Bundestag Climate protection in Fast track

Status: 06/24/2021 4:41 a.m.

The Bundestag wants to pass the stricter climate protection law today. The opposition speaks of a quick shot – and doubts the effect.

From Martin Polansky, ARD capital studio

The federal government hastily got the new climate protection law in motion. At the end of April, the Federal Constitutional Court ruled: The previous Climate Protection Act of 2019 must be improved because the measures to reduce emissions from 2031 are inadequate. After the decision in Karlsruhe, there would actually have been time until the end of next year to remedy the deficiencies. But the Union and the SPD wanted to prove their ability to act again in terms of climate protection.

Environment Minister Svenja Schulze from the SPD speaks of a “very important week for climate protection in Germany”. “This means that climate neutrality will become law in Germany in 2045. And with this, we will fulfill the mandate of the Federal Constitutional Court in the shortest possible time and ensure a fair balance between the generations.” The Karlsruhe judges had emphasized that future generations could be burdened too much in their freedoms by climate protection measures, if not changed in time.

2045 greenhouse gas neutral

The amendment now stipulates that Germany is to become greenhouse gas neutral as early as 2045 – i.e. from then on it will not emit more carbon dioxide than is absorbed primarily through forests. To achieve this, the annual savings targets for power plants, industry, traffic, agriculture and buildings are tightened.

And after a long turmoil, the federal government has agreed on some immediate measures: for example, additional wind turbines and solar systems in the coming year and simplified repowering, in which old wind turbines are replaced by new and higher ones. Communities should also benefit financially when they provide open space for solar systems.

And: The federal government has launched an eight billion euro investment program to accelerate the energy transition. “We want to involve the citizens with us. We want to get people excited about climate protection. That is why we rely on the promotion of environmental technologies,” says the chairwoman of the Union in the Bundestag Environment Committee, Anja Weisgerber from the CSU. “And we want to prevent jobs from being relocated due to excessively strict climate protection requirements. We achieved that in the agreement.” Some in the Union and the SPD are concerned that voters’ enthusiasm for climate protection could wane as soon as it becomes concrete and costly. Therefore, the SPD has blocked plans of the Union to increase the CO2 price for fuel, heating oil and natural gas, which has been in effect since the beginning of the year, more quickly.

Costs for the tenants?

At the same time, the CO2 costs for heating remain entirely with the tenants. The Union did not want to burden the landlords additionally. And: CDU / CSU have blocked the SPD’s plans for a significantly faster expansion of renewable energies. Because new wind turbines and power lines are unpopular in many places.

Criticism comes from the environmental expert of the Greens Oliver Krischer: “We have agreements in the smallest details that hardly make a difference in the matter,” he says. “And there is no progress at all with the major measures such as phasing out coal, refurbishing buildings, or switching off combustion engines.”

“A quick shot”

The Left and the FDP speak of an election maneuver. The federal government does not have a clear plan for climate protection, says the FDP environmental expert Lukas Köhler: “What the federal government is doing now is a quick shot that is neither coordinated at European level nor in any way really stipulates that it works efficiently and purposefully. ” With the government majority of the Union and SPD, the tightened climate protection is likely to pass the Bundestag today. The current federal government no longer has to achieve the new climate targets. To this end, future governments will be bound to the goal of greenhouse gas neutrality in 2045

