Month: February 2021

Florida can run on 100 percent clean, renewable energy

We are at a tipping point when it comes to how we power our lives. Nationwide, and in Florida, we are still producing, consuming and wasting energy in ways that create lasting damage to our environment and our health. In 2021, we have the opportunity and know-how to tap into clean and renewable energy from sources such as the sun and wind, but doing so will require the nation and state to transform the way they produce and consume energy.

Given the inaction on clean energy at the federal level and the deep-rooted influence of fossil-fuel companies within our politics today, that transformation sometimes feels out of reach.

But it isn’t. Floridians have the power to demand better of their elected officials, and we have the state-based policy solutions to bring the Sunshine State into a clean-energy future.

That is why I filed House Bill 283, legislation to transition Florida to 100 percent renewable energy by 2040 and carbon neutrality by 2050. Filed in the state Senate by Sen. Lori Berman, D-Boynton Beach, this legislation also bans fracking in Florida and establishes a workforce board to ensure that the state’s drive toward a clean-energy economy produces new high-paying jobs — a much-needed initiative following COVID-19’s damaging impact on the state’s unemployment rate.

Renewable energy resources are vast. Tapping into just a fraction of them could give us all the energy we need for every aspect of our lives. The United States has the technical potential to meet its current electricity needs more than 100 times over with solar energy alone, or more than 10 times over with wind energy. With that inexhaustible potential, falling renewable energy prices and installations booming, we can envision a future powered entirely by clean energy.

We have the power to reshape our energy future. Since the 1990s, states across the country have been setting minimum standards for renewable energy that utility companies must meet. Today, 30 states have these renewable portfolio standards (RPS) in place, and 25 of those have substantially increased their standards since they were first implemented.

States have consistently bumped up their renewable-energy targets, in part because of growing public demand for action, and because renewables have consistently risen to the occasion. Across the country, states, including Massachusetts, Colorado and California, have been meeting their targets ahead of schedule, increasing them, hitting them again and then repeating that cycle. We’ve learned one key lesson from this: Goal-setting works.

In just the past five years, seven states have stepped up to set the ultimate goal — reaching 100 percent clean or renewable electricity. Hawaii first started the trend with a landmark commitment in 2015, and California followed suit in 2018. Last year, New Mexico, Washington, Maine and New York all jumped on board, and Virginia became the latest to join those ranks in April. Momentum is building in many more states, and Florida absolutely should be next to set its sights on transitioning to 100 percent renewables.

With rising sea levels and increased storm activity directly affecting the Sunshine State, Florida has a chance to set an example and be a leader in clean energy. On top of risks from Mother Nature, the continued use of fossil fuels could lead to more harmful effects to our ecosystems like we saw in the Gulf in 2010 after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.

We need to stop digging for energy from the ground and instead garner the energy that is all around us. Passing HB 283 and adopting clean, renewable energy to power every aspect of our lives — from keeping the lights on to heating our homes and fueling our cars — will mean a safer, healthier Florida right now and for generations to come.

Rep. Anna Vishkaee Eskamani, a Democrat, represents Florida’s 47th district in Orange County in the state House.

What Will Happen To Our Planet After All the Polar Ice Melts

BSEV

What Will Happen To Our Planet After All the Polar Ice Melts

Around 50 million years ago, Earth had no glaciers. Today, it is partially covered with ice, but what will happen if the polar ice caps melt? How will our world look like and what will it happen to the environment, to humans and the animals whose lives depend on ice?

Scientists already know how the melting of glaciers will change the world because the event is already taking place. While the entire ice melting should take a few thousands of years, let’s take a look into the future and see how these changes will impact the entire planet. You’ll notice some of these events are already taking place!

20. A Longer Day
ranker.com

According to Steven Dutch (University of Wisconsin-Green Bay), when the polar ice caps melt, the day will be a little longer. How longer? Well… only around 2/3 of a second.

The melting of ice caps will redistribute the water on Earth and create a moment of inertia, so the rotation of Earth will be slightly slower.

19. Massive Earthquakes
phys.org

It seems that all the ice melting on Earth will bring a slew of Biblical catastrophes. That includes massive earthquakes, explains Anthony Fordham, editor of Popular Science Australia. He likens Earth with a Ping-Pong ball that has a dent in it…

Here’s his fun and doomsday explanation.

18. Antarctica’s Volcanoes Will Also Erupt
usa-today.com

The dent in Earth is the pressure that the sheet of ice lays on top of Antarctica. When the ice is remove, Earth’s crust will pop out and cause intense earthquakes all over the world.

Not to mention that the seismic activities will also make all the active volcanoes in Antarctica erupt.

17. Civil War?
independent.co.uk

In an interview with the National Geographic in 2013, Dr. Hal Wanless from the University of Miami stated that the rising water could lead to war:

“We’re going to see civil unrest, war. You just wonder how—or if—civilization will function.”

16. Huge Cities Underwater
ranker.com

The melting of polar ice caps will lead to evacuation of large cities like Miami or London who will be underwater. This lead to a huge refugee problem. By the next century, millions of people will need to find someplace else to live since the sea levels keep on rising.

15. Viruses Waiting to Be Released
imgur.com

Biologist Elena Giorgi knows that the permafrost hides many pathogens from antique times. With the thawing and melting of polar ice caps, many viruses and bacteria will be released. Giorgi explains that researchers have already discovered a “giant” prehistoric virus they named “pithovirus.”

14. Polar Bears Will Go Extinct
nationalgeographic.com

Considering polar bears live on the Arctic ice and their lives depend on that habitat, they will soon be extinct. According to Alun Anderson, the Arctic will be open ocean by 2050 and the “killer whale living in open water will be the symbol of the Arctic, replacing a bear on ice.”

Walruses will also go extinct, since the mothers give birth on ice…

13. We’ll Have A Hot Earth
nasa.gov

Losing the ice caps will end with a hotter planet because of the albedo effect. Sunlight is reflected by ice into the atmosphere and the open water that will be at the North Pole instead of ice would absorb the sun radiation and make our planet warmer!

12. Expect Extremely Weird Weather
imgur.com

Weather will get wacky with. Winds will slow, so we’ll see some strange persistent weather, like very long periods of rain, snow storms or in the summer longer periods of heat and droughts.

11. New ‘Trans-Arctic’ Shipping Routes Will Form
taas.com

According to researchers from the Ohio State University, by 2050, “common open-water ships” will be able to cross the Arctic in the summer and bigger “ice-strengthened ships” will get “robust new routes.”

Global trade will increase, but so will vessel safety standards, environmental protections, among others, explained researchers.

10. Alaska’s Infrastructure Crumbles
discovermagazine.com

Cathleen Kelly (Center for American Progress) already reported that the permafrost is “sinking unevenly, causing highways, pipelines, railroads, runways, and other infrastructure to buckle.” With all the ice caps and glaciers melting, the infrastructure will crumble, and fixing it is very expensive!

9. Exploiting Oil In the Arctic
forbes.com

In 2015, Shell tried to exploit oil in the Arctic, but they finally gave up. They said they chose to stop it because of the “significant regulatory restrictions” from the government, but the main reason was the ice, severe winters and drifting ice. With all the ice gone, imagine how easier it would be for these companies to exploit oil…

8. Inuits Will Also Suffer
arcticjournal.ca

The Inuit people will have to adapt and change their way of life. According to the Canadian Inuit spokesman, Jose A. Kusugak, the people already are feeling the changes, and they will have to “completely reinvent what it means to be Inuit.” Researcher Dr. Lori Lambert added that they will also have to move and their traditions will be lost, since their “cultural identity depends on [the Arctic landscape].”

7. “We Are Nothing”
greenland.nordicvisitor.com

Kusugak said that no matter how Inuit’s lives will be in the future, “it will not be an uninterrupted continuation of the traditional ways.” In Qaataak, Greenland, the Inuit stated that “without the ice, we are nothing.”

6. Earth’s Continents Without Ice
nationalgeographic.com

Wondering how the maps will look if the Earth will be left with no ice? Here’s how the coastlines across some continents will look, when all the ice on land will get drained in the sea. It would raise the sea level by 216 feet and create new shorelines, new inland seas, while it will also drown many cities across the globe…

5. North America – No More Florida
nationalgeographic.com

Imagine there’s no Florida and Gulf Coast. Look at California, where San Francisco’s hills will become islands and the Central Valley will be just a giant bay.

4. Africa – Uninhabitable Regions, Now More Alexandria and Cairo
nationalgeographic.com

While Africa will keep most of its land, the extreme weather will make a huge region uninhabitable. Africa will lose Alexandria and Cairo, which will be swallowed by the Mediterranean.

3. Europe – No More London and Venice
nationalgeographic.com

Among many other lost shorelines, London and Venice will be swallowed by the sea. Netherlands will be gone, and so will most of Denmark. The Mediterranean will expand and raise the levels of the Black and Caspian Seas.

2. Asia – China and India Will Lose Massive Lands
nationalgeographic.com

Right now, that shoreline that is swallowed by the seas in China is inhabited by 600 million people. In the coastal India, 160 million people will have to find new homes and Cambodia’s Cardamom Mountains will become an island.

1. Australia Gets a New Inland Sea
nationalgeographic.com

Australia will get a new sea, but most of the narrow coast will be lost. Unfortunately, most of the population lives on the coastal strip.

As you can see, some of the extreme changes from ice melting on Earth are already happening and there’s nothing we can do to stop it. Let’s say the good news is the complete melting of the ice caps will happen thousands of years in the future.

Herrera Beutler says McCarthy told her Trump sided with the Capitol mob as the assault unfolded.

The New York Times

Herrera Beutler says McCarthy told her Trump sided with the Capitol mob as the assault unfolded.

By Nicholas Fandos               February 13, 2021

Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler, Republican of Washington, at the Capitol last week.
Credit…Drew Angerer/Getty Images

 

On the eve of a verdict in Donald J. Trump’s Senate trial, one of the 10 Republicans who voted to impeach him confirmed on Friday night that the top House Republican, Representative Kevin McCarthy, told her that the former president had sided with the mob during a phone call as the Jan. 6 Capitol attack unfolded.

In a statement on Friday night, Representative Jaime Herrera Beutler, Republican of Washington, recounted a phone call relayed to her by Mr. McCarthy of California, the minority leader, in which Mr. Trump was said to have sided with the rioters, telling the top House Republican that members of the mob who had stormed the Capitol were “more upset about the election than you are.”

She pleaded with witnesses to step forward and share what they knew about Mr. Trump’s actions and statements as the attack was underway.

“To the patriots who were standing next to the former president as these conversations were happening, or even to the former vice president: if you have something to add here, now would be the time,” Ms. Herrera Beutler said in the statement.

Her account of the call between Mr. McCarthy and Mr. Trump, first reported by CNN, addressed a crucial question in the impeachment trial: what Mr. Trump was doing and saying privately while the Capitol was being overrun.

Ms. Herrera Beutler said that Mr. McCarthy had relayed details of his phone call with Mr. Trump to her. She has been speaking publicly about it for weeks, including during a virtual town hall on Monday with constituents, and she recounted their conversation again in the statement on Friday.

A spokesman for Mr. McCarthy did not reply to a request for comment. Spokespeople for the House impeachment managers did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The Republican leader’s response to Mr. Trump in the weeks since the attack on the Capitol has fluctuated. On the day of the House’s impeachment vote, he said Mr. Trump bore some responsibility for the attack because he had not denounced the mob, but he has since backtracked and sought to repair his relationship with the former president.

By Ms. Herrera Beutler’s account, Mr. McCarthy called Mr. Trump frantically on Jan. 6 as the Capitol was being besieged by thousands of pro-Trump supporters trying to stop Congress from counting Electoral College votes that would confirm his loss.

She said Mr. McCarthy asked him “to publicly and forcefully call off the riot.”

Mr. Trump replied by saying that antifa, not his supporters, was responsible. When Mr. McCarthy said that was not true, the former president was curt.

“Well, Kevin, I guess these people are more upset about the election than you are,” he said, according Ms. Herrera Beutler’s account of what Mr. McCarthy told her.

Hours after the assault began, Mr. Trump tweeted a video in which he asked those ransacking the Capitol to leave. “Go home. We love you. You’re very special,” he said.

Nicholas Fandos is congressional correspondent for The New York Times, based in Washington. He has covered Capitol Hill since 2017, chronicling two Supreme Court confirmation fights, two historic impeachments of Donald J. Trump, and countless bills in between.

The global race to produce hydrogen offshore

The global race to produce hydrogen offshore

Chris Baraniuk, Tech Business reporter     February 12, 2021
Wind turbines stand at the Riffgat offshore wind farm, Germany
Excess energy from windfarms could be stored as hydrogen

 

Last year was a record breaker for the UK’s wind power industry.

Wind generation reached its highest ever level, at 17.2GW on 18 December, while wind power achieved its biggest share of UK energy production, at 60% on 26 August.

Yet occasionally the huge offshore wind farms pump out far more electricity than the country needs – such as during the first Covid-19 lockdown last spring when demand for electricity sagged.

But what if you could use that excess power for something else?

“What we’re aiming to do is generate hydrogen directly from offshore wind,” says Stephen Matthews, Hydrogen Lead at sustainability consultancy ERM.

His firm’s project, Dolphyn, aims to fit floating wind turbines with desalination equipment to remove salt from seawater, and electrolyzers to split the resulting freshwater into oxygen and the sought-after hydrogen.

Plan of offshore hydrogen plant
Plan of offshore hydrogen plant

 

The idea of using excess wind energy to make hydrogen has sparked great interest, not least because governments are looking to move towards greener energy systems within the next 30 years, under the terms of the Paris climate agreement.

Hydrogen is predicted to be an important component in these systems and may be used in vehicles or in power plants. But for that to happen, production of the gas, which produces zero greenhouse gas emissions when burned, will need to dramatically increase in the coming decades.

Mr. Matthews says his firm’s project is just getting going, with a prototype system using a floating wind turbine of roughly 10 megawatt capacity planned, but not yet built.

It’s possible that the system could be based in Scotland and the aim is to start producing hydrogen around 2024 or 2025.

But there are many other ventures in this area besides Dolphyn.

Wind turbine maker Siemens Gamesa and energy firm Siemens Energy are ploughing 120m euros ($145m; £105m) into the development of an offshore turbine with a built-in electrolyzer.

German energy company Tractebel is exploring the possibility of building a large-scale, offshore hydrogen production plant powered by nearby wind turbines; and UK-headquartered Neptune Energy is seeking to convert an oil platform into a hydrogen production station, which will pump hydrogen ashore to the Netherlands via pipes that are currently transporting natural gas.

Q13a oil platform
There are plans to convert this old North Sea oil platform into a hydrogen production plant

 

All of the excitement around hybrid wind energy and hydrogen generation systems is partly down to climate commitments but economics are also involved.

Large-scale hydrogen electrolyzers are becoming more available while the costs of installing wind turbines has fallen “dramatically”, says James Carton, assistant professor in sustainable energy at Dublin City University.

He and others think the time is right to kick-start large-scale hydrogen electrolysis at sea, though the idea has been around for many years.

ITM Power electrolyser stacks
Electrolyser stacks break seawater down into hydrogen and oxygen

 

Oyster is yet another project in this area, and involves a consortium of companies including Danish energy firm Ørsted and British electrolyzer specialists ITM Power, among others.

In the first instance, a wind turbine will power an onshore electrolyzer that will churn out hydrogen. The device will be exposed to sea spray to simulate, to a degree, the harsh environment facing offshore equipment. ITM intends to design a system compact enough to fit into a single wind turbine.

The firm’s chief executive, Graham Cooley, points out that it is much easier to store molecules such as hydrogen than electrons in batteries.

“All the renewable energy companies… they’ve realized they’ve got a new product,” he adds. “Now they can supply renewable molecules to the gas grid and industry.”

The Oyster consortium hopes to have shown off a demonstrator of its system within 18 months.

ITM Power Electrolyser
ITM plan to build a hydrogen-producing unit that can fit into a wind turbine

 

Among the many potential uses for hydrogen is as a fuel for gas-burning boilers in homes. Converting the domestic gas grid to provide hydrogen, and fitting homes with boilers capable of burning it, would be a huge task.

However, it would mean that excess wind energy could in principle be used to supply this giant system, meaning very little of that energy would go to waste, says Mr. Carton, referring to the gas main pipes scattered around the UK and Ireland: “We have a big tank, it’s just a really long tank in the ground.”

For some, this is all very exciting. But there are hurdles yet to overcome. A spokesman for the wind energy industry body WindEurope says that while renewable hydrogen produced via wind-powered electrolysis is “future-proof”, a decade or so of technological development is required before these systems will have a larger impact.

Jon Gluyas, Ørsted/Ikon chair in geoenergy, carbon capture and storage at Durham University, adds that the real question is whether it is cost-effective to set up such equipment at scale. Proponents, unsurprisingly, argue it is – but with energy systems the proof is only ever in the pudding. Ultimately, Prof Gluyas says a mix of different technologies and approaches will be needed for countries like the UK to be carbon neutral.

For Mr. Carton, the vision remains tantalizing. Schemes that solve the problem of wind’s variability by using excess power to good use could be transformative, he argues: “It’ll change the way we look at renewables.”

Wind energy had a ‘banner year’ in 2020. Here’s what that means for Joe Biden’s climate plan.

Wind energy had a ‘banner year’ in 2020. Here’s what that means for Joe Biden’s climate plan.

Elinor Aspegren, USA TODAY                     February 11, 2021
The wind energy sector in the U.S. blew away records in 2020.

A study from the American Clean Power Association released this month reports that 2020 was a record year for the industry, with developers adding enough megawatts of capacity to provide power for millions of homes and inching the U.S. closer to the Biden administration’s goal of carbon neutrality by 2035.

In all, 16,913 megawatts of new wind power capacity was installed in the U.S. last year – an 85% increase over 2019. That’s the equivalent of the power generated from 11 large coal plants, and enough to serve nearly 6 million homes, Jonathan Naughton, a professor of mechanical engineering and director of the Wind Energy Research Center at the University of Wyoming, told USA TODAY.

Texas hosted the most activity with 13% of energy output, followed by Wyoming (10%), Oklahoma (7%), Kansas (5%) and New Mexico (4%).

“2020 was a banner year for the wind industry,” Heather Zichal, president/CEO of American Clean Power, formerly the American Wind Energy Association, said in a statement. “Despite all the challenges COVID-19 placed on our businesses, we still shattered nearly every record for capacity and growth.”

Here’s how states stack up, and how the industry’s current capacity figures into the country’s goal for carbon neutrality.

Texas: Wind power ‘driving significant economic growth’

Wind power produced up to two thirds of Texas’s energy output in 2020, according to the Energy Information Administration. In total, the Lone Star State generated about 29,407 MWs of wind power, installing 2,197 MWs in 2020 – meaning that if Texas were a country, it would rank fifth in the world for wind power capacity, some estimates say.

“Texas is the number one energy consumer in the country. Our economy and continued growth are dependent on reliable power, and how we meet this massive demand has tremendous implications,” Powering Texas writes on its website. “Renewable energy is helping Texas meet this growing demand for energy, while also providing jobs, bolstering rural economies and supporting communities all across the state.”

A vehicle drives past wind turbines on a rural road near Sweetwater, Texas, in this July 29, 2020, file photo.
A vehicle drives past wind turbines on a rural road near Sweetwater, Texas, in this July 29, 2020, file photo.

 

Why is Texas such a windy state? It sits right in the wind belt, a swath of land blessed with an excellent wind resource. The wind resource continues straight up the middle of the country to Canada and includes Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska and the Dakotas. There’s also significant wind in portions of Minnesota, Iowa, Wyoming and Montana.

It also has less restrictive zoning, taxation systems that encourage building and robust transmission lines that together have allowed it to jump ahead of the rest.

Wyoming: An improving political climate for wind energy?

Wyoming is an interesting place for wind energy – it’s the No. 1 producer for coal in the country, said Naughton.

“Wind energy is always looked at as a threat to the coal industry,” he said.

But in 2020, the state nearly doubled its wind capacity for power, adding nearly 900 MWs over the past year. That signals to Naughton that the political climate for wind power is improving in the Cowboy State.

Biden’s climate crusade: How his plan to cut carbon emissions, create jobs could impact U.S.

“People are understanding that wind is likely to develop here and it produces some jobs and some tax money, and it does some good things,” he said.

Part of that is due to a tax on wind power, which brings in about $4.2 million a year, reported the Casper Star-Tribune.

But Naughton and other energy experts cautioned that people shouldn’t take the burst in Wyoming’s wind development as a trend from year to year. The Industrial Siting Council, the regulatory board charged with reviewing big wind project applications in the state, hasn’t received a new proposal for a wind project since 2019, the Star-Tribune reported.

How close is US to carbon neutrality?

Despite the wind energy industry’s gains in 2020, the U.S. remains far from carbon neutrality by 2035, a main goal in the Biden administration’s climate plan.

“We’re in the single digits still. But we’re in the high single digits,” Naughton said. Compared to 2000, when the U.S. was stuck in the sub-single digits, he added, “We’ve come an amazing way.”

Still, Naughton said the U.S. would need to accelerate its pace of installation to achieve President Joe Biden’s goal, which he described as doable with a recommitment to offshore wind energy farms and to those areas impacted by the loss of old energy outputs.

“We have a policy push to do it. And we also have an economic push to do it. So the pieces are in place,” he said. “We’ve just got to make sure it actually happens.”

Contributing: Elizabeth Weise and Rick Jervis, USA TODAY

He might be acquitted, but he won’t live down his disgraceful conduct.

He might be acquitted, but he won’t live down his disgraceful conduct.

By Editorial Board               February 10, 2021

President Donald Trump attends rally January 6, 2021: CAROL GUZY/ZUMA PRESS

Whether a former President ought to be subject to an impeachment trial is a matter of constitutional debate. Whether it’s prudent, if acquittal appears likely, is a related question. But wherever you come down on those issues, the House impeachment managers this week are laying out a visceral case that the Capitol riot of Jan. 6 was a disgrace for which President Trump bears responsibility.

Long before November, Mr. Trump was saying that the only way he could lose the election was if it were rigged. On the night of the vote, he tweeted, “they are trying to STEAL the election.” In his speech that night, he called it “a fraud on the American public,” and said, “frankly we did win.” Is it a surprise that some of his fans took his words to heart?

Instead of bowing to dozens of court defeats, Mr. Trump escalated. He falsely claimed that Vice President Mike Pence, if only he had the courage, could reject electoral votes and stop Democrats from hijacking democracy. He called his supporters to attend a rally on Jan. 6, when Congress would do the counting. “Be there, will be wild!” Mr. Trump tweeted. His speech that day was timed to coincide with the action in the Capitol, and then he directed the crowd down Pennsylvania Avenue.

Mr. Trump’s defenders point out that he also told the audience to make their voices heard “peacefully.” And contra Rep. Eric Swalwell, who argued the incitement to attack the Capitol was “premeditated,” it’s difficult to think Mr. Trump ever envisioned what followed: that instead of merely making a boisterous display, the crowd would riot, assault the police, invade the building, send lawmakers fleeing with gas masks, trash legislative offices, and leave in its wake a dead Capitol officer.

But talk about playing with fire. Mr. Trump told an apocalyptic fable in which American democracy might end on Jan. 6, and some people who believed him acted like it. Once the riot began, Mr. Trump took hours to say anything, a delay his defenders have not satisfactorily explained. Even then he equivocated. Imagine, Rep. Joe Neguse said, if Mr. Trump “had simply gone onto TV, just logged on to Twitter and said ‘Stop the Attack,’ if he had done so with even half as much force as he said ‘Stop the Steal.’”

The impeachment managers hurt their case by blaming only Mr. Trump for earlier clashes. “Donald Trump, over many months, cultivated violence,” said Stacey Plaskett, the delegate for the Virgin Islands. But often those events were showdowns between left and right, with both seeking trouble. “When darkness fell,” the Washington Post reported after one melee, “the counter-protesters triggered more mayhem as they harassed Trump’s advocates, stealing red hats and flags and lighting them on fire.”

Yet there’s no defense for Mr. Trump’s conduct on Jan. 6 and before. Mitch McConnell is reportedly telling his GOP colleagues that the decision to convict or acquit is a vote of conscience, and that’s appropriate. After the Electoral College voted on Dec. 14, Mr. Trump could have conceded defeat and touted his accomplishments.

Now his legacy will be forever stained by this violence, and by his betrayal of his supporters in refusing to tell them the truth. Whatever the result of the impeachment trial, Republicans should remember the betrayal if Mr. Trump decides to run again in 2024.

Champs-Élysées to Become an Urban Garden

The B1M – Cities

Champs-Élysées to Become an Urban Garden

Tim Gibson                                   February 11, 2021

 

PARIS Mayor Anne Hidalgo has given the green light for the city’s iconic Champs-Élysées to be transformed into an urban garden.

Traffic congestion has seen the famous boulevard lose its grandeur over recent decades, and many local Parisians have abandoned it in favour of more pedestrian-friendly avenues.

Hidalgo hopes to bring the road back to its people by removing its outer lanes, widening pedestrian areas, planting more trees and greenery, and creating dedicated bicycle lanes.

Plans were first proposed in 2019 by local community leaders who begged the government to restore the road to its former glory.

The mayor then made it a cornerstone of her February 2020 reelection campaign.

Above : The Champs-Élysées will be “returned to the French people” with wider pavements, bicycle lanes and more green spaces. Images courtesy of PCA Architecture.

The massive overhaul is part of a £225M project to regenerate Paris’ streets and make the city greener and more people-friendly.

Throughout Paris, 140,000 on-street car parking bays will be removed and replaced with vegetable allotments, food composting, playgrounds, bicycle lock-ups and more trees.

Local residents have been consulted on what they’d prefer the spaces to be used for.

“We can no longer use 50% of the capital for cars when they represent only 13% of people’s journeys,” deputy mayor David Belliard told The Times.

“We have to plant greenery in the city to adapt to the acceleration of climate change. We want to make the air more breathable and give public space to Parisians who often live in cramped flats.”

While plans for the rejuvenation of Paris pre-date COVID-19, the pandemic has expedited the entire process.

City-wide lockdowns have shifted the perspective of many Parisians – and others around the world.

There is a newfound emphasis on public transport, green spaces, parks and community.

Hidalgo has become a major proponent of the “fifteen minute city”, where all residents will be able to reach necessary amenities such as shops, parks and offices within a fifteen minute walk or bike ride.

This concept is starting to become popularized across the world with many cities using their lockdowns to implement car-free infrastructure.

Copenhagen continued with plans to become completely carbon-neutral by 2025 and have 75 percent of all journeys be done by foot, bicycle or public transport.

Like Paris, the city has started transforming many of its parking bays into areas for plants and trees.

During the April lockdown, London also shifted space on its roads over to bicycles, expanding its network of cycling lanes.

As cities begin to rebuild from the pandemic, Paris offers a glimpse of what a post-COVID city could look like.

Header Image courtesy of PCA Architecture.

Prostate scan breakthrough could prevent thousands of cancer deaths every year, landmark study finds

Prostate scan breakthrough could prevent thousands of cancer deaths every year, landmark study finds

Phoebe Southworth                  February 11, 2021
A man having an MRI scan
A man having an MRI scan

 

A prostate scan breakthrough could save thousands of men from dying of cancer every year, a landmark study has found.

Scientists at Imperial College London have developed a 15-minute MRI scan, known as a Prostagram, which can detect the disease early – much like a female mammogram.

It is far less invasive than current examination methods, such as a rectal examination, and could lead to an extra 40,000 cases of prostate cancer being identified every year.

This is the first time that any scan has been accurate enough to be considered for use as a prostate cancer screening test.

The landmark trial involved 408 men in the UK having the short, non-invasive scan using innovative resonance imaging (MRI).

The technique is modelled on breast cancer screening, which invites women to have a mammogram scan every three years as part of a national programme.

It was found to pick up twice as many prostate cancers compared with the standard prostate-specific antigen (PSA) blood test, which is a common method of diagnosis currently used.

At the moment, men who are suspected of having prostate cancer may also be asked to provide a urine sample and have a digital rectal examination by their doctor.

If the patient is found to have a raised PSA level, they may be referred for an MRI scan, which takes around 40 minutes, potentially followed by a biopsy.

Researchers hope this less intrusive MRI scan method will encourage men to come forward if they have potential symptoms of prostate cancer. These include the need to urinate more frequently, feeling the bladder has not fully emptied, and blood in urine or semen.

Prof Hashim Ahmed, chair of urology at Imperial College London, said: “Prostagram has the potential to form the basis of a fast, mobile national screening programme for prostate cancer and could be a game-changer.

“Prostagram also has the potential to detect more aggressive cancers earlier and pass over the many cancers which don’t need to be diagnosed. By finding these aggressive cancers at the earliest opportunity, men have the opportunity to be offered less invasive treatments with fewer side effects.”

Some 12,000 men die from prostate cancer every year, with the figure overtaking breast cancer deaths (11,000) during the last decade.

The worrying increase means men should also have access to a national screening programme, the researchers said.

Black men are at an increased risk of prostate cancer and almost a third of the trial participants were black.

Dr David Eldred-Evans, who helped develop the Prostagram, said: “The encouraging results of this research study bring a mass screening programme for prostate cancer, equivalent to mammogram testing for women, a step closer.

“A major achievement for the trial was the recruitment of ethnic minority and lower socio-economic participants broadly equivalent to their proportion within the community, which could be replicated in future general population screening trials.

“Plans for a more extensive trial covering 20,000 men are well advanced and will proceed in the coming months subject to funding. If results from this study are similar or better than those revealed today, there is then a clear pathway to the widespread implementation of Prostagram into the general population.”

The findings were published in the journal Jama Oncology.

Opinion: My fellow Republicans, convicting Trump is necessary to save America

Washington Post

Opinion: My fellow Republicans, convicting Trump is necessary to save America

Opinion by Adam Kinzinger                          February 8, 2021

Adam Kinzinger, a Republican, represents Illinois’s 16th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.

 

Opinion | My fellow Republicans, convicting Trump is necessary to save America              Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. Early on Jan. 6, The Post’s Kate Woodsome saw signs of the violence to come hours before thousands of Trump loyalists besieged the Capitol. (Joy Yi, Kate Woodsome/The Washington Post)

Winston Churchill famously said, “Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.” All Americans, but especially my fellow Republicans, should remember this wisdom during the Senate’s trial of former president Donald Trump.

I say this as a lifelong Republican who voted to impeach Trump last month. Virtually all my colleagues on the right side of the aisle took the opposite path. Most felt it was a waste of time — political theater that distracted from bigger issues. The overwhelming majority of Senate Republicans appear to feel the same way about conviction.

But this isn’t a waste of time. It’s a matter of accountability. If the GOP doesn’t take a stand, the chaos of the past few months, and the past four years, could quickly return. The future of our party and our country depends on confronting what happened — so it doesn’t happen again.

The immediate cause for Trump’s impeachment was Jan. 6. But the president’s rally and resulting riot on Capitol Hill didn’t come out of nowhere. They were the result of four-plus years of anger, outrage and outright lies. Perhaps the most dangerous lie — or at least the most recent — was that the election was stolen. Of course it wasn’t, but a huge number of Republican leaders encouraged the belief that it was. Every time that lie was repeated, the riots of Jan. 6 became more likely.

Even now, many Republicans refuse to admit what happened. They continue to feed anger and resentment among the people. On Jan. 6, that fury led to the murder of a Capitol Police officer and the deaths of four other Americans. If that rage is still building, where does it go from here?

Impeachment offers a chance to say enough is enough. It ought to force every American, regardless of party affiliation, to remember not only what happened on Jan. 6, but also the path that led there. After all, the situation could get much, much worse — with more violence and more division that cannot be overcome. The further down this road we go, the closer we come to the end of America as we know it.

The Republican Party I joined as a young man would never take that road. The GOP that inspired me to serve in uniform and then run for public office believed a brighter future was just around the bend. We stood for equal opportunity, firm in our conviction that a poor kid from the South Side of Chicago deserves the same shot as a privileged kid from Highland Park. We knew that if we brought everyone into America’s promise, we would unleash a new era of American progress and prosperity. Outrage and the fear of a darker future were nowhere to be found in that Republican Party.

When leaders such as Donald Trump changed that dynamic, many of my fellow Republicans went along without question. Many are still there because they believe the rank-and-file Republican voter is there, too. But I think that’s an illusion. The anger and outrage are drowning out the much larger group of people who reject that approach. Worse, many have gone silent because they assume the party’s leaders no longer represent them. They’re waiting for leaders who will say what they know is true.

Since my vote to impeach Trump, I’ve heard from tens of thousands of my constituents. Their reaction has been overwhelmingly supportive. Republicans of all backgrounds and outlooks have told me they appreciate my efforts to return the GOP to a foundation of principle, not personality. I’ve even heard from many Democrats. They don’t agree with me on a lot of issues, but they want the Republican Party to be healthy and competitive.

I firmly believe the majority of Americans — Republican, Democrat, independent, you name it — reject the madness of the past four years. But we’ll never move forward by ignoring what happened or refusing to hold accountable those responsible. That will embolden the few who led us here and dishearten the many who know America is better than this. It will make it more likely that we see more anger, violence and chaos in the years ahead.

The better path is to learn the lessons of the recent past. Convicting Donald Trump is necessary to save America from going further down a sad, dangerous road.

Read more:

Dozens of former Republican officials in talks to form anti-Trump third party

Reuters

Exclusive: Dozens of former Republican officials in talks to form anti-Trump third party

 

By Tim Reid                    February 10, 2021

 

Trump to address CPAC about Republican Party future and conservative movement
U.S. President Donald Trump waves as he arrives at Palm Beach International Airport in West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., January 20, 2021. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

 

(Reuters) – Dozens of former Republican officials, who view the party as unwilling to stand up to former President Donald Trump and his attempts to undermine U.S. democracy, are in talks to form a center-right breakaway party, four people involved in the discussions told Reuters.

More than 120 of them held a Zoom call last Friday to discuss the breakaway group, which would run on a platform of “principled conservatism,” including adherence to the Constitution and the rule of law – ideas those involved say have been trashed by Trump.

The plan would be to run candidates in some races but also to endorse center-right candidates in others, be they Republicans, independents or Democrats, the people say.

Evan McMullin, who was chief policy director for the House Republican Conference and ran as an independent in the 2016 presidential election, told Reuters that he co-hosted the Zoom call with former officials concerned about Trump’s grip on Republicans and the nativist turn the party has taken.

Three other people confirmed to Reuters the call and the discussions for a potential splinter party, but asked not to be identified.

Among the call participants were John Mitnick, general counsel for the Department of Homeland Security under Trump; former Republican congressman Charlie Dent; Elizabeth Neumann, deputy chief of staff in the Homeland Security Department under Trump; and Miles Taylor, another former Trump homeland security official.

The talks highlight the wide intraparty rift over Trump’s false claims of election fraud and the deadly Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol. Most Republicans remain fiercely loyal to the former president, but others seek a new direction for the party.

The House of Representatives impeached Trump on Jan. 13 on a charge of inciting an insurrection by exhorting thousands of supporters to march on the Capitol on the day Congress was gathered to certify Democrat Joe Biden’s election victory.

Call participants said they were particularly dismayed by the fact that more than half of the Republicans in Congress – eight senators and 139 House representatives – voted to block certification of Biden’s election victory just hours after the Capitol siege.

Most Republican senators have also indicated they will not support the conviction of Trump in this week’s Senate impeachment trial.

“Large portions of the Republican Party are radicalizing and threatening American democracy,” McMullin told Reuters. “The party needs to recommit to truth, reason and founding ideals or there clearly needs to be something new.”

‘THESE LOSERS’

Asked about the discussions for a third party, Jason Miller, a Trump spokesman, said: “These losers left the Republican Party when they voted for Joe Biden.”

A representative for the Republican National Committee referred to a recent statement from Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel.

“If we continue to attack each other and focus on attacking on fellow Republicans, if we have disagreements within our party, then we are losing sight of 2022 (elections),” McDaniel said on Fox News last month.

“The only way we’re going to win is if we come together,” she said.

The Biden White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

McMullin said just over 40% of those on last week’s Zoom call backed the idea of a breakaway, national third party. Another option under discussion is to form a “faction” that would operate either inside the current Republican Party or outside it.

Names under consideration for a new party include the Integrity Party and the Center Right Party. If it is decided instead to form a faction, one name under discussion is the Center Right Republicans.

Members are aware that the U.S. political landscape is littered with the remains of previous failed attempts at national third parties.

“But there is a far greater hunger for a new political party out there than I have ever experienced in my lifetime,” one participant said.

Reporting by Tim Reid; Additional reporting by Jarrett Renshaw; Editing by Soyoung Kim and Peter Cooney