Author: Charlotte Gill

COP21, day three: Unilever promises to be ‘carbon positive’ by 2030

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

Whatever the agreement reached at the COP21 climate talks, it won’t be enough.

Eventually the world’s power will come entirely from renewable sources. It’s inevitable, but the current pace of change is sluggish at best. Governments will give businesses time, most likely too much, and targets will be re-evaluated at COP30-something when it becomes clear that no-one moved fast enough. People are acutely aware of this; it’s why parody billboards appeared all over Paris at the start of the conference that took aim at some of the event’s sponsors.

But some companies have seen the end of dirty power coming, and they’ll be at an advantage when the smokestacks are mothballed and the energy grid we know today fundamentally changes.

Currently India’s power system is, frankly, very poor indeed

“The Paris climate talks represent a window of opportunity, but they are the start rather than the end of the journey,” Unilever CEO Paul Polman said in a statement prior to COP21.

“We all have a responsibility to act now by turning aspirations into practical solutions. That’s why today we are stepping up our own efforts by announcing that Unilever will be ‘carbon positive’ by 2030, eliminating fossil fuels from our business and directly supporting the generation of more renewable energy than we consume.”

It’s an attainable goal. In November all of the energy used by Unilever’s Japanese arm came from renewable sources, making 32 percent of Unilever products sold in Japan carbon neutral. Andrew Bowers, Supply Chain Director at Unilever Japan, said that the next step is to work with the company’s partners to do the same.

The targets were developed by Unilever with the assistance of Forum for the Future. Founded in 1996, Forum for the Future is a sustainable development non-profit based in London that has worked with companies including Levi’s and Pepsi. CEO Sally Uren said the organisation’s partnership with Unilever has lasted for 19 years, and that the future for sustainable projects is going to come from big businesses.

“We are going to get some kind of agreement in Paris in the next couple of days that’s really important. It probably won’t be as robust as we might like, so it’s really important that businesses like Unilever, who are massive, go further than negotiated agreements and really set the pace of change.”

Unilever is by no means the only company investing in green power for their own use. Apple is building new data centres that generate their own renewable power and IKEA’s Scandinavian business is entirely energy independent. Uren said businesses that run their own sustainable power operations are becoming more common.

“It’s certainly a good approach at the moment as what it allows them to do is put energy back to the grid, and overall increase the amount of renewable energy flowing through the system. One of the big drivers for adopting this approach is not just the fact that is saves them a tonne of money and gives them security of supply, but it’s consistent with their publicly stated ambition on broader sustainability issues. Strategically, all of these businesses have got very serious commitments to sustainable development and clearly reducing energy, as well as reducing carbon emissions, is pretty central.”

Uren said that this trend could lead to more local and creative partnerships between businesses and their partners.

“I think that’s an overarching trend with a shift from pure reliance on centralised energy distribution, a fixed grid if you will, to a decentralised energy provision. You see that happening in emerging markets in particular, so in fast growing economies like India they are actually going to leapfrog the stage that we went through here in Europe where we laid down all of this infrastructure that then helped us distribute energy. What renewable energy allows you to do is be much more flexible and cover a much more decentralised approach, which then allows you to generate energy locally from sources such as farms. This is all part of a sort of shift that we need to see; from a kind of very leaky and creaky energy infrastructure to a much more resilient, agile and renewable one.”

Currently India’s power system is, frankly, very poor indeed. In 2012 more than 700 million people were affected by mass blackouts when three of the nation’s five electricity grids failed. Increasing demand from India’s growing middle class for appliances has put a remarkable strain on the system.

According to the International Energy Agency 2015 World Energy Outlook, approximately 237 million people still don’t have access to power in India, most located in rural areas. A business case was developed by the Climate Group for off grid energy in India, and put forward a positive case for smaller systems to generate electricity for at least a few hours per day in rural communities. The Climate Group also hosted the India Off-Grid Summit 2015 in August promoting decentralised power solutions. India’s power future seems clear and progressive; many smaller interconnected generators instead of a few massive ones.

Big business is also innovating in India. ITC, an Indian company with a yearly turnover of $8bn has a broad range of investments ranging from hotels, packaging and information technology. Through a range of measures, including carbon storage to social farm and forestry initiatives, ITC has boasted that is has been water positive for the last 13 years, carbon positive for the last 10, and solid waste recycling positive for the last eight.

