ReportWire

Tag: iab-home utilities

  • Justin Bieber launches clean water company Generosity at Qatar’s World Cup | CNN

    Justin Bieber launches clean water company Generosity at Qatar’s World Cup | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Justin Bieber is on a mission to make the world’s drinking water more sustainable.

    Bieber and Micah Cravalho have evolved bottled water brand Generosity into a water technology company that is providing premium alkaline water in refillable fountains across the globe. They showcased 150 water fountains this month at the FIFA World Cup in Qatar. Bieber spoke about the brand’s social impact initiative in a statement to CNN.

    “I want the world to have access to the best water. I also want countries to know how to best protect their people. The overuse of plastic is hurting us, we need to be more sustainable,” Bieber said.

    Generosity is aimed at not just providing premium water but reducing the usage of single-serve plastic.

    “We aspire to be the global leader in water technology, empowering consumers with refillable products as an alternative to single-use packaging,” said co-founder Cravalho.

    Bieber and Cravalho recently visited Qatar and met with Sheikha Al Mayassa bint Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani, the sister of country’s emir.

    Having participated in beach clean-up efforts in Qatar for many years, I have witnessed first-hand the effect of pollution on our natural environment. Through initiatives such as those undertaken by Generosity and the Supreme Committee, and projects such as the FIFA World Cup Qatar 2022 Art water bottles, which bring together the global artistic community to advocate for a more sustainable future, we are all encouraged to play our part during the World Cup and beyond,” Al Mayassa said in a press release.

    Generosity connects to any water source and is able to create premium refillable alkaline water dispensed through their sustainable fountains which the company says will be found commercially at major venues, festivals and in homes in 2023.

    The Grammy Award winner has been at the forefront of social impact initiatives in Hollywood with his involvement in organizations like Pencils of Promise, which builds schools in third world countries. He also raised over $3 million dollars for the First Responders Children’s Foundation with Ariana Grande in 2020 with their “Stuck with U” collaboration.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Two very different points of view on nuclear energy in the US | CNN Politics

    Two very different points of view on nuclear energy in the US | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]

    A version of this story appears in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.



    CNN
     — 

    Two distinct and unrelated stories this week convinced me it was a good moment to look at nuclear power in the US.

    Those developments, which might give anyone pause about the future of nuclear power, are counteracted by other headlines.

    The opening of a new nuclear plant in Georgia, for example, will bring carbon emission-free energy at exactly the time worldwide temperature records drive home the reality of climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

    Germany made the decision to decommission all of its nuclear plants after disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima. The last nuclear reactor there was taken offline earlier this year, a decision some might have regretted after Germany’s access to Russian natural gas was threatened by the war in Ukraine.

    Next door, France is the worldwide nuclear leader. Most of its electricity is generated by nuclear power.

    Russia, while it has been ostracized from the world economy in almost every way since its invasion of Ukraine, remains a major player in nuclear power. It enriches and sells uranium through its state-controlled nuclear energy company, Rosatom, which builds and operates plants around the world, according to a March report from CNN’s Clare Sebastian that explains why the West has largely left Russia’s nuclear power industry alone.

    But it is China that is moving the quickest toward nuclear power production, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

    As of 2022, about 18% of US electricity is generated by nuclear power, according to the US Energy Information Administration. Most large US nuclear reactors are old – averaging 40 years or more.

    In addition to the Georgia reactor coming online, a new reactor began operating in Tennessee in 2016. But otherwise, the US nuclear power portfolio is old, and much of it is in need of improvement.

    For an idea of the money and corruption that can revolve around energy production, look at the sentencing last week of Ohio’s former House Speaker Larry Householder to 20 years in prison for his involvement in a bribery scheme meant to get the utility company FirstEnergy Corp. a billion-dollar taxpayer bailout for two nuclear plants.

    The bipartisan infrastructure law signed by President Joe Biden in 2021 included a $6 billion program to provide grants to nuclear reactor owners or operators and stave off closing them.

    More than a dozen reactors have closed early in the US over the past decade, according to the Department of Energy. At least one reactor, the Diablo Canyon Power Plant in California, will be kept open after a more than $1 billion grant.

    Nuclear power – and how aggressively the US and other countries should be pursuing it – is a topic that splits scientists as well.

    I talked to one nuclear expert who said the US should be slow and methodical about nuclear power and another who argued there are multiple, public misperceptions about nuclear power that should be corrected.

    The more circumspect voice is Rodney Ewing, a Stanford University professor and expert on nuclear waste who was chairman of a federal review of nuclear waste procedures. I was put in touch with him by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, which aims to “reduce man-made threats to our existence.”

    Despite his decades spent focused on nuclear issues, he said something I found remarkable:

    “I don’t have yet, although I’ve tried for years, a well-formed position for or against nuclear energy,” Ewing said.

    “Too often in the enthusiasm for nuclear energy, a carbon-free source of energy – and in the present situation of the issue of climate change, really a very important existential crisis – it’s easy to say, well, we’ll solve the problems later.”

    He said the issues with nuclear energy – from the potential for disaster to the issue of how to store nuclear waste – should be compared with the potential for renewable alternatives like solar and wind energy.

    The University of Illinois energy professor, David Ruzic – who has a lively YouTube channel, “Illinois EnergyProf,” with multiple videos meant to dispel concerns about nuclear energy – has a much more positive view of nuclear energy’s future.

    Illinois, by the way, generates more nuclear power than any other state. Lawmakers there recently voted to lift a moratorium on new reactor construction that was in place until the federal government can develop a technology for disposing of nuclear waste. That new policy must still be signed by the state’s governor.

    Ruzic argues nuclear waste takes up such little space it should simply be encased in yards of solid concrete and kept at the site of nuclear reactors. The concrete, he argued, can be repaired every 70 years or so as it degrades.

    “Over the 60 years we’ve been doing this commercially, we have learned so much about how to do it extremely safely and very well,” Ruzic said, arguing that the new plant in Georgia would not be affected by an earthquake and tidal wave in the way that Fukushima was, because the new reactor in Georgia is cooled by air in case of an emergency.

    He argued that even in Fukushima, it’s important to note that there were no deaths associated with the radiation due to the failure of the plant, although many thousands were evacuated.

    Any concern you can find to raise about nuclear power, Ruzic has a ready answer. He said no one should worry about the radioactive water Japan plans to release into the ocean from Fukushima because there is a level of radioactivity in everything already.

    “You are adding something trivial and inconsequential, which will be diluted even more,” Ruzic said.

    Even the Russia-Ukraine standoff over the Zaporizhzhia plant does not concern Ruzic; the biggest threat he sees, assuming it is not targeted by bunker-busting bombs, is that the plant ceases making electricity – not that it could turn into another Chernobyl.

    “It’s really unfortunate that it’s in the middle of a war zone. But it’s also really unfortunate that chemical plants or coal plants or other plants are in the middle of a war zone as well,” he argued.

    Both professors brought up the push toward small, modular nuclear technology for which there are numerous companies speculating there will be a major market. That market could grow exponentially if the government decides to put a tax on carbon emissions to account for the harm they cause.

    Ewing argued there is not a clear US national energy strategy, and that means numerous state and federal agencies and private companies are searching, often at odds with each other, for something new. The expense and difficulty of developing nuclear technology will be a roadblock. The new Georgia plant took more than a decade to build and came in over budget.

    Ruzic said that after the initial capital expenditure, the relative low cost of fuel for nuclear plants makes them a good, long-term investment.

    When I came back to Ewing about his comment that he has no clear preference for or against nuclear energy, he said the broad question overlooks too much.

    “The nuclear landscape is, from a technical and social point of view, complicated enough that broad general positions really don’t serve us very well,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Can Biden achieve his cornerstone climate goal? Why 100% clean power is still out of reach | CNN Politics

    Can Biden achieve his cornerstone climate goal? Why 100% clean power is still out of reach | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Tucked into President Joe Biden’s ambitious, sweeping climate commitments is a crucially important goal that dates back to his campaign: Transforming the US electric grid to run entirely on clean energy by 2035.

    The goal could make or break Biden’s pledge to slash the country’s planet-warming emissions in half by 2030. And if successful, 100% clean electricity could energize vast sectors of the US economy: electric vehicles, home and office heating and cooling, and appliances. It could even power heavy industry and manufacturing, which is currently reliant on fossil fuels.

    “When you have a fully clean grid, versus a grid that either is a quarter or a half clean, that makes a significant difference in terms of the greenhouse gas performance of the things you’re plugging in to that grid,” White House national climate adviser Ali Zaidi told CNN. “That electric vehicle now is twice or three times cleaner when you shift to a fully clean grid.”

    Yet while renewable energy has exploded over the past decade, bringing Biden’s cornerstone climate goal to fruition by 2035 could be beyond his grasp.

    As of this year, about 44% of America’s electricity was powered by zero-emissions sources like wind, solar, nuclear and hydropower, according to the Department of Energy. The rest comes from fossil fuels like methane gas and coal.

    After the Inflation Reduction Act passed last year – legislation that aimed to supercharge clean energy in the US – an analysis from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory predicts the US will get to around 80% clean electricity by 2030, a number that includes renewables, nuclear energy and carbon capture on fossil fuel plants.

    By 2035, the federal analysis shows clean and renewable sources will make up about 86% of US energy, spurred in large part by the IRA. (That analysis did not include the Biden administration’s proposed pollution rules for power plants, which could increase the adoption of clean energy.)

    “That’s a doubling from today, which is huge,” Ben King, an associate director at the nonpartisan think tank Rhodium Group, told CNN. But it’s also short of Biden’s goal of 100% clean electricity by that date.

    Decarbonizing the last portion of the power sector will be the most difficult, federal officials and experts told CNN. The closer you get to 100% percent clean electricity, the harder it is to go all the way.

    “We’ve known that the last 10% – maybe the last 20 to 25% – is going to be challenging,” Zaidi said. “And the reason is because you’re not just trying to deliver clean electrons onto the grid. You’re trying to deliver cleaner electrons when you want them, where you want them. That’s a hard thing to do.”

    Not only does the power need to come from clean sources, it also needs to be readily available to energize the US economy during peak demand.

    But wind and solar are still variable – especially without massive, costly battery storage. And newer technologies, like green hydrogen, carbon capture and small modular nuclear reactors haven’t yet been built to a large enough scale.

    That could mean some fossil fuels plants outfitted with carbon capture would need to remain connected to the grid to provide power that can brought online quickly, King said.

    There are also big infrastructure hurdles for renewables to take the lead. Even if massive amounts of wind and solar are developed by the end of this decade, the US may not have enough electrical transmission infrastructure to move all of that renewable energy around the grid.

    “The bottlenecks of a lack of transmission are very real,” Lena Moffitt, executive director of Evergreen Action, told CNN. There also needs to be significant investment in massive batteries to store the power generated by wind and solar to be used at all hours, she said.

    While companies and the federal government are racing to scale up new zero-carbon technologies, traditional wind and solar will largely power this clean electricity transition.

    They are the most reliable and trusted clean energy sources for utilities and developers, and they have quickly become cheaper than fossil fuels – so inexpensive that it is becoming more cost-effective for some utilities to build new wind and solar, rather than constructing new fossil plants or even running existing ones, experts told CNN.

    Wind and solar are also mature technologies that developers know they can finance and get huge tax breaks on through the Inflation Reduction Act.

    They are the “natural choice for developers who are looking for those low risk and very cost-effective projects to develop,” Sonia Aggarwal, a former White House senior advisor for climate policy and CEO of nonpartisan think tank Energy Innovation, told CNN. “We will see them play a large role because of how good they look from an economic perspective.”

    By the end of 2021, wind and solar together made up about 228 gigawatts of power. By 2034, NREL predicts that number – including offshore wind – will grow by more than four times to over 1 terawatt, or 1 trillion watts of power.

    “Where we are now is very different from even 5 or 10 years ago as far as the costs of clean energy, particularly renewables, being significantly lower than they’ve been in the past,” Carla Frisch, acting executive director of the US Energy Department’s Office of Policy, told CNN. “So just a really rapid acceleration that we’re already experiencing right now.”

    While getting new clean technologies to scale will be difficult, it’s work worth doing, Zaidi said.

    “Let’s deploy the stuff we have right now, right away,” he said. “And let’s work hard as we can to innovate on the stuff that we need in the future.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why Montana’s TikTok ban may not work | CNN Business

    Why Montana’s TikTok ban may not work | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Montana has become the first US state to ban TikTok on all devices, even personal ones, triggering renewed doubts about the short-form video app’s future in the country.

    On Wednesday, the state’s governor, Greg Gianforte, signed a bill into law that would fine TikTok and online app stores for making the service available to state residents. It takes effect next year.

    The move goes a step beyond other states that have restricted TikTok from government devices. It also comes at a time when some federal lawmakers are pushing for a nationwide ban.

    But legal and technology experts say there are huge hurdles for Montana, or any state, to enforce such a law. The TikTok ban immediately prompted one lawsuit from TikTok users who allege it violates their First Amendment rights, with more legal challenges expected. Even if the law is allowed to stand, the practicalities of the internet may make it impossible to keep TikTok out of the hands of users.

    Montana’s new law, SB419, makes it illegal for TikTok and app marketplaces to offer the TikTok service within state lines.

    Passed in April, the bill establishes fines of $10,000 per violation per day, where a single violation is defined as “each time that a user accesses TikTok, is offered the ability to access TikTok, or is offered the ability to download TikTok.”

    Individual users themselves would not be on the hook just for accessing TikTok, according to the law.

    If the law survives in the courts, TikTok, and companies such as Apple and Google, could be forced to find ways to restrict TikTok from Montana smartphone users — or face huge penalties.

    But that’s a big if.

    TikTok and other civil society groups warn that the law as written is unconstitutional. There are two main arguments TikTok’s defenders have cited.

    One is that the law violates the First Amendment rights of Montanans, by restricting their ability to access legal speech and by infringing on their own rights to free expression through the app.

    On Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union accused Gianforte and the state legislature of having “trampled on the free speech of hundreds of thousands of Montanans who use the app to express themselves, gather information, and run their small business in the name of anti-Chinese sentiment.”

    A group of TikTok users echoed that complaint in a lawsuit filed Wednesday evening in the US District Court for the District of Montana, hours after the governor’s signature. “Montana can no more ban its residents from viewing or posting to TikTok than it could ban the Wall Street Journal because of who owns it or the ideas it publishes,” according to the complaint.

    Another allegation is that the law represents an unconstitutional “bill of attainder,” or a law that penalizes somebody absent due process.

    NetChoice, an industry trade group that counts TikTok as a member, said the bill “ignores the U.S. Constitution.”

    “The government may not block our ability to access constitutionally protected speech – whether it is in a newspaper, on a website or via an app,” said Carl Szabo, NetChoice’s general counsel.

    A spokesperson for Gianforte didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    Even if the law survives a legal challenge, experts say its breadth could make it difficult to effectively implement and enforce.

    For one thing, app stores such as Apple’s operate on a country-by-country basis and aren’t able to filter apps at the state level, multiple experts have said.

    As a result, there would be no way for companies such as Apple and Google to practically comply with the law, TechNet, a trade organization that counts those companies as members, told Montana lawmakers at a hearing in March.

    “App stores,” a TechNet witness said at the hearing, “do not have the ability to geofence on a state-by-state basis. It would thus be impossible for our members to prevent the app from being downloaded specifically in the state of Montana.”

    The open-ended nature of the law means enormous unbounded liabilities for TikTok and app store operators.

    “What this really does is create a huge potential liability for both TikTok and the mobile app stores,” said Nicholas Garcia, policy counsel at the consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge. “And what it requires them to do is to figure it out, under threat of Montana coming in and saying, ‘You have not been complying with the law.’”

    It’s unclear how, exactly, Montana officials might determine noncompliance.

    One sure-fire way would be for Montana officials to attempt to download or access TikTok themselves on devices they control, and if they are successful, to sue TikTok or app store companies for those violations, said Alan Rozenshtein, an associate law professor at the University of Minnesota. But that would not identify violations occurring on devices used by the wider public, which is the entire point of the ban, he added.

    “That would require Montana to do surveillance of its own citizens of who’s downloading, and how,” Rozenshtein said. Alternatively, he added, Montana could try to obtain court orders compelling the companies to hand over business information — such as billing data or other non-content information related to users — that could identify them as Montana residents.

    Authorities could also try to subpoena TikTok or the app stores for information on users who have accessed or downloaded TikTok from within the state, but those requests wouldn’t capture the many people who would likely circumvent the ban using more sophisticated methods.

    Virtual private networking (VPN) services would make it trivial for users to get around the restrictions, according to Evan Greer, director of Fight for the Future, a consumer advocacy group. A VPN could make a user in Montana appear as if they are connected to the internet from outside state lines.

    “Any teenage anime fan or British TV aficionado can tell you how to circumvent such a silly ban using a VPN,” said Greer.

    Officials could potentially try to expand their dragnet by asking companies to use additional data they possess on their users to make inferences about who may be accessing TikTok. But depending on the scope of such a request, it could trigger legal objections and privacy concerns — if the additional data is even available.

    Asking internet providers to implement statewide network filters might be another way to enforce the law, said Garcia. But internet providers are not named as a type of entity subject to the TikTok ban.

    “So the only reason they would get involved would be if TikTok or Apple and Google wanted them to,” Garcia said, “and made some business case for why they should go through that effort on a contractual basis or something.”

    Still, said Rozenshtein, just because the Montana law is silent on internet providers does not preclude Montana from potentially seeking a court order forcing broadband companies to filter TikTok traffic at the network level.

    As with the dozens of other states that have imposed some level of TikTok restrictions, Montana’s government has cited the app as a potential privacy and security risk.

    US officials worry that TikTok’s links to China through its parent company, ByteDance, might result in American’s personal information leaking to the Chinese government. That could help China with spying or disinformation campaigns against the United States, according to authorities.

    So far, though, the risk appears to be hypothetical: There is no public evidence to suggest that the Chinese government has actually accessed TikTok’s US user data. And TikTok isn’t the only company that collects large amounts of data, or that might be an attractive target for Chinese espionage.

    TikTok has said it is executing on a plan to store US user data on cloud servers owned by the US tech giant Oracle, and that when the initiative is complete, access to the data will be overseen by US employees.

    More than half of US states have announced some restrictions on TikTok affecting the app on government devices. Montana’s ban marks the beginning of a new phase, however — and the widely expected legal challenges may determine whether other states soon follow suit.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • The Reddit blackout shows no signs of stopping | CNN Business

    The Reddit blackout shows no signs of stopping | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    A widespread Reddit blackout affecting some of the site’s largest communities has continued into its third day with no signs of stopping, as a number of groups on the site vowed to remain closed off indefinitely to protest changes to the platform’s data policies.

    As of Wednesday morning, more than 6,000 subreddits remained inaccessible and in private mode after what began as a two-day voluntary shutdown. The blackout includes popular forums such as r/aww, r/videos and r/music, each of which claims more than 25 million subscribers on the platform.

    The extended protest highlights the commitment of some users, moderators and developers to a long-term standoff with Reddit’s management over a decision to begin charging steep fees for third-party data access to its platform.

    Reddit didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The coming fees have provoked broad outrage because of their expected impact on independent apps and moderator tools that have grown up around Reddit and that many users view as a critical resource. Some of the largest third-party apps, such as Apollo and RIF, have said they cannot afford the fees and must shut down, effectively driving users to Reddit’s native app that has been widely panned as slow, buggy and inferior, particularly for users with disabilities.

    In recent days, Reddit has said it would exempt some accessibility apps from the price changes and allow some third-party tools to continue operating through its application programming interface (API). But many moderators have called the announcements little more than a “microscopic” concession.

    In response to allegations that Reddit is imposing the fees and forcing developers to shut down in a “profit-driven” move, Reddit co-founder and CEO Steve Huffman said in a recent Q&A with users that Reddit will “continue to be profit-driven until profits arrive.”

    “Unlike some of the [third-party] apps, we are not profitable,” Huffman said.

    The tensions echo how Twitter, under its new owner Elon Musk, has prompted criticism with plans for its own paywall for data in a bid to develop new revenue sources and to shore up the company’s struggling finances. For Reddit, the stakes are also high to grow revenue, as the company reportedly looks to go public later this year.

    Huffman reportedly dismissed the blackout in a leaked internal memo obtained by The Verge. According to the memo, Huffman described the protest as “among the noisiest we’ve seen” but insisted that “like all blowups on Reddit, this one will pass as well.”

    “We absolutely must ship what we said we would,” Huffman reportedly wrote in the memo, in an apparent reference to the API changes. Huffman also reportedly predicted that some subreddits would end their protest after the initially scheduled two days.

    As of Wednesday morning, many groups participating in the blackout had lifted their self-imposed restrictions. But even as some groups went public once more, others joined the protest.

    [ad_2]

    Source link