As Moammar Gadhafi’s forces make their way toward Libyan rebel stronghold Benghazi , the situation in the city is getting tenser by the moment, reports the BBC . A spokesman for the rebels’ council says there will be a “massacre” if the international community fails to intervene. Gadhafi will “kill civilians, he…
Continue reading …
Markets that trade carbon pollution permits are meant to cut emissions. So why did the carbon dioxide vented in 2010 under Europe’s scheme go up? An update on the European Union’s Emissions Trading Scheme and just how loose the cap on emissions is now, following the economic crash … The latest analysis from Bloomberg New Energy Finance shows that last year, carbon emissions from the energy, steel, concrete and manufacturing facilities in the ETS rose by an estimated 1.8%. Yes, rose, not fell. I think carbon trading schemes are necessary as part of efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and limit climate change. But to work, the cap on emissions has to be tight enough. The reason emissions rose in 2010 compared with 2009 was that emissions had fallen hard from 2008-2009 (11%) and 2007-2008 (5%). So there was room last year for emissions to grow, as the economy recovered a little, without hitting the cap. As it stands, Sandbag ‘s Damien Morris tells me that no country in the EU will have to cut its carbon until at least 2015. Sandbag’s analysis shows that the entire 2008-2012 ETS period (phase two) is likely result in no carbon being cut, at all. On the contrary, some spare pollution permits will probably be carried over into the next phase. I agree with the UK’s energy secretary, Chris Huhne, that Europe has to increase its ambition, to a continent-wide 30% . Some may argue that allowing businesses to make use of the looseness of the carbon cap as they recover from the recession makes perfect sense. But that is only the case if you believe that high-carbon businesses have a long-term future. If you think a low-carbon future is inevitable, then banking the carbon cuts caused by the recession and thereby redirecting investment to develop sustainable activities, such as renewable energy, is the only sane choice. If not, I’m sure China will be very happy to sell us the technology when we realise we need it, rather than vice versa. Footnote: If you want to post comments below like “the ETS is corrupt and broken – time to cash in”, or “quick, fill your boots before they close down this scam!”, then feel free. The ETS has been appallingly badly run . But for the sake of clarity, do please say whether you think carbon emissions need to be reduced at all. If you do, please say what your alternative to the ETS is. I am away for much of tomorrow, but will dive into the comments later. Carbon emissions Carbon offsetting European Union Damian Carrington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
When a TechCrunch writer posted ‘snarky’ remarks about Source Code’s marketing, the studio wasn’t impressed. So what? Reader, prepare yourself: Someone on the internet thinks Source Code looks silly. Source Code, of course, is a movie that premiered at South by Southwest last weekend, and which stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a man who must relive a train wreck over and over again, in the hope of changing its outcome. The last time you saw this movie, it was a comedy called Groundhog Day, and it starred Bill Murray and a remarkably unrealistic groundhog puppet who could drive a car. This time, however, the time loop is achieved with futuristic technology rather than mystical rodent curses, and as far as the Summit Entertainment studio is concerned, jokes should not be allowed anywhere near it. Consider Alexia Tsotis, a TechCrunch blogger called upon to cover the movie’s premiere. Her piece focused on the movie’s marketing, described as a “cross-platform, trans-media campaign” involving “social media game play”. This amounts to asking people to promote the movie on Facebook; Tsotis noted that, and joked about it, calling the above-quoted hype a “buzzwordgasm”. At which point, the trans-media cross-platform marketers at Summit found a whole new use for the internet: contacting AOL, the company that owns TechCrunch, to suggest that Tsotis change her piece. The email from MovieFone – the AOL-run film blog that Summit contacted – is apologetic. “Wanted to raise a concern that Summit had about the piece,” it says. “They felt it was a little snarky and wondered if any of the snark can be toned down?” It concludes on a similarly uncomfortable note: “If you have good reasons not to change anything that’s fine, I just need to get back to Summit.” One pities the sender. Especially since Tsotis published the email after receiving it. MovieFone defends its actions , but it had every reason to know it was doing something wrong. It wasn’t Summit’s place to demand changes; nor was it MovieFone’s place to imply that TechCrunch needed “good reasons” not to make them. The “good reason” they had to keep the piece intact was simple: Tsotis was paid to write a blog post, not to write ad copy for Summit. And she definitely wasn’t answerable to Summit’s concerns about, of all things, her sense of humour. Summit is not alone in its concerns. Most criticisms of internet writing centre on its tone. It is undeniably true that “snark” – the single most irritating new word of the past 20 years, given that it means “sarcasm”, which we already have a word for – does predominate, in some