One hundred or so years ago the grid made perfect sense; put up a big, ugly power plant on the outskirts of a city where people can forget about it, and run lines to where energy is needed. Gradually it is becoming less feasible, and gradually it is changing.

New technology lends itself better to a new model. Instead of having a giant field of solar panels, it’s easier to have a couple on the roof of every building. Power stations won’t have to do the heavy lifting, as excess energy generated by businesses and residents is fed back into the system. It’s why Tesla’s next big project is a giant battery to hang on the side of your house. If you want to cut yourself off the grid, your excess power now has somewhere to go.

Governments will have to change plenty of regulations for the power grid to evolve, but they need businesses to give them the urgency and incentive to move away from an outdated energy system. Unilever can’t do it on behalf of everyone.

While representatives from over 190 countries gather in Paris to reach a shared agreement on climate change, The New Economy will be at the Sustainable Innovation Forum to expand on the role and responsibilities of business. Check back for video updates from the event as they happen.

Career women: egg freezing may put dreams of having a baby on ice

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

The clock is ticking. At least, that’s how it seems for many women in their 20s and 30s who would like to be mothers but worry about the consequences for their careers. From the last century to this one, balancing work with family life has been a tricky issue for womankind, who bear the biological brunt of having babies.

Over time, more initiatives have come into play to help women experience both professional success and motherhood, such as maternity leave and flexible working contracts. But a couple of companies have gone even further. Just last year, Apple made headlines with the news that it would be offering egg-freezing services as a perk to its female staff. The move followed a similar one from Facebook, which offers employees grants of $20,000 towards the service.

It’s no surprise the technology giants have bought into the procedure, which has been hailed as a saving grace for broody, ambitious women. Egg freezing has become increasingly fashionable, promoted as an insurance policy to help women delay motherhood and take ownership of their careers. Clinics offering the treatment have piled on the publicity: Dr Angeline Beltsos, Medical Director and Clinical Research Director of Fertility recently described egg freezing as an “opportunity to shatter the biological clock” and “rest easy”. In an interview for The Guardian, Sarah Elizabeth, author of Motherhood, Rescheduled: The New Frontier of Egg Freezing and the Women Who Tried It, said: “It makes you feel more in control of your life, and that sense of empowerment has an impact that lasts for years.”

It can be seen as old fashioned or conservative to point out female fertility has an
expiration date

Never has it been so simple for women to explore egg freezing, either. Not only are organisations such as Apple and Facebook now offering grants to their staff, but there is a growing emergence of lenders, such as Eggbanxx, which provide loans specifically for the treatment.

Research by WhatClinic.com revealed that, in 2014, egg freezing became the most popular fertility treatment in the UK, with demand shooting up 400 percent that year. A survey of 1,000 Danish and British women found nine out of 10 supported the procedure for lifestyle reasons, and one in five was actively considering it.

Ice ice baby
The problem with all this demand is that, aside from egg freezing being an extremely pricey procedure (some women in the UK pay up to £30,000 a year to freeze their eggs), it remains a new and relatively unknown procedure; there has also been evidence to suggest it is not as reliable as some journalists would have you believe. A recent study published in JAMA showed that, across 11,000 cycles of IVF, frozen eggs were 14 percent less successful than fresh eggs at conceiving a baby. Some experts believe this is because frozen eggs may become damaged during the thawing process.

Women who do undertake the procedure typically find it incredibly gruelling, as they have to inject themselves with hormones for two weeks to encourage their ovaries to produce a surplus of eggs. This is not only uncomfortable, but hormonal fluctuations can greatly affect a woman’s emotional wellbeing. To help women balance motherhood with their careers, more traditional methods might be worth sticking to.

Many have suggested women need to have a greater understanding of their fertility in order to factor it into their working lives. There is still a degree of ignorance about female fertility, as it can be seen as old fashioned or conservative to point out it has an expiration date.

This is not helped by the promotion of procedures such as egg donation, which make women overly optimistic about their future ability to produce offspring. Tracey Sainsbury, Senior Fertility Counsellor and Research Officer at the London Women’s Clinic, pointed out clinics are highly selective about who can take part in the procedure. “In order to donate, you have to have a clear medical history for you and your wider family, and to have very good fertility rates”, she said, adding that less than 10 percent of women who try to donate their eggs via the London Egg Bank are accepted.

The big rejig
Professor Adam Balen, Chair of the British Fertility Society and a spokesperson for the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, said: “We need to provide young people with more information about fertility and how it changes with age, to enable them to both have a career and start a family. This will require a societal shift to better support working mothers.”

One radical proposal is that women should rejig the traditional order of life events. Most women in western societies start motherhood after getting their qualifications and working, but it might be better for them to have families first – as having babies is, arguably, the only life event that has a time limit. Doing this, however, will require a big change in society’s expectations and attitudes.

In the interim, employers must do their utmost to support female workers in want, or in possession, of a family. Jennifer Owens, Editorial Director of Working Mother magazine and the Working Mother Research Institute, said: “Flexibility helps everyone, but specifically for working mothers.” She added that she didn’t think focusing specifically on routes such as egg freezing was “going to help a lot of women”.

A holistic model is needed to facilitate mothers and mothers-to-be, where employers – and policymakers – promote flexible working hours, mentorship, childcare and even adoption packages. At the moment, egg freezing is far too narrow a stream for employers to focus their efforts on, and women should think of it as a route only when all others to motherhood have been ruled out. Ultimately, with its vast expenses – emotionally, physically and financially – investing in egg freezing may not only result in no end product for women, but could be more detrimental to their careers in the long run than having a baby the vanilla way.

Windows phone needs Android apps, says ex-Microsoft CEO

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

One of biggest advantages the Windows 10 smartphone has over its competitors is that it can run desktop-class applications on the device.

The major downside for the company, however, is that its app store has far too few applications – something that its former-CEO Steve Ballmer said must be rectified during Microsoft’s annual shareholder meeting.

Ballmer was also critical of the current CEO Satya Nadella’s response to an audience member at the meeting

Ballmer was also critical of the current CEO Satya Nadella’s response to an audience member at the meeting after he was asked why key apps were missing from the Windows Phone.

Nadella responded to the question, explaining that he believed Windows developers will be motivated by the fact that apps they create will work across all platforms – PCs, smartphones and tablets, making them more accessible. But Microsoft’s former-CEO does not believe this is enough to attract developers.

“That won’t work,” chimed Ballmer. He then went on to say that in order to appeal to developers the company must allows Windows Phones “to run Android apps”.

Project Astoria, the codename given for a supposed plan to port Android apps, was recently shelved – with Microsoft seemingly more concerned about helping iOS developers bring their creations to their device.

“We’re committed to offering developers many options to bring their apps to the Windows Platform, including bridges available now for Web and iOS, and soon Win32,” said a spokesperson for Microsoft in an official statement. “The Astoria bridge is not ready yet, but other tools offer great options for developers.

“For example, the iOS bridge enables developers to write a native Windows Universal app which calls UWP APIs directly from Objective-C, and to mix and match UWP and iOS concepts such as XAML and UIKit.”

The simple fact is that Microsoft’s plan to allow Android developers to port their applications over to their Windows 10 smartphone was less ambitious than it was for iOS developers. That may change, however, after Ballmer’s recent comments.

COP21, day three: Without climate finance we have nothing

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

The question of whether negotiators in Paris will sign up to a shared commitment on climate change depends on whether there is willingness enough to stamp out wayward emissions, and as much was said in Ban Ki-moon’s introductory remarks. Far more than the will to make it so, however, an international agreement rides on access to capital, and yet, the specifics of climate finance were largely absent from the 140 plus speeches delivered on day one.

Broadly speaking, the over 190 nations represented at COP21 are split into two categories: givers and receivers. And an international deal depends in great part on whether wealthier nations can free up enough funding – in an equitable and transparent fashion – for developing nations to finance the transition to a low carbon economy.

According to Carbon Brief, developing nations have put in a request for $3,534bn in funding for the period spanning 2015-30, looking only at their INDCs; the scale of this request is doubling shocking given it has been suggested that countries not include financial particulars in their them. What’s more, it looks likely the $100bn Green Climate Fund (GCF) deal, forged in Copenhagen six years ago to smooth the transition for poorer countries, could fail to materialise by 2020 – as intended.

The issue of climate finance is not as simple a matter of the wealthy parties gifting money to poorer countries

The latter point will be of particular concern in the early stages of the summit, and developing nations are unlikely to commit to any deal with quite the same enthusiasm – if at all – should wealthier nations fall short of their $100bn promise. Going back to the last days of October, only $87bn had been accounted for: $62bn by way of public and private funds, and the rest attributable to development banks. Should wealthier nations fall short, any discussion on the issue of climate finance will be built on fractured relations.

The full $100bn
Looking again at the GCF, the 12-day talks kicked off on a positive note: Erna Solberg of Norway pledged to double the country’s $258m donation, on the condition that it “ensures verified emission reductions from deforestation and forest degradation”, whereas Mariano Rajov Brey of Spain pledged to do much the same for the country’s €120m donation. Vietnam’s Nguyen Tan Dung, meanwhile, took the third day of Paris to pledge an additional $1m, although the nation will likely prove a net beneficiary of the fund.

John Hodges, Managing Director of Advisory Services at BSR says of the GCF, “mobilising more funds to mitigate climate change and help emerging economies adapt to imminent climate impacts is a worthy cause. However, there are already a lot of existing international organisations focused on climate financing.” The World Bank, for example, already devotes $10bn a year to climate finance, and is asking its members to double their contributions in Paris. “So the creation of a new fund with a similar role and mission as existing funds can arguably just result in the shifting of resources as opposed to raising additional resources.”

Hodges goes on: “There are aspirations that the GCF will raise significant investment by the private sector. However, many large investors are already making commitments themselves through their own businesses and don’t necessarily need a third party to manage green investments for them, particularly when the return on investment is very unclear. Take Bank of America, for example, which already has a $125bn environmental finance commitment over 10 years under its own business operations and has long track record of financial management.”

This being said, the issue of climate finance is not as simple a matter of the wealthy parties gifting money to poorer countries, and a global agreement on climate change requires a radical redistribution of funding. Known in some circles as “shifting the trillions”, the question of finance extends far beyond the GCF, and this point is not one that has been lost on representatives gathered in Paris.

Climate finance how?
Looking at day one, the US, together with the UK, Switzerland, France and Germany, made a joint pledge of $248 to the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDC Fund), with a laser focus on identifying vulnerabilities and on rebuilding in the event of a climate-related disaster. Going back barely a year, there was talk of the LDC being hard up for funding, though the contributions should go some distance towards replenishing its coffers.

Surely the issue of climate finance is the most contentious of all at COP21, and precisely because the rest hinges on it. “Access to markets is critical for countries where the cost to reduce emissions is high,” says Katie Sullivan, the IETA’s director of North America and climate finance, “international market mechanisms can help them to achieve their targets at a lower cost. Allowing trading in the Paris Agreement can help channel and increase climate finance flows to countries with lower abatement costs, via means such as the Clean Development Mechanism, a REDD+ mechanism, or other market-based mechanisms.”

Major emitters such as India and China, meanwhile, have been far from shy in alerting those in attendance to the fact that more mature economies have contributed in great part to the issue of rising temperatures in years gone by. Any contributions, they say, should take into account historical emissions and the extent to which they’ve contributed to the problem. More than that, any fixture of the climate finance market must abide by strict governance controls and keep to any promises set out – as in the case of the GCF.

“Healthy, robust markets inevitably require – and help drive – strong governance, accounting frameworks, and cross border cooperation in order to realise proper results-based finance,” says Sullivan. “Twin access to markets and climate finance are mutually reinforcing initiatives that can test new and innovative market approaches while addressing regional redistribution.”

Certainly, a great deal rests on the ability of representatives in Paris to reach a shared agreement on how climate change adaptation and mitigation will be funded, and parties must make good on their outstanding commitments. Ambitious INDCs are fine, though without the means to fund them, the promises of Paris will likely come to nothing.

While representatives from over 190 countries gather in Paris to reach a shared agreement on climate change, The New Economy will be at the Sustainable Innovation Forum to expand on the role and responsibilities of business. Check back for video updates from the event as they happen.

COP21, day three: World Bank launches carbon coalition

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

The World Bank took the third day of the Paris meet to launch its Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition, which, according to the coalition itself: “aims to bring together leaders from across government, the private sector and civil society to share experience working with carbon pricing and to expand the evidence base for the most effective carbon pricing systems and policies.” Prompted by a groundswell of support for the issue of pricing carbon at the source, the coalition will act as a support group for participating governments and companies.

The coalition will offer support to participants on issues such as carbon leakage and border tariffs

Advocates argue that a carbon pricing mechanism might more accurately reflect the impact of climate change on human health and the environment. The idea, in short, is for the social costs of climate change to be passed onto polluters, and provide a financial incentive to reduce emissions and boost investments in low carbon alternatives both.

“The coalition will collect the evidence base, benefiting from experience around the world in designing and using carbon pricing, and use this input to help inform successful carbon pricing policy development and use of carbon pricing in businesses,” according to the CPLC. “It will also deepen understanding of the business and economic case for carbon pricing. In that role, it is developing pathways for use by companies, investors and governments that will illustrate plausible outlooks under a variety of carbon pricing policies and timelines.”

The coalition will offer support to participants on issues such as carbon leakage and border tariffs, all while focusing on the difficult issues of coordination and alignment at national and company level. By shifting the burden back to those responsible, carbon pricing schemes incentivise polluters to consider cleaner alternatives – as has been shown in the case of Ontario and Quebec recently.

“Carbon pricing makes investments in low-carbon or carbon-free technologies attractive and ensures that fossil fuels are used efficiently,” according to Germany’s Angela Merkel, and the issue is likely to raise its head yet again before COP21 is up.

While representatives from over 190 countries gather in Paris to reach a shared agreement on climate change, The New Economy will be at the Sustainable Innovation Forum to expand on the role and responsibilities of business. Check back for video updates from the event as they happen.

Zuckerberg gives away $45bn after daughter’s birth

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

Upon announcing the birth of his daughter, Mark Zuckerberg has pledged to give 99 percent of his shares in Facebook to charity, totalling a whopping $45bn. The news was unveiled on Zuckerberg’s Facebook profile in an open letter to his newborn, named Max, during which the billionaire explains that he and his wife, Dr Priscilla Chan, “have a moral responsibility to all children in the next generation”.

Naturally, many will find Zuckerberg’s decision to give away his fortune surprising, particularly at the young age of 30

Zuckerberg’s shares will be given away gradually over the course of his lifetime, with a cap of $1bn per year for the first three years.

The funds will be donated to the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, an organisation the couple has founded with the aim of “advancing human potential and promoting equality”. In the extensive letter, the young billionaire lists their plans for long-term investments to tackle the world’s challenges, participation in policy and public debate, as well as driving technological innovations that can create change. Zuckerberg also speaks of a future in which personalised learning tools are available on the internet for all children around the globe, which can thus “give everyone a fair start in life”.

Naturally, many will find Zuckerberg’s decision to give away his fortune surprising, particularly at the young age of 30. Yet, there appears to be a growing tendency of the world’s wealthiest donating their billions earlier on in life, as opposed to in their wills and only to their families. The most obvious example to date is Bill and Melinda Gates, who, so far, have given away $34.5bn of their Microsoft wealth to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The couple also launched the Giving Pledge with Warren Buffet in 2010 in an effort to convince the wealthiest individuals in the US to donate at least half of their wealth to philanthropic causes. So far, Elon Musk, Michael Bloomberg and Larry Ellison have signed up to the pledge, along with several others.

As evidenced by this rising trend, it would seem that the world’s most successful business people are more aware of the impact that their wealth can have on the world and the needlessness of hoarding more money that they can possibly spend in a lifetime. An added benefit of striving to tackle the many problems facing the world today is the legacy that doing so leaves behind – a legacy that is far more powerful, far-reaching and lasting than their commercial successes could ever achieve.

COP21, day two: Whispers of decarbonisation on day two

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

A new Climate Action Tracker report presented at the Paris summit December 1 showed that planned construction works for the coal sector are inconsistent with a 2˚C scenario. Without a radical rethink, the plans could derail the transition to a low carbon economy. For some, keeping temperatures below 2˚C demands no less than a radical decarbonisation of the energy mix, yet the impact of the planned construction works could tip emissions into dangerous territory .

Even without any new builds, coal-fired emissions by the year 2030 could be 150 percent greater than the specified limit, and the same percentage could creep as high as 400 percent if the planned works are allowed to go ahead. Globally, 2,440 coal-fired stations worth 1,428GW are waiting in the pipeline, ready to boost coal capacity by over 40 percent and reach 16 to 18 percent of the total emissions allowed under a 2˚C compatible scenario.

There is real and growing concern that governments are effectively failing or refusing to acknowledge the risks posed by emissions-heavy resources like coal

“There is a solution to this issue of too many coal plants on the books: cancel them,” said Pieter Van Breevoort of Ecofys, writing in the report. “Renewable energy and stricter pollution standards are making coal plants obsolete around the world, and the earlier a coal plant is taken out of the planning process, the less it will cost.” For those forced to contend with the issue of rising demand, the resource is not so easily cast aside.

There is real and growing concern that governments are effectively failing or refusing to acknowledge the risks posed by emissions-heavy resources like coal. The black stuff is favoured in emerging economies to meet rising demand, whereas in the EU member nations are using it to replace existing capacity . Going by the report, in seven of the nine countries, plans to ramp up production are at odds with their stated INDCs, and in India and China there are plans to build as many as 1617 new plants by 2030 .

Markus Hagemann of the NewClimate Institute, one of four contributors to the report, made reference to the falling cost of renewables and went on to suggest that coal construction might not prove financially viable in the near future. “It is unlikely that all of these planned coal plants are going to be built, especially when low carbon alternatives are reaching price parity,” he said. “If renewables take off as fast as is currently expected, many of these planned coal plants could be stranded investments or would have to operate under difficult financial circumstances.”

Crucially, the report picks up – if not explicitly – on the issue of decarbonisation and why some nations such as India and China are averse to the use of the term. Conventionals, particularly in poorer nations, are set to make up a considerable share of the energy mix for some time, and plans to cast aside fossil fuels are not so easily carried out.

India, for example, launched the International Solar Alliance and underlined its commitment to renewables on the opening day of the Paris meet. However, Modi has refused to cast aside coal and will surely reject the use of the word “decarbonisation” in any international agreement on climate change. Where the case for phasing out the use of carbon intensive fuels is clear, poorer nations will be unwilling to do so for as long as they’re not given reassurances about how the transition to renewables – in place of cheap fossil fuels – will be financed.

While representatives from over 190 countries gather in Paris to reach a shared agreement on climate change, The New Economy will be at the Sustainable Innovation Forum to expand on the role and responsibilities of business. Check back for video updates from the event as they happen.

COP21, day one: The key talking points in quotes

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon opened the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change with the first in a series of 140 or so speeches. “You are here today to write the script for a new future. A future of hope and promise – of increased prosperity, security and dignity for all,” he said.

“Let us build a durable climate regime with clear rules of the road that all countries can agree to follow. Paris must mark a turning point. We need the world to know that we are headed to a low-emissions, climate-resilient future, and that there is no going back.”

The fallout of rising temperatures threatens real and immediate consequences for millions around the globe

For some, the issue of climate change is not just a concern for future generations, and the fallout of rising temperatures threatens real and immediate consequences for millions around the globe, many of which are among the most susceptible to poverty.

“We are on the front line; we will fall. It must not happen to anybody else,” said President Anote Tong of Kiribati, an island in the Pacific and one of the countries worst affected by rising seas. “The future of every men, women and children, all cultures, cities, villages hang in the balance, we must not remain indecisive going forward. To those of us whose survival is at stake, our plea is simple, let us give substance to the pledges that have been made.”

Juan Hernandez, President of Honduras, made a heartfelt plea to those gathered in Paris when he said, “For Honduras, climate change is a matter of life and death. The figures don’t add up… we are not all equally responsible.” Here the president made reference to the issue of accountability, and a number of developing nations agreed that the world’s wealthiest nations must shoulder the biggest burden.

“Developed countries are being miserly,” said Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe, “they burden us for cleaning up the mess they have created.”

Baron Waqa, President Of Nauru Baron Waqa, argued that island communities were paying a disproportionately high price for the effects of climate change. “The climate bill has finally come due,” he said. “Who will pay? Right now it is being paid by the smallest and most vulnerable. We see a small toll exacted every day as our shorelines are surely eroded. Small island communities are among the first to pay the price of climate change but no one will escape forever.”

French President Francois Hollande spoke in more general terms about the issues at hand, and urged those in attendance to take action. “To resolve the climate crisis, good will, statements of intent are not enough. We are at breaking point,” he said.

“I can’t separate the fight with terrorism from the fight against global warming. These are two big global challenges we have to face up to, because we have to leave our children more than a world freed of terror, we also owe them a planet protected from catastrophes.”

President Barack Obama also touched on the recent atrocity in Paris when he said, “What greater rejection of those who would tear down our world than marshalling our best efforts to save it?”

On the issue of climate change: “I’ve come here personally, as the leader of the world’s largest economy and the second-largest emitter, to say that the United States of America not only recognises our role in creating this problem, we embrace our responsibility to do something about it.”

China’s President Xi Jinping urged world leaders to consider how solutions might differ from country-to-country. “Addressing climate change should not deny the legitimate needs of developing countries to reduce poverty and improve living standards,” he said. “Tackling climate change is a shared mission for mankind … Let us join hands to contribute to the establishment of an equitable and effective global mechanism on climate change, work for global sustainable development at a high level and bring about new international relations featuring win-win cooperation.”

India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi echoed Xi’s statements. “Climate justice demands that the little carbon space we still have, developing countries should have enough room to grow.” The fear for India and a number of other fast-growing economies is that a resulting deal could force conventional energy into early retirement and make the issue of energy poverty more difficult to resolve.

Some in attendance made reference to what form an international agreement on climate change might take. The aim of the summit, according to the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, was to decide on “a binding UN framework” and a binding review mechanism to limit temperatures now and in the future.

“If we fail to achieve binding agreements, this could be the beginning of the burial of our civilization,” warned Ecuador’s president Rafael Correa. “It is not understandable that we have courts to force countries to pay financial debts but we do not have a court to enforce environmental debts.”

Ultimately, the first day of COP21 consisted of little more than generalities and sound bites, and Ikililou Dhoinine, President Of Comoros, summed it up best when he said, “We must accept the reality that climate change is accelerating more quickly than climate change negotiations.”

COP21, day two: India’s climate policy under the microscope

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

The opening day of COP21 was best characterised by the Heads of State family portrait, in which world leaders posed side-by-side for what was the largest gathering of heads of state on record. In it, the subjects appear united in a common fight against climate change, yet there are divisions lurking beneath the surface.

World leaders posed side-by-side for what was the largest gathering of heads of state on record

Day one featured speeches from over 140 leaders, starting with President Ollanta Humala Tasso of Peru and ending with Deputy Prime Minister Christopher Claude Emelee of Vanuatu. And while the day consisted mostly of sound bites and generalities, there was time for one important announcement when India’s Nahendra Modi unveiled the International Solar Alliance (ISA).

“Solar energy is a practical and efficient way to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions,” according to a statement released by the Indian government. Launched on November 30, the ISA invites all countries between the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn to partake in what is a limitless energy opportunity and a major milestone on the road to a low carbon future. The aim: to bring clean and affordable energy to all.

The ISA’s collective ambitions are to reduce the cost of solar technology and secure additional financing to support the development of supportive generation and storage technologies. Regulatory and personnel issues will also factor into the mix, as the body looks to deliver on the promise of universal energy access.

Speaking at a press conference in Paris, Hollande said of the ISA: “What we are putting in place is an avant garde of countries that believe in renewable energies.” The body’s membership is made up mostly of countries from the tropics, yet France and other European nations number among the membership. “What we are showing here is an illustration of the future Paris accord, as this initiative gives meaning to sharing technology and mobilising financial resources in an example of what we wish to do in the course of the climate conference.”

The ISA could well succeed in connecting peripheral communities to renewable energy, and remote areas in India for which access to the grid is not an option will welcome solar power with open arms. The country has long seen solar as a key component of its national energy strategy, having already sketched out plans to reach 100GW of solar capacity by the year 2022.

Looking at India’s INDC, the country has pledged to up renewables share of the energy mix to 40 percent and slash CO2 emissions by 35 percent (on 2005 levels) by 2030, by which time it will play host to the world’s largest population. This, together with the fact that 300 millions Indians are without reliable access to electricity, is testament to the scale of the task at hand, and the targets underline the seriousness with which policymakers there are treating climate change.

However, some see the country’s stance on climate change in a less favourable light, owing to India’s refusal to accept a cap on emissions. Modi, in his opening day remarks, made a plea on behalf of emerging markets that they be allowed “enough room to grow”, and that they not handicapped by those intent on forcing conventionals into early retirement. While India’s renewables targets are more ambitious than both the EU and US, the country stops short of naming an exact date from which its emissions will decline.

This refusal feeds into the question of whether fast-growing emerging economies can address the issue of energy poverty without a commitment – however slight – to fossil fuels. Expect to see the issue raise its head again before the two weeks are up.

While representatives from over 190 countries gather in Paris to reach a shared agreement on climate change, The New Economy will be at the Sustainable Innovation Forum to expand on the role and responsibilities of business. Check back for video updates from the event as they happen.

COP21 kicks off in Paris

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

The United Nations Climate Change Conference – or COP21 to most – is to begin today (November 30) in Paris, as representatives from over 190 countries gather to discuss the international political response to climate change. The negotiations are scheduled to take place over two weeks, over which time world leaders should reach an agreement on a new global approach to climate change.

40,000 in all are scheduled to attend

Each nation will come armed with INDCs (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions) of their own making, containing the specifics of how they’re to reduce emissions and lead the transition to a low carbon future. There are concerns, however, that the INDCs, when taken together, will exceed the IPCC’s two degrees gateway and mean the international community must reconvene at a later date to commit to more reductions.

It’s also worth noting that many of the world’s developing nations – particularly island nations – are of the opinion that any more than a 1.5 degrees rise would be catastrophic.

Much of the focus for the conference will fall on carbon emissions and how developed and developing countries alike can kick their reliance on fossil fuels. One major area of contention is how much responsibility mature economies should accept for historical emissions, and the issue is likely to be a major area of contention. Another issue is whether or not an agreement will be legally binding, with the US, as well as Canada, pointing out that a Republican-dominated Congress wouldn’t ratify any legally binding treaty.

Not just government delegates but industry representatives, business leaders and environmental activists – 40,000 in all – are scheduled to attend. All will be looking to avoid the failure of Copenhagen in 2009, when world leaders were invited to the party too late and failed to make any changes of note. With leaders attending from the start this time around, observers will be hoping Paris will be a notable improvement.

While representatives from over 190 countries gather in Paris to reach a shared agreement on climate change, The New Economy will be at the Sustainable Innovation Forum to expand on the role and responsibilities of business. Check back for video updates from the event as they happen.

Zano drone fails to launch – to Kickstarter investors’ dismay

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

The creators of the Zano drone, once the most successful European Kickstarter in history, have entered liquidation and announced that backers will not be receiving the promised product.

The Zano’s Kickstarter campaign ended in January this year, with backers pitching in £2.3m to get the palm-sized drones off the ground. They were scheduled to be delivered in June, but problems saw them delayed to August. Torquing, the Wales-based technology firm behind the Zano, lost CEO Ivan Reedman on November 12. The project was officially shut down a few days later with Torquing pursuing a creditors’ voluntary liquidation.

This isn’t the only major Kickstarter to fall into trouble recently

“We would like to make a sincere apology for the understandable disappointment felt by all of those that have supported the project,” read an update on the Zano’s project page.

“We would like to reaffirm the significant efforts made by the board of directors and every employee of the company to try and bring this project to fruition and thank their unwavering commitment over the last 12 months.”

The post stated that upgrades to the design increased the weight of the device, and mass production of the drone led to software calibration issues that couldn’t be fixed.

The Zano was supposed to automatically lock onto a smartphone and intelligently avoid obstacles to capture footage of the user. Cost allocations for the project were released, but that hasn’t stopped Trading Standards from launching an investigation into the project.

Kickstarter doesn’t offer refunds, and it is very unlikely that backers will be getting their money back.

This isn’t the only major Kickstarter to fall into trouble recently. PUGZ, lightweight wireless earbuds that were funded in October, will have to be redesigned after announcing that Apple will not allow the earphones to be charged directly from the iPhone. The Coolest Cooler from 2014 was supposed to combine a drink cooler with a blender, Bluetooth speaker and a USB charger. Backers put down $13m for the idea, but most are still waiting for a product. In an update on the project page, the creators asked for understanding and assured that the project is still going ahead.

Apple buys virtual reality start-up Faceshift

Posted on by Charlotte Gill

On November 25, Apple confirmed its acquisition of Faceshift, a Zurich-based start-up that specialises in motion capture technology. Faceshift’s revolutionary technology enables computer-generated avatars to capture someone’s actual facial expressions in real time. The technology has been used in the making of various high-profile film and video games in order to make animated characters more realistic than ever, including the new Star Wars film.

Rumours about the possible acquisition appeared earlier on in
the year

Faceshift was created in 2012 by a group of academics as a spinoff from a research facility at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. The Swiss university had owned two of Faceshift’s patents until August, at which point they were transferred over to the company, ahead of the Apple deal.

Rumours about the possible acquisition appeared earlier on in the year, but the media giant had refrained from commenting about its plans. Even after the deal was made, Apple again gave its standard response to such questions; “Apple buys smaller technology companies from time to time, and we generally do not discuss our purpose or plans”.

In May, it was reported that Apple had acquired, Metaio, a Silicon Valley start-up with various virtual reality patents, including augmented reality technology. The deal follows the purchases of Polar Rose, a Swedish facial recognition firm in 2010, and Israeli sensor company, PrimeSense in 2013. While it is unclear what exactly Apple is planning with this collection of start ups, it is highly likely that the media giant is preparing to make a bold move into the virtual reality space at a time when the technology is at a critical point in its history.