The 8X boss of the ‘$22 billion company’ will answer questions via an online channel The content of the email, this 8X character (also known as Marin) stated: “In the past time, our corporation has registered a business with charter capital of 500,000 billion. This has caused a stir in public opinion and has caused a lot of problems. People who ask questions and raise many questions about our corporation To clarify all doubts I am Nguyen Vu Quoc Anh, currently the Chairman and CEO of GAB group, will officially open a press conference to answer questions. questions about the registration of Charter Capital 500 trillion and a brief introduction about GAB Group”. The press conference will be held tomorrow Tuesday, June 15, 2021 online via its own Youtube channel. According to Article 41 of the Press Law, Vietnamese agencies, organizations and citizens have the right to hold press conferences to announce, declare, explain and respond to contents related to their tasks, powers or interests. of that agency, organization or individual. Regarding the regulations on press conferences according to Article 19, Chapter V, Decree No. 51/2002/ND-CP of the Government, organizations and citizens who want to hold a press conference must notify in writing at the latest twenty-four (24) hours before the press conference, the state management agency in charge of the press, specifically organizations and citizens in the provinces and centrally run cities, shall notify the People’s Committee of the province or city directly under the Central Government. (Department of Information and Communication). Talking over the phone, Quoc Anh acknowledged that this was not a press conference, because he had not asked for permission from the Department of Information and Communications, so this was an online form to answer questions from the community about the company’s huge capital. As VietnamFinance has information, in 1 month, Nguyen Vu Quoc Anh personally established 5 companies at the same time. Specifically, Mr. Nguyen Vu Quoc Anh held the controlling share when, along with other shareholders, on May 20, he registered a new establishment with a charter capital of up to VND 500,000 billion for the Technology Investment Group Joint Stock Company. global auto. Also on May 20, they registered to establish a joint stock company of a global auto trading group with a capital of VND 25,000 billion and a joint stock company of Global Automated Tools Group with a capital of VND 100 billion. On May 28, Mr. Quoc Anh continued to register to establish a global luxury gift group Joint Stock Company, with a charter capital of VND 50 billion. Previously, on April 27, Mr. Quoc Anh established E-Commerce Headhunter Vietnam Co., Ltd., with a charter capital of 1 billion VND. The total charter capital of these 5 companies is VND 523,151 billion, of which Quoc Anh personally accounted for a total capital of 523,102 billion (equivalent to USD 22.7 billion). The registered address of the company is a level 4 house at 109, street 3, Phuoc Binh ward, TP. Thu Duc, City. HCM. In addition, the sales offices of large companies are located in Bitexco Financial Tower and Landmark 81. Although located in two different places, the leased floors are operated by Compass Offices, a service provider. virtual office and serviced office for rent. According to the homepage of Compass Offices, the rental price of virtual offices at Bitexco Financial Tower and Landmark 81 is only VND 1,200,000/month, including services such as providing business registration addresses, mailboxes, and call centers. customer care… Compass Offices currently provides virtual and serviced office rentals in 9 major cities across Asia-Pacific. In the city. In Ho Chi Minh City, the company has 2 branches at Bitexco Financial Tower and Landmark 81. Virtual office leasing is a service that provides businesses with a physical address and other office facilities, but does not include an office. With a virtual office, the business does not have a workspace but still has a registered business address, mailbox, answering service or other services.

Professor Marc Lipsitch, professor of epidemiology at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, said the scientists signed a letter published in the journal Science to call for the attention of the scientific community. “What we’re saying is that the available evidence doesn’t rule out a laboratory origin of COVID-19, nor does it rule out a natural origin. And there’s really no solid evidence either. It’s just that. There’s quite a bit of evidence lacking right now, and we’re calling for it to be addressed because it’s such an important question,” said Prof. Meanwhile, the Business Standard on May 29 said that since last year, Professor Angus Dalgleish (British) and Norwegian scientist Birger Sorensen have come to a conclusion about the possibility that “the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated from To confirm their position, the two scientists published a 22-page paper in the journal Biophysical Discovery, explaining that, in the course of their research Researching the vaccine, they discovered “special traces” that the virus was not of natural origin.The clue was a row of four amino acids, which generate a positive charge and bind to negative human cells. . “The law of nature is that you can’t have four positive amino acids in a row. The only way to have this is to make it yourself,” commented Professor Angus Dalgleish. The article by these two scientists also affirms: “We now have no doubt that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was purposefully manipulated, forcing us to reconsider the We think there are retro-engineered viruses. They changed the virus, then tried to figure it out in sequence years ago. We’ve seen leaks. We know it’s happening in the lab, and we know it’s happening. We also know from the reports we’ve found that the coronavirus is studied in Biosafety Level 2 or 3 laboratories.” Both scientists are respected experts: Prof Angus Dalgleish is a professor of oncology in London known for his groundbreaking work on HIV vaccines while Birger Sorensen is a virologist and president of Immunor Pharmaceuticals, which is developing a COVID-19 vaccine called Biovacc-19. On May 26, US President Joe Biden ordered the country’s intelligence community to unravel the conspiracy theory that the virus leaked from a Chinese laboratory and must provide an answer within 90 days. Doubts Apparently, the hypothesis that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could be the result of a scientific experiment has heated up the debate among scientists about the operation of the safest biological laboratories in the world today. . The Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is suspected of leaking the virus, is a virology research institute managed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). Located in Jiangxia District, Wuhan, Hubei, Wuhan Institute of Virology has China’s first biosafety level 4 (BSL – 4) laboratory and has close relations with the National Laboratory. Galveston in the US, the Center International de Recherche en Infectiologie in France, and the National Microbiology Laboratory in Canada. Gregory Koblentz, director of Biodefense Graduate, revealed that BSL-4 is built to work safely and securely against the most dangerous bacteria and viruses that can cause serious illnesses for which there is no treatment or vaccine. : “There’s an HVAC filtration system, so viruses can’t escape through the exhaust. Any wastewater that leaves the facility is treated with chemicals or high temperatures to ensure that nothing remains alive. The researchers themselves are highly trained and wear protective clothing.” Statistics show that there are 59 BSL-4s around the world but there are no binding international standards for safe, confidential and responsible work with pathogens. The report, Mapping Maximum Biological Containment Labs Globally, shows that accidents can happen, sometimes in top-tier facilities, and more often in lower-level labs. For example, the human H1N1 virus – the same flu that caused the 1918 pandemic, was leaked in 1977 in the Soviet Union (former) and China. In 2001, a mentally disturbed employee at a US laboratory sent anthrax spores across the country, killing five people. Two Chinese researchers exposed to SARS in 2004 spread the disease to others, resulting in one death. In 2014, a handful of vials of smallpox were discovered during an office move by the US Food and Drug Administration. Lynn Klotz, a senior scientist at the Centers for Non-Proliferation and Control, has been sounding the alarm for years about the public safety threats posed by such facilities. “Human error accounts for more than 70% of errors in laboratories, adding that US researchers must rely on data from freedom of information requests to learn about incidents.” hey,” Lynn Klotz said. These incidents do not mean that COVID-19 has leaked from a laboratory and the fact that there is no scientific evidence to support the scenario yet, said molecular biologist Richard Ebright of Rutgers University. laboratory accident for this pandemic.

This image almost completely coincides with the information and speculation so far. Besides, there is a special feature that will surely make the sisters fall in love, which is the extremely eye-catching pink color scheme of this iPhone. The image is said to be dummy of the upcoming iPhone 13 Pro Max model This iPhone 13 Pro Max first appeared on Weibo on June 1, then quickly received the attention of the Chinese online community, then spread to Twitter and quickly became a phenomenon on this social network. According to this model, we can see that the design of the iPhone 13 Pro Max is not too different from its predecessor 12 Pro Max with 2 flat glass front and back, promising to still use unique Ceramic Shield technology. rights as predecessors. The camera cluster also seems larger to accommodate upcoming upgrades. The biggest highlight that makes everyone admire is not from the striking pink back of this 13 Pro Max, but the glossy steel border, of course also pink, but looks “luxurious and smooth”. ” more. An image of the iPhone 13 Pro Max was posted on Twitter not long ago iPhone 13 Series is expected to be launched by Apple around September this year, if there is no impact from the global epidemic. According to leaked information, this will be a slight upgrade from the iPhone 12 series and will remain the same 4 versions as mini, standard, Pro and Pro Max. According to recent information from major technology sites, important components for this new iPhone line such as screens and processors have begun to be mass-produced by outsourcing firms to ensure power supply. supply products to Apple, despite the “thirst for chips” that has swept through and rattled the technology world since the beginning of the year. Photo: Twitter

Photo: The Verge The above information was shared by the developers of the graphic and design application Artstudio Pro on the Procreare forum. Accordingly, the application can only use up to 5 GB of RAM on the latest iPad. According to the developers, trying to use more than this amount of space causes the application to crash. Photo: The Verge “There was a big problem with the iPad Pro running the M1 chip. After testing the pressure tests on an iPad Pro M1 with 16 GB of RAM, it turned out that the application could only use 5 GB of RAM or less. If used more, the application will crash. This limit is only 0.5 GB more RAM than the old iPads that only had 6 GB of RAM,” the programmer shared. Photo: The Verge Thus, with single applications, as is the case with Artstudio Pro, users do not seem to benefit too much even though the new iPad Pro has an increased RAM capacity. However, overall, with the increased amount of RAM, you can still open more applications to run in the background at the same time because iPadOS itself is not limited to the amount of RAM used. Photo: The Verge The iPad has long been criticized that iPadOS doesn’t allow users to take advantage of the device’s full hardware potential. Apple will hold this year’s WWDC event on June 7. Here, iPadOS 15 will certainly be introduced as well. Bloomberg previously said that iPadOS 15 will bring a completely redesigned Home screen.

Illustration. Source: CNN “Electric car data security is very important. And Tesla will make efforts to ensure this data security,” billionaire Tesla posted information on Weibo. According to Reuters and Bloomberg, earlier this year, the Chinese military banned Tesla electric vehicles from entering military facilities over concerns that the cameras installed in the vehicles could be used for surveillance. Tesla CEO – Elon Musk voiced China’s concerns about this information. “We always want to keep any customer information confidential. If a customer finds out that Tesla is using an electric car to spy in China or anywhere else, we will shut down,” Billion said US billionaire Elon Musk said at the China Development Forum in March. Tesla has recently faced many challenges in the Chinese electric vehicle market. In February, the company was summoned by regulators to discuss the quality of electric vehicles made in Shanghai. Chinese authorities expressed concern about a number of problems with the vehicles manufactured by the company, such as abnormal acceleration and battery fires. The company has faced direct criticism from consumers. In February, Tesla was forced to apologize after a customer provided a video of an issue with charging. In a public interview last month, billionaire Musk emphasized: “I am very confident about Tesla’s future in China. The Chinese economy will thrive in the next decade and will become a major economy. best of the world”.

Glass bridge over the mountain, Longjing city, Jilin, China The world in general, and especially in China, is favoring the trend of building glass bridges in rugged mountainous areas to attract tourists who love adventurous experiences. But these glass bridges raise a lot of doubts about the level of safety, especially after the recent glass bridge was severely damaged by wind and storm in China recently. Glass bridge trend blooms, risks go hand in hand There is no organization that has statistics on the number of glass bridges in the world, but one thing is for sure, as tourism develops, the number of new glass bridges, with records of length and sophistication, is built in different places. where the terrain is difficult… more. In the West, there are some names such as Tower Bridge in London (UK), Skywalk Bridge in Grand Canyon (Arizona, USA…). In Asia, China is leading this trend with an estimated 60 glass bridges that have been built across the country of billions of people since 2016, according to the Earth Journal of the China Geological Museum. Even, many Chinese glass bridges entered the Guinness World Records. For example, the glass bridge at Tianmen Mountain, Zhangjiajie, 430m long, spanning two cliffs 300m deep, opened to visitors in 2016. At that time, this was the tallest and longest glass bridge in the world. Recently, this record was broken by the bridge in Qingyuan, Guangdong, China with a length of 526m. Vietnam is also not out of the trend of developing glass bridges with the names of Dragon Cloud Bridge in Sapa and Love Bridge in Moc Chau… However, since this trend has blossomed, China has witnessed a lot of incidents that threaten the lives of tourists, making the people of this country in particular and the world question the level of safety. Recently, on May 7, stormy winds damaged the suspension bridge on Mount Piyan (Longjing City, Jilin Province), many of the bridge’s glass panels were cracked, some were even swept away, causing a tourist stuck, trembling, clinging to the bridge wall in front of winds up to 150km/h. Although the guest in trouble was safely brought down by the rescue team, checked for health and psychology and did not cause any other consequences, local authorities decided to close the bridge and conduct a comprehensive inspection. The entire incident was recorded by nearby tourists and posted on social media, raising concerns about the safety of glass bridges across China. “Too many glass bridges have been built in the last few years to serve tourists, but how can we ensure the safety of these structures?” said a doctor surnamed Li in Sichuan province. question. What are the technical standards and operation of the glass bridge? Photos of tourists stuck on the glass bridge According to Xinhua, many local governments of this country have published guidelines to ensure glass safety since 2018. In particular, Hubei province has published a set of technical standards for bridges and roads for people walk in glass at attractions, clearly stating instructions on materials, location, design, construction as well as operating procedures. For example, glass bridges should not be built in places where earthquakes often occur, must be closed during bad weather or natural disasters, and limit the number of people on the bridge to no more than 3 people/m2. In potentially hazardous locations, the bridge management must provide additional protective equipment, install warning signs in Chinese and at least 1 foreign language. Around the world, according to Paul Bingham, a materials scientist at Sheffield Hallam University (UK), designers and architects always think very carefully before choosing materials. “If using glass as a building material, there will be two weaknesses. The first is glass, which is fragile. The second is that the glass has no crystals, so if there is a crack on the surface, it will quickly spread and be difficult to restore,” said Paul Bingham. Therefore, a lot of research on glass materials has been done focusing on finding ways to limit cracking of the glass surface. “A scratched glass is much weaker than pristine glass when it has not been exposed to dust or air,” says Mr. Bingham. A number of new glass materials manufacturing techniques have been invented to make bridges, which is to add a layer of material such as polymer to the outside, preventing the glass from being cracked or scratched. This technique was used to build bridges in Longjing, China as outlined above. Many other glass manufacturers may put thin layers of flexible polymer in between the glass layers in case one glass breaks, leaving another layer intact to prevent total cracking. In general, the British expert affirmed, if the glass bridge is built by the above methods, it is basically safe. The most important thing is to ensure safety in operation, especially in case of bad weather. Around March 2018, according to China state television (CCTV), Hebei province had to close all 32 glass bridges for safety checks. In 2019, a man in Guangxi, China slipped on a glass bridge due to heavy rain, fell off the bridge and died.

Wuhan Institute of Virology – which is hypothesized to be the source of Covid-19 infection. (Source: Reuters) According to a report published on 30/3, a joint investigation by the World Health Organization (WHO) and China conducted on the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus causing acute respiratory infections (Covid- 19) concluded that it was “extremely unlikely” that the virus had escaped a laboratory in the central Chinese city of Wuhan. The origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is still questionable The report concludes that the virus is most likely transmitted to humans from an unknown animal, while contradicting the theory made by former US President Donald Trump that the Chinese lab may be the birthplace. virus. While China praised the report, 14 countries including Japan, the US, Australia, the UK, Canada and South Korea have expressed “common concern” about the study and claim that the investigation has was “delayed a long time and lacked access to complete data and originals”, and called for “a fast, efficient, transparent, science-based and independent process” to produce international assessments in case of future outbreaks. WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus said: “All theories are still being discussed. Although the team has concluded that the laboratory leak is the least likely hypothesis, it requires requiring further investigation, it is likely that additional missions including many experts will have to be deployed. According to WHO Director-General, the inspection team should have access to full data including biological samples from at least September 2019. He asserted that this report is a very important beginning and not the end. “We have not found the origin of the virus yet, and must continue to follow the science without missing any details”, Mr. Tedros Ghebreyesus stressed. While the majority of the report focuses on molecular studies, viral evolution, and potentially host animals, the report on potential laboratory leaks does. Very sketchy presentation. Although the host origin of SARS-CoV-2 is widely recognized, some scientists still maintain the view that this virus may have been collected and stored in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, despite the fact that Chinese scientists have rejected this claim. Viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 were reported to have been found in bats and pangolins, but an intermediate host for transmission to humans has yet to be identified. This report is based on a study conducted by an international team of experts that mink and cats, which are known to be susceptible animals, may be one of the potential hosts. Need more information The Trump administration once hypothesized that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and claimed that some researchers there had already had Covid-19-like symptoms in the fall. year 2019. However, the team said they found no evidence to support this claim during a January-February 2021 field trip to Wuhan City to investigate the source of the virus. The Chinese authorities have stated that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have been introduced into the country through imported frozen food. Such transmission is possible but cannot be verified as imported frozen products are not considered a potential path of infection during early spread, the team report said. viruses and there were no tests for them at the time. Matthew Kavanagh, a researcher at Georgetown University, said the report said more in-depth information about the origin of the virus, but more information is needed. “Obviously, the Chinese government does not provide all the necessary data, and until they do this, the conclusions will be very difficult,” said researcher Matthew Kavanagh. The reporting team included experts from many different countries and officials from WHO, World Veterinary Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The team, after being quarantined for two weeks in Wuhan in mid-January 2021, inspected the research institute and other places believed to be related to the virus such as seafood markets. They also had discussions with Chinese experts. Representatives of the WHO and China expert group at a joint press conference in Wuhan on February 9. (Source: Reuters) “Opposite” views Jesse Bloom, an expert on evolutionary biology at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle (USA), said he does not believe that a lab leak is unlikely. The expert agrees that the virus naturally evolved to spread to humans, but he did not see any explanation in the report disproving the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could catch. source from a laboratory. Meanwhile, Mr. Peter Daszak, a member of the WHO expert group, a British ecologist in infectious diseases, and the executive director of the Ecological Health Coalition – a disease prevention organization in New York. , has voiced opposition to the flow of comments criticizing the research results and the degree of cooperation of China. Mr. Peter Daszak said that the lab leak hypothesis “has political purposes from the very beginning”. Dr. Daszak added that the WHO team of experts was not prohibited from participating in interviews with scientists who were on the ground during the early stages of the pandemic. Mr. Daszak himself has also been accused of a conflict of interest due to collaborating research on the virus with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which he thinks an infectious disease ecologist should do. “We were in the right place because we knew there was a risk of disease outbreaks. We were working there with this exact team and it happened,” said Dr Daszak. A group of scientists not affiliated with WHO is calling for a new investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic. They argue that such an investigation needs to consider the possibility of the virus spreading from a laboratory in Wuhan or infecting people inside it. (synthetic)