domingo, 12 de febrero de 2023

ENERGY TRANSITIONS AND COLONIALISM

 


ENERGY TRANSITIONS AND COLONIALISM
What does history tell us about energy transitions?
The simple and undoubted premise: free lands where the natives lived fishing, hunting and cultivating to meet their needs were enslaved and their lands colonized to produce wealth for foreign countries.
What do energy transitions tell us about the history of colonialism?
They are the intertwined histories of colonies that were forced to transform their resources into energy for the production of wealth for the colonizers.
Social aspects are often left out of discussions of energy transitions, which are often dominated by economic, engineering, or scientific narratives.
energy colonialism. The concept of energy colonialism became a prominent issue when Power Shift Africa director and celebrity activist Mohamed Adow accused European nations of practicing energy colonialism.
Energy colonialism is defined as a situation in which foreign countries and companies use land and resources belonging to another country to generate energy for their own benefits and profits.
In the 21st century, a transition is needed in which the energy sources used massively in the last two centuries will no longer be available. At the same time, this crisis exacerbates socio-environmental and economic conflicts.
In this sense, there is an open debate on renewable energies due to the problems and environmental impacts generated by fossil fuels in the environment.
In times of crisis like these, if we are serious about going beyond fossil fuels, it is crucial to take a close look at the links between fossil fuels and the economy, and address power relations and hierarchies in the energy system. These relationships have their roots in colonial legacies, as well as in practices of dispossession and looting.
When we talk about energy in the popular imagination, we talk about resources. The modality of control and looting of these resources is called extractivism, perhaps because it initially arose from extracting gold and other metals as well as precious stones of great value for the European market.
It was launched in 1492 with the conquest of the Americas and is structured through colonialism, slavery, exploitation and sheer violence. It continues today with the development of energy colonism.
Let's call things by their name: it is the energetic version of colonialism. And the problem is that the rich once again tell us to stay poor, and we must once again submit to their greed schemes.
This situation has been imposed and shaped by colonialism and attempts to break it have thus far been defeated by new tools of subjugation: crippling debts, the religion of "free market/trade", structural adjustment programs (such as the Fiscal Control Board ), among others.
These tools of domination not only lock countries into an economic model with external objectives, responding to the demands of rich countries and foreign corporations, but also limit the political space to make sovereign decisions, such as moving away from fossil fuels and develop an equitable energy system.
France did it with Total in Algeria: Displacing the costs of a destructive industry is a strategy of capital in which environmental racism joins energy colonialism, inserting a people into a subordinate position with a profoundly unfair division of labor: on the one hand, providers of a reservoir of cheap labor, and on the other as a captive market.
A green and just transition must fundamentally transform and decolonize our economic system from what is unfit for the purpose of environmental justice on a social, ecological, and even biological level.
We need to break with the colonialist and racialized (as well as gender) logic of energy systems that, if not questioned, only generate a new extractivism and exploitation (of nature and work).
Any and all conversations about the green transition and sustainability must break through the rhetorical facade of colonial schemes of plunder and domination.

sábado, 3 de septiembre de 2022

LUMA Energy - x-ray of a failed change



How low are the criteria to “assess” LUMA Energy? When do we call a fiasco by its name?

Despite a few real organizational successes, change remains elusive and few manage the process as well as they would like.

The brutal fact is that around 70% of all change initiatives fail. (Harvard Business Review)

The result is that most change efforts come at a high cost, both human and financial. To improve the odds, it is imperative to understand much better the nature and process of change. But even that is not enough.

Organizational research as a science suggests that there are two archetypes, or theories, of change as to why and how changes should be made.

Theory E is change based on economic value.

Theory O is change based on organizational capacity.

Both are valid models, but the E-theory strategies are more common than the O- theory strategies.

The deep and broad problem with LUMA Energy is that it has failed both perspectives, from both an economic value perspective and it has failed miserably on achieving a minimal organizational capacity.

Why does LUMA Energy fail so miserably, is a multi-layered question.

In a change approach, the goal is to build corporate culture and human capacity through individual and organizational learning: the process of changing, getting feedback, reflecting, and making more changes.

LUMA Energy has not achieved any of the above.

Conventional wisdom tells us that “what starts badly ends worse.”

After 14 months of setbacks, LUMA Energy is similar to that of the sports organization whose team has not achieved a victory throughout the season but instead a string of embarrassing defeats, is excluded from the final series, has lost its fans and the franchise is bankrupt.

The truth is that metrics are useless when used as a rationalization tool to try to justify the obvious. There is no possible creativity that overcomes the absolute existential fallacy.

More service interruptions, low customer satisfaction, higher rates, inability to achieve efficient cost controls, worse, inefficient, and longer repairs, dangerous electrical explosions and charge fluctuations, and inability to assemble an adequate workforce sums LUMA Energy's failings.

The fiction is over.

So how stuck in the mud do we have to be to realize that not only won't we get out of the mud this way but sink deeper and deeper into disaster?

I remember the case of an incompetent student who, upon receiving his poor grades, Igor’s to ask for an academic review and the professor simply has to tell him that an “incomplete” F is insurmountable, it is subzero, he/she failed, period. 

There is no valid probatory because there is simply nothing left to prove.


Pachi Ortizfeliciano


Postscript.- Perhaps the alleged non-existence of “metrics” is just a miserable excuse or unacceptable subterfuge to not admit what 90% of the Puerto Rican people know: LUMA Energy has not served us and does not serve us, period.



LUMA Energy - radiografía de un fracaso


¿Qué tan bajo es el criterio para “evaluar” a LUMA Energy? ¿Cuándo llamamos un fiasco por su nombre?

A pesar de algunos escasos éxitos organizacionales reales, el cambio sigue siendo difícil de lograr y pocos manejan el proceso tan bien como les gustaría. 

El hecho brutal es que alrededor del 70% de todas las iniciativas de cambio fracasan. (HarvardBusinessReview)

El resultado es que la mayoría de los esfuerzos de cambio tienen un alto costo, tanto humano como económico. Para mejorar las probabilidades, es imperativo comprender mucho mejor la naturaleza y el proceso de cambio. Pero incluso eso no es suficiente.

La investigación organizacional como ciencia sugiere que hay dos arquetipos, o teorías, de cambio sobre por qué y cómo se deben realizar los cambios. 

La teoría E es el cambio basado en el valor económico.

La teoría O es el cambio basado en la capacidad organizativa.

Ambos son modelos válidos pero las estrategias de cambio E son más comunes que las estrategias de cambio O.

El problema profundo y amplio de LUMA Energy es que ha fracasado en ambas consideraciones tanto desde la perspectiva de valor económico y ha fracasado miserablemente en lograr el mínimo de capacidad organizativa.

¿Por qué fracasa tan estrepitosamente LUMA Energy, es una pregunta de varias capas?

En un enfoque de cambio, el objetivo es desarrollar la cultura corporativa y la capacidad humana a través del aprendizaje individual y organizacional: el proceso de cambiar, obtener retroalimentación, reflexionar y realizar más cambios.

LUMA Energy no ha logrado nada de lo anterior.

La sabiduría convencional nos asevera que “lo que comienza mal, termina peor.”

Tras 14 meses de tropiezos el cuadro de LUMA Energy es similar al del dirigente deportivo cuyo equipo no ha logrado una victoria en toda la temporada sino una ristra de derrotas bochornosas merecedoras de abucheos, está excluido de las series finales, ha perdido su fanaticada y la franquicia está en quiebra.

Lo cierto es que las métricas son inútiles cuando se emplean como herramienta de racionalización para intentar de  justificar lo evidente. No hay creatividad posible que supere la falacia existencial absoluta.

Más interrupciones del servicio, menor satisfacción del cliente, tarifas más costosas, incapacidad para alcanzar controles de costos eficientes, reparaciones peores y más prolongadas, peligrosas explosiones y fluctuaciones eléctricas e imposibilidad de reunir una fuerza laboral adecuada suman las fallas de LUMA Energy.

Se acabaron los cuentos.

Entonces, ¿qué tan atrapados en el fango tenemos que estar para darnos cuenta de que no solo no saldremos del lodo sino que nos hundiremos cada vez más en el desastre?

Recuerdo el caso del alumno incompetente que al recibir sus notas va a pedir revisión académica y el profesor simplemente le tiene que decir que una F “incomplete” es insuperable, es subcero, reprobaste, punto. No hay probatoria porque simplemente no queda nada que probar.


Pachi Ortizfeliciano


Posdata.- Tal vez la supuesta inexistencia de “métricas” es sólo una miserable excusa o inaceptable subterfugio para no admitir lo que el 90% del pueblo sabe: LUMA Energy no nos ha servido ni nos sirve, punto.



jueves, 1 de septiembre de 2022

The Great Puerto Rico Electricity System Fraud



The debate surrounding LUMA Energy is not limited to constant blackouts; this neoliberal proposal has been created to exploit Puerto Rico (to the extreme) while delaying the transition to renewable sources and plotting a scheme of illicit enrichment of the federal funds for the reconstruction of the grid and system.

They are scamming us, the narrative is straightforward, there have been 7 increases in electricity rates since LUMA Energy was inaugurated (data); These increases respond to requests from LUMA Energy to the Puerto Rico Energy Bureau based on supposed increases in operating costs (data); Specifically, the last two hikes have been requested under the premise of rising crude oil prices (data); The Puerto Rico Energy Bureau recently announced a "reduction" in the rate of 8.2% (data), 

The truth is that the cost of oil has fallen (to 2020 prices) and has continued to fall for more than three months and today is trading at less than 27% of the price used for the hike proposals. 

Conclusion- the increases are scams because they do not reflect the reality of the market, which is why they de facto inflate costs. 

Regarding renewable sources, the truth is that Puerto Rico has not reached 4% of electricity generation by renewables. Also, many of the residents who have installed photovoltaic systems have not received adjusted bills even as they use much less, even no electricity from the grid. 

In a fascinating sidebar, the Pierluisi administration has not in any manner nor form communicated nor addressed to the island the recently approved Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and its energy implications.

This is not an accusation devoid of references, it is a cold analysis based on data. It seems to prove the obvious complicity of the Puerto Rico Energy Bureau in the scheme to defraud PREPA customers in collusion with LUMA Energy and the Pedro Pierluisi administration.


Pachi Ortizfeliciano

 

La Gran Estafa del Sistema Eléctrico en Puerto Rico.