circles. It’s an easy way to convey that your target might be silly or inconsequential. It can be cruel; it’s undeniably unpleasant to work hard on something and to have it dismissed with a nasty joke. But one suspects that Summit’s response is less about hurt feelings than about the fact that negative coverage might affect its bottom line. Which somewhat relieves one’s sentimental concerns. And it’s also true that bloggers are frequently called upon to cover extremely silly and inconsequential things. To discuss the bold new marketing innovation of “making people talk about a movie on Facebook” with a straight face, especially when that movie is a Groundhog Day remake with slightly more train explosions, is a bit too much to ask for. Without at least some acknowledgment of the ridiculousness at hand, the writer risks turning in an article that is little more than a press release. Without snark, Tsotis’s piece wouldn’t be cruel. It would be something even worse: boring. SXSWi Blogging SXSW Festivals Digital media Internet United States Sady Doyle guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …When a TechCrunch writer posted ‘snarky’ remarks about Source Code’s marketing, the studio wasn’t impressed. So what? Reader, prepare yourself: Someone on the internet thinks Source Code looks silly. Source Code, of course, is a movie that premiered at South by Southwest last weekend, and which stars Jake Gyllenhaal as a man who must relive a train wreck over and over again, in the hope of changing its outcome. The last time you saw this movie, it was a comedy called Groundhog Day, and it starred Bill Murray and a remarkably unrealistic groundhog puppet who could drive a car. This time, however, the time loop is achieved with futuristic technology rather than mystical rodent curses, and as far as the Summit Entertainment studio is concerned, jokes should not be allowed anywhere near it. Consider Alexia Tsotis, a TechCrunch blogger called upon to cover the movie’s premiere. Her piece focused on the movie’s marketing, described as a “cross-platform, trans-media campaign” involving “social media game play”. This amounts to asking people to promote the movie on Facebook; Tsotis noted that, and joked about it, calling the above-quoted hype a “buzzwordgasm”. At which point, the trans-media cross-platform marketers at Summit found a whole new use for the internet: contacting AOL, the company that owns TechCrunch, to suggest that Tsotis change her piece. The email from MovieFone – the AOL-run film blog that Summit contacted – is apologetic. “Wanted to raise a concern that Summit had about the piece,” it says. “They felt it was a little snarky and wondered if any of the snark can be toned down?” It concludes on a similarly uncomfortable note: “If you have good reasons not to change anything that’s fine, I just need to get back to Summit.” One pities the sender. Especially since Tsotis published the email after receiving it. MovieFone defends its actions , but it had every reason to know it was doing something wrong. It wasn’t Summit’s place to demand changes; nor was it MovieFone’s place to imply that TechCrunch needed “good reasons” not to make them. The “good reason” they had to keep the piece intact was simple: Tsotis was paid to write a blog post, not to write ad copy for Summit. And she definitely wasn’t answerable to Summit’s concerns about, of all things, her sense of humour. Summit is not alone in its concerns. Most criticisms of internet writing centre on its tone. It is undeniably true that “snark” – the single most irritating new word of the past 20 years, given that it means “sarcasm”, which we already have a word for – does predominate, in some circles. It’s an easy way to convey that your target might be silly or inconsequential. It can be cruel; it’s undeniably unpleasant to work hard on something and to have it dismissed with a nasty joke. But one suspects that Summit’s response is less about hurt feelings than about the fact that negative coverage might affect its bottom line. Which somewhat relieves one’s sentimental concerns. And it’s also true that bloggers are frequently called upon to cover extremely silly and inconsequential things. To discuss the bold new marketing innovation of “making people talk about a movie on Facebook” with a straight face, especially when that movie is a Groundhog Day remake with slightly more train explosions, is a bit too much to ask for. Without at least some acknowledgment of the ridiculousness at hand, the writer risks turning in an article that is little more than a press release. Without snark, Tsotis’s piece wouldn’t be cruel. It would be something even worse: boring. SXSWi Blogging SXSW Festivals Digital media Internet United States Sady Doyle guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former Haitian president will be joined by Hollywood actor on return to homeland from seven-year exile in South Africa Actor and campaigner Danny Glover has arrived in South Africa to escort former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide home, the politician’s lawyer said. American lawyer Ira Kurzban has flown to Johannesburg to accompany Aristide back to Haiti. She has been joined by the star of the Lethal Weapon action movies, who is board chair of the human rights and social advocacy organisation TransAfrica Forum . The United States has called for Aristide to delay his departure until Sunday’s disputed presidential run-off in his homeland , saying his return would distract voters. Aristide, who emerged as a leading voice for Haiti’s poor in a popular revolt that forced an end to the Duvalier family’s 29-year dictatorship, remains Haiti’s most popular politician despite being in exile for seven years. He has said he will not be involved in politics in Haiti and wants to lead his foundation’s efforts to improve education in the impoverished Caribbean nation, which was devastated by last year’s catastrophic earthquake. Aides say he fears the winner of the presidential elections might reverse the long-awaited decision to allow his return. Both candidates in the the run-off have long opposed Aristide. Glover is among several high profile US figures who have been pushing for Aristide’s speedy return, including politician Jesse Jackson, the US envoy to Haiti Paul Farmer, and singer Harry Belafonte. “I am going to South Africa to show our solidarity with the people of Haiti by standing at the side of the leader they elected twice with overwhelming support,” Glover wrote on the TransAfrica Forum website. “People of good conscience cannot be idle while a former dictator is able to return unhindered while a democratic leader who peacefully handed over power to another elected president is restricted from returning to his country by external forces,” Glover said. Kurzban blamed Aristide’s delayed trip on arranging an aircraft. Air charter companies in South Africa said a private jet would cost more than half a million dollars. South African officials said they are consulting “interested parties” on the logistics of moving Aristide, his wife and two daughters. Glover and nine others recently wrote to the South African president, Jacob Zuma, urging him to “assist the Aristides in making their transition as soon as possible” because “all the last remaining obstacles to the Aristides’ return have been removed”. Haiti South Africa US foreign policy Human rights guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Former Haitian president will be joined by Hollywood actor on return to homeland from seven-year exile in South Africa Actor and campaigner Danny Glover has arrived in South Africa to escort former Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide home, the politician’s lawyer said. American lawyer Ira Kurzban has flown to Johannesburg to accompany Aristide back to Haiti. She has been joined by the star of the Lethal Weapon action movies, who is board chair of the human rights and social advocacy organisation TransAfrica Forum . The United States has called for Aristide to delay his departure until Sunday’s disputed presidential run-off in his homeland , saying his return would distract voters. Aristide, who emerged as a leading voice for Haiti’s poor in a popular revolt that forced an end to the Duvalier family’s 29-year dictatorship, remains Haiti’s most popular politician despite being in exile for seven years. He has said he will not be involved in politics in Haiti and wants to lead his foundation’s efforts to improve education in the impoverished Caribbean nation, which was devastated by last year’s catastrophic earthquake. Aides say he fears the winner of the presidential elections might reverse the long-awaited decision to allow his return. Both candidates in the the run-off have long opposed Aristide. Glover is among several high profile US figures who have been pushing for Aristide’s speedy return, including politician Jesse Jackson, the US envoy to Haiti Paul Farmer, and singer Harry Belafonte. “I am going to South Africa to show our solidarity with the people of Haiti by standing at the side of the leader they elected twice with overwhelming support,” Glover wrote on the TransAfrica Forum website. “People of good conscience cannot be idle while a former dictator is able to return unhindered while a democratic leader who peacefully handed over power to another elected president is restricted from returning to his country by external forces,” Glover said. Kurzban blamed Aristide’s delayed trip on arranging an aircraft. Air charter companies in South Africa said a private jet would cost more than half a million dollars. South African officials said they are consulting “interested parties” on the logistics of moving Aristide, his wife and two daughters. Glover and nine others recently wrote to the South African president, Jacob Zuma, urging him to “assist the Aristides in making their transition as soon as possible” because “all the last remaining obstacles to the Aristides’ return have been removed”. Haiti South Africa US foreign policy Human rights guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …A plume of radiation from stricken Japanese nuclear reactors is crossing the Pacific and will be detectable in southern California by Friday, according to a United Nations forecast. Experts stress that the radiation in the plume will be extremely diluted and will, at worst, have very minor health consequences for…
Continue reading …
Hillary Clinton condemns the rulers in Manama for not showing restraint as Shia-Sunni tensions mount around the Middle East The US has issued a sharp rebuke to Bahrain after a day of crackdowns on demonstrators, in which hospitals were blockaded by riot police, scores of people were wounded and the Shia diaspora condemned the kingdom’s rulers. The capital, Manama, was under curfew from 4pm to 4am, and the government was using emergency laws to ban public gatherings. The central square known as Pearl Roundabout, which had been a base for the protest movement, was violently cleared by riot police. Troops and riot police then moved on to locations across the city, including the Salmaniya medical clinic , which had become a second focal point of demonstrations. Doctors reported being attacked in wards and claimed power to part of the hospital had been turned off. The government said it was pursuing “thugs and outlaws”. “We have been chased, attacked and locked inside the grounds,” one doctor told the Guardian. “But the worst thing is … that we have been stopped from reaching patients.” On Wednesday night the British government said it would charter planes to evacuate its citizens who want to flee the deteriorating situation in Bahrain. The Foreign Office has urged people to leave the country on commercial flights but those who cannot get a ticket will be evacuated on a Foreign Office-chartered flight costing £260. Phone lines to Bahrain appeared blocked for much of the day , making it difficult to confirm reports of attacks on demonstrators. However, videos uploaded to YouTube and Facebook showed clear violence against unarmed protesters – including one man shot in the leg from at least 100 metres away. In another case, men in riot police uniform vandalised parked cars as they confronted demonstrators. The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, led diplomatic reaction to the violence, delivering a stern warning to Bahrain’s rulers. Clinton said Bahrain, and neighbouring Gulf states that have sent troops to help quell the uprising, were “on the wrong track”. She demanded that Bahrain show restraint with demonstrators and keep hospitals open. She described the situation in Manama as alarming and condemned the use of force against demonstrators. She said four Gulf states had sent troops to Bahrain. Only Saudi Arabia has so far publicly acknowledged doing so. In the UK, William Hague, the foreign secretary, said Britain would review arms sales to Bahrain and Libya, including crowd control equipment which has been used against unarmed protesters. Iran, meanwhile, ratcheted up its rhetoric, labelling the damage done to diplomatic relations as “irreparable”. In Iraq and Lebanon, the Shia leaders Muqtada al-Sadr and Hassan Nasrallah criticised the attacks in comments that underscored sectarian undertones. “They attack us because we are Shia and our presence threatens them,” said Hussein Mehdi, a protester shot in the leg by birdshot on Tuesday. “The Saudis are the ones who have driven this. They are taking a hard line and the regime answers to them.” Saudi Arabia’s stance has been the subject of much speculation among demonstrators, who felt they had established trust with Bahrain’s crown prince, Sheikh Salman bin Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa . Saudi Arabia has a restive Shia minority near its border with Bahrain, which accounts for roughly 12% of its population. Saudi’s rulers have long viewed the Shia as a potential threat. Commentators say Riyadh was not prepared to tolerate demonstrations that would weaken it by proxy and empower its arch foe, Iran. Bahrain Saudi Arabia US foreign policy Iran Hillary Clinton Martin Chulov guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Washington’s ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, says new resolution would authorise aerial bombing of Gaddafi’s tanks The US is pushing the UN to authorise not just a no-fly zone over Libya, but also the use of air strikes to stop the advance of forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi. Washington’s ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, said on Wednesday that a no-fly zone would have only a limited use, and that the Obama administration was working “very hard” to pass a new resolution, which would authorise the use of aerial bombing of Libyan tanks and heavy artillery. The UN security council is planning to vote on the resolution late on Thursday. After a day of intensive negotiation in New York, Rice told reporters: “We need to be prepared to contemplate steps that include, but perhaps go beyond, a no-fly zone at this point, as the situation on the ground has evolved, and as a no-fly zone has inherent limitations in terms of protection of civilians at immediate risk.” The draft, supported by the US, Britain, France and Germany, reflects a significant shift by Washington, alarmed by the speed at which the uprising is collapsing and concerned at the possibility of a massacre in the rebel stronghold of Benghazi. Until this week, the US had been totally opposed to becoming involved militarily in Libya. “We are interested in a broad range of actions that will effectively protect civilians and increase the pressure on the Gaddafi regime to halt the killing and to allow the Libyan people to express themselves in their aspirations for the future freely and peacefully,” Rice said. A diplomat on the security council told the Associated Press that Rice said the goal should be expanded from creating a no-fly zone to protecting civilians. To do this, the international community must have all the necessary tools – including authorisation to use planes, troops or ships to stop attacks by Gaddafi’s air, land and sea forces. The US, still fighting in both Iraq and Afghanistan, is deeply reluctant to be drawn into conflict in another Muslim country, and remains opposed to putting American troops on the ground to create “safe havens”. “The United States is pretty busy with two wars, and we don’t want a third,” a senior official told the New York Times. Washington is insisting that any military action would have to be authorised by the security council and be carried out by an international coalition, including Arab states. Barack Obama has been cautious over calls for a no-fly zone, which the Pentagon has described as a step tantamount to war. But the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, told reporters that the turning point was the Arab League’s support over the weekend for a no-fly zone over Libya. “That was an extraordinary statement,” Clinton said, noting that Arab nations were asking the UN security council to take action “against one of their own”. Libya’s deputy UN ambassador, Ibrahim Dabbashi, who supports the opposition, said five Arab countries have offered support, and told reporters he expects a no-fly resolution to be adopted, with a provision that will also allow air strikes. Whether the security council does take action and authorises “all necessary measures” to protect civilians remains to be seen. A vote has been pencilled in for Thursday afternoon, although schedules have a tendency to slip at the UN. Russia and China, which both have a veto on the 15-member security council, could yet block it. China’s UN ambassador, Li Baodong, the current council president, told reporters “we hope we will have real progress tomorrow”. Libya Muammar Gaddafi Arab and Middle East protests Middle East United States United Nations Ewen MacAskill guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …
Prince describes quake aftermath as unbelievable during tour of New Zealand and Australian disaster areas Prince William described the scale of damage caused to Christchurch by last month’s earthquake as “unbelievable” as he visited the city at the start of a tour of parts of New Zealand and Australia that have been struck by disaster in recent months. The prince walked through central Christchurch, which remains inaccessible to the public, to see the impact of the magnitude 6.3 quake which struck on 22 February, killing at least 166 people. “The scale of it is unbelievable. It really does bring it home to you to see a building like that, it’s just so sad,” he said looking at the 26-storey Hotel Grand Chancellor, which remains at a dangerous angle after part of its foundations slumped. The prince had earlier been greeted at the emergency response headquarters by a wall of media before spending almost an hour talking to staff at the repurposed art gallery. One worker in the building said the prince’s visit “definitely lifted spirits”. Morale is low in New Zealand, where people are struggling to cope with the aftermath of two earthquakes in five months. On Wednesday the New Zealand government and the International Rugby Board confirmed that Christchurch would no longer host its seven allotted games in the Rugby World Cup , owing to damage to the stadium and accommodation. The Christchurch mayor, Bob Parker, one of the officials who accompanied William through the city, said the prince appeared to have been strongly affected by what he had seen. “He’s been exposed to some pretty gritty things in his life given his career path,” Parker said. “He’s taken this in his stride. “He’s our prince. He didn’t have to come here but he did and the fact that he did means a great deal to us.” Later in the day, William flew across the South Island to the west coast, to meet the families of the 29 men who died in the Pike River mine explosion . Welcoming him at the Miners’ Hall in Shantytown, near Greymouth, the Grey district mayor, Tony Kokshoorn, said: “We look at you and we know that you, also, have had tragic times in your past.” Bernie Monk, the father of one of the miners killed in November’s explosion and spokesman for the victims’ families, told local radio: “We need these events to keep us going and keep our chins up. It’s just overwhelming and humbling.” The prime minister, John Key, who met Prince William in Shantytown, said the visit was “hugely appreciated by New Zealanders”. He said the inclusion of the Christchurch earthquake appeal on the royal wedding charity gift fund “reflects the couple’s close ties to and affection for New Zealand”. The royal visit was not, however, universally welcomed. Keri Hulme, patron of the Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand, said the tour appeared to be “designed to enhance politicians’ profiles”. The 1984 Booker prizewinner, for her novel The Bone People, told the Guardian in an email that the prince probably meant well. “But he’s here today and gone by Saturday. And in the meantime, and for years and years coming, it’s Aotearoa New Zealanders and their friends who will be the ones slowly rebuilding places.” Writing in the Christchurch Press, Vicki Anderson questioned the timing of Friday’s memorial service, expected to be attended by more than 10,000 people, including Prince William and politicians from New Zealand and Australia, in Christchurch’s Hagley Park. The event, Anderson wrote, amounted to “a grandiose, empty gesture starring so-called VIPs”. For residents, she said, “life is still too raw here for us to have a memorial”. William is due to depart on Saturday for Australia, where he will visit parts of Queensland and Victoria recovering from flooding and cyclones. Prince William New Zealand Australia Natural disasters and extreme weather Monarchy Toby Manhire guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …