Latest news with #AnInconvenientTruth

Breakingviews - Why green investors keep getting carried away

Reuters

18 hours ago

Business
Reuters

Breakingviews - Why green investors keep getting carried away

LONDON, June 26 (Reuters Breakingviews) - To paraphrase Mark Twain, speculative bubbles don't repeat themselves, but they often rhyme. The green technology boom that has imploded over the past three years is remarkably similar to the alternative energy bubble that inflated prior to the global financial crisis of 2008. Both frenzies were driven by investors' unrealistic expectations about how quickly new energy technologies would be taken up. What is now known as the Cleantech 1.0 boom took off in 2005 after the U.S. Congress enacted tax credits for renewable energy. Former Vice President Al Gore's 2006 documentary 'An Inconvenient Truth' raised public awareness of climate change. In early 2007 the venture capital investor John Doerr gave a much-publicised TED talk, opens new tab in which he asserted that 'green technologies – going green – is bigger than the internet. It could be the biggest opportunity of the twenty-first century.' Doerr's firm, Kleiner Perkins, later launched a fund to 'help speed mass market adoption of solutions to the climate crisis.' Many other venture capitalists jumped on the bandwagon. The WilderHill Clean Energy Index, launched in 2004, more than doubled between May 2005 and December 2007. Dozens of startups were launched to invest in batteries, solar, biomass and wind energy. An electric vehicle company, Better Place, established in Silicon Valley in 2007, raised nearly $1 billion to build a network of charging stations. Solyndra, an innovative solar panel manufacturer, attracted a host of big-name investors and later received more than $500 million in loan guarantees from the administration of President Barack Obama. No single factor was responsible for pricking the bubble. The collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008 dampened animal spirits; advances in hydraulic fracturing technology led to cheaper U.S. natural gas; Spain and Germany reduced their subsidies for renewable energy; and American solar companies proved unable to compete with subsidised Chinese competitors. Nearly all the 150 renewable energy startups founded in Silicon Valley during the boom subsequently failed, including Solyndra and Better Place. Cleantech venture capital funds launched during the bubble produced negative returns. By the end of 2012 the WilderHill index had fallen 85% from its peak to around 40. By coincidence, that is where the benchmark currently trades. The recent green tech bubble was more extreme. The WilderHill index climbed from 47 in March 2020 to 281 less than a year later. Whereas U.S. venture capitalists spent an estimated $25 billion funding clean energy startups between 2006 and 2011, Silicon Valley splurged more than twice that sum in 2021 alone, according to Silicon Valley Bank. Market valuations were quite absurd. By late 2020, the battery company QuantumScape (QS.N), opens new tab, which came to the market by merging with a blank-check firm, was valued at more than General Motors (GM.N), opens new tab, despite having no sales. The market frenzy is long past. QuantumScape stock is down more than 95% from its peak, while the WilderHill index has fallen 85%. Several listed electric vehicle companies, including truck maker Nikola, have filed for protection from creditors. President Donald Trump's administration is reducing subsidies for renewables and electric vehicles. Oil giants BP (BP.L), opens new tab and Shell (SHEL.L), opens new tab are cutting back their alternative energy investments, just as they did after the Cleantech 1.0 boom. The outcome for green venture capital remains unclear but anecdotal evidence suggests that many funds are now changing hands at steep discounts to their appraised valuations. The common error investors made during both booms was to become entranced by extravagant growth forecasts. In his book, 'More and More and More: An All-Consuming History of Energy', Jean-Baptiste Fressoz criticises the application of the sigmoid function – also known as the S-curve – to predict the course of the energy transition. This model describes the adoption of a new technology as starting out slowly, rapidly gathering pace before eventually levelling off when the market becomes saturated. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has used the S-curve in its projections for renewable energy demand and the accompanying decline of fossil fuels. The S-curve was originally discovered a hundred years ago to describe how the population of drosophila flies changes under laboratory conditions. It was later applied, with varying degrees of success, to project human population growth. The American energy scientist M. King Hubbert was the first to use the S-curve to forecast energy production. In the 1950s, advocates for nuclear energy used the model to predict what they believed was the inevitable transition from fossil fuels towards an atomic-powered future. Hubbert also used the S-curve for his famous forecast that U.S. oil production would peak in 1970. Vaclav Smil, a leading energy historian, points out that energy transitions are slow, inherently unpredictable and require extraordinary amounts of investment. Fressoz goes further, claiming that – when energy consumption is viewed in absolute rather than relative terms – there has historically never been a transition. It's true that coal took over from wood as the world's prime energy source in the 19th century, and that later oil and natural gas became dominant. Yet the consumption of all these energy sources continued increasing. The world has never burned more wood than it does today. In absolute terms, coal usage continues to grow. The S-curve has also been used to predict the uptake of various green technologies. As Rob West of Thunder Said Energy, a research firm, observed in a report published last September, both the speed of adoption and the ultimate penetration rate for new inventions are variable. For instance, the demand for refrigerators and television by U.S. households grew very rapidly from the outset, with both reaching penetration rates of nearly 100% in just a few decades. Yet it took more than half a century for gas heating to reach 60% of U.S. households, at which point its market share flatlined. 'It is important not to fall into the trap of assuming that the 'top of the S' is an endpoint of 100% adoption,' writes West. Not long ago, electric vehicles were set to rapidly replace the internal combustion engine, but sales forecasts are now being cut back in developed markets. West anticipates that the eventual market share for battery-powered cars will not surpass 30%. That's a guess. The actual outcome will depend on the state of future technology, which is unknowable. That leaves plenty of scope for green investors to get it wrong again. Follow @Breakingviews, opens new tab on X

Yahoo

16-05-2025

Entertainment
Yahoo

'Deaf President Now!' amplifies the birth of a rights movement

The events depicted in 'Deaf President Now!' — a documentary revisiting the 1988 protest by students at Gallaudet University that led to the selection of the school's first deaf president in its 124-year history — may seem, in the scheme of things, like an incremental advancement for representation in the deaf community. But in this stirring telling by co-directors Nyle DiMarco, producer of the Oscar-nominated 2021 documentary short 'Audible,' and Davis Guggenheim, director of the Oscar-winning 2006 documentary feature 'An Inconvenient Truth,' the achievement lands with the force of the first salvo in a revolution. It feels like no exaggeration to compare the Deaf President Now protest, or DPN, as it became known, to Stonewall, the 1969 riots protesting a police raid on a Greenwich Village gay bar that marked the beginning of a new civil and human rights movement. DiMarco and Guggenheim use archival footage to re-create a ticktock of the week-long protest, which was sparked by the March 6, 1988, announcement that the school's board of trustees had chosen a new president: Elisabeth Zinser, vice chancellor of the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. Of the three finalists, who also included I. King Jordan, then dean of Gallaudet's College of Arts and Sciences, and Harvey Corson, superintendent of the Louisiana School for the Deaf, Zinser was the only hearing candidate. Students, who had sought one of their own at the top, exploded in anger. 'Deaf people are not ready to function in a hearing world,' Jane Bassett Spilman, chair of the board of trustees, was reported to have said on the night of Zinser's appointment. In an old interview, Spilman, who is hearing, argues that her comment — which she says she can't recall and of which there is no recording — was mistranslated into sign language by her interpreter in the chaos of the moment. In addition to conventional archival footage, the filmmakers use two innovative techniques to immerse viewers not just in the history but in the emotions of the moment. During interviews with the DPN Four, as the quartet of student protest leaders became known, the remarks of Bridgetta Bourne-Firl, Jerry Covell, Greg Hlibok and Tim Rarus are not translated into subtitles but rendered by four actors — Abigail Marlowe, Leland Orser, Paul Adelstein and Tim Blake Nelson — in voice-over. DiMarco and Guggenheim also deploy an experimental narrative technique they call Deaf Point of View, which uses expressionist photography and sound design — moments of silence or muffled audio, a flashing lightbulb to indicate an alarm or incoming phone call — that invites viewers into the world and perspective of the protest's participants. As with Guggenheim's 'Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie,' which blended standard interview footage, clips from Fox's filmography and staged re-creations using a body double of the actor, it's a radical kind of oral history, one delivered not solely by traditional documentary's talking heads but by the more expressive hands, bodies and faces. 'I usually sign right about here,' says a smiling Covell, tracing the edges of an expansive, invisible box with his hands that almost fills the camera frame to explain his somewhat dramatic way of signing. 'But I move a lot when I get emotional,' he adds by way of preemptive apology. At one point, Covell inadvertently knocks into the filmmakers' boom microphone during a particularly animated answer. It's part of what's great about this film. There are contrasting moments of near-tears and speechlessness as well — the kind brought on by powerful feeling, not an inability to articulate. The message of 'Deaf President Now!' comes across loud and clear: We will be heard. Rather, it is Gallaudet's paternalistic administration that seems slow to listen to the students' legitimate demands, among which, in addition to the hiring of a deaf president, were Spilman's resignation and the reformation of the board to incorporate more deaf trustees. There are echoes here of many other protests, including those that have recently roiled college campuses in the wake of Israel's response to the attacks by Hamas of Oct. 7, 2023. After the DPN protests began and the students locked down the Gallaudet campus, bringing classes to a standstill, Rarus, the fourth generation of a deaf family, recalls his grandfather phoning him on a TTY device — remember, this is before texting — to say, 'Please respect your elders.' Rarus's grandfather later retracted that advice, ultimately telling his grandson he was right to stand up in the face of unfairness. But it's a manifestation of what change makers all too often run into: ears that are metaphorically deaf to the obvious. TV-MA. Available on Apple TV+. Contains brief vulgarity. In English and American Sign Language, with simultaneous interpretation. 99 minutes.

Washington Post

16-05-2025

Entertainment
Washington Post

‘Deaf President Now!' amplifies the birth of a rights movement

The Sun

28-04-2025

Climate
The Sun

A storm is coming, act now

IN 2006, former US Vice President Al Gore released An Inconvenient Truth, a gripping visual and literary presentation that opened millions of eyes to the growing threat of global warming. It was more than just a book; it was a wake-up call. For me, it held a personal weight. My late father owned a copy, its pages worn and corners folded from repeated readings. He used to say: 'The planet speaks – we just need to listen.' Once upon a time, the world was worried about the thinning ozone layer. Schoolchildren were taught about the dangers of CFCs or chlorofluoro-carbons and how they punched holes in our atmospheric shield. The world banded together, signed the Montreal Protocol, and slowly, we began to heal the ozone. That success gave us a sense of triumph; a belief that we had solved the big environmental problem of our time. However, as years passed, a new threat emerged – climate change. Unlike the ozone issue, it did not come with a single chemical to ban. It was complex, inconvenient to our modern lives and easy to ignore. We dismissed the warnings, called it seasonal heat and built bigger drains. But the weather has changed. It is no longer something we can plan around. It is something we are forced to react to. Unpredictable weather patterns Malaysia is no stranger to rain and heat but recent years have seen more erratic shifts. According to the Meteorological Department, average temperatures have steadily increased across the country. What used to be predictable seasons are now punctuated by long droughts and intense downpours. Even experienced forecasters struggle with the increasing volatility. Monsoon extremes and flooding Once dependable, the monsoon now brings destruction. Between November 2024 and January 2025, over 122,000 people were displaced by floods in Kelantan, Terengganu and Sarawak. Homes disappeared, roads collapsed and shelters overflowed. These disasters now recur annually, bringing with them massive economic losses and social disruptions. The Irrigation and Drainage Department has stepped up mitigation efforts but infrastructure alone cannot stop climate extremes without addressing root causes. Emergence of tornado-like phenomena Malaysia is not known for tornadoes, yet in March 2025, Sekinchan, Selangor, experienced two twisters within a week. The second incident damaged over 30 homes. Experts said this may become more common due to warmer temperatures and shifting wind patterns. These events show that climate disruptions are no longer limited to familiar patterns – they are evolving fast. Health and economic impacts Rising heat brings more than discomfort – it brings health risks. Heat-related illnesses are increasing. Agriculture and fisheries, critical to rural economies, suffer from unpredictable yields. Food prices are climbing. Jobs are lost. Livelihoods are destabilised. National policy and international commitments Malaysia has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions intensity by 45% by 2030. The national climate change policy emphasises green technology and urban resilience. Under the 12th Malaysia Plan, steps are being taken towards low-carbon initiatives and disaster risk reduction. Yet, implementation faces hurdles like bureaucratic delays and lack of public awareness that often slows progress. Small actions, big impact As Al Gore emphasised, change begins with individuals. Here is how we can help: Use energy wisely: Switch to energy-efficient appliances and unplug devices. Travel smarter: By walking, biking or taking public transport. Waste less: Refuse single-use plastics. Compost and recycle where possible. Support renewables: Encourage solar energy adoption at homes and in our community. Conserve water: Fix leaks. Use water-saving taps. Promote awareness: Engage in conversations about climate issues and support environmental NGOs. Listening to the Earth My father treasured An Inconvenient Truth not just for its facts but its heart. 'The science is there', he said, 'but what matters is whether we care enough to act'. Malaysia is already seeing the effects of climate change – in our skies, on our land and in our communities. The Sekinchan twister, the floods, the sweltering heat – these are no longer warnings. They are consequences. Let this serve as a reminder and a call to action – a pledge that we did not stay silent when the storm arrived. Because it is already here. Dr Jehana Ermy Jamaluddin is a senior lecturer at the Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, College of Engineering and director of the Centre for Academic Advancement and Flexible Learning, Universiti Tenaga Nasional. This article is written in loving memory of Allahyarham Datuk Dr Jamaluddin Md Jahi, the beloved father of the writer, in honour of the legacy he so passionately lived and left behind.

ELDER: Uncovering the 'dirty' truths about electric vehicles

Toronto Sun

27-04-2025

Automotive
Toronto Sun

ELDER: Uncovering the 'dirty' truths about electric vehicles

A truck driver refuels his electric vehicle at the first truck charging station in France, in Sommesous, southeast of France, on April 25, 2025. Photo by FRANCOIS NASCIMBENI / AFP via Getty Images Are electric vehicles better for the planet than gasoline-powered vehicles? This is the question we explore in my new documentary, Electric Vehicles — The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account Whether one agrees with former president Joe Biden, who calls climate change 'an existential threat,' or whether one agrees with the late physicist Freeman Dyson, who dismissed Al Gore and his An Inconvenient Truth as 'lousy science,' this question remains. Are electric vehicles better for planet Earth than 'gas guzzlers?' After all, fossil-fuel-generated energy is required to manufacture an electric vehicle and transport it to the dealership. The electricity required to charge it comes mostly from fossil-fuel-generated power. Electric vehicles are a triumph of technology, with incredible features. They are quiet, fast and fun to drive. The self-driving feature, while not foolproof, will likely save lives because human driving errors are more common. (There are some gas-powered cars with a similar feature.) There are concerns about the driving range, as well as the availability of charging stations for long drives. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Right now, an EV compared to a gas-powered car of similar size may be more expensive. There are still tax incentives available, but they may be reduced, if not phased out at some point. With the more expensive purchase price, mandates to buy an EV or to restrict the sale of gas cars stand to hurt those less well-off. Then there is the China factor. The computer chips required for the EV disproportionately come from China. The minerals in the batteries — lithium, nickel, cobalt, manganese — are mined, processed and manufactured in China, or in places under China's control, such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Take cobalt in the Congo. Two years ago, NPR wrote 'How 'modern-day slavery' in the Congo powers the rechargeable battery economy.' It featured the work of Siddharth Kara, author of the book Cobalt Red. Kara said: 'People (including children) are working in subhuman, grinding, degrading conditions. They use pickaxes, shovels, stretches of rebar to hack and scrounge at the earth in trenches and pits and tunnels to gather cobalt and feed it up the formal supply chain. … Cobalt is toxic to touch and breathe — and there are hundreds of thousands of poor Congolese (workers) touching and breathing it day in and day out. Young mothers with babies strapped to their backs, all breathing in this toxic cobalt dust. … There's complete cross-contamination between industrial excavator-derived cobalt and cobalt dug by women and children with their bare hands (for $1 or $2 a day).' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. As for reviews about Electric Vehicles — The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, Paul Bond, veteran journalist formerly of Newsweek' and The Hollywood Reporter , wrote: 'Larry Elder's latest documentary … begins with … provocative claims: EVs might harm the planet more than gas-powered cars, they rely on child labor and open the door to privacy invasions and hacking. … Whether you're waving a Trump flag or preaching clean living, Elder's film demands a second look at the EV craze. It's not just about cars — it's about who controls your life, your data, and your future.' Tyler O'Neil of The Daily Signal wrote: 'While environmental activists and EV manufacturers have crafted a narrative that EVs are not just the cars of the future but our only clean solution to an ostensible climate crisis, Elder uncovers the dirty truth: EVs require more energy to produce, provide less freedom for drivers, empower America's chief rival in the world, and actually make things worse for the environment.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. 'Mass delusion has always fascinated me,' Elder says in the film. 'Scientists, media people, politicians, academics have convinced the average person that our climate is in peril and if we don't do something real fast to get us off fossil fuels, we're going to be in trouble. I just, intuitively, am skeptical about that.' O'Neil wrote: 'He asks the hard questions and comes away with unsettling answers — for the proponents of EVs. Ironically, only the oft-demonized fossil fuels give viewers a sense of hope for the future, and many political and ideological forces are attempting to snuff out the lights powered by the internal combustion engine.' Electric Vehicles — The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is available on Columnists Columnists Columnists Toronto & GTA Canada