 


El debate en torno a LUMA no se limita a los apagones; esta propuesta neoliberal se ha creado para explotarnos (hasta lo exageradamente injusto) mientras se retrasa la transición a fuentes renovables y traman un esquema de enriquecimiento ilícito de los fondos federales de reconstrucción de la red.

Nos estafan, la narrativa es clara, han habido 7 alzas en las tarifas de electricidad desde que inauguro LUMA Energy (dato); estas alzas responden a solicitudes de LUMA Energy al Negociado de Energía a base de un supuesto encarecimiento de los costos operacionales (dato); específicamente las últimas dos alzas se han solicitado bajo la premisa del encarecimiento del petróleo crudo (dato); Recientemente el Negociado de Energía anunció una “rebaja” de la tarifa de 8.2% (dato), ahora lo cierto es que el costo del petróleo ha descendido (inclusive a precios del 2020) y sigue en baja desde hace más de tres meses y hoy se cotiza en menos del 27% del precio utilizado para las alzas. Conclusión- las alzas son estafas porque no reflejan la realidad del mercado por lo cual de facto inflan los costos. Referente a las fuentes renovables lo cierto es que Puerto Rico no ha alcanzado el 4% de generación por concepto de renovables y además los residentes que han instalado sistemas fotovoltaicos no se le ajustan las facturas aún cuando consumen mucho menos hasta nada de electricidad de la rojo. No es una acusación desprovista de referencias, es un análisis a base de datos. Parece probar la evidente complicidad del Negociado de Energía en el esquema de estafar a los clientes de la AEE en concubinato con LUMA Energy y la administración de Pedro Pierluisi.


Pachi Ortizfeliciano 

martes, 16 de agosto de 2022

El descalabro de LUMA Energy y la transición a fuentes fotovoltaicas

 


La noticia que El Nuevo día incumple en comunicar adecuadamente es que la Cámara aprobó un amplio proyecto de ley sobre impuestos, salud y clima, denominado Ley de Reducción de la Inflación (IRA), (tampoco Pierluisi se ha manifestado a pesar de que se espera que Biden firme la legislación ya que es pieza central de su agenda).

Tal vez la apatía local se deba a que el plan incluye un gasto récord de $369 mil millones en políticas climáticas y energéticas que contradice a LUMA Energy, ya que favorece la expansión de la energía solar en los techos residenciales y las microredes en comunidades de ingresos bajos y medios.
La Ley de Reducción de la Inflación hace que sea más barato frenar las emisiones de calentamiento climático residenciales y comunitarios, y en otras palabras significa reducir las facturas de electricidad.
Esto es lo que necesita saber sobre tres (3) formas en que propulsa tomar decisiones más ecológicas:
1. Dinero para paneles solares residenciales y almacenamiento de energía. Para los propietarios de viviendas que buscan capturar energía renovable ellos mismos, la Ley aumenta los créditos fiscales existentes para energía solar residencial y los ofrece también para los sistemas de almacenamiento de energía en el hogar, básicamente baterías gigantes.
Las instalaciones solares en la azotea tienden a costar entre $15,000 y $25,000, reducir entre $4,500 a $7,500 es una consideración importante.
Los propietarios de viviendas podrían recuperar hasta el 30% del costo/ inversión de la energía solar, retroactivo a principios de 2022 y hasta 2032, y la cantidad se reduciría hasta finales de 2034. El mismo incentivo aplica al almacenamiento de baterías.

Hay $4.5 mil millones para proporcionar reembolsos de hasta el 100 por ciento para familias con ingresos de menos de $38,500/año en compras de hasta $14,000. y es importante destacar que se incentivan las microredes comunitarias y cooperativas rurales,
2. Los créditos fiscales para vehículos eléctricos tienen como objetivo ayudar a los compradores de bajos y medianos ingresos. Los compradores elegibles no pueden ganar más de $300,000/año en una declaración de impuestos presentada conjuntamente cuando reclaman el crédito por un vehículo eléctrico nuevo, y el dinero no puede aplicarse a un automóvil que se vende por más de $55,000, o a una camioneta/SUV/van con un precio superior a $80,000.
3. Dinero para electrodomésticos eficientes y mejoras en el hogar necesarias. El beneficio para el hogar es un crédito fiscal para mejoras de eficiencia energética.
Hay mucho para ayudar a las personas a mejorar la eficiencia energética de sus hogares: entre los artículos elegibles se encuentran bombas de calor para calentadores de agua (hasta $1,750) y para calefacción y refrigeración de espacios (hasta $8,000), estufas u hornos eléctricos o una secadora de ropa con bomba de calor eléctrica (hasta $840), una actualización de las cajas de disyuntores/“breakers” (hasta $4,000), mejoras en la ventilación (hasta $1,600) y mejoras en el cableado (hasta $2,500); Las familias pueden tomar tantos de estos reembolsos como deseen, hasta un total de $14,000 por año.
Además de los tipos de reembolsos específicos para electrodomésticos, el proyecto de ley también ofrece un enfoque más generalizado. Una modernización que reduce el uso de energía de una casa en un 35 por ciento, a través de mejoras, es elegible para hasta $8,000 en reembolsos o el 80 por ciento del costo del proyecto, lo que sea menor. Para mejoras menores en el uso de la energía, ese número se reduce entre el 20 y el 35 por ciento, por ejemplo, el beneficio alcanza un límite de $4,000.
Entonces, ¿por qué LUMA Energy y sus cómplices están interesados en desinformarle? Sencillo, dinero y no tu beneficio o ahorros, por cierto 
El uso y la producción de energía, que incluye combustibles que impulsan vehículos y edificios, constituye la mayor contribución de las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero en todo el mundo, según la EPA, los sectores de transporte, energía eléctrica e industria representan cada uno alrededor del 25 por ciento de la producción de emisiones, dice la agencia. La eliminación de las emisiones se relaciona directamente con la reducción y en casos la eliminación de las facturas de electricidad = menos dinero que ganará LUMA.
Hay más que plantear: Puede significar una reducción significativa de su potencial de facturar, por ejemplo comunidades incluyendo pequeñas empresas pueden optar por asociarse en microredes y cooperativas de generación solar.
El IRÁ solo espera por la firma de Biden y como todo proyecto principal de política pública debe ser interpretado y estructurado mediante reglamentaciones y normas administrativas que pueden tardar algo. 
Una interrogante pertinente es saber cómo ha de implementarse en Puerto Rico por nuestro carácter de territorio/ colonia. 
En ese tema debemos estar alertas de que la administrarse Pierluisi sea responsable (lo cual como hemos sufrido, es cuestionable), en palabras simples que deje de cargarle las maletas a LUMA.

Un comentario adicional. El proyecto de Queremos Sol cobra mayor validez con esta ley y los resultados del informe federal que concluye que las fuentes fotovoltaicas pueden ser nuestro sistema energético fundamental.

Pachi Ortizfeliciano

Addendum:

Una mirada crítica al problema de LUMA Energy revela que EL CONTRATO (fuente de control) ES EL PROBLEMA. Tanto textualmente como evidentemente (la experiencia de hechos) EL CONTRATO ES, y SIEMPRE HA SIDO, INJUSTO y ABUSIVO.


Nota adicional:


En el debate en los medios locales sobre la inadecuación del contrato de LUMA Energy en Puerto Rico sospechamos de la agenda temática y las referencias (o la carencia de fuentes confiables). Es necesario insistir en el contexto general de una discusión de proceso energético en un planeta en crisis ambiental pronunciada.
Escuchamos opiniones totalmente desacertadas como quienes plantean la inexistencia de alternativas olvidando por completo las posibilidades de crear una cooperativa energética.
Desconocen: Las cooperativas energéticas sirven a 42 millones de personas, alimentando a más de 21 millones de empresas, comunidades, escuelas y agricultores en 48 estados de los Estados Unidos. Dichas cooperativas generaron más de $1500 millones en créditos de capital a sus miembros en 2020. 63 cooperativas de generación y transmisión generaron energía al por mayor a 831 cooperativas de distribución como base de la red de cooperativas de energía. En conjunto, las principales 24 cooperativas de energía produjeron $22.300 millones este año.
Y escuchamos opiniones que parecen desconocer la aprobación de una nueva política ambiental federal que entre otras cosas impulsa las instalaciones de sistemas fotovoltaicos tanto en los techos de residencias y negocios como mediante microredes comunitarias.
Sepa: Los costos de la energía solar se han reducido un 85% desde hace una década. Eso significa que ahora es posible obtener ganancias de fuentes de energía limpia que pueden ayudar a reducir las emisiones de gases de efecto invernadero. La energía renovable atrajo más de $2,6 billones en inversiones entre 2010 y 2019. Construir nueva capacidad solar cuesta menos que agregar o perpetuar plantas de carbón o gas natural. La inversión ha llevado la energía solar a más del 8% de la capacidad de generación global. (datos de Bloomberg)

Urge que insistamos en un debate serio y fundamentado.


jueves, 3 de junio de 2021

Stop the privatization of the Electric Power Authority (PREPA) by means of LUMA. (petition)


The proposed privatization of PREPA through LUMA is both an injustice to thousands of workers and their families, an attack on the energy justice of communities, and a perpetuation of the fossil fuel pollution that threatens the planet. Puerto Rico needs an energy change but LUMA is NOT the necessary change.

This is not the time for LUMA, it is the time to reflect and plan in advance for a cleaner and healthier environment, it is also a reminder of how minorities and low-income communities (in Puerto Rico more than 60% of the population) are forgotten and attacked by the type of polluting energy system that LUMA represents.

Climate change disproportionately affects those who suffer from socioeconomic inequalities.

A March 2019 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) found that minority and low-income communities experience 56% and 63%, respectively, more pollution, which is characterized as an "additional pollution burden.".

See:

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/13/6001

Puerto Rico has 44 coastal towns, more than 270 miles (501 km) of coastline, and some 1,200 beaches. 25% of our geography is flat land adjacent to the sea. Puerto Rico is an archipelago that includes several islands (Vieques, Culebra, Mona, Monito, Caja de Muertos, Desecheo, and the keys that surround them).

New research says the total collapse of a crucial ice sheet in Antarctica could mean sea level rises 30% more than scientists currently predict.

The study, published in Science Advances, looks at how melting ice in the West Antarctic ice sheet will affect the Earth's crust underneath. Current predictions say that the ice sheet will raise sea level by 10.8 feet (3.3 meters) if it completely melts over the next 1000 years, but this study found that the onset of the bedrock could add a total 3.3 feet (1 meter) to current predictions. Furthermore, the models the researchers used show that predictions of sea level rise from the ice sheet by the end of this century could be 20% higher due to this bedrock effect.

See:

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/18/eabf7787.full

"This will reduce the amount of accommodation space for water, further raising sea levels on time scales ..." says Bethan Davies, a glacier researcher at Royal Holloway University in London.

See:

https://apple.news/AW92FI5kURG2sZSOVXP0Q9g

The climate crisis also affects coastal erosion by intensifying severe weather events. “Five municipalities in different areas of Puerto Rico had coastal sediment losses of between 40 and 50 meters due to erosion problems caused by Hurricane María in September 2017, according to a study revealed this Thursday. Mayagüez, Isabela, Dorado, Hatillo and Yabucoa are the municipalities that have suffered these losses of coastal sediment, according to the report "Findings of the state of the beaches of Puerto Rico post-hurricane María", by the geological oceanographer Maritza Barreto Orta. Professor at the Graduate School of Planning at the University of Puerto Rico and director of the Institute for Coastal Research and Planning of Puerto Rico. "

See:

https://www.panamaamerica.com.pa/opinion/la-erosion-en-las-costas-de-puerto-rico-1170690

“Some of the coastal areas of Puerto Rico that have been most affected by erosion are Ocean Park, in San Juan; Suárez and Villa Cristiana plots in Loíza; Fortuna, in Luquillo, Punta Salinas, in Toa Baja; La Boca in Barceloneta, Barrio Obrero in Arecibo, as well as others in Rincón and Humacao. "

See:

https://www.periodicolaperla.com/puerto-rico-vive-una-erosion-critica-por-huracanes-y-construcciones/

Recently, Professor Méndez Tejeda (Rafael Méndez Tejeda, professor and director of the Laboratory of Atmospheric Sciences of the University of Puerto Rico (UPR) in Carolina) explained that for more than 25 years he has studied global warming. This phenomenon translates into accelerating changes in the atmosphere, which has repercussions in transcendental situations such as those that have been occurring in recent years ... ”It is enough to visit the coasts of the Island —as in Arecibo or Loíza— to know we have a worrying coastal erosion. "

See:

https://www.elvocero.com/actualidad/call-to-combatir-el-calentación-global/article_d083e138-a306-11eb-afca-a79e36ae5a54.html

So the problem is more than evident, we are losing a part of our island and the unquestionable scientific fact is that methane, the largest component of natural gas, is a climate super-pollutant 86 times more powerful to heat the atmosphere than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period.

On our Caribbean island, the sun is undoubtedly a source of greater potential, the wind is also a presence impossible to ignore, and however, the LUMA proposal obviates these potentials and seeks to perpetuate the energy model based on natural gas. The International Energy Agency (IEA) declared that reaching net zero emissions by 2050 is a global goal.

See:

https://theconversation.com/amp/wondering-if-your-energy-company-takes-climate-change-seriously-a-new-report-reveals-the-answer-161360

https://www.iea.org/news/pathway-to-critical-and-formidable-goal-of-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-is-narrow-but-brings-huge-benefits-according-to-iea-special-report

In the report, they evaluated companies that were not aligned with the Paris targets, including and highlighting ATCO, the Canadian natural gas company that owns 50% of LUMA's shares.

Let's be clear LUMA / natural gas / methane must be eliminated now: How much methane, one of the most powerful sources of global warming, is there in the atmosphere that comes from the oil and natural gas industry? New research, published in Nature, suggests that natural geological sources make up a much smaller fraction of the methane in today's atmosphere. Instead, the researchers say, the methane is most likely attributable to industry. Together, the results indicate that we have underestimated the impacts of methane from fossil fuel extraction by as much as 40 percent.

On a 20-year time scale, a molecule of methane is about 90 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than a molecule of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that exerts the most control over future warming of the planet. Long-term land. Atmospheric methane concentrations have increased by at least 150 percent since the Industrial Revolution. Due to its power, the more there is in the air, the more difficult it will be to prevent the planet's temperatures from skyrocketing beyond global climate targets.

It means that oil and gas production has had a bigger and messier impact on the greenhouse gas budget than scientists knew. But the more methane emissions that can be attributed to human activity such as oil and gas extraction, the more control means that legislators, companies and regulators have to solve the problem, it means in Puerto Rico eliminating the LUMA energy model.

"So what we are saying is that the fossil fuel portion is larger than we think, and we can have a greater influence on the portion size, because it is something that we can control." says Benjamin Hmiel, lead author of the study and a researcher at the University of Rochester.

See:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-1991-8

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/super-potent-methane-in-atmosphere-oil-gas-drilling-ice-cores

The rationale is clear, and unthinkably ironic, after Hurricane Maria, the island experienced the destruction of its energy system. Later, the good news is received that there will be an extraordinary allocation of federal funds to rebuild that system. The cruel irony is to invest these once-in-a-lifetime funds in a system that directly drives the crisis that produces hurricanes like Maria in addition to increasing environmental heat and coastal erosion.

Research led by the University of Arizona, published in Geophysical Research Letters, suggests that more record temperatures will actually occur in the tropics, where there is a large and rapidly growing population. As the study's lead author, Xubin Zeng, director of the Arizona Center for Hydrometeorology and Climate Dynamics and a professor of atmospheric sciences, put it: "The second fact is that warming over land is greater than over the ocean." The question now is: Where do we see the most extreme heat events?

Over the tropics, where it is hot and humid, raw temperature data reveals smaller temperature fluctuations. But when the temperature is normalized, or divided, by temperature fluctuations over the same period, the data shows that the tropics have more normalized warming and are actually experiencing more record-breaking heat events.

This new perspective allowed Zeng and his team to describe the threat to these areas in a new way. "Temperature trends in the tropics do not need to be that great to break records and affect the environment, ecosystem and human well-being," write Zeng and the study co-authors.

This is important because marine heat waves are not well understood, but they would likely have large impacts on marine ecosystems. Zeng also publishes annual hurricane forecasts. He said warming oceans not only leads to more intense hurricanes, but ocean temperatures affect climate in other ways as well.

See:

https://apple.news/AojS6--3-TIqnVXMrv_szeA

On May 27, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) released its 10-year study, which included dire predictions: There is a 90 percent chance that one of the next five years will be the hottest on record, and a 40 percent chance. that we experience a year with a global average temperature 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels.

The WMO found that 2020 had an average global temperature of about 2.2 degrees Fahrenheit above pre-industrial levels. And over the next five years, the organization predicts that the average global temperature will be about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than pre-industrial levels.

See:

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/united-nations-report-shows-climate-change-accelerating-180977860/

The global warming that has already taken place may be even worse than we thought. That's the conclusion of a new study that finds that satellite measurements have likely underestimated the warming of the lower levels of the atmosphere over the past 40 years.

That means satellite measurements of the troposphere have either underestimated its temperature or overestimated its humidity, study leader Ben Santer, a climate scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in California, said in a statement.

See:

https://www.llnl.gov/news/satellites-may-have-undeestimated-warming-lower-atmosphere

In other words, the measurements that show the least warming may also be the least reliable.

See:

https://www.space.com/satellites-underestimated-global-warming

More than a third of heat deaths in the world each year are directly due to global warming, according to the latest study to calculate the human cost of climate change. But scientists say that is only a small part of the total cost of the climate, even more people die from other extreme weather events amplified by global warming, such as storms, floods and droughts, and the numbers of deaths from heat will grow exponentially with rising temperatures.

Dozens of researchers who analyzed heat deaths in 732 cities around the world between 1991 and 2018 calculated that 37% were caused by higher temperatures from human-caused warming, according to a study published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

That works out to about 9,700 people a year from those cities alone, but that's much more worldwide, the study's lead author said.

“These are heat-related deaths that are actually preventable. It's something we directly cause, ”said Ana Vicedo-Cabrera, an epidemiologist at the Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine at the University of Bern in Switzerland.

See:

https://apple.news/AGYPAKLrxSrmpapLY56KSsg

Vicedo-Cabrera, A.M., Scovronick, N., Sera, F. et al. The burden of heat-related mortality attributable to recent human-induced climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01058-x

Climate change disproportionately affects those who suffer from socioeconomic inequalities.

Racial, social, and ethnic disparities in air pollution show that exposure to particulate matter is disproportionately caused by patterns called environmental discrimination and racism.

It is essential to ensure that communities bearing a disproportionate pollution burden have a voice in decision-making processes that affect their health, resilience, and vitality, environmental experts say.

The underlying message of the fossil fuel-based energy model is that these communities and people matter less than others based on a fiction of business economics. These communities are disproportionately victims of environmental hazards and are much more likely to live in areas with higher pollution.

Abundant data shows that low-income communities like Guayama breathe the worst air and have excessive rates of pollution-related illnesses such as asthma and other respiratory problems associated with the energy system. There is data of higher mortality associated with this contamination.

Annually, the oil and gas industry releases tons of methane gas and other toxic chemicals into the atmosphere, and low-income communities are disproportionately affected.

In addition, exposure to poor air quality can cause numerous health problems such as asthma. About 13.4% of low-income children suffer from asthma compared to just 7.3% of other children.

Science warns that the proportion of Category 4 and 5 hurricanes has increased at a rate of ~ 25-30% per ° C of global warming after considering the analysis and observing the system changes. This has been balanced by a similar decline in the proportions of Category 1 and 2 hurricanes, leading to the development of a clearly bimodal intensity distribution, with the secondary maximum in Category 4 hurricanes. This global trend is replicated in all ocean basins.

See:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00382-013-1713-0

The biggest storms in recent years were driven by climate change, which increased the amount of torrential rains. Future storms could be even windier, wetter, and potentially more destructive.

The researchers evaluated 15 tropical cyclones (which are called hurricanes when they form in the Atlantic) from the last decade and then simulated how the storms would have behaved during pre-industrial times, before the arrival of recent climate change. They also analyzed possible future scenarios, modeling what storms would look like if Earth's climate continued to warm.

The scientists' findings, published in the journal Nature, paint a sobering picture of a future marked by supercharged hurricane seasons.

See:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0676-z?utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=3_nsn6445_deeplink_PID100052171&utm_content=deeplink

The researchers investigated the role that a warm climate could play in hurricane force winds and rainfall, looking at factors such as greenhouse gas concentrations, humidity, and temperature variations in air and ocean water.

They found that hurricane rainfall increased under climate change scenarios, with Hurricanes Katrina, Irma and Maria producing 5 to 10 percent more rain than they could have generated under pre-industrial conditions.

Future storms are likely to get windier, with maximum wind speeds increasing by as much as 53 km / h (33 mph). Precipitation is also predicted to increase in hurricanes by 25 to 30 percent, if current emissions remain uncontrolled, the scientists reported.

Warming oceans is already recognized as a fuel source for more intense hurricane seasons. And rapidly accumulating evidence shows how climate change is directly affecting individual storms.

"We are already beginning to see anthropogenic factors influencing tropical cyclone rainfall," study lead author Christina Patricola, a research scientist in the Division of Climate and Ecosystem Sciences at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, said in a statement.

See:

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2018-11/dbnl-csp111218.php

"Our simulations clearly indicate that as time passes we can expect to see even greater increases in precipitation," added Patricola.

More rainfall during seasonal hurricanes carries a higher risk of flooding in regions close to the coasts.

But the dangers of coastal life can also be intensified by another factor: the human transformation of rural and suburban areas into more urban settings. The scientists found that urbanization significantly increased the amount of rain that fell during the storm and also increased the risk of flooding.

See:

https://www.space.com/42464-wetter-storms-climate-change.html

The president of LUMA has said and repeated that LUMA will be ready to face a Category 2 hurricane. His statements are an admission of disability.

LUMA Energy Chief Executive Officer Wayne Stensby assured that they are ready to respond to a hurricane emergency "... should such an atmospheric phenomenon reach Category 2 on the Saffir-Simpson scale." 

The quote is taken from:

https://www.elnuevodia.com/noticias/locales/notas/luma-energy-alega-tener-suficientes-recursos-para-un-huracan-categoria-2/

Stipulated: They are not ready or nor adequately prepared for the task even after a year of supposed preparations for which they requested payments in excess of $130 million.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) predicted an active Atlantic hurricane season for 2021. NOAA said it expects six to ten hurricanes to occur during the year, and three to five of them are likely to become major hurricanes. Category 3 or higher on the Saffir-Simpson Scale. Forecasters predict a 60% chance of an above-normal season.

By 2021, a likely range of 13 to 20 named storms (winds 39 mph or greater), of which 6 to 10 could become hurricanes (winds 74 mph or greater), including 3-5 major hurricanes (Category 3 , 4 or more). 5; with winds of 111 mph or more). NOAA provides these ranges with 70% confidence.

https://www.noaa.gov/media-release/noaa-predicts-another-active-atlantic-hurricane-season

The expensive LUMA preparations did NOT meet the necessary mínimums in what is known to be a major priority (hurricane María).

From 1981 to 2010, there were, on average, 12.1 named storms, 6.4 hurricanes, and 2.7 major Category 3 or higher hurricanes each year. In the new period, from 1991 to 2020, there were an average of 14.4 named storms, 7.2 hurricanes, and 3.2 hurricanes 3-5 each year, according to data analyzed by Brian McNoldy, principal investigator at the University of Miami. .

Hurricane Hugo hit Puerto Rico as a category 3-4 in 1989. Since then, the total volume of storms is higher in the new 30-year period. From 1991 to 2020, those numbers increase.

Storms are getting wetter, because warmer air can hold and then drop more torrential rains, while hurricane scientists are confident that global warming is making stronger storms stronger when it comes to winds.

Over the past century, the water temperature of the tropical Atlantic has risen by 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit. With that in mind, it makes sense that global warming is causing an increase in hurricane activity and strength.

In this context, LUMA itself admits that it is not prepared, nor does it recognize that it is precisely fossil fuels, especially methane / natural gas, that are driving this trend of strengthening cyclones.

See:

https://climate.nasa.gov/blog/2956/how-climate-change-may-be-impacting-storms-over-earths-tropical-oceans/

https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/climate-change/551948-rising-temperatures-wetter-storms-are-now-the

So science repeatedly proves beyond doubt that the social costs and environmental effects of the fossil fuel energy model imply environmental injustice.

It is not a mystery that federal funds are what the LUMA project is looking for, as expressed in Quanta Services documents in their messages to investors. 

Doing good business in itself is not a bad idea, but profiting from a bad idea is never good business.

We must not forget the science: Methane emissions can be reduced by up to 45 percent in this decade to help meet global warming management goals.

Science looks at the air and climate pollution costs and benefits of methane mitigation and says a 45 percent reduction would prevent 260,000 premature deaths, 775,000 asthma-related hospital visits, 73 billion work hours’ losses due to extreme heat and 25 million tons. of crop losses annually.

How can it be a good idea to just forget about science and exploit public funding for the sole benefit of corporate interests while putting the island in grave danger?

Why should we act now and stop LUMA?

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says updated indicators show that "climate change has become even more apparent, stronger and more extreme."

In a study published in the journal Science Advances entitled Cost-effective implementation of the Paris Agreement using flexible greenhouse gas metrics, Johannes Morfeldt explains, "The cumulative greenhouse effect over a 100-year period for methane gives a conversion factor of 28. This means that one kilogram of methane is 28 times more powerful than one kilogram of CO2. However, since methane has a shorter life and a greater radiative impact than CO2, the cumulative effect in 20 years is much more significant. : 84 times more than 1 kilogram of CO2. "By changing the time horizon, the conversion factor changes and, therefore, if a kilogram of methane is 84 times more important than one of CO2, it will be more effective to reduce global emissions by reducing methane.

See:

https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/7/22/eabf9020.full

On the island, both legislative bodies have called for the LUMA project to be stopped, the College of Engineers and the Puerto Rico Bar Association also, as well as a joint demonstration of all religious denominations and environmental groups, and thousands of energy workers, the same ones who heroically sacrificed themselves after Maria are losing their jobs while LUMA talks about a tax on the sun.

Many on the island wonder how LUMA can fit into the new energy policies and there is no logical answer.

If it is ever necessary to stop an inconceivable contract, it is now that the fate of Puerto Rico and the planet are in danger.

Cutting methane by 45% this decade would keep warming below a threshold in the Paris Agreement. Taking action has multiple benefits, including: rapid reduction in warming, which can help prevent dangerous climate tipping points; improve air quality that can save hundreds of thousands of lives; improve food security by preventing crop failure; and creating jobs through mitigation efforts while increasing productivity through reducing heat stress.

See:

https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-methane-assessment-benefits-and-costs-mitigating-methane-emissions

”Our analysis shows that 100% clean electricity from a combination of solar, wind and battery (SWB) is physically possible and economically affordable throughout the continental United States, as well as in the vast majority of other populated regions of the world by 2030. SWB adoption is growing exponentially around the world and disruption is now inevitable because by 2030 they will offer the cheapest electricity option for most regions. Coal, gas and nuclear power assets will be stranded during the 2020s, and there are no new investments in these technologies, from this point on. But the replacement of conventional power technology by SWB is just the beginning.

As has been the case with many other outages, SWB will transform our energy system in fundamental ways. The new system that emerges will be much larger than the existing one we know today and will have a completely different architecture that operates in unknown ways.

One of the most contradictory and extraordinary properties of the new system is that it will produce a much greater amount of energy overall, and that this overabundance of clean energy production, which we call a superpower, will be available at almost zero marginal cost at all times. much of the year in almost all populated places. SWB's disruption of energy will parallel the digital disruption of information technology. Just as computers and the Internet cut the marginal cost of information and opened the door to hundreds of new business models that have collectively had a transformative impact on the global economy, SWB will also cut the marginal cost of electricity and create a plethora of opportunities ...”

See:

https://www.rethinkx.com/energy-executive-summary

A growing number of frontline doctors and healthcare workers are turning to climate activism to urge world leaders to declare climate change a public health emergency.

Their demands for immediate action include a focus on preventive health care with educational programs in schools and the community at large, more equitable distribution and access to health care, reducing the carbon footprint of health care, and more control strict of industries to ensure clean water and air.

Underscoring the progressive nature of their platform, the protesters also called for the creation of citizen assemblies to guide strategic health decisions. Their demands were listed in a petition, signed by more than 1,200 leading doctors and healthcare workers around the world.

WHO chief Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who welcomed the protesters, said that while "the pandemic will end, there is no vaccine for climate change." Later, he tweeted that health and climate change were "inextricably intertwined" and that the WHO would "stand in solidarity and urge global action" with the protesters.

In fact, the WHO and the prestigious medical journal Lancet have declared that climate change is the greatest threat to global health in the 21st century, a statement made even before the Covid-19 crisis.

Professor Valerie D'Acremont, an infectious disease physician and global health specialist at Lausanne University Hospital, is among those speaking out because "governments and the public have not understood the strong links between climate change and the loss of biodiversity and health ... We want governments to act,”she said.

“Many of us feel that there is no point in doing our job because we are fed up with always being behind, preparing for the next health catastrophe instead of acting on the root causes of problems. Covid-19 is an illustration of this problem ... Some diseases such as cardiovascular and respiratory diseases will increase more strongly, but it is more difficult for people to establish a link with climate change because they already exist, "said D'Acremont.

D ’Acremont said there was already a movement among the health professions to talk about the gaps in the health care system, although he agrees that climate activism among physicians is a relatively new phenomenon.

“Some public health experts were already saying that we cannot continue in this direction. The human side of medicine is being lost because the health system does not allow us to do preventive medicine. The system has to adapt and climate change is proving this point”.

During the pandemic, data confirmed direct links between global air pollution levels and Covid-19 outbreaks, with spikes observed where outbreaks were active.

See:

https://apple.news/AGw3YzNlgReib_0cf3qgdDA

This petition calls, first and foremost, for a pause to rethink the fundamental aspects of the energy policy proposal based on scientific criteria that include the social costs of the climate impacts involved and that it be widely discussed with the full participation of the communities.

The petition was originated by Roberto Ortiz-Feliciano, a Puerto Rican citizen and resident. All translations, editions, and texts are free and motivated exclusively by my interest in the public good and commitment to a better world. This petition as of Sunday, June 6, 2021 has been endorsed by 10,709 signatures.

See:

https://www.change.org/p/departament-of-energy-detengan-la-privatizaci%C3%B3n-de-la-autoridad-de-energ%C3%ADa-el%C3%A9ctrica-aee-mediante-luma