US subsidies – Grantstation Trendtrack Thu, 17 Nov 2022 20:22:02 +0000 en-US hourly 1 US subsidies – Grantstation Trendtrack 32 32 COP27: Fossil fuel interests take us for fools Thu, 17 Nov 2022 19:30:00 +0000

Consider how our world fuels its economies: we extract fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) and burn them. Air pollution alone causes millions of deaths and heat-trapping emissions overheat the planet, leading to sea level rise, heat waves, droughts, wildfires, floods and other extreme weather events. The companies that produce these fuels profit from a pernicious business model that allows them to pollute for free, pass the costs of all damages on to the public, and use their financial and political power to perpetuate their lucrative business.

To be fair, there is no doubt that abundant and cheap fossil fuels fueled the Industrial Revolution and improved the livelihoods of people around the world. Initially, the environmental impact appeared insignificant. Then, scientists noticed that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels were not dissipating but building up in the atmosphere.

In recent decades, as more data has been collected, the impacts have become more worrisome. Although scientists working in fossil fuel companies were among the first to understand the dangers, the industry has done all it can to protect its business model by denying climate science, obscuring the problem and delaying the transition to clean energy alternatives. This industry and its political allies have deceived us. In response, corporations have unwittingly allowed these life-destroying fuels to jeopardize the future of humanity. They take us for fools.

It would be a different story if fossil fuels were our only energy options, but that is not the case. Clean and renewable energy sources are readily available to replace fossil fuels. Indeed, solar and wind power are already cheaper than fossil fuels in many places. Moreover, the United Nations’ International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has concluded that the technologies and policies needed to mitigate climate change already exist – and that the only real obstacles are politics and vested interests. related to fossil fuels.

Think about how fossil fuel lobbyists manage to influence and manipulate UN climate change conferences. Last year, at COP26 in Glasgow, their outsized influence was widely reported and had the effect of undermining and delaying important climate action. According to a report by climate groups, industry presence at this year’s UN climate summit COP27 in Egypt is even greater, far exceeding the number of representatives from a single national delegation, exception of the United Arab Emirates, a major fossil fuel producing country. More worryingly, a seemingly fossil-fuel-friendly PR firm has been hired to handle COP27 communications and appears to be using that role to distract from polluting industry, scientists and climate activists say.

The COP27 agenda includes discussions on who should pay for the losses and damages suffered by poor countries. Conveniently for fossil fuel interests, the framing of this conversation identifies rich countries and governments as the “polluters who should pay”, diverting attention from the real polluters – the coal, oil and gas companies.

Speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, Antigua Prime Minister Gaston Browne said, “The oil and gas industry continues to bring in $3 billion [USD] daily in profits.

“It is high time these companies were forced to pay a global carbon tax on their profits as a source of funding for loss and damage,” he added. “While they’re enjoying it, the planet is burning.”

Since reducing emissions is the goal of UN climate conferences, shouldn’t he be asking the real polluters to pay? If the nations of the world imposed an ever-increasing carbon pollution tax on fossil fuel companies, huge sums of money would be generated. A carbon tax, long advocated by economists, would be far more effective than government-funded or corporate-funded efforts to help poor countries. More importantly, it would spur the clean energy transition by lowering demand for fossil fuels, giving renewables a competitive advantage, and incentivizing all countries, including China, to adopt similar policies (when they are used as a carbon border tariff).

Fossil fuel interests are powerful, but citizens also have political power. In the United States and in every country around the world, citizens should support leaders who will expose the business model of the fossil fuel industry that is jeopardizing our lives and jeopardizing the future of our children and grandchildren. First steps for government action should include ending fossil fuel subsidies, enacting carbon pricing legislation to make polluters pay for the devastation they cause, and providing the financial incentives our societies need to stop using polluting fuels.

Robert Taylor is a freelance journalist whose research and published work focuses on environmental issues.

Craig B. Smith, Ph.D., is an engineer, former UCLA faculty member, former president and president of a major international architectural/engineering firm, author of several books on efficiency energy and global warming.

Taylor was a contributor and Smith was co-author (with WD Fletcher) of “Reaching Net Zero: What it takes to solve the global climate crisis”.

The Unmistakable Clues to Janet Yellen’s Visit to India Tue, 15 Nov 2022 07:02:24 +0000

Friendhoring is an experiment in which the United States plans to favor its political allies when building new supply chains and revamping existing ones. The idea is to exclude China from supply chains. “For too long, countries around the world have been too dependent on risky countries or a single source of critical inputs. We are proactively deepening economic integration with trusted trading partners like India,” Yellen said in Delhi last week.

The term is said to have been coined a few weeks ago by Yellen, a former chairman of the US Fed and one of the world’s most renowned economists.

you might also like

Seasoned investors take a stake in Dish TV

Why Every Brand Says It With Stickers

More easy choices for Zomato

5 charts show domestic airlines gain height in winter

By weakening the U.S.-China trade relationship, President Joe Biden aims to reduce U.S. economic dependence on China and tame geopolitical ambitions and growing assertiveness. aggressive from Beijing. He also fears that China, not the United States, controls the technologies of the future.

The United States has traditionally relied on export controls to hold China down technologically for a generation, but without hurting American business revenue through low-cost manufacturing. But even Donald Trump’s trade wars were less aggressive than the Biden administration’s trade assault on China.

Tariffs and quotas put in place during the Trump presidency remain as well as rules such as “Buy America” ​​requiring manufacturers to use American iron and steel, for example. Additionally, the Biden administration has banned U.S. companies from exporting semiconductor chips and manufacturing tools essential to making high-quality chips to China.

Sweeping export controls announced last month bar US citizens and green card holders from working in China’s semiconductor industry. The world’s major chipmakers from all countries – South Korea, Japan and the Netherlands – will have to rethink their supply chains to be on the safe side of these US export controls. Many of their employees stopped working in China within hours of the White House announcement.

The United States also spends billions of dollars in subsidies and tax credits to spur the creation of domestic chip factories. As part of friendhoring, the United States also plans to favor battery ores processed in countries with which it already has preferential trade agreements. Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) gave a tax credit to electric vehicles assembled in North America, not just the United States, extending the benefit to Mexican and Canadian automakers as well.

What are the implications? There could be a full-fledged tech cold war that could disrupt supply chains, make advanced chips more expensive, and deprive the modern, tech-dependent global economy of vital rare metals.

Second, chips will become more expensive at a time when high global inflation is already hurting. The US-China decoupling will inevitably increase production costs around the world, as there could be second-round effects: China could retaliate, given that it processes just under three-quarters of the world’s lithium and has monopolized the supply of rare metals.

Third, the commercial world can be fragmented into blocs: one led by Russia and China and the other by the United States. Although the chances of that are low. Finding allies and building neat alliances isn’t that easy. Already, given its deep manufacturing ties to China, Germany is taking a different stance on Beijing, which Mint Snapview wrote about.

Despite protracted negotiations, the United States has yet to reach preferential trade agreements with Japan, the EU, and even India, which diminishes the appeal of any offshoring benefits.

The EU, Japan and South Korea are not eligible for the tax preference that Canadian electric car makers will receive, and they are unlikely to be too happy that the level playing field is disrupted.

Finally, the reliance on friendly offshoring shows that competing with China is still not how the United States thinks it can win the tech war with China. If the experiment fails, there could be supply chain disruptions and related vulnerabilities.

What are the implications for India? India will not be immune to the changing dynamics, the inevitable chaos as supply chains are adjusted and realigned, and the possibility of the rise of a new world trading order.

India is building its autonomy in semiconductors. Building autonomy and strategic alliances means both gains and costs, as companies will need to be compensated to stay away from the cheapest sources of inputs and technology and conform to choices dictated by geopolitical calculations. governments. Can the public treasury bear the budgetary costs of the subsidies that this requires? If it’s not taxpayers, consumers will foot the bill for higher costs.

The Modi government is spending millions of dollars and has lined up more tax incentives and subsidies to boost the industry. The biggest trading houses, from Tatas to RIL, have announced big ambitions. Yellen’s friendship comments are a strong signal for chipmakers to diversify supply chains away from China and favor India instead (she also met with business leaders at Microsoft India Development Center, Noida, on this trip, the first as US Treasury Secretary). This is an opportunity worth seizing, given India’s ambitions in semiconductor manufacturing.

Second, Biden’s export controls are meant to clamp down on the Chinese military’s use of advanced chips, blunting its aggressive ambitions — something India’s strategic watchers can’t complain about.

Third, Yellen’s statements show that there is limited disenchantment with India despite New Delhi’s calibrated stance on Russia and the war in Ukraine.

By failing to echo the US-led Western alliance’s anti-Russian rhetoric on Ukraine and increasing rather than decreasing imports of Russian crude, India is straddling the middle ground of in a way that is not old-fashioned non-alignment. India criticizes the spillover of economic difficulties onto developing economies from Western sanctions directed against Russia. Nonetheless, India is participating in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework grouping launched by the United States in May and stands to benefit from Biden’s trade assault on China.

Yellen’s statements confirm that New Delhi’s consistent thinking behind what may appear to be a contradictory position is understood and accepted in Washington.

Dalip Singh, deputy national adviser of the United States, had drawn strong reactions during a state visit to India this summer by commenting disapprovingly on India’s purchase of Russian crude. Yellen’s interview with Reuters last week was a stark contrast. She made the US position unambiguous that India can buy oil from Russia at any price as long as it does so without using Western services (i.e. the Swift and other international payment mechanisms and agreements that are covered by the sanctions against Moscow).

Elsewhere mint

In Opinion, Dani Rodrik writes that the great powers put the keys to the global economy to their security establishments. says Allison Schrager investors burned by crypto must not learn all the wrong lessons. Sanjeev Krishan and Sambitosh Mohapatra say India Inc should play a bigger role in finance climate action. Long Story tells how the RBI unfolded wrong about inflation.

Catch all the trade news, market news, breaking news and latest updates on Live Mint. Download the Mint News app to get daily market updates.

More less

Bangladesh must advocate for legal migration opportunities for climate-vulnerable people Sat, 12 Nov 2022 18:32:23 +0000 Climate migration was not on the agenda at COP27, despite millions of people around …]]>

Climate migration was not on the agenda at COP27, despite millions of people around the world being vulnerable to climate change. Photo archives: Habibur Rahman


Climate migration was not on the agenda at COP27, despite millions of people around the world being vulnerable to climate change. Photo archives: Habibur Rahman

The last 15 years have seen an increase in the frequency and intensity of cyclones, floods and tidal waves in Bangladesh. The impacts of salinity intrusion and drought have worsened over the past two years. These climatic events have affected the livelihoods of the coastal population and their ability to adapt.

Agricultural options are already scarce in coastal areas, and due to extreme salinity and changing rainfall patterns, harvesting paddy or other seasonal crops has become quite difficult. On the other hand, shrimp farming, although popular in coastal areas, has not generated many job opportunities. It is also vulnerable to the effects of climate change, as shrimp farms can be swept away by powerful tidal waves and cyclones. Apart from agricultural activities, opportunities for entrepreneurship and employment in the service sector are also limited in coastal villages.

For all the latest news, follow the Daily Star’s Google News channel.

If you look from the outside, it may seem that local young people and their families have very little hope for the future. Poverty, school dropouts, early marriages and health problems due to the use of salt water are widespread. But if you hear about their dreams, you will be surprised at their resilience.

Many young people in the region have already completed college or even higher education. The internet has now reached even the remotest villages of Padmapukur and Koyra, connecting people and their ideas. Young people don’t just play games on their smartphones, they access information about job opportunities, at home and abroad.

For example, I met an HSC student from the Kaikhali Union of Shyamnagar, Satkhira, who planned to learn computer skills to get freelance or online jobs. Ambitions have no borders. I met Asmat, eight years old, who has already decided to become a pilot. He doesn’t want to be a van driver like his father, who works hard to make ends meet.

Another HSC candidate, Sadiya, is looking for opportunities to work abroad. In fact, many teenagers like her are fascinated with overseas employment. For example, a man told me how he went to work in India every year. Although a friend of his was arrested by the police and imprisoned for a few months for working there illegally, he still considers it profitable because he cannot find any viable job opportunities in his village during the rainy season.

The young population of coastal villages wants to develop their skills and knowledge and advance their careers. But in the absence of training and employment opportunities, many of them are not realizing their potential. They end up working in brick kilns or other informal sector jobs where labor exploitation is quite prevalent. The lack of necessary protection mechanisms also leads to migration failure for some.

However, the parents of these young children also understand the importance of research for local adaptation. Many have expressed hope that the government will make special arrangements to export labor from their climate-vulnerable villages.

Residents of coastal areas may be unaware of the goals of the GCM (Global Compact on Migration) which aim to create a legal route for their migration abroad. They are also unaware of government action plans designed for their adaptation. Yet they are increasing demands for overseas jobs and training opportunities to become self-sufficient and resilient wherever they are.

But how far have we come in achieving the goals of the GCM? So far, he has taken the biggest step by calling on state parties to plan visa options for climate-vulnerable people. But there is still a long way to go to produce substantial policies and translate them into tangible benefits. The politics around climate migration remains an intractable problem. For example, at COP27, climate migration was not on the agenda. But can we discuss climate adaptation and loss and damage without even considering the need to create a global pathway for climate-vulnerable people? Adapting or building resilience will not be so easy if this part is missing.

Advocacy on climate migration at COP27 is an opportunity to influence wealthier countries to play their part. In addition to getting their affirmation or general commitment, we need to make them responsible for providing funding and technical support to establish safe pathways for overseas migration. The Government of Bangladesh can play an important role here by discussing legal frameworks to promote overseas employment for climate-vulnerable people in Bangladesh.

Shakirul Islam is the founding president of the Ovibashi Karmi Unnayan Program (OKUP), a grassroots migrant organization in Bangladesh.

SEAT-VW says to go ahead with Spanish electric car and battery project Wed, 09 Nov 2022 11:20:00 +0000

MADRID, Nov 9 (Reuters) – Volkswagen’s Spanish unit SEAT is to go ahead with a mega project to make electric vehicles and batteries after overcoming initial reservations about the scale of government subsidies for the company of strategic importance for Spain, she announced on Wednesday.

The SEAT-led project, which will also involve 60 other Volkswagen-linked companies, involves an investment of 10 billion euros ($10.06 billion) to electrify Spain’s automotive industry and make the country a European hub for production of electric vehicles and batteries. .

The government said last month that VW-SEAT would receive 397.4 million euros of the 877 million total of the first phase of the PERTE electric vehicle financing program using EU recovery funds in the event of a pandemic.

Although SEAT received the largest allocation, it initially said the funding was not enough. It was not immediately clear whether the funding had been increased. Local media reported that regional authorities had offered additional grants and loans.

“The acceptance of LOSS by the Volkswagen Group and SEAT is a sign of our strong commitment to Spain and Europe,” SEAT Chief Executive Wayne Griffiths said in a video, calling it “a day history for all of us.

The Volkswagen Group will electrify factories in Martorell and Pamplona and Spain will have its first battery factory in Sagunto, he said, adding that the project will create thousands of jobs.

Spain is the second-largest car-producing country in Europe behind Germany and plans to use European Union pandemic relief funds to bolster its industry.

A new round of grants will see the disbursement of more than €2 billion more to provide the continued support the sector needs to successfully tackle electrification, the government has said.

“This is a first step and now we will continue to look for solutions to develop our ambitious electrification plan,” said Griffiths.

($1 = 0.9939 euros)

Reporting by Andrei Khalip and Jessica Jones; Editing by Kirsten Donovan

Our standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

New bill aims to make all electric vehicles in the US immediately eligible for federal subsidies Sun, 06 Nov 2022 19:53:19 +0000

Several members of Congress have co-sponsored a bill that suspends the strict requirements automakers must meet in order to make their electric vehicles eligible for the US$7,500 US tax credit reintroduced with the recent Inflation Reduction Act. Introduced by Congresswoman Terri Sewell, the so-called Affordable Electric Vehicles for America Act essentially seeks to defer all made-in-the-U.S. eligibility requirements for three years. According to Rep. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05), one of the bill’s co-sponsors:

Our legislation takes important steps to make the historic electric vehicle tax credits enacted in the Cut Inflation Act immediately available to consumers, especially working-class and middle-class Americans who want to buy a electric vehicle but need the federal credit to do so. As oil companies insist on continuing to jack up sky-high prices for American families at the pump, these tax credits offer hard-working Americans immediate and significant financial assistance to help them buy a better-for-the-environment vehicle. and their wallet. This bill would be a major victory for consumers, autoworkers and businesses, and I will work with my colleagues to ensure that it is signed into law by President Biden.

The application deadline is intended to give all electric vehicle manufacturers an equal chance to revamp their manufacturing base to comply while their current models remain eligible for subsidies. The new Affordable Electric Vehicles for America Bill calls for deferring all Made-in-America and other subsidy requirements for three years:

(a) FINAL MEETING.—Subparagraph (G) of Section 30D(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by Section 13401(b) of Public Law 117- 169, is amended by inserting ”in the case of any motor vehicle sold after December 31, 2025,” before ”final assembly”.

With the current requirements, the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y won’t become eligible until after January 1, 2023, for example, while some manufacturers like Hyundai that sell wildly popular EVs won’t be eligible at all because their current units on market are not eligible. ‘t assembled in the USA.

Since the Cut Inflation Act took effect, automakers and battery makers have been trying to move production to the United States, announcing new factories and joint ventures that will be based in America at a breakneck pace. .

Tesla’s Korean battery suppliers, for example, have reportedly started cleaning their supply chain of Chinese components or raw materials that would make their cells ineligible for the new wave of electric vehicle subsidies that will run until 2032. Tesla itself has expressed interest in building its own lithium refinery. on the Gulf Coast to ensure a steady, grant-compliant supply of critical battery equipment.

All of these investments in a new manufacturing base or retooling of existing plants will take time, however, and that’s what the new Affordable Electric Vehicles for America bill will try to address by making all vehicles electricity in the United States immediately eligible for the government program. tax credits.

Get the Tesla Motors 24′ Cable Wall Connector at Amazon

A Semiconductor Strategy for the United States Fri, 04 Nov 2022 12:03:14 +0000


Semiconductors are the engine of the digital economy. The semiconductor industry has moved to the forefront of political discourse in the United States and other countries. Surges from America’s economic rivals and challenges facing its own domestic industry, coupled with supply chain shortages, have prompted the US government to “do something” to support the industry. The most visible response is the CHIPS Act, which allocates $39 billion in public funding to national semiconductor manufacturing facilities and additional billions for research and development (R&D) and workforce programs. in the field of semiconductors.1

Many cite America’s declining share of semiconductor manufacturing as a justification for the moves, with “unfair” subsidies from other countries being the root cause. Much of the debate has focused on assessing what other countries are doing and adapting their programs.

Of course, benchmarking is not a strategy. Voluntary exit from global markets is not a strategy. Addressing short-term product shortages (in a way the industry cannot) is not a strategy. In fact, the argument that the industry needs funding to address shortages rings hollow at the time of this writing, as demand for semiconductors for personal computers and smartphones plummets.2 This “downcycle” is not only good for consumers of these products, but it also shifts the policy debate to a more appropriate focus: how does the United States develop a sustainable, market-centric semiconductor policy that pulls harnessed the strengths of the financial system, industry and academia to collectively accelerate the industry – and not just for a few years, but into the decade to come? How is the United States ensuring that global competition in semiconductors doesn’t turn into “zero-sum” negotiations around moving manufacturing capacity, but rather that competition brings out the best in the world? America: Its Ability to Harness the World’s Best Scientists and Entrepreneurs to Solve Difficult Technical Problems, Develop Business Around Those Solutions, and Scale Them Globally?

In short, how does the United States build an open, comprehensive, long-term, committed, patient, and successful government strategy?

To do this, policy must recognize that competitive advantages come not from emulating the approaches of others (for which US capabilities are not suited) but rather from deepening the existing advantages of the US position. These American advantages are deep and wide-ranging, and should not be underestimated.

I recommend that government policy focus not just on increasing America’s manufacturing capacity, but rather on comprehensively strengthening the entire semiconductor industry, enabling it to withstand the supply shocks, drive technology transitions and win future industry checkpoints. Basic research and the commercialization of R&D breakthroughs are the ingredients for future success and will determine the global footprint of semiconductor manufacturing as much as the subsidies.

I recommend using the CHIPS Act funding as share capital in a government fund that can scale via industry and Wall Street co-investment to over $300 billion and can lower the cost of capital of l industry by taking advantage of the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet. This fund would be self-replenishing, as it would harness American innovation to finance projects that have market-level rates of return and would generate significant returns for the government. These returns would then be reinvested in the next set of challenges facing the United States in three, four, five and 10 years.

Instead of copying policies that pin all hope on singular national champions, often dressing them up with policy goals that may or may not be achievable, the equity fund would have tiers of financial and industry partners – enabling it to provide financing to small and large companies — and would operate at all levels of the value chain and across the ecosystem. I urge this U.S. government fund not to compete with incentives from other countries, but would rather encourage it to partner with those who want to seamlessly co-invest in a growing, global semiconductor industry. , diversified, risk-free and market-oriented. The resulting robust global supply chain, populated with more clusters and second sources of supply across Europe and Asia, would only help the United States.

Along with the creation of this fund, the United States could tackle other obstacles to success. The country simply does not have enough engineers to build and accelerate the manufacturing facilities of the plan – targeted and accelerated immigration must begin now. Building and scaling up manufacturing plants (fabs) in the United States takes up to a year longer than in Asia. This self-inflicted slowness, if left unaddressed, will cost billions in lost opportunity and technology leadership for companies building in the United States – thwarting any benefit from the government-funded billions. The fund would have a policy arm that partners with federal and state governments to aggressively simplify permit requirements and close timing gaps. Too few entrepreneurs, professors and venture capitalists are taking risks on future semiconductor technologies and applications – government funding can be a catalyst to reverse this trend, without giving the fund a mandate to pick the winners.

Finally, to effectively execute a long-term, committed, and patient investment program, the United States needs a new hybrid government team capable of evaluating, structuring, and monitoring investments at the intersection of semi- drivers and finance. The government must quickly recruit this team from the spheres of semiconductors, finance, and politics and insulate the team (via legislative action) from short-term political considerations while maintaining the oversight capacity of elected leaders. As the primary point of contact for the execution of US semiconductor strategy, this team would provide speed, consistency, and clarity in its decision-making authority role. It would work through different administrations, through industry cycles, through new generations of technology, and through shifts in geopolitical priorities; and in doing so, it could permanently partner with global industry to create a resilient, winning, global, and market-driven US semiconductor industry.

To make farming viable, farmers demand increased support price, timely subsidies Tue, 01 Nov 2022 23:35:54 +0000 November 02, 2022 | 05:56 IST

To make farming viable, farmers demand increased support price, timely subsidies

Team Herald

MARGAO: Alleging that government programs benefiting farmers remain only on paper and subsidies to support agriculture are not arriving on time, Sirjem Add Tenant Association, a farmers’ organization based in Curtorim, has warned that they might be forced to stop growing and look for other sources of income. Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Milagres Menezes, chairman of the association, demanded that the support price be raised from Rs 20 to Rs 50 as labor and other costs soared. “We have been engaged in cultivation for many generations, but given the current situation, the next generation might not follow because agriculture is no longer viable for us,” Menezes said. Treasurer Rupesh Naik added, “We demand that the government raise the price of the grant. The Chief Minister must visit us physically and look at the practical difficulties we are facing; agricultural reports cannot be prepared in an office.

He said local farmers are not happy with this year’s yield but will soon start plowing the fields for a second paddy crop.

Joe Biden’s $369 billion climate push ripples through developing countries Sat, 29 Oct 2022 04:02:15 +0000

So far, 2022 has not been a great year for emerging economies in Asia. The immediate challenges of a strong dollar, rising interest rates and inflation in everything from food to fuel show little sign of abating.

Now another complicating factor has emerged – from an unlikely source.

The Cut Inflation Act signed into law in August by President Joe Biden contained a far-reaching climate initiative. It commits more than $369 billion in grants and tax credits over a decade to encourage decarbonization and cleaner energy.

As a clear positive U.S. commitment to lower carbon emissions and cleaner energy, this is truly a global good. But there is an unintended consequence: its impact on developing countries’ climate change efforts.

Analysts and executives in some emerging markets like India fear that one of the effects of the new law will be to increase the cost of renewables for them, making coal a more attractive alternative.

“By handing out subsidies, this law may well have the effect of distorting the entire renewable energy supply chain,” says Mahesh Kolli, Chairman and Co-CEO of Greenko Group, a Hyderabad-based renewable energy company. .

For example, he says solar panel suppliers will be able to charge US customers far more than the price at which India imports panels. This means that the price of solar panels will increase for developing countries, which will hinder the switch to renewable energy.

“Taxpayers in the US (and Europe) are hurting India and other emerging markets. Solar power has never been reliable, but in the past it was cheap. Now the incentive is to go back to coal,” says Kolli.

Furthermore, some industry experts point out that the new US measures, particularly in the area of ​​solar energy, are all aimed at increasing domestic production over time. The United States wants to reduce the global reliance on China for everything from batteries to the guts of clean energy infrastructure by giving American companies and global companies an incentive to produce in the United States.

Today, for example, China holds more than 80% of the global solar panel market, according to data from JPMorgan. The bank also claims that China accounts for 10 of the top 15 wind turbine producers, with a total market share of around 55%.

An executive from a major Asian investor said, “It’s American protectionism first.” And if China sends more of its production out of the United States, it could affect other countries like Malaysia, another major source of solar panels.

It is certain, however, that the US legislation will have different impacts across Asia.

In South Korea, there has been anger over the impact of the bill’s decision to eliminate subsidies for electric vehicles assembled outside North America. There are fears that Hyundai and its electric vehicles will be at a disadvantage until the company starts production at a $5.5 billion plant in the US state of Georgia in 2025. But South Korean battery producers present in the United States will benefit from subsidies there. and probably an increase in demand.

For some in countries like India, however, this is another example of how the burdens of climate change fall unevenly. Many countries like Pakistan, India and Bangladesh have less capacity and fewer resources to build resilience to global warming.

India is preparing to lead the G20 in mid-November. He is already positioning himself as the face of those emerging nations who believe that it is the developed countries that are responsible for climate change, when the burden of reversing the evil falls largely on them.

“A transition to low-carbon technologies can only be successful if developing countries have access to resources, including finance, on concessional terms,” ​​said Anantha Nageswaran, Chief Economic Advisor to the Government of India, in a co-authored column in the journal Mint. .

He said developing countries need help to meet the transition costs of moving to less carbon-intensive production in a shorter time frame than their developed counterparts.

“The role of the latter in raising capital on reasonable or concessional terms to enable this transition of developing countries is a sine qua non and, quite frankly, part of their promise made at the Earth Summit in 1992 and under the Paris Agreement in 2015,” he added.

The Cut Inflation Act may be a breakthrough in the United States for climate change, but the burden of adjustment falls increasingly heavily on many cash-strapped emerging markets.

How Digital Twins Can Bridge the U.S. Chipmaking Gap Wed, 26 Oct 2022 10:59:00 +0000 Can we alleviate our overreliance on Asia for the microprocessors used in everything from the appliances in our homes to the laptops we use and the cars we drive?

In early September, the Department of Commerce unveiled its implementation plan to distribute $50 billion of the CHIPS Act in subsidies to build chip factories in the United States and support chip research and development in the United States. . Just this month, new restrictions were placed on China’s ability to buy and manufacture some high-end chips used in military applications. Export controls also impact US companies exporting any semiconductor manufacturing equipment to China.

Already, companies are announcing investments to reduce US dependence on Asia for semiconductors. Intel Corp. plans to spend $20 billion on a new manufacturing facility in New Albany, Ohio, expected to be operational by 2025 and one of the largest silicon manufacturing sites in the world. Taiwan Semiconductor (TSMC) and Samsung (which has already announced plans to open a $17 billion chip factory in Texas in 2024) have also pledged to bring chip manufacturing back to US shores.

At the same time, investments in artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in the semiconductor industry are increasing to increase efficiency in ways we never imagined. In today’s era of extreme automation, AI, coupled with digital twin technology, has the ability to speed up the chip design and manufacturing process and, in turn, help us bridge more quickly the gap between demand and supply.

Digital twins – virtual representations that serve as real-time digital counterparts of physical objects or processes – have evolved significantly since their first practical application at NASA in 2010 to improve simulation of the physical model of spacecraft.

Today’s digital twin technology allows chip makers to improve performance while operating at full capacity without any downtime. Companies such as LAM Research, Bosch (which uses a digital twin in one of its German semiconductor factories) and Applied Materials (a leader in materials engineering solutions used to produce virtually all new chips and displays advanced in the world) are already using substitutes for machine learning models that are more accurate and up to a million times faster than traditional physics-based simulations.

Tech startups such as Tignis (one of our portfolio companies), AspenTech and Ansys are now at the forefront of advancements, leveraging digital twins to optimize industrial operations and make AI and ML available for almost any application.

With AI poised to play a key role in process control and modeling and available for use in any area of ​​engineering simulation, there will be a huge opportunity for disruption in the manufacturing industry through delivering significant improvements in performance, quality, and throughput.

Digital twin modeling can therefore prove invaluable to the chip manufacturing process, contributing to a more streamlined design and production process while reducing reliance on physical prototyping.

Yet, while some chipmakers are already using digital twins to create development models, the technology has not been widely used to optimize production. This is surprising considering that by using data already available, digital twins have the ability to help chipmakers better determine whether production goals are adequate and, if not case, what even a modest increase in production might mean.

By recreating what a physical system looks like in the cloud, manufacturers can identify key learnings and achieve an even greater increase in capacity, all without the risks associated with traditional methods.

With private and public funds at stake, digital twins could be a game-changer for chipmakers, manufacturers and consumers.

Chris Rust is the founder and general partner of Clear Ventures.

The opinions expressed in comments are solely the opinions of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.

More must-have comments posted by Fortune:

Sign up for the Makeshift Features mailing list so you don’t miss our biggest features, exclusive interviews and surveys.

Calls for subsidies as low-income Australians see insurance as a luxury they can no longer afford Sun, 23 Oct 2022 18:11:41 +0000

Malcolm Battersby can keep his shopping bill down by growing his own vegetables.

“I still have tomatoes from the last harvest in the freezer, so it’s really, really good,” he said.

“Without that, it’s just more expense.”

But the Tasmanian pensioner feels helpless when it comes to reducing the cost of his insurance bill.

He switched insurance providers for his home and contents insurance policy three years ago, but the cost has increased by $300 every year since.

“If this continues, I expect that within five years I will be paying over $3,000 a year just for insurance,” he said.

“It’s always the low-income people who seem to get hammered.”

Mr. Battersby knows the risk of not having insurance. His house was one of the few on his street left standing after bushfires tore through the Tasman Peninsula in 2013.

“Some people had no insurance and they were in a lot of disputes. The man across the road, he slept in a tent for good years.

Malcolm Battersby can only afford liability insurance for his car.(ABC News: Maren Preuss)

“I know the risks of not having insurance and I will try hard to keep paying the premiums.”

But when it comes to insuring his 20-year-old car, Mr Battersby can only afford third-party cover.

He said without the car he is “stuck”, describing nearby public transport as unreliable.

He backs calls for insurance to be considered an essential service.

“With the electricity bill they give us a discount, with the rego we get a discount, so that’s just another essential. I just think the government could be a bit more generous,” he said. -he declares.

No insurance means “rooted poverty”

The cost of insurance increased by 3.4% between the June 2021 quarter and June 2022, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Julia Davis of the Financial Legal Rights Center said “part of it is the number of claims insurers are paying and the rising cost of those claims.”

Price increases were even higher in some states.

“In Tasmania alone, insurance has grown by 5.8% over the last year and that really puts it out of reach for many Tasmanians living on low and middle incomes,” said Adrienne Picone of the Tasmanian Council. of Social Service (TasCOSS).

“A recent report…showed that even people living on incomes between $50,000 and $99,000, of whom – half said they were unlikely to get insurance because they couldn’t afford it,” she said.

A woman sitting at the desk.
Adrienne Picone says even Tasmanians on $90,000 a year struggle to afford insurance.(ABC News: Adam Langenberg)

A 2021 report from the South Australian Council for Social Services (SACOSS) found that up to one in three low-income people lacked contents insurance.

The report warns of the increased risk of natural disasters due to climate change in Australia:

“There will be a greater risk of bushfires, droughts, floods and coastal hazards from sea level rise, coastal erosion and coastal storms.

“The consequences of uninsured people will increase dramatically as the frequency of natural disasters continues to increase with climate change.”

Flood fallout expected to push premiums higher

One million households in Australia are already facing “extreme” levels of insurance stress and will bear the brunt of future premium hikes driven by climate change, research has warned.

A man wearing a hat descends the steps of a house.
Malcolm Battersby backs calls for insurance to be considered an essential service.(ABC News: Maren Preuss)

The Insurance Council of Australia said premiums are likely to rise further following catastrophic flooding in Tasmania and Australia’s east coast.

CEO Andrew Hall said collectively it was the biggest flood in Australian history.

He said poor long-term planning in flood-prone areas and rising reconstruction costs were forcing premiums to rise.

“I expect premiums to remain in an upward cycle, largely because the cost of construction and repairs, labor costs, have all gone up across the board,” he said. he declared.

An aerial view shows widespread flooding in Latrobe.
Many towns on the east coast were partially submerged by floodwaters after heavy rains in October.(ABC News: Luke Bowden)

The cost of auto insurance is also becoming increasingly unaffordable for many.

The South Australian Council of Social Service (SACOSS) report found that one in four low-income car owners did not have comprehensive car insurance.

“Our fact sheet on having a car accident and being uninsured is one of the most popular fact sheets on our entire website,” said Julia Davis.

A woman with brown hair and glasses smiles at the camera
Julia Davis says climate change and severe weather will exacerbate the consequences of being uninsured.(Provided)

She said that without insurance, in the event of an accident or car theft, “they just don’t have options, they just can’t absorb that kind of loss and without insurance, we can’t do much to help them.”

“People on low incomes will be the least resilient and the least able to bounce back from a bad event, from theft or an accident or an electrical fire or something that destroys their home or their rental property or their possessions,” he said. she declared. said.

“They won’t have a reserve of savings to rely on, they won’t be able to easily and quickly access credit to replace their assets.

“If they don’t have insurance, it will be very difficult for them to get back on their feet.

“It may just entrench poverty for people who are already struggling.”

Calls for insurance to be an “essential service”

Portrait of Malcolm Battersby on the deck outside his house.
Malcolm Battersby is able to cut food costs by growing his own vegetables.(ABC News: Maren Preuss)

In Australia, the only way to protect assets is to purchase insurance in the private market.

“There will always be vulnerable, low-income members of our society who cannot afford market rates for all services,” said Julia Davis.

“Insurance plays a very important social role in this country in keeping communities resilient and united.

“I just think it’s time to start talking about insurance as an essential service.”