civilisation to access energy from billions of stars across the galaxy. A Type III civilisation would be highly advanced in terms of space colonization, interstellar travel, and technological capability. It is the most advanced on the original scale.

WHERE IS HUMAN CIVILISATION ON KARDASHEV SCALE?

Currently, humanity falls below Type I on the scale. Carl Sagan proposed a more nuanced version, placing Earth at approximately 0.7 on the scale. Some experts estimate we could reach Type I status within the next 100-200 years.

Elon Musk emphasises the scale's implications for energy production, stating, "The biggest source of energy is The Sun... When you think in terms of the Kardashev scale, it becomes obvious that the Sun is the most overwhelming source of energy, and everything else is tiny potatoes."

The Kardashev scale has inspired both scientific research and science fiction, prompting discussions about future energy technologies and the potential existence of advanced extraterrestrial civilisations.

It has also influenced SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) efforts, guiding researchers in their search for technosignatures of advanced civilisations.

While the scale has faced criticism for being overly simplistic, it continues to serve as a thought-provoking framework for considering humanity's technological progress and energy future. More of this article (India Today) - link - more like this (Elon Musk) - link - more like this (solar) - link

(MON) THE JEVONS PARADOX

In 2022, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres declared that the “lifeline of renewable energy can steer [the] world out of climate crisis.” 

In saying so, he echoed a popular and tantalizing idea: that, if we hurry, we can erase the climate emergency with widespread adoption of renewables in the form of solar panels, wind farms, electric vehicles and more.

But things aren’t that simple, and analysts increasingly question the naïve assumption that renewables are a silver bullet.

That’s partly because the rapid transition to a global energy and transport system powered by clean energy brings with it a host of new (and old) environmental problems. To begin with, stepping up solar, wind and EV production requires many more minerals and materials in the short term than do their already well-established fossil fuel counterparts, while also creating a major carbon footprint.

Also, the quicker we transition away from fossil fuel tech to renewable tech, the greater the quantity of materials needed up front, and the higher the immediate carbon and numerous other environmental costs. But this shift is now happening extremely rapidly, as companies, governments and consumers try to turn away from oil, coal and natural gas.

But this triumph hasn’t brought with it a simultaneous slashing in global emissions, as hoped. In fact, 2023 saw humanity’s biggest annual carbon releases ever, totaling 37.4 billion metric tons, which has led experts to ask: What’s going on?

Jevons paradox meets limits to growth

Some analysts suggest the source of this baffling contradiction regarding record modern energy consumption can be found in the clamor by businesses and consumers for more, better, cheaper technological innovations, an idea summed up by a 160-year-old economic theory: the Jevons paradox.

Postulated by 19th-century English economist William Stanley Jevons, it states that, “in the long term, an increase in efficiency in resource use [via a new technology] will generate an increase in resource consumption rather than a decrease.” 

Put simply, the more efficient (and hence cheaper) energy is, the greater society’s overall production and economic growth will be — with that increased production then requiring still more energy consumption.

Writing in 1865, Jevons argued that the energy transition from horses to coal decreased the amount of work for any given task (along with the cost), which led to soaring resource consumption. For proof, he pointed to the coal-powered explosion in technological innovation and use occurring in the 19th century.

Applied to our current predicament, the Jevons paradox challenges and undermines tech prognosticators’ rosy forecasts for sustainable development.

Here’s a look at the paradox in action: The fastest-expanding renewable energy sector today is solar photovoltaics (PVs), expected to account for 80% of renewables growth in the coming years.

In many parts of the world, large solar power plants are being built, while companies and households rapidly add rooftop solar panels. At the head of the pack is China, with its astounding solar installation rate (216.9 GW in 2023).

But paradoxically, as China cranks out cheap solar panels for domestic use and export, it is also building six times more coal power plants every year than the rest of the world combined, though it still expects almost half its electricity generation to come from renewables, mainly solar, by 2028. More this brilliant article (Mongabay) - link - picture (sketchplanations) - link - more like this (renewables) - link - more like this (pv) - link

(WEV) RENAULT 5 E-TECH NOW AVAILABLE

The highly anticipated Renault 5 E-Tech electric, recently crowned Car of the Year, is now available for pre-order, offering early access and exclusive benefits to R Pass holders. This retro-inspired electric supermini, which has already garnered significant acclaim, promises a blend of style, technology, and practicality, with first deliveries expected in Spring 2025.

Renault is offering R Pass holders priority access to order the 5 E-Tech electric, allowing them to jump the queue and be among the first to experience this award-winning vehicle. But the perks don't stop there. 

Those who order before March 31st and purchase through Mobilize Financial Services will receive up to three years of free servicing, adding significant value to the ownership experience. To further sweeten the deal, the availability of the £150 R Pass has been extended until January 28th, ensuring more customers can take advantage of these launch offers. The wider public will be able to place orders from January 29th.

Prices for the Renault 5 E-Tech electric start from £22,995 on the road, making it a competitive option in the burgeoning electric supermini segment. A range of enticing PCP (Personal Contract Purchase) finance offers are also available, designed to make the car even more accessible. For example, customers can drive away in the multi-award-winning supermini for as little as £182 per month on a 24-month contract with a minimum 30% deposit. More of this article (Which EV) - link - more like this (Renault) - link - more like this (ev) - link

(ICN) THE COAL POWER COME BACK

There is renewed talk of a coal power comeback in the United States, inspired by Donald Trump’s return to the presidency and forecasts of soaring electricity demand.

The evidence so far only shows that some plants are getting small extensions on their retirement dates. This means a slowdown in coal’s rate of decline, which is bad for the environment, but it does little to change the long-term trajectory for the domestic coal industry.

In October, I wrote about how five of the country’s 10 largest coal-fired power plants had retirement dates. Today, I’m revisiting the list, providing some updates and then taking a few steps back to look at U.S. coal plants as a whole. Consider this the “before” picture that can be judged against the “after” in four years.

Some coal plant owners have already pushed back retirement timetables. The largest example, this one from just before the election, is the Gibson plant in Indiana, the second-largest coal plant in the country. It’s set to close in 2038 instead of 2035, following an announcement in October from the owner, Duke Energy. More of this article (Inside Climate News) - link - more like this (Donald Trump) - link - more like this (America) - link - more like this (Indiana) - link

(EUN) ANNE LOVES BRAD

Fraudsters have scammed a French woman out of €830,000 by making her believe she was dating Brad Pitt. The victim has faced an onslaught of online harassment – revealing quite to what extent empathy and human decency is in short supply when it comes to people falling for AI scams.

An AI-generated con featuring Brad Pitt is causing quite the stir in France. A French interior designer, known as Anne, was scammed out of €830,000 after she was duped into thinking that she was in a relationship with the Hollywood actor and that he needed money for cancer treatment.

The 53-year-old's story was broadcast on the French TV show Sept à Huit on TF1, where she disclosed being scammed by individuals pretending to be Brad Pitt. They used fake social media and artificial intelligence image-creating technology to craft an elaborate and heartbreaking swindle.

In the episode, Anne shared how she received a message from someone purporting to be Jane Etta Pitt, the actor’s mother, telling her she was exactly the woman her son needed.

Soon afterwards, she started to receive messages from what she didn’t know was an AI imitation of Brad Pitt. Anne was going through a divorce with a millionaire entrepreneur at the time, and over the course of a year, her ‘lover’ would send declarations of love and even asked her to marry him.

“At first I said to myself that it was fake, that it’s ridiculous,” Anne explained on Sept à Huit. “But I’m not used to social media and I didn’t really understand what was happening to me.”

“There are few men who write to you like that,” she told French media. “I loved the man I was talking to. He knew how to talk to women and it was very well put together.” more of this article (Euro News) - link - more like this (France) - link - more like this (scams) - link

(RCH) DI BLIGH DEFACES CHARLES DARWIN'S GRAVE

Two women have been charged with criminal damage after chalk paint was sprayed on Charles Darwin’s grave in Westminster Abbey.

The words “1.5 is dead” were written in orange on the 19th century biologist’s grave on Monday, referring to attempts to limit global warming to 1.5C and reduce the impact of climate change.

Environmental campaign group Just Stop Oil said Alyson Lee, 66, a retired teaching assistant from Derby, and Di Bligh, a 77-year-old former chief executive of Reading Council from Frome in Somerset, were at the Abbey on Monday.

They have both been charged with criminal damage and bailed to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on separate dates next month – Lee on February 11 and Bligh on February 12.

A spokesperson for the church said they do not anticipate there will be any permanent damage caused by the protest.

On Monday, Lee told the PA news agency: “We are trying to get the Government to act on climate change. They are not doing enough.”

Bligh added: “We’ve done this because there’s no hope for the world, really. More of this article (Reading Chronicle) - link - more like this (protest) - link - more like this (just stopping oil) - link

(THF) DONALD TRUMP'S ENERGY PLAN

President-elect Donald Trump announced that he would declare a national energy emergency on his first day in office, ending President Joe Biden’s restrictions on energy production, doing away with the electric vehicle mandate, ending incentives for renewable energy, and cancelling Biden’s natural gas export ban.

This is welcome news. America faces a national energy emergency because the Biden administration has created a serious and dangerous energy situation so damaging to ordinary people and our country that it requires immediate action.

Trump can ensure that America does not walk down the same yellow brick road of Europe’s energy and climate policies.

The danger of climate change measures is already hurting Europe. Europe’s manufacturing sector is closing down due to climate change regulations. Germany used to be renowned for its industry, but German industry expects a 3% fall in production in 2024, the third year of decline, with no uptick in 2025.

German workers are losing their jobs because of climate regulations, with auto industry layoffs due to inexpensive Chinese EV imports.

Biden’s climate change rules need to be changed to commonsense measures to prevent strengthening Chinese workers at the expense of Americans.

His regulations have caused prices of electricity and transportation to rise, raising inflation. Higher electricity prices drive up inflation, disproportionately hurting poor people, small businesses and farmers.

The worst is that these poorly considered climate regulations impoverish Americans and make China rich without lowering global emissions or temperatures. Four more years of Democrat green energy policies will indebt the nation through subsidies and high energy costs while only reducing global temperatures by a fraction of a degree by 2100. 

More of this article (The Heritage Foundation) - link - more like this (Donald Trump) - link - more like this (America) - link

(RES) THAILAND TIRES OF IMPORTING THE WORLD’S CRAP

As of January 1 2025, Thailand has officially banned the import of plastic waste. Introduced by the Natural Resources and Environment Ministry, the ban was approved by Thailand’s Cabinet on December 3 2024, and published in the Royal Gazette later that month.

The ban includes amendments to Thailand’s Tariff Schedule, which covers the import of waste, pairings, and plastic scraps. As a result, a complete ban of all imports of plastic waste has been enacted from January 2025 onwards.

Thailand has been one of several Southeast Asian nations commonly paid to receive plastic waste imports from Europe, the US, the UK and Japan, with 50,000 tonnes of waste exported from Japan to Thailand in 2023.

Thailand became the leading destination for these imports after China’s ban in 2018. Statistics from the Customs Department suggest that the amount of imported plastic waste jumped to more than 500,000 tonnes in 2018 - a tenfold increase from the average amount before 2015.

Illegal waste trafficking has been an area of particular concern and is another target of the ban. A 2024 report by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) highlights that Southeast Asia remains a key destination for illicit waste shipments.

In August, environmental campaigners such as the Basel Action Network (BAN) raised the alarm about two Maersk-chartered ships suspected of carrying hazardous waste from Albania to Thailand.

Thailand’s plastic plan

Discussions on the ban began in 2020, and a plan to phase out the imports has been in place since 2023. Since then, only 14 Thai factories in tariff-free zones have been allowed to import and utilise these items for export purposes.

The ban is part of a broader effort to reduce plastic waste in Thailand under the Roadmap on Plastic Waste Management for 2020-2030 released in 2019. Goals include a ban of several types of single-use plastics and a 100 per cent recycling rate for domestic plastic waste.

The ban may also be a response to the recent failure of the international community to reach a binding, global agreement on plastic pollution at the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee (INC-5) meetings in November. More of this quality journal (resource.co) - link - more like this (Thailand) - link - more like this (plastic) - link

(REW) NO NEW WINDMILLS FOR AMERICA

The South Brooklyn Marine Terminal, under construction as part of Equinor’s Empire Wind 1 project. Courtesy: Equinor

Incoming U.S. President Donald Trump has reaffirmed his stance against the offshore wind industry, promising Tuesday that “no new windmills” would be built during his second term in office.

Trump made the remarks amidst a lengthy, disorganized hodgepodge of passing thoughts and unsettled grievances billed as a press conference at Mar-a-Lago that was very much reminiscent of the political theatre we all grew accustomed to during his first presidency. But unlike his suggestion to rename the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America” or his sudden desire to annex Canada and buy Greenland, Trump’s vendetta against turbines and the clean power they produce is long-running, well-established, and appears to have some teeth.

“We are going to have a policy where no windmills are being built,” Trump said, adding that they “litter our country” like “garbage in a field.”

On the campaign trail last year, Trump promised to sign an executive order on the first day of his presidency halting offshore wind development.

“Nobody wants them and they are very expensive,” the President-elect asserted Tuesday, likening the Biden Administration’s spending on clean energy to throwing money “out the window.”

Why doesn’t Trump like wind power?

Trump’s beef with wind turbines appears to trace back to (unsuccessfully) lobbying against the construction of one built in the backdrop of one of his Scottish golf courses. Since then, he has proliferated a series of false claims including that wind farms are harmful to the environment, they’re somehow linked to cancer, and that they kill birds and whales, “obviously driving them crazy.”

It’s worth noting that Trump is recognized as friendly to fossil fuel interests. He has pledged to massively increase oil production, a plan that could be stymied slightly by President Biden’s new prohibition on oil and gas lease sales in 625 million acres of federal waters, although the United States is already the world’s biggest oil producer and more production may not be a priority at the moment. The President-elect campaigned on drastically decreasing energy costs for Americans and pledged to achieve global “energy dominance.” More of this article (Renewable Energy World) - link - more like this (US wind power) - link - more like this (Donald Trump